This, as you can see, is a very long post.
I wanted to post a number of articles I have read in the past few weeks, all written by prominent Jews from around the world, all about the increasingly hostile atmosphere within the Jewish community towards Jewish voices for human rights. Especially, of course, those who oppose Israel's brutal policies in the Occupied Territories.
Work your way through these articles and get a taste of the growing dissent against the institutional Jewish organizations who incorrectly assert that they speak for the Jewish communities.
***
Winnipeg Free Press
February 24, 2007
Criticizing Israel is not an act of bigotry
By Jason Kunin
A grassroots revolt is underway in Jewish communities throughout the world, a revolt that has panicked the elite organizations that have long functioned as official mouthpieces for the community. The latest sign of this panic is the recent publication by the American Jewish Committee of an essay by Alvin H. Rosenfeld, entitled Progressive Jewish Thought and the New Anti-Semitism, which accuses progressive Jews of abetting a resurgent wave of anti-Semitism by publicly criticizing Israel.
This is the latest attempt to conflate anti-Semitism with anti-Zionism in order to silence or marginalize criticism of Israel. This approach is widely used in Canada. Upon becoming CEO of the Canadian Jewish Congress, Bernie Farber declared that one of his goals was to "educate Canadians about the links between anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism."
It is misleading for groups like the CJC to pretend that the Jewish community is united in support of Israel. A growing number of Jews around the world are joining the chorus of concern about the deteriorating condition of the Palestinians in the Occupied Territories as well as the inferior social and economic status of Israel's own Palestinian population.
In a world where uncritical support for Israel is becoming less and less tenable due to the expanding human rights disaster in the West Bank and Gaza, leaders of Jewish communities outside Israel have circled their wagons, heightened their pro-Israel rhetoric, and demonized Israel's critics. These leaders imply that increased concerns about Israel do not result from that state's actions, but from an increase in anti-Semitism.
Despite this effort to absolve Israel of responsibility for its treatment of Palestinians, Jewish opposition is growing and becoming more organized. On Feb. 5, a group in Britain calling itself Jewish Independent Voices published an open letter in The Guardian newspaper in which they distanced themselves from "Those who claim to speak on behalf of Jews in Britain and other countries (and who) consistently put support for the policies of an occupying power above the human rights of the occupied people." Among the signatories of the letter were Nobel-prize winning playwright Harold Pinter, filmmaker Mike Leigh, writer John Berger, and many others.
This development follows the emergence of similar groups in Sweden (Jews forIsraeli-Palestinian Peace), France (Union Juive Francaise pour la paix, Rencontre Progressiste Juive), Italy (Ebrei contro l'occupazione), Germany (Jüdische Stimme für gerechten Frieden in Nahost), Belgium (Union des Progressistes Juifs de Belgique), the United States (Jewish Voice for Peace, Brit Tzedek, Tikkun, the Bronfman-Soros initiative), South Africa, and others, including the umbrella organization European Jews for a Just Peace and the numerous groups within Israel itself. In Canada, the Alliance of Concerned Jewish Canadians (ACJC) has been founded as an umbrella organization bringing together Jewish individuals and groups from across thecountry who oppose Israel's continued domination of the West Bank and Gaza.
Criticism of Israel is not anti-Semitic, nor does it "bleed into anti-Semitism," a formulation that says essentially the same thing. Some genuine anti-Semites do use Israel as a cover for maligning the Jewish people as a whole, but it is fallacious to argue that anyone who criticizes Israel is anti-Semitic because anti-Semites attack Israel. There are some anti-Semites who support Israel because they are Christian fundamentalists who see the return of Jews to Jerusalem as a precondition for the return ofChrist and the conversion of Jews to Christianity, or because they are xenophobes who want to get rid of Jews in their midst. Anti-Semites take positions in support of and in opposition to Israel.
It is wrong to criticize all Jews for Israel's wrongdoings, yet Israel's leadership and its supporters in the Diaspora consistently encourage this view by insisting that Israel acts on behalf of the entire Jewish people. This shifts blame for Israel's crimes onto the shoulders of all Jews. But Jewish critics of Israel demonstrate through their words and deeds that the Jewish community is not monolithic in its support of Israel.
Defenders of Israel often argue that Israel is forced to do what it does -- to destroy people's homes, to keep them under the boot of occupation, to seal them into walled ghettos, to brutalize them daily with military incursions and random checkpoints -- to protect its citizens from Palestinian violence. Palestinian violence, however, is rooted in the theft of their land, the diversion of their water, the violence of the occupation, and the indignity of having one's own very existence posed as a "demographic threat."
To justify Israel's continued occupation and theft of Palestinian land, the state and its defenders attempt to deny Palestinian suffering, arguing instead that Palestinian resentment is rooted not in Israeli violence, but rather in Islam, or the "Arab mentality," or a mystical anti-Semitism inherent in Arab or Muslim culture. Consequently, pro-Israel advocacy depends upon on the active dissemination of Islamophobia. Not surprisingly, engendering hatred in this manner inflames anti-Jewish sentiment among Arabs and Muslims. None of this is a recipe for making Jews safe.
Jewish people can help avert the catastrophic effects of Israeli behaviour, but only by taking a stand in opposition to it.
Jason Kunin of Toronto is a member of the administration council of theAlliance of Concerned Jewish Canadians. This article was written with helpfrom other council members, including Cy Gonick and Dr. Mark Etkin, both ofWinnipeg, Andy Lehrer of Toronto, Sid Shniad of Vancouver and AbrahamWeizfeld of Montreal.
***
WOMEN IN BLACK-LOS ANGELES HOLDS SUCCESSFUL VIGIL OPPOSING ISRAELI APARTHEID IN PALESTINE
Los Angeles,
Monday, February 5, 2007
In the hour and a half before Monday's Los Angeles performance of the Israel Philharmonic at Disney Hall, candle light illuminated more than 60 black-clad protestors standing silently in front of downtown's Disney Hall with signs saying "End Israeli Apartheid in Palestine and Boycott Israel Philharmonic".
With the parking garage closed, the entire audience had to walk by the protestors, and, while most ignored the leaflet offered by one of the organizers, none was able to ignore the protestor' message.
In the week before the performance, the L.A. Philharmonic had tried to move the protest away from Disney Hall. They even asked for, and got a resolution from the Los Angeles City Council, closing the sidewalk in front of DisneyHall. But once attorneys Jim Lafferty and Carol Smith from the National Lawyer's Guild-Los Angeles Chapter made it clear that they would sue on constitutional grounds, Disney Hall agreed that the protestors could use the public sidewalk. And use it we did, to great effect.
The vigil, organized by Women in Black-Los Angeles, was the culmination of four months of organizing that began with a letter to the musicians of the Israel Philharmonic asking them to take a public stand against Israel's 40-year occupation of the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem, following the example of famed Israeli conductor and pianist Daniel Barenboim.
The letter was signed by more than 1,000 supporters worldwide, but their plea was not honored with a reply from the musicians. A written request tothe L.A. Philharmonic management asking them to either cancel the Isareli group's perfomances or make an announcement in opposition to the occupation before each performance met with refusal, so the organizers began their protest in January with silent vigils at matinee performances of the Los Angeles Philharmonic. On Tuesday, Feb. 6th, 20 protestors returned for a second night of silent vigil.
In addition, six brave souls in New York held a vigil during the January 3oth performance at Carnegie Hall, and people attending couldn't miss them. Dispite some insults from the crowd, they stood in silence with their signs and the letter to the Philharmonic in their hands. One of the vigilers said, "We will not remain silent as long as there is so much injustice in the world."
The letters and photos of the vigil can be found at http://www.wib-la.org/.
In addition to Women in Black-Los Angeles, the vigil was supported by the ANSWER Coalition, Middle East Fellowship and Campaign to End Israeli Apartheid
***
http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,,2005881,00.html
The Guardian
Monday February 5, 2007
Prominent Jews call for open debate on Israel
• Pinter and Farhi among signatories to open letter
• Institutions accused of not representing community
By Julian Borger
A group of prominent British Jews will today declare independence from the country's Jewish establishment, arguing that it puts support for Israel above the human rights of Palestinians.
Independent Jewish Voices will publish an open letter on the Guardian's Comment is Free website calling for a freer debate about the Middle East within the Jewish community. Among the more than 130 signatories are Stephen Fry, Harold Pinter, Mike Leigh, Jenny Diski and Nicole Farhi, as well as leading academics such as Eric Hobsbawm and Susie Orbach.
"We come together in the belief that the broad spectrum of opinion among the Jewish population of this country is not reflected by those institutions which claim authority to represent the Jewish community as a whole," the letter says. Jewish leaders in Britain, it argues "put support for the policies of an occupying power above the human rights of an occupied people" in conflict with Jewish principles of justice and compassion.
The statement does not name the institutions it is criticising. But one signatory, Brian Klug, an Oxford philosopher, writing an accompanying article on Comment is Free, singles out the Board of Deputies of British Jews for calling itself "the voice of British Jewry" while devoting "much ofthe time and resources of its international division to the defence ofIsrael".
Mr Klug also criticises Britain's chief rabbi, Sir Jonathan Sacks, for telling a pro-Israeli rally in London last year: "Israel, you make us proud."
"Others felt roughly the opposite emotion," Mr Klug writes.
The emergence of the group, which calls itself a "network of individuals"and can be found at www.ijv.org.uk comes at a time of ferment over attitudes towards Israel, stoked by the war in Lebanon and the bloodshed in the occupied territories. The question of whether radical opposition to Israeli policies necessarily amounts to anti-Semitism is central to the debate.
The row was brought to a head in recent weeks by the resignation of board members of the Institute of Jewish Policy Research (IJPR) after it emerged that its director, Antony Lerman, had voiced support for the merging of Israel with the Palestinian territories into a single bi-national federation and a repeal of the "law of return" giving the right of anyone of Jewish descent to Israeli citizenship.
Stanley Kalms, the former head of the Dixons Group, stepped down as the IJPR's honorary vice president, saying Mr Lerman's views made his position "untenable". Writing in the Jewish Chronicle, Lord Kalms called his views "dangerous and unacceptable" and "contrary to my concept of the role of the diaspora - to support the State of Israel, warts and all".
The row has brought furious exchanges to the Jewish Chronicle's letter pages. "Some of our biggest mailbags lately have been prompted by prominent Jewish public figures voicing dissenting views of Israel, which typically provokes angry rebukes from other members of the community," David Rowan, the editor, said.
A parallel struggle is under way in the US where the American Jewish Committee published an article accusing liberal Jews such as the historian Tony Judt of fuelling anti-Semitism by questioning Israel's right to exist.
The essay by Alvin Rosenfeld said that "one of the most distressing features of the new anti-Semitism" was "the participation of Jews alongside it".
Prof Judt told the New York Times: "The link between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism is newly created." He feared the two would become so conflated that references to anti-Semitism and the Holocaust would be seen as "just a political defence of Israeli policy".
***
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/independent_jewish_voices/2007/02/hold_jewish_voices_statement.html
The Guardian
February 5/2007
A time to speak out
There is a need for alternative Jewish voices to be heard - especially in the light of the grave situation in the Middle East.
We are a group of Jews in Britain from diverse backgrounds, occupations and affiliations who have in common a strong commitment to social justice and universal human rights. We come together in the belief that the broad spectrum of opinion among the Jewish population of this country is not reflected by those institutions which claim authority to represent the Jewish community as a whole. We further believe that individuals and groups within all communities should feel free to express their views on any issue of public concern without incurring accusations of disloyalty.
We have therefore resolved to promote the expression of alternative Jewish voices, particularly in respect of the grave situation in the Middle East, which threatens the future of both Israelis and Palestinians as well as the stability of the whole region. We are guided by the following principles:
1. Human rights are universal and indivisible and should be upheld without exception. This is as applicable in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories as it is elsewhere.
2. Palestinians and Israelis alike have the right to peaceful and secure lives.
3. Peace and stability require the willingness of all parties to theconflict to comply with international law.
4. There is no justification for any form of racism, including anti-semitism, anti-Arab racism or Islamophobia, in any circumstance.
5. The battle against anti-semitism is vital and is undermined whenever opposition to Israeli government policies is automatically branded asanti-semitic.
These principles are contradicted when those who claim to speak on behalf ofJews in Britain and other countries consistently put support for the policies of an occupying power above the human rights of an occupied people. The Palestinian inhabitants of the West Bank and Gaza Strip face appalling living conditions with desperately little hope for the future. We declare our support for a properly negotiated peace between the Israeli and Palestinian people and oppose any attempt by the Israeli government to impose its own solutions on the Palestinians.
It is imperative and urgent that independent Jewish voices find a coherentand consistent way of asserting themselves on these and other issues of concern. We hereby reclaim the tradition of Jewish support for universal freedoms, human rights and social justice. The lessons we have learned from our own history compel us to speak out. We therefore commit ourselves to make public our views on a continuing basis and invite other concerned Jews to join and support us.
Dr Lisa Appignanesi
Sir Geoffrey Bindman
Lady Ellen Dahrendorf
Dr Edie Friedman
Uri Fruchtmann
Rabbi David Goldberg
Dr Anthony Isaacs
Ann Jungman
Anne Karpf
Dr Brian Klug
Prof Francesca Klug
Dr Tony Klug
Prof Susie Orbach
Prof Jacqueline Rose
Leon Rosselson
Prof Donald Sassoon
Prof Lynne Segal
Gillian Slovo
Henry Stewart
Janet Suzman
Plus many others. The full list of signatores can be found at www.ijv.org.uk. For more information email press@ijv.org.uk
Click here for a full list of articles in the Independent Jewish Voices debate.
***
The Guardian
Monday February 5, 2007
No one has the right to speak for British Jews on Israel and Zionism
We will not accept the vilification of those who protest at injustices carried out in the name of the Jewish people
By Brian Klug
If there is one thing on which Jews can agree, it is this: it's good to argue. Jewish culture has thrived on argument - frank, sincere disagreement- ever since Moses disputed with God. But today an oppressive and unhealthy atmosphere is leading many Jews to feel uncertain about speaking out on Israel and Zionism. People are anxious about contravening an unwritten law on what you can and cannot discuss, may or may not assert.
It is a climate that raises fundamental questions: about freedom of expression, Jewish identity, representation, and the part that concerned Jews in Britain can play in assisting Israelis and Palestinians to find their way to a better future.
As the situation in the Middle East deteriorates yearly, more and more Jews watch with dismay from afar. Dismay turns to anguish when innocent civilians - Palestinians and Israelis - suffer injury and death because of the continuing conflict. Anguish turns to outrage when the human rights of a population under occupation are repeatedly violated in the name of the Jewish people.
No one has the authority to speak for the Jewish people. Yet during Israel's war with Lebanon last summer, Ehud Olmert, the prime minister, told an American audience: "I believe that this is a war that is fought by all the Jews." His belief is not based on evidence: it is an article of faith, a corollary of the doctrine that Israel represents Jewry as a whole - in Britain included.
This is a fallacy; and, moreover, a dangerous one, since it tars all Jews with the same brush. Yet this misconception is reinforced here by those who, claiming to speak for British Jews collectively or allowing that impression to go unchallenged, only ever reflect one position on the Middle East. Onits own account, the Board of Deputies of British Jews (which calls itself "the voice of British Jewry") devotes much of the time and resources of its international division to "the defence of Israel". When a "solidarity rally" was held in London last July in the midst of the conflict with Lebanon, it was the board that organised it.
All of which suggests that British Jewry, speaking with one voice, stands solidly behind the Israeli government and its military operations.
Two things are wrong with this suggestion. First, it's false. Jews were deeply divided over Israel's campaigns in Gaza and Lebanon last year. Certainly, there were those who shared the sentiment of the chief rabbi, SirJonathan Sacks, who, addressing the rally, said: "Israel, you make us proud." Others felt roughly the opposite emotion.
Second, the board has no business taking a partisan position on the Middle East. Let groups such as the Zionist Federation or perhaps the Israeli embassy organise solidarity rallies. The role of the board is to promote the welfare of British Jews in all their variety, not to defend Israel. Similarly, the chief rabbi is entitled, ex officio, to bring a religious perspective to political matters, but it is not his role to act as political spokesman for his flock.
Faced with this state of affairs, a group of Jews in Britain has come together to launch Independent Jewish Voices (IJV). We come from a variety of backgrounds and walks of life. Some of us are religious, some not. A number feel a strong attachment to Israel as Jews, others feel none. We do not all share the same vision for the Middle East. We are a network of individuals, not a movement or political party.
But we are united by certain fundamental commitments. These are set out in our launch statement, published today on the Guardian's Comment is Free website and in advertisements placed in the Jewish Chronicle and the Times. They include: putting human rights first; giving equal priority to Palestinians and Israelis in their quest for a peaceful and secure future; and repudiating all forms of racism aimed at Jews, Arabs, Muslims or whomever.
We believe that these commitments - not ethnic or group loyalties - define the limits of legitimate debate. We invite like-minded Jews in Britain to add their names to the list of IJV signatories.
Jews abroad who are confronted with the same climate are taking similar steps to make their voices heard. The Alliance of Concerned Jewish Canadians has been formed to promote "an alternative public Jewish voice" on Israeli policies. Last July "concerned South African Jews" appealed to "all who share our commitment to a common humanity" to call for Israel to stop its bombardment of Lebanon. In the past few years, Jewish groups speaking out against Israel's violations of human rights have proliferated, notably in the United States, but especially in Israel itself.
We are not setting ourselves up as an alternative to the Board of Deputies or any other body. But we challenge the standard concept of "the Jewish community" as a collective entity for which the board is the secular voice and the chief rabbi the religious voice. This system was developed in another era - though it is being used today as a template for other minorities. It pictures "the Jewish community" as a single bloc that, whatever its internal complexity, presents a common face to the outside world via its ambassadors.
There is an affinity between our initiative and the New Generation Network, which was launched in the Guardian last November. A diverse group of Britons questioned the idea that the pie of British society (or that portion consisting of "minorities") can be divided into neat ethnic or religious slices: discrete "communities" with authoritative "leaders". For many of us, this model is suffocating and goes against the grain of our experience.
Among other things, it places a premium on keeping disagreement "in the family". For Jews, this ethos is especially stifling if the subject is Zionism or Israel. Some people, rightly condemning demonisation of the Jewish state, do not hesitate to demonise fellow Jews who, when expressing their views on these subjects in public, cross an invisible line of acceptability. We reject any attempt to suppress legitimate public debate and we abhor the culture of vilification.
The slur of "traitor" or "self-hating Jew" is especially noxious. For, if we feel compelled to protest against injustice to Palestinians, this is partly because of the lessons of our own history: the Jewish experience of marginalisation and persecution. Furthermore, when the language of human rights is spoken, many of us (secular and religious) hear the voices of those Hebrew prophets, rabbis, writers, activists and other Jewish figures down the centuries for whom Judaism means nothing if it does not mean social justice.
So, when we speak out against Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, or the bombing of Lebanon, or discrimination against Palestinians within Israel itself, we are not turning against our Jewish identity; we are turning to it. Some of us, recalling that nearly 40 years have passed since Israel's occupation began, hear a resonance. This was the length of time the Israelites wandered in the wilderness, near the end of which Moses gave them a directive: "Justice, justice shall you pursue" (Deuteronomy 16:20). It is a compass bearing for all humanity, especially when we are trying to findour way - or help others to find theirs - to a better future.
· Brian Klug is senior research fellow in philosophy at St Benet's Hall, Oxford, and associate editor of Patterns of Prejudice
www.ijv.org.uk
***
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/02/04/INGFLNSJQJ1.DTL
San Francisco Chronicle
Sunday, February 4, 2007
Silencing critics not way to Middle East peace
By Joel Beinin
Last Sunday in San Francisco, the Anti-Defamation League sponsored "Finding Our Voice," a conference designed to help Jews recognize and confront the "new anti-Semitism." For me, it was ironic. Ten days before, my own voice was silenced by fellow Jews.
I was to give a talk about our Middle East policy to high school students at the Harker School in San Jose. With one day to go, my contact there called to say my appearance had been canceled. He was apologetic and upset. He expected the talk would be intellectually stimulating and intriguing for students. But, he said, "a certain community of parents" complained to the headmaster. He added, without divulging details, that the Jewish Community Relations Council of Silicon Valley had played a role.
[Editor's note: Diane Fisher, executive director of the Jewish Community Relations Council of Silicon Valley, says that although she left a message for the school principal, she never actually spoke to him, and any suggestion that the council was responsible for the cancellation of Beinin's appearance at the school is inaccurate and an "unlikely inflation of JCRC's influence."]
I was raised a Zionist. I went to Israel after high school for six months to live on a kibbutz. I met my wife there. We returned four years later thinking we'd spend our lives on a kibbutz, working the land and living the Zionist dream. Why did the council feel the need to silence me?
In fact, this was not our first run-in. I have long advocated equal rights for the Palestinians, as I do for all people. I criticize Israeli policies. I seem to have crossed the council's line of acceptable discourse. Because I am a Jew, it is not so easy to smear me as guilty of this "new anti-Semitism." Instead, hosts like the Harker School, and others, are intimidated, and open dialogue on Israel is censored.
In 2005, Marin's Rodef Sholom synagogue caved to the council and revoked my invitation, unless my talk could be accompanied by a rebuttal. Roy Mash, aboard member, resigned in protest. He asked in his resignation letter whether "given Judaism's long and deep tradition of concern for justice and ethics, a Jewish venue is (not) precisely the setting most appropriate for a speaker like Dr. Beinin?"
I was indeed raised to believe that being Jewish meant being actively committed to social justice. I moved to Israel expecting to pursue that ideal. Yet much of what I saw there called this into question.
I tended livestock on Kibbutz Lahav, which was established on the ruins of three Palestinian villages. The Palestinian inhabitants had been expelled and, because they are not Jewish, were unable to return. One day, we needed extra workers to help clean manure from the turkey cages. The head of the turkey branch said we should not ask for kibbutz members to do the work because, "This isn't work for Jews. This is work for Arabushim." "Arabushim" is an extremely derogatory racial term.
I had participated in the civil rights movement in America, picketing Woolworth's stores that wouldn't serve African Americans. Yet in Israel I discovered the same, stark racism. How could this bring peace between Palestinians and Israelis? While still living in Israel, I began to speak out for equal rights for Palestinians, as I had done for blacks in America.
Organizations claiming to represent American Jews engage in a systematic campaign of defamation, censorship and hate-mongering to silence criticism of Israeli policies. They hollow the ethical core out of the Jewish tradition, acting instead as if the highest purpose of being Jewish is to defend Israel, right or wrong.
No one is spared. New York University Professor Tony Judt also moved to Israel with notions of justice. Judt learned, as I did, that most Israelis were "remarkably unconscious of the people who had been kicked out of the country and were suffering in refugee camps to make this fantasy possible." In October, the Polish Consulate in New York canceled a talk by Judt after pressure from the Anti-Defamation League and the American Jewish Committee.
Even former U.S. presidents are not immune. Jimmy Carter has been the target of a smear campaign since the release of his latest book, "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid." Carter's most vociferous critics have not challenged him on the issues. Rather, they discredit him with personal attacks, even insinuating that the man who has achieved more than any other American president in Arab/Israeli peacemaking is anti-Semitic.
Why discredit, defame and silence those with opposing viewpoints? I believe it is because the Zionist lobby knows it cannot win based on facts. An honest discussion can only lead to one conclusion: The status quo in which Israel declares it alone has rights and intends to impose its will on the weaker Palestinians, stripping them permanently of their land, resources and rights, cannot lead to a lasting peace. We need an open debate and the freedom to discuss uncomfortable facts and explore the full range of policy options. Only then can we adopt a foreign policy that serves American interests and one that could actually bring a just peace to Palestinians and Israelis.
Joel Beinin co-edited "The Struggle for Sovereignty: Palestine and Israel,1993-2005." Contact us at insight@sfchronicle.com
***
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1167467841906&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
The Jerusalem Post
January 29, 2007
The problem, Benny Morris, is Zionism
By Yakov M. Rabkin
Benny Morris is an honest man. He was one of the first to expose the history of Zionist dispossession and expulsion of the Palestinians. He later honestly regretted that the ethnic cleansing had not been radical enough: The United States had done a better job in cleansing the country of its previous inhabitants.
Recently he published a heart-rending prophecy of doom to the effect that the entire Zionist enterprise in the Land of Israel is facing annihilation from an Iranian nuclear strike. His article ("This Holocaust will be different" The Jerusalem Post, January 18 - http://tinyurl.com/ysoxrw) is not pleasant to read. It contains graphic violence. But it must be read.
Benny Morris, professor of history at Ben-Gurion University, compares Israel's current predicament with the Holocaust. His depiction of the tragedy of European Jews is blood-curdling. Dismissing Israel's presumed nuclear arsenal as "unusable," he is truly desperate as he contemplates missile strikes against Israel's population centers and estimates that the casualties may reach the number of victims claimed by the Nazi genocide.
Morris appears to perpetuate the prophetic tradition that inspires quite a few Jews these days. Some denounce Israel's treatment of the Palestinians; some question the Zionist nature of the state; all believe that they are speaking truth to power. They propose solutions, advocate positions and defend opinions.
Morris does none of the above. He mourns the country he chose to live in and in which he has raised family. He does not say how to save the inhabitants of the State of Israel. In this sense, he may be closer to the authors of Greek tragedies than to the Bible prophets, who invariably point to a way out. This is why the Book of Jonah, in which repentance averts catastrophe, is read on the Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement, when Jews stand in awe of divine judgement.
MORRIS'S FATALISM is explicable. Zionism has been a rebellion against Diaspora Judaism and its cult of submission, humility and appeasement. It has been a valiant attempt to transform the humble Jew relying on divine providence into a intrepid Hebrew relying on his own power. This transformation has been an impressive success. Israel has acquired the mightiest military in the region, but this has brought her neither peace nor tranquillity.
Morris could have concluded his essay by quoting a Bible prophet: for it is not by strength that man prevails (Samuel I 2:9). Intimately familiar with the history of the creation of modern Israel, he could have proposed ways to recognize the injustice done to the Palestinians for the sake of establishing and expanding the Zionist state. He could have called on his compatriots to seek ways to correct the injustice and thus assuage the grievances of the Palestinians that have plagued Israel throughout her history.
Morris would then be pointing a way out of the violent impasse. As it stands now, his prophecy may only legitimize military strikes against Iran and further escalation of violence in the region. Once again Israel may come out victorious, but the Israelis will continue to live in fear of the next enemy.
Several Jewish thinkers have warned of this predicament. One of them prophesied during the War of Independence in 1948: And even if the Jews were to win the war, the "victorious" Jews would live surrounded by an entirely hostile Arab population, secluded inside ever-threatened borders, absorbed with physical self-defense. And all this would be the fate of a nation that - no matter how many immigrants it could absorb and how far it extended its boundaries - would still remain a very small people greatly outnumbered by hostile neighbors.
This warning came from Hannah Arendt who understood the perils of establishing a state against the will of local inhabitants and all the surrounding nations. Secular and Orthodox thinkers alike feared that Ben-Gurion's version of Zionism would endanger both physical and spiritual survival of the Jews.
NOWADAYS, when no Arab state poses a military threat to Israel it is Iran that many Israelis fear. Just next to Iran, which is as yet far from acquiring a nuclear potential, lies Pakistan, an unstable regime with a strong Islamist movement and a real, not imaginary, nuclear arsenal. Just as Arendt prophesied, there may be no end to existential threats if Israel stays its course. Benny Morris may have indeed written a Greek tragedy, a fatalistic turn of events that neither humans, nor gods, can alter.
Fatalism, just as multiple gods, is alien to Judaism. A Jewish reference to the eternal hatred of the nations is the talmudic saying: "Esau hates Jacob." Yet some rabbis, including Rabbi Naphtali Zvi Berlin (the Netziv), emphasize that in the future the two will love one another deeply, as did Rabbi Judas the Prince and the Roman Emperor Antoninus.
In the light of this interpretation it is easier to grasp why many community leaders took their inspiration from the story of Esau and Jacob before negotiating with unfriendly authorities: They were attempting to turn an enemy into a friend.
This is what the anti-Zionist rabbis of today claim they are doing when they travel to Iran and embrace President Ahmadinejad. Unlike Benny Morris, they are trying to find a way to prevent a tragedy from coming true. They may not succeed, but they should not be condemned for trying.
The author is professor of history at the University of Montreal. His latest book is A Threat from Within: A Century of Jewish Opposition to Zionism.
Monday, February 26, 2007
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
Parental Love
I'm sorry I haven't made a post in a few weeks.
I've done a couple more talks on Palestine in the past month (and I got married!), so I think you'll understand my absence.
My talks have been given entirely to United Church audiences and, though varying in length, I've tried to give some historical context, some anecdotal evidence about the Occupation, and an analysis of the anti-Occupation movement in the United Church of Canada.
I've been overjoyed with the reception I've received from the audiences. While I've had to address one or two difficult questions, I think I've been able to respond to them with the conviction that has driven me to speak out in the first place.
I want to thank especially the congregation at Riverside United Church in Ottawa where I spoke and engaged in a fruitful discussion for nearly two hours.
I'll try to post a bit more on some of these talks but for now I wanted to post this recent article by Gideon Levy, who I used as an inspirational introduction to my (accidentally) near-noteless presentation in Ottawa last Sunday.
This happens to be a recent article, and I direct it towards the question I received this past Sunday about the idea that if only Palestinian parents would love their children more, there wouldn't be this conflict. I reminded the audience that such a suggestion is racism of the simplest kind - the same racism that suggests Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims are savages or animals, less human than their Israeli counterparts. I then reminded the audience that the logic of this argument is also flawed for it ignores the reality that parents living in the diaspora routinely send their teenage children from the safety and security of North America or Europe to risk their lives serving a foreign army in an illegal military occupation. And while senseless to me I wouldn't suggest that these parents don't love their children.
We need to remember that parents here too will put on a brave face when their son or daughter is killed fighting for their country. That there death is honourable seems never to be questioned.
When a Palestinian is killed (as a victim of the Occupier or engaged in a violent act) parents sometimes put on a brave face and make nationalist and religious claims. This is in front of the media (how we can come to question their love for their children) and in front of their neighbours. But to suggest that when the western media leaves the mourning tent, or the neighbours clear out of the family home, that that parent feels no sense of loss, no mourning for the death of their child, indicates an absence of logic and humanity in the person that first suggests such a thing.
***
Ha’aretz
February 11, 2007
The Twilight Zone / Victims of the fence
By Gideon Levy
A still-life image: a building covered with Jerusalem stone, a large memorial poster hanging high up on one of the floors, and below, a sign in broken English over the "Paradise Cafe." Second image: a makeshift soccer field, empty, on which a huge puddle formed on Sunday of this week. Across the road a barbed-wire fence encircles the abandoned airfield of Atarot, once touted as "Jerusalem's international airport." Along the fence runs a ditch - into which the boy fell and, according to witnesses, bled for a long time until he died. He was struck by a bullet in the leg and lay there, dying in agony.
Was he only playing soccer? Did he just run to get the ball, which had fallen into the ditch along the fence, as his friends say? Or did he sabotage the fence and try to take the metal for his family's livelihood, as the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) said the next day?
What difference does it make? What does make a difference is the appalling question of what prompted a soldier, or a Border Policeman, to open fire from a long way off at the boy and then to leave him bleeding on the ground until he died. What goes through the mind of the shooter, in the moments before and after he takes the life of an adolescent, who was in no way putting anyone at risk - even if he touched a fence that must not be touched? Three fences surround the abandoned airport, and last Sunday we saw no hole in any of them, three days after the unnecessary, criminal shooting.
In this terrible place the children of Qalandiyah and its surroundings are killed like flies. At least eight have been killed here in the past few years, along the death fence. In this space we wrote about 11-year-old Yasser and his brother, Samar, 15, the two children of Sami Kosba, who were killed at the fence a month apart, in February, 2002; about Omar Matar, 14, killed in April, 2003; and about Ahmed Abu Latifi, 13, in September, 2003. And there was Fares Abed al-Kader, 14, killed in December, 2003. Now there is also Taha Aljawi, February, 2007.
It's said that he was a good boy, the kind of boy who goes with his father to pray in the morning and evening. And he was Jerusalem-born, the bearer of a blue ID card, like us. Taha Aljawi, a nice kid from Jerusalem, not yet 17 at his death.
The Hamas memorial poster shows dripping blood. In the Fatah poster the photograph is more recent: Taha looks a little older and has the shadow of a mustache. The Al-Aqsa Mosque appears in both posters - a rare instance of Palestinian national unity these days, in the paradisical cafe in Kafr Aqab, a Jerusalem neighborhood whose residents carry blue ID cards and pay municipal taxes, but which has nevertheless been fated to be on the other side of the separation fence, north of the capital, on the way to Ramallah.
The men sit in the big space of the cafe, which has been transformed into a mourning room, and eat lamb with rice in yogurt, as is the custom. Two weeks ago we were offered the same fare in nearby Anata, on the occasion of the killing of an 11-year-old girl, Abir Aramin, by the Border Police.
Taha's bereaved father, Mahmoud Aljawi, worked for the Jerusalem Municipality part-time for 11 years as a school janitor, until he was forced to take early retirement a few months ago. He is 48 and the father of six children, including the dead Taha, who was the second child. To supplement his income, Mahmoud also made leather garments in the Old City, and had a kiosk that sold sweets at the Qalandiyah checkpoint. He learned basic Hebrew at a beginners' course at the Gerard Behar cultural center on Bezalel Street in Jerusalem. Until three years ago the family lived in the Old City, but because of the overcrowding moved to Kafr Aqab. Their rented apartment is above the Paradise Cafe.
Last Thursday, Mahmoud went to the offices of the National Insurance Institute (NII) in Jerusalem, to arrange for his unemployment insurance. Taha had a free morning: In the past few weeks the authorities lengthened the school hours on the first four days of the week and canceled classes on Thursdays. He was a 10th-grader at the school for orphans in the Old City, opposite Al-Aqsa, an educational institution for the children of poor families. He got up at 5 every morning and went with his father and his two brothers, Mohammed, 18, and Suleiman, 8, to the adjacent mosque to pray, and then at about 7:30 left for school via the checkpoints. It was 40 minutes each way, if there were no problems.
Taha wanted to learn the printing profession. He was weak in English and also got into problems with the teacher. Not long ago his father had a talk with him and explained that if he wanted to work in the print industry, he would have to be articulate in both English and Hebrew. Taha was thinking about enrolling in Hebrew lessons at a center near the Rockefeller Museum in East Jerusalem.
Last Thursday Taha returned from the mosque at 7 A.M., after his last prayer, as it turned out. Mahmoud made breakfast for his son and at 7:30 his friends came by and asked him to play soccer with them on the field on the other side of the Ramallah road. The word "road" is a bit misleading: It's actually an intercity route peppered with potholes and puddles, flanked by garbage on both sides, on which traffic moves slowly.
According to the testimonies of Taha's friends, as related to the grieving father, shortly after the game started, the ball flew over another road that abuts the improvised playing field. Taha ran to retrieve the ball and then the kids heard a few shots. They say they ran in panic, but saw Taha slump into the ditch. No one knows for sure what happened after that. The children told Mahmoud that the shots had come from the direction of the skeleton of a tall building, which is under construction next to the soccer field. They say that the soldiers hid high up in the building and that they opened fire at Taha. Usually, they said, there are no soldiers in that building - only on that particular day.
The bullet slammed into Taha's left leg, above the knee. At the time, his father was near the government compound in East Jerusalem, on the way to the NII. Mahmoud's brother, Kamal, phoned him to say that Taha had been wounded.The two brothers rushed to Kafr Aqab. They tried to call Taha on his mobile phone - Mahmoud says he got his son a phone so he would always know where he was - but the boy didn't answer. Next to the house, people had already gathered; they related that Taha had been taken to the hospital in Ramallah. Kamal set out for Ramallah, while the distraught Mahmoud said he felt he had to stay with the mother and other children to calm them.
At the hospital, Kamal was told that Taha had been dead on arrival. He saw his nephew's body - with one bullet hole above the knee. In most cases, abullet in the leg will kill you only if it causes a massive loss of blood. Taha apparently lay in the ditch for a long time: The children told Mahmoud that at least an hour went by before the soldiers arrived to collect their victim and take him to the Qalandiyah checkpoint. From there a Palestinian ambulance was summoned - even though Taha was Israeli - to take him to Ramallah. Kamal called his brother and told him to come to the hospital to identity his son's body. Taha was buried that evening in the cemetery on Saladin Street in East Jerusalem, next to the post office.
"I always made sure that my children were with me. I watched over them, like over my eyes," Mahmoud says. "On Fridays I would walk with them to pray at Al-Aqsa, go by the grandparents' place, have a bite to eat, always staying close together. Everyone who knows me knows how I watched over them. I hear a lot from people: You have good children - they pray, they are getting a good education, they have no problems, quiet children. Sometimes people would ask: Who is Taha's father? Good for you, having a well-educated boy like that. In the winter he went to play computer games, in the summer he went to the Casablanca Pool in Ramallah, and other than that he was with me. Maybe 18 hours a day with me. We are a family that respects its children and the children respect their father.
"How can we know what he was doing there, next to the fence? It's not important. A boy of that age, he didn't endanger the soldiers - a shy boy, not violent, quiet. I didn't see what he was doing next to the fence. I didn't see, but what if he even cut the fence? And why should he cut the fence? He has a blue ID card. I always taught him to keep away from things like that."
The response of the IDF Spokesperson's Office: "On February 1 during the morning an IDF force spotted four suspicious youths next to the Qalandiyah refugee camp south of Ramallah, while they were still engaged in sabotaging the security fence and trying to breach it. The force fired at the lower body of one of the youths and hit his leg. Minutes later an IDF medical team arrived, which worked to stabilize the wounded person's condition, but without success."
We go out to the killing field. Mahmoud hasn't been there since his son fell by the fence. It's empty, even though people live all around it. We stop at the road, looking at the fence from a distance and at the ditch where Taha bled to death. Within seconds a Border Police Jeep barrels out of the abandoned airport terminal - a long way from us - and we scatter, in panic.
I've done a couple more talks on Palestine in the past month (and I got married!), so I think you'll understand my absence.
My talks have been given entirely to United Church audiences and, though varying in length, I've tried to give some historical context, some anecdotal evidence about the Occupation, and an analysis of the anti-Occupation movement in the United Church of Canada.
I've been overjoyed with the reception I've received from the audiences. While I've had to address one or two difficult questions, I think I've been able to respond to them with the conviction that has driven me to speak out in the first place.
I want to thank especially the congregation at Riverside United Church in Ottawa where I spoke and engaged in a fruitful discussion for nearly two hours.
I'll try to post a bit more on some of these talks but for now I wanted to post this recent article by Gideon Levy, who I used as an inspirational introduction to my (accidentally) near-noteless presentation in Ottawa last Sunday.
This happens to be a recent article, and I direct it towards the question I received this past Sunday about the idea that if only Palestinian parents would love their children more, there wouldn't be this conflict. I reminded the audience that such a suggestion is racism of the simplest kind - the same racism that suggests Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims are savages or animals, less human than their Israeli counterparts. I then reminded the audience that the logic of this argument is also flawed for it ignores the reality that parents living in the diaspora routinely send their teenage children from the safety and security of North America or Europe to risk their lives serving a foreign army in an illegal military occupation. And while senseless to me I wouldn't suggest that these parents don't love their children.
We need to remember that parents here too will put on a brave face when their son or daughter is killed fighting for their country. That there death is honourable seems never to be questioned.
When a Palestinian is killed (as a victim of the Occupier or engaged in a violent act) parents sometimes put on a brave face and make nationalist and religious claims. This is in front of the media (how we can come to question their love for their children) and in front of their neighbours. But to suggest that when the western media leaves the mourning tent, or the neighbours clear out of the family home, that that parent feels no sense of loss, no mourning for the death of their child, indicates an absence of logic and humanity in the person that first suggests such a thing.
***
Ha’aretz
February 11, 2007
The Twilight Zone / Victims of the fence
By Gideon Levy
A still-life image: a building covered with Jerusalem stone, a large memorial poster hanging high up on one of the floors, and below, a sign in broken English over the "Paradise Cafe." Second image: a makeshift soccer field, empty, on which a huge puddle formed on Sunday of this week. Across the road a barbed-wire fence encircles the abandoned airfield of Atarot, once touted as "Jerusalem's international airport." Along the fence runs a ditch - into which the boy fell and, according to witnesses, bled for a long time until he died. He was struck by a bullet in the leg and lay there, dying in agony.
Was he only playing soccer? Did he just run to get the ball, which had fallen into the ditch along the fence, as his friends say? Or did he sabotage the fence and try to take the metal for his family's livelihood, as the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) said the next day?
What difference does it make? What does make a difference is the appalling question of what prompted a soldier, or a Border Policeman, to open fire from a long way off at the boy and then to leave him bleeding on the ground until he died. What goes through the mind of the shooter, in the moments before and after he takes the life of an adolescent, who was in no way putting anyone at risk - even if he touched a fence that must not be touched? Three fences surround the abandoned airport, and last Sunday we saw no hole in any of them, three days after the unnecessary, criminal shooting.
In this terrible place the children of Qalandiyah and its surroundings are killed like flies. At least eight have been killed here in the past few years, along the death fence. In this space we wrote about 11-year-old Yasser and his brother, Samar, 15, the two children of Sami Kosba, who were killed at the fence a month apart, in February, 2002; about Omar Matar, 14, killed in April, 2003; and about Ahmed Abu Latifi, 13, in September, 2003. And there was Fares Abed al-Kader, 14, killed in December, 2003. Now there is also Taha Aljawi, February, 2007.
It's said that he was a good boy, the kind of boy who goes with his father to pray in the morning and evening. And he was Jerusalem-born, the bearer of a blue ID card, like us. Taha Aljawi, a nice kid from Jerusalem, not yet 17 at his death.
The Hamas memorial poster shows dripping blood. In the Fatah poster the photograph is more recent: Taha looks a little older and has the shadow of a mustache. The Al-Aqsa Mosque appears in both posters - a rare instance of Palestinian national unity these days, in the paradisical cafe in Kafr Aqab, a Jerusalem neighborhood whose residents carry blue ID cards and pay municipal taxes, but which has nevertheless been fated to be on the other side of the separation fence, north of the capital, on the way to Ramallah.
The men sit in the big space of the cafe, which has been transformed into a mourning room, and eat lamb with rice in yogurt, as is the custom. Two weeks ago we were offered the same fare in nearby Anata, on the occasion of the killing of an 11-year-old girl, Abir Aramin, by the Border Police.
Taha's bereaved father, Mahmoud Aljawi, worked for the Jerusalem Municipality part-time for 11 years as a school janitor, until he was forced to take early retirement a few months ago. He is 48 and the father of six children, including the dead Taha, who was the second child. To supplement his income, Mahmoud also made leather garments in the Old City, and had a kiosk that sold sweets at the Qalandiyah checkpoint. He learned basic Hebrew at a beginners' course at the Gerard Behar cultural center on Bezalel Street in Jerusalem. Until three years ago the family lived in the Old City, but because of the overcrowding moved to Kafr Aqab. Their rented apartment is above the Paradise Cafe.
Last Thursday, Mahmoud went to the offices of the National Insurance Institute (NII) in Jerusalem, to arrange for his unemployment insurance. Taha had a free morning: In the past few weeks the authorities lengthened the school hours on the first four days of the week and canceled classes on Thursdays. He was a 10th-grader at the school for orphans in the Old City, opposite Al-Aqsa, an educational institution for the children of poor families. He got up at 5 every morning and went with his father and his two brothers, Mohammed, 18, and Suleiman, 8, to the adjacent mosque to pray, and then at about 7:30 left for school via the checkpoints. It was 40 minutes each way, if there were no problems.
Taha wanted to learn the printing profession. He was weak in English and also got into problems with the teacher. Not long ago his father had a talk with him and explained that if he wanted to work in the print industry, he would have to be articulate in both English and Hebrew. Taha was thinking about enrolling in Hebrew lessons at a center near the Rockefeller Museum in East Jerusalem.
Last Thursday Taha returned from the mosque at 7 A.M., after his last prayer, as it turned out. Mahmoud made breakfast for his son and at 7:30 his friends came by and asked him to play soccer with them on the field on the other side of the Ramallah road. The word "road" is a bit misleading: It's actually an intercity route peppered with potholes and puddles, flanked by garbage on both sides, on which traffic moves slowly.
According to the testimonies of Taha's friends, as related to the grieving father, shortly after the game started, the ball flew over another road that abuts the improvised playing field. Taha ran to retrieve the ball and then the kids heard a few shots. They say they ran in panic, but saw Taha slump into the ditch. No one knows for sure what happened after that. The children told Mahmoud that the shots had come from the direction of the skeleton of a tall building, which is under construction next to the soccer field. They say that the soldiers hid high up in the building and that they opened fire at Taha. Usually, they said, there are no soldiers in that building - only on that particular day.
The bullet slammed into Taha's left leg, above the knee. At the time, his father was near the government compound in East Jerusalem, on the way to the NII. Mahmoud's brother, Kamal, phoned him to say that Taha had been wounded.The two brothers rushed to Kafr Aqab. They tried to call Taha on his mobile phone - Mahmoud says he got his son a phone so he would always know where he was - but the boy didn't answer. Next to the house, people had already gathered; they related that Taha had been taken to the hospital in Ramallah. Kamal set out for Ramallah, while the distraught Mahmoud said he felt he had to stay with the mother and other children to calm them.
At the hospital, Kamal was told that Taha had been dead on arrival. He saw his nephew's body - with one bullet hole above the knee. In most cases, abullet in the leg will kill you only if it causes a massive loss of blood. Taha apparently lay in the ditch for a long time: The children told Mahmoud that at least an hour went by before the soldiers arrived to collect their victim and take him to the Qalandiyah checkpoint. From there a Palestinian ambulance was summoned - even though Taha was Israeli - to take him to Ramallah. Kamal called his brother and told him to come to the hospital to identity his son's body. Taha was buried that evening in the cemetery on Saladin Street in East Jerusalem, next to the post office.
"I always made sure that my children were with me. I watched over them, like over my eyes," Mahmoud says. "On Fridays I would walk with them to pray at Al-Aqsa, go by the grandparents' place, have a bite to eat, always staying close together. Everyone who knows me knows how I watched over them. I hear a lot from people: You have good children - they pray, they are getting a good education, they have no problems, quiet children. Sometimes people would ask: Who is Taha's father? Good for you, having a well-educated boy like that. In the winter he went to play computer games, in the summer he went to the Casablanca Pool in Ramallah, and other than that he was with me. Maybe 18 hours a day with me. We are a family that respects its children and the children respect their father.
"How can we know what he was doing there, next to the fence? It's not important. A boy of that age, he didn't endanger the soldiers - a shy boy, not violent, quiet. I didn't see what he was doing next to the fence. I didn't see, but what if he even cut the fence? And why should he cut the fence? He has a blue ID card. I always taught him to keep away from things like that."
The response of the IDF Spokesperson's Office: "On February 1 during the morning an IDF force spotted four suspicious youths next to the Qalandiyah refugee camp south of Ramallah, while they were still engaged in sabotaging the security fence and trying to breach it. The force fired at the lower body of one of the youths and hit his leg. Minutes later an IDF medical team arrived, which worked to stabilize the wounded person's condition, but without success."
We go out to the killing field. Mahmoud hasn't been there since his son fell by the fence. It's empty, even though people live all around it. We stop at the road, looking at the fence from a distance and at the ditch where Taha bled to death. Within seconds a Border Police Jeep barrels out of the abandoned airport terminal - a long way from us - and we scatter, in panic.
Thursday, January 18, 2007
Ontario Teachers criticize Israel - and get threatened for it.
Support OSSTF District 12's RIGHT to have a Democratice Debate on Israel!
Support DEMOCRACY not HATE!
One District of the Ontario Teachers Union has decided to raise the issue of Israel's horrific abuses in the Occupied Territories, and have been threatened for it. Once again, we see that ANY criticism of the Occupation brings out the worst in human nature.
So while B'Nai Brith and the Jewish Defense League mount a campaign of intimidation, the Union tries to pass a benign motion that criticizes Israel. Read the document below, as well as OSSTF's response to the intimidation from B'Nai Brith and the JDL. And also check out these links to Jewish Groups who maintain that B'Nai Brith and the JDL DO NOT REPRESENT THE JEWISH COMMUNITY!!!
This sort of thing again reminds us the national communities in the diaspora are often FAR MORE fanatical than those living in the actual state. Please defend OSSTF's right to criticize a brutal State's abuse of an indigenous community.
http://www.hostultra.com/~jwceo/jwceo4/
http://www.jfjfp.org/
The Motion:
BIRT District 12 STBU Council endorse the following motion for AMPA 2007:
“BIRT AMPA 2007 urge the Provincial Executive to express OSSTF’s criticism of Israel’s continued violation of the human rights of Palestinians as well as its belief that the achievement of justice for the Palestinians will help bring peace to the Middle East and to the people of Israel by taking the following actions:
a) Request the provincial Human Rights Committee to develop an educational campaign for its members as well as curricular materials for the classroom, to be ready for September’s Provincial Council, on Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians, Palestine’s role in this conflict, the role of Canada in the Israel-Palestine conflict, and the international community’s response.
b) Request the Human Rights Committee to devise a campaign to materially and morally
support the students of the occupied territories unable to receive an education due to the occupation and make links with teacher unions and student organizations both in the occupied territories as well as Israel who are seeking a just and peaceful solution to this region’s conflicts.
c) Write a letter to the prime minister as well as to the leaders of the oppositions parties, urging them to:
i) Pressure Israel to comply with international humanitarian law including the
decisions of the International Court of Justice and the Fourth Geneva Convention;
ii) Call for Israel’s withdrawal from all occupied territories;
iii) Demand the removal of Israel’s “separation wall” which has resulted in the
annexation of Palestinian land and extreme hardship in the daily lives of Palestinians;
iv) Pressure Israel to restore the revenues collected by them to their rightful owners,
the Palestinian Authority;
v) Publicly criticize Israel’s aggression against Gaza and Lebanon and
vi) End Canada’s sanctions against the democratically elected government of Palestine
which has resulted in the paralysis of the civil service and the extreme impoverishment
of the Palestinian people.
d) Develop ways OSSTF can demonstrate its support of the growing international call for
Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions against Israel.”
Estimated cost: to be determined
J. Kunin, Vaughan Road Academy/H. Hulays, Harbord CI
***
Press Release - January 17th 2007
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Teachers’ Union Defends Right to Freedom of Speech
The Executive of District 12 Secondary Teachers Bargaining Unit unanimously condemns B’nai Brith and the Jewish Defense League for what it believes amounts to a bullying campaign launched against OSSTF and its members.
On January 12th, B’nai Brith launched an all-out assault on OSSTF by sending an e-mail "alert" to its members urging them to pressure OSSTF members to disengage from a debate scheduled to take place at this Thursday’s regular monthly Council Meeting. Today, the Jewish Defense League announced its intention to rally outside of the OSSTF office during the meeting.
"This can be seen as nothing short of an attempt to intimidate our membership" said Doug Jolliffe, President of OSSTF District 12 Toronto.
"What seems to be missing, as indicated by the actions of these two organizations, is an understanding, despite an explanation from me to B’nai Brith before this alert was released, that as a democratic organization, OSSTF must entertain debate on any motion duly moved and seconded, as long as it does not ask for support of an illegal action or an action which breaches our own Constitution, Policies or Bylaws" explained Jolliffe.
"The Executive can not quash debate, nor can the Executive control what items Members feel worthy of debate, nor as a democratic organization should we."
Each month, OSSTF Toronto Teachers hold a Council Meeting the purpose of which is in part to consider motions. Unless passed by a majority vote, the motions belong only to the Mover and Seconder. Motions are brought forward for debate in order to ascertain whether the idea contained therein has broad enough acceptance and support among the Membership to become the Union’s official position by a majority vote. It is only through the support of a majority of its representative Council that a motion can be approved.
"The Executive understands the emotional response these kinds of ideas provokes. We have had to grapple with that ourselves as voting Members of this meeting, and certainly we know that our Membership is not a monolith when it comes to these motions, or in fact any other motion that might come before our Council for debate. However for an outside organization to encourage and engage in this kind of heavy-handed, intimidating action before a decision as to whether these motions are ones we can support, is absurd."
"Make no mistake about it. Whether the motions are carried or defeated, it will be a reflection of the will of the majority of our Members, and that’s as it should be."
For further information contact:
Doug Jolliffe President
OSSTF District 12
(416) 393-8900, Extension 240
***
Response to B'nai Brith Alert
By STBU Executive
Jan 15, 2007, 08:45
On Time Motions
Posted on our website are the On Time Motions to our Council Meeting. On time motions are those received, in accordance with our rules, by the deadline.
An On Time Motion is not owned by the Union, nor does it reflect the position of the Executive or the Union. An On Time Motion reflects the position of the people who brought it forward.
OSSTF is a democratic organization. Therefore, in accordance with acceptable meeting practice principles (see Robert’s Rules of Order), if two members of our some 6000 members feel an issue is something they want their organization to consider and discuss, they put that issue forward in the form of a motion. They own the motion and its ideas - not the Union.
As a democratic organization, unless the ideas in the motion are illegal (ultra vires) or form a breach of the established Policy or Bylaws of our Union, the subject of the motion is considered to be In Order and therefore debatable.
The Executive can not quash debate.
Calling our office to tell us not to debate a particular subject is therefore a useless waste of your time, and ours. Neither as a group, nor as individuals do we have the right, or authority, to tell our Members what topic of discussion the organization will or will not entertain, regardless of our personal position or opinion about that topic.
The Motions coming to January Council, as they stand right now, are simply that - Motions; the ideas of two people who wish to see whether their opinion has broad enough acceptance and support among their colleagues and fellow Members that it might become the Union's official position.
A motion only becomes official OSSTF action/policy IF it is passed by a majority vote. This has not occurred.
Why Do Teachers Engage in Debates about Controversial Issues?
Many people ask why teachers are even discussing such issues. The answer, in part, is that many teacher members of our union would share the very same concern underlying that very question. That is the thing about democracy. Not everyone agrees. So, some people feel we should be looking at this particular international human rights issue. Others feel we should not. The debate will occur, and the majority will rule.
B’nai Brith Interference in OSSTF Democratic Processes
With regard to B’nai Brith’s alert, it is our belief that B’nai Brith should refrain from interference in the democratic processes of other organizations. We further feel that it is irresponsible for B’nai Brith to council people to become involved in a bullying campaign to try to force Members of a duly constituted, legal organization into not discussing an issue of interest to its Members. Our organization provides equal opportunity for those Members both in favour of and opposed to any motions being debated to state their opinion and participate in the voting process. We feel that pre-judging the topics of another’s debates is repressive.
Of interest to some may be that the information B’nai Brith provided in its most recent alert is incorrect. They indicated in their e-mail that it was as a result of community response to their last alert that the motion for December's meeting was withdrawn. In fact that motion was withdrawn prior to their alert. Had they called to check their facts, they would have been told that.
As a result of the last community alert by B’nai Brith, we had to turn off our phones because the staff who answer our phones were taking so much horrible abuse from callers, that one was actually in tears. Many of the callers motivated by B’nai Brith’s last alert were abusive.
Further, the e-mails we received as a result of B’nai Brith’s alert showed an astonishing lack of understanding of the meaning of tolerance, and some were outright hate-filled. OSSTF found it interesting to note that ignorance can breed this kind of behaviour, regardless of which community is doing the behaving.
Finally, the District 12 STBU Executive understands that discussions dealing with the middle east can provoke highly emotional responses. However we believe that no one has the right to interfere in the right of others to hold open discussion and debate, provided the topics being debated do not contravene the law and will not lead to illegal action.
© Copyright 2006 by OSSTF District 12
Support DEMOCRACY not HATE!
One District of the Ontario Teachers Union has decided to raise the issue of Israel's horrific abuses in the Occupied Territories, and have been threatened for it. Once again, we see that ANY criticism of the Occupation brings out the worst in human nature.
So while B'Nai Brith and the Jewish Defense League mount a campaign of intimidation, the Union tries to pass a benign motion that criticizes Israel. Read the document below, as well as OSSTF's response to the intimidation from B'Nai Brith and the JDL. And also check out these links to Jewish Groups who maintain that B'Nai Brith and the JDL DO NOT REPRESENT THE JEWISH COMMUNITY!!!
This sort of thing again reminds us the national communities in the diaspora are often FAR MORE fanatical than those living in the actual state. Please defend OSSTF's right to criticize a brutal State's abuse of an indigenous community.
http://www.hostultra.com/~jwceo/jwceo4/
http://www.jfjfp.org/
The Motion:
BIRT District 12 STBU Council endorse the following motion for AMPA 2007:
“BIRT AMPA 2007 urge the Provincial Executive to express OSSTF’s criticism of Israel’s continued violation of the human rights of Palestinians as well as its belief that the achievement of justice for the Palestinians will help bring peace to the Middle East and to the people of Israel by taking the following actions:
a) Request the provincial Human Rights Committee to develop an educational campaign for its members as well as curricular materials for the classroom, to be ready for September’s Provincial Council, on Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians, Palestine’s role in this conflict, the role of Canada in the Israel-Palestine conflict, and the international community’s response.
b) Request the Human Rights Committee to devise a campaign to materially and morally
support the students of the occupied territories unable to receive an education due to the occupation and make links with teacher unions and student organizations both in the occupied territories as well as Israel who are seeking a just and peaceful solution to this region’s conflicts.
c) Write a letter to the prime minister as well as to the leaders of the oppositions parties, urging them to:
i) Pressure Israel to comply with international humanitarian law including the
decisions of the International Court of Justice and the Fourth Geneva Convention;
ii) Call for Israel’s withdrawal from all occupied territories;
iii) Demand the removal of Israel’s “separation wall” which has resulted in the
annexation of Palestinian land and extreme hardship in the daily lives of Palestinians;
iv) Pressure Israel to restore the revenues collected by them to their rightful owners,
the Palestinian Authority;
v) Publicly criticize Israel’s aggression against Gaza and Lebanon and
vi) End Canada’s sanctions against the democratically elected government of Palestine
which has resulted in the paralysis of the civil service and the extreme impoverishment
of the Palestinian people.
d) Develop ways OSSTF can demonstrate its support of the growing international call for
Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions against Israel.”
Estimated cost: to be determined
J. Kunin, Vaughan Road Academy/H. Hulays, Harbord CI
***
Press Release - January 17th 2007
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Teachers’ Union Defends Right to Freedom of Speech
The Executive of District 12 Secondary Teachers Bargaining Unit unanimously condemns B’nai Brith and the Jewish Defense League for what it believes amounts to a bullying campaign launched against OSSTF and its members.
On January 12th, B’nai Brith launched an all-out assault on OSSTF by sending an e-mail "alert" to its members urging them to pressure OSSTF members to disengage from a debate scheduled to take place at this Thursday’s regular monthly Council Meeting. Today, the Jewish Defense League announced its intention to rally outside of the OSSTF office during the meeting.
"This can be seen as nothing short of an attempt to intimidate our membership" said Doug Jolliffe, President of OSSTF District 12 Toronto.
"What seems to be missing, as indicated by the actions of these two organizations, is an understanding, despite an explanation from me to B’nai Brith before this alert was released, that as a democratic organization, OSSTF must entertain debate on any motion duly moved and seconded, as long as it does not ask for support of an illegal action or an action which breaches our own Constitution, Policies or Bylaws" explained Jolliffe.
"The Executive can not quash debate, nor can the Executive control what items Members feel worthy of debate, nor as a democratic organization should we."
Each month, OSSTF Toronto Teachers hold a Council Meeting the purpose of which is in part to consider motions. Unless passed by a majority vote, the motions belong only to the Mover and Seconder. Motions are brought forward for debate in order to ascertain whether the idea contained therein has broad enough acceptance and support among the Membership to become the Union’s official position by a majority vote. It is only through the support of a majority of its representative Council that a motion can be approved.
"The Executive understands the emotional response these kinds of ideas provokes. We have had to grapple with that ourselves as voting Members of this meeting, and certainly we know that our Membership is not a monolith when it comes to these motions, or in fact any other motion that might come before our Council for debate. However for an outside organization to encourage and engage in this kind of heavy-handed, intimidating action before a decision as to whether these motions are ones we can support, is absurd."
"Make no mistake about it. Whether the motions are carried or defeated, it will be a reflection of the will of the majority of our Members, and that’s as it should be."
For further information contact:
Doug Jolliffe President
OSSTF District 12
(416) 393-8900, Extension 240
***
Response to B'nai Brith Alert
By STBU Executive
Jan 15, 2007, 08:45
On Time Motions
Posted on our website are the On Time Motions to our Council Meeting. On time motions are those received, in accordance with our rules, by the deadline.
An On Time Motion is not owned by the Union, nor does it reflect the position of the Executive or the Union. An On Time Motion reflects the position of the people who brought it forward.
OSSTF is a democratic organization. Therefore, in accordance with acceptable meeting practice principles (see Robert’s Rules of Order), if two members of our some 6000 members feel an issue is something they want their organization to consider and discuss, they put that issue forward in the form of a motion. They own the motion and its ideas - not the Union.
As a democratic organization, unless the ideas in the motion are illegal (ultra vires) or form a breach of the established Policy or Bylaws of our Union, the subject of the motion is considered to be In Order and therefore debatable.
The Executive can not quash debate.
Calling our office to tell us not to debate a particular subject is therefore a useless waste of your time, and ours. Neither as a group, nor as individuals do we have the right, or authority, to tell our Members what topic of discussion the organization will or will not entertain, regardless of our personal position or opinion about that topic.
The Motions coming to January Council, as they stand right now, are simply that - Motions; the ideas of two people who wish to see whether their opinion has broad enough acceptance and support among their colleagues and fellow Members that it might become the Union's official position.
A motion only becomes official OSSTF action/policy IF it is passed by a majority vote. This has not occurred.
Why Do Teachers Engage in Debates about Controversial Issues?
Many people ask why teachers are even discussing such issues. The answer, in part, is that many teacher members of our union would share the very same concern underlying that very question. That is the thing about democracy. Not everyone agrees. So, some people feel we should be looking at this particular international human rights issue. Others feel we should not. The debate will occur, and the majority will rule.
B’nai Brith Interference in OSSTF Democratic Processes
With regard to B’nai Brith’s alert, it is our belief that B’nai Brith should refrain from interference in the democratic processes of other organizations. We further feel that it is irresponsible for B’nai Brith to council people to become involved in a bullying campaign to try to force Members of a duly constituted, legal organization into not discussing an issue of interest to its Members. Our organization provides equal opportunity for those Members both in favour of and opposed to any motions being debated to state their opinion and participate in the voting process. We feel that pre-judging the topics of another’s debates is repressive.
Of interest to some may be that the information B’nai Brith provided in its most recent alert is incorrect. They indicated in their e-mail that it was as a result of community response to their last alert that the motion for December's meeting was withdrawn. In fact that motion was withdrawn prior to their alert. Had they called to check their facts, they would have been told that.
As a result of the last community alert by B’nai Brith, we had to turn off our phones because the staff who answer our phones were taking so much horrible abuse from callers, that one was actually in tears. Many of the callers motivated by B’nai Brith’s last alert were abusive.
Further, the e-mails we received as a result of B’nai Brith’s alert showed an astonishing lack of understanding of the meaning of tolerance, and some were outright hate-filled. OSSTF found it interesting to note that ignorance can breed this kind of behaviour, regardless of which community is doing the behaving.
Finally, the District 12 STBU Executive understands that discussions dealing with the middle east can provoke highly emotional responses. However we believe that no one has the right to interfere in the right of others to hold open discussion and debate, provided the topics being debated do not contravene the law and will not lead to illegal action.
© Copyright 2006 by OSSTF District 12
Friday, January 12, 2007
Ilan Pappe on the Ethnic Cleansing of the Palestinians
Please listen to the following speech given by Israeli Prof. Ilan Pappe at Northeastern University in Boston on November 19, 2006. Prof. Pappe is a Professor at Haifa University in Israel and the author of numerous works on the history of the Arab-Israeli Conflict.
Here, he describes the Zionist planning and execution of the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians which started in 1948 and continues to this day. Professor Pappe makes a plea to the people of America and Europe to put a halt to Israel's ongoing ethnic cleansing of the indigenous Palestinian people.
http://kabobfest.com/interview/IlanPappe111906.mp3
Here, he describes the Zionist planning and execution of the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians which started in 1948 and continues to this day. Professor Pappe makes a plea to the people of America and Europe to put a halt to Israel's ongoing ethnic cleansing of the indigenous Palestinian people.
http://kabobfest.com/interview/IlanPappe111906.mp3
Tuesday, January 02, 2007
Cliometrics
B'Tselem, the Israeli Human Rights Organization has released it's casualty report for 2006. You can navigate to their home page by following the link on the right hand side of this page.
Here is how the numbers breaks down for 2006...
Palestinians killed 17 Israeli CIVILIANS in the Occupied Territories and in Israel proper in 2006. This includes 1 minor. Palestinians also killed 6 members of the Israeli "Security Forces".
Israelis Killed 660 Palestinians. This includes 141 minors. B'Tselem estimates that at least 322 of these Palestinians were uninvolved in any hostilities when they were killed.
So lets look at these figures head to head:
Total Israelis Killed = 23
Total Palestinians Killed = 660
Thats 28 Palestinians for every Israeli life lost.
Total Israeli Children Killed by Palestinians = 1
Total Palestinian Children Killed by Israelis = 141
Thats 140 Palestinians Children for every Israeli Child killed.
Here is how the numbers breaks down for 2006...
Palestinians killed 17 Israeli CIVILIANS in the Occupied Territories and in Israel proper in 2006. This includes 1 minor. Palestinians also killed 6 members of the Israeli "Security Forces".
Israelis Killed 660 Palestinians. This includes 141 minors. B'Tselem estimates that at least 322 of these Palestinians were uninvolved in any hostilities when they were killed.
So lets look at these figures head to head:
Total Israelis Killed = 23
Total Palestinians Killed = 660
Thats 28 Palestinians for every Israeli life lost.
Total Israeli Children Killed by Palestinians = 1
Total Palestinian Children Killed by Israelis = 141
Thats 140 Palestinians Children for every Israeli Child killed.
Monday, December 18, 2006
The Banality of Suffering
The Banality of Suffering
Nathalie Khankan writing from Ramallah, occupied Palestine,
Live from Palestine, 7 December 2006
Is it looking at my own students at Birzeit University that reminds me of my old English teacher John S.? Every Tuesday and Thursday at 3:10 pm, and ten minutes before the end of class, they are all restless in their chairs, eager to continue their day without me. I do not take it personally. I feel their energy. But I do remember John fondly.
I recall his ability to last throughout the lesson and to end it with a virtual cliffhanger. Not all, but some of us would just be sitting there, nailed to our chairs, as the bell rang and other students began chatting, doors opening, noise everywhere. And, in the midst of clatter and laughter, John's last sentence would linger in the air. His cliffhanger.
One such cliffhanger I remember particularly well. We were discussing Brueghel's Fall of Icarus painting--the one that you can find in Musee des Beaux-Arts in Brussels. The myth of Icarus and his father Daedelus who made wings with wax to escape their Crete-prison. Flight. Youthful desire. Hubris. Icarus flying too close to the sun. Wings melting. The young Icarus falling into the sea and drowning. Tragedy.
In fact, not much of Icarus is showing in the painting. Only his white legs sticking up from the water in the bottom right-hand corner. But there are other people depicted, all going about their everyday lives. One man is ploughing. I do not remember the details, only the big panorama of a landscape with people in it, doing their things, like ploughing, undisturbed by the boy drowning. Icarus. The silent drama of a boy dying.
Did we talk about Auden's poem, as well? The one that speaks to Brueghel's painting:
About suffering they were never wrong,
The Old Masters: how well they understood
Its human position; how it takes place
While someone else is eating or opening a window or just
walking dully along ...
Maybe we did, or maybe I read the poem later. I do not remember. But I know the cliffhanger still hangs strong: Brueghel's painting as a depiction of the banality of great suffering. We just sat there, some of us, thinking on as the classroom emptied and John packed away his books. Not really knowing then what it means or could also mean. The banality of suffering ... its human position ...
Suffering ... its headline position. The headlines on the front pages of al-Quds and al-Ayyam that we read every day. Every day there is a number.
The number of casualties, Palestinians injured or killed or murdered under occupation. This month there have been headlines in white on black background, the colours themselves having their own language.
I wonder what you do when every day the headline contains a count and that count is about you? A relative newcomer to occupied-Palestine realities, I still cannot fully comprehend the idea, let alone fact, of years and decades of outrageous headlines that enumerate the deaths of my people. Like one long headline that forgot it had to change.
On this morning of November 8, Icarus comes from Bayt Hanoun. Eighteen people killed in their sleep. Most of them women and children. Not that men dying is less suffering. From the comfort zone of Ramallah, these numbers are strangely close-far.
The headline continues. And under it, a picture from Ma'an News that makes me want to plough on even harder. It is without sleeping-dead women and children. Three living men are in the picture. They are all in an alley, the ground muddy, stony. There is a pool of water on the ground. On the right-hand side. A pool of red water. In the middle of the picture, one man is down on his knees. Leaning on one knee actually. The other leg (there they are, the legs again!) shows a bare foot. His hands cover his face. His head is bent in grief. The other two men lean towards him, their arms under his. A Beit Hanoun snapshot. Really, it is just two men trying to make a third man stand. But no matter how hard I try, I cannot make it go away.
Nathalie Khankan is a doctoral candidate at the University of California, Berkeley. She writes on modern Palestinian poetry and can be reached at khankan@berkeley.edu. This article was originally published in This Week in Palestine and is republished with the author's permission.
Thursday, December 14, 2006
Israeli Supreme Court legalizes state murder
Israeli Supreme Court has ruled that targeted assassinations are LEGAL. Read about it here:
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/801083.html
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/801083.html
Wednesday, December 13, 2006
Palestinian Poverty
HAARETZ - December 13th
No Palestinian fishing rod
By Amira Hass
The world is applauding Nobel Peace Prize laureate Muhammad Yunus for applying the folk wisdom that a poor man should be given not a fish but rather a fishing pole. That is, to fight poverty, it is necessary not to feed poor people but rather to let them earn a living. And at the same time, the world is being asked to keep giving the Palestinians fish, because it knows very well that Israel will block any shipment of fishing rods.
More than 1.3 million Palestinians, out of a population of 3.7 million (including the inhabitants of East Jerusalem), were defined as poor in 2005. More than half of them, 820,000, were defined as sunk in "deep poverty." The Palestinian National Commission for Poverty Alleviation has set two poverty lines, on the basis of average consumption expenses: The official poverty line relates to nine categories of goods and services, if the daily expenditure for them is less than $2.40 per capita. The "deep poverty line" relates to just three categories - food, clothing and housing (without medical care, education, or transportation expenses), the expenditure for which is less than $2.00 a day.
In the first half of 2006, the number of Palestinians in a state of "deep poverty" reached 1,069,200, as noted in a detailed United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) report that was published in November, headed "Prolonged Crisis in the Occupied Palestinian Territory: Recent Socio-Economic Impacts on Refugees and Non-Refugees." Their number did decline by half toward the end of 2006 because of aid they received and the payment of part of the public sector salaries. One-third of the Palestinian public reported that it had received aid during the second half of 2006: 15.3 percent of the West Bank's inhabitants and 56.9 percent of the inhabitants of the Gaza Strip. Nearly 78 percent reported that the aid was in the form of food. This is a matter of sums that range between NIS 200 and NIS 489 per family.
On the backdrop of these shocking cumulative reports, last week the UN agencies in partnership with 14 non-governmental organizations embarked on a campaign to raise $453.6 million for emergency humanitarian aid to the Palestinians. This places the Palestinian territories in third place among 13 focal points for aid, all the others of which are in Africa: after Sudan and Congo, and before Somalia and Zimbabwe. Even if the sums are not covered in their entirety, the high ceiling reflects the assessment that the crisis will continue in the coming years. It shows that the international boycott of the Hamas government cannot really work, because the "African" poverty that has been created here is more threatening: from the perspective of health, politics, security and morality.
And above all, the high aid ceiling reflects the depths of the leniency toward Israel, or the absence of the political ability to cause Israel to do one of two things: Either to recognize its obligations as the occupying power under international covenants, and to care for the occupied population, or to desist immediately from its policy of intentional economic strangulation. For years, Israel has been using the weapon of economic strangulation as a means of political pressure. And the tempest this policy has reaped has thus far been that the Palestinians are growing closer to Iran.
Israel is continuing to steal hundreds of thousands of shekels in customs and tax monies that do not belong to it, which it is not transferring to the Palestinian treasury. This is the proximate cause of the deepening of the crisis. The continuing, permanent and historic cause are the limitations on movement Israel imposes, contrary to the repeated promises (particularly to the World Bank and the American State Department) to "ease up": The closing of the Gaza Strip crossing points and the positioning of hundreds of roadblocks and barriers in the West Bank are the factors that make any economic activity a gamble, to the point of bankruptcy and giving up a priori. It is much easier for the Western countries to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars a year to subsidize food that Israel is not allowing the Palestinians to produce and purchase themselves than it is to cause Israel to stop behaving as though it stands above international law.
Monday, December 11, 2006
Jimmy Carter
Former President Jimmy Carter addresses, in general, the response to his recent book "Palestine: Peace not Apartheid".
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-carter8dec08,0,7999232.story?coll=la-news-comment-opinions
LA Times Op-ed,
December 8, 2006
Speaking frankly about Israel and Palestine
Jimmy Carter says his recent book is drawing knee-jerk accusations of anti-Israel bias.
By Jimmy Carter
JIMMY CARTER was the 39th president of the United States. His newest book is "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid," published last month.
I SIGNED A CONTRACT with Simon & Schuster two years ago to write a book about the Middle East, based on my personal observations, as the Carter Center monitored three elections in Palestine and on my consultations with Israeli political leaders and peace activists.
We covered every Palestinian community in 1996, 2005 and 2006, when Yasser Arafat, and later Mahmoud Abbas, were elected president and members of parliament were chosen. The elections were almost flawless, and turnout was very high, except in East Jerusalem, where, under severe Israeli restraints, only about 2% of registered voters managed to cast ballots.
The many controversial issues concerning Palestine and the path to peace for Israel are intensely debated among Israelis and throughout other nations, but not in the United States. For the last 30 years, I have witnessed and experienced the severe restraints on any free and balanced discussion of the facts. This reluctance to criticize any policies of the Israeli government is because of the extraordinary lobbying efforts of the American-Israel Political Action Committee and the absence of any significant contrary voices.
It would be almost politically suicidal for members of Congress to espouse a balanced position between Israel and Palestine, to suggest that Israel comply with international law or to speak in defense of justice or human rights for Palestinians. Very few would ever deign to visit the Palestinian cities of Ramallah, Nablus, Hebron, Gaza City, or even Bethlehem, and talk to the beleaguered residents. What is even more difficult to comprehend is why the editorial pages of the major newspapers and magazines in the United States exercise similar self-restraint, quite contrary to private assessments expressed quite forcefully by their correspondents in the Holy Land.
With some degree of reluctance and some uncertainty about the reception my book would receive, I used maps, text and documents to describe the situation accurately and to analyze the only possible path to peace: Israelis and Palestinians living side by side within their own internationally recognized boundaries. These options are consistent with key U.N. resolutions supported by the U.S. and Israel, official American policy since 1967, agreements consummated by Israeli leaders and their governments in 1978 and 1993 (for which they earned Nobel Peace Prizes), the Arab League's offer to recognize Israel in 2002 and the International Quartet's "Roadmap for Peace," which has been accepted by the PLO and largely rejected by Israel.
The book is devoted to circumstances and events in Palestine and not in Israel, where democracy prevails and citizens live together and are legally guaranteed equal status.
Although I have spent only a week or so on a book tour so far, it is already possible to judge public and media reaction. Sales are brisk, and I have had interesting interviews on TV, including "Larry King Live," "Hardball," "Meet the Press," "The NewsHour With Jim Lehrer," the "Charlie Rose" show, C-SPAN and others. But I have seen few news stories in major newspapers about what I have written.
Book reviews in the mainstream media have been written mostly by representatives of Jewish organizations who would be unlikely to visit the occupied territories, and their primary criticism is that the book is anti-Israel. Two members of Congress have been publicly critical. Incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for instance, issued a statement (before the book was published) saying that "he does not speak for the Democratic Party on Israel." Some reviews posted on Amazon.com call me "anti-Semitic," and others accuse the book of "lies" and "distortions." A former Carter Center fellow has taken issue with it, and Alan Dershowitz called the book's title "indecent."
Out in the real world, however, the response has been overwhelmingly positive. I've signed books in five stores, with more than 1,000 buyers at each site. I've had one negative remark "that I should be tried for treason", and one caller on C-SPAN said that I was an anti-Semite. My most troubling experience has been the rejection of my offers to speak, for free, about the book on university campuses with high Jewish enrollment and to answer questions from students and professors. I have been most encouraged by prominent Jewish citizens and members of Congress who have thanked me privately for presenting the facts and some new ideas.
The book describes the abominable oppression and persecution in the occupied Palestinian territories, with a rigid system of required passes and strict segregation between Palestine's citizens and Jewish settlers in the West Bank. An enormous imprisonment wall is now under construction, snaking through what is left of Palestine to encompass more and more land for Israeli settlers. In many ways, this is more oppressive than what blacks lived under in South Africa during apartheid. I have made it clear that the motivation is not racism but the desire of a minority of Israelis to confiscate and colonize choice sites in Palestine, and then to forcefully suppress any objections from the displaced citizens. Obviously, I condemn any acts of terrorism or violence against innocent civilians, and I present information about the terrible casualties on both sides.
The ultimate purpose of my book is to present facts about the Middle East that are largely unknown in America, to precipitate discussion and to help restart peace talks (now absent for six years) that can lead to permanent peace for Israel and its neighbors. Another hope is that Jews and other Americans who share this same goal might be motivated to express their views, even publicly, and perhaps in concert. I would be glad to help with that effort
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-carter8dec08,0,7999232.story?coll=la-news-comment-opinions
LA Times Op-ed,
December 8, 2006
Speaking frankly about Israel and Palestine
Jimmy Carter says his recent book is drawing knee-jerk accusations of anti-Israel bias.
By Jimmy Carter
JIMMY CARTER was the 39th president of the United States. His newest book is "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid," published last month.
I SIGNED A CONTRACT with Simon & Schuster two years ago to write a book about the Middle East, based on my personal observations, as the Carter Center monitored three elections in Palestine and on my consultations with Israeli political leaders and peace activists.
We covered every Palestinian community in 1996, 2005 and 2006, when Yasser Arafat, and later Mahmoud Abbas, were elected president and members of parliament were chosen. The elections were almost flawless, and turnout was very high, except in East Jerusalem, where, under severe Israeli restraints, only about 2% of registered voters managed to cast ballots.
The many controversial issues concerning Palestine and the path to peace for Israel are intensely debated among Israelis and throughout other nations, but not in the United States. For the last 30 years, I have witnessed and experienced the severe restraints on any free and balanced discussion of the facts. This reluctance to criticize any policies of the Israeli government is because of the extraordinary lobbying efforts of the American-Israel Political Action Committee and the absence of any significant contrary voices.
It would be almost politically suicidal for members of Congress to espouse a balanced position between Israel and Palestine, to suggest that Israel comply with international law or to speak in defense of justice or human rights for Palestinians. Very few would ever deign to visit the Palestinian cities of Ramallah, Nablus, Hebron, Gaza City, or even Bethlehem, and talk to the beleaguered residents. What is even more difficult to comprehend is why the editorial pages of the major newspapers and magazines in the United States exercise similar self-restraint, quite contrary to private assessments expressed quite forcefully by their correspondents in the Holy Land.
With some degree of reluctance and some uncertainty about the reception my book would receive, I used maps, text and documents to describe the situation accurately and to analyze the only possible path to peace: Israelis and Palestinians living side by side within their own internationally recognized boundaries. These options are consistent with key U.N. resolutions supported by the U.S. and Israel, official American policy since 1967, agreements consummated by Israeli leaders and their governments in 1978 and 1993 (for which they earned Nobel Peace Prizes), the Arab League's offer to recognize Israel in 2002 and the International Quartet's "Roadmap for Peace," which has been accepted by the PLO and largely rejected by Israel.
The book is devoted to circumstances and events in Palestine and not in Israel, where democracy prevails and citizens live together and are legally guaranteed equal status.
Although I have spent only a week or so on a book tour so far, it is already possible to judge public and media reaction. Sales are brisk, and I have had interesting interviews on TV, including "Larry King Live," "Hardball," "Meet the Press," "The NewsHour With Jim Lehrer," the "Charlie Rose" show, C-SPAN and others. But I have seen few news stories in major newspapers about what I have written.
Book reviews in the mainstream media have been written mostly by representatives of Jewish organizations who would be unlikely to visit the occupied territories, and their primary criticism is that the book is anti-Israel. Two members of Congress have been publicly critical. Incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for instance, issued a statement (before the book was published) saying that "he does not speak for the Democratic Party on Israel." Some reviews posted on Amazon.com call me "anti-Semitic," and others accuse the book of "lies" and "distortions." A former Carter Center fellow has taken issue with it, and Alan Dershowitz called the book's title "indecent."
Out in the real world, however, the response has been overwhelmingly positive. I've signed books in five stores, with more than 1,000 buyers at each site. I've had one negative remark "that I should be tried for treason", and one caller on C-SPAN said that I was an anti-Semite. My most troubling experience has been the rejection of my offers to speak, for free, about the book on university campuses with high Jewish enrollment and to answer questions from students and professors. I have been most encouraged by prominent Jewish citizens and members of Congress who have thanked me privately for presenting the facts and some new ideas.
The book describes the abominable oppression and persecution in the occupied Palestinian territories, with a rigid system of required passes and strict segregation between Palestine's citizens and Jewish settlers in the West Bank. An enormous imprisonment wall is now under construction, snaking through what is left of Palestine to encompass more and more land for Israeli settlers. In many ways, this is more oppressive than what blacks lived under in South Africa during apartheid. I have made it clear that the motivation is not racism but the desire of a minority of Israelis to confiscate and colonize choice sites in Palestine, and then to forcefully suppress any objections from the displaced citizens. Obviously, I condemn any acts of terrorism or violence against innocent civilians, and I present information about the terrible casualties on both sides.
The ultimate purpose of my book is to present facts about the Middle East that are largely unknown in America, to precipitate discussion and to help restart peace talks (now absent for six years) that can lead to permanent peace for Israel and its neighbors. Another hope is that Jews and other Americans who share this same goal might be motivated to express their views, even publicly, and perhaps in concert. I would be glad to help with that effort
Thursday, November 30, 2006
The Failures of Human Rights Watch
Please read Jonathan Cook's article in Ma'an. Its a scathing critique of Human Rights Watch.
I'd love to hear what you think!
http://www.maannews.net/en/index.php?opr=ShowDetails&ID=17657
Once again, I think I've posted this picture I took at a flying checkpoint south of Jenin before. Thought it might be appropriate again.
Wednesday, November 29, 2006
Monday, November 13, 2006
Jameela al-Shanti
Twice last week, CBC's nightly current affairs show "As It Happens" did interviews with Palestinian Member of Parliament Jameela al-Shanti. Once following the march and intervention she helped lead against the Israeli Invasion in Beit Hanoun, Gaza... and once following the Israeli destruction of her home a few nights later. Here is an article she wrote for The Guardian a few days ago.
The Guardian 11/09/06
We overcame our fear
The unarmed women of the Gaza Strip have taken the lead in resisting Israel's latest bloody assault
By Jameela al-Shanti in Beit Hanoun
Yesterday at dawn, the Israeli air force bombed and destroyed my home. I was the target, but instead the attack killed my sister-in-law, Nahla, a widow with eight children in her care. In the same raid Israel's artillery shelled a residential district in the town of Beit Hanoun in the Gaza Strip, leaving19 dead and 40 injured, many killed in their beds. One family, the Athamnas, lost 16 members in the massacre: the oldest who died, Fatima, was 70; the youngest, Dima, was one; seven were children. The death toll in Beit Hanoun has passed 90 in one week.
This is Israel's tenth incursion into Beit Hanoun since it announced its withdrawal from Gaza. It has turned the town into a closed military zone, collectively punishing its 28,000 residents. For days, the town has beenen circled by Israeli tanks and troops and shelled. All water and electricity supplies were cut off and, as the death toll continued to mount, no ambulances were allowed in. Israeli soldiers raided houses, shut up the families and positioned their snipers on roofs, shooting at everything that moved. We still do not know what has become of our sons, husbands and brothers since all males over 15 years old were taken away last Thursday. They were ordered to strip to their underwear, handcuffed and led away.
It is not easy as a mother, sister or wife to watch those you love disappear before your eyes. Perhaps that was what helped me, and 1,500 other women, to overcome our fear and defy the Israeli curfew last Friday - and set about freeing some of our young men who were besieged in a mosque while defending us and our city against the Israeli military machine.
We faced the most powerful army in our region unarmed. The soldiers were loaded up with the latest weaponry, and we had nothing, except each other and our yearning for freedom. As we broke through the first barrier, we grew more confident, more determined to break the suffocating siege. The soldiers of Israel's so-called defence force did not hesitate to open fire on unarmed women. The sight of my close friends Ibtissam Yusuf abu Nada and Rajaa Ouda taking their last breaths, bathed in blood, will live with me for ever.
Later an Israeli plane shelled a bus taking children to a kindergarten. Two children were killed, along with their teacher. In the last week 30 children have died. As I go round the crowded hospital, it is deeply poignant to see the large number of small bodies with their scars and amputated limbs. We clutch our children tightly when we go to sleep, vainly hoping that we canshield them from Israel's tanks and warplanes.
But as though this occupation and collective punishment were not enough, we Palestinians find ourselves the targets of a systematic siege imposed by the so-called free world. We are being starved and suffocated as a punishment for daring to exercise our democratic right to choose who rules and represents us. Nothing undermines the west's claims to defend freedom and democracy more than what is happening in Palestine. Shortly after announcing his project to democratise the Middle East, President Bush did all he could to strangle our nascent democracy, arresting our ministers and MPs. I have yet to hear western condemnation that I, an elected MP, have had my home demolished and relatives killed by Israel's bombs. When the bodies of my friends and colleagues were torn apart there was not one word from those who claim to be defenders of women's rights on Capitol Hill and in 10 Downing Street.
Why should we Palestinians have to accept the theft of our land, the ethnic cleansing of our people, incarcerated in forsaken refugee camps, and the denial of our most basic human rights, without protesting and resisting?
The lesson the world should learn from Beit Hanoun last week is that Palestinians will never relinquish our land, towns and villages. We will not surrender our legitimate rights for a piece of bread or handful of rice. The women of Palestine will resist this monstrous occupation imposed on us at gunpoint, siege and starvation. Our rights and those of future generations are not open for negotiation.
Whoever wants peace in Palestine and the region must direct their words and sanctions to the occupier, not the occupied, the aggressor not the victim.The truth is that the solution lies with Israel, its army and allies -- not with Palestine's women and children.
• Jameela al-Shanti is an elected member of the Palestinian Legislative Council for Hamas. She led a women's protest against the siege of Beit Hanoun last Friday
The Guardian 11/09/06
We overcame our fear
The unarmed women of the Gaza Strip have taken the lead in resisting Israel's latest bloody assault
By Jameela al-Shanti in Beit Hanoun
Yesterday at dawn, the Israeli air force bombed and destroyed my home. I was the target, but instead the attack killed my sister-in-law, Nahla, a widow with eight children in her care. In the same raid Israel's artillery shelled a residential district in the town of Beit Hanoun in the Gaza Strip, leaving19 dead and 40 injured, many killed in their beds. One family, the Athamnas, lost 16 members in the massacre: the oldest who died, Fatima, was 70; the youngest, Dima, was one; seven were children. The death toll in Beit Hanoun has passed 90 in one week.
This is Israel's tenth incursion into Beit Hanoun since it announced its withdrawal from Gaza. It has turned the town into a closed military zone, collectively punishing its 28,000 residents. For days, the town has beenen circled by Israeli tanks and troops and shelled. All water and electricity supplies were cut off and, as the death toll continued to mount, no ambulances were allowed in. Israeli soldiers raided houses, shut up the families and positioned their snipers on roofs, shooting at everything that moved. We still do not know what has become of our sons, husbands and brothers since all males over 15 years old were taken away last Thursday. They were ordered to strip to their underwear, handcuffed and led away.
It is not easy as a mother, sister or wife to watch those you love disappear before your eyes. Perhaps that was what helped me, and 1,500 other women, to overcome our fear and defy the Israeli curfew last Friday - and set about freeing some of our young men who were besieged in a mosque while defending us and our city against the Israeli military machine.
We faced the most powerful army in our region unarmed. The soldiers were loaded up with the latest weaponry, and we had nothing, except each other and our yearning for freedom. As we broke through the first barrier, we grew more confident, more determined to break the suffocating siege. The soldiers of Israel's so-called defence force did not hesitate to open fire on unarmed women. The sight of my close friends Ibtissam Yusuf abu Nada and Rajaa Ouda taking their last breaths, bathed in blood, will live with me for ever.
Later an Israeli plane shelled a bus taking children to a kindergarten. Two children were killed, along with their teacher. In the last week 30 children have died. As I go round the crowded hospital, it is deeply poignant to see the large number of small bodies with their scars and amputated limbs. We clutch our children tightly when we go to sleep, vainly hoping that we canshield them from Israel's tanks and warplanes.
But as though this occupation and collective punishment were not enough, we Palestinians find ourselves the targets of a systematic siege imposed by the so-called free world. We are being starved and suffocated as a punishment for daring to exercise our democratic right to choose who rules and represents us. Nothing undermines the west's claims to defend freedom and democracy more than what is happening in Palestine. Shortly after announcing his project to democratise the Middle East, President Bush did all he could to strangle our nascent democracy, arresting our ministers and MPs. I have yet to hear western condemnation that I, an elected MP, have had my home demolished and relatives killed by Israel's bombs. When the bodies of my friends and colleagues were torn apart there was not one word from those who claim to be defenders of women's rights on Capitol Hill and in 10 Downing Street.
Why should we Palestinians have to accept the theft of our land, the ethnic cleansing of our people, incarcerated in forsaken refugee camps, and the denial of our most basic human rights, without protesting and resisting?
The lesson the world should learn from Beit Hanoun last week is that Palestinians will never relinquish our land, towns and villages. We will not surrender our legitimate rights for a piece of bread or handful of rice. The women of Palestine will resist this monstrous occupation imposed on us at gunpoint, siege and starvation. Our rights and those of future generations are not open for negotiation.
Whoever wants peace in Palestine and the region must direct their words and sanctions to the occupier, not the occupied, the aggressor not the victim.The truth is that the solution lies with Israel, its army and allies -- not with Palestine's women and children.
• Jameela al-Shanti is an elected member of the Palestinian Legislative Council for Hamas. She led a women's protest against the siege of Beit Hanoun last Friday
Friday, November 10, 2006
Money and Leadership...
It has been reported today the Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh announced to attendees at a Gaza mosque for Friday prayers that he is willing to step down as Prime Minister to get International aide flowing back into Palestine. He said that the International Community (the so-called Quartet of Middle East peace brokers of the US, UN, EU and Russia) has put one condition on any new Palestinian Unity Government - that they replace Haniyeh as PM.
From CNN: "[They have] one condition, that the siege will not be lifted unless the prime minister is changed," Haniya said, according to Reuters. "When the issue is like this, the siege on one hand, the prime minister on the another ... I prefer the siege be lifted and the suffering ended."
It's amazing to me that the international community is so hypocritical. Let's go over a few facts and figures before I give you a recent article from the Globe and Mail about Avigdor Leiberman, the new Deputy Prime Minister of Israel...
According to a December 2002 report...
- Over 1/3 of total US aid to foreign countries goes to Israel.
- Between 1949 and 2002 US Aid to Israel: $134 Billion
- US Aid PER Israeli: $23,240
- Last year the US financed Israel to the tune of more than $7 Million A DAY.
- Israel ranks SECOND (after the US) in Economic inequality (between rich and poor) and guess who those poor Israelis are... Arab-Israelis and the non-Zionist Ultra Orthodox Jews.
And as for the Palestinians...
- HALF of the Palestinian population live on LESS than $2 a day.
- UN puts the poverty rate of Gazans at 80%.
So what does this have to do with Haniyeh? Why are we hypocrites?
From CNN: "[They have] one condition, that the siege will not be lifted unless the prime minister is changed," Haniya said, according to Reuters. "When the issue is like this, the siege on one hand, the prime minister on the another ... I prefer the siege be lifted and the suffering ended."
It's amazing to me that the international community is so hypocritical. Let's go over a few facts and figures before I give you a recent article from the Globe and Mail about Avigdor Leiberman, the new Deputy Prime Minister of Israel...
According to a December 2002 report...
- Over 1/3 of total US aid to foreign countries goes to Israel.
- Between 1949 and 2002 US Aid to Israel: $134 Billion
- US Aid PER Israeli: $23,240
- Last year the US financed Israel to the tune of more than $7 Million A DAY.
- Israel ranks SECOND (after the US) in Economic inequality (between rich and poor) and guess who those poor Israelis are... Arab-Israelis and the non-Zionist Ultra Orthodox Jews.
And as for the Palestinians...
- HALF of the Palestinian population live on LESS than $2 a day.
- UN puts the poverty rate of Gazans at 80%.
So what does this have to do with Haniyeh? Why are we hypocrites?
We will have forced a democratically elected leader (in a region we want democracy to flourish in so badly that we started a war) out of office because we have suffocated the life out of the indigenous Palestinian population. At the same time that we starve Palestinian children we finance the construction of the illegal Apartheid Wall, we finance the use of chemical weapons against civilian populations (http://news.independent.co.uk/world/fisk/article1935945.ece) and we keep silent when a racist like Avigdor Lieberman is named Deputy Prime Minister in Israel... But we've been silent in the past over the same things. Menachem Begin, former Israeli Prime Minister once led a Terrorist group that, among other attacks, killed 91 people (British, Arab and Jewish civilians) in July 1946. Begin STEADFASTLY REFUSED TO RECOGNIZE PALESTINE'S RIGHT TO EXIST:"The Jewish people have unchallengable, eternal, historic right to the Land of Israel including the West Bank and Gaza Strip, the inheritance of their forefathers"
So we starve Palestinians because Haniyeh will not "recognize" Israel...
We shower Israel with money to buy weapons....
Haniyeh will be forced to step down to save his people...
And Lieberman becomes the new Deputy Prime Minister...
And Begin is given the Nobel Peace Prize...
We shower Israel with money to buy weapons....
Haniyeh will be forced to step down to save his people...
And Lieberman becomes the new Deputy Prime Minister...
And Begin is given the Nobel Peace Prize...
Thursday, November 09, 2006
Avigdor Lieberman appointed Deputy Prime-Minister
Globe and Mail
November 7, 2006
Knesset critic urges boycott of Olmert's 'fascist' deputy
Lieberman under fire for plan to expel Israeli Arabs by redrawing the border
By Mark MacKinnon
Jerusalem -- Israel's new Deputy Prime Minister is a dangerous "fascist" who should be boycotted by the international community, a leading Israeli Arab politician said yesterday.
Ahmad Tibi, deputy speaker of Israel's parliament, the Knesset, said that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's decision last month to invite Avigdor Lieberman into cabinet has given legitimacy to policies that are racist against Arab citizens of the country.
Mr. Lieberman has ignited controversy in recent days by calling for Israel's borders to be redrawn in order to exclude most Arab citizens and make a more homogenously Jewish state. He said Cyprus, which has been divided between Greek and Turkish halves since a war in 1974, was the "best model" for Israel.
"I'm not surprised at all because I know his ideology. But now it's much more dangerous and serious because it's not just the statements of a member of the Knesset, it's the racist statements of the Deputy Prime Minister of the state of Israel," Mr. Tibi said in an interview at his Knesset office.
He compared Mr. Lieberman to other far-right politicians such as Austria's Joerg Haider and France's Jean-Marie Le Pen.
"Practically, he is calling for ethnic cleansing. Using the Cyprus model is outrageous because 160,000 Greek [Cypriots] were deported, by force. But this is the way [Lieberman] sees things."
Over the course of a series of interviews with foreign and domestic media, Mr. Lieberman said that "minorities are the biggest problem in the world" and advocated giving Israel's Arab villages and their citizens to the Palestinian Authority in exchange for Jewish settlements in the West Bank.
Once viewed as a fringe extremist, Mr. Lieberman has seen his popularity rise sharply in recent months. Anti-Arab sentiment in Israel has hardened over the course of the 34-day war this summer against Lebanon's Hezbollah militia, and the ongoing firing of rockets by Palestinian groups based in the Gaza Strip. Recent polls suggest Mr. Lieberman is now the country's second most popular politician, trailing only former prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, another right-winger.
Mr. Tibi, whose hometown of Taibeh is one of those Mr. Lieberman proposes toexclude from Israel, said the Deputy Prime Minister's popularity reflects growing street-level racism against the Arabs who make up 20 per cent of Israel's population.
A poll taken earlier this year by GeoCartographia, a respected Israeli research group, found that 63 per cent of Israeli Jews saw the country's Arab citizens as a "security and demographic threat to the state," while 40per cent believed that Israeli Arabs should be encouraged to emigrate. The poll was taken in the spring, before the Lebanon war.
"Racism is racism, whether it is in France, Austria or Israel. Lieberman is much more radical than Joerg Haider in Austria. Joerg Haider did not ask to transfer 20 per cent of the Austrian population," Mr. Tibi said. "Lieberman should be isolated and the international community should put pressure ontothe Israeli government to kick him out of the cabinet."
Mr. Lieberman has no love for Mr. Tibi either. Earlier this year, he called for Israeli Arab politicians who had contacts with Hamas, the Islamist group that runs the Palestinian Authority, to be executed. Mr. Tibi, himself a controversial figure who once served as an adviser to Yasser Arafat, flew to Cairo last week to meet with Palestinian foreign minister Mahmoud Zahar, aleading Hamas member. Mr. Tibi has also violated Israeli law by travelling to Lebanon, which is classified as an enemy state.
"World War II ended with the Nuremberg trials," Mr. Lieberman said back inMay. "The heads of the Nazi regime, along with their collaborators, were executed. I hope this will be the fate of the collaborators in this house."
Israeli Arabs aren't the only ones opposed to Mr. Lieberman. His appointment to cabinet was sharply criticized by many on the country's weakened political left, and led to the resignation of cabinet minister Ophir Pines-Paz, a member of the Labour Party, which nonetheless remained in Mr.Olmert's coalition.
Giving Mr. Lieberman the posts of Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Strategic Affairs was the price Mr. Olmert paid to get Mr. Lieberman and his party, Yisrael Beiteinu ("Our Home is Israel"), to support his coalition government, which was facing the possibility of collapse amidst public dissatisfaction with the conduct and nebulous outcome of the Lebanon war.
While Mr. Olmert was quick to distance himself from Mr. Lieberman's remarks over the weekend, Mr. Tibi said Mr. Olmert should have gone further and dismissed Mr. Lieberman from cabinet.
"You cannot just say that 'I don't agree with these ideas, or these ideas are not representing us.' If you are upgrading him [to Deputy Prime Minister], you are giving him public legitimization, official legitimization and a place from which he can, day by day, express his fascist ideas," Mr.Tibi said.
Mr. Tibi said it was particularly offensive that Mr. Lieberman, who lives in a Jewish settlement in the occupied West Bank and who immigrated to Israel from Moldova in 1978 when he was 21, was claiming the right to take away the citizenship of Arabs who had lived in Israel since its formation.
November 7, 2006
Knesset critic urges boycott of Olmert's 'fascist' deputy
Lieberman under fire for plan to expel Israeli Arabs by redrawing the border
By Mark MacKinnon
Jerusalem -- Israel's new Deputy Prime Minister is a dangerous "fascist" who should be boycotted by the international community, a leading Israeli Arab politician said yesterday.
Ahmad Tibi, deputy speaker of Israel's parliament, the Knesset, said that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's decision last month to invite Avigdor Lieberman into cabinet has given legitimacy to policies that are racist against Arab citizens of the country.
Mr. Lieberman has ignited controversy in recent days by calling for Israel's borders to be redrawn in order to exclude most Arab citizens and make a more homogenously Jewish state. He said Cyprus, which has been divided between Greek and Turkish halves since a war in 1974, was the "best model" for Israel.
"I'm not surprised at all because I know his ideology. But now it's much more dangerous and serious because it's not just the statements of a member of the Knesset, it's the racist statements of the Deputy Prime Minister of the state of Israel," Mr. Tibi said in an interview at his Knesset office.
He compared Mr. Lieberman to other far-right politicians such as Austria's Joerg Haider and France's Jean-Marie Le Pen.
"Practically, he is calling for ethnic cleansing. Using the Cyprus model is outrageous because 160,000 Greek [Cypriots] were deported, by force. But this is the way [Lieberman] sees things."
Over the course of a series of interviews with foreign and domestic media, Mr. Lieberman said that "minorities are the biggest problem in the world" and advocated giving Israel's Arab villages and their citizens to the Palestinian Authority in exchange for Jewish settlements in the West Bank.
Once viewed as a fringe extremist, Mr. Lieberman has seen his popularity rise sharply in recent months. Anti-Arab sentiment in Israel has hardened over the course of the 34-day war this summer against Lebanon's Hezbollah militia, and the ongoing firing of rockets by Palestinian groups based in the Gaza Strip. Recent polls suggest Mr. Lieberman is now the country's second most popular politician, trailing only former prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, another right-winger.
Mr. Tibi, whose hometown of Taibeh is one of those Mr. Lieberman proposes toexclude from Israel, said the Deputy Prime Minister's popularity reflects growing street-level racism against the Arabs who make up 20 per cent of Israel's population.
A poll taken earlier this year by GeoCartographia, a respected Israeli research group, found that 63 per cent of Israeli Jews saw the country's Arab citizens as a "security and demographic threat to the state," while 40per cent believed that Israeli Arabs should be encouraged to emigrate. The poll was taken in the spring, before the Lebanon war.
"Racism is racism, whether it is in France, Austria or Israel. Lieberman is much more radical than Joerg Haider in Austria. Joerg Haider did not ask to transfer 20 per cent of the Austrian population," Mr. Tibi said. "Lieberman should be isolated and the international community should put pressure ontothe Israeli government to kick him out of the cabinet."
Mr. Lieberman has no love for Mr. Tibi either. Earlier this year, he called for Israeli Arab politicians who had contacts with Hamas, the Islamist group that runs the Palestinian Authority, to be executed. Mr. Tibi, himself a controversial figure who once served as an adviser to Yasser Arafat, flew to Cairo last week to meet with Palestinian foreign minister Mahmoud Zahar, aleading Hamas member. Mr. Tibi has also violated Israeli law by travelling to Lebanon, which is classified as an enemy state.
"World War II ended with the Nuremberg trials," Mr. Lieberman said back inMay. "The heads of the Nazi regime, along with their collaborators, were executed. I hope this will be the fate of the collaborators in this house."
Israeli Arabs aren't the only ones opposed to Mr. Lieberman. His appointment to cabinet was sharply criticized by many on the country's weakened political left, and led to the resignation of cabinet minister Ophir Pines-Paz, a member of the Labour Party, which nonetheless remained in Mr.Olmert's coalition.
Giving Mr. Lieberman the posts of Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Strategic Affairs was the price Mr. Olmert paid to get Mr. Lieberman and his party, Yisrael Beiteinu ("Our Home is Israel"), to support his coalition government, which was facing the possibility of collapse amidst public dissatisfaction with the conduct and nebulous outcome of the Lebanon war.
While Mr. Olmert was quick to distance himself from Mr. Lieberman's remarks over the weekend, Mr. Tibi said Mr. Olmert should have gone further and dismissed Mr. Lieberman from cabinet.
"You cannot just say that 'I don't agree with these ideas, or these ideas are not representing us.' If you are upgrading him [to Deputy Prime Minister], you are giving him public legitimization, official legitimization and a place from which he can, day by day, express his fascist ideas," Mr.Tibi said.
Mr. Tibi said it was particularly offensive that Mr. Lieberman, who lives in a Jewish settlement in the occupied West Bank and who immigrated to Israel from Moldova in 1978 when he was 21, was claiming the right to take away the citizenship of Arabs who had lived in Israel since its formation.
Wednesday, November 08, 2006
Beit Hanoun
As people slept in their beds in the northern Gaza neighborhood of Beit Hanoun, teenage Israeli soldiers loaded their tanks, turned their turrets towards the center of town and let loose a barrage of shells.
This morning 18 to 20 people, half of whom were children, were blown apart as they slept. Their extended family - mostly women - were also killed and dozens injured.
Now Hamas is claiming that it will resume Suicide Bombings within Israel. All because Israel has decided that the inconvenience of rockets being fired from Gaza into southern Israel merited a response of serial massacres of civilians. Instead of pursuing peace: by dismantling the Apartheid Wall that has ruined thousands of lives in the West Bank and by withdrawing from the Occupied Territories (instead of expanding it's settlements there, murdering Palestinians, and stealing their land) Israel has chosen violence and war. A war it cannot win.
While it saddens me that Hamas [Islamic Jihad has carried out the occasional suicide bombing in Israel during Hamas' official and unofficial cease-fire(s)] has chosen to do this, I doesn't surprise me. Let me review a few of the events that have happened in the past six months that has led to this decision:
- Eight members of a family, three of whom were children, are blown apart by a mortar shell while picnicking on a Gaza beach in June.
- A Family of nine were killed when the Israeli Air Force dropped a 225kg bomb on a residential building at 6 in the morning. July 13th (see Post from this date)
- and today, 20 killed by intentional tank shelling of a residential complex. BBC reports that most were "women and children".
And we are again reminded of the question posed by Dr. Eyad el-Sarraj, the Gazan psychiatrist, outspoken opponent of suicide bombings and winner of the prestigious Martin Ennals Award for Human Rights Defenders: Given the conditions in which the Palestinian people must live the question is not "why are there suicide bombers" but "why is not every Palestinian a suicide bomber"?
From BBC reporter Matthew Price:
A father of one child who was killed told me: "One missile I believe could have been a mistake, but the number of missiles that were fired, I can't believe that was a mistake."
A resident who works in one of Gaza's hospitals says: "I have not seen injuries like this for a long time."
"The shrapnel severed peoples hands and arms and they were left lying on the ground," Dr Ali said.
He had been sleeping in his bedroom when the shells struck the next door building. The windows of his bedroom had been blasted out and there was glass on the ground.
Dr Ali tells the same story as everyone I spoke to, that there had been no anti-Israeli attacks by Palestinian militants from this area, as the Israeli military claims, before the shells struck.
"I am angry. I hate the US, I hate George W Bush, I hate of course Israel. I also hate the Arab states which do nothing to help and the international community," said Raed. But it was not anger in his eyes, it was more like an immense sadness that showed through.
That mood was shared by most of the people we saw, many of them slumped tearfully against walls in the street. Normally when something like this happens members of armed groups turn up and chant slogans with their loudspeakers.
But this time we only saw one militant appear, and he quickly vanished again.
Friday, November 03, 2006
Women and Children
Despite what you see on the news, the situation in Palestine is not just the Israeli Army (with it's Canadian, French, American, British soldiers) against scary, bearded Palestinian Militants. Women and children often are at the receiving end of the former's brutality.
Today after Hamas radio asked for women to demonstrate against the latest Israeli invasion of Gaza, these same women marched towards an-Nasser mosque in Beit Hanoun and acted as a human shield - on their own free will - to help Palestinian "militants" held inside the mosque by the Israeli army. The Israelis, in a fashion that we've seen time and time again, opened fire.
One 40 year old woman is dead - and dozens are injured. BBC has reported that another woman has since also died of her wounds. More than 20 people have been killed in Gaza by the Israeli army in the past three days (including a child) as they relaunch an assault on the strip of land and it's inhabitants - some of the poorest people in the world. Israeli Human Rights Group Bet'selem has reported that 300 Palestinians have been killed in Gaza by the Army since Gilad Shalit (from France) was captured a few months ago.
So keep in mind, as you listen to the Israelis try to spin the story of their soldiers shooting unarmed middle aged women in order to extra-judiciously assassinate men they think might have fired rockets from Gaza into Israel (even though they rarely hit anything) that there is no excuse for this. That Israel is again committing horrible acts of violence. And that it continues to go unaddressed by us in "the West" because he think that we are not involved. We are involved.
***
Also remember that violence against the Palestinian people happens VERY DAY and goes unreported here. How about children trying to get to school in Hebron...
The Israelis, needing to protect the Fundamentalist Jewish Settlers in Hebron (see "Hebron" post from July) from the dangerous textbooks of these Palestinian children refuse them access to their school. So they conduct, as an act of defiance, their class in front of the illegal checkpoint.
Later, pubescent boys are beaten and arrested in the streets as they confront the Israeli occupying Army. So threatening those young boys are, with their backpacks and their shifty teenage eyes. Thank god those soldiers have machine guns and bullet proof vests.
If you don't think that Hebron, with it's thousands of soldiers and militant, fundamentalist Jewish Settlers looks bad... check out what they do to Christian Peacemaker Teams and UN International Observers. Or if you want to see some more proof of the difficulties Palestinian children face trying to get to school watch some of the videos provided through the Tel Rumieda Project (an organization dedicated to monitoring Jewish Settlements in Hebron).
http://www.telrumeidaproject.org/video.html
Friday, October 27, 2006
News from Palestine.
Maybe this will be a good way to get me back into the swing of writing...
Every few day's I'll post a couple of the headlines news stories from the Occupied Territories. Here are today's:
Ma'an is reporting that there is a leaked document from Shin Bet that states that Israel has drawn up an assassination list of Palestinians officials... Including the democratically elected Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh. The plan would become effective should Palestinian Groups RESUME attacks "in the heart of Israel".
Ma'an is also reporting that Fatah and Hamas are once again close to a "national accord government" and that it will be announced "within days".
Haaretz is reporting that Israeli Defense Minister Amir Peretz (Israel's version of a center-left politician... Hahaha) has no intention of uprooting illegal West Bank Outposts.... we're not even talking about Settlements here... Outposts are the campers and shipping containers housing some of the most radical Settlers.
3 Palestinian men were killed in two separate invasions by the Israeli Army in the northern West Bank. (Haaretz and Ma'an)
Anyway, those are some of today's stories in the Palestinian and Israeli press. You can read them both online: hit the Ma'an News link to the right and this link to Haaretz:
www.haaretz.com
By the way... a great deal of the "comments" in Haaretz's Talkback section are filled with anti-Arab and anti-Palestinian Racism if you ever need to be reminded that those "anti-Semitic Palestinians" are not alone in their bigotry.
Every few day's I'll post a couple of the headlines news stories from the Occupied Territories. Here are today's:
Ma'an is reporting that there is a leaked document from Shin Bet that states that Israel has drawn up an assassination list of Palestinians officials... Including the democratically elected Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh. The plan would become effective should Palestinian Groups RESUME attacks "in the heart of Israel".
Ma'an is also reporting that Fatah and Hamas are once again close to a "national accord government" and that it will be announced "within days".
Haaretz is reporting that Israeli Defense Minister Amir Peretz (Israel's version of a center-left politician... Hahaha) has no intention of uprooting illegal West Bank Outposts.... we're not even talking about Settlements here... Outposts are the campers and shipping containers housing some of the most radical Settlers.
3 Palestinian men were killed in two separate invasions by the Israeli Army in the northern West Bank. (Haaretz and Ma'an)
Anyway, those are some of today's stories in the Palestinian and Israeli press. You can read them both online: hit the Ma'an News link to the right and this link to Haaretz:
www.haaretz.com
By the way... a great deal of the "comments" in Haaretz's Talkback section are filled with anti-Arab and anti-Palestinian Racism if you ever need to be reminded that those "anti-Semitic Palestinians" are not alone in their bigotry.
Thursday, October 26, 2006
How Embarrassing!
I feel slightly embarrassed that I can't or have not been maintaining the blog - and giving you the stories from my last few days in the Middle East. I'm working full-time now that my thesis is finished and in fact I don't have much of an excuse... other than my laziness.
Just to keep you updated: as I said, I'm working full-time at U of T. Office life is a totally different experience from what I've been doing and I'm taking to it shamefully! But I'm also in the process of applying to do PhD's starting in September 2007. I'm just compiling my packages that I'm sending out to my referees for both schools and funding. I'm going to be applying to three schools in the States (two in NY, one in Cambridge Mass.) and to U of T. And I have an appointment on Tuesday to meet a Professor here who could turn out to be my Doctoral advisor - so I'm excited about that!
Other than that I haven't been up to much. Playing Hockey twice a week... Going to Ottawa this weekend for my Mother's 60th birthday celebrations... Wedding planning...
So I'll try and get back into the swing of this and start posting things asap. How about a Slide-Show! That's what I'm going to work on!
Just to keep you updated: as I said, I'm working full-time at U of T. Office life is a totally different experience from what I've been doing and I'm taking to it shamefully! But I'm also in the process of applying to do PhD's starting in September 2007. I'm just compiling my packages that I'm sending out to my referees for both schools and funding. I'm going to be applying to three schools in the States (two in NY, one in Cambridge Mass.) and to U of T. And I have an appointment on Tuesday to meet a Professor here who could turn out to be my Doctoral advisor - so I'm excited about that!
Other than that I haven't been up to much. Playing Hockey twice a week... Going to Ottawa this weekend for my Mother's 60th birthday celebrations... Wedding planning...
So I'll try and get back into the swing of this and start posting things asap. How about a Slide-Show! That's what I'm going to work on!
Friday, September 29, 2006
Petra (part 1)
Getting from my hotel in the morning to the bus station where the minibuses head to Wadi Musa was decidedly easier than any of my previous day's travels. In front of the hotel I caught a taxi for the half-hour drive to the bus station in the north end of the city. As often is the case my taxi driver and I had an engaging discussion about the war and what Nasrallah means to the Arab world. His english was exceptional as he described his travels throughout the Arab world and what he thought about each nationality. I learned a lot form him in those fifteen minutes of driving through pre-rush hour Amman traffic. He dropped me next to the proper bus platform and because my ride was metered I felt for the first (and in some ways last) time that I wasn't being ripped off in Jordan.
A group of kuffiyah wearing Arabs sat on a blanket behind the bus - I immediate realized that they were bus drivers and bus-wranglers for lack of a better world when one jumped up and asked me in English where I was going. Standing behind the Wadi Musa bus I answered him by gesturing towards the bus, at which point he showed me to the passenger seat. Excellent! I would get to ride the King's Highway through most of Jordan from the passenger seat of the minibus! My day was starting off right!
When the bus finally filled up one of the men who had been taking his tea on the blanket behind the bus jumped in the drivers seat and we were off.
The signs for Baghdad in the windows of the tour companies surrounding my hotel last night had made me nervous. The first fifteen minutes of the drive to Wadi Musa stirred the same unease in my stomach as we drove through the northern reaches of the city, exiting via an off-ramp marked "az-Zarqa". Just a few weeks ago I had told the man in the Old City of Nablus that I thought the recently killed leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq - Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was "majnoon" - crazy. Now I was driving through the southern reaches of the town that he had come from and that had given him his nom de guerre. I got shivers as I thought of the young Japanese man who lost his life at the hands of Zarqawi two years ago after he had traveled to Baghdad from Amman; probably using one of the tour companies offering those cross-border-and-certain- death journeys that had frightened me so the night before. (See tangent below...). It was the second time that the war in Iraq, raging in the country next door was brought to my mind in the span of 12 hours.
The drive along the King's Highway was pleasant and impressive. It, in a strange way, reminded me of parts of Mexico: desert, mostly flat, and with random restaurant/gas stations that looked straight out of a movie.
The drive took a couple of hours and eventually we began to veer right towards the Jordan that I knew ran beyond the wadis towards our west. Over small hills we drove closer our destination passing through surprisingly vibrant small towns. It was mid-morning when we arrived in Wadi Musa and on our drive into town we passed the hotel where I, with the help of my tour book had decided to stay. Down the hill we continued past dozens of small hotels and restaurants geared towards backpackers. The parking-lot bus station held a few cabs but I decided to walk back up the hill to my hotel. 20 minutes and twenty pounds lighter I arrived at the hotel, drenched in the sweat that poured from my body in the arduous uphill climb that ended up being a lot longer than I had calculated in my mind.
No there were no dorm style rooms (as my book had suggested) but they had a good room and a special rate just for me! Imagine that - two hotels in Jordan offering me a special rate! I braced myself for a heavy quote but it turned out to be not too bad at about 20 Canadian dollars a night. The room itself was exceptional. Large with a King sized bed, the best part was the balcony that looked out over the town in the direction of Petra.
One of the reasons I chose this hotel was for it's pool. I quickly threw on my swim shorts and headed down the hall and around the corner and out into the blaring sun. I slid into the pool and was shocked by what was easily one of the coldest pools I've ever been in. I dunked my head and jumped back out. Shivering I returned quickly to my room to get ready for what would probably be only a half day at Petra.
The front desk got me a cab (fare included in my rate) and I asked to be dropped off in the center of Wadi Musa. I was starving and found the restaurant recommended to me in my tour book (not the best tour book I had decided). The Lentil soup I had was great but my shish kebab was disappointing. I decided that I was ready for the park and jumped in another cab heading for the gate.
At 20 dollars CDN for a two-day student pass into the park, the admission to Petra is a steal. I have read in a number of places that it takes at least two days to experience so I figured I could do it in a day and a half (I'm in good walking shape).
The Siq is the famous two kilometer winding, narrow, water hewn passageway through the rock that leads to Petra but before the entrance to the Siq you need to first walk a kilometer along a more open path that runs parallel to a horse road - where you can hire a horse from the Bedouins to take you to the entrance. In fact, there are a number of transportation options to and within Petra - all offered by the local Bedouins. Horse, horse-drawn buggy, donkey, camel. I didn't ride on any but I do admit, the camel was tempting.
At the entrance of the Siq you get the sense that you're entering some sort of time warp - or that you are going into a hidden world. It was really quite amazing. The Siq itself felt surprisingly long. The ground, often changing from Roman cobble-stones to well swept, hard rock was kept very clean. Along the towering walls, embedded into the stone about hip high were the troughs and ceramic pipes installed by the Nabateans 2000 years ago and carefully maintained and replaced since, that fed the arid Petra with water runoff from the surrounding Wadis. Water, an obvious precious commodity in such a hot and dry place is a hard thing to envision now, in our era of waterbottles (I had two liters in my back pack) . And water in Petra has an interesting history: in the 1960's dozen of tourists were killed in the Siq when a dam broke and the narrow passageway flooded.
I knew that the Kahzneh lay at the end of the Siq. The Treasury, as it is also known, is the most well preserved of Petra's edifices and as I rounded what I thought was just one more curve in the road, it appeared ahead of me and I stopped dead in my tracks. Rosy pink in the mid-day sun, random tourists gathered at the steps at its base and I stood in awe as its carved pillars and reliefs towered above me. I took a few shots and decided to keep moving. I wandered past ornate entrances to tombs, past the large roman amphitheatre, past ancient buildings that are only now being excavated. The immense size of the complex was almost overwhelming. I peeked into tombs and unknown buildings and chuckled to myself to see that most of these fabulously constructed buildings hold very small, usually single rooms, and are complete empty.
With the red sand of Petra gathering in my shoes, and with Bedouin children, again like their Mexican counterparts trying to eke out a living by selling mass produced trinkets to tourists, I grew tired quickly and decided to return to the Kahzneh where I sat on one of the wooden benches opposite the Treasury and stared at its wonderful artistry and watched the tourists pose at its steps and beside the well placed camels.
At some point I thought I might be able to come back tomorrow and see what I want before moving on that same day to Aqaba and back to Israel. I got up and walked back through the Siq.
***
Pictures:
The view of the Kahzneh from The Siq
The Entrance of the Siq
Petra from my hotel balcony
Friday, September 15, 2006
Any Man's Death Diminishes Me
I'm sorry I haven't finished transcribing my hand-written blog updates from what is now four weeks ago!!! I was just working on the Petra update when I started off on a tangent as I discussed the city north of Amman called az-Zarqa. I wanted to excise this from the post because I want it to stand alone and I think everyone should visit the link and hear what this man has to say.
Here's what I had written into the Petra update...
Nick Berg you will remember was the subject of the first beheading video to be aired by Tawhid wa Jihad (later al-Qaeda in Iraq) - also an alleged victim of Abu Musab's knife. Following al-Zarqawi's death in June, just before I left on my trip, Michael Berg was interviewed on As It Happens, a CBC Radio show in Canada. I was on my way to meet my fiancee at her house outside of Ottawa. The interview brought me to tears as I drove along the highway connecting the city and my suburban destination. He described his feelings of compassion towards the man and the men behind his son's horrific killing, the regret he felt for Zarqawi's death, and how he had come to such forgiveness. I was amazed as the interviewer asked him how he handles the protests that greet his anti-war talks, which have involve pro-Republican, pro-War demonstrators holding up large banners with the image of his son's decapitated head. His response was moving. You can download the audio of that interview (which I might try to transcribe) at http://www.cbc.ca/radioshows/AS_IT_HAPPENS/20060608.shtml
And you can read more about Michael Berg at http://bergforcongress.us/ .
Now back to the Petra Update!
Here's what I had written into the Petra update...
Nick Berg you will remember was the subject of the first beheading video to be aired by Tawhid wa Jihad (later al-Qaeda in Iraq) - also an alleged victim of Abu Musab's knife. Following al-Zarqawi's death in June, just before I left on my trip, Michael Berg was interviewed on As It Happens, a CBC Radio show in Canada. I was on my way to meet my fiancee at her house outside of Ottawa. The interview brought me to tears as I drove along the highway connecting the city and my suburban destination. He described his feelings of compassion towards the man and the men behind his son's horrific killing, the regret he felt for Zarqawi's death, and how he had come to such forgiveness. I was amazed as the interviewer asked him how he handles the protests that greet his anti-war talks, which have involve pro-Republican, pro-War demonstrators holding up large banners with the image of his son's decapitated head. His response was moving. You can download the audio of that interview (which I might try to transcribe) at http://www.cbc.ca/radioshows/AS_IT_HAPPENS/20060608.shtml
And you can read more about Michael Berg at http://bergforcongress.us/ .
Now back to the Petra Update!
Friday, September 01, 2006
One Night in Amman
A British tourist has been shot dead and a number of others injured in Amman today. While it's easy to jump to the conclusion that this was some sort of "terrorist act" as the mainstream news outlets are reporting I want to caution you that this is a HUGE city with violent and tragically random crimes just like all others. While it certainly could have been some sort of premeditated act by some sort of "al-Qaida Terrorist" (terrorist masterminds aren't usually disposed to taking pot shots at tourists in broad daylight with a pistol) it's just as likely that this is an ill Jordanian that thinks he's a terrorist... or anything else.
Sitting in that bus - now the one heading to Amman - was nearly as nerve wracking as sitting in that other coach heading across the bridge. I wasn't entirely sure that this bus that I was on was the right one. I guess I'm not a fan of buses.
But it was the right one. And while I had held out hope that I could get to Amman in enough time to catch a servees or a mini-bus to Petra that evening, I was quickly convinced that that wouldn't be possible. It took forever to get to Amman. At one point we stopped for no apparent reason. A few people got off and had a smoke... I think the driver's helper got off and picked up his dinner from the BBQ restaurant that we had stopped in front of... I'm not sure what was going on and between my uncertainties and the kid beside me who rarely took his eyes off of me it was altogether another painful experience in what had turned out to be a series of painful experiences.
When we got to what looked like the beginnings of a city I was convinced we were in Amman and while my spirits picked up thinking that I might be able to make it to Petra, the fact that the bus kept on driving through the city for what seemed like an hour, immediately told me that Amman was huge and my ability to get from point A to point B in any semblance of timeliness was extinguished. Yes Amman is huge. With a population of more than a million and a half people, I hadn't been expecting such a city. I live in Toronto here sprawl has given the impression that the city is even bigger than it's nearly 3 million people suggest... but I've been living in rural Palestine for months, where even my trips to the city (Jerusalem) only get me to a place half of Amman's size. Being also fairly familiar with the history of Jordan I had the image in my mind of a much smaller and dispersed place (the territory of Jordan was sparsely populated - and mostly by nomadic bedouins - less than 100 years ago).
So we drove and drove through city - past MacDonalds and Pizza Huts that looked as if they were transplanted physically from suburban North America (again, I hadn't seen a fast food place in months either!) until we eventually came to a large parking lot that was actually the Andali bus station.
I descended from the bus and decided that it being 7pm, I wasn't going to be able to get to Petra that night. I walked across the open space towards a large "hotel" sign, entered on the ground floor and took the elevator up to the 7th floor - the lobby. "For you I'll give you a good price" right "35 Dinars for the night". For such a great deal it sure was a lot for a room. Again I was being ripped off. And again I didn't have the energy to fight it.
The room was nice enough - the air conditioning was especially welcome - and I quickly collapsed on my bed.
An hour or so later, as the sun was beginning to set on Jordan's capital, I left the hotel and walked around. There were a string of book stores off of the square that was the bus station and I went in them looking at the Arabic books. Expensive, I decided not to buy but continued to browse. Cook books, children's stories, books by Edward Said, politics, religion. Many - especially the politics books concerning the Middle East had comically inflammatory (yet in many ways accurate) covers. But then I saw something that I had expected to see, yet had hoped I wouldn't. The cover was a painting of a bearded wizard-like figure with extended hands towards the viewer between which, floated magically, the globe. An innocuous cover in a section with few innocuous covers but immediately I knew what it was. The Arabic title confirmed my disappointment: "Protocols of the Elders of Zion." The book, detailing the "protocols" of a secret Jewish Cabal to a new member describes how this cabal is conspiring to take over the world. Claiming to be an ancient document, The Protocols has been proven to be a hoax and is actually mostly a plagiarized text based on a fictional anti-Napoleon French document from the 19th century. The reality is that The Protocols is erroneously thought to be a real document by some in the Middle East where European anti-semitism has found an audience since the creation of the State of Israel. I knew that you could get the book fairly easily here but still had hoped that it would be harder to find than it turned out to be. In fact, until 2004 you could by a copy of the book online from Wal-Mart throughout North America... and this document gained most notoriety as an anti-Bolshevik text in eastern Europe at the beginning of the 20th century - don't get the impression that this is limited to the Middle East. (For a good set of articles on the current state of anti-semitism check out the October 2004 issue of The New Internationalist magazine at http://www.newint.org/issues/2004/10/01/ )
Leaving the bookstore I continued along my circuitous route around the square. Lined up along most of the four streets were travel agencies. In the windows of the agencies are listed the locations to which they dispatch buses and taxis. You order a taxi ahead of time or take a bus that departs on a preset schedule. I became increasingly uncomfortable in Amman as I passed by each travel agency...
The taxi and bus destination, listed first in each of the windows and written on with paint that had probably been applied years ago, was Baghdad.
***
Picture:
Amman at Night
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
