Facing Facts

Let's give Obama the public pressure he needs.

2011-10-07T16:36:00.006-05:00

I just started a petition on the White House Petitions site, We the People.
Will you sign it? Take a look, please,at http://wh.gov/2BE

How Our Core Beliefs Can Help Bring Peace to Israel/Palestine

2010-09-30T22:10:00.000-05:00

MSNBC: Disappointing Shill Reporting

2010-06-08T15:22:00.001-05:00

Duplicity on the airwaves

Published: Tuesday, June 8, 2010 10:45 AM CDT
On June 2, Chris Mathews interviewed Massachusetts Congressman Barney Frank on MSNBC about the recent Israeli-Gaza-flotilla incident. Both men gave unbalanced, cleverly skewed and dishonest assessments of the occurrence including calling peace activists terrorists, changing the subject to North Korea, bringing Iran into a conflict which involved Turkey and misrepresenting Israel’s wrongdoing in militarily attacking an unarmed civilian ship in international waters.

The duplicity of this kind of press commentary is evident because it was based entirely on Israel’s press statements and public relations spin. Getting the other side of the story would have taken a lot of work because as soon as the incident happened, Israel imposed a blackout on any reporting about it except their own.

What do Americans who have not studied the history of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict think when they turn on mainstream media and get a blather of public relations spin instead of balanced news? Frank and Mathews are no more than shills for the Israeli government, a government which appears to have taken over our own.

Frank does not sit on the Congressional Foreign Affairs Committee and is a self-admitted staunch friend of Israel. Yet, MSNBC chose him to be the primary commentator about the Israeli diplomatic blunder on the high seas. Mathews owes his job to a pro-Zionist television network that, in the past, has been silent about Israel’s misdeeds. Silence influences American thought through omission that belies the importance of information we need to know.

How difficult would it have been for MSNBC to interview a less biased member, say, from the Congressional Foreign Affairs Committee. So much for balance in reporting. So much for MSNBC, liberal in all ways but one. People, check the Internet to get the real story.

Elizabeth S Mayfield
Ames

Why Do Churches Refuse to Question Israel's Actions?

2010-06-07T09:51:00.000-05:00

What Ever Happened to Never Again?

2010-05-29T08:37:00.003-05:00

Published: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 11:38 AM CDT
What happened to ‘never again’? by Elizabeth S Mayfield
Ames Tribune, Ames, Iowa

Recently, I sent out an e-mail to a small group of like-minded people and, to everyone’s surprise, our exchange about the honorable Ms. Kagan for the Supreme Court was usurped by a local Zionist gang of four and turned into a debate about Israel’s rights.

Most amazing was the claim that Israel uses codicils from Ottoman Law to manage its occupation and apartheid. Since most of us, here in America, know nothing about Ottoman law, means that we should all shut up and let poor Israel be. I thought the Ottomans were soundly defeated because we Westerners didn’t like their oppressive acts of double-standard non-justice doled out to colonized subjects?w

In the course of this “debate,” the author of “Is Israel an Apartheid State?” available at the link for Israeli Committee Against House Demolition, USA, sent out an interesting list of selected examples of the 2,500 military orders that govern Palestinians today in Israel’s apartheid state.

These include Order No. 818 which “establishes how Palestinians can plant decorative flowers,” No. 811 and No. 847 which “allow Jews to purchase land from unwilling Palestinian sellers by using a ‘power of attorney,’ No. 58, Article 5, which makes any land transaction un-voidable even if it is proved that the transaction was invalid, No. 363 which “requires Palestinian mechanics to report to the Israeli military the particulars of any and all cars they repair,” and, two more I can’t resist reporting: No. 1147, a requirement that Palestinians get permission from the Israeli military to grow onions” and No. 1229 which “authorizes Israel to hold Palestinians in administrative detention for up to six months without charge or trial. Six-month detentions can be renewed indefinitely.”

I wonder: two states or one? Will it matter if military orders like these remain, made credible by resurrection of an Ottoman Empire legal system. Oh, dear, what ever happened to “never again?”

Down with Road Blocks; Up with Peace

2010-03-24T12:31:00.001-05:00

Time to be creative

Published: Wednesday, March 17, 2010 2:43 PM CDT
The Tribune, Ames, Iowa

My friend suggests erecting road blocks forcing people to sit in their cars for hours so Amesites begin to understand why road blocks destroy civil society in Palestine.

“Fat chance,” I tell him.

Instead, let’s write about why Israel’s democracy is diminishing itself through the Knesset’s “Constitution, Law and Justice Committee.” Sounds democratic, right? But, no, the committee drafts laws to discourage inter-religious marriages, deny Jerusalemites residency rights, declare it legal to take land for Jewish development from those natives who happen to be non-Jews. Jews of conscience tell me these laws are not what having a state religion is about.

It’s just wrong to use religion to destroy the lives and cultures of others, period. Sure, Israel has a demographic problem with Arab birthrates much higher than Jewish, but this is no surprise. There are ways around disparities.

Israeli academic Neve Gordon talks about one-state with a real democracy, not the one-person, one-vote American democracy, but a Lebanese-type democracy in which each faith group involved has a specific role in the government: Jews would always be prime ministers, Muslims would always be presidents and Christians would always be secretaries of state. The people vote, yes, and there are branches of government, a parliament, but each group is assured of shared power, the kind of power that would encourage, no, demand, cooperation.

Are we going to have to kill half the people of the world to get to a point in which good for all trumps greed for a few? How about it, objectors? It’s a Jewish saying, I believe, “If not now, when?”

With the closure of the Damascus Gate to “modernize” the Old City and a development about to displace more than 1,000 Palestinian families, I can’t think of a better time for creative thinking. Onward, Neve Gordon.

Betsy Mayfield

What Can We Say

2010-01-30T14:30:00.000-06:00

Issue is far from one-sided
Published: Friday, January 29, 2010 11:04 AM CST

I’ve been reading with interest the recent exchange of letters regarding the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.

As someone who has spent the majority of his 35-year business career living in the Middle East and traveling extensively throughout the Arab World and Israel, I also have several insights and thoughts to share.

It’s interesting that those who find fault with Betsy Mayfield’s knowledgeable and well-researched criticism of many of Israel’s policies have, in the main, taken her to task with the conspicuously feeble argument that other countries do even worse things. It’s the old “bait and switch” trick: confuse the issue.

Also, when anyone has the audacity to question anything Israel does, they are quickly condemned as “anti-Semitic.” This doesn’t address the facts, but it can throw people off the real issue.

There’s a big difference between people of the Jewish faith and culture and the actions and policies of the state of Israel. Those who blindly support the latter, when confronted with criticism, are the first to switch the subject to the former.

Another response to criticisms of Israel’s often brutal policies is the “self-defense” argument. But, then, unacknowledged is the continued Palestinian humiliation of check points, demise of economic and educational opportunity, home destruction, land confiscation, etc. These are at the root causes of the conflict. While no nation would tolerate the tossing of homemade rockets into their territory, neither would any colonized people agree to unchecked subjugation and daily degradation.

So, have the oppressed become the oppressors? Even millions of Israelis believe that is what their government has become. It seems the U.S. is one of the only countries that isn’t seriously asking the same question.

Let’s not let any of us be misled into believing that this is mainly an issue of Israel just defending itself. It’s far from one-sided.

Don Lambert
Ames

Complaint:: Why Be Concerned If There's No Blood

2010-01-21T12:38:00.004-06:00

A transparent distinction
Published: Friday, January 15, 2010 11:49 PM CST

A recent Tribune letter (“Double standard or anti-Semitism,” Dec. 11) finally said it as it is: “It is striking that two (Tribune) letter writers have published more than 50 letters during the past few years exclusively devoted to criticizing, besmirching and delegitimizing Israel ... (They) obsessively focus on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict ... Singling out the only Jewish state for criticism and condemnation is at best an extreme case of double standard; at worst, a case of the new anti-Semitism.”

Not a month went by and one of these letterwriters struck again (“The strange case of Berlanty Assam,” Dec. 31.) That writer chose to ignore many terrible atrocities taking place around the world: Suicide bombings in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq where every month dozens, sometimes hundreds of Muslims are killed by other Muslims, the ongoing atrocities in Somalia and Darfur and the catastrophic plight of refugees in those countries, the clamping down by the ruthless Iranian regime of demonstrators longing for democracy in their totalitarian country ruled by a dangerous madman, etc.

Why ignore all this spilled blood and a host of outrageous human rights violations in many countries to inform us of a Palestinian student unable to complete her university degree on time? The answer is obvious.

All the truly horrible cases do not involve Jews; the mild, albeit unfortunate, case of the Palestinian student does. This distinction becomes all the more transparent when her letter employs explicit anti-Semitic motifs, e.g. “There is a ‘family’ of Washington leaders who encourage Congress to issue declarations of support for Israel … These men consider themselves ‘chosen’ by God ... Since they, like Israel, are ‘chosen’...”

How sad that in the enlightened city of Ames, in the 21st century, a few individuals still uphold anti-Semitic views, directing them occasionally toward Jews and incessantly toward the Jewish state.

B.C. Kaufman

West Des Moines

An American Jew of Conscience Speaks, Thank Goodness

2010-01-17T17:04:00.000-06:00

"What would King say about Israel today?"
http://wagingnonviolence.org/2010/01/what-would-king-say-about-israel-today/

by Jim Haber, January 16, 2010

Today is Martin Luther King, Jr.’s birthday, not the national holiday
which is Monday. As an activist member of Jewish Voice for Peace
http://www.jewishvoiceforpeace.org/, I have at times faced
counter-demonstrations while I speak out against unjustifiable
atrocities being committed allegedly for me and by “my” side. Being
from the United States, I could be doubly responsible for the
US/Israeli treatment of the Palestinians. As a long-time member of the
War Resisters League http://www.warresisters.org/, King and I share a
belief that (in his words) “social change comes more meaningfully
through nonviolence,” that the “business of burning human beings with
napalm, of filling our nation’s homes with orphans and widows, of
injecting poisonous drugs of hate into the veins of peoples normally
humane, of sending men home from dark and bloody battlefields
physically handicapped and psychologically deranged, cannot be
reconciled with wisdom, justice, and love,” and that God didn’t choose
“America as his divine, messianic force to be a sort of policeman of
the whole world.” 42 years have passed since he was assassinated.

So I am perplexed when I see “pro-Israel” signs that extol Martin
Luther King’s defense of Israel, using quotes (which I also am fond of
doing) by the late revolutionary, but in their case, highlighting
things he said that seem to place him on “their” side of the police
line, not mine. On the occasion of his birth, newsletters of
synagogues may even have articles touting King as a staunch defender
of Israel’s right to defend itself. They take quotes from 42 years ago
as I do, to make our points. Certainly, after the Six Day War of 1967
(and before), King defended Israel. However, events of the last two
score years I think would have reinforced King’s pacifism and “eternal
hostility towards militarism, racism and economic exploitation.” He
never would have become an anti-Semite, but I do think facts on the
ground would have led him to become quite critical of Israel. I want
to briefly mention five specific issues that would have negatively
effected King’s perspective on Israel:

1. Regarding nuclear weapons and disarmament: as a critic of nuclear
weapons, he would have pushed for real steps on the part of the US on
this issue. He would have opposed ALL states building nuclear weapons,
US allies or not. Israel has a formidable nuclear arsenal and delivery
systems even though it and the United States refuse to admit it.
Israel has nukes, and King wouldn’t have been fooled or supportive of
the lie of omission. As he said, “In international conflicts, the
truth is hard to come by because most nations are deceived about
themselves. Rationalizations and the incessant search for scapegoats
are the psychological cataracts that blind us to our sins. But the day
has passed for superficial patriotism. He who lives with untruth lives
in spiritual slavery. Freedom is still the bonus we receive for
knowing the truth.”

2. Israeli support for apartheid in South Africa would certainly have
given MLK pause. Maybe he would have been able to help change Israeli
(and US) policy, but he certainly would have pointed out that
supporting the horrific racism of South Africa was wrong, in the
extreme. He would have seen Jews and some Israelis take anti-racist
stands, but as a whole, and on a governmental level, he would have had
much to rebuke.

3. Israel has been singular in its support for many of the worst
aspects of US foreign policy like covert actions undermining
democratically elected governments. Against oppressive regimes, he
would have supported nonviolent actors. Actions he spoke against while
denouncing the Vietnam war continue. Again, quoting King, “A nation
that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense
than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death.”

4. I don’t think King would have laid all or even most of the blame on
the Palestinian people for the unresolved catastrophe they have
suffered. He would not have supported efforts to punish all the people
of Gaza trying to make them turn on Hamas (a democratically elected
party, like it or not). He would have supported conscientious
objectors like the Shminitsim http://www.shministim.com/ and the
former fighters of Breaking the Silence
http://www.shovrimshtika.org/index_e.asp and Combatants for Peace
http://www.combatantsforpeace.org/. He would see Palestinian homes
being demolished or forcibly occupied by religious zealots (ala
Hebron) and say that it was not just. He would surely have supported
nonviolent Israeli and Palestinian initiatives and would have
sympathized with people being shot at, imprisoned and abused for
speaking out or demonstrating against the wall. He would have had
solidarity with the people of Sderot, many of whom denounced Operation
Cast Lead. He would have cared about every dead and injured person,
but he would maybe have thought that the numbers also had an important
story to tell. He would have denounced ALL war crimes, crimes against
humanity and collective punishment committed in or from Gaza. He would
hear appeals from Christian Palestinians and Palestinian civil society
and be moved.

5. The second class citizenship that Israeli Palestinians have with
its separate and unequal treatment by the State would have appeared
eerily reminiscent of the occasion for lunch counter sit-ins and bus
boycotts in the South. Even if they have more rights than people in
many Arab states, such partiality makes a mockery of democracy. Would
King be more likely to stand with Avigdor Leiberman and Ehud Olmert,
or Bishop Desmond Tutu and Nelson Mandela?

I certainly don’t think King would have become an anti-Semite, but he
may have become an anti-Zionist. They are not the same thing. “The
truth must be told, and I say that those who are seeking to make it
appear that anyone who opposes the war in Vietnam is a fool or a
traitor or an enemy of our soldiers is a person that has taken a stand
against the best in our tradition.” That is a quote of his that I have
no doubt could accurately be updated to go beyond mention of Vietnam
and include every military adventure subsequently waged by “the
greatest purveyor of violence in the world today–my own government,”
including the US/Israeli occupation of the Palestinian Territories.

-------------------

Jim Haber is the Coordinator of Nevada Desert Experience (NDE) which
organizes interfaith resistance to nuclear weapons and war. Jim is on
the War Resisters League National Committee, and he edited the 2008
WRL Peace Calendar. Jim is also very active with Jewish Voice for
Peace, the G.I. Rights Hotline and former SF CW and a regular
volunteer at the Las Vegas CW. He can be reached at:
jim[at]nevadadesertexperience.org.

Changing the Subject from Israel/Palestine to Me

2010-01-14T14:12:00.000-06:00

Vilifying Israel is an Obsession
Published: Wednesday, January 13, 2010 10:59 AM CST

Elizabeth Mayfield’s letter (Jan. 8) follows the rhetoric of much anti-Israel hatred: pre-empt all criticism of Israel with a statement that your words will be labeled antisemitic. Thus, when such biased statements are made, you can say, “See, I told you so.”

It’s probably fair to say that the majority of Tribune readers, from ultra-liberal to ultra-conservative, think that the U.S. is a great nation in many respects, and at the same time, we also can find various aspects of our culture and government to criticize.

Israel, like the U.S., should not be exempt from criticism. Neither should Israel be criticized out-of-context (e.g., ignoring the terror that prompted military actions.)

However, the obsession with incessantly vilifying and demonizing Israel (and no other country) renders the accusations meaningless and reveals more about the accuser’s motives than about Israel.

Mayfield claims “Israel will cost us money, lives and morality.” The aid given to Palestinians and their descendents in Gaza, the West Bank and in several Arab countries by the U.S. and other nations has, over the years, amounted to many billions of dollars. The U.S. funds Palestinians both directly and indirectly via the United Nations (note: the U.S. is the largest contributor to the U.N.). Much of that money has gone to Arafat’s billionaire widow, to plump up Hamas and Fatah bigwigs and to purchase weapons that facilitate terror.

Anybody who believes Israel has a problem with morality should try living under Sharia law, where he won’t have to endure any western morality or democracy.

When Gaza and the West Bank grant free speech and free press and when Palestinian children are no longer nurtured on a diet of hatred and worship of terrorists, then a true comparison can be conducted between Israel and its Islamic neighbors.

JL Metcalf

Fort Dodge

Response to Name Calling In Letters

2010-01-13T14:09:00.000-06:00

Understanding; Reconciliation
Published: Wednesday, January 13, 2010 10:59 AM CST

For the past several years, I have read many letters to the editor pertaining to the conflict between Israel and Palestine. As I recall, most of the pro-Palestine and pro-Israel letters have focused on aggressive Israeli policies and actions toward Hamas and other Palestinians, and Israel’s right to live within safe and secure boundaries.

The exchange of views offered by Betsy Mayfield (Dec. 31) and James Eaves-Johnson (Jan. 6) suggested to me that Mayfield’s comments were, in part, directed at what she referred to as “members of Congress” who support Israel no matter what that government does, and Eaves-Johnson, who suggested that Mayfield “trades in thinly veiled anti-Semitism.” Attacking Mayfield for being anti-Semitic and, as I read him, anti-Jew, postpones a search for truth and perpetuates antagonism at the expense of seeking common ground.

I also have experienced how difficult it is to engage in civil conversation with Central Iowan Jews, Christians, Muslims and other people of goodwill on the topic of Israel and Palestine. I am reminded of Rabbi Jonathan Sacks’ insights in “The Home We Build Together” (pages 72-23). “Those who seek to build bridges find it difficult to make their voice heard. Eventually they give up trying, for in the current climate, the risk is great. In a polarized atmosphere, peacemakers are seen by their own side as betrayers.”

Rabbi Sacks speaks from experience, and he speaks the truth. Another great teacher, St. Paul, once wrote: “So let us not grow weary in doing what is right, for we will reap at harvest time, if we do not give up.” (Galatians 6:9.) I encourage people of goodwill within Judaism, Christianity and Islam to seek understanding and reconciliation as, together, we pursue the elusive goal of peace.

Russell Melby

What More Can I Say

2010-01-08T14:51:00.000-06:00

Sharing what I have learned
Published: Friday, January 8, 2010 10:58 AM CST

Criticize Israel or Israeli government violence, and the response is always the same: you’re an anti-Semite. Those who spuriously spit out the slur intend to damage my reputation and discredit my perspective.

In defense, I am not anti-Semitic. Anti-Semitism, bigotry, means not sitting at the same table as a Semite, blaming all for the sins of one, developing irrational hatred. A bigot feels that all members of the group are lesser beings to be denigrated in the basest ways.

Does this mean that because I am well prepared to discuss what happens in Israel/Palestine, but not prepared to discuss similar problems elsewhere, that I am a bigot? I have lived in Jerusalem, visited Gaza and maintain close ties with Palestinians and Israelis of conscience. I have spent 15 years researching the situation and history of the Israeli/Palestinian problems.

I sit at the same table as Israelis and plenty of Semitic people; I do not blame all for the crimes of the Zionist government. I know the difference between Judaism, Zionism and Israeli nationalism. Motivated by a need to inform, I write to advance peace that only justice can bring.

I speak against Israel because I feel complicit in what Israel does. My taxes pay for actions that never will bring about peace. When Congolese women are gang raped, the United States Congress does not pass a resolution saying they approve. When Israel unjustly crushes Palestinians who have no recourse whatsoever, we not only send words of approval, we pay for the deed.

There’s no need to write about Palestinian wrongs; we get that news. The American people have the right to know the whole truth. Israel’s will costs us money, lives and morality. I make no apology for trying to share what I have learned.

Elizabeth S. Mayfield

Ames

Name Calling, again, does not address the issues

2010-01-06T16:13:00.001-06:00

The trade of antisemitism
Published: Wednesday, January 6, 2010 11:15 AM CST

Elizabeth Mayfield’s Dec. 31 letter ostensibly addresses the problem Berlanty Assam has traveling between Gaza and the West Bank for her education. There is legitimate criticism of Israeli policies, and there is antisemitism. Mayfield offers little of the former and much of the latter.

The background of Assam’s case is the Hamas-Fatah war. Their war has stopped only because Hamas is isolated in Gaza and cannot infiltrate the West Bank. As the left-wing Haaretz noted in 2007, Hamas was brutal in seizing Gaza, “aside from assassinating Fatah officials, Hamas also killed innocent Palestinians, with the intention of deterring the large clans from confronting the organization.”

To prevent the spread of Hamas’ terror, Israel has imposed restrictions on movement between the Palestinian areas. This effort to protect Palestinians has had unfortunate consequences.

Among others, it has impeded Gaza resident Berlanty Assam from completing her studies in the West Bank in a normal fashion. Despite her apparent illegal entry into Israel, people such as Assam benefit from Israeli democracy. She has legal representation from a major human rights organization in Israel and has received review of her case by the Israeli Supreme Court.

Unfortunately, Mayfield seriously examined none of the important issues in Assam’s case. Instead, she trades in thinly veiled antisemitism.

Mayfield claims that a “family” of “chosen” people manipulate the U.S. Congress. She invokes Christmas imagery in describing how “chosen” Israel disrupted the peace of Bethlehem in arresting Assam. She claims “they” invoke some God-given right to “murder,” among other crimes. If the “they” who Mayfield calls “chosen” are not Jews, she should be clear. Any normal person knows she means Jews.

Myths of Jewish control, lies about Jewish defilement of Christianity and allegations that Jews claim divine right to commit evil crimes are the stock in trade of antisemitism.

James Eaves-Johnson
Coralville

A Story about Injustice

2010-01-05T15:04:00.000-06:00

The Strange Case of Berlanty Assam
BY: Elizabeth S. Mayfield
Published: The Tribune, Ames, Iowa, December 31, 2009

Berlanty Assam, a fourth year undergrad from Gaza at Bethlehem
University in the little town of Christmas song, was awakened from
sleep on October 26th, blindfolded, handcuffed, thrown in the back of
a van and transported back to her parent's home in Gaza. The Israeli
government, issuers of a 2005 permit allowing her to study and live in
Bethlehem, changed their minds three months shy of her graduation. A
trial ensued. No, Berlanty was not a security threat. Old documents
including those Berlanty held were confiscated and promptly lost.
Missing, too, all Israeli administrative records. No evidence; no
college degree for Berlanty. In early December, Israeli courts denied
Berlanty and her university's plea to allow her to finish.

This injustice affects fewer than the Christmas 2008 murderous attack
leaving more than 1,000 Palestinians dead, but it still matters.
Imagine how you would feel if Berlanty were your child attending an
American University and our "democracy" just yanked her out and sent
her home. Is this a deed worthy of our support? There is a "family"
of Washington leaders who encourage Congress to issue declarations of
support for Israel whenever this colonizer country feels unjustly
criticized. Always our Representatives give a thumbs-up to Israel, no
matter what the rest of the world says. Evidently, these men consider
themselves "chosen" by God to lead the rest of us. Since they, like
Israel, are "chosen," they believe that if they support outrageous
acts like this one or the murders of a year ago, it's O.K. because
they're chosen by God and God knows best.

What about you? Please think about Berlanty and how injustice done
to her might be brought to an end. Think letters; think about Obama's
"just war" application. Think about how you could help give Berlanty
a gift of a future and end your year with a uniquely personal gift
representing justice and love.
_________________________________________________________________________
P.S. The Ames Tribune ran this letter on the last day of the year, Dec. 31, 2009. I had written it as a Christmas letter asking people to remember the Bethlehem of today when they celebrated the Christian holiday on Dec. 24th and 25th. I rewrote the letter so that I would get it in as my monthly contribution in December. The paper chose not to run this letter in their electronic mail follow up.

Today, another letter surfaced from one of the friends of Israel in our area who regularly rebuts letter I send in. We'll see if they publish that one on-line. This is how people in the United States are silenced by the friends of Israel.

___________________________________________________________________________

Public Relations War in Ames, Iowa

2010-01-04T15:22:00.000-06:00

In Ames,Iowa, there are a handful of us who are, frankly, engaged in a public relation's war. Every letter that I or my colleague, John Hauptman, write in support of the Palestinian people is refuted with the charge that we are anti-Semitic. I cannot speak for John, who speaks for himself below in an unpublished response to the latest Pnina Luban public charge against us, but I believe that I cannot, must not stop writing until the opposition, the friends of Israel in our area, stop slandering me and the Palestinian people in their rendition of one of the worst human rights crises in the world today. Of course, what is happening to the Palestinian people is not the only crime against humanity on our planet, but it's the one I know about first hand and that is why I focus on it. I try to not engage in direct rebuttal or name calling with those like Luban and Eaves Johnson who harass John and me . In the past, the editor of our paper would not run directly slanderous letters that named names and called people names in the manner of an uncreative seven grader bully. The new editor, however, has chosen to allow any slanderous writings to be printed. This is why so few Americans will engage at all in discussions about the horrendous (and getting worse everyday) situation in Gaza and, for that matter, in the entire region.

The letter below answers each of our opposition's charges, but the editor, so far, refuses to print John's letter. It is longer than the paper requires for Letters to the Editor, but it could be run as commentary. I have asked for that and received no answer. Anyone really interested in this exchange needs to read the four following letters starting with Pnina Luban's letter, John Hauptman's unpublished reply, my letter, Dec. 31 and the Jan.6 rebuttal from Eaves Johnson. You will need to read down and, then, select the lates archive dates to see the whole stream.

A Rebuttal to Pnina Luban (her letter follows)

From: John Hauptman
Professor of Physics
Iowa State University
Ames, Iowa 50010

Dear Editor,

There are so many things wrong with the "double standard or anti-Semitism" letter,(see below on this blog) that I don't know where to start. Honest and accurate criticism of a government's illegal actions evoked a long list of non-sequiturs, followed by the explicit contradiction between a "tiny democracy" and a "Jewish state" with 420 nuclear weapons designed for the incineration of cities. A "Jewish state" can be a "theocracy", but not a "democracy".

As for "two" people and "50 letters", I know people in Ames who have been threatened, don't speak up, and don't write letters, and in a community where the main currency is one's reputation, this is a powerful suppressant. I have been threatened and hilarious inventions have been floated, but I cannot be easily intimidated. I have understood the dynamics of revolt and protest since Berkeley in 1964, and the use of personal intimidation by the John Birch Society even earlier. I have the comfort of knowing that my opinions are well aligned with the whole world.

The Pew Research Center (Washington, D.C.) conducts vast surveys of national and international opinion. Every year the Israeli government is ranked as the "greatest threat to world peace" (59% in the European Union, and pegged close to 100% in friendly countries like Jordan and Egypt), followed in second place by Iran, then North Korean.

We can talk about Richard Goldstone and the 650-page report (Google: goldstone gaza un) of his Fact Finding committee on "crimes against humanity" by the Israeli government, "war crimes" by the Israeli military, and both "war crimes" and "crimes against humanity" by Hamas. Although I find identifications abhorrent, Richard Goldstone (a citizen of South Africa) is always identified as Jewish, a strong supporter of Israel, on the Board of Directors of Hebrew University, whose daughter lives in Israel. On Israeli Army radio, his daughter said that her father tried to protect Israel, but that the evidence was so extensive and so clear. The slaughter of 1000 defenseless civilians on one side, and 10 soldiers on the other (four by "friendly fire"), was a "crime against humanity". Richard Goldstone has been accused of being an "anti-Semite", an "enemy of Israel", a "self-hating Jew", and all the rest of the usual slanders from the Israeli government.

Watch for this truism: when a government finds it necessary to attack an individual, you know that something is wrong.
The leader of the Israeli opposition party, Tzipi Livni, canceled a trip to London this week because a warrant had been issued for her arrest by the UK. The Israeli government confirmed that this morning (Dec. 14). Why? Her role in the slaughter in Gaza, that's why.

The Israeli government strategy, adopted by the US government, is to dismiss the Goldstone report as "biased" and unworthy of consideration. Goldstone has explicitly asked Obama to point out any bias in the report. No answer. The US is silent. They just hope it will go away, but it won't go away.

For years the Israel lobby has told us "look at Darfur, look at Darfur" (don't look at what we are doing). My Federal tax dollars pay for what the Israeli government is doing, and it is illegal. I don't pay for Darfur, Somali, Chechnya, or the Tamil rebels. Because so much innocent blood is being spilled, we paying in more than dollars.

A British diplomat remarked to an American diplomat recently "If you want better relations with Muslims, you should stop killing Muslims."

I read the Israeli press every day (Jerusalem Post, Ynet, Jewish Forward, Ha'aretz), and none of this is a mystery. The Israeli government whines about Hamas, but they created Hamas as a counter to Fatah, not suspecting that their creation would grow its own legs. I also read the weekly report of the PCHR (http://www.pchrgaza.org).

By the time this letter is printed, I will probably be listening to the roars of "God is Great" echoing over the roof tops of Tehran. There is a revolt there, no different from any other revolt against a government or any arbitrary authority. This one is for Iran, however, not for us. The US government has already done enough damage to the Iranian people by toppling their democracy in 1953, installing a dictator, stealing their oil for 30 years, supporting Saddam Hussein as he murdered one million people and rained US-made chemical weapons onto Iranian cities, shooting down a civilian airliner killing 300 people, supporting terrorist groups inside Iran, and all of this in spite of Iran's help against Al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan by guaranteeing a safe haven to US pilots. You didn't read any of this in the US press. Humans yearn for freedom, like we did under the British Redcoats, like Iranians today, like Palestinians today. It is not unusual at all.

Roger Cohen of the New York Times has written a series of perceptive columns on Iran, from Iran. He demolishes the propaganda from the Israel Lobby that is trying to sucker the US into starting a third war in the region. To save the American Republic, we must resist the Israel Lobby whose primary loyalty is to another country.

This Christmas season when you see a Nativity scene, look carefully at Mary, veiled and covered. The dress and veil are identical to that of Palestinian women today, and for good reason. The Palestinians today are the direct genetic descendants of the Jews during the Roman occupation. They have stayed in this land of "milk and honey" for thousands of years, invaded by Roman Legions, Arab conquerors, Christian Crusaders, Ottoman Turks, and now an invasion by European Zionists intent on conquering the land, all of it. (Google: amazon Salomo Sand). The Palestinians have invaded no one, and the whole world knows this. They are, as always, essentially completely defenseless civilians. As a citizen of the United States, a "high contracting party to the Geneva Conventions", it is our legal obligation to bring the Israeli government into compliance with basic international humanitarian law. That is not a double standard and it is not anti-Semitism.

Double Standard: Anti-Humanist or Zionist?

2009-12-11T15:19:00.000-06:00

Double standard or anti-Semitism
Published: Friday, December 11, 2009 6:35 PM CST

Tribune letter writers rarely engage in criticizing the world’s other 193 countries. It is striking that two letter writers have published more than 50 letters during the past few years exclusively devoted to criticizing, besmirching and delegitimizing Israel.

While a tiny minority of determined Israel-bashers exists, the great majority of Americans - polls consistently show - firmly support Israel and appreciate her monumental challenge of surviving as a tiny democracy (1/6 area of Iowa) in a sea of hostile authoritarian Arab countries, while forced to defend herself against Palestinian terrorism, repeated attacks on her territory and rejection of her right to exist.

These letter writers obsessively focus on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict but are silent about other massacres and genocide that have exacted a far greater human toll: Sudan’s killing of 350,000 Darfuris and the plight of millions of Darfuri and Somali refugees subjected to violence, hunger, and rape; Russia/Chechnya conflict where Russian troops killed tens of thousands of Chechnyan civilians; Tamil Tigers’ terrorism and Sri Lanka’s military assault on Tamil-occupied territory that resulted in 20,000 civilian casualties; Spain/Basque; China’s robbing of the Tibetan people’s homeland; Turkey’s occupation of northern Cyprus; Turkey’s suppression of Kurdish nationalism; gross human rights abuses by North Korea, Myanmar, Iran and many Arab countries; deprivation of women’s rights in Saudi Arabia and other totalitarian countries.

Many of these countries are close U.S. allies; some (e.g. Egypt) are major recipients of U.S. foreign aid.

Singling out the only Jewish state for criticism and condemnation is at best an extreme case of double standard; at worst, a case of the new anti-Semitism. According to Middle East scholar Bernard Lewis, “the new anti-Semitism” is characterized by denying the Jewish people the right to self-determination; applying double standards by requiring of Israel a behavior not expected or demanded of any other country.

Pnina Luban
Ames

Is it really O.K. for Israel to get so much special dispensation from the US?

2009-11-10T05:01:00.006-06:00

Dairy tariffs eliminated: An under the table deal to benefit Israel, but not US dairy farmers. Once again, Israel, first; the US, second. Is that how our country should be run?

Published: Sunday, November 8, 2009 12:19 AM CST

Here’s news for you. I haven’t seen it in our papers nor heard it discussed on FOX or even MSNBC. Sad to say, its pertinent to those of you in Iowa who grew up on dairy farms or sell dairy products or make a living off the land.

According to research made public by If Americans Knew, Israeli wire service Ynet announced that President Obama recently signed a presidential memo eliminating a tariff or subcharges on dairy products that Israel ships to the United States. Seems that Dudu Buch, an Israeli export broker, takes credit for obtaining the protection from the levy for Israel saying that the company he represents will receive a $17,000 credit because of the deal.

Evidently, an Israeli attache expressed glee because he exclaimed aloud that the levy-leveling happened by presidential decree rather than through regular channels which means that Israel will have no fear that it will be placed on (Israel) again in the future. Hum!

Although the United States does not levy taxes on most imports we receive from Israel, this is new and previous administrations did not wave the usual tariff requirements for dairy product from Israel. Hum again! On top of this, The National Milk Producers Federation say that U.S. dairy producers have been facing unprecedented losses over the past year due to low milk prices and high input costs. Hum, yet again!

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu recently joked that even with all the largess he gets from America he wouldn’t really want Israel to be Americas 51st state. Why? He said because he’d only have two senators representing him and not the many he has under his thrall, today. A final, hum.

Elizabeth Mayfield

Ames

Facing Facts: Anna Baltzer and Mustapha Barghouti: The truth about Palestine

2009-10-29T12:22:00.002-05:00

See a great show on the sidebar: most recent entry.

One Last Pitch for Sabeel in Iowa

2009-10-04T14:35:00.001-05:00

A speech worth listening to

Published: Sunday, October 4, 2009 12:08 AM CDT

Is a two-state solution for Israel/Palestine possible? Consider how far 60 years of Zionist regimes have taken Israel into belligerent gathering of land to make one state, a Jewish state, a land without borders, millions of brokenhearted people living in occupation and, because of occupation, an angry population within and without Israel proper and Israel far and wide.

Does Israel really want two states after all, and how do the demographics of the region affect probability of two states or even one state or, even, a disastrous ecological ruination of the region?

The Rev. Dr. Naim Ateek is a Christian Arab who will speak from noon to 2 p.m. on Wednesday, Oct. 7, at First Christian Church in Ames and again at 7 p.m. at Collegiate Methodist. He’s worth hearing because he’s lived in Jerusalem and environs his entire life. He’s what is called a Jerusalemite, an elite category for Israeli and Palestinian both.

Ateek will speak from his own perspective, but when he heads up to the University of Northern Iowa to lead a conference called “A Secure Israel and A Free Palestine,” he will bring four leading Jewish intellectuals to tell their stories: Phyllis Bennis, policy wonk from D.C.; Anna Baltzer, traveling star of discussion circles in towns all over the United States; Jeff Halper, formerly from Hibbing, Minn., and now a staunch Israeli citizen; and psychologist Mark Braverman, member of Jewish Voice for Peace.

I expect to get a better sense of what’s actually happening in the Middle East by listening to what Ateek and friends have to say. I expect it to be challenging.

Elizabeth S. Mayfield

Ames

The Place to be on October 9 and 10

2009-09-13T07:54:00.000-05:00

Speakers discuss Middle East

Published: Wednesday, September 2, 2009 3:23 PM CDT

In trying to share information about Palestine or attempting to talk about human rights violations against Palestinians, I encounter objections: “I won’t talk about Palestinians as long as Hamas is throwing rockets. Israel has a right to defend itself.” That’s the old trick of changing the subject.

I want to talk about Palestinians and Israelis who want peace and want to get on with their lives without trepidation; the opposition wants to bring up the worst aspect of the resistance to end the conversation. The result: deadlock, intransigence. We talk past each other. Isn’t 60 plus years of this enough?

You can read about not ending this world-affecting battle opined by those who benefit from keeping the fray going. Palestine, however, is still the issue. On Oct. 9 and 10, those in Cedar Falls who want peace in the Holy Land will host some of the most articulate and internationally recognized speakers on the circuit. Amesites who care even a wink about the situation have an opportunity here.

Take the time to drive 90 minutes up Interstate 35 and across on U.S. Highway 20 and learn first hand what the nonviolent peace and justice exponents can tell you. First speaker up is writer/analyst Phyllis Bennis, Institute for Policy Studies, in D.C., at 1 p.m. on Friday, Oct. 9. Phyllis and the event, in general, offer substance missing here in Ames where tit-for-tat argument keeps us confused and uninformed about reality on the ground.

If using U.S. dollars to help Americans at home rather than creating or abetting wars around the world matters to you, go to Cedar Falls on Oct. 9. Check it out at www.fosna.org.

Elizabeth Mayfield

Ames

Home Exchange, Bezonnes, France 2009

2009-08-23T13:40:00.001-05:00

2009-07-22T18:59:00.003-05:00

Check out this Site. It's a good one!

Just Another Week in the Holy Land

2009-07-22T14:08:00.000-05:00

Weekly report about Israelis

Published: Saturday, July 18, 2009 8:05 AM CDT

The following items are from the July 2 to 8, 2009 weekly report of the Palestinian Center for Human Rights.

1. A Palestinian child was killed and her father and uncle were wounded by Israeli forces in the Gaza Strip.

2. Three Palestinian civilians, including two children, were injured when Israeli forces used force against a peaceful protest against the Annexation Wall.

3. Israeli forces conducted 25 incursions into Palestinian communities in the West Bank.

4. Israeli forces arrested 18 Palestinian civilians, including seven children, and an American human rights defender in the West Bank.

5. Israeli forces have continued to impose a total closure on the occupied Palestinian territories and have isolated the Gaza Strip from the outside world.

6. Israeli troops positioned at military checkpoints in the West Bank arrested three Palestinian civilians.

7. Israeli forces have continued measures aimed at establishing a Jewish majority in occupied east Jerusalem.

8. Israeli forces forced a Palestinian civilian to demolish a structure added to his house in Beit Hanina village near Jerusalem.

9. Israeli forces stormed the Palestinian National Theater in Jerusalem and prevented an art show.

10. Israeli forces have continued settlement activities in the West Bank and Israeli settlers have continued to attack Palestinian civilians and property.

11. Israeli forces issued military orders to demolish 11 houses and four wells in al-Khader village, south of Bethlehem.

12. Israeli forces razed areas of Palestinian land in Yatta village, south of Hebron, to expand a settlement outpost.

13. Israeli settlers attacked a Palestinian child and attempted to run him down in Hebron.

14. Israeli settlers released hundreds of wild boars in the northern West Bank.

It is like this every week. President Obama deserves the support of all Americans.

John Hauptman

Ames

Zionists Answer to My Call to End Aid to Israel

2009-07-01T19:15:00.002-05:00

Aid to ‘refugees’ adds to conflict

Published: Friday, June 19, 2009 11:56 PM CDT

Aid to ‘refugees’ adds to conflict

Last week, Palestinian Authority President Abbas reiterated a long-standing demand that, in addition to establishing a Palestinian state, Israel absorb an untold number of Palestinians.

This demand is a non-starter because it contradicts the principle of two states for two peoples and by virtue of demographics, Israel would be transformed into another Arab state. Ironically, U.S. aid to so-called Palestinian refugees has helped perpetuate the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

Since World War II, 130 million refugees became the responsibility of the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees. Thanks, in part, to UNHCR’s efforts in settling these refugees, their numbers have shrunk considerably, as most have become citizens of their host countries, except Palestinians.

To further the Arab agenda of destroying Israel, in 1950, under pressure from Arab and Muslim countries, the U.N. established a special agency, UNRWA, to care exclusively for Palestinian refugees. Whereas the U.N.’s definition of all refugee groups is restricted to the original refugees and specifically excludes their descendents, UNRWA makes an exception to that rule by defining Palestinian refugees as both the original refugees and all their descendents.

In six decades, the number of original Palestinian refugees shrunk from 650,000 to less than 100,000, while the number of their descendents ballooned to 4.2 million. For 59 years, UNRWA, whose largest contributor is the U.S., has provided billions of dollars to sustain this ever-growing population while keeping them in a permanent state of welfare dependency. This has led to a birth rate 10 times higher than that of Western countries; half of Gaza’s population is under age 15.

Since UNRWA is a major employer of Hamas members, our taxpayer dollars support Hamas terrorist activities as well as UNRWA-run schools that teach militant, anti-Western ideology. It is our taxpayer money that helps perpetuate the Palestinian refugee problem and thereby the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

Pnina Luban

Ames

HERE'S WHY WE SHOULD STOP AID TO ISRAEL

2009-05-24T09:31:00.001-05:00

U.S. should stop Israel support

Published: Thursday, May 21, 2009 11:33 AM CDT

For 20 years, I have passionately asked for justice for the Palestinians and tried to explain the horrors of Zionist colonialism which our nation enabled.

Now, as our own economy fizzles in starts and stops and American workers lose their livelihoods, Congress considers a FY2010 budget request for $2.775 billion in foreign military financing for Israel, an increase of $225 million in military aid compared to FY2009. During FY2007, the U.S. gave more than $6.8 million per day to Israel and $0.3 million per day to the Palestinians. Should we continue to offer our purse to Israel, year after year?

More and more global speakers, including voices of Jews of conscience, ask that America stop supporting Israel until Israel ends its unjust occupation of Palestine. When people from Palestine to Pakistan speak of struggles in Gaza and the West Bank, they do not say, “Israeli violence”; they refer, instead, to “American/Israeli injustice.” Should we be paying Israel to reject human rights we ourselves accept, causing ourselves worldwide disdain and accompanying dangers?

The Jewish Federation of Des Moines, as well as federation professionals all over America, have the job of silencing those of us who dare speak against Israel’s actions. They twist the facts; they use the word “Jew” rather than “Zionist,” even when many Jews do not approve of Israel’s occupation anymore than I do.

With Jewish groups (none of whom call me anti-Semitic) like J-Street, Jewish Voice for Peace, Not in My Name supporting lasting peace and encouraging America to insist on peace, maybe it’s time for the federation to become mainstream by supporting a just peace, too.

For the record, I do not mean this “blithely.”

Elizabeth S. Mayfield

Ames

THE LATEST ISSUE: IRAN AND ISRAEL

2009-05-21T15:29:00.002-05:00

Below is a rejection letter from a prominent pastor in Des Moines, Iowa. The response is typical of may church leaders who fear the vehemence and viciousness of the Jewish Federation of Greater Des Moines who will do just about anything to silence institutions as well as people. The rejection, this time, goes to a couple who want to speak about Israel and Iran and our role in a potential debacle or, worse, war. Following the rejection are responses from those of us who disagree about keeping our congregations from ever having to "gasp" when they hear truth spoken to power. When will our churches, synogogues and mosques assert moral leadership in America and stand up for justice and peace?

May 12, 2009

Karla:

Last night at the Plymouth Peace Committee meeting, the request to sponsor your presentation in June came to the attention of the committee. After much discussion about the nature of your topic, the committee felt that your topic is important and should be heard, but not at Plymouth.

Plymouth Peace Committee tries to avoid political commentary and points of view that may not be received well by our Jewish neighbors. As the past president of the Des Moines Area Religious Council, I am particularly sensitive to this problem. It’s almost impossible to separate questions of religion and politics when discussing the Middle East.

The last presentation sponsored by the Peace Committee at Plymouth was a presentation called “Love Your Enemies” by Louie Vitale. Although the slide show at the beginning of the evening was a rather harmless pictorial journal of the development of a cross cultural relationship, the following question and answer period brought up some very pointed political views that made some of our congregation gasp [emphasis supplied]. We are not willing to do that again.

I hope you do find a venue where you can hold your presentation. Please let us know where it is. Some of our membership will want to attend.

Thanks for your understanding.

Faith V. Ferré

Minister of Discipleship

Plymouth U.C.C.

Des Moines, IA

(515) 255-3149

Any speaker who suggests that Iran is not the existential threat pro-Israel war mongers say it is makes the Israel-firsters nervous, and they are pulling out all the stops in their largely behind-the-scenes effort to silence anyone and everyone who speaks against a US attack on Iran, anyone who thinks the US military has better things to do than fight Israel's wars for that rigidly ultranationalistic, militantly expansionist, nuclear-armed state, which, with largely uncritical US diplomatic and economic support, has persistently and systematically engaged in black letter law Geneva Conventions war crimes and crimes against humanity in the illegally Occupied Palestinian Territories for some 60 years. Here's something that may make you gasp, Faith Ferre: http://www.ifamericansknew.org/about_us/etyt.html Too bad Hedy Epstein is not one of your Jewish neighbors. Or this: http://www.ifamericansknew.org/media/footageerasedyt.html Too bad none of these kids are your neighbors. Perhaps you or your gasping congregation could minister to them, or in their behalf?

The article and photos below appear on page 14 of the (current) May issue of The Independent Monitor, the national newspaper of Arab Americans.

Vitale: “The sticky wicket is Israel”

By Michael Gillespie

For The Independent Monitor

4/20/2009 – 977 words

Franciscan priest and activist Fr. Louie Vitale spoke at Plymouth Congregational Church in Des Moines on Sunday, April 19, about his experiences during a visit to Iran in late February and his protest and arrest at Creech Air Force Base in Nevada earlier in April.

Vitale, whose commitment to the practice of active nonviolent civil disobedience in behalf of peace and justice has led to his arrest on more than 200 occasions, offered his perspective on the prospects for peace in the Middle East and Southwest Asia.

“Let’s be honest about it,” said the 76-year-old priest, “the sticky wicket is Israel. There is so much tension about Israel, and they are all identifying the U.S. with Israel.”

“When [the Israeli December 2008-January 2009 attack on] Gaza was going on, and before when [the 2006 Lebanon War] was going on, everybody knows that the weapons came from the United States,” said Vitale.

“I was in Washington in 2006 when the Lebanon War was going on and it was very clear and I kept waiting for the government to say, for Condoleezza Rice to say, you know we were all calling for ‘a truce, a truce, a truce,’ and she said ‘no truce, no truce,’ well, that doesn’t help,” said Vitale.

Vitale recalled a meeting that occurred during his February visit to Iran. He and the other five American peacemakers who formed the multi-faith delegation led by Quaker David Hartsough met with people from all walks of life, merchants and professors, students and politicians, families and clergy members. They also met for about two hours with members of the Iranian parliament, including several representatives of various minority religious communities within Iran.

“That was a very powerful meeting,” said Vitale.

“Two of them represented the Armenian and Assyrian Christians. There was one representing the Jews and one representing the Zoroastrians, which is the oldest religion out there in Iran,” said Vitale.

“The one who was from Iran representing the Jews was really focused particularly on one our young fellows who is Jewish, and really insisting, ‘You’ve got to talk to American Jews about backing off,’” said Vitale.

During a wide-ranging Q&A that followed his formal remarks and media presentation, Vitale responded to questions and invited comments from the audience.

The Independent Monitor mentioned news media coverage of controversial statements by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran, his prominent role in the United Nations conference on race taking place in Geneva, Switzerland, and asked Vitale if, when he was in Iran, he had seen or heard any evidence of anti-Jewish sentiment among Iranians.

Vitale said he believes that reports asserting that Ahmadinejad has called for the destruction of Israel “have been debunked.”

“The bottom line, what they are really trying to say is, ‘There is all this incredible energy directed toward what happened to Israel, but what’s happening to us?’” said Vitale.

“With the U.S. and with Israel, I think the question is the governments,” said Vitale, who pointed to widespread anti-war sentiment in the USA and to members of the Israeli military who have refused to serve in the illegally Occupied Palestinian Territories.

“[Ahmadinejad] speaks in pretty inflammatory language, but our last president spoke, you know, of the ‘Axis of Evil’ and some of the things that were said were very inflammatory,” said Vitale.

In response to Vitale’s remarks about Iran, one member of an audience of about 60, Navid Emami, who has lived and worked in Iowa for many years, offered some observations that drew general applause.

“I am from Iran. … There is a right wing government in Iran now. But there are also progressive movements in Iran. [Former Iranian president Mohammad] Khatami has urged dialog with other cultures and nations. Within Iranian society, the camp of reform, they were really gaining ground, but as soon as Bush went to the Congress with that famous speech about the ‘Axis of Evil’, well of course the right wing took advantage of that,” said Emami.

“This doesn’t happen in a vacuum. If the U.S. would lessen the pressure, Iranians will do their part. But if they feel they are surrounded by enemies, well of course they will support their government because they don’t want what happened to Iraq to happen to them. They don’t want revolution, they don’t want ‘regime change’, but if you leave it to them they will change,” said Emami.

“You are exactly right,” said Emami, “the Iranians are not anti-Semites. Literate Iranians are not against gays or lesbians. Actually, the majority of Iranians are very liberal,” said Emami.

A former provincial of the California Franciscan Friars, Vitale co-founded the Nevada Desert Experience, a movement to end nuclear testing, and Pace e Bene. Pace e Bene invites people to “Imagine a world with dignity, justice, and peace for all. A world with the tools to challenge the spiral of war, poverty and ecological devastation. A world where we apply these tools to our own lives as well as our larger society.”

Vitale, who was pastor of a Catholic church in a low-income neighborhood in San Francisco, CA for 12 years, served a five-month prison sentence in 2007 and 2008 for staging an anti-torture protest at a military intelligence training center at Fort Huachuca, AZ in 2006.

Vitale’s most recent arrest occurred on April 9 when he and thirteen others entered the gate of Creech Air Force Base north of Las Vegas, Nevada singing and prayerfully challenging the remote operation of hunter-killer drone aircraft over Afghanistan and Pakistan. Two Iowans, Rene Espeland, of the Des Moines Catholic Worker Community, and Brian Terrell, of the Strangers & Guests Catholic Worker Farm, Maloy, IA, were among those arrested in Nevada with Vitale.

Vitale told The Independent Monitor that he has no plans to return to Iran, but he noted with a grin that he didn’t have plans for his most recent visit there either.

What has happened to intellectual courage? When will the Christian clergy in America wake up?

2009-05-21T15:03:00.005-05:00

WHEN WILL CHRISTIAN CLERGY IN AMERICA CARRY OUT THE MESSAGE OF CHRIST THEY PROFESS TO FOLLOW?

Religious perplexities are inevitable; there can be no growth without psychic conflict and spiritual agitation. The organization of a philosophic standard of living entails considerable commotion in the philosophic realms of the mind. Loyalties are not exercised in behalf of the great, the good, the true, and the noble without a struggle. Effort is attendant upon clarification of spiritual vision and enhancement of cosmic insight.

Dear Faith Ferre:

Years ago I came to you to ask for support for a Palestinian film festival I and others were trying to mount in Des Moines in the face of angst and undermining tactics from the Jewish Federation of Great Des Moines. I doubt that you remember the festival or me because your response was, "I'm busy and can only give you a minute of my time. What do you want?" The implication was "get out of here." I went.

Your brush off, which happened that day and, at least, one other time over the years, is one of the reasons I no longer attend church or belong to a church even though I am the daughter and sister of Presbyterian pastors and have been an elder myself.

Growing up, my father did not teach me to bend to tyrannical pressure when wrong was being done. Until he was fading into Alzheimer's disease, he did not preach that a comfortable, unchallenged life was our right as Christians or Americans nor did he cowardly refuse to recognize world shaking events because he might cause people in his congregation or community to gasp. He preached against the Holocaust. He stood up for people in pain and for people who did without. He believed in the power of acting like Jesus Christ rather than spouting off cliches about the man as savior and lord of himself.

I have come to think that the majority of clergy in Ames and Des Moines value a conversation with members of the Jewish Federation of Greater Des Moines and their subscribers more than the lives of Palestinians or Israelis and, apparently, have no interest in justice except as the federation sees it. As the federation sees it does not represent the views of all of Judaism, however silent those disagreeing may be. You can talk only so long until you realize that there has to be a will for peace, concession, revolutionary forgiveness and justice on both or all sides of any issue. In this case, the conversations should have stopped at least 30 years ago. In this case, unless you, yourself, know and understand the history and differences between Zionism and Judaism, you help no one at all.

When I received a copy of you letter rejecting the Hansen's request to speak at your church, I was beyond furious. As I said above, you are not alone in the sentiments you expressed, though few have expressed this rejection of the Christian message better than you. By doing so, you put an argument on the table, and I would be remiss not to respond. Maybe you're about to set the methods right by putting such a vivid take on the idea that being a Christian leaders means ignoring, rejecting or avoiding difficult questions affecting our entire world. Is it only for comfort that you and your church refuse to honor and assist those putting themselves on the line to stop violence and evil, much of which is beyond the American experience. The greatest wish of the Jewish Federation is to keep institutions from allowing other voices to be heard. By refusing to allow others to speak in the institution you represent, you succumb to Zionist silencing techniques. The Jewish Federation wants to talk forever and they restrain themselves not at all in using verbal assassination and lies and fear to secure their ideologies.

When I came to you, you knew I could not threaten you or your position nor could I advance either. It was easy for you to reject me, but in so doing, you also rejected the voices of people who cannot speak here for themselves: the poor, the colonized, the suffering. Such cowardliness seems to be what many Christian churches have become. Moral initiatives fall through the cracks, safe or "politically correct" topics hide reality, comfort offers unrealistic security and a false understanding of dangers that do exist and do affect us. Many of us have never lived in the midst of war or occupation or behind a hideous wall of exclusion. When war comes to America, as it very well may, saying, "I didn't know; I didn't understand," will be no excuse.

The idea that Plymouth Church is there only for its congregation's comfort and peace of mind (never to be interrupted by controversy or a "gasp") is, for me, the opposite of the teachings that built the Christian religion. Evidently, what you have at Plymouth are the Sadducee and Pharisees and no righteously honest clergy intent on making a Christ like sanctuary. I think this because anyone who values his or her own conversation with those who shred the lives of a whole people for their own mistaken sense of refuge has failed Jew, Christian, Muslim, all of us. Where is love and hope and justice that can achieve peace? Is your only option to look away from pain, fearful of a gasp? Will you not offer those who gasp a path to forgiveness and real peace for everyone rather than a justification of your own timidity, self-preservation and denial?

This is a long letter, I know, and since it doesn't agree with you, I can imagine another brush off. That's angry, I know, but you represent to me what the American Christian mainstream church has become, cowardly, deliberately ignorant and on the way to extinction. I lament this everyday of my life.

A Student of Liberation Theology
and Determined Activist
Betsy Mayfield

"Hate and revenge is a disease, and I don't want to be diseased or sick."

Gaza doctor whose family were killed by IDF fundraises for Israeli hospital

by The Associated Press

Dr. Izzeldin Abuelaish, a Gaza infertility specialist, is a familiar figure to Israelis - a Palestinian who crossed the lines of enmity years ago to work in Israeli hospitals and become a frequent guest on Israeli TV and radio.

But the interview he did on Jan. 16, as Israeli forces waged war on Gaza's Hamas rulers, was horrifyingly different: Israeli tank shells had just killed three of his daughters, and he was phoning an Israeli journalist-friend, live on the air, to plead for help in evacuating the wounded, including another daughter and a niece.

Four months later, far from voicing bitterness over his loss, Abuelaish is trying to turn his tragedy into hope, raising money for a scholarship fund for Gaza girls and an Israeli hospital, and preaching reconciliation.

"We need to open our eyes, our minds and to have big hearts, to smash the mental and physical barriers and borders, to build the broken trust," said the Harvard-trained son of a Gaza laborer, sitting in the apartment where 14-year-old Aya, 15-year-old Mayar and 21-year-old Bissan were killed two days before the war ended.

At a time when U.S. President Barack Obama has begun a round of meetings with Middle East leaders on how to end the Middle East conflict, Abuelaish's story illuminates the reality at ground level. With Israelis and Palestinians increasingly separated by fences and fear, it has offered a rare example of suffering on one side drawing empathy from the other.

Born in Gaza's largest refugee camp, the eldest of nine children, the 54-year-old doctor navigates easily between worlds. One day, he's bowing in Muslim prayer in Gaza. The next, he's chatting with fellow physicians at Tel Hashomer, a leading Tel Aviv-area hospital.

During the Gaza war, launched to end Hamas rocket fire on Israeli border towns, Israeli journalists often turned to him for a Gaza perspective, delivered in his fluent Hebrew.

Abuelaish, a widower, and his children, ages 6 to 21, spent the war in their apartment on the second floor of the five-story family building he shares with his brothers and their families in the town of Jebaliya, close to the border with Israel.

On Jan. 3, after a week of air attacks, Israeli tanks and ground forces moved into the Gaza Strip, including the doctor's neighborhood, and over the next two weeks would fire heavily, demolishing homes they said were thought to serve as Hamas positions.

On Jan. 16, Abuelaish was due to be interviewed by phone by Channel 10, a
commercial Israeli TV station.

Four of his older daughters - Aya, Mayar, Bissan and 17-year-old Shada - were in their room that day, along with his niece Noor, 17. Shortly after 4:30 p.m., the first shell crashed into the home.

Abuelaish ran to the girls' room. "Aya, Mayar, Bissan and Noor were dead, their bodies torn, pools of blood on the floor," he said. "Shada was badly wounded in the right eye and hand."

"I don't want anyone to witness what I witnessed," Abuelaish said quietly.

He scooped up Shada. A second shell struck, critically wounding 12-year-old niece Ghaida and two of the doctor's brothers.

The doctor quickly took charge.

Fearing that Ghaida would die and Shada go blind, he called his friend, Shlomi Eldar, Palestinian affairs reporter for Israel's Channel 10 TV.

Eldar aired their conversation live. Viewers heard the doctor's pleas to
evacuate the wounded to Israel, interrupted by his cries of grief.

Eldar also fought back tears as he urged anyone from the Israeli military who was watching the program to help the doctor. Then he worked the phones to get someone to rescue the family, said Ofer Shelah, a Channel 10 anchorman.

"Everybody was flabbergasted," he recalled. "It was a very shocking, human moment for everyone involved."

Palestinian ambulances couldn't reach the house for fear of coming under Israeli fire, so the family left on foot for the nearest Palestinian hospital, with teenagers carrying the wounded on makeshift stretchers. After many phone calls, Gaza ambulances drove the wounded to the border for a transfer to Tel Hashomer that was covered live by Channel 10 during evening prime time.

Shelah said he believes the doctor's tragedy changed attitudes. Israeli public support for the offensive remained strong, as a justified response to years of rocket fire, but Abuelaish made them empathize for the first time with Gaza civilians, he said. "He is such a winning person and his response was so noble that you couldn't sweep it under the rug as Palestinian propaganda, Shelah said."

The army says its investigation shows that its soldiers were shot at from a building next to Abuelaish's, and that the tanks fired at suspicious figures on the upper level of the doctor's house. It says it had repeatedly urged the doctor and others in the building to leave for their own safety.

Abuelaish denies getting warnings and insists there were no militants in his building or any shooting in the area until the tank shells struck.

Four months later, Palestinians and Israelis cling to their dueling narratives - that Israel used excessive force in a densely crowded area and killed a large number of civilians, that Hamas provoked the war by its eight years of rocket fire on Israeli civilians and then used its own civilians as human shields
against the Israeli forces.

But Abuelaish says time is too precious to be wasted on arguments. "Hate and revenge is a disease, he says, and I don't want to be diseased or sick."

He is now walking a path others have traveled before him, among them several hundred bereaved Israeli and Palestinian parents who come together in what they call The Parents' Circle.

"In both societies, people are willing to listen to the bereaved," said an Israeli leader of the group, Roni Hirshenson, who has lost two sons to the conflict, one of them in a Palestinian suicide bombing.

"The message is that if the families of victims on both sides speak out together, we can overcome the hatred and act with reason," said Hirshenson, 67, who visited Abuelaish at Tel Hashomer after the war to try to comfort him.

Abuelaish said he has been inundated by sympathetic e-mails from Israelis.

The doctor is taking up a teaching position at the University of Toronto in the fall and will probably leave with his surviving children, Abdullah, 6; Ghafa, 9, Mohammed, 13; Dalal, 20; and Shada. Shada's eyesight was saved, and last week she was at home sitting in front of a pile of books, cramming for her high school finals.

Abuelaish will also spend part of each year teaching at Haifa University in Israel, and plans to return to Gaza in five years.

He plans to write a book about his life to make the case for coexistence. In partnership with Tel Hashomer, he is helping to raise money for a conference center there, to be named after his daughters.

"I lost three precious daughters, but I have another five [children]" he said. "I have a future, I have my people, and hatred and revenge can be driven out by love and wisdom."

100:4.1 Religious living is devoted living, and devoted living is creative living, original and spontaneous. New religious insights arise out of conflicts which initiate the choosing of new and better reaction habits in the place of older and inferior reaction patterns. New meanings only emerge amid conflict; and conflict persists only in the face of refusal to espouse the higher values connoted in superior meanings.

100:4.2 Religious perplexities are inevitable; there can be no growth without psychic conflict and spiritual agitation. The organization of a philosophic standard of living entails considerable commotion in the philosophic realms of the mind. Loyalties are not exercised in behalf of the great, the good, the true, and the noble without a struggle. Effort is attendant upon clarification of spiritual vision and enhancement of cosmic insight. And the human intellect protests against being weaned from subsisting upon the nonspiritual energies of temporal existence. The slothful animal mind rebels at the effort required to wrestle with cosmic problem solving.

100:4.3 But the great problem of religious living consists in the task of unifying the soul powers of the personality by the dominance of LOVE. Health, mental efficiency, and happiness arise from the unification of physical systems, mind systems, and spirit systems. Of health and sanity man understands much, but of happiness he has truly realized very little. The highest happiness is indissolubly linked with spiritual progress. Spiritual growth yields lasting joy, peace which passes all understanding.

A PLEA FOR NONVIOLENCE

2009-04-29T09:22:00.000-05:00

Give up butter; Lose the guns

Published: Friday, April 24, 2009 12:05 PM CDT

I just got an e-mail from my college roommate now living in Arizona.

She bitterly complained about illegal immigrants, which an accompanying article lambasted as taking up one in seven places in Arizona public schools.

I have an idea. How about taking all the money we send to Israel for their defense (which is used in ways many of us disparage and creates massive international hatred toward our government) and send it, instead, to Mexico for social service and educational programs there.

That would be the butter part of the old guns and butter analogy.

Mexicans would have resources to stay put in their own country with renewed hope for better lives than they could find in an unwelcoming society here.

After all, if people from a nation on our own border and our citizens rumble, that really does affect us. Give up the butter and lose the guns sounds much better to me.

Besides, if Israel continues to act in ways which makes its neighbors want to throw it into the sea, it shouldn’t be our problem.

They’re there, and we’re here. Wouldn’t it make us safer to address the problems on our borders and among those who live in America?

Hey, there are solutions which wouldn’t cost America more than it already spends. We’re plump enough not to need the butter, and we could make up for losing the guns with more dodge-ball and soccer games as well as American football to bump the testosterone out of our national angst and those who, evidently, need violence or, at least, roughhouse to find peace within themselves. Just a thought.

Betsy Mayfield

Ames

THE WORDS OF REALITY

2009-04-29T09:20:00.001-05:00

Issues that are facing Israel

Published: Friday, April 17, 2009 4:28 PM CDT

I have not written about Gaza because it is too obvious. What is new about an occupying army that kills a thousand defenseless civilians and maims a few thousand more? What is there to know? How many girls without arms and boys without legs?

The new Israeli Foreign Minister is an ex-bouncer from Moldava, he is being investigated for fraud, and he claims the Annapolis

initiative by the Bush administration is null and void. Oh?

An Israeli general flew on Al El to London, but stayed on the aircraft and went back to Tel Aviv. Why? Because British police were going to arrest and charge him with crimes against humanity if he set foot on British soil.

The CIA released a report concluding Israel may not last 20 years, and it will fall like apartheid South Africa fell: quickly, quietly and without bloodshed. Why? As New York Times columnist Ethan Bronner reported, the main problem Israel has is that Jews don’t want to live there, preferring the U.S. and France, and even Turkey and Iran.

Some Israeli exporters have discounted prices 60 percent or more. Why? Because people are not buying products from Israel. There is a growing boycott and divestment by several countries and large Protestant denominations.

The federal judiciary of Spain is investigating war crimes charges against Israeli officials. The UN investigator for human rights, Richard Falk, called for an independent inquiry into Israel’s violation of international humanitarian law, as have many others.

The Arab League has offered the Israeli government full recognition and a comprehensive peace with all countries of the region, including Iran and Hamas, who have accepted this offer. Israel has rejected it.

I know these things by reading the Israeli press, which is actually fair and balanced.

John Hauptman

Ames

Zionist Response to John Hauptman

2009-04-28T09:24:00.000-05:00

Israel is doing quite well

Published: Friday, April 24, 2009 12:05 PM CDT

John Hauptman’s letter tells more about John Hauptman than it does about Israel. The only thing wrong with Israel’s Gaza incursion was it did not do it sooner.

After receiving more than 2,000 rockets fired at them from Gaza over five years, Israel finally attempted to put a stop to the rockets and protect its own citizens from the Islamic terrorists.

Despite Hauptman’s opinion and the actions of some of the anti-Israel leftist zealots, Israel is surviving and doing well. It is a good country, just in a bad neighborhood. Neighboring Arab countries are plagued by high rates of illiteracy, second-class citizenship for women, lack of scientific or technological training, the absence of civil liberties, very low per capita incomes in those that have no oil, poor distribution of wealth in those that have oil — and not a functioning democracy among them.

Hauptman, like his Islamic fundamentalist friends, offers nothing constructive, just hate.

Sheldon Rabinowitz

Des Moines

URI AVNERY, a man who understands

2009-04-27T09:08:00.000-05:00

No, I Can't!

Obama, Israel and AIPAC

By URI AVNERY

After months of a tough and bitter race, a merciless struggle, Barack Obama has defeated his formidable opponent, Hillary Clinton. He has wrought a miracle: for the first time in history a black person has become a credible candidate for the presidency of the most powerful country in the world.

And what was the first thing he did after his astounding victory? He ran to the conference of the Israel lobby, AIPAC, and made a speech that broke all records for obsequiousness and fawning.

That is shocking enough. Even more shocking is the fact that nobody was shocked.

IT WAS a triumphalist conference. Even this powerful organization had never seen anything like it. 7000 Jewish functionaries from all over the United States came together to accept the obeisance of the entire Washington elite, which came to kowtow at their feet. All the three presidential hopefuls made speeches, trying to outdo each other in flattery. 300 Senators and Members of Congress crowded the hallways. Everybody who wants to be elected or reelected to any office, indeed everybody who has any political ambitions at all, came to see and be seen.

The Washington of AIPAC is like the Constantinople of the Byzantine emperors in its heyday.

The world looked on and was filled with wonderment. The Israeli media were ecstatic. In all the world's capitals the events were followed closely and conclusions were drawn. All the Arab media reported on them extensively. Aljazeera devoted an hour to a discussion of the phenomenon.

The most extreme conclusions of professors John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt were confirmed in their entirety. On the eve of their visit to Israel, this coming Thursday, the Israel Lobby stood at the center of political life in the US and the world at large.

WHY, ACTUALLY? Why do the candidates for the American presidency believe that the Israel lobby is so absolutely essential to their being elected?

The Jewish votes are important, of course, especially in several swing states which may decide the outcome. But African-Americans have more votes, and so do the Hispanics. Obama has brought to the political scene millions of new young voters. Numerically, the Arab-Muslim community in the US is also not an insignificant factor.

Some say that Jewish money speaks. The Jews are rich. Perhaps they donate more than others for political causes. But the myth about all-powerful Jewish money has an anti-Semitic ring. After all, other lobbies, and most decidedly the huge multinational corporations, have given considerable sums of money to Obama (as well as to his opponents). And Obama himself has proudly announced that hundreds of thousands of ordinary citizens have sent him small donations, which have amounted to tens of millions.

True, it has been proven that the Jewish lobby can almost always block the election of a senator or a member of Congress who does not dance - and do so with fervor - to the Israeli tune. In some exemplary cases (which were indeed meant to be seen as examples) the lobby has defeated popular politicians by lending its political and financial clout to the election campaign of a practically unknown rival.

But in a presidential race?

* * *

THE TRANSPARENT fawning of Obama on the Israel lobby stands out more than similar efforts by the other candidates.

Why? Because his dizzying success in the primaries was entirely due to his promise to bring about a change, to put an end to the rotten practices of Washington and to replace the old cynics with a young, brave person who does not compromise his principles.

And lo and behold, the very first thing he does after securing the nomination of his party is to compromise his principles. And how!

The outstanding thing that distinguishes him from both Hillary Clinton and John McCain is his uncompromising opposition to the war in Iraq from the very first moment. That was courageous. That was unpopular. That was totally opposed to the Israel lobby, all of whose branches were fervidly pushing George Bush to start the war that freed Israel from a hostile regime.

And here comes Obama to crawl in the dust at the feet of AIPAC and go out of his way to justify a policy that completely negates his own ideas.

OK he promises to safeguard Israel's security at any cost. That is usual. OK he threatens darkly against Iran, even though he promised to meet their leaders and settle all problems peacefully. OK he promised to bring back our three captured soldiers (believing, mistakenly, that all three are held by Hizbullah - an error that shows, by the way, how sketchy is his knowledge of our affairs.)

But his declaration about Jerusalem breaks all bounds. It is no exaggeration to call it scandalous.

NO PALESTINIAN, no Arab, no Muslim will make peace with Israel if the Haram-al-Sharif compound (also called the Temple Mount), one of the three holiest places of Islam and the most outstanding symbol of Palestinian nationalism, is not transferred to Palestinian sovereignty. That is one of the core issues of the conflict.

On that very issue, the Camp David conference of 2000 broke up, even though the then Prime Minister, Ehud Barak, was willing to divide Jerusalem in some manner.

Along comes Obama and retrieves from the junkyard the outworn slogan "Undivided Jerusalem, the Capital of Israel for all Eternity". Since Camp David, all Israeli governments have understood that this mantra constitutes an insurmountable obstacle to any peace process. It has disappeared - quietly, almost secretly - from the arsenal of official slogans. Only the Israeli (and American-Jewish) Right sticks to it, and for the same reason: to smother at birth any chance for a peace that would necessitate the dismantling of the settlements.

In prior US presidential races, the pandering candidates thought that it was enough to promise that the US embassy would be moved from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. After being elected, not one of the candidates ever did anything about this promise. All were persuaded by the State Department that it would harm basic American interests.

Obama went much further. Quite possibly, this was only lip service and he was telling himself: OK, I must say this in order to get elected. After that, God is great.

But even so the fact cannot be ignored: the fear of AIPAC is so terrible, that even this candidate, who promises change in all matters, does not dare. In this matter he accepts the worst old-style Washington routine. He is prepared to sacrifice the most basic American interests. After all, the US has a vital interest in achieving an Israeli-Palestinian peace that will allow it to find ways to the hearts of the Arab masses from Iraq to Morocco. Obama has harmed his image in the Muslim world and mortgaged his future - if and when he is elected president.

* * *

SIXTY FIVE years ago, American Jewry stood by helplessly while Nazi Germany exterminated their brothers and sisters in Europe. They were unable to prevail on President Franklin Delano Roosevelt to do anything significant to stop the Holocaust. (And at that same time, many Afro-Americans did not dare to go near the polling stations for fear of dogs being set on them.)

What has caused the dizzying ascent to power of the American Jewish establishment? Organizational talent? Money? Climbing the social ladder? Shame for their lack of zeal during the Holocaust?

The more I think about this wondrous phenomenon, the stronger becomes my conviction (about which I have already written in the past) that what really matters is the similarity between the American enterprise and the Zionist one, both in the spiritual and the practical sphere. Israel is a small America, the USA is a huge Israel.

The Mayflower passengers, much as the Zionists of the first and second aliya (immigration wave), fled from Europe, carrying in their hearts a messianic vision, either religious or utopian. (True, the early Zionists were mostly atheists, but religious traditions had a powerful influence on their vision.) The founders of American society were "pilgrims", the Zionists immigrants called themselves "olim" - short for olim beregel, pilgrims. Both sailed to a "promised land", believing themselves to be God's chosen people.

Both suffered a great deal in their new country. Both saw themselves as "pioneers", who make the wilderness bloom, a "people without land in a land without people". Both completely ignored the rights of the indigenous people, whom they considered sub-human savages and murderers. Both saw the natural resistance of the local peoples as evidence of their innate murderous character, which justified even the worst atrocities. Both expelled the natives and took possession of their land as the most natural thing to do, settling on every hill and under every tree, with one hand on the plow and the Bible in the other.

True, Israel did not commit anything approaching the genocide performed against the Native Americans, nor anything like the slavery that persisted for many generations in the US. But since the Americans have repressed these atrocities in their consciousness, there is nothing to prevent them from comparing themselves to the Israelis. It seems that in the unconscious mind of both nations there is a ferment of suppressed guilt feelings that express themselves in the denial of their past misdeeds, in aggressiveness and the worship of power.

* * *

HOW IS it that a man like Obama, the son of an African father, identifies so completely with the actions of former generations of American whites? It shows again the power of a myth to become rooted in the consciousness of a person, so that he identifies 100% with the imagined national narrative. To this may be added the unconscious urge to belong to the victors, if possible.

Therefore, I do not accept without reservation the speculation: "Well, he must talk like this in order to get elected. Once in the White House, he will return to himself."

I am not so sure about that. It may well turn out that these things have a surprisingly strong hold on his mental world.

Of one thing I am certain: Obama's declarations at the AIPAC conference are very, very bad for peace. And what is bad for peace is bad for Israel, bad for the world and bad for the Palestinian people.

If he sticks to them, once elected, he will be obliged to say, as far as peace between the two peoples of this country is concerned: "No, I can't!"

Uri Avnery is an Israeli writer and peace activist with Gush Shalom. He is a contributor to CounterPunch's book The Politics of Anti-Semitism.

Reports our News Refuses to Tell us

2009-03-18T07:19:00.000-05:00

Who knows the truth?

Published: The Tribune, Tuesday, March 17, 2009 11:23 AM CDT

Parsley and spinach! We think of these greens as life sustaining, not death bringing. But, the Israeli defense forces brought death to farmer Anwar Zayed al-Breem, 27, on Jan. 27. He, along with an international support team, was harvesting his crop of parsley, a staple in Palestinian diets. Shots rang out. The weaponless farm crew called out for the IDF firing to stop. You can see it all on YouTube.

Shooting amid parsley and spinach happened again on Feb. 14 and, yet again, on Feb. 20. Twenty-year-old farmer Mohammad al-Breem was shot in the leg, against the protests of the his international team. Have you seen this story? Don’t you wonder what you’d read were this situation reversed?

What should we accept? Should we allow this serial genocide to go on for another 60 years? Must we be fearful of speaking out lest we be labeled anti-Semitic, anti-Jewish, anti-Zionist or the latest, “rejectionist.”

We could blame all the countries of the Middle East for not “taking in” the hapless Palestinians as if Canada would take all of us were Mexico to effectively manage to move its entire nation to Texas and California. What’s acceptable to you? To us? Is it really “war” when only one side has an army? Is encouraging such bogus violence as Israel’s power permits what we want American morality to advance?

Zionist Israel is breaking the supposed “cease fire,” while harming the people of Gaza and their hapless, democratically elected government, Hamas. All the while, Israel’s supporters “innocently” whinny and whimper. In Ames, American Federation Zionist writers excuse Israel, blindly clinging to Zionist excuses and wrongs against humanity. Our war here, however, is fought with words. Who lies; who knows the truth? At least here, we start on an even playing field.

Elizabeth S. Mayfield

When right is wrong

2009-03-17T07:21:00.001-05:00

U.S. is paying for this conduct

Published: The Tribune: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 11:23 AM CDT

I have written a number of difficult letters on the problem of Israel-Palestine. I have been called names. I have been tarred by association, as have many others.

One reason I write is the column below, which you may access directly from the Web site of Ha’aretz, the next-to-largest newspaper in Israel:
http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1068989.html

Americans are paying for this conduct. But, Americans never read columns like this, because they are never printed. It is time to open the eyes of the American people to what is being done in our names, and also what is well-known to the rest the world (through Al Jezeera, for example). Why do they hate? Here is an example.

John Hauptman

Amnesty International, Encourage America to Abide by International Human Rights Considerations

2009-03-09T15:36:00.001-05:00

Amnesty International, Encourage America to Abide by International Human Rights Considerations

SEE SIDE BAR - TOP ENTRY - ACT NOW!

Amnesty International, Encourage America to Abide by International Human Rights Considerations

2009-03-09T15:33:00.001-05:00

Check out this link and act, today, March 9, 2009.

Good reads about Gaza's Turmoil

2009-02-24T09:56:00.001-06:00

Check out address for Michigan Peace Team on the right hand side of the screen. It's new; it's true and it's what we all need to know. Thanks to the great people sending this news.

From the Huffington Post: Thank you Mr. Slater

2009-02-20T19:49:00.000-06:00

Philip Slater

Posted January 7, 2009 | 01:56 PM (EST)

A Message to Israel: Time to Stop Playing the Victim Role

I can understand that after centuries of persecution it's satisfying for a Jewish state to be the aggressor for a change, but there's a codicil that goes with that role. You don't get to act like a victim any more. "Poor little Israel" just sounds silly when you're the dominant power in the Middle East. When you've invaded several of your neighbors, bombed and defeated them in combat, occupied their land, and taken their homes away from them, it's time to stop acting oppressed. Yes, Arab states deny your right to exist, threaten to drive you into the sea, and all the rest of their futile, helpless rhetoric. The fact is, you have the upper hand and they don't. You have sophisticated arms and they don't. You have nuclear weapons and they don't. So stop pretending to be pathetic. It doesn't play well in Peoria.

(Yes, I know, we Americans should talk--always trembling in our boots about terrorists and 'rogue states' and 'evil empires' when we have enough nukes to blow up entire continents, and spend more on arms in an hour than most of the world's nations spend in a year. But just because we're hypocrites and Nervous Nellies doesn't mean you have to be).

Calling Hamas the 'aggressor' is undignified. The Gaza strip is little more than a large Israeli concentration camp, in which Palestinians are attacked at will, starved of food, fuel, energy--even deprived of hospital supplies. They cannot come and go freely, and have to build tunnels to smuggle in the necessities of life. It would be difficult to have any respect for them if they didn't fire a few rockets back.

The Israel lobby has a hissy fit when anyone points out that Israel has been borrowing liberally from the Nazi playbook, but to punish a whole nation for the attacks of a few--which Israel has been doing consistently in Gaza--is a violation of international law--a law enacted in response to the Nazi practice. And please, spare us the hypocrisy--borrowed, I'm ashamed to admit, from my own government--of saying 'every effort is made to avoid civilian casualties'. When you drop bombs on a crowded city you're bombing civilians. Bombs don't ask for ID cards. Bombs are civilian killers. That's what they do. They're designed to break the spirit of a nation by slaughtering families. They were used all through World War II by all sides for that very purpose. And that's what they're intended for in Gaza.

And please, Israel, try to restrain yourself from using that ridiculous argument, borrowed again from Bush (how low can you get?), that Hamas leaders "hide among civilians", by living in their own homes. Apparently, in the thinking of Israelis, they should all run out into an uninhabited area somewhere (try to find one in Gaza), surround themselves with flares and write in the sand with a stick, "Here I am!"

Yesterday you shelled three UN-run schools, killing several dozen children and adults, despite the fact that the UN had given you the precise coordinates of all its schools in Gaza. So much for 'taking every care to avoid civilian casualties'. You seem to feel you can kill whomever you like, whenever you like, and wherever you like, just because you have a blank check from the United States. Every day this assault goes on you're demonstrating contempt for the UN, the international community, and human life. Talk about a rogue state.

You might also pay attention to the fact that your outdated policy of macho bullying--the policy you've been following for decades--isn't working! The Palestinians are human. They're not dogs you can beat into submission. The worse you treat them, the more they'll fight back. That's what it means to be human. The more you oppress people, the more people resist. We dropped more bombs on Viet Nam than all the bombs dropped by all nations in World War II. Not to mention napalm, herbicides and all kinds of sophisticated land mines. But did they bow down and kiss the feet of their conquerors? They did not.

You'll have to kill them all. And when you do, you may finally lose the support even of the United States.

Remember that American support is based entirely on the notion that no politician can win without the Jewish vote. But not all American Jews think Israel is on a divine mission from God. A great many American Jews believe in international law and justice.

I can understand how Israel could resent this lecture coming from an American. After all, isn't this what we Americans did? Came into someone else's country, slaughtered 95% of its inhabitants and took over? And didn't we go all Nervous Nellie whenever they fought back, accusing them of aggression to justify even more genocidal slaughter? And didn't we get away with it?

Yes, but I'm sorry to tell you, Israel, you came on the scene too late. Genocide just doesn't fly any more. I know it isn't fair, you have every right to feel aggrieved about this, but the world's smaller, cowboys are passé, and bullies aren't heroes any more.

Truth in Advertising

2009-02-04T09:47:00.000-06:00

HAMAS

Israel does not recognize
The Hamas government in Gaza –
But holds it responsible
For the attacks from there.

Israel does not recognize
The Hamas government in Gaza –
But demands that it
Guarantee the cease-fire there.

That is ridiculous. That is hopeless.
We must talk with Hamas.
The enemy in war is also
The partner in the cease-fire.

Ad published in Haaretz, January 30, 2009

Time for You and Me to Be Responsible

2009-02-03T16:26:00.001-06:00

Let’s set the record straight

BY: ELIZABETH MAYFIELD

Published: Tuesday, February 3, 2009 12:55 PM CST, The Tribune, Ames

To the Editor

So, “Hamas has broken the truce,” journalist-activist Alison Weir, of “If Americans Knew,” alerted those of us among her Internet audience that on Jan. 27, CNN (among others) loudly told Americans that Hamas had caused the first incident of violence since the Gaza/Israel Defense Forces cease-fire.

Remember when every bad thing that happened between Israel and the Palestinians during the Arafat years was his fault? With the scapegoat Arafat gone, it’s now Hamas’ turn to take the blame for every evil visited upon the Israelis and, to some degree, to the whole region and beyond.

Do any of you who have two or more children believe that everything that goes amiss in your household is always the fault of just one child? If you did and spanked just that one child over and over, praising the others as paragons of innocence, do you think your progeny would grow up understanding what it means to share, let alone justice and empathy for others?

For our own sake of understanding, let’s get the record straight. It’s looking back, I know, but it’s important for those who care about this fight and know that it takes two kids in the back seat to start a ruckus, never just one.

Before Jan. 27, Israel already had violated the cease-fire at least seven times, including the Israeli military killing of two Palestinian civilians and the injuring of at least five, a child among them.

Here’s what Israel, the “good child” among the two, did before our news told us that Hamas once again had caused “the first incident” to break the cease fire between Gaza and Israel.

• Israeli forces killed a Palestinian farmer in Khuza’a east of Khan Yunis on Jan 18.

• Israeli forces killed a Palestinian farmer east of Jabalia on Jan 19.

• Israeli naval gunboats shelled Gaza’s coast line, damaging civilian structures on Jan 21.

• Israeli troops shot and injured a child east of Gaza City on Jan 22.

• Israeli gunboat fire injured four to seven Palestinian fishermen on Jan 22.

• Israeli shelling set a Palestinian house on fire on Jan 22.

• Israeli tanks fired on the border town, Al Faraheen, causing damaging homes and farms, Jan 24.

Richard Falk, United Nations special rapporteur on human rights in the occupied Palestinian territories, is like the daddy who tries ever so hard to nurture all his children. He writes in The Nation, “Israel could recover in the legitimacy war by dealing directly with Hamas and taking its offer of a long-term cease-fire seriously. Israel could also show a willingness to engage in peace talks based on the 2002 Arab League Peace Initiative. Even at this late stage of the conflict, such alternatives offer both Israelis and Palestinians a promising, if perilous, escape route from the inferno.”

Let’s, at least, set the record straight and begin to see both sides of this wretched story. This horrendous “good child-bad child” story is an endless nightmare we need to awaken from once and for all.

Elizabeth S. Mayfield

TIME FOR THE U.S. TO BE RESPONSIBLE

2009-01-31T10:42:00.003-06:00

Can the U.S. be an honest broker?

BY: HAIFA AKILI

Published: Thursday, January 29, 2009 11:09 AM CST, The Tribune, Ames

The Israeli incursion into Gaza, done in front of the eyes of all people on earth, is a disgrace and shame to human kind. That the world’s leaders seem disabled, unable to address the obvious underlying causes of this violence brings more shame to our national intellect, empathy and responsibility.

Do our leaders feel nothing when they see children blown apart; families destroyed and property demolished beyond repair? For 22 days, the United Nations and the people of the world begged for a cease fire while Israel continued to do its ugly mission of destroying and killing.

Where was the condemnation of Israel, a state that will not declare its own borders and can have its leader call our president and tell him what to do and how to respond?

Has the United States become this weak and ineffectual?

Israelis knew how to ignite attacks from Hamas. They challenged the Palestinians on the day a new president was elected in the United States, Nov. 4, 2008. On that day, Election Day, thinking Americans would not notice, Israel broke a truce by firing missiles into the Gaza Strip. They assassinated several Hamas members, and they knew fully well Hamas would have to respond.

What does it mean when a powerful nation tries to destroy any semblance of potential peace, sneaking in to break a truce they know will lead to renewed violence?

As I read reactions of news people and writers, Jewish and Israelis among them, it became clear to me Israel was not particularly worried about Qassam rockets, but in the potential of the Palestinian leadership to build a real Palestinian state, with borders and with an economy that would give its people normal life expectations. Israeli and Jewish writers explained the Zionist agenda always has been to avoid accord, to create “facts on the ground” which would be hard to reverse and, in the end, to eliminate or displace forever the indigenous people of Palestine.

Oxford professor Avi Shlaim wrote in The Guardian, Jan. 7, 2009, that we cannot understand the violence of attacks like this one unless we place it in the context of history. Shlaim tells about British reactions to the 1948 establishment of Israel, quoting Sir John Troutbeck who wrote that the Americans were responsible for the creation of “the gangster state headed by an utterly unscrupulous set of leaders.”

Shlaim adds, “I used to think that this judgment is too harsh, but Israel’s vicious assault on the people of Gaza, and the Bush Administration’s complicity in this assault, has reopened the question.”

American partisanship with the Zionist movement, which began when Israel was born, has come full circle. It is “the rough beast” that Yeats once wrote about in his famous poem, “The Second Coming.”

Now, under a new American president, we have a chance to recreate a history that serves us through compassion that makes us responsive to the suffering of all people, most decidedly, to the Palestinian people.

If we loosen the grip of Zionist lobbying in the United States, truly become an “honest broker” and respond justly, recognizing the human rights of all people, we have a chance to create a world worthy of peaceful living. “Yes, we can!”

Haifa Akili

P.S. While cease fire was declared a week ago, firing from the sea has not stopped on the shores of Gaza.

A Video I Believe In

2009-01-31T09:33:00.001-06:00

A SCENERIO TO PONDER

2009-01-28T10:49:00.001-06:00

I wonder ...

BY: GAIL HOEPNER

Published: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 11:29 AM CST

Many settlers came to Iowa, attracted by its rich land and the abundance of crops it produced.

Those settlers came from the East Coast of the United States and from foreign countries such as Germany, Ireland and others. All of the settlers lived and worked together to produce such abundance that Iowa was soon feeding most of the country/world/whatever.

But the time came when thousands and thousands of folks from the East Coast experienced mass foreclosures on their homes and their livelihoods and were evicted. These East Coast folks, for very good, historical, and even Biblically based, reasons decided to settle in, and establish their own government in the state of Iowa.

They were supported in their claim on Iowa by several foreign entities that did not really want all of those immigrants coming to their lands.

The time came when the national government decided to let the East Coast people move to Iowa, establish a government and evict all of the non East Coast natives from their homes of many years. Those who were evicted had no say and no input into the decision.

Eventually, the Iowans who were not of native East Coast origin were offered a small portion of Iowa for their land — the hilliest, driest segment, with the least access to water.

When Iowans fought back, they were called terrorists and intransigent. Then the East Coast folks wanted more land than what they already have taken, so they infringed on the already small segment left to the Iowans by coming in and taking over some of the more productive farms.

The Iowans were pushed onto smaller and smaller parcels of land. To control the Iowan terrorists, walls are built around their towns and cut them off from other Iowans in other towns, which are also walled off.

I wonder ...

Gayle Hoepner

Voices for Justice

2009-01-27T10:53:00.000-06:00

Stimulating New Discussions

BY: DEAN PRESTEMON

Published: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 11:29 AM CST, The Tribune, Ames

The vastly disproportionate response by Israel against Hamas in Gaza deserves worldwide condemnation. More than 1,000 Palestinians (including 300 children) have now been killed by Israeli air and ground attacks. These aggressive military actions were initially justified as retaliation against Hamas rocket attacks on Israel that had reportedly killed seven Israelis in the previous three years. Since the offensive began, 13 Israeli combatants have lost their lives.

The Israelis claim hey have expended great effort to avoid harming civilians is just not credible; their armed forces must know that, in this densely populated area with these type of attacks, a large number of women, children and other noncombatants will certainly end up as casualties. When challenged, official Israel expresses little regret and simply blames Hamas and the innocent victims. Furthermore, Israeli blockades prevent Palestinian civilians from fleeing Gaza and have frustrated many international relief efforts.

Anna Balzer, Jewish Fulbright Scholar, opined it would be criminal to bombard the entire population of Israel for the crimes of their government, but that is exactly what is happening in Gaza. Rabbi Michael Lerner has written that these Israeli attacks and the devastating loss of life is a humanitarian disaster and is creating more and more anger at Israel around the world even in countries that had no previous history of anti-Semitism or antagonism toward Israel.

In the face of this unwarranted, excessive use of military force by Israel, political leaders and the mainstream media in the United States have typically been either supportive of Israel’s “right to defend itself” or just silent. This is an incredibly biased, irresponsible response; official revulsion at the widespread civilian casualties in Gaza should have been immediate and unequivocal. Columnist Rekha Basu recently observed that solidarity with the Jewish people does not demand uncritical acquiescence to a bellicose Israeli government or military and that constructive negotiations offer a much better potential for improving Israeli security than use of armed force.

Unfortunately, the Bush administrations obvious, overwhelming favoritism toward Israel in this conflict has made it impossible for the United States to be considered an honest broker. Furthermore, the invasion and occupation of Iraq has essentially dissipated any moral authority this country may have once possessed in that part of the world.

Negotiating an acceptable two-state solution offers the best hope for finally resolving this long-standing conflict and bringing a durable peace to this troubled region. The new Obama administration is uniquely positioned to stimulate productive discussions; every effort should be made to enlist the cooperation and assistance of Middle East countries, our European allies, and the United Nations. The alternative is continuing instability, hatred, violence and suffering in the region.

Dean R. Prestemon

The Price of Insisting that the Ends Justify the Means

2009-01-26T13:04:00.002-06:00

In the Ames Tribune as the violence began to slow due to a supposed cease-fire.
By: Betsy & John Mayfield

The Israeli government's slaughter of the people in Gaza that has gone on, as of this writing, more than 19 days is a human made catastrophe of apocalyptical proportions, certainly to families of the more than 1,000 people who are dead because of it. In addition, when we hear that 4,000 plus people have been injured, we do not mean hurt with scratches or, even, internal injury like hematomas. We mean children, women and men forced to have multiple amputations. We receive photos of people sliced open with shrapnel or burned in the precise way phosphorus sears right down to the bone. We read physicians' accounts of patients faced with long term suffering because Israeli explosives are a new kind of slow killing machines: Dense Inert Metal Explosives or depleted uranium shelling that leads to cancer and slow, painful deaths. All the while, Israel claims that they are not targeting civilians; that destruction of Hamas is their goal and their right.

There are those in Israel and here in America who object to this kind of supposed reparation not only because it is a moral outrage against a helpless people, or that Israel is destroying itself in this tragic bargain with evil, but that the rationale for it is a lie. Israeli and Jewish writers continue to tell us with amazing consistency that this bombardment against the Palestinians, Hamas or ineffectual rockets of rebellion is just a cover for the real reason behind the onslaught. Jewish writers tell us that this is a result of Israel's determination to never, ever allow a Palestinian state to exist and to set the stage for endless war in the Middle East. You may not have heard of these writers, but they are world famous and they are all saying the same thing, this killing is about the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people, an act that will unite those who would continue violence rather than quell. Uri Avnery, Tom Segev, Ilan Pappe, Gideon Levy, Amira Hass beg us to understand what's behind the carnage. They are Jewish, they are Israeli, they have watched first hand as this battle has evolved. Foreign corresponds who join this choir include Chris Hedges, Robert Fisk, Justin Raimondo, Tony Karon, Joe Klein. American Jews of conscience who take more heat from Zionists in America than any of the rest of us are Harvard's Sara Roy, MIT's Noam Chomsky, NYU's Tony Judt, The Nation Magazine's Naomi Klein and Henry Siegman, Wisconsin's Jennifer Lowenstein, Chicago's Norman Finkelstein and the UN's Richard Falk. If these people of international note are willing to put themselves and their careers on the line to stop Israel's slaughter where are the rest of us?

The writers above tell us that the violence is not because of Hamas and their Qassam rockets. Why? The 85-year old, Jewish, Israeli writer, Uri Avnery, tells us that Israel's idea that "the state must defend it's citizens "is a ridiculous propaganda device since Israel is the occupier and oppressor not the occupied and oppressed. Why should Israelis be safe, but millions of Palestinians always face unimaginable danger and starvation every single day?

The idea that Israel has to defend itself against a hapless people, he tells us, "has been accepted as the whole truth" He adds, however, "War–every war–is a realm of lies." "The trouble is that propaganda is most convincing for the propagandist himself." Few mention that the Qassams are retaliation for a two-year Israeli siege that has caused a man-made human rights disaster for the million and a half inhabitants of the Gaza Strip. That Hamas held a two-year truce and for this received nothing from Israel but closed borders, continued incursions and killings and under-reported bombings. Do not the Palestinians and their elected government, Hamas, have a right to defend themselves?

For those who are indifferent to this horror, consider this: Whatever happens, even if this ends without a single Hamas member standing, Hamas wins. Writer Chris Hedges explains, "Hamas cannot lose this conflict." Israel, he tells us, is delivering a package of facts for the world to see, truckloads of maimed and dead. We cannot look away forever. The reality show comes in waves of truth that no lie can vanquish. Says Hedges, "Hamas fighters, armed with little more than light weapons, a few rockets and small mortars, are battling one of the most sophisticated military machines on the planet. . . The Israeli assault, by destroying Hamas as an [elected] governing force, has opened a Pandora's box of ills. Life will become a nightmare for most Palestinians and, in the years ahead, for most Israelis."

A Review of Gazan Horror

2009-01-20T11:01:00.000-06:00

America, wake up

By John Mayfield

Published: Tuesday, January 20, 2009 12:01 PM CST, The Tribune, Ames

The Israeli government’s slaughter of the people in Gaza that has gone on, as of this writing, more than 19 days is a human-made catastrophe of apocalyptical proportions. Life in Gaza has become hell on Earth.

When we hear that 4,000 plus people have been injured, this does not mean scratches or bruises. It means children, women and men forced to have amputations. We receive photos of people sliced open with shrapnel or burned in the horrible way phosphorus sears right down to the bone.

We read physicians’ accounts of patients faced with long-term suffering because Israeli explosives are a new kind of slow-killing machines: Dense Inert Metal Explosives or depleted uranium shelling that leads to cancer and slow, painful deaths. All the while, Israel claims it is not targeting civilians; that destruction of Hamas is their goal and their right, regardless of the consequences.

There are those in Israel and here in America who object to this justification not only because it is a moral outrage against a helpless people, or even that Israel is destroying itself in this tragic bargain with evil, but because the rationale is a lie. Israeli and Jewish writers continue to tell us with amazing consistency that this bombardment to stop ineffectual rockets of rebellion is just a cover for the real reason behind the onslaught.

Jewish writers tell us that it is a result of Israel’s determination to never, ever allow a Palestinian state to exist and to set the stage for perpetual war in the Middle East. You may not have heard of these writers, but they are world famous and they are all saying the same thing, this killing is about the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people, an act that ironically, cannot fail to unite those who would continue violence rather than end it.

Uri Avnery, Tom Segev, Ilan Pappe, Gideon Levy, Amira Hass beg us to understand what’s behind the carnage. They are Jewish, they are Israeli, and they have watched first hand as this battle has evolved. Foreign corresponds who join this chorus include Chris Hedges, Robert Fisk, Justin Raimondo, Tony Karon and Joe Klein.

American Jews of conscience who take more heat from Zionists in America than others are Harvard’s Sara Roy, MIT’s Noam Chomsky, NYU’s Tony Judt, The Nation Magazine’s Naomi Klein and Henry Siegman, Wisconsin’s Jennifer Lowenstein, Chicago’s Norman Finkelstein and the UN’s Richard Falk. If these people of international stature are willing to put themselves and their careers on the line to stop Israel’s slaughter, where are the rest of us?

The 85-year-old Israeli writer, Uri Avnery, a veteran of the Israeli fight for independence, tells us that Israel’s idea that “the state must defend it’s citizens” is a “ridiculous propaganda device” since Israel is the occupier and oppressor not the occupied and oppressed.

Why should Israelis be safe, but millions of Palestinians whose lives are controlled by Israel face unimaginable danger and starvation every day of their lives?

The idea that Israel has to defend itself against a hapless people, he tells us, “has been accepted as the whole truth” He adds, however, “War, every war, is a realm of lies.” “The trouble is that propaganda is most convincing for the propagandist himself.”

The government can no longer see the truth. Few mention that the Qassams are retaliation for a two-year Israeli siege that has caused a man made human rights disaster for the million and a half inhabitants of the Gaza Strip.

That Hamas held a two-year truce and for this received nothing from Israel but closed borders, continued incursions, killings and under-reported bombings, indicates the problem is not a one-sided issue. Do not the Palestinians and their elected Hamas government have a right to defend themselves?

For those who are indifferent to this horror, consider this: Whatever happens, even if the current violence ends without a single Hamas defender standing, Hamas wins. They win in the eyes of the downtrodden whether they survive or not.

Writer Chris Hedges explains, “Hamas cannot lose this conflict.” Israel, he tells us, “is delivering a package of facts for the world to see, truckloads of maimed and dead.”

We cannot look away forever. The reality show comes in waves of truth that no lie can vanquish. Says Hedges, “Hamas fighters, armed with little more than light weapons, a few rockets and small mortars, are battling one of the most sophisticated military machines on the planet ... The Israeli assault, by destroying Hamas as an [elected] governing force, has opened a Pandora’s box of ills. Life will become a nightmare for most Palestinians and, in the years ahead, for most Israelis.”

America can stop the insanity. Why don’t we?

John Mayfield

Reframing of Zionist Propaganda by ICAD

2009-01-18T14:32:00.004-06:00

Israel in Gaza: A Critical Reframing
ICAHD
Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions

Saturday, January 10, 2009

Photo courtesy of AP

Israel’s core messages, listed below, argue for the justice of its cause in Gaza, cast Israel as the victim and ensure that its war is seen not in terms of occupation but of the broader Western struggle against terror. The critical reframing we offer, that of Israelis committed to human rights, international law and a just peace as the only way out of this interminable and bloody conflict, argues that security cannot be achieved unilaterally while one side oppresses the other and that Israel’s attack on Gaza is merely another attempt to render its Occupation permanent by destroying any source of effective resistance. It argues that Israel could have avoided all attacks upon it over the last twenty years, and the rise of Hamas, if it had genuinely negotiated a two-state solution with the Palestinian leadership. Israel, the strong party and the Occupying Power, is not the victim. Indeed, its attack on Gaza is a form of State Terrorism.

Israeli PR: Like all countries, Israel has a right and duty to defend its citizens. Israel, acting as any life-loving nation would, has a right to be a normal country living in peace and security.

Critical Reframing: To pursue offensive policies of prolonged occupation as well as sanctions, boycotts and closures that impoverish a civilian population, and to then refuse to engage with that population’s elected leaders, is not defending ones’ citizens. To expect your citizens to live in security while a million and a half subjugated people just a few kilometers away live in misery is both unrealistic and presumptive. Israel will only be able to defend its citizens – which is indeed its duty – if it addresses the causes of their insecurity, a 41 year-old occupation.
Israeli PR: Israel had no choice but to attack in response to the barrage of 8,500 Hamas rockets fired from Gaza into Israel over the past eight years that have killed 20 Israeli civilians.

Critical Reframing: In the past three years alone Israel – together with the US, Europe and Japan – imposed an inhumane siege of Gaza while conducting a campaign of targeted assassinations and attacks throughout the cease-fire that left 1,700 Palestinians dead. Hamas’ barrage did not exist in a vacuum. This war is no “response:” it is merely a more deadly round of the tit-for-tat arising out of a political vacuum. The rocket firings could have been avoided had there been a genuine political horizon. To present the “barrage” as an independent event disassociated from wider Israeli policies that led to them is disingenuous.
Israeli PR: There is no occupation – in general, but specifically in Gaza. Israel ended its occupation of Gaza in 2005 with the “disengagement.” Gaza could have flourished as the basis of a Palestinian state, but its inhabitants chose conflict.

Critical Reframing: Economic development, not to mention a political process which might have prevented the violence on both sides, was actively prevented by both Israel and its international supporters, which share responsibility for the present tragedy in Gaza. At no time since the “disengagement” did Israel ever relinquish or even loosen its control. The closure remained in force, including by sea; Gazans were never allowed to reopen their sea or air ports; nor were any conditions conducive to economic development allowed. Israel’s claim that there has never been an occupation of the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza is rejected by every member of the international community. Neither does it accept Israel’s claim that occupation ended in 2005, since the definition of occupation in international law has to do with exercising effective control of a foreign territory, which Israel obviously does over Gaza.
Israeli PR: Only Hamas violated the cease-fire, and thus it carries full responsibility.

Critical Reframing: Israel and Hamas agreed to a truce (through Egypt) by which Israel would allow the opening of the Gazan border crossings (at least partially) in return for an end to rocket fire on Israel. Hamas largely, though not entirely, kept its part of the bargain; Israel almost never did. Killings of Palestinians from the air continued, and on the American election day in early November it attacked the tunnels (which functioned as alternative means of supplying Gaza in the absence of open borders, which would have allowed control over the movement of arms), killing a number of Hamas people. In response Hamas launched rockets and….the truce began breaking down.
Israeli PR: Israel is only attacking the “infrastructure of terror” in Gaza and only targets Hamas fighters.

Critical Reframing: Being the elected government, all the infrastructure, from traffic cops to schools to military installations, “belong” to Hamas. It is clear that Israeli attacks go beyond “the infrastructure of terror.” Who’s a “Hamas fighter?” The graduating class of traffic cops that was slaughtered in the first aerial attack on Gaza? Professors and students who attend the “Hamas” Islamic University? Family members of Hamas military figures? People who voted for Hamas? All, but for those actively participating in hostilities, would be defined as civilians under international law.
Israeli PR: Civilians may die, but it’s because Hamas hides its fighters and weapons factories among ordinary people.

Critical Reframing: Israel’s military headquarters are located in the center of Tel Aviv, the military headquarters over the West Bank are in the densely populated civilian settlement Neveh Ya’akov in East Jerusalem, the Pentagon is located in downtown Washington D.C. and the British Ministry of Defence is located in central London. Hamas, of course, as both a government and a military organization, carries responsibility for protecting the civilian population and keeping the fighting away from them but the question that should be asked, and never is, is why western nations who do the same are not faced with such criticism?
Israeli PR: Hamas is a terrorist organization that refuses to recognize Israel or enter into a political process.

Critical Reframing: Which Israel should Hamas recognize? 1947 U.N. partition borders? 1967 borders? With annexed East Jerusalem? With the settlement blocs? So long as Israel refuses to define its borders then there is only an abstract concept available for recognition. Hamas has openly declared that it will de facto recognize Israel on the 1967 borders. Israel has made no such offers to any Palestinian faction, government or representatives.
Israeli PR: Hamas is a global problem, part of Islamist fundamentalism together with Iran and Hezbollah and therefore Israel is only doing its part in the West’s agreed-upon War on Terror.

Critical Reframing: Hamas started as a social welfare organization that was allowed by Israel to develop as a political force in Occupied Palestine to weaken the standing of the secular PLO. There also, was no Hezbollah prior to the 1982 Israeli invasion. The theocrats in Iran were an organized but quite small political force until the U.S. overthrew Iran’s democracy. The local population will always resist when foreign countries try to oppose their will and the resistance will not always be pretty. Painting Hamas as part of a global conspiracy when it’s a product of the Occupation itself is disingenuous and a gross distortion of history. http://www.icahd.org/eng/

Caring About All People

2009-01-17T10:57:00.000-06:00

Alleviate Palestinian Suffering

BY: DR>MOHAMMAD JABER KABBESH

Published: Saturday, January 17, 2009 12:13 AM CST, The Tribune.

Most of us have heard what is happening in Gaza; many have seen horrible images of dead or dying children and civilians including those killed when “two Israeli tank shells struck (a UN) school in Jabaliya refugee camp, spraying shrapnel on people inside and outside the building.”

More than 40 people, mostly children, died in that direct hit adding to the more than 600 people killed as of this writing and almost 3,000 people injured.

While Americans can see the catastrophe happening before their eyes, few have heard the whole truth about the incursion into the prison that is Gaza. How many Iowans know Israel never has stopped controlling every aspect of life in Gaza even after they closed their settlements and claimed to leave? Palestinians forced to live in Gaza cannot get out of their prison by air, sea or land and; furthermore, they have nowhere to go.

Worldwide charities who try to provide essential food, water, fuel, medicines are stopped at Israeli check points. More than a million and a half Palestinians are so oppressed on a daily basis that they cannot live with even a modicum of the basic human rights acceptable to international agencies or to laws that make our American lives full of promise.

It is very easy to shake one’s shoulders or to feel sorry when such tragedy happens in other parts of the world, but it is heart-breaking to see many Americans assume that every Palestinian is a terrorist, as defined by the oppressors who use the term to justify their own breach of basic human norms and international treaties. Most Americans cannot be blamed for their perceptions for they have heard little but propaganda over the last 61 years of Israel’s existence.

Biases are long lived when a whole people is portrayed as not human in rhetoric and through misinformation. Who are these terrorists, we must ask, when we see babies lying dead in the streets? Are they terrorists or resisters?

We are told that Israel is only targeting Hamas, until everyone witnessed the killing of United Nations and Red Cross relief workers, forcing them to stop supplies, cutting off all food and medicine supplies. Why does Israel have a right to exist, but Palestine be ground into the earth? “Hamas, the breaker of a truce, is the target,” Israelis say.

Here, our government leaders say, “What if Canada sent missiles into Seattle? Wouldn’t we react?” I ask you, “Wouldn’t Canada react if we cut off their food, their water, their electricity, their medical supplies, their ability to come and go throughout their own land and, then, called them terrorists, to boot?”

We have been told by officials that Hamas started this fight and so no one has a right to ask that the killing stop including the UN Security Council. But, for the last two years, when Hamas did refrain from sending ineffectual rockets across their prison walls, Israel continued to torment them and their people.

It has come out that some leaders in Israel spent two years planning this offensive so that it would happen just before contested elections, rockets or no rockets. Who, then, really broke the truce?

The saddest thing in this “war” is that we in America are told that civilian deaths are unavoidable collateral damage. That is not what is said on British airwaves nor even by Israeli human rights organization like B’Tselem, who discredited the Israeli army’s propaganda, showing that oxygen cylinders not rockets are the true targets. You can see video proof of this posted by Israel itself on YouTube.

In the Gazan town, Rafah, people have been told to leave their homes, making some refugees for a second, third or fourth time. Some were children when they were scared away from their homes in1948. Some had to flee, again, in 1967 and others moved into open space, tents, camps whenever Israel determined that someone’s home or village had to be destroyed. The Palestinians had no place to go, then, and they have nowhere to go, now.

It is up to people of conscience all over the world, especially to people of conscience here in America to stop the slow death of the Palestinian people. We can do this by insisting that the United Nations’ Special Rapporteur to the Palestinian Territories on Human Rights, who was detained and deported by Israel shortly before bombing started, be allowed return to investigate atrocities against civilians by Israel’s occupation forces.

We can say to our own government, “deal with our economic downturn by stopping our support of occupation and oppression of one people by another. Help provide security for all the people in this conflict and spend our taxes on creating peace and preserving human life in Palestine and in Israel instead of gifting our taxes to support violence and war that has no end.”

Finally, I invite you to use these links to gain more information or donate to alleviate Palestinian suffering: www.mapcan.org/english.

html; www.un.org/unrwa/ or www.friendsunrwa.org/

Mohammad Jaber Kabbesh

Three things Israel can do for peace

2008-12-30T13:00:00.001-06:00

An Answer to Ronata Dermansky and Persistent Zionists All

12/18/2008

Rebuttals to this letter follow, a record of American-Zionist Comment to local objection to the violence leveled against the Palestinian people by the Israeli government.

Ronata Dermansky (Tribune, Dec 11) says that her comments are "facts," implying that those sympathetic to the Palestinians are misrepresenting "truth" or missing the point. Unfortunately, Zionist facts tend to be defined differently than one would find in the universal human rights canon. Anyone who actually wants to know what's true and what's not can find plenty of references in books or on the Net about Zionist myths including the tale of the "generous offer."

Nothing about the Palestinian/Israeli debacle is all black or all white and most of the time one side considers evil or black what most of the world would deem good or white and vice versa. We've seen this white is black and black is white mentality stretch to Washington, and we've also seen a majority of Americans asking for change.

Is it possible that the Zionist's political machine will recognize the value of changing their attitude, with or without Palestinian compliance (from my corner, Palestine has already complied and plenty), and really want peace, a peace that would renew Israel as a trustworthy partner in the citizenship of their neighborhood as well as in the world?

Three things come to mind (and could well apply to the U.S., too). Given worldwide financial concerns, there is something to be said for ending a "war economy" even if it was part of Israel's basic foundation. For example, leading in electronics is much more productive and representative of the modern age than sending Israeli kids out to shoot Palestinian kids, regardless of the demographics and the history of the Maccabees.

Two, by deciding to establish "real borders" which any state that claims to be sovereign and recognized should have (Israel doesn't have established, legal borders, except between land they can make fertile and the impossibly sere Sinai, a fact that makes one wonder about sincerity), Israel could cure their own creeping settlement disease.

Three, accepting their "win" in displacing or destroying the Arabs living on the land Israel chose might give us all a sense that the Jews really are special in Biblical terms because, as colonists, they have the unprecedented grace to show compassion in return for the acceptance they demand. Might caring about everyone living in their region be a plus that could do much to improve local and worldwide acceptance and appreciation?

I hesitate to bring up Albert Einstein given the history of articles in The Tribune about this subject, and I admit to the "fact" that yes, the great man appreciated and subscribed to Zionism. But, he said this in 1938, "...one more personal word on the question of partition. I should much rather see reasonable agreement with the Arabs on the basis of living together in peace than the creation of a Jewish state. Apart from practical consideration, my awareness of the essential nature of Judaism resists the idea of a Jewish state with borders, an army, and a measure of temporal power no matter how modest. I am afraid of the inner damage Judaism will sustain-especially from the development of a narrow nationalism within our own ranks, against which we have already had to fight strongly, even without a Jewish state. We are no longer the Jews of the Maccabee period. A return to a nation in the political sense of the word would be equivalent to turning away from the (spiritualism) of our community which we owe to the genius of our prophets."

Sounds good to me.

Elizabeth S. Mayfield

Another Name Calling Rebuttal against Me

2008-12-30T12:33:00.001-06:00

In the rejectionist camp

12/30/2008

Updated 12/30/2008 11:38:25 AM CST

To the Editor

My father used to say that when someone sticks in a "and by the way" at the end of their conversation it is likely to be their most important agenda item and that everything else might well be a subterfuge.

Elizabeth Mayfield's "and by the way" conclusion to her letter of Dec. 18 illustrates the subterfuge perfectly. At the end of her letter which she might describe as "only criticizing Israeli policies," Mayfield pulls up a 1938 quote that Israel as a political entity is not really needed.

That the mass murder of Jews between 1941 and 1945 recontextualized the debate about Israeli statehood (and moots the point of the 1938 quote) is of no interest to Mayfield.

She'll use the 1938 quote anyway because, as she expressed on her Web site for more than a year, she questions the need for - and, by extension, the right of - Israel to exist.

One would think Mayfield's rhetoric would be transparent by now, but maybe not. As demonstrated in her current letter, her demonization of "the Zionists" both dehumanizes and casts as evil the vast majority of Jews in Israel (and elsewhere) and promotes the hope one day, when "the Zionists" are overthrown, the world will not have to endure a state explicitly created by the United Nations as a Jewish state. In the foregoing sentiments Mayfield is joined, of course, not only by Iran's intolerant regime but by Hamas, Hezbollah and by arguably countless millions of neighbors, as well as Mayfield's domestic allies.

The implications of Mayfield's ideology are clear. If Israel has no right to exist, then Israel bears the entire responsibility for the tragic plight of the Palestinians, and the Palestinians themselves bear little or no responsibility at all. This is not right. The complex matters between Israel and the Palestinians must be resolved, yet to claim that "Palestine has already complied" and to keep insisting in subtle ways that Israel has no need to exist and no right to exist places Mayfield in the rejectionist camp and not in the peace camp.

Mark S. Finkelstein
director of community relations
Jewish Federation of Greater Des Moines
Des Moines

Out of context response and bitter rebuttal against my comments, Ames Tribune

2008-12-28T15:21:00.005-06:00

If the tone of this rebuttal to my last letter to the Ames Tribune is out of context, the assumptions wrong and the reader a reactionary Zionist, consider that this nothing compared to what his compatriots are doing to the Palestinians in Gaza on this very day. I will respond, but today, name calling has no sting compared to the sadness I feel for the children, the mothers and fathers and people unlucky enough to have been born or transported to Gaza. ESM

Israel eventually will find its peace

By James Eaves-Johnson

12/26/2008

To the Editor

The expectation that Jews should prove their "specialness" is a very real, though subtle, expression of anti-Semitism. No other group is expected to demonstrate "specialness" in order to be tolerated or respected.

According to Elizabeth Mayfield ('Three things Israel can do for peace', Dec. 18), if Jews would just "have the unprecedented grace to show compassion," then perhaps we might all "sense that the Jews really are special."

Mayfield, and people like her, need to learn that Jews are people. Jews are under no obligation to prove that they are "special." If they don't prove their "specialness," they do not deserve the regular condemnation they receive from Mayfield in the pages of the Ames Tribune.

Following in a long tradition of seeking to indict Jews with their own words, Mayfield quoted Albert Einstein in 1938. Had Mayfield shared the title of the source of her quote, Einstein's "Our Debt to Zionism," a casual reader would have realized that Mayfield's selective quote subverted Einstein's message.

Einstein summarized the thesis of his speech by noting, "In this hour, one thing, above all, must be emphasized: Judaism owes a great debt of gratitude to Zionism." He talked about the greatness of the Zionist project by saying, "The productive work in Palestine, to which self-sacrificing Jews throughout the world have contributed, has saved a large number of our brethren from the direst need."

And, even in those days, when the Jews had no state, terrorism against the Jews was commonplace. Einstein described the plight of Jews in Palestine, noting, "Fields cultivated by day must have armed protection at night against fanatical Arab outlaws."

In light of his energetic defense of the national home of Jewish people, Einstein sought to distinguish the Jewish national project from the National Socialism that was then destroying the Jewish people. Unlike racist Nazi Germany, Einstein envisioned a Jewish future in a place like Israel today. Citizens of Israel today are not only Jewish, but also Arab, Druze, Circassian ... Israel is not the completely peaceful place Einstein hoped for, but Israel embraces the values he espoused.

Fortunately, Einstein also gave us guidance about those like Mayfield and the people she defends when he said, "Anti-Semitism has always been the cheapest means employed by selfish minorities for deceiving the people. A tyranny maintained on such deception and maintained by terror must inevitably perish from the poison it generates within itself."

When Einstein wrote these words in 1938, the worst of the Holocaust was still to come.

He remained optimistic even as darkness loomed.

Israel still has not found its peace, but just as Einstein's words eventually proved true, Israel eventually will find its peace and prove wrong those who seek to defame it and the Jewish people.

James Eaves-Johnson
Coralville

When silence is not golden

2008-11-21T11:36:00.001-06:00

Is peace with justice possible?

11/21/2008

To the Editor:

The call is out, "we want your Letters to the Editor" (Tribune, Nov.12). My topic is one I wish would disappear allowing dialogue on more popular or locally relevant topics. Alas, too much still troubles me to end my sermonizing about Palestine.

Following the advice of journalist Amy Goodman, I still have "to go where the silence is and say something." What saddened me during our long campaign season and even now that our hopes for change are high is the almost total removal of the Palestinians from the dialogue and the seemingly unchallenged slander against Arabs and Muslims.

Obama couldn't even say something as benign as "I know the Palestinians are suffering" without a barrage of "he's against Israel" criticism. Then, there was the woman who whispered to Sen. John McCain, "I'm afraid. Obama's an Arab. He scares me." McCain quietly corrected her and spoke well of our new president-elect in rebuttal, but he did not clearly add, "So what if he is."

President-elect Obama isn't Arab, of course, but if any of you heard publically expressed campaign rhetoric that gave credence to the fact that there's nothing inherently wrong with being Arab or Muslim, I wish you'd let me know. Sure there are some Arabs who don't like Western society, but there are plenty who would be tremendously happy if we'd just let them have their culture of birth in a live-and-let-live world where no one hurt one another based on cultural, racial or religious differences.

Toward the end of the campaign season, there was the ridiculous ruckus about Rashid Khalidi, an intellectual, as American as anyone, but of Palestinian heritage. Khalidi's a soft-spoken academic, not a rough and tumble evil guy like some "habibis" in the movie "Body of Lies." Given that his grandparents or cousins or ancestors were Palestinian, is it surprising he would support justice for Palestinians? For whom is activism on behalf of justice synonymous with evil?

The other night, MSNBC's Keith Olbermann rightly ranted about the just passed bill that reverses an earlier decision to allow gay marriage in California, loudly exposing the bigotry of the latter decision. During the campaign, however, Olbermann was as silent about Palestine as everyone else on the airwaves.

Sadly, bigotry is not gone because we elected a president who is half-black, half-white and not at all Arab or Muslim. Silence about Palestine tries to hide bigotry, but it's there keeping our public unaware and easily forgetful of the fact that Israel with American financial and moral backing is keeping more than 1.5 million people in a concentration camp called Gaza all the while continuing to build illegal settlements on Palestinian land in the West Bank.

Maintaining such a camp and an expansion program which Palestinians are powerless to stop is not justice for all, not democracy, not a Christian take on God's will and not a path to a kinder, more forgiving world. Because of the wrong of what's happening in Gaza and the West Bank, I can never stop reminding myself that, probably, if I had been born into an Arab family in Palestine and, certainly, if I came into the world in Iraq or Iran, I'd be Muslim. I wouldn't have had a choice, at least throughout childhood.

Think about your own birthright whenever you feel the need to hate or slander people you don't know or those who practice a faith or national pride you haven't objectively studied.

Understanding the odds and genetics that made you who you are and others who they are may educate you about randomly ascribed differences none of us can control. Might such understanding open your heart to peace with some semblance of justice?

After all, many of us subscribe to the axiom, "Politics is the art of the possible." Is there any possibility that there will be peace with justice for Palestinians.

Just a little ponder on the beach

2008-09-13T05:34:00.003-05:00

What I Thought on my Summer Vacation

09/09/2008

To the Editor:

In August, I gave respite to those who vent against my endless plea for justice for Palestinians. Having spent the summer contemplating the behavior of birds and fish and tiny crabs hiding in crevices, my awareness of the vulnerability of every living being and the earth, itself, renewed my consciousness of how much balance matters not just in the Middle East, but everywhere and for everyone.

Terns dive head first and osprey feet first into the ocean and come up with fish, sometimes, too big to carry off. My realizations intensify. Nature is not kind. A bald eagle attacks the osprey flying by with the fish in his talons; the osprey drops the fish; it falls back to the sea; no one benefits. Well, there's always fertilization, I guess.

I have thoughts of having a successful mosquito genocide, becoming more and more aware that we human beings are not alone in our desires to be the fittest, the fastest, the winner, the taker. Life with its challenges of success and failure touches even the strongest bird. I find an ailing gannet, a bird with a 6-foot wing span, sitting helplessly on the beach, rather than soaring at sea on an updraft as he should. I put him in a box and house him for the night, away from predators. The cozy box is temporary. The next day, we set him afloat, knowing that he may or may not survive.

We humans are told that we inherit the earth and everything in it. Perhaps? Sea and shore life and death like purple jelly fish wetly dragging tentacles behind them to scare swimmers one day, drying out and deteriorating in the sand the next, make me feel that it's the earth that inherits us, man and beast alike. Better make the most of what we have before we're forced to drop our sustenance without recourse.

On the other hand, it's comforting to think that our short lifetimes on earth are mere visits after which we simply blend into the whole again.

In this near-perfect retreat, far from people who choose to debase rather than debate or to misinform rather than search for reasonable balance, I finally break down and check for news. In The Tribune, argument continues and those who would deny Palestinians their human right to pursue productive, happy lives are at it again, blatantly blaming all Arabs for the nasty attitudes of some, as though only Arabs have unsavory thoughts, the rest of us as pure in our thinking as little creatures tucked comfortably into dunes to avoid being swept away by the tides. It's time to join the dispute, again.

When I leave this "gentle" island, I wonder whether or not I'll remember how easily life sifts through the hands of need and, then, how violently, through the rocky fist of greed. Will I remember Prince Edward Island lying amid a pristine sea innocently massaging the shore, and forget that, actually, the sea is awash in centuries of blood?

I live near Savage Harbour. The locals say that savage refers to our population of mosquitoes and sand and black flies, but, in truth, the name was given by Europeans who took most of the island away from the Mi'kmaq, tribes who had been here for ages before the conquerors even knew that to sail around, they had to lose their fear of traveling flat.

Ecologist Farley Mowat explains how human interlopers caused the extinction of spear bills and Eskimo curlews among species gone forever. Throughout the Atlantic provinces, white bears and brown, cod and salmon, whales and seal pups skinned alive and left to crawl out of the water without life preserving fur have fled or learned that survival means becoming invisible, lost to human enjoyment. There is no reprieve for cuteness in killing fields.

In successions of dispossession, the British colonialists chased away the French settlers, the Acadians and whole shiploads of farmers and fishermen and their families drowned at sea. They did this seven times and, still, the Acadians returned. We are made to seek renewal.

Survival of the fittest doesn't have to mean destruction of all others; it surfaces when desire for impossible certainty takes precedence over human responsibility for our fellow earth travelers. A lot has gone from this red clay island and on a windy night, the howling sounds of sea and air remind anyone awake that we are fragile and far from safe.

Those who remain: Scottish, Irish, Acadian, Mi'kmaq, people born on the island and people from away sing together about their diversity and pleasures and everything seems at peace. This is, however, an eroding island and the dangers we face have little to do with who our fathers and mothers were, but a great deal to do with how we manage what we have and who we are, now.

The same is just as true in Palestine, Israel and Ames. I don't think I'll be forgetting my summer reveries anytime soon.

Elizabeth S. Mayfield

THE PUBLIC RELATIONS WAR IN AMES, IOWA Truth-Lying --Trying to get to the Truth

2008-07-29T15:47:00.007-05:00

PALESTINIAN SUPPORTERS SPEAK AND
ANTI-PALESTINIAN ZIONIST RESPOND
(on and on it goes)

How to Lie While Telling the Truth
Published in the Ames Tribune
July 1, 2008
By: Betsy Mayfield

I do not like to directly respond to the opposition's whines about how terrible the Palestinians and the Arabs are, but I have to bite the carrot that Pnina Luban dangled in her letter, "60 years of Israel," (Trib., June 10) about the position Vladimir, "Zev", Jabotinsky expressed in his infamous 1923 letter/s that helped create Revisionist Zionism. Published for the pro-Zionist rank and file on November 4, 1923 in the publication Rasswyet, among other places, Jabotinsky began to twist Zionism from a relatively benign religious movement initiated by rabbis who sought to keep their members from assimilating and putting nationalism above religiosity to a political entity that has kept a violent winner-take-all mentality going for 60-years, officially, and another 85-years dating from Jabotinsky's demand. (No, this conflict is not 2,000 years old.) Yes, Jabotinsky did start his prospectus to his fellows with a rational paragraph quoted by Luban. Before going on to explain to his compatriots that crushing the Palestinians was the only way to assure lasting success for Zionism (forget Judaism), he eased into his ugly rhetoric saying, "we shall never do anything contrary to the principle of equal rights (for Christian and Muslim Arabs & Jews) and we shall never try to eject anyone." Luban spoke the truth in quoting this line; but since it is only a slice of the truth, she hides what Jabotinsky goes on to say about a crime against humanity that has caused unimaginable pain for the Arabs involved not to forget Israelis who went to the Middle East hoping for safer, fuller lives without the guile essential to violently taking another people's land and destroying an entire culture.

In spite of promising words, Jabotinsky was decidedly Machiavellian in his consequential 1923 decree. Being candid is an understatement when it comes to Jabotinsky. The guy said what he meant; no holds barred. "My emotional relationship to the Arabs is the same as it is to all other people - polite indifference," he tells us. Today, we've been taught that indifference, not hate, is the opposite of love. Jabotinsky didn't hate the Arabs or the Palestinians; he just didn't care what Zionism did to them.

Next Jabotinsky explained what we all know, "Any native people. . .view their country as their national home. . .And so it is for the Arabs." (Note the recognition of Palestine as country and Arabs as indigenous people, a comment which belies Golda Meir and other's famous lie, "Palestine is a land without a people for a people without a land.") In 1923, Jewish immigration, as such, was viewed with concern by the local Arab population. Then, a justifiable fear of a land grab led to clashes and the beginning of serious violence. Zionists went to Israel well aware that it would take war to get the land they wanted, and the US and Britain knew this, too.

Consider the advice in the rest of Jabotinsky's 1923 open letter: "Zionist colonization, even the most restricted, must either be terminated or carried out in defiance of the will of the native population. . . This does not mean that any kind of agreement is impossible, only a voluntary agreement is impossible. . . The only path. . .is an iron wall, that is to say the strengthening in Palestine of a government without any kind of Arab influence, that is to say one against which the Arabs will fight. . .For us the only path to an agreement in the future is an absolute refusal of any attempts at an agreement now" (. . .or ever). After the initial statement, Zabotinsky continued his rant in fevered favor of a Zionist occupation of the Holy Land and this had nothing at all to do with God or the Old Testament or Revelations, a wish for peaceful co-existence or a just peace. Jabotinsky and a whole lot of nationalists just wanted to take everything and they didn't care a hoot about the implications of their plan on the Middle East or the world. Unfortunately, this selfishness continues to prevail. As for Jabotinsky, he got tired of having to urge his compatriots on. He wrote, "Zionism is a colonizing adventure and therefore it stands or falls by the question of armed force. It is important to build, it is important to speak Hebrew (an issue of the 1920s), but, unfortunately, it is even more important to be able to shoot - or else I am through with playing at 'colonialization'."

When David Ben Gurion became Israel's first prime minister, it is said that his first act was to hang a picture of Jev Zabotinsky above his desk. Today, we are drawn into an endless war of wills that began long before the Holocaust was a mere twinkle in an evil eye. The hostilities have continued from Ben Gurion to Olmert with Sharon finally having the essential ruthlessness to actually raise Zabotinsky's iron wall, an act that infringes on peace for Israel and for the Middle East as well as on the United States, especially if Israel's supporters continue to influence our government as they have for the last 60 years. To read the whole story from Luban's start to my finish, check http://www.cactus48.com/verses.html or google Vladimir Jabotinsky. The Israeli-Palestine debacle may not intrigue you as much as local news, but it is a story for our times, perverted with as much conspiracy and adventure as a story from Tolkien or CS Lewis or the realities of WWI or WWII.

Elizabeth S. Mayfield
Published: Ames Tribune, July 1, 2008

Luban's response to my Truth-Lying Letter

2008-07-28T15:51:00.000-05:00

Obama is a Zionist

By Pnina Luban

07/27/2008

To the Editor:

A recent speech by Barack Obama (June 4) provides a thoughtful, intelligent and factual rebuttal to the ideas repeated in scores of virulent anti-Israel, anti-Zionism letters published over the last several years in The Tribune chiefly by two letter writers (most recently "A story for our times," Elizabeth Mayfield, July 6).

Their fixation with besmirching and seeking to delegitimize one country, Israel, should be contrasted with Obama's warm song of praise.

In his speech, Obama stated "I learned of the long journey and the steady determination of the Jewish people to preserve their identity through faith, family and culture. Century after century, Jews carried on their traditions and their dreams of a homeland in the face of impossible odds ... I understood the Zionist idea that there is always a homeland at the center of our story ... We know that the establishment of Israel was just and necessary, rooted in centuries of struggle and decades of patient work. But 60 years later, we know we cannot relent ... Not when there are still voices that deny the Holocaust, not when there are terrorist groups and political leaders committed to Israel's destruction, not when there are maps across the Middle East that don't even acknowledge Israel's existence and government funded textbooks filled with hatred towards Jews ... And then there are those who would lay all the problems of the Middle East at the doorsteps of Israel and its supporters as if the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the root of all trouble in the region. These voices blame the Middle East's only democracy for the region's extremism. They offer the false promise that abandoning a stalwart ally is somehow the path to strength. It is not; it has never been and it will never be. Our alliance is based on shared interests and shared values. Those who threaten Israel threaten us ... Just look at what Israel has accomplished in 60 years, from decades of struggle in the terrible wake of the Holocaust, a nation was forced to provide a home for Jews from all corners of the world ... In the face of constant peril, Israel has prospered. In a state of constant insecurity, Israel has maintained a vibrant and open discourse and a resilient commitment to the Rule of Law."

The historical context for Sen. Obama's remarks is highly relevant. The land of Israel became the home of a Jewish state 3,200 years ago. Two hundred years later, Jerusalem became its capital, and the Jewish state continued until its ruthless conquest by the Roman Empire in 70 CE.

Although the majority of the citizens were forcibly and cruelly exiled, Jewish life in the Holy Land continued uninterrupted for 1,900 years and often flourished. Meanwhile, against all odds, the strong bond of Diaspora Jews to their ancestral homeland was never broken, and often when circumstances allowed, they made determined efforts to return.

A successful large-scale effort got underway toward the end of the 19th century, when fewer than 250,000 people (Muslims, Christians and Jews) inhabited the desolate land, ultimately leading to the re-establishment of Israel in 1948.

The Holy Land has the capacity to sustain more than 10 million inhabitants, easily accommodating two states for two peoples: Israel, the state for the Jewish people, and Palestine, the state for the Palestinian people.

Note though that democratic Israel has a large Arab minority (20 percent) whose equal rights are guaranteed by law. Whether the Palestinians will agree to tolerate and ensure equal rights and essential freedoms to a comparable Jewish minority in their future state, if and when it is established, remains to be seen.

Historically, Jews always have been second-class citizens (Dhimmis) in the many authoritarian Arab countries they inhabited for millennia. These Jews were denied many rights and opportunities and were required to pay special taxes, until essentially all of them, nearly one million, fled in the wake of pogroms (1940-50) organized by the Arab governments and the street crowds.

The two-state solution could have become reality already 60 years ago if not for the Palestinian vehement rejection of a Jewish state next to their proposed state. The two-state solution can still become reality once the Palestinians agree, as does Israel, to share the Holy Land and make it a home for two countries, allowing two nations to live in peace and security alongside each other.

Rebuttal to Lyban's Piece on "Two Writers"

2008-07-27T08:17:00.000-05:00

Submitted to the Ames, Tribune, July 30, 2008
Dear Editor,

Sure, Obama's a Zionist [July 27, Letters]. You bet. Vote for him. I will. Thank you.

Obama speaks with far more nuance that either his admirers or detractors can fathom, and my hope in his presidency is that he is an anti-fascist (like most decent, intelligent human beings). Anti-this or anti-that is usually in the eye of the beholder; the name-calling is not working anymore. Let me illustrate why I am an anti-fascist. In one day (yesterday) I read these articles in the international press:

1. "Palestinian Child Shot Dead by Israeli Soldiers", The Times, London (UK).

2. "Palestinians Capture Violence of Israeli Occupation on Video", The Guardian, London (UK)

3. "Soldiers Seldom Punished for Attacks on Palestinians: Report", Agence France Presse, Paris (France)

4. "Where is Our Jerusalem", The Jerusalem Post, Jerusalem (Israel)

5. "How Can a Boy Threaten Soldiers?", Ynetnews, (Israel)

6. "Naalin Photographer's Father Kept in Custody", Ynetnews (Israel)

7. "US Says Settlements are a 'Problem' ", Ha'aretz (Israel)

Item 2 is an article on "Shooting Back" organized by B'Tsalem the Israeli human rights organization the gives video cameras to Palestinian civilians in danger of being murdered by Israeli fascist settlers. About 100 defenseless civilians are killed or wounded by Israelis each week.

Item 4 chronicles the demolition of another Palestinian home in East Jerusalem, the eviction of the family onto the streets, and turning this stolen private property over to a Jewish group, and argues that "Jewish sovereignty" can be strengthened if Palestinians are treated like real citizens.

Item 6 reports on the arrest of the father of a young girl who accidentally video taped an Israeli
soldier shooting a bound and blindfolded Palestinian boy. No charges filed, of course.

The whole world knows these things, but Americans are completely in the dark about the realities of what is happening in militarily occupied Palestine. I will say it again: if the Israeli press were printed in the US press, i would be happy and never write another letter to the newspaper.

But the happy-talk propaganda that Israel is a democracy and the nasty Palestinians don't want
peace is a complete fiction. In the first instance, Israel is hardly a democracy. Every democracy on Earth has a constitution that both defines and protects the rights of its citizens. Israel does not have a constitution. No such thing exists. Instead, there is a complicated set of "rules" that justifies throwing Palestinian families onto the streets and turning their homes over to Jewish groups. No constitution on Earth could justify this; it is not possible to write the words.

I hope that Obama can force the Israeli government to accept the two-state solution with East
Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine and the green line its internationally recognized border.
This is the legal border under international law. In addition to not having a constitution, Israel
has never defined its border. In this sense, the Israeli government itself "de-legitimizes" Israel.

I believe that only Obama can do it, and that only this can save the US, Israel and the Middle
East from 100 years of war.

Many in the Israeli press argue for exactly this. Exactly. It is not just two people in Ames, Iowa. Don't be fooled.

John Hauptman

Rebuttal One to my Truth-Lying Piece

2008-06-28T16:05:00.003-05:00

To the Editor:

Those who promote hatred rely on the quiet acquiescence of otherwise decent people to spread their lies.

On July 6, The Tribune published a letter by Elizabeth Mayfield ('A story for our times') directing people to the webpage created by an outfit called "Cactus 48." Even the mildest examination of the webpage revealed what it was - an anti-Semitic diatribe.

The webpage opens, "Why is there anti-Semitism? The reasons for anti-Semitism is [sic] found in its intellectuals and their leaders." What follows is a litany of falsified or out of context "quotes" purporting to show the widespread evil intent of many Jews, and particularly Zionists.

In case the grammatically defective opening left room for doubt, the purpose of this webpage is to blame Jews, and particularly Zionists, for creating anti-Semitism. Unfortunately for the purveyors of this lie, history flatly contradicts the assertion.

While Jews are called by their faith to return to the land of Israel and Jews have answered that call for centuries since their initial dispossession, Zionism is a relatively new manifestation of Jewish return and is not more than 150 years old. In fact, the Zionist movement began in Russia principally as a reaction to pogroms involving the mass beating, rape, murder and expulsion of Jews there.

Other anti-Semitic violence and persecution throughout western Europe, North Africa, and Central Asia gave Zionism the critical mass it needed to become a large movement capable of building a state.

But, even then, Jew hatred had a centuries-old lineage. The biblical book of Esther is the first documented case of an attempt to exterminate the Jews. Since then, the Jews have been brutalized by the Romans, the Crusaders, the Almohads, the Inquisition, Czarist Russia ... all prior to the rise of rise of Zionism.

Perhaps what the author intended was not that Zionism is the cause of anti-Semitism, but that Jews are the cause of anti-Semitism. That is the same kind of doublespeak that allows haters to blame women for rape, blacks for racism, gays for homophobia, and so on.

Apparently the shamelessness of the webpage alone was not enough, Cactus 48 attributes the page to "Michael Santomauro, Editorial Director of Reporters Notebook" and provides the link to the Reporters Notebook Web site. Following the link verifies the ugly truth.

The reader is first confronted with a challenge and reward for anyone who can disprove a notorious Holocaust denial Web site. Next, the reader is referred to the Web site of a man who is doing time in Germany for Holocaust denial. The rest of it is a disturbing mix of anti-Zionism, Holocaust denial, and old-fashioned Jew hatred.

Further examination of the letter reveals that it relies principally on the same falsified or out-of-context "quotes" provided on the page that was cited as well as other parts of the Cactus 48 Web site.

To help activists such as Mayfield, Cactus 48 puts out its own booklet of misleading quotes. Rather than publish in its own name, Cactus 48 tries to create legitimacy by attributing it to a fake organization called "Jews for Justice in the Middle East."

It is possible Mayfield is willfully blind to the anti-Semitism she promotes. But we must be more diligent in preventing careless people from spreading lies. We cannot acquiesce to the promotion of hatred.

James Eaves-Johnson

My Rebuttal - In Praise of Something New

2008-06-01T09:56:00.000-05:00

The strength of will

By Betsy Mayfield

06/01/2008

I was so pleased to see the letter to the editor statement published in The Tribune, on May 16, from Jeremy Ben-Ami, executive director of J Street, a new Israeli lobby and political action committee in Washington, that I zipped off a thank you, thank you, thank you to the paper's staff worthy of personal note, but not for publication.

I was grateful that The Trib provided us all with another option for examination of the Palestinian/Israeli conflict. For me, Palestinian supporter to the core, it's fantastic to be able to have this new group on the radar, because J Street provides a reasonable and hope-inducing alternative to friends of Israel's "be-for-us-100 percent or die" ideology expressed by the more famous Israeli lobby, AIPAC, and their local offshoots.

The latter group supports the long standing attitude of some Zionist folk who bow to the pain of the Holocaust in a way that makes similar holocausts certain if not for Jews (but, them, too, actually), for those who oppose their Jewish state plunked down in the Holy Land as an inevitable right. Thank you J Street. If your views are fair enough and supported enough to slant public opinion, Israel may, indeed, get what they've fought 60 years and still counting to have and the Palestinians will get a chance for freedom unknown through centuries of foreign occupation.

J Street has offered a perspective that endorses the idea of doing what's right and just for all concerned, not only what's desired by the most mighty and ruthless set of Zionists willing to wage war no matter how long (100 years, maybe?) and no matter who suffers as a result.

Presenting an excellent example of the difference "between the ideology" of, say, AIPAC and "the foreign policy realism" of J Street," David Brooks's column in the May 18 Tribune, took the words in quotes from our potential U.S. statesman, Barak Obama. To whom do we owe appreciation for sharing these thoughtful and more "nuanced" rhetorical presentations? None other than our Tribune. We should be proud to have a local paper that makes us think.

In these two articles, we have the premises needed for making politics "the art of the possible." For those of you who believe that consideration of "a just policy realism" is weak, please remember that choosing or even suggesting violent reaction simply because you can may be fear inducing, but lacks the wisdom of real strength.

As we saw in the movie, "Schindler's List," knowing you can be violent and choosing not to be is the kind of powerful choice that can diminish governmental corrosion-within. The ones who will stabilize the world for generations to come need to have the strength of will to face our problems with cautious and calculated trust. This takes the ability to "know" our enemies and ourselves.

It takes monumental bravery to choose a path that can stabilize the world rather than destroy it. Will this happen? It sort of depends on whether or not we are tired enough of war and violence to rethink the methods we need to use to win and to let others win, as well?

Betsy Mayfield

Redundancy: Repetition of the Batttle Cry

2008-05-30T09:54:00.000-05:00

If only ...

By Ronata Dermansky

06/01/2008

To the Editor

Why is it that the state of Israel is now commemorating its 60th independence day while a Palestinian state has yet to be realized? Why is it that 60 years ago, the first detailed plan for a two-state solution, one Arab and one Jewish, was overwhelmingly approved by the United Nations, yet only one country emerged?

The reason is rather simple and has remained unchanged for 60 years. It is the Palestinian rejection of Israel's right to exist. None can summarize this better than the Palestinian leaders themselves. On May 14, Hamas leader Mahmoud Zahar declared that a Palestinian state will be established on all of the land of Palestine and not only on parts of it, and that it will include the (Israeli) cities "Jaffa, Lod and Haifa." Zahar also reiterated Hamas' unwillingness to recognize the State of Israel and added "After we defeat the Zionists we will persecute them to eternity." (www.jpost.com/servlet/
Satellite?cid=1210668634777&pagename=JPost%
2FJPArticle%2FShowFull)

On the same day, the "moderate" Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas joined dozens of Palestinians in signing a document pledging to continue the "struggle" until all the descendents (about 4 million) of Palestinian refugees are permitted to settle in Israel. This declaration is tantamount to a rejection of a two-state solution since, if implemented, Israel would become yet another Arab country (in addition to the 21 Arab countries that already exist.)

In 1947, much like today, the Jewish community in the Holy Land was pragmatic, forthcoming, flexible, and peace-loving and thus accepted with open hands the U.N. Partition Resolution 181, despite the fact that the area allotted to the Jewish state was tiny (around 1/10 the area of Iowa).

By contrast, the Palestinians and the Arab countries rejected the two-state plan and demanded every inch of the land for themselves. In their extremism, they lost everything.

The Palestinians, determined to sabotage the November 1947 U.N. Partition Plan, intensified their violent attacks on the Jewish population, and following Israel's declaration of independence on May 14, 1948 were joined by the armies of five Arab countries in a vicious attack on the day-old Israel.

This military assault was literally a unified Arab attempt at ethnic cleansing of the 650,000 Jews of the Holy Land. Israel narrowly survived this onslaught but at a staggering cost in human life, 1 percent of its population, which is comparable to 3 million Americans today.

In the following decades (including 1967, 1973), the Arabs made further attempts to exterminate Israel. As a result of the 1967 war, Israel became a reluctant occupier of territories it had gained.

When for the first time in history, an Arab country, Egypt, positively responded to Israel's repeated calls for reconciliation, Israel made enormous sacrifices. She relinquished to Egypt the strategic Sinai Peninsula with its oil fields, leaving Israel entirely dependent on foreign oil.

It is doubtful whether another country would have agreed to such far-reaching concessions, which only speaks for Israel's desire to achieve peace. Several years later, Israel signed a peace treaty with Jordan.

As we celebrate Israel's birthday, let us hope and pray for the day when the two-state solution will be finally accepted by the Palestinians, and two countries - Israel and a Palestinian state - will live in peace next to each other.

Ronata Dermansky

A Wise and Thoughtful Activist: Mazin Qumsiyeh

2008-05-27T08:41:00.002-05:00

On enlightened self-interest

Waking up into a communal and peace farm in Luck, Wisconsin gives a new meaning to "sunrise of a new day". The families and activists gathered there provided inspiration to us beyond measure. They had built their own houses, they used solar energy for electricity and heat, grew their own foods, used composting toilets, and collected rainwater for their very minimal water needs. They were also all active in the peace movement. Their activities ranged from civil disobedience at Fort Benning, Georgia to playing key roles in the Wheels of Justice bus tour. See the website http://www.anathothcommunityfarm.org/ Our bus retreat brought members from the farm and volunteers from many part of the country. This experience at the farm and in talking to such people (e.g. Kathy Kelly, Abbie Coburn, Ceylon Mooney, Lama Nassar, Bill Hill, Bob Abplanalp, Mike Miles, Cecilia Lucas, Dan Pearson, Jessie Chang, etc.). We had a great time with these inspiring people and then the nearly 200 people in the Chicago Peace Walk Sunday (see http://www.cjpip.org/ ). In Greenwich, CT, three good people who happen to be Jewish spoke from the heart about how they came to view Israel and Zionism. I could not help but think that life is really good and these are people I truly love. It is a humbling experience to jot down some thoughts about the meaning of activism, self-sacrifice, love, and enlightened self-interest. I hope you will find those hesitant meditations/observations useful.

We ask ourselves many questions as we struggle through this short life of ours. What is the nature of activism? Why do we do what we do? How much self-sacrifice are we really willing to take? What do those of us feel after lost jobs, after time in jail, after being beaten and gassed by Israeli soldiers, or after all of the above? How does one distinguish between selfishness and enlightened self-interest? Is activism for peace and justice the ultimate love of humanity or the triumph of optimism over experience? Is activism and living live simply the ultimate love of mother nature or of God? The following rambling thoughts do not intend to give answers but hopefully give us time to reflect and think (please send my your comments and I will post and share them).

Several years ago a prominent person in the Palestinian right to return movement repeatedly criticized Prof. Edward Said (then at Columbia University) for "self-interest". While some are tempted to dismiss such comments by attributing other reasons for making them (jealousy, inability to get Said to help in key areas thought important etc), the subjects of self-interest, self-sacrifice, collective work are worthy of examination when we look at what makes activists "tick", what gets us to do the things we do, and this could help us get more people involved in the movement for peace and justice and remain active even after setbacks and challenges. Edward Said was a brilliant Professor of Literature, a prominent music critic, and a noted commentator on human conditions. What motivated him and millions like him is worthy of examination but perhaps looking inward to our own motivations is a more fruitful endeavor. Perhaps we can make some comments on issues of love and enlightened self-interest that could initiate a dialogue at least with ourselves.

My background is in evolutionary biology including genetic and behavioral biology. It would not be necessary for the sake of this discussion to review the exhaustive literature on evolution of human behaviors that relates to group and individual behavior. Scientific explanations can certainly give us certain insights but they are limited. We do know that each individual human being has certain basic needs that are easily recognized: water, food, shelter, safety, social interactions, and sex. In many parts of the world with limited technological development, people still have to focus on their day to day survival: scavenging for food, finding a shelter etc. In technologically advanced societies, we still find such people represented among our ranks as the homeless in cities around Europe and North America. Such a life is described as closest to the state of affairs for much of humanity throughout much of our history. But when basic survival issues are met, we do recognize that it is very hard to live without social interactions; hence solitary confinement is the most dreaded punishment for inmates. Lack of social interactions is known to depress the immune system, cause extreme behavior changes and even lead to premature death.

Humans unlike other mammals also have concepts of self-sacrifice, collective work, and work for the common good that emanate directly from a social society. Other social animal societies (ants, bees, elephants) do show many of the features we recognize in such groupings. But humans have complex communication systems and as far as we know the only species that ponders its existence, thinks of life after death and has other concepts that we cannot observe in other life forms. We do find many animals that exhibit self-sacrificial behaviors from losing their life to feed and protect their young to domesticated dogs that jump into dangerous situations to save their human companions. But why has human societies developed such highly amazing forms of complex behaviors that involve things like standing in front of a bulldozer that aims to demolish a house of someone totally unrelated to you (Rachel Corrie)? Such behaviors call for deeper explanations (most personal) that are very hard to analyze by objective and rational thought processes.

Could one argue that Mother Teresa or Mahatma Gandhi were driven by a pure form of self-sacrifice and altruism or by what we may term as enlightened self-interest? Are these two things distinguishable? The diaries of Mother Teresa which she did not want published disturbed many of her supporters who were shocked to learn that throughout a life time of doing good for others, she had doubts about so many things (even the existence of God). Yet, this simple women I think epitomizes the love of the poor more than we can imagine. That love is the issue that we should start with when discussing sacrifice and enlightened self-interest.

Love between a child and a parent involve significant sacrifices and maybe the easiest to understand in linking biology (genetic relationship), learned behaviors, and perhaps much more. In ancient China, children sometimes cut off pieces of their own flesh to feed an ailing or starving parent. Caring for immediate family members is biologically ingrained for the obvious reason that they share some of our genes. But the human intellectual and social development produced other traits that sometimes overcome the biological wiring. Think of the love and sacrifice for adopted children for example. Think of people who donate to the point of impoverishing themselves to help children in far away places. These are not so easily explained by biology. The love of couples to each other also cannot be reduced to biological needs or even social needs. The caring of the people living at a communal farm for each other is obviously much more than their needs or desires. It is something much more profound and much less analyzable than mere language or analytic logic can describe.

The role of religion and morality cannot be underestimated. I think of how people like Clarence Jordan was raised as a privileged white man in the segregated south of the 1940s and 1950s and opposed wars (all wars including WWII and Vietnam). Learning ancient languages and learning what Jesus really taught transformed him. His faith led him to challenge the comfortable clergy in the south and then move on to establish Koinonia farms in Georgia where blacks and whites lived and worked together. They got firebombed and attacked frequently but never gave up. As I listened to his tapes, I am always impressed by the sense of optimism and the general goodness. His vision was validated while he lived and validated after he died (Habitats for Humanity was founded at Koinonia farms). I think of Dorothy Day ("my job is to comfort the afflicted and make the comfortable less comfortable"), Martin Luther King Jr (his vehement rejection of wars is forgotten by a government that names streets after him), Desmond Tutu, Mahatma Gandhi, Sheikh Mohammad Hussain, Father Naeem Atik, Abouna Hanna Atallah, Father Elias Chakour and countless others. A while back I started compiling names of people we honor at my website (http://www.qumsiyeh.org/honorlist/) but that task would be endless since there are literally millions of people, most of them we have never met. But even that task would be rather simple compared to the task of understanding what made one of these activists do what they do or did.

We can safely state as Anthropologist Margaret Mead observed: "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed people can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." But Mead cannot tell us why these people became committee or thoughtful. What makes a Kathy Kelly or a Clarence Jordan?

We can safely say indeed that human societies evolved in spite of sometimes incredible odds precisely because of such thoughtful committed (I would add loving) people. A good example of such a historical study is Howard Zinn's "A people history of the United states"). US historical development has shown that pure individual altruism is hard to come by but that enlightened self-interest was critical in key developments in the US going back hundreds of years. Advocates for native American rights helped save thousands of natives from the European colonial onslaught. These were examples of Enlightened Self-Interest (ESI). ESI drove abolitionists (white and black) to save thousands of slaves before the civil war. Reconciliation after the Civil War was also an example of ESI. ESI also got us the women's right to vote in the US elections (happened only in the 1920s). ESI got us the 40-hour workweek and other workers rights. ESI is what ended the war on Vietnam. It is what ended 30 years of US support to Apartheid South Africa (the State Department had designated Nelson Mandela and African National Congress as terrorist organizations). None of these actions were done by people who thought their actions were 100% altruistic. All thought they were doing what we now understand as enlightened self-interest. Many of them thought (many of us think) in fact that it is the only meaningful way to live.

Ofcourse many individuals may think they are engaged in ESI when they are not (or even when they are even racist or bigots). Members of many artificial grouping (including extended family, co-religionists, nation, people who think alike) have taken up arms against "others" that by definition did not belong to the self-defined grouping. These are actually the primary cause of wars and conflicts around the world. And as any independent and rational observer knows, there are no winners in wars only losers.

We can explain ESI in terms of nagging conscience, morality, religion, logic, psychological hedonism, or any combination thereof but we cannot deny its existence and widespread impact on human history. For example, I talked to people who think of Jesus as a Son of God, those who think of him as a prophet of God, and those who don't believe in God and all have agreed that Jesus lived on earth and did give of himself for humanity even as they differ on what his message was (would it not be good to acknowledge the example he provided?) or that it had a huge impact on human history.

We can cite genetic and behavioral studies to show that self-sacrifice for the group is a trait that does exist and evolve in mammalian societies. My son actually did a simulation via computer programming with random mutations and noted that group behaviors evolved that included altruism; It evolved without being programmed or encouraged so clearly groups that show these behaviors benefit. We can cite religious reasons for doing good to others even at the expense of our material well being (this is also enlightened self-interest as we think of ourselves as vessels and tools of God). We can cite moral or other reasons for helping others even if we are not religious (agnostic or atheist) such as a livable human and humane society. We can each come up with many ways of looking at these issues but again I think it is something deeply personal and that is where it must come from.

But we need not look beyond our own personal experiences to find who the people we admire are. If you take a moment to think of the person you personally knew/met that you most admire (whether they are still alive or dead). If you think what qualities made you admire this person. If you then think of what motivates that person. I think these are things that provide the best and most meaningful personal lessons for each of us. For me it was an uncle who was the first Zoologist in Palestine and who was killed in 1970 right after he finished his PHD (and after he had already made significant scientific and other contributions to humanity). His letters and motivation to help not just his relatives but humanity as a whole made a difference in my own life. Reading his letters and notes years later and speaking to his close friends showed me that he had truly epitomized the Buddhist statement of "having joyful participation in the sorrows of this world." I am sure each of us knows someone like that (either dead or alive).

The English language has limitations in describing the source of these desires that add to positive energy in the world. They are described differently by different people or even by the same person in different stages of understanding. They are deeply personal. Perhaps those who have the best skill to describe these emotions and desires are poets and we should read them more. My own favorite poet is Kahlil Gibran. For me his meditation on love speak directly to the issues at hand.

On Love, from The PROPHET, by Kahlil Gibran

When love beckons to you follow him,
Though his ways are hard and steep.
And when his wings enfold you yield to him,
Though the sword hidden among his pinions may wound you.
And when he speaks to you believe in him,
Though his voice may shatter your dreams as the north wind lays waste the garden.
For even as love crowns you so shall he crucify you. Even as he is for your growth so is he for your pruning.
Even as he ascends to your height and caresses your tenderest branches that quiver in the sun,
So shall he descend to your roots and shake them in their clinging to the earth.
Like sheaves of corn he gathers you unto himself.
He threshes you to make you naked.
He sifts you to free you from your husks.
He grinds you to whiteness.
He kneads you until you are pliant;
And then he assigns you to his sacred fire, that you may become sacred bread for God's sacred feast.
All these things shall love do unto you that you may know the secrets of your heart, and in that knowledge become a fragment of Life's heart.
But if in your fear you would seek only love's peace and love's pleasure,
Then it is better for you that you cover your nakedness and pass out of love's threshing-floor,
Into the seasonless world where you shall laugh, but not all of your laughter, and weep, but not all of your tears.
Love gives naught but itself and takes naught but from itself.
Love possesses not nor would it be possessed;
For love is sufficient unto love.
When you love you should not say, "God is in my heart," but rather,
"I am in the heart of God."
And think not you can direct the course of love, for love, if it finds you worthy, directs your course.
Love has no other desire but to fulfill itself.
But if you love and must needs have desires, let these be your desires:
To melt and be like a running brook that sings its melody to the night.
To know the pain of too much tenderness.
To be wounded by your own understanding of love;
And to bleed willingly and joyfully.
To wake at dawn with a winged heart and give thanks for another day of loving;
To rest at the noon hour and meditate love's ecstasy;
To return home at eventide with gratitude;
And then to sleep with a prayer for the beloved in your heart and a song of praise upon your lips.

Send your comments and feedback to qumsi001@hotmail.com

A Frightening Perspective: Let's see what this blog's readers have to say

2008-05-22T08:19:00.001-05:00

Contempt for the Jewish nation

05/21/2008

To the Editor

In their many letters to the editor, the enemies of Israel continue their campaign against God's chosen people, the Jews. They are mostly godless atheists who are unable to hide their contempt for the Jewish nation.

The reason they give for their hatred of Israel is the plight of the Arabs on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. There is no doubt that these people are in a bad way. However, they brought it on themselves. They could have lived in peace with their Jewish neighbors but chose not to.

As soon as the Star of David was raised above the reborn nation of Israel, the entire Arab world rose up to destroy her. Their aim was to drive the Jews into the sea. The question is how could a few million Jews withstand the onslaught of Arab armies time after time after time? The answer can be found in Zechariah, chapter 12, verse 2 where God says, "Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling unto all the people round about, when they shall be in the siege both against Judah and against Jerusalem," and again in verse 9 God says, "And it shall come to pass in that day that I will seek to destroy all nations that come against Jerusalem."

One would think that after 60 years of war, the world of Islam would realize that when it attacks Israel, it is attacking the apple of God's eye.

Atheists would do well to remember this, also. In a recent letter to the editor, the writer said Israel is a fascist country and from the very beginning, it has been expelling the Palestinians from their homes, killing defenseless civilians and engaging in continuous ethnic cleansing of the once peaceful people of Palestine. This is a monstrous lie and only demonstrates how deep the hatred for Israel some people have.

Israel is a democracy. It has free elections. The Knesset has both Jews and Arabs as its members. We have been to Israel twice and were invited to visit the Knesset by the Israeli government, which we did. As we traveled about Israel, we saw a nation under siege, a people living in constant fear of the next rocket attack or a suicide bomber.

On our way to Bethlehem, a young policeman was shot dead; his blood was still in a pool on the street. His only crime was that he was a Jew. The Arab world claims the land of Israel is Arab land. Here again is a monstrous lie. God himself set the borders of the land of Israel in Deuteronomy, chapter 11, verse 24, and Joshua, chapter, 1 verse 4. The fact of the matter is, Arabs are trespassing on Israeli land.

On the front page of the Des Moines Tribune Friday, May 19, 1939, the headline was "Palestine Jews Battle with Police." Right below the headline, there is a map of Palestine and below the map it says, and I quote, "this map shows where rioting took place following Britain's decision to make the homeland of Jews an Arab-dominated independent Palestine." The map shows that all of Palestine at that time was the homeland of the Jews.

In Ezekiel, chapter 36, verse 24, God says about his people Israel, "I will take you from among the heathen and gather you out of all countries and bring you into your own land." One must notice here that God says I will bring them back to their own land, not Arab land. The return of the Jews to their homeland is the last great sign that we are fast approaching the end of this age.

The stage is set. The final act of this Christ-rejecting world is about to begin. The four riders of the Apocalypse are in their saddles. Even now, their shadows can been seen across the world. In Luke, chapter 21, Jesus said, "There will be wars, great earthquakes, famines and pestilences, fearful sights in heaven, men's hearts failing them for fear, the power of heaven shall be shaken and then shall they see the son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory." Even so, come Lord Jesus.

Sam and Darlene Erickson

Betsy's Latest Plea for Peace

2008-05-21T08:26:00.000-05:00

Letter to the Editor

I was so pleased to see the letter to the editor statement published in The Trib, 5/16/08, from Jeremy Ben-Ami, executive director of J Street, a new Israeli lobby and political action committee in Washington, that I zipped off a thank you, thank you, thank you to the paper’s staff worthy of personal note, but not for publication. I was grateful that The Trib provided us all with another option for examination of the Palestinian/Israeli conflict. For me, Palestinian supporter to the core, it’s fantastic to be able to have this new group on the radar, because J Street provides a reasonable and hope-inducing alternative to friends of Israel’s “be-for-us-a-hundred percent or die” ideology expressed by the more famous Israeli lobby, AIPAC, and their off local offshoots. The latter group supports the long standing attitude of some Zionist folk who bow to the pain of the Holocaust in a way that makes similar holocausts certain if not for Jews (but, them, too, actually), for those who oppose their religious state plunked down in the Holy Land as an inevitable right. Thank you J Street. If your views are fair enough and supported enough to slant public opinion, Israel may, indeed, get what they’ve fought 60-years and still counting to have and the Palestinians will get a chance for freedom unknown through centuries of foreign occupation. J Street has offered a perspective that endorses the idea of doing what’s right and just for all concerned, not only what’s desired by the most mighty and ruthless set of Zionists willing to wage war no matter how long (100 years, maybe?) and no matter who suffers as a result.

Presenting an excellent example of the difference “between the ideology” of, say, AIPAC and “the foreign policy realism” of J Street,” David Brooks’s Trib column, 5/18/08, took the words in quotes from our potential US statesman, Barak Obama. To whom do we owe appreciation for sharing these thoughtful and more “nuanced” rhetorical presentations: none other than our Tribune. We should be proud to have a local paper that makes us think. In these two articles, we have the premises needed for making politics “the art of the possible.” For those of you who believe that consideration of “a just policy realism” is weak, please remember that choosing or even just suggesting violent reaction simply because you can may be fear inducing, but is not real strength. As we saw in the movie, Schindler’s List, knowing you can be violent and choosing not to be is the kind of powerful choice that can diminish governmental corrosion-within. The ones who will stabilize the world for generations to come need to have the strength of will to face our problems with cautious and calculated trust. This takes the ability to “know” our enemies and ourselves. It takes monumental bravery to choose a path that can stabilize the world rather than destroy it. Will this happen? It sort of depends on whether or not we are tired enough of war and violence to rethink the methods we need to use to win and to let others win, as well?

WORDS ABOUT GAZA - Another Nabka

2008-05-12T14:16:00.000-05:00

The Human Rights Crime in Gaza

by Jimmy Carter

The world is witnessing a terrible human rights crime in Gaza, where a million and a half human beings are being imprisoned with almost no access to the outside world. An entire population is being brutally punished.

This gross mistreatment of the Palestinians in Gaza was escalated dramatically by Israel, with United States backing, after political candidates representing Hamas won a majority of seats in the Palestinian Authority parliament in 2006. The election was unanimously judged to be honest and fair by all international observers.

Israel and the US refused to accept the right of Palestinians to form a unity government with Hamas and Fatah and now, after internal strife, Hamas alone controls Gaza. Forty-one of the 43 victorious Hamas candidates who lived in the West Bank have been imprisoned by Israel, plus an additional 10 who assumed positions in the short-lived coalition cabinet.

Regardless of one's choice in the partisan struggle between Fatah and Hamas within occupied Palestine, we must remember that economic sanctions and restrictions on the supply of water, food, electricity and fuel are causing extreme hardship among the innocent people in Gaza, about one million of whom are refugees.

Israeli bombs and missiles periodically strike the area, causing high casualties among both militants and innocent women and children. Prior to the highly publicised killing of a woman and her four children last week, this pattern had been illustrated by a report from B'Tselem, the leading Israeli human rights organisation, which stated that 106 Palestinians were killed between February 27 and March 3. Fifty-four of them were civilians, and 25 were under 18 years of age.

On a recent trip through the Middle East, I attempted to gain a better understanding of the crisis. One of my visits was to Sderot, a community of about 20,000 in southern Israel that is frequently struck by rockets fired from nearby Gaza. I condemned these attacks as abominable acts of terrorism, since most of the 13 victims during the past seven years have been non-combatants.

Subsequently, I met with leaders of Hamas -- a delegation from Gaza and the top officials in Damascus. I made the same condemnation to them, and urged that they declare a unilateral ceasefire or orchestrate with Israel a mutual agreement to terminate all military action in and around Gaza for an extended period.

They responded that such action by them in the past had not been reciprocated, and they reminded me that Hamas had previously insisted on a ceasefire throughout Palestine, including Gaza and the West Bank, which Israel had refused. Hamas then made a public proposal of a mutual ceasefire restricted to Gaza, which the Israelis also rejected.

There are fervent arguments heard on both sides concerning blame for a lack of peace in the Holy Land. Israel has occupied and colonised the Palestinian West Bank, which is approximately a quarter the size of the nation of Israel as recognised by the international community. Some Israeli religious factions claim a right to the land on both sides of the Jordan river, others that their 205 settlements of some 500,000 people are necessary for "security".

All Arab nations have agreed to recognise Israel fully if it will comply with key United Nations resolutions. Hamas has agreed to accept any negotiated peace settlement between the president of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, and Israel's prime minister, Ehud Olmert, provided it is approved in a referendum of the Palestinian people.

This holds promise of progress, but despite the brief fanfare and positive statements at the peace conference last November in Annapolis, the process has gone backwards. Nine thousand new Israeli housing units have been announced in Palestine; the number of roadblocks within the West Bank has increased; and the stranglehold on Gaza has been tightened.

It is one thing for other leaders to defer to the US in the crucial peace negotiations, but the world must not stand idle while innocent people are treated cruelly. It is time for strong voices in Europe, the US, Israel and elsewhere to speak out and condemn the human rights tragedy that has befallen the Palestinian people.

It's All About Context

2008-05-12T08:21:00.000-05:00

Story for the Ames Tribune, run May 3, 2008
By: Betsy Mayfield

I was just about to write a letter to the editor that wasn't about Israel/Palestine, but, alas, I'm stuck. I just can't let the other side's propaganda go. There are many Palestinians, most, I venture, who desperately want peace with Israel. I speak out for the Palestinians because I have seen their suffering and know how dreadfully it's going for them right now; others favor the Israelis because, I guess, they believe in Zionism and the right for a Jewish state to exist. (Does any particular state have a 'right' to exist? Don't we all have a 'right' to exist? Must we deny one to justify the other?) I just wish the American press would simply publish the news and do so regularly and straightforwardly without trying to influence what we all think. Then, I and the coin's other side could stop this tit-for-tat parley which goes no where. As I see it, neither side thinks their side gets a fair deal from coverage and we're both probably right on that. Certainly, when I know about crimes against humanity going on in Gaza and the West Bank, and there's nothing but silence here in the US, I feel anger and I have to speak or consider myself complicit.

Not long ago, I attended a talk by Marda Dunsky, author of Pens and Swords: How the American Mainstream Media Report the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. Dunsky focused her attention on the lack of context that Americans get through press accounts of the Middle East conflict. Unless a reader really wants to delve into the topic, few ever get to the bottom of the Israeli/Palestinian debacle, even though it's pretty clear from my research (and Jimmy Carter's, as well) that Israel has the upper hand and, like a pit bull with big teeth, will not let go until there's nothing left of the Palestinians and, maybe, all the Arabs in the Arab World. Maybe that's where 'the right' comes from–might makes right, no? I once heard an elderly lady here in Ames exclaim, "Things will be fine in the Middle East when all the Palestinians are dead." I wanted to cry. But, this lady, hopefully venting a misinterpretation, didn't know enough about the situation to fit it into context. Evidently, she could not envision horrors like those happening now in Gaza. After all, if she had only heard about the Qassam rocket throwing and had no knowledge of the horrendous control Israel maintains over Gaza (and the West Bank) from checkpoints to the seas to the skies to the water supply to medical aide to daily food rations, what could she think? When does the press tell us about all this? We hear about Israel's 60th Year Anniversary, but we do not have an equally realistic story about the displacement and occupation of the Palestinian people that began 60 years ago, also.

Lately, Ames was given a stellar chance to see for themselves the difference between public relations and propaganda. I have never appreciated The Tribune more than the day the paper gave thumbs down to the documentary, Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed. (Cheers & Jeers", April 19) My husband and I saw the film and came away appalled at the misrepresentation and omission of key points. Remarks of those interviewed were taken out of context and used only to bolster one idea: the film maker's perspective. The film used dark images taken completely out of context to imply that the issue is one of good against evil, the tradition of religion against the consensus of science. I, always thinking of Israel/Palestine, thought that the creator of the film used the same techniques that are used by the Israeli propaganda machine to deflect discussion away from the real issues and to make Israel the eternal innocent victim which it is not.

Maxwell Anderson, a playwright who wrote in verse about British royalty, gave his character Elizabeth I a great line: "It's not what happens that matters, it's what people believe to have happened. . .and they will believe the worst of you (Mary, Queen of Scots) and the best of me." Remember that line and, maybe, the value of considering what you hear within context will allow you a better interpretation of truth.

More Wisdom from Hauptman

2008-05-12T08:06:00.001-05:00

'Maybe we should live together'

05/02/2008

To the Editor: Ames Tribune
From: John Hauptman

Just read the originals, "Righteous Victims" by Benny Morris, "The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine" by Ilan Pappe, and "One Palestine, Complete" by Tom Segev. Do not believe the incessant repeated lies of the Israel lobby. All three authors are Israeli and Jewish. You can receive these books in a plain brown wrapper from Amazon.com.

There are also humane books of great beauty, such as "The Other Side of Israel" by Susan Nathan, and "A Witness in Palestine" by Anna Baltzer, both sensitive, intelligent and thoughtful Jewish women who see all of this with a clarity we men often miss. Susan Nathan talks of the similar rituals of life, the spices used in cooking, the gentle often shy women at tea. Anna Baltzar talks of peaceful non-violence and the resilient lives of people under duress.

The constant demonization of the Palestinians is wearing thin. These historically completely innocent people have been slandered and murdered at will. Bringing up Husseini and Hitler ignores the illegal British military occupation of Palestine as the result of the European First World War (which Palestinians had nothing to do with).

Anyone can play this game. For example, Adolf Eichmann was in Jerusalem twice, the second time to get his neck stretched, and the first time to swing a deal with David ben Gurion for sending German Jews to Palestine. It was a deal in their common interest. I repeat Jane Haddad: "People always seemed to know half of history, and to get it confused with the other half."

Conflating Palestinian with Arab, and further claiming historic hostility between Palestinians and Jews is a falsehood. Jews were safe in Palestine for nearly 2,000 years while European Jews were murdered, slandered and driven from country to country by Christian religious fervor (and stupidity). The Palestinians absorbed Jewish refugees, their fellow Semites.

As for the larger Arab world, there are still vibrant Jewish communities in Iran and Turkey, for example, who refuse to emigrate to Israel. Hostility began in the 1920s after the illegal British Balfour Declaration when Palestinians were driven from their farms and their land. Of course there was subsequent hostility.

This is not a simple or easy subject, and one-sided letters are easy to write. (For example, the above two paragraphs are one-sided: I did not emphasize the degree of persecution of Jews, nor the anti-Semitism of Americans as late as two generations ago.) There have been historic wrongs, mainly by Europeans, and both Jews and Palestinians have been maligned.

The words of Karen Armstrong in her book "Holy War," an excellent history of Palestine from the Crusades to the present, come to mind: when the Crusaders reached Jerusalem "we could not tell the difference between Muslim and Jew, so we killed them all," and that "the blood in the streets of Jerusalem was up to the knees of our horses."

She claims that the ways of thinking have not changed since then. Not a good sign.

Whenever anyone in the U.S. media says something good about the Palestinians, such as the library film series a few years ago, there is a torrent of invective and threats coming from one small group. But, as far as I can tell, everything in the U.S. media is 1,000-to-1 pro-Israel. In contrast, the Israeli press is far more balanced, even the right-wing correctly acknowledging that the Israeli army created Hamas and Hizbollah by their brutal suppression of Palestinian civilians in Gaza (2000) and Lebanon (1982).

As one older Israeli man spoke in the newspaper Ha'aretz, "when we came here, we thought that the Palestinians would be willing to leave, and it would be all ours. But, they have an attachment to the land and don't want to leave. So, we need another plan. Maybe we should live together." The voice of reason.

Needs Response: Comment Please

2008-05-06T10:25:00.000-05:00

A casual blog site may seem an unlikely place for philosophical discussion, but since my interests grow out of philosophy as well as political reality, I can’t resist. Besides, it’s summer and we can do with some musing. Writing each month about the problems in Gaza and Arab Palestine draws fire usually three or four fold and, then, there are the Christian Zionists who astound me in their kill and destroy mentality that belies what I know about Christ’s philosophy of love and brother/sisterly care for our neighbors, defined as everyone, not just those in our own tribe. It makes sense, then, to examine my own background, an occasion for which occurred when my husband brought home a book written in 1940 by Arthur H. Compton, a scientist-Christian of his era, who did much to shape the college I eventually attended, The College of Wooster in Ohio. Compton’s book, “The Human Meaning of Science,” is interesting because of behaviors and evils Compton could, then, point to (American-Indian Wars, Leopold’s Congo, Germany’s audacity and Japan’s Nanking massacre) as examples of using hatred to unify one group of power seekers: those who chose to use destruction for gain and ethnic superiority by cultivating blame and loathing of an easily identified group. Of course, Compton couldn’t have known about Viet Nam or Israel/Palestine or Iraq and Iran, but his message, vintage as it is, must have influenced the mindfulness expressed through classes at Wooster which, evidently, helped determine my world view. Compton’s theses written in 1940 are echoed today.

Reading along, words and thoughts jumped out at me. “To the member of a tribe which lives as an organized unit, only rights within this group are of importance [Israel, the US, Saudi Arabia and, of course, many others come to mind]. If a nation is self-sufficient, it may reasonably teach that promotion of the nation’s growth is the highest good. But when the world becomes a closely co-ordinated unit, it is clear that nothing less than the welfare of all mankind is an adequate objective for life. The rights of the individual must be interpreted in light of this great goal.”

I am pretty sure Arthur Compton wouldn’t have used the words “globalization,” “international wage legislation” or “terrorism” to describe individual behavior, but not the ways of nations. He knew, however, about the decline of the nation state, international economic cooperation, taking care of the natural world and he talked most about why, as the modern world evolves, we need to be our “brother’s keepers,” again, caring for everyone, even those well beyond our select group. He talks about the unity of hatred to really pull a people together and to do that quickly. “Hate,” he explains, “is the spirit of destruction. . . evil as in war is nearly always an idea or attitude that is contrary to the common good. . .[that] such attitudes are rarely to be overcome by force.” Sound familiar?

“Love,” on the other hand, he explains, “requires more time. . .the evolution of conscience. . . altruism implied by good will.” If love widens co-operation, hate, he says, carries the seeds of its own destruction. That’s what the great Bishop Tutu says today when he talks about the “moral laws of the universe” and about Israel “imploding” in response to gross deterioration from within.

Today, as I read Arthur Compton, a man who barely registered with me as a flit of a drama student at Wooster, I am astounded at the relevance of what he was saying before my Wooster days, when I was a mere baby. Long before Jared Diamond’s, “Guns, Germs and Steel” or “Collapse,” here was Compton talking about how races destroy themselves. Before “The Economist” editors wrote worrisome commentary comparing the American empire to the rising Chinese economic bloc, Compton was marking the decline of truth, “organized lying”, he called it. He well understood greed in international politics and in our own government.

Compton’s writing is indicative of the saying “there’s nothing new under the sun”. That’s all good and well, but as I bask in the summer sun, I risk self-delusion, hoping that somehow, those who oppose my humanistic point-of-view on Israel/Palestine will somehow renew their various religions’ emphatic charge that we are here on earth as representatives of the spirit of service and that we need to co-operate for the common welfare of all. I hope our government will evolve along with us to dismiss the quick fix: hate. Will we, instead, give love a chance. That will be something new under the sun.

Betsy

John Hauptman Speaks Again: Israel's Fascist Policies (John's last entry on this go around)

2008-04-14T21:33:00.000-05:00

Israel's fascist policies

By John Hauptman

To the Editor, Ames Tribune:

George Orwell never thought of this one. Take tens of billions of dollars that support failing military adventures in Iraq and Afghanistan and relabel it as "foreign aid." Very clever.

Mr. Bush's State Department even has a nice plot of this recent "foreign aid" spike (http://qesdb. usaid.gov/gbk/index.html), but this newspeak does not fool anyone. Show us $20 billion worth of schools, clinics, roads, water or electric systems anywhere in Iraq or Afghanistan. Show us anything. It is only one more deceit in a long string of simple-minded deceits that brought this nation to war.

This is how the Israel lobby and its 100,000 minions make the fractional support of the Israeli government look small: make the denominator big.

I read the Israeli press every day and there is no mystery here. The Israeli government, from the very beginning, has been expelling Palestinians from their homes, confiscating private property, killing defenseless civilians and engaging in continuous ethnic cleansing of the once peaceful inhabitants of Palestine. You can read about this in Ilan Pappe's book "The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine."

There are names for this. Albert Einstein, Hannah Arendt and 26 other prominent Americans called it "Nazi and fascist," specifically referring to the political party that now runs the Israeli government. Einstein was a refugee from Nazi Germany and he understood quite clearly what "Nazi" meant and what "fascist" meant, and he and many other brave Americans condemned Menachem Begin for his slaughter of hundreds of defenseless Palestinians in the village of Deir Yassin. This was one of 530 peaceful villages wiped from the map and their residents forced into refugee camps. You can read this Dec. 4, 1948 letter to the New York Times by Googling Einstein NYT 1948.

Einstein forcefully condemned these crimes against humanity with a clarity reminiscent of his clarity in physics. We need another Einstein today, maybe 100 Einsteins.

I grew up in a time and a place where Judaism was revered, where Jews were heroes, and where most of the important books on ethics, physics, psychology and humanity on our shelves were written by European or American Jews. The name-calling, and the insinuated name-calling, is not working anymore. Only desperate people without an argument resort to this.

It is not an accident that almost all of my human rights heroes, from Einstein to Finkelstein, are Jews. Most of my heroes are still Israeli Jews, like Gideon Levy, Amira Hass, Jeff Halper, Akiva Eldar and the many more who condemn the fascist policies of the current Israeli government. I think the Israeli government is anti-Semitic, not only because it is fascist, but also because it endangers Jews worldwide, all the while claiming to be defending Jews.

This lie is exposed by the millions of Jews who do not support this government and who condemn it as either "secular and without God" or as contrary to the centuries-old teachings of Judaism. The International Declaration of Human Rights, mostly written by Eleanor Roosevelt, I believe to be inspired almost in its totality by the centuries of persecution of Jews by European Christians.

It is a historic mistake to use this holocaust to justify another holocaust, this time of the Semitic Palestinians who had nothing to do with European Christians.

The historian Jane Haddam famously wrote: "People always seemed to know half of history, and to get it confused with the other half." This is the essential problem, not only in Israel/Palestine, but also Iraq, Kashmir, Rwanda, Congo, etc., where historic mistakes were made by European Empires, and now the United States is stepping into the same trap, and making more mistakes of its own.

We have a Republican candidate for President who still repeatedly confuses Shia with Sunni, and Iran with al-Qaeda. It leaves me speechless.

The wars in the Islamic countries of what we call the Middle East will be over when we respect Human Rights and International Law, as Albert Einstein insisted. They will be over and Osama bin Laden will be helpless when we treat the Palestinians as human beings, rather than the "dogs" that Moise Dayan called them. It is that simple. And, it is our choice.

Anis Nin Nudges Us Toward Our Better Selves - My Final Piece in This Discussion

2008-04-14T20:26:00.000-05:00

To the Editor, Ames Tribune:
From Betsy Mayfield

I have a picture of a lovely free-spirit from the past, Anis Nin, over my desk along with a comment she made. Said Nin, “We don’t see things as they are; we see them as we are.” That statement is what I think of those who attempt to discredit writers who speak out on behalf of the Palestinian people or who dare to question the violent and terrorizing practices of the Israeli government that I, for one, see as immoral, unjust and plainly not in the best interest of peace including peace for Israelis. Were I in Israel, I could say this in the newspaper, Haaretz, and not be nearly as beset with animosity as I am in Ames, Iowa. For goodness sake, can we not tear ourselves away from nightly trivia about our presidential candidates long enough to find out what’s actually happening in our names all over the world?

I see the slander, the name calling, the slippery slope rebuttal as what those who do the speaking are. In the same way, my writing reflects what and who I am. The name calling has become so pervasive, especially the anti-Semite reference that it renders itself irrelevant. Worse it makes the term something people ignore even though the problem does, indeed, exist and needs our attention. I no long even blink when someone hurls that epithet at me. Those here in America who join me to insist on human rights for Palestinians and recognition of Arab humanity get the same slurs slung at them, even if, and probably more so, if they happen to be Jewish themselves. I think we’ve all come to the conclusion that this is the price of our activism. If anything, slurs against me or those who share my views make me want to speak out even more. When a critic chooses to throw querulous invectives at me, the remarks simply provide me with incentive.

A few days ago, I got a one-line email from the only family I actually know in Gaza saying, “Nothing has changed; we’re starving.” Another article complained that America is giving $6 million a day to Israel. Some say we give more; others less. Doesn’t matter. To me, whatever it is, it’s too much. I’m all for aid to developing countries; I am not for aid to abusive second world countries. I want my friends in Gaza to have a reasonably safe life like we do in Ames, Iowa. I want to encourage Americans to think about the aid our country continues to feed into Israel (and Egypt, too, for that matter) while ignoring the needs of people here on our own doorsteps. It's worse when countries we fund will not allow peace and bask in an endless show of arrogant power. We’ve become like the aging parent who supports a kid who won’t get off the couch even though he’s 60-years old. That the old bugger is nasty to his Mom, no matter; that he shuns his care giver, too bad. For goodness sake, are we blind?

There’s a blog on google from a person called Hope Man who lives in Sderot, where the Gazan missiles tend to land, and a person from Gaza who calls himself Peace Man. The Jewish blogger from Sderot wrote, “Our understanding that we cannot wait for our leaders to solve our problems for us and that if any change is to happen it will happen from us, the civilians. We, citizens of Gaza, Sderot and people all over the world desperately call you, our leaders and decision makers, to completely cease fire immediately.” For goodness sake, are we deaf? I’m all for Hope Man and Peace Man. It would be nice to be able to turn my attention elsewhere.

Use the Right Information: Another Rebuttal to John Hauptman and Me

2008-04-14T09:57:00.000-05:00

Use the right information

04/10/2008

To the Editor, Ames Tribune
BY: James Eaves-Johnson

It requires extreme bias to read a piece that provides the primary source (USAID, the agency that administers U.S. foreign assistance - both loans and grants) and Web site (http://qesdb.usaid.gov/gbk/index.html) for the facts on U.S. aid to Israel, and completely ignore it.

Instead, a recent letter to the editor cites some generic "State Department" source providing "recent" data ("U.S. aid to Israel pays for crimes" 03/30/2008).

In checking the facts with USAID, we learn they are, at a minimum, stale numbers. USAID maintains "Program Reports" which give the last four years of data in cross-country reports - the numbers cited cannot be found there. However, if you dig into the "Country Reports," USAID provides individual country data spanning many years.

If you look back to 1998, you can find that Israel received the $1.2 billion economic aid and $1.8 billion military aid, which was cited as the "recent" figure. However, the loans that are added to these numbers are already included. Moreover, the total U.S. foreign aid number is for 2002 and not 1998. In short, the letter provides a hodgepodge of poorly assembled data spanning multiple years that include double-counted figures. These facts could have been checked easily.

If we look at the most recent USAID data available, we discover a far more complex reality that does not affirm his Israel-bashing predispositions. In 2006, Israel received "Total Economic & Military Assistance" (the highest level roll-up of foreign assistance) of $2.6 billion or 6.64 percent of the total $39.0 billion U.S. aid budget. As I noted previously in The Tribune, much of this aid arises out of parallel obligations to Egypt, Jordan and the Palestinian Authority. Aid to those nations totaled $2.5 billion in 2006, or 6.37 percent of the U.S. aid total.

Moreover, Iraq received $9.8 billion and Afghanistan received $3.7 billion in foreign aid in 2006 (25.26 percent and 9.58 percent of total aid, respectively). None of those numbers include the many billions spent and lives lost directly securing those countries with U.S. military forces. Those costs dwarf aid to Israel and its neighbors.

What is most shocking about all of this is that only Israel draws the letter's ire. Israel indisputably meets far higher standards of human rights and liberal values in comparison to these other countries. And yet, the letter apparently has no problem with the far greater abuses of individual rights subsidized by the U.S. in those countries.

Jordan and Egypt have used far harsher techniques against their Palestinian Arab opponents than Israel ever has. And yet, the letter is eerily silent in defending the victims of those crimes and is critical only when a Jew, or a state with a Jewish majority, can be accused of the crime. There is a word for people who make these kinds of biased accusations.

If anything, U.S. aid to Israel, as well as other countries in the region and the world, should be greater. A more secure Israel can bring peace. A more prosperous Arab world can bring peace. American money can help promote security, liberalism and prosperity world wide. A safe and prosperous world is a world that is good for America.

Israel is a major trade partner of the U.S. and has created many of the technological advancements, goods and services that make American's daily lives better. Israel buys American goods and services at very high rates, providing America with an important export market.

In promoting liberalism and security globally, we can advance our interests while redeeming the world. Rather than picking on a tiny nation with a Jewish majority, perhaps we should be more broadly focused on supporting freedom and liberalism throughout the Middle East and everywhere else.

HOW THE OTHER SIDE RESPONDS

2008-04-13T16:41:00.002-05:00

_____________________________________________________________________________
One-sided hate
By Joseph P. Mancuso
4/02/2008

To the Editor

I am tired of reading about the one-sided hate for Israel and Jews that people submit in letters to the editor of The Tribune. These so-called arguments of "facts" are nothing but the same old anti-Semitic hate mongering of the past.It frightens me to think that kind of blind hatred still exists in Ames. Apparently some of this virulent disease thrives in Ames. Be careful, it's contagious. What group is next?

Joseph P. Mancuso
______________________________________________________________________________
U.S. aid to Israel pays for crimes, by John Hauptman Ames Tribune 03/30/2008
To the Editor:

"There are lies, damned lies, and statistics" wrote Mark Twain, and every statistician knows you can get more-or-less any number you want by a careful selection of samples. This is the case in the discussion of the fraction of all U.S. foreign aid going to Israel, Mayfield (March 12) claiming 30 percent and Eaves-Johnson (March 20) claiming 10 percent.

Recent direct average annual aid-to-Israel is $1.2 billion economic and $1.8 billion military, for $3 billion out of $20.4 billion total U.S. foreign aid, or 14.7 percent. But, Israel also receives about $2 billion in loans, which by implication must be repaid with interest, but these loans never have been repaid and routinely are converted to "grants" thereby becoming direct aid. Adding these loans increases the aid to 24.5 percent. These numbers are from the State Department.

In addition, Israel collects all the funds at the beginning of the year, unlike all other countries receiving U.S. aid, with the consequent benefit of interest, raising total aid to $5.4 billion, or 26.5 percent. Finally, Israel has negotiated that the U.S. is required to supply Israel with all its oil needs, regardless of price or availability, and that the U.S. DoD must buy a certain fraction of Israeli military equipment. These are also aid. I believe the effective total is actually more than 30 percent. In fact, we Americans who pay taxes may never know how much goes to Israel.

As a consequence, Israel is now a major arms exporter, and it was recently found out that Israel has sold sensitive U.S. weapons systems to China in violation of U.S. law.

The core problem is much worse. Israeli historian Ilan Pappe recently published "The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine" (2007, amazon.com, ISBN 1851684670) based on newly acquired military and political archives in Tel Aviv, including the personal diaries and personal letters of the early Zionists who bragged about the destruction of 530 Palestinian villages.

Relentlessly, from 1947 through the beginning of 1949, Israeli commandos would enter a village at night, bomb a few homes, round up men and boys over 12, execute a few in the public square, take the rest out for summary execution, and tell the women and old men to walk to Lebanon, Jordan or the desert.

The Palestinians call this the "Nakba," or "The Catastrophe." Ben Gurion publicly proclaimed an "existential threat", but privately was worried because the Palestinians put up no resistance, providing no excuse for their massacre. The killing continues even today; the Palestinian dead and wounded in the West Bank number about 100 per week.

These are full-fledged crimes against humanity, and that is why the aid numbers matter: we Americans are paying for these crimes, by the tens of billions over many years.
____________________________________________________________________________________

03/20/2008

To the Editor

Betsy Mayfield's rhetoric (Shall we abandon hope? 3/12/08) really deserves no response. However, the editors of The Tribune found it fit to print, and so a reply appears to be required.

Mayfield's borderline anti-Semitism should ward people away from her views. If not, they can easily verify, with original sources, that she is willing to use false facts in support of her assertions. Mayfield says, "The United States gives 30 percent of its foreign aid to Israel." Wrong. USAID publishes its statistics at http://qesdb.usaid.gov/gbk/index.html. Israel receives substantial aid - principally out of comparable obligations to Egypt, Jordan, and the Palestinian Authority. But, in the last three years on record, Israel's aid has not exceeded 10 percent of total U.S. foreign aid.

People can criticize Israel without being anti-Semitic. But, if one is going to malign Jews and Israel as aggressively as Mayfield does, she should at least check the facts.

James Eaves-Johnson
____________________________________________________________________
Leader of courage, strength needed
03/19/2008

To the Editor

Betsy Mayfield's anti-Israel diatribe begins with selected "facts" and concludes that if Israel were left to the fate desired by Hamas and Hezbollah, that justice and morality would be served.

Mayfield, apparently, would like to see the "imbalance of deaths" corrected, apparently by increasing the number of deaths on the Israeli side to match or exceed those on the Palestinian side. Of course, that is exactly what would happen if Israel's military and public resolve were less strong, just as would happen in the U.S. if our military and public resolve were less strong in defending us against enemies, past and present.

War is hell. We all recognize and accept that. Peace is certainly preferable.

As to the accusation of Israel being a "religious" state, Israel is no more a religious state than is England, which has the Church of England as its national religion and certainly much less so that Saudi Arabia and some of the other Arab and predominantly Islamic countries. Israel is, in fact, a muti-ethnic democracy with more than 1 million Arab citizens, and a population that originally came from throughout the Middle East, eastern and western Europe, Africa and elsewhere.

Yes, it gives those of Jewish ethnic background (religious or not) the "right of return" to the area of origin of the Jewish people, but that influx from the diaspora included Jews from Arab, Persian (Iranian), Indian, Chinese, African and virtually all European countries.

In considering the source of the conflict that continues there, consideration of the facts, left out of Ms. Mayfield's commentary, requires acknowledging that it was the Arab nations that declared war on Israel in 1948, 1967 and 1973 with no peace in between those specific conflicts. Gaza was occupied by Egypt, which did not grant citizenship to that population, and the West Bank was occupied by Jordan in the first of those wars.

And it was only late in the history of more than 50 years of attacks by Arab entities on Israel and the Jewish population of first Ottoman and then British mandate Palestine that a particularly brave Arab statesman, Anwar Sadat said, "enough killing," and agreed to a formal peace settlement with Israel. This was followed by a similar agreement to the formal end of hostilities with Jordan.

Sadat literally gave his life for that settlement, having been murdered by a countryman representing the same radical element of Arab citizenry that cheered in the street at the recent murder of the Israeli students and missile strikes on Israel sent by Saddam Hussein during the first Gulf war.

There will be peace and justice in Israel and Palestine when another leader of the courage and strength of Anwar Sadat arises among the Palestinians who, in a similar manner to Sadat's bravery and vision, says "enough, no more killing" and agrees to a peaceful settlement that will benefit all of the peoples of that troubled region.

Miles Weinberger
____________________________________________________________________

MY TAKE ON YESHIVA KILLINGS

2008-04-12T13:31:00.000-05:00

Shall we Abandon Hope?
Betsy Mayfield
Ames Tribune
03/12/08

Here are the facts: Eight yeshiva students have been slaughtered by one angry Palestinian in a manner much like America’s school boy shootings; in Gaza, more than 100 Palestinians have just been assassinated or murdered by Israeli Defense Forces penetrating a slice of land for which Israel takes no responsibility, except to imprison and torment the 1.5 million Palestinians who live there, not by choice, but because they have no where else to go and they can’t go home. Since the beginning of 2008, Israel caused the deaths of, at least, 238 Palestinians, 37 of them children. Palestinians caused the deaths of 14 Israelis, 4 of them minors. In 2007, Israelis killed 384 Palestinians and Palestinians killed 13 Israelis. This imbalance of deaths shows the result of the 20-of-ours-to-one-of-yours mentality which the government of Israel uses to maintain their “religious” state. The Israeli government, a magnificently armed military occupying power, has no trouble winning a war given that the people under siege have nothing but ineffective home made rockets and possibly, now, given a week long exodus from Gaza a couple real rockets with which to defend themselves. Neither the Gazans nor the West Bankers have any military might at all. Given America’s long-term involvement in support of Israel, (See Vanity Fair, April 2008) I am tired of paying for this. The United States gives 30 percent of its foreign aid to Israel to the tune of up to $3 billion a year or, if you prefer, more than $100 billion over multiple years. This comes from our US tax dollars. (http://www.miftah.org/)

No one in the world doubts that Israel exists regardless of nasty rhetoric and war after war has been won to make it so, but now, other issues arise as old eras move into new eras. By building “the wall”, Israel has implied that they have the borders they want, although, if you ask, some may say, “well, we still want more and we’re scared and not safe.” My Jewish acquaintances, some sheer Zionist apologists; others, willing to concede the fatigue we all feel with the endlessness of this game, say that what’s happening now, the restructuring of Gaza into the worst refugee camp in the world, is part of the “war.” Sound familiar? Israel’s siege mentality, back by our own government’s complicity, not only cordons off the indigenous Palestinians, but also locks in the Israelis themselves. What a way to live! Knowing these things make it pretty easy to see what McCain means when he says that we’re in for 100-years of war. Again, who’s going to pay for all this, not only in terms of money, but of lives?

Finally, I’ve been told that while “individuals are moral, governments are not.” Governments, however, are made up of individuals. The people in governments have choices just like the rest of us. What’s the point of turning to religion to teach our children that its not good to lie, steal or kill if our kids are going to grow up and live or die under the thumb of immoral nationalism? Shouldn’t we just sell out the concepts of love and altruism if survival under immoral governments is all we have ahead? Yes, I am angry that Israel, with the complicity of the American government, insists that a winner can just go on occupying others, treating them with contempt and hatred and focusing the lives of generations on fear and hatred and war? I agree that we may be hard pressed to find historical examples of moral national strategies. Given that, maybe we should just stop looking for forgiveness in ourselves and others and just live to kill another day. The rationale that we can't expect governments to be moral crushes the concept of nurturing justice and peace. It promises a future of survival, but not the joy of living. Is it possible for us to consider the consequences of violence not only on our perceived enemies, but also on ourselves? What do you say: shall we abandon hope all together?

A Report from Rev. Darrell Mitchell about his recent trip to Bethlehem

2008-04-10T20:13:00.000-05:00

Good people are everywhere

04/18/2008

To the Editor:

Lately, The Tribune has published letters to the editor about American financial support of the state of Israel. Those who have written expressing dismay at the huge amounts invested in a foreign nation have been answered by those who seem to feel that Israel deserves unquestioned support and that anyone who dares disagree with this position is an anti-Semite, a hater and a skewer of facts.

I am an Iowan who recently returned from a mission travel study trip to Palestine/Israel, implemented in February for two weeks, by the General Board of Global Ministries of the United Methodist Church. There were 85 of us from 22 annual conferences in the United States.

One night, each person on our trip spent the night with a Palestinian Christian or Muslim family. My host family, living in the Aida Refugee Camp, included Azmir, who before retiring, had been a United Nation's administrator for five Palestinian refugee camps in the Bethlehem and Hebron area, and his wife, Amal, who has been a teacher of math and science for 32 years in the Aida Camp. There are close to 45,000 Palestinian refugees in the five camps this couple served.

Each of their five adult children has a college education. Their oldest daughter is a graduate of Harvard University. A son, now married, works as a news reporter for Arabia News Network. Another son is a medical doctor in Bethlehem. Another son lives in Canada with his Canadian wife and their child. A fifth adult child, a daughter, is a professor at Bethlehem University. In addition to making sure all their children have been well educated, Azmir and Amal made it clear to me that they have instilled in their children the value of living moral lives regardless of their situations.

Because there is no central heat in refugee homes like Azmir's I had to wear my longjohns. They carried a small kerosene burner from room to room, so we would always have a little heat. When I went to bed, I used about six layers of blankets to keep me warm. At 4 a.m., I woke up hearing the music from a local mosque, reminding people to pray as they begin a new day with God. I thought to myself, "Well, I should pray, too." And so I said, "Lord, help me to be a better follower, and to love my brothers and sisters of other faiths and this dear Muslim family that has invited me into their home. Save me, O Lord, from demonizing them and taking part in collective judgment of them. Amen."

It was close to daylight. I heard a rooster crow. As it was the season of Lent, I thought about Peter and his denial of our Lord. How could he have done that? How come I do that? Why don't I speak up more often on peace and justice issues? Should we be supporting Israel 100 percent of the time? Is everything that happens in this land the fault of people like Azmir and Amal? What does the Israel lobby group in America do to continue the conflict between the Israelis and the Palestinians?

Morning arrived. We had a great breakfast with egg, oranges, rice and pasta type food. It was more than I could possibly eat, but it was not rich in meat. We all enjoyed our coffee and hot tea, too. I shared a Bible verse with them, from I John 4:7, "Beloved, let us love one another, because love is from God; everyone who loves is born of God and knows God." They thought that was a nice thought that needed to be shared and thanked me for it.

After breakfast, I sat down with Azmir and he told me his story. He said, "In 1946, I went to a school in Jerusalem. In 1948 I was placed in the Aida Refuge Camp, along with my mother and brothers and sisters. My father was killed one month after Israel occupied Palestine. My mother was left with the responsibility of raising two boys and three girls. I entered a private school in Bethlehem and then went on to college. I graduated from Terrezanta College in Bethlehem. I was then asked to work for the United Nations. Eventually I became an administrator of five refugee camps. I did this for 22 years. I got married to Amal in 1972. One year ago, Amal got breast cancer. She went through chemotherapy; she is doing quite well at this time. As for me, I have a bad habit of smoking, and I should try to stop. Maybe, you should pray for me."

I sat down with Amal and she told me her story. Amal said, "My oldest brother was killed in fighting in Lebanon in 1977. My mother died in 2003. My father is now 80 years old. He is still living. I have one brother and two sisters living in Jordan and three sisters in Bethlehem. One of my sisters is a professor at Bethlehem University. My other two sisters are unable to find employment because 50 percent of the people are unemployed. Living in Palestine is like living in a prison. You have walls, checkpoints and you find it so difficult to travel and go places. We need the help of God, we need good American friends who might be willing to help us."

A car came to pick me up and take me to a Palestinian Christian Church. The Immanuel Evangelical Church of Bethlehem. In going to church, I felt a need to pray for these Palestinian people that are in every visible way, "the salt of the earth." These are the kind of people I grew up in America admiring as role models.

It did not mater to me that Azmir and Amal were Muslim; they were simply good people, people any community would welcome. The Palestinian Christians are the real mediators between the Israelis and Muslim factions. Again and again, I heard that many Muslims are non-violent, and I do not hear or read about them in our American press. It is time that we speak well concerning that Palestinian people. We need to recognize that there are good people everywhere.

Rev. Darrell V. Mitchell

2008-04-10T10:21:00.000-05:00

Dear friends,

On this day (April 15) in 1948, Zionist (pre-Israeli) forces occupied
the following Palestinian villages:

al-Manshiyya (Tulkarem)
Khirbat Zalafa (Tulkarem)
Khirbat al-Sarkas (Haifa)
al-Dalhamiyya (Tiberias)
al-Tira (Baysan)
Nitaf (Jerusalem)

Almost every day, particularly this season, you can find at least one
(and sometimes, like today, many) Palestinian villages attacked,
occupied, and destroyed exactly 60 years ago.  If you are interested
in more information about the 534 occupied/destroyed Palestinian
villages and the now millions of refugees originally from those
places, you can search by date, village, or district on
palestineremembered.com.

I am currently working with many other Jewish people throughout North
America to remember the Nakba and stand in solidarity with Palestinian
resistance to Zionism.  I have written about the campaign and petition
before, which you can find at notimetocelebrate.org.  But now... our
Haggadah supplement is ready as well!  So for any of you who are
organizing or attending Passover seders this weekend, take a look.  It
is not intended to be a full Haggadah - you can pick and choose what
to put into your seder:
http://notimetocelebrate.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/notimetocelebrate_haggadah_supplement.pdf

Remembering and Resisting,
Hannah

Mazin Qumsiyeh, Another Day's Stories

2008-04-09T09:50:00.000-05:00

Short of being a witness, storytelling (spoken words, video, audio etc) is always the best way to understand a grim reality whether in Jim Crow South, in Apartheid South Africa, or in occupied/colonized Palestine. Below are four stories to share with your friends and colleagues of millions of stories of "life" (the quotes are warranted) in Palestine. But we must also go beyond understanding/telling stories to join and organize with others to liberate/free ourselves (including fellow human beings). Liberating fellow human beings applies to the oppressor AND the oppressed. The Prophet Muhammad said: "Help your brother, whether he is an oppressor or he is oppressed." The Prophet was asked: "It is right to help him if he is oppressed, but how should we help him if he is an oppressor?" He replied: "By preventing him from oppressing others" (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 3, Hadith 624). And let us remember the Golden rule found in ALL religious, spiritual, and moral traditions: do not do to others what you do not want done to you.
-------------------
1) Three blind women at a checkpoint, notes by Rana Qumsiyeh, April 13, 2008
[While reading this remember that a) all here are the lucky 0.1% of the population of Bethlehem who have a "permit" to get to Jerusalem and b) that this is the mild forms, many died at checkpoints while refused to get to medical facilities and many are starving because their lands and jobs are on the other side of the Apartheid wall. Mazin Q]

Yesterday was not the first time I see those three blind women at the checkpoint. They are familiar to many who cross the Bethlehem checkpoint on daily basis to get to Jerusalem. Two middle-aged Palestinian women and one elderly woman who seems to be a foreigner; could be German, as I have heard them talk to each other in German at times. I have always wondered how they manage to make their way through this maze, being blind, when most people with perfect eye sight struggle to find their way through, when crossing this checkpoint for the first time, and have to ask for directions.

So, yesterday, despite that it was a Saturday, there was a long line forming when those three blind women walked in, and it was taking too long for the door to open and let people in one by one. As usual, they were let through ahead of everyone because of their situation. A few minutes later, they got inside and it seems two of them got through the metal-detector door and the third one “beeped”. The female soldier on duty screamed at her in Hebrew to take her shoes off. This female soldier is known to all of us, the crowds who go through everyday, we call her the screamer. We know she is on duty before we even get into the terminal, because her yelling reaches outside the Wall! Of course, standing in line outside, we barely can see anything of what is happening inside, we just hear and try to understand what is going on. Thus, we assumed that the blind woman took off her shoes and passed again and she still “beeped”, the soldier screamed again, now louder, in Hebrew, ordering her to take her jacket off. One more time, we hear beeping, then we hear crying. Apparently, the blind woman started to cry at that point. The soldier screamed louder, and this time, I didn’t understand what she was saying.

Half an hour had passed since I got in line and I was still there, and the line was not moving. People started complaining, calling, so a male soldier’s voice came through the loud speaker saying “You have to wait, we have ‘problems’ inside”. We heard more beeping and then a loud laugh from the “screamer”.

Eventually, they opened the door and I got to the ID and permit inspection point, there were the two other blind women, apparently still waiting for their companion, who had been forced into one of the “further investigation” rooms. I went outside and got on the bus, and soon after the three women followed. The third one was very stressed out and in tears. It turns out; her skirt zipper was the problem. I am not sure if she was forced to take her skirt off in that closed 'cell', no one dared ask. As the bus drove off, I watched her cry all the way from the checkpoint to Jerusalem…
-------------------
2) GAZA: No Ambulance, Call the Radio
Mohammed Omer

GAZA CITY, Apr 12 (IPS) - "I am bleeding uncontrollably, I need an ambulance." That was not a call to emergency services, it was an appeal broadcast live on radio in Gaza City.

Who knows whether there will ever be an ambulance or not. But this way the ambulance services still hear the appeal broadcast on Al-Iman FM Radio Station, one of few independent radio stations in Gaza. And if the emergency services cannot help, someone else who hears the appeal might.

The ambulance dispatcher announces he cannot get the ambulance to the man. An Israeli bulldozer is blocking the road, and an Israeli tank on a hilltop has been firing at the ambulance, he says. Nobody can say if anyone else got to help the man. But at least his SOS could have been heard.

Appeals again went on air after the Friday attacks on Bureij refugee camp, where the death toll climbed to 16 by the weekend. The deaths included six children among nine people killed Friday. Again, ambulance crews confirmed they could not reach many of the injured. But the appeals were made on radio for all to hear.

A man called from east of Jabaliya refugee camp asking for an ambulance for his wife about to deliver. The radio host asked his location, and that of Israeli tanks. "I can't look from the window to see," he said. "They will shoot me if I do."

A lady called to ask an ambulance to clear the remains of a body lying on the door. IPS confirmed later that it was the body of Abdelrazek Nofal, who was 19. He was blown to bits by an Israeli tank shell.

Someone else called from Bureij asking for ambulance, and for food and water. "My mother needs to be in hospital urgently," he called the radio station to say. Another difficult mission, with the Israeli troops patrolling the area.

The appeals are heard on radio day after day. No one can say what follows the appeals in each case. But the live broadcasts on the radio can be a lifeline – or at the least, a line of hope. Where emergency services and aid agencies are not listening in, the radio then calls them.

"It brings tears to my eyes," says radio host Khaled al-Sharqawi. "I can sometimes hear shooting, and women and children screaming, asking for ambulances, and the ambulances cannot reach them."

Emergency services keep the radio on, if only to go in when it's safe to bring out bodies. On one recent mission, said Ahmed Abu Sall, who works as a volunteer medical worker, "we were shot at by an Israeli tank. Two bullets hit the wheels."

This mission succeeded, as several do. But it can be a long haul to call and wait. Often, cell phone batteries run out as people call again and again with the appeals for help.

The Palestinian Telecommunications Company has given the radio station a toll-free number. That makes calling easier, but the radio statiion has to be on guard also against mischief. Hosts do what they can to check sources and credibility before putting an appeal live on air.

Not every call is a medical crisis. "In such cases we call human rights organisations," Sharqawi told IPS. "But they usually tell us they cannot help people on the ground."

Most people working at the radio station are young volunteers. And Al-Iman isn't the only one; several other local radio stations have begun now to hear and to broadcast live appeals for help.
(END/2008)
--------------------
3) This is a story that is over 8 years old but I was reminded of it when Rana sent her story about the blind women. Young Hiam recently celebrated her 16th birthday and has now half her life with a prosthetic eye thanks to Israeli occupation. Also most receiving this may not have seen it in 2001 and certainly Hiam (then 8 year old) is still in occupied, starved Gaza and we occasionally talk on the phone:
http://www.qumsiyeh.org/hiamsstory/
-----------------------
4) Video of Palestinian Children speaking for themselves in refugee camps
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d_bqHtgG0vE
-----------------
SILENCE IS COMPLICITY

Mazin Qumsiyeh
http://qumsiyeh.org
http://peace-action.org
http://justicewheels.org

2008-03-30T15:24:00.008-05:00

READING FOR A SUMMER BEACH HOUSE

The Revolution Will Not Be Televised
Joe Trippi, advisor to John Edwards & former
advisor to John Dean

Gardens of Water
Alan Drew, about an earthquake in Turkey
and a Kurdish family trying to survive

LET ME STAND ALONE
The Journals of Rachel Corrie
Edited and Introduced by The Corrie Family.

"I must walk with care
as I wander in the wood
that I may crush no flower below my shoes."
Rachel Corrie, 1989-1990

"Maybe my world swirls around me
but one thing is stationary.
Friendship is a pillar of clarity
in my bizarre land."
Rachel Corrie, 1990-1991

"I am a good, strong word giver
I am a jealous guard of my own secrets
Freedom is the rule
I am hungry for one good thing I can do"
Rachel Corrie, 1992-1993

A Thousand Splendid Suns
A novel by the author of The Kite Runner
Khaled Hosseini

The Red Queen--Sex and the Evolution of Human Nature
By Matt Ridley, author of the National Bestseller,Genome

Saturday, March 29, 2008

John Hauptman carries on the conversation about US Funding of Israel's Crimes Against Humanity

_____________________________________________________________________________
HOW THE OTHER SIDE RESPONDS
One-sided hate
By Joseph P. Mancuso
4/02/2008

To the Editor

I am tired of reading about the one-sided hate for Israel and Jews that people submit in letters to the editor of The Tribune. These so-called arguments of "facts" are nothing but the same old anti-Semitic hate mongering of the past.It frightens me to think that kind of blind hatred still exists in Ames. Apparently some of this virulent disease thrives in Ames. Be careful, it's contagious. What group is next?

Joseph P. Mancuso
______________________________________________________________________________
U.S. aid to Israel pays for crimes, by John Hauptman Ames Tribune 03/30/2008
To the Editor:

"There are lies, damned lies, and statistics" wrote Mark Twain, and every statistician knows you can get more-or-less any number you want by a careful selection of samples. This is the case in the discussion of the fraction of all U.S. foreign aid going to Israel, Mayfield (March 12) claiming 30 percent and Eaves-Johnson (March 20) claiming 10 percent.

Recent direct average annual aid-to-Israel is $1.2 billion economic and $1.8 billion military, for $3 billion out of $20.4 billion total U.S. foreign aid, or 14.7 percent. But, Israel also receives about $2 billion in loans, which by implication must be repaid with interest, but these loans never have been repaid and routinely are converted to "grants" thereby becoming direct aid. Adding these loans increases the aid to 24.5 percent. These numbers are from the State Department.

In addition, Israel collects all the funds at the beginning of the year, unlike all other countries receiving U.S. aid, with the consequent benefit of interest, raising total aid to $5.4 billion, or 26.5 percent. Finally, Israel has negotiated that the U.S. is required to supply Israel with all its oil needs, regardless of price or availability, and that the U.S. DoD must buy a certain fraction of Israeli military equipment. These are also aid. I believe the effective total is actually more than 30 percent. In fact, we Americans who pay taxes may never know how much goes to Israel.

As a consequence, Israel is now a major arms exporter, and it was recently found out that Israel has sold sensitive U.S. weapons systems to China in violation of U.S. law.

The core problem is much worse. Israeli historian Ilan Pappe recently published "The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine" (2007, amazon.com, ISBN 1851684670) based on newly acquired military and political archives in Tel Aviv, including the personal diaries and personal letters of the early Zionists who bragged about the destruction of 530 Palestinian villages.

Relentlessly, from 1947 through the beginning of 1949, Israeli commandos would enter a village at night, bomb a few homes, round up men and boys over 12, execute a few in the public square, take the rest out for summary execution, and tell the women and old men to walk to Lebanon, Jordan or the desert.

The Palestinians call this the "Nakba," or "The Catastrophe." Ben Gurion publicly proclaimed an "existential threat", but privately was worried because the Palestinians put up no resistance, providing no excuse for their massacre. The killing continues even today; the Palestinian dead and wounded in the West Bank number about 100 per week.

These are full-fledged crimes against humanity, and that is why the aid numbers matter: we Americans are paying for these crimes, by the tens of billions over many years.
____________________________________________________________________________________

03/20/2008

To the Editor

Betsy Mayfield's rhetoric (Shall we abandon hope? 3/12/08) really deserves no response. However, the editors of The Tribune found it fit to print, and so a reply appears to be required.

Mayfield's borderline anti-Semitism should ward people away from her views. If not, they can easily verify, with original sources, that she is willing to use false facts in support of her assertions. Mayfield says, "The United States gives 30 percent of its foreign aid to Israel." Wrong. USAID publishes its statistics at http://qesdb.usaid.gov/gbk/index.html. Israel receives substantial aid - principally out of comparable obligations to Egypt, Jordan, and the Palestinian Authority. But, in the last three years on record, Israel's aid has not exceeded 10 percent of total U.S. foreign aid.

People can criticize Israel without being anti-Semitic. But, if one is going to malign Jews and Israel as aggressively as Mayfield does, she should at least check the facts.

James Eaves-Johnson
____________________________________________________________________
Leader of courage, strength needed
03/19/2008

To the Editor

Betsy Mayfield's anti-Israel diatribe begins with selected "facts" and concludes that if Israel were left to the fate desired by Hamas and Hezbollah, that justice and morality would be served.

Mayfield, apparently, would like to see the "imbalance of deaths" corrected, apparently by increasing the number of deaths on the Israeli side to match or exceed those on the Palestinian side. Of course, that is exactly what would happen if Israel's military and public resolve were less strong, just as would happen in the U.S. if our military and public resolve were less strong in defending us against enemies, past and present.

War is hell. We all recognize and accept that. Peace is certainly preferable.

As to the accusation of Israel being a "religious" state, Israel is no more a religious state than is England, which has the Church of England as its national religion and certainly much less so that Saudi Arabia and some of the other Arab and predominantly Islamic countries. Israel is, in fact, a muti-ethnic democracy with more than 1 million Arab citizens, and a population that originally came from throughout the Middle East, eastern and western Europe, Africa and elsewhere.

Yes, it gives those of Jewish ethnic background (religious or not) the "right of return" to the area of origin of the Jewish people, but that influx from the diaspora included Jews from Arab, Persian (Iranian), Indian, Chinese, African and virtually all European countries.

In considering the source of the conflict that continues there, consideration of the facts, left out of Ms. Mayfield's commentary, requires acknowledging that it was the Arab nations that declared war on Israel in 1948, 1967 and 1973 with no peace in between those specific conflicts. Gaza was occupied by Egypt, which did not grant citizenship to that population, and the West Bank was occupied by Jordan in the first of those wars.

And it was only late in the history of more than 50 years of attacks by Arab entities on Israel and the Jewish population of first Ottoman and then British mandate Palestine that a particularly brave Arab statesman, Anwar Sadat said, "enough killing," and agreed to a formal peace settlement with Israel. This was followed by a similar agreement to the formal end of hostilities with Jordan.

Sadat literally gave his life for that settlement, having been murdered by a countryman representing the same radical element of Arab citizenry that cheered in the street at the recent murder of the Israeli students and missile strikes on Israel sent by Saddam Hussein during the first Gulf war.

There will be peace and justice in Israel and Palestine when another leader of the courage and strength of Anwar Sadat arises among the Palestinians who, in a similar manner to Sadat's bravery and vision, says "enough, no more killing" and agrees to a peaceful settlement that will benefit all of the peoples of that troubled region.

Miles Weinberger
____________________________________________________________________
Shall we Abandon Hope?
Betsy Mayfield
Ames Tribune
03/12/08

Here are the facts: Eight yeshiva students have been slaughtered by one angry Palestinian in a manner much like America’s school boy shootings; in Gaza, more than 100 Palestinians have just been assassinated or murdered by Israeli Defense Forces penetrating a slice of land for which Israel takes no responsibility, except to imprison and torment the 1.5 million Palestinians who live there, not by choice, but because they have no where else to go and they can’t go home. Since the beginning of 2008, Israel caused the deaths of, at least, 238 Palestinians, 37 of them children. Palestinians caused the deaths of 14 Israelis, 4 of them minors. In 2007, Israelis killed 384 Palestinians and Palestinians killed 13 Israelis. This imbalance of deaths shows the result of the 20-of-ours-to-one-of-yours mentality which the government of Israel uses to maintain their “religious” state. The Israeli government, a magnificently armed military occupying power, has no trouble winning a war given that the people under siege have nothing but ineffective home made rockets and possibly, now, given a week long exodus from Gaza a couple real rockets with which to defend themselves. Neither the Gazans nor the West Bankers have any military might at all. Given America’s long-term involvement in support of Israel, (See Vanity Fair, April 2008) I am tired of paying for this. The United States gives 30 percent of its foreign aid to Israel to the tune of up to $3 billion a year or, if you prefer, more than $100 billion over multiple years. This comes from our US tax dollars. (http://www.miftah.org/)

No one in the world doubts that Israel exists regardless of nasty rhetoric and war after war has been won to make it so, but now, other issues arise as old eras move into new eras. By building “the wall”, Israel has implied that they have the borders they want, although, if you ask, some may say, “well, we still want more and we’re scared and not safe.” My Jewish acquaintances, some sheer Zionist apologists; others, willing to concede the fatigue we all feel with the endlessness of this game, say that what’s happening now, the restructuring of Gaza into the worst refugee camp in the world, is part of the “war.” Sound familiar? Israel’s siege mentality, back by our own government’s complicity, not only cordons off the indigenous Palestinians, but also locks in the Israelis themselves. What a way to live! Knowing these things make it pretty easy to see what McCain means when he says that we’re in for 100-years of war. Again, who’s going to pay for all this, not only in terms of money, but of lives?

Finally, I’ve been told that while “individuals are moral, governments are not.” Governments, however, are made up of individuals. The people in governments have choices just like the rest of us. What’s the point of turning to religion to teach our children that its not good to lie, steal or kill if our kids are going to grow up and live or die under the thumb of immoral nationalism? Shouldn’t we just sell out the concepts of love and altruism if survival under immoral governments is all we have ahead? Yes, I am angry that Israel, with the complicity of the American government, insists that a winner can just go on occupying others, treating them with contempt and hatred and focusing the lives of generations on fear and hatred and war? I agree that we may be hard pressed to find historical examples of moral national strategies. Given that, maybe we should just stop looking for forgiveness in ourselves and others and just live to kill another day. The rationale that we can't expect governments to be moral crushes the concept of nurturing justice and peace. It promises a future of survival, but not the joy of living. Is it possible for us to consider the consequences of violence not only on our perceived enemies, but also on ourselves? What do you say: shall we abandon hope all together?

Wednesday, March 26, 2008

It's All About Money

Does Washington care as much for American citizens as it does for Israeli citizens? If American's Knew, a Washington, D.C. based research organization, explains in an old article by former U.S. foreign service officer, Richard Curtiss, "America's $84.8 billion in aid to Israel from fiscal years 1949 to 1998 along with the interest the U.S. paid to 'borrow' this money, has cost U.S. tax payers, $134.8 billion, 'not' adjusted for inflation." While USAID may give similar approximations of gifts to Israel to other countries, as well, there are several difference. USAID is one source of money for Israel, but there is also military aid to Israel (For FY2009, our President is asking for a 9% increase requesting $2.55 billion in military aid alone. This is based on a ten-year agreement which will eventually total $30 billion, just in military aid, by FY2018.) While the U.S. gives an equivalent amount to Egypt (with strings attached that do not apply when we fund Israel) our gift must serve 65 million Egyptian citizens while our allotment to Israel serves only 5.8 million people. That's the discrepancy! Furthermore, if the war between Israel and its neighbors were not ongoing, we would not have to finance (bribe) Egypt as we do to keep them from upsetting their neighbor, Israel. Do we ask the same of Israel? What’s more, the money we give to Israel alone is more foreign aid than we give to all of the countries of sub-Saharan Africa, all of the countries of Latin America and all of the countries of the Caribbean combined - a total population of 1,054,000,000 people vs. 5.8 million people in the tiny state of Israel, not counting the money we could very use here at home for our own people.

Then, there is the matter of loan guarantees. This is another source of revenue Israel collects from the United States. These "loans" given, with under the table toe tapping, are often forgiven before Israel is required to repay them. Israel brags that they never default on a loan payment; if you don't have to give the money back, what does default have to do with it? Curtiss explains, "By disguising grants as loans, our Congress exempts Israel from oversight that normally accompany grants (So what if Israelis starve the Gazans or make war on Lebanon, while America takes the blame). For those of us who live in America, this arrogance of power is not good, but worse, perhaps, is that fact that Israel never returns to the U.S. Treasury, money owed us.

Why does this matter? For me, who believes in the goodness of the Jewish people as much as anyone, but not in the Zionist power plan for themselves and my own country, it's the money exchanges described above that makes war in the Middle East inevitable. This is not good for America, let alone for Israel or the Arab World, and it certainly won't stop war now or ever. It's time for Israel to get along with her neighbors and to put America first. You cannot get along and have peace without justice. You just cannot. If my taxes are making it possible for the killing, the occupations and the plans for more and more war suggested by the need to construct the largest US embassy in the world-in Iraq-I (we) ought to be able to criticize Israel and ourselves as we would any issue that does not score with America's philosophical commitment to justice, democracy and life, liberty and pursuit of happiness for all citizens regardless of faith, creed or race. The information about America's support of Israel is all over the Internet, most of it straightforward; some not; if you read more than one article on the subject, you’ll be able to decipher what's true and what isn't. Those of us who do not want our children to live in a world at war, it's time to account for the use of our resources and our principles.

Thursday, March 13, 2008

People I Love Are Dying

From my friend, Kathy Walsh, Madison-Rafah Sister City Project, 03 March 08

People I know and love are dying. They are under a siege that prevents them from getting adequate food, medicine and potable water. Children I held and played with are being targeted by the world's fourth largest military power. They are in danger if they leave their homes, and equally in danger if they stay put. Their crime - being born in a part of the world that was sacrificed to atone for horrible crimes committed elsewhere by other people - being born to parents who refuse to lie down and let the world quietly take from them what little remains of who they are and what the Western world has left to them - being born Palestinian in the Gaza Strip.

Every night I go to bed terrified of what may happen while I sleep, if I sleep. When I get up, I check the news to see what was lost overnight. Yesterday I got news that a blast near a friend's apartment had blown out their windows. No one was hurt - physically - but the children's symptoms of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, or more accurately Chronic Traumatic Stress Disorder have worsened. Same with the parents who must deal with their own anxieties while trying to protect and heal their children. These are children who shared their toys with me when I visited Gaza three years ago. One tried to teach me a few words in Arabic. My pronunciation was apparently unacceptable and quite funny. But we persisted until we all dissolved in laughter. I in turn showed them how to fold peace cranes with wings that flapped. And we flapped these cranes all around the apartment. We provided crane noises.

February 29. I read that Matan Vilnai, the Israeli deputy defense minister has threatened a "shoah" or "holocaust" on the people of the Gaza Strip. Now this "shoah" is reality - not so deadly as the Nazi "holocaust" that murdered 6 million Jews along with various other "undesirables". But A "shoah" nonetheless. A "nakba" or catastrophe for the people of Gaza.

Now, missiles are flying around and landing, some landing near or in other apartments. The noise they make is much louder and scarier than noises made by paper cranes. The cranes have probably long since been lost or worn out. The trauma from the missiles will last a lifetime.

I spent an afternoon in Rafah in the home of a family expecting twins. I ate food prepared especially for me. I played with five young nephews - the toys, paper cranes again. I spent the night with them. My host was a fieldworker for the Al Mezan Center for Human Rights.

The following morning my host took me on a tour of Rafah. We were interrupted by reports that a young girl was killed by sniper fire from an Israeli tower while waiting in her schoolyard for school to start. I saw her mother surrounded by friends trying to console her. I saw the body at the morgue. I saw her wounds. I visited a child in the hospital that was injured in the same "incident." Barely a blip in the US news. A few days later I visited the newborn twins.

Al Mezan carefully documents human rights abuses in the Gaza Strip. Israeli abuses of Palestinians, Palestinian abuses of Israelis, and Palestinian abuses of other Palestinians. Human Rights Watch also documents these human rights violations. Their reports can be found on-line. And all types occur, but the overwhelming majority of human rights violations that occur here are of the first kind. Palestinian civilians have been killed at an alarming but hardly noticed rate. Homes, greenhouses, gardens have been routinely destroyed. This killing and destroying has gone on at times when Palestinians resisted peacefully and at times when the resistance was not so peaceful. Yet Israel, the US and the US news media frames the violence as Palestinian provocation and Israeli retaliation.

This latest escalation of violence is framed as Israeli retaliation for rocket fire from Gaza that injured a teen-aged girl in Ashkelon. But nobody asks if maybe that rocket fired from Gaza was retaliation for ongoing Israeli violence in Gaza. And the immediate Israeli retaliation: four young boys killed playing soccer in Gaza.

Death by siege, death by the IOF, death (rarely) by Palestinian rockets. Why is the latter deplored while the former are largely ignored? Who decides what is provocation and what is retaliation? Who decides who can retaliate? Who decides who is allowed to react to what in "self-defense" and who must quietly accept an intolerable situation?

The Israel siege of Gaza is deadly violence. There is not enough food, not enough water, the water there is is unsafe, there is no more hypochlorite to disinfect it. There is not enough fuel to pump the wells, boil water, drive ambulances, run hospital machinery. Critically ill and injured Gazans are often prevented from leaving Gaza to obtain life-saving treatment.

Targeted assassinations occur routinely, often killing innocent family member and random nearby people. The target is not always killed. Buildings that "might" house "extremists" are blown up, possibly killing the targets, and usually killing others. Random acts of deadly violence also occur routinely. Nowhere is safe. There is nowhere to go.

I am worried about the physical and mental health of my host, the twins, the nephews. Will they survive?Intact? How will the current trauma effect the rest of their lives? What kind of adults will they become?

My mission in Rafah was to help Playgrounds for Palestine build a playground in a park, previously bulldozed by the Israeli army during "Operation Rainbow" . Playgrounds are not safe places to be in Gaza. Neither are schools, or the streets, or homes. Might as well have playgrounds.

Last night I got news of a family from Rafah I met here in Madison. They were on tour raising money for The Rebuilding Alliance to rebuild homes for people whose homes had been bulldozed by Israel. They brought along an infant. Last night a missile exploded a kilometer from their home, but it was loud enough that the children thought it hit very nearby. More traumatized children.

Some children are not traumatized. They are dead. My latest information is that since February 27, 101 Palestinians have been killed; 49 were unarmed civilians, 25 of these, children. The Israeli toll: three deaths, of which two were soldiers.

We must stop pretending that this situation is the Palestinians fault. We must admit that they are the ultimate victims of an attempt to remedy the crimes of a European nation on the backs of innocent Asian victims. We must admit that they are currently victims of the worlds fourth largest military power, backed by the world's only superpower. They are the victims of racism by former victims of racism and their allies. And the only way to end racism is to end all racism. Everywhere. By everyone. Forever.

It's All About Money

2008-03-26T08:58:00.001-05:00

Lessons from Hannah Mermelstein

2008-03-15T13:13:00.000-05:00

Preface:

Hannah Mermelstein is a Jewish activist who spent a couple nights visiting me and others in Ames, Iowa, a few months ago. I was extremely impressed with her ideas and ideals, and her presentation, given in concert with Anna Baltzer, another Jewish activist and international speaker who frequents our region when she is in the United States. Below is an article that Hannah submitted to the Jewish Advocate. As Hannah requested, I looked up the responses Hannah received after publication of her article. One was full of thoughts that I find untrue or half true. I am going to do as Hannah asked and respond to the response. That will be my next offering. It's important that we stand up to falsehoods; really, it's our only defense.

Congratulations, Hannah for your persistent efforts to bring about justice, not just for those who share your religious background, but for everyone, everywhere including Palestinians of various religions.

I invite my readers to review Hannah's story, one reader's response and, my response, too. I will not keep this going endlessly, but I think we must make a stand for truth and I encourage you to join Hannah and me in speaking out against injustice.
Blogger Betsy
* * *

Creating Palestine's Refugees, 1948
Photo from United Nation's files.

By: Hannah Mermelstein
Published by: The Jewish Advocate
Date of publication:

On March 20, 1941, Yosef Weitz of the Jewish National Fund wrote: “The complete evacuation of the country from its other inhabitants and handing it over to the Jewish people is the answer.”

On this day in 1948, almost two months before the first “Arab-Israeli war” technically began, the 1,125 inhabitants of the Palestinian village Umm Khalid fled a Haganah military operation. Like their brethren from more than 500 villages, they likely thought they would return to their homes within a few weeks, after the fighting blew over and new political borders were or were not drawn.

Instead, more than 6 million Palestinian people remain refugees to this day, some in refugee camps not far from their original towns, others in established communities in Europe and the US, all forbidden from returning to their homeland for one reason: they are not Jewish.

Yosef Weitz’s wish was granted. In my name, and in the name of Jewish people throughout the world, an indigenous population was almost completely expelled. Village names have been removed from the map, houses blown up, and new forests planted. In Arabic, this is called the Nakba, or catastrophe. In Israel, this is called “independence.”

Last month I went with a man from Umm il Fahm (a Palestinian city in Israel) to his original village of Lajun, only a few miles away. Adnan’s land is now a JNF forest “belonging” to Kibbutz Megiddo.

As we walk the stone path he points to each side of the road, naming the families that used to live there: Mahamid, Mahajne, Jabrin…. The land there is not naturally rocky; the stones that we walk on are a graveyard of destroyed houses. Adnan was only six years old when the Haganah’s bullets flew over his head and he and his family fled. But he remembers. He tears up as we stop at the site of his destroyed house and says, “Welcome to my home.”

Adnan is an Israeli citizen, yet the land that was stolen from him has been given to a body that refuses to let him live on it. As an American Jew, I could move to Lajun/Megiddo tomorrow, gain full citizenship rights, and live on the land that Adnan’s family has tended for centuries. Adnan, who lives just a few minutes away, is forbidden from doing so.

As we approach the 60th anniversary of the state of Israel, the 60th anniversary of the Nakba, let us remember Adnan. Let us remember the inhabitants of Umm Khalid. Let us remember more than 6 million people whose basic human rights have been deprived for 60 years, and let us, as Jewish people with a history of oppression and a tradition of social justice, work for the right of indigenous people to return to their land. This is our only hope for true peace and security in the region.

Hannah Mermelstein is a co-founder of Birthright Unplugged and lives in Boston, Philadelphia and Ramallah.

Moving People Out, Now

HOW TO KEEP A CONVERSATION GOING: Links below can be copied, but will not automatically connect you to the Jewish Advocate.

Dear friends, I hope you're well. This is your weekly update about the Jewish Advocate. :) I don't want to crowd your in boxes, nor do I think the Jewish Advocate is the most important aspect of the struggle for Palestine, so this will be the last e-mail I'll send about it. I do find it exciting, though, and imagine the discussion will continue in the Advocate for weeks to come, so if you're interested in following it, please continue to check their site yourself at thejewishadvocate.com. So, as for this week: First of all, thank you to all the folks who wrote letters - many of your letters have found their way into the paper this week!

http://thejewishadvocate.com/this_weeks_issue/letters_to_the_editor/
?content_id=4729 This week's editorial is about Palestinian refugees: http://thejewishadvocate.com/this_weeks_issue/editorial/?content_id=4718. Its conclusions and some of its facts are suspect, but note that it begins by saying: "As the letters in response to Hannah Mermelstein's March 21 column and last week's editorial continue to pour in – both lauding and condemning us for running them – along with questioning the statistics and message contained in each, we are compelled to continue the discussion." So... keep on writing! And perhaps most amazingly, the online poll this week is about the right of return: "With regard to the Palestinian refugee issue, do you think some or all of the 3.7 million should be granted the right of return or given compensation in the event that a Palestinian state is created?" So their number of refugees is a little low, the word "or" should be "and", and the refugees should have rights regardless of the presence of a Palestinian state, but hey, just the fact that this question is out there in a Jewish newspaper is good. http://thejewishadvocate.com/ (Poll is near the bottom in the middle.) Thanks, all. if you want to keep following this, feel free to keep in touch and to follow the developments every Thursday at thejewishadvocate.com (I'll be checking for sure, so let me know if you think you'll forget and you want me to drop you a line). And keep up all your good work in many realms. -Hannah

People I Love Are Dying

2008-03-13T11:29:00.000-05:00

What my shower and the situation in the ME have in common

2008-03-12T11:53:00.004-05:00

My friend says that my blog has too much about Palestine and not enough about me. The truth is I am bound up in the issues involving Israel/Palestine and I simply cannot detach myself from the struggle I know goes on and on half-way around the world while I enjoy the mundane simplicity and pleasure of life in a peaceful burg in America. Furthermore, “the war” goes on here, too. It’s a public relations war, a war within which I must fight. From my perspective the whole Middle East thing is a matter of public opinion. The Zionists have the most brilliant public relations strategy ever known to man and they’ve been at it since the late 1800s. Those of us who value a world not tied up in “isms”, nationalism heading the list, have only of late begun a campaign to foster peace and prosperity for people everywhere; irregardless, of religion, culture, color, creed, whatever. I do not want a land for Presbyterians for heaven’s sake, or any other “ians,” and I’m going to have to sell that idea, I guess, even if I have years of catching up to do.

Given the history of the struggle for land in the inappropriately named Holy Land (it’s not holy, these days), I feel that there has never been a time better than now to start sharing and behaving ourselves worldwide. The situation reminds me of cleaning the bathroom. I’ve always been a bit of a potty mouth.

Today, no less, I really cleaned my bathroom, especially, the tub. Our bathroom was installed about 10-years ago, all white and shining. At first, I took care of it, going in periodically to look at my matching towels and wallpaper and smiling at the thought of my Corrian shower, something special for us. But, it wasn’t long until I lost interest in the novelty of this corner of my house. I stopped washing down the walls and the glass doors. It was in and out of the shower for me. Sometimes my beloved husband would suggest a cleaning, and I’d give him a look that said, “you do it.” I think some men trick us women when we ask them to clean something in the house. They do it, but ever so badly. I never ask my guy to clean anymore. Well, sometimes.

Of course, a scum developed, a scum that could not be washed away simply . Remember those shower sprays advertised as a way to clean the shower without having to do any rubbing at all. I did that. It only added to the scum; it was like a public relations campaign that tries to get people to see things in a certain way knowing they don’t have the understanding to know where the real dirt begins and ends. It’s a perfumed spray, a cover up, unsanitary with nothing in it to really solve a problem or bring disaster to an end. It allows build up after build up. Soon, the mess is truly out of hand. I’m sure you get the point.

Well, I finally knew that I couldn’t let the shower go any longer. Mold developed making it into a no-mans-land for me. My shower was a place that made my eyes sting and my skin get hives. My shower was winning. Hum! So, I bought the strong lye based cleaner I could find and started. I bought an excellent squeegee that really gets the water and soap off after each use and I started caring about my shower: how it felt, how it looked, how it made me feel.

The first scrub down did nothing at all. The second did a little more, but all the yellow mold spots stayed stuck (they always do). I got a different kind of cleaner. I scrubbed until I was red in the face and even though I wore rubber gloves, little warts arose on my hands from the fumes coming from the cleaner. I put on my swimming goggles and a worker’s face mask. I scrubbed some more. Today is the first day since all this cleaning began several weeks ago that the yellow spots began to fade. I still have a long way to go.

Even with my shower, it’s never too late to make things right. In my case, there was no time like the now before me to start. I want a perpetually clean shower. I could not get that without an effort, the right kind of effort: a cover up wouldn’t do; ignoring the creeping sludge made things worse; refusing to face reality pushed my shower and me further and further apart; a change in strategy and behavior became essential. When all is said and done, to make a place safe and clean and pleasant takes work, care and recognition of truth, i.e. justice for the shower and for me. I’m sure you get the point.