Congress pro-peace letter (or is it-- you decide)

This particular letter is supported by (Jewish) Americans for Peace Now and is from May 2010 (my apologies). The Congressional action in my last post reminded me of this other one. A lot of stuff they do is great, but support for this letter is not one of them. It's apparent goal is to verbally support peace and the start of peace talks between Israel and Palestinians, but it actually smears rather successful Palestinian efforts and puts Netanyahu and Israel on a pedestal they most certainly don't deserve.

Full text of the letter is at this link:
http://peacenow.org/entries/feinstein_letter

"Pro-peace" Senate letter (as it's called)

As steadfast supporters of Israel and the U.S.-Israeli relationship, we are writing to express our support for the start of proximity talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority on ending the Israeli-Palestinian dispute with the active participation of U.S. Special Envoy George Mitchell.

It will solidify Israel's identity as a Jewish, democratic state by giving it safe and secure borders.

Attacks by Hamas and Hezbollah are mentioned as obstacles, but they are often in areas not controlled by the PA; they are Israeli controlled. This is often blamed on Abbas, though. Interestingly, Netanyahu's obstinance isn't alluded to, nor the fact that he chose such to embrace people like Lieberman who are in fact settlers (part of the problem) and terrorists who make public statements that undermine peace and call into question Israel's desire for peace and value placed on human life and rights.

This is indicative of congress's view:

We applaud Prime Minister Netanyahu for committing to direct talks and we urge you to press President Mahmoud Abbas and Prime Minister Salam Fayyad to reciprocate.

Just one report on this reciprocation that Congress is so intent on not seeing:

While No One is Looking, the Palestinians are Building a State (June 2010)
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2010/06/16/while_no_ones_looking_the_palestinians_are_building_a_state

US House to vote no to Palestinian state

Sign the petition. Palestinians are ready for a state. It's always us and or Israel (what's the difference really) who aren't.

This reminds me of another Congressional action this year in the form of a letter by Feinstein, I believe, that I found utterly ridiculous. It was meant to support peace talks, but ended up smearing Palestinians and their efforts and putting Israel on a very high pedestal it doesn't deserve in the least.

And as for the "problem" with a unilateral decision... boo hoo. Israel makes them all the time and often innocents die as a result. I'm glad Palestinians are taking the bull by the horns for a change.

---
From the US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation:

We are outraged to learn that Rep. Howard Berman, Chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, is trying to push through Congress today a resolution “condemning unilateral declarations of a Palestinian state.”

As Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. wrote in his famous “Letter from a Birmingham Jail,” the worst stumbling block to freedom’s advance is the person who “paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's [or woman’s] freedom.”

Yet, this is exactly what Rep. Berman’s resolution seeks to do: subjugate Palestinian freedom and self-determination to Israel’s indefinite timeline. As MLK said, “‘Wait’ has almost always meant ‘Never.’”


TEXT OF RESOLUTION

Supporting a negotiated solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and condemning unilateral measures to declare or recognize a Palestinian state, and for other purposes.

Whereas a true and lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinians can only be achieved through direct negotiations between the parties;

Whereas Palestinian leaders have repeatedly threatened to declare unilaterally a Palestinian state and to seek recognition of a Palestinian state by the United Nations and other international forums;

Whereas Palestinian leaders are reportedly pursuing a coordinated strategy of seeking recognition of a Palestinian state within the United Nations, in other international forums, and from a number of foreign governments;

Whereas on November 24, 2010, Mahmoud Abbas, leader of the Palestinian Authority and the Palestine Liberation Organization, wrote to the President of Brazil, requesting that the Government of Brazil recognize a Palestinian state, with the hope that such an action would encourage other countries likewise to recognize a Palestinian state;

Whereas on December 1, 2010, in response to Abbas’s letter, the Government of Brazil unilaterally recognized a Palestinian state;

Whereas on December 6, 2010, the Government of Argentina announced its decision to recognize unilaterally a Palestinian state, and the Government of Uruguay announced that it would unilaterally recognize a Palestinian state in 2011;

Whereas, on March 11, 1999, the Senate adopted Senate Concurrent Resolution 5, and on March 16, 1999, the House of Representatives adopted House Concurrent Resolution 24, both of which resolved that ‘‘any attempt to establish Palestinian statehood outside the negotiating process will invoke the strongest congressional opposition’’;

Whereas Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton stated on October 20, 2010, that ‘‘There is no substitute for face-to-face discussion and, ultimately, for an agreement that leads to a just and lasting peace.’’;

Whereas, on November 5, 2010, United States Department of State Spokesman Mark Toner, responding to a questions about the Palestinians possibly taking action to seek recognition of a Palestinian state at the United Nations, said, ‘‘[T]he only way that we’re going to get a comprehensive peace is through direct negotiations, and anything that might affect those direct negotiations we feel is not helpful and not constructive’’;

Whereas Secretary Clinton stated on November 10, 2010, that ‘‘we have always said and I continue to say that negotiations between the parties is the only means by which all of the outstanding claims arising out of the conflict can be resolved. . .There can be no progress until they actually come together and explore where areas of agreement are and how to narrow areas of disagreement. So we do not support unilateral steps by either party that could prejudge the outcome of such negotiations.’’;

Whereas on December 7, 2010, Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs Philip J. Crowley stated, ‘‘We don’t think that we should be distracted from the fact that the only way to resolve the core issues within the process is through direct negotiations.’’;

Whereas Secretary Clinton state on December 10, 2010, that “it is only a negotiated agreement between the parties that will be sustainable”;

Whereas the Government of Israel has made clear that it would reject a Palestinian unilateral declaration of independence, has repeatedly affirmed that the conflict should be resolved through direct negotiations with the Palestinians, and has repeatedly called on the Palestinian leadership to return to direct negotiations; and

Whereas efforts to bypass negotiations and to unilaterally declare a Palestinian state, or to appeal to the United Nations or other international forums or to foreign governments for recognition of a Palestinian state, would violate the underlying principles of the Oslo Accords, the Road Map, and other relevant Middle East peace process efforts;

Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the House of Representatives—

(1) Reaffirms its strong support for a negotiated solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict resulting in two states, a democratic, Jewish state of Israel and a viable, democratic Palestinian state, living side-by-side in peace, security, and mutual recognition;

(2) reaffirms its strong opposition to any attempt to establish or seek recognition of a Palestinian state outside of an agreement negotiated between Israel and the Palestinians;

(3) urges Palestinian leaders to—

(A) cease all efforts at circumventing the negotiation process, including efforts to gain recognition of a Palestinian state from other nations, within the United Nations, and in other international forums prior to achievement of a final agreement between Israel and the Palestinians, and calls upon foreign governments not to extend such recognition; and

(B) resume direct negotiations with Israel immediately;

(4) supports the Obama Administration’s opposition to a unilateral declaration of a Palestinian state;

(5) Calls upon the Administration to:

(a) lead a diplomatic effort to persuade other nations to oppose a unilateral declaration of a Palestinian state and to oppose recognition of a Palestinian state by other nations, within the United Nations, and in other international forums prior to achievement of a final agreement between Israel and the Palestinians; and

(b) affirm that the United States would (i) deny recognition to any unilaterally declared Palestinian state and (ii) veto any resolution by the United Nations Security Council to establish or recognize a Palestinian state outside of an agreement negotiated by the two parties.

---

We’re asking you to take action now because this resolution will be voted on today. (By the way, the text of the resolution isn’t even public yet, but we got our hands on a copy of it, which we’re publishing below.) Here’s what you can do:

1. Sign our petition to Rep. Berman letting him know that it is wrong for the United States to put a timeline on Palestinian freedom and self-determination.

If we get 5,000 signatures before the vote, we will hand deliver the signatures to Rep. Berman to let him know in person how outraged you are by his resolution. Help us reach our goal now by signing the petition and then spreading the word.

2. Call your Representative and ask him/her to vote “no” or “present” on this resolution and to speak against it on the House floor. After you sign the petition, you will be redirected to a page where you can enter your zip code and then get the phone number for your Representative.

Use one or more of the talking points below when calling your Representative, but be sure to call now before the vote!

---

TALKING POINTS

* I urge Representative X to vote “no” or “present” on the resolution condemning Palestinian statehood, and ask him/her to speak against the resolution on the House floor.

* It is wrong for Congress to condemn Palestinian attempts to achieve freedom and self-determination. Congress has no business putting a timeline on Palestinian human rights.

* Israel has shown repeatedly that it prefers to colonize Palestinian land, rather than end its illegal 43-year military occupation of the Palestinian West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza Strip and negotiate in good faith to establish an independent Palestinian state. Under these circumstances, Palestinians cannot be blamed for seeking alternatives ways to establish an independent state.

* This resolution paternalistically demands Palestinians “resume direct negotiations with Israel immediately” even while Israel continues to illegally colonize Palestinian land supposedly designated for a future Palestinian state.

* This resolution calls on the Administration to meddle in the internal affairs of other countries by opposing the recognition of a Palestinian state by other nations.

* The text of this resolution was kept secret prior to the vote, the Obama Administration probably had no time to offer its opinion on it, there were no hearings about it, and the public had little chance to offer its opinion on it. The process by which this resolution is being brought to a vote is fundamentally anti-democratic.

Romans 12:18

Part 1


One of my favorite verses and one that provokes much thought. I've been thinking about it lately in various contexts. Peace within one's self, peace among believers, peace in the Middle East, etc.

“If it is possible, as much as it depends on you, live peaceably with all men.”

What immediately comes to mind is the run up to Iraq and various discussions in and out of the church building that I listened to- support for and (not so much) against- Biblical and opinion. Bush’s rush to war in the face of very convincing and grave doubts about the immediacy or even the threat of Saddam Hussein made this verse stand out to me then. I know the political/national scene doesn’t really apply, here, but sometimes we can act impulsively like that as individuals. We say I’ve tried all I feel like trying. I’m not going to take the hit. I can say I’ve tried to live peaceably, but this guy makes me mad and I’m not going to take it anymore. We rationalize and say, well it does say “if it is possible…” I think we need to look more closely at the second clause, not stop at the first to get the real and complete meaning- as much as it depends on us. A lot of times we give another meaning to “if it is possible.” We instead often mean by possible, “it’s probably not possible (or I don’t want to).”


Sunday’s lesson from James actually fit right in to me thinking about this lately, which was cool.

So many good points. Taming the tongue (or pen or FB status as the case may be) fits in quite nicely to how to live peaceably with all men:

James 3:8 But no man can tame the tongue. It is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison. 9 With it we bless our God and Father, and with it we curse men, who have been made in the similitude of God. 10 Out of the same mouth proceed blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not to be so.

Self-seeking wisdom and then the wisdom to seek by which we can sow peace:

15 This wisdom does not descend from above, but is earthly, sensual, demonic. 16 For where envy and self-seeking exist, confusion and every evil thing are there. 17 But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, willing to yield, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality and without hypocrisy. 18 Now the fruit of righteousness is sown in peace by those who make peace.by those who make peace.

It’s a tough balance. We have to stand up for the truth and balance that righteous judgment (with which we are supposed to judge) with being gentle and willing to yield. Obviously we aren’t to yield so as to be unscriptural. Jesus is the perfect example (of course) of this balance.

Another point of the lesson fit into my consideration of how to live peaceably. Sometimes you have to take a hit and not always assert your right to say and do this or that. In fact, you should strive to “take it patiently” instead of reviling and threatening in return. This is definitely not an American value, so we may have to fight against our schooling, here.

1 Peter 2: 18 Servants, be submissive to your masters with all fear, not only to the good and gentle, but also to the harsh. 19 For this is commendable, if because of conscience toward God one endures grief, suffering wrongfully. 20 For what credit is it if, when you are beaten for your faults, you take it patiently? But when you do good and suffer, if you take it patiently, this is commendable before God. 21 For to this you were called, because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that you should follow His steps: 22 “ Who committed no sin, Nor was deceit found in His mouth”; 23 who, when He was reviled, did not revile in return; when He suffered, He did not threaten, but committed Himself to Him who judges righteously;

And it’s always good to know what to do rather than just what not to do…

Eph 4:29 Let no corrupt word proceed out of your mouth, but what is good for necessary edification, that it may impart grace to the hearers. 30 And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption. 31 Let all bitterness, wrath, anger, clamor, and evil speaking be put away from you, with all malice. 32 And be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God in Christ forgave you.

The context of “live peaceably with all men” also gives us insight into the meaning of that phrase and some goals, too.

Romans 12: 9 Let love be without hypocrisy. Abhor what is evil. Cling to what is good. 10 Be kindly affectionate to one another with brotherly love, in honor giving preference to one another; 11 not lagging in diligence, fervent in spirit, serving the Lord; 12 rejoicing in hope, patient in tribulation, continuing steadfastly in prayer; 13 distributing to the needs of the saints, given to hospitality.
14 Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse. 15 Rejoice with those who rejoice, and weep with those who weep. 16 Be of the same mind toward one another. Do not set your mind on high things, but associate with the humble. Do not be wise in your own opinion.
17 Repay no one evil for evil. Have regard for good things in the sight of all men. 18 If it is possible, as much as depends on you, live peaceably with all men. 19 Beloved, do not avenge yourselves, but rather give place to wrath; for it is written, “Vengeance is Mine, I will repay,”[a] says the Lord. 20 Therefore
“ If your enemy is hungry, feed him;
If he is thirsty, give him a drink;
For in so doing you will heap coals of fire on his head.”[b]
21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

War and the Peace Prize

Elie Wiesel jointly authored a rather spurious ad that drew the criticism of US officials. This guy is a Nobel Peace Prize laureate. Granted, it was 1986, but still!

There is a lot of talk in the news that Obama is reaching the Israeli audience and changing some minds over Netanyahu's head. I don't know if that's true, but Weisel (an American) feels he needs to hit back (at Obama?). I guess.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mj-rosenberg/elie-wiesel-and-the-rest_b_544027.html


Text of ad:

It was inevitable: Jerusalem once again is at the center of political debates and international storms. New and old tensions surface at a disturbing pace. Seventeen times destroyed and seventeen times rebuilt, it is still in the middle of diplomatic confrontations that could lead to armed conflict. Neither Athens nor Rome has aroused that many passions.

For me, the Jew that I am, Jerusalem is above politics. It is mentioned more than six hundred times in Scripture—and not a single time in the Koran. Its presence in Jewish history is overwhelming. There is no more moving prayer in Jewish history than the one expressing our yearning to return to Jerusalem. To many theologians, it IS Jewish history, to many poets, a source of inspiration. It belongs to the Jewish people and is much more than a city, it is what binds one Jew to another in a way that remains hard to explain. When a Jew visits Jerusalem for the first time, it is not the first time; it is a homecoming. The first song I heard was my mother’s lullaby about and for Jerusalem. Its sadness and its joy are part of our collective memory.

Since King David took Jerusalem as his capital, Jews have dwelled inside its walls with only two interruptions; when Roman invaders forbade them access to the city and again, when under Jordanian occupation, Jews, regardless of nationality, were refused entry into the old Jewish quarter to meditate and pray at the Wall, the last vestige of Solomon’s temple. It is important to remember: had Jordan not joined Egypt and Syria in the war against Israel, the old city of Jerusalem would still be Arab. Clearly, while Jews were ready to die for Jerusalem they would not kill for Jerusalem.

Today, for the first time in history, Jews, Christians and Muslims all may freely worship at their shrines. And, contrary to certain media reports, Jews, Christians and Muslims ARE allowed to build their homes anywhere in the city. The anguish over Jerusalem is not about real estate but about memory.

What is the solution? Pressure will not produce a solution. Is there a solution? There must be, there will be. Why tackle the most complex and sensitive problem prematurely? Why not first take steps which will allow the Israeli and Palestinian communities to find ways to live together in an atmosphere of security. Why not leave the most difficult, the most sensitive issue, for such a time?

Jerusalem must remain the world’s Jewish spiritual capital, not a symbol of anguish and bitterness, but a symbol of trust and hope. As the Hasidic master Rebbe Nahman of Bratslav said, “Everything in this world has a heart; the heart itself has its own heart.”

Jerusalem is the heart of our heart, the soul of our soul.

- Elie Wiesel

A Response:
http://www.counterpunch.org/amin04212010.html

Israel threatens and is uncompromising, yet hopes for peace (???)

I saw these headlines at the BBC website today:

Israeli tanks 'advance into Gaza'

No change on Jerusalem, says PM

Israeli PM hopeful on peace talks

Israel 'will build in Jerusalem'

Hopeful on peace talks? Really?

Israel: Our tanks are advancing on Gaza. Despite the fact that international law says settlements are illegal and E. Jerusalem's occupied (illegal to build), Jerusalem's ours, we're building on it, and we hear you America (and the law and rest of the world), but we're still building on Occupied Territory.

How can they be hopeful for peace when they can't even follow international law, much less make concessions for peace?! What is their hope? That Palestinians will suddenly be satisfied with being prisoners on part of their land? That Palestinians will out of the blue be satisfied with no homeland, representation, freedom, justice, food, water, movement, etc??

Would/ did Jews accept that? Did we expect them to? Why are we waiting on Palestinians to do so?

Total garbage!

Mossad and its murders

**I don't think the link feature is working today. I don't have time to fix it manually right now. You'll have to copy and paste to see the links I guess.

This is something I was thinking about when I wrote the thing on the recent Mossad success or failure- depending on what you think should have been the end- murder or murder and secrecy.


In most publications, the murder of Naim Khader and other moderates has been attributed to Abu Nidal as kind of a collaborator killing type of thing. I think Khader was working unofficially on a peace deal with Israel with the help of Europeans or the UN or something.

http://www.wrmea.com/archives/november02/0211048b.html

In Victor Ostrovsky's book, By Way of Deception, among other observers, there is another school of thought- that Mossad was responsible. The first link below explains it rather well why this is more plausible than the typical Palestinian extremists killed the moderates line.

http://randompottins.blogspot.com/2008/04/voice-that-was-silenced.html

http://www.uruknet.info/index.php?p=62595

Fair trade

James posted this article on a note on Facebook earlier this year. I have been coming back to this fair trade concept a lot in my mind. Being your average greedy American I always think I am entitled to the lowest price. Long live The Market, right? But really what about those people who are making these things we buy at Wal-Mart in Chinese sweat shops, farmers who get a tiny fraction of our $3 cups of “premium” coffees, and Palestinians who deal with so much to try and make their living in their ever-temporary homes? Do we care? Should we? That’s up to you. And regardless of what or if you think of the politics of the Middle East, the fact remains there is a humanitarian situation that we could be helping by buying olive oil, olive oil soap, spices, etc.

This might explain better:

North American Fair Trade for Peace in the Middle East
http://www.chicagofairtrade.org/aboutFairTrade/fair-trade-in-conflict-zones/news_item.2006-02-06.1817772353

Will it be as popular as the coffee? I don't know why it isn't yet- Rachel Ray talks about EVOO all the time, Italian places do the olive oil and bread thing (if they served zaatar with the olive oil, it'd be way better, but I digress), olive oil is considered trendy and healthy these days. Add fair trade into the mix and I can't figure out why you can't pick it up at at least one place around here. I would think Chapel Hill, Carrboro, Asheville, etc would be all over this.

As far as locally, this is the one thing I’ve found. I don’t know what they sell from these countries, but they mention fair trade and Egypt and the West Bank. If it’s the same as World Market, I think I’ve been, but still don’t know what was from the West Bank, and if not, then I haven’t been at all.

http://www.tenthousandvillages.com - Egypt and West Bank, among other 3rd world locations
* Sarasota, FL
* Cumming, GA
* Greenville Crossing, DE
* Atlanta, GA - Perimeter Place
919-929-8022 | Eastgate Shopping Center1800 East Franklin St Chapel Hill, NC
(919) 286-2457 | One World Market811 9th Street Suite 100 Durham, NC


This sums up the regions’ organizations::

North America - www.afsc.org * www.canaanfairtrade.com * www.palestineoliveoil.org * www.worldcentric.org * www.zatoun.com

Europe - www.zaytoun.org

Middle East - www.canaanfairtrade.com * www.pal-arc.org * www.palestinefairtrade.org

These are various organizations I found:

Canaan Fair Trade, 5218 Shorecrest Dr., Middleton , WI 53562, phone: (608)831-0707, fax: (608)821-0790, email:nasser@canaanfairtrade.com. National distributor of fair trade products from Palestine, specializing in olive oil. All products are certified by the Palestine Fair Trade Association

Friendship and Peace Society Embroidery Project, PO Box 275, Point Arena, CA 95468; phone and fax: (941)922-7657; email: ellen.rosser@sbcglobal.net. Markets beautiful cross-stitch embroidery made by poor Palestine women who are the sole support of their families. Featuring: pillows, jackets, shawls, wall hangings, dresses, etc.

Holy Land Olive Oil; 2930 Domingo Ave., #122, Berkeley, CA 94705; phone: (510)830-8804; fax: (206)203-0515; email:info@holylandoliveoil.com. Startup business rooted in an all volunteer effort to help farmers in Palestine. Importer of Extra Virgin olive oil from Palestine.


http://www.palestinefairtrade.org/

https://www.canaanfairtrade.com/distributors-and-partners

http://WWW.OLDECITYIMPORTS.COM -- USA, MA

http://www.olivebrancholiveoil.com -- USA, MA

http://www.sunbula.org/etemplate.php?id=22
http://www.aseela.org/

Hadeel, St. George's West Church
Location:
58 Shandwick Place
Edinburgh, United Kingdom
http://hadeel.org/page.html?id=11


Along the same lines, I wrote this awhile back. Not too long ago. And I don't think it was on this site. I'm not exactly the go-getter type, but I think from time to time about stuff like this or getting something going. Petitioning the government is certainly (or seems so) one way to influence policy, but if Americans are talking to Palestinians and start to see them as people with perhaps more in common with themselves than they think (rather than The Others, terrorists, etc), maybe this will make people re-think the "Israel's way or the highway" mentality that holds us captive and causes common sense to escape us.

Here goes:
I have heard of (and have been inspired by) various efforts lately to aid Palestine like Galloway's convoy, Kite Gang (NPR), Gaza Surf Relief, etc:
http://www.vivapalestina.org/events.htm,
(edit 7/2009- A convoy actually left the US on July 4 and went to Gaza July 13)

http://www.kitegang.org/what_we_do/jordan
(http://thestory.org/archive/the_story_496_Kites_and_Plastic.mp3/view ),

http://www.gazasurfrelief.com/Start.html ,

https://www.canaanfairtrade.com/about ,

various programs among elementary students/schools from the US and Palestine exchanging letters, pictures, goodies, etc (why don't cities or peace groups in the two areas do the same sorts of things?)
*Facebook comments about Flat Stanleys around that time kind of re-inspired that one. I thought- what ifFlat Stanley went to a Free Gaza event or protest...

and even http://www.provoforpalestine.org/ (go figure!)


*************************************************

And with that, I'm all brainstormed out. Maybe something will come of it one day. If not from me, then from someone reading this. I feel less cluttered having put all this on "paper", so I guess I've accomplished something.

Palestinian non-violent resistance

I posted these 2 questions on a forum- I think in response to hearing this week about the protests at Bil'in where Israel killed several people.

I can see why Israel wants to silence these people. They've got valid points that they're trying to get across peacefully and they are organized with their own conference and village website. Now that's more dangerous that suicide bombers! It should inspire fear in the hearts of those who thrive on oppression and hatred.

Bil’in’s conference on non-violent resistance
http://www.commongroundnews.org/article.php?id=25400&lan=en&sid=0&sp=0

The village's website:
http://www.bilin-village.org/english/

***
***


How much do you know about the history of Palestinian non-violent resistance?

Do you think there is only suicide bombing and rocket launching?

Were you aware of any non-violent protests currently or in the past?

Do you think these non-violent protests have made a difference?

Should they continue?

http://www.palestinemonitor.org/spip/spip.php?article49

http://qumsiyeh.org/palestiniannonviolentresistance/
(scroll down on this one- it is very detailed when you get there)


***
***


Do you know as much about peaceful Palestinian protest as you do about suicide bombers?
My guess is more Palestinians have peacefully protested than suicide bombed, but that's not the impression you get from the media.

What do you think?

Which do you think are actually more prevalent?

If more people indeed have peacefully protested than suicide bombed, why the opposite impression? Maybe violence sells? What does that say about us? Does it put us on the opposite side of peace?

Non-violent protests against West Bank barrier turn increasingly dangerous
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/27/israel-security-barrier-protests

Question:Is it reasonable to expect these conditions for Palestinians, but none for Israel?

Is it reasonable to expect (these) conditions for Palestinians, but none for Israel?

Renounce violence – Israel doesn’t

Recognize Israel - Israel doesn’t have to recognize Palestine

Accept Roadmap- Israel rejects (Israel supporters claim Israel follows this, all agreements and ceasefires, but teh 14 reservations that must be in place before it can think about accepting it kind or defeat it's purpose in the first place.)

Roadmap- Israel said they’d sign but had 14 reservations (Palestinians not allowed violence or incitement/criticism, but Israel is, no discussion of settlements, etc) so wouldn’t observe it (??).
Here are the 14 – totally guts the agreement; they should just say no, we won’t do it. But then maybe they'd lose the "man of peace" moniker, so scratch that.
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Peace/road1.html

Several of these are their obligations under international law, hence should occur independently and not be conditional upon any Palestinian actions.

journey from peacenik to warmonger

I do love The Story on NPR,

these are a few I really liked:
To Catch a Thief
http://thestory.org/archive/the_story_287_ID_Theft_Anarchy.mp3/view
Scammed
http://thestory.org/archive/the_story_425_Scammed.mp3
Scamming the Scammers
http://thestory.org/archive/the_story_433_Commodifying_Race.mp3/view

BUT some do bother me. I guess that's why I like this program, though. There is such a variety of people and situations represented. I almost deleted the podcast, A Father’s Rite, but ended up listening to it later, despite the description. The last one to really bother me like this one below was about a girl who shoplifted habitually, made it a game, had rules and didn't really feel any remorse in hindsight.
http://thestory.org/archive/the_story_385_Oil_Game.mp3/view

Oh, and another one that got under my skin was about a family who squatted in a foreclosed home and felt as though they had some right to stay there rent free. They did clean it up and possibly kept crackheads away, but is that worth $100,000 or whatever the value is? Maybe I should stop paying my mortgage- hey, maybe they owe me for paying my mortgage for some 6 years? That said, though, I think there should be some help available for those who were wronged by mortgage and credit companies (I can’t remember if this family falls into this category). Maybe there could be a temporary rental situation to be worked out matching homeless families to all the foreclosed properties, but if that occurs, it would make sense for the family foreclosed on to get dibs. While I don’t think all the blame for people getting in over their heads with credit cards and mortgages and loans should be on the individuals all of the time, I was dumbfounded that they thought that because they found a vacant property, cleaned it up, and moved in it was theirs- and not just theirs- theirs free and clear. Perhaps I’m not as socialist as I thought!
http://thestory.org/archive/the_story_475_New_Life_In_A_Foreclosed_Home.mp3/view


This ended up being a rather long analysis or over-analysis of this particular “The Story,” but everything the guy said ruffled my feathers. Enjoy- or not!


The Story: A Father's Rite
http://thestory.org/archive/the_story_702_Israeli_Father.mp3

This story is described as one of a guy's turning point from optimistic leftist peacenik to not so sure. In listening to this, I really doubt how much of a peacenik he actually was. That’s going a bit far. Maybe he was on the Zionist left as opposed to the peace-loving left. I have recently learned there may be a difference between “leftists” like Yossi here and the likes of Amira Hass, Gideon Levy, Uri Avnery, and Jeff Halper that I have enjoyed reading for some time.

He talks happily about Israel basking in the 6 Day War victory against 3 Arab countries when he went to visit Israel with his parents when he was young. He said the attitude there was that anything is possible (as long as you can beat down your neighbors?). Peace is possible (only when you are in the position to dictate the terms?). He used to think peace without weapons was possible and now he's not so sure (because your enemy now has access to guns instead of rocks?).

This optimism seems driven by military victory rather than a real desire for peace. The Israeli view seems always to be colored by military superiority and getting their way; equality doesn't enter their equation, which is a big problem and obstacle to peace as far as I can see.

From the time of that first visit, he was committed to coming back to live in Israel. He thought it was “the most compelling place on earth for him as a Jew to live.” This seems to indicate a love for Israel (and it's Jewishness) above all else which would lead one to believe that he won't ask the hard questions- should it be a Jewish state, do Palestinians have a right to the land as well, etc- that leftists generally ask for the good of their country and their neighbors. If keeping Israel Jewish is your primary concern, peace will take a distant second or worse. After all, when you've got to worry about demographics, dismantling illegal settlements becomes a bit of a problem and equal rights for Palestinians may mean a more involved Palestinian Israeli presence at the polls which would obviously “threaten” Israel's Jewishness. The Occupation is good for demographics, but bad for peace and saving and improving lives of Israelis, Palestinians, Jews, Christians and Muslims. That's part of what makes Israel's response disproportionate. When they say some violence was necessary or for security measures what they really mean is that it's necessary in their view to help maintain a Jewish majority and Jewish state. This is a political goal for which they are willing to terrorize and collectively punish the Palestinian population in order to maintain. A former Mossad agent has said that the Gaza blockade is counterproductive, so why is it in place? We probably will never hear them say they target civilians (unless Lieberman and his ilk gain still more power), but there is ample evidence that they, at the very least, do not take care to minimize civilian casualties.

In contrasting the effect of war on Israelis during the 6 Day War and 1982, Yossi equated war and existential threat and said that that usually united Israelis, but in 1982 there were anti-war protests. Later in the story, he also said that if Israel doesn't go to war with Hamas, it will say that Israel doesn't have the nerve to survive. Peaceniks are able to separate war and existential threat; they aren't always the same. In Israel's case, the two haven't been the same since the beginning; not even the existence of Israel as a Jewish state has been under existential threat. I have a hard time believing that anyone who equates war and existential threat is or was anywhere near the left or peace camp.

Another part of his story that makes me doubt he was ever in the peace camp was his account of an experience on a "mission" during his alleged peacenik phase:

He woke a man and his two sons in the middle of the night to paint over anti-Israel slogans on the wall and looking for militants. (???) First, isn't this free speech? Is that an Israeli value? Guess not. And what did this have to do with their supposed mission to find militants?? He didn't seem to think there was anything wrong with making civilians do slave labor to cover up free speech. It's standard practice for the IDF to deface everything with the star of David and derogatory things about Arabs. Shall we wake Israeli families up at night and have them come clean that up- and while they're at it, rebuild Gaza?? Even if he's become more of a hawk, surely he would have remembered some feelings of guilt, thinking it was odd, etc about this, but nothing.

He did say that his reservists would discuss why were they here and what were they doing in general. Yossi even expressed empathy for Palestinians throwing rocks at soldiers with guns. Now that's generous of him. Now that Palestinians have guns- I wouldn't say they are on an equal playing field, but it's better than rocks- suddenly Yossi thinks they have to be crushed.

He also describes how he would fight with his kids about going out for fear of an attack, but let them go once his wife framed it this way: we should let them go out or move and concede Israel is a failed project. So it comes back to Zionism once again. They have the right to live there, but these Palestinians whose land they are on don't. Not only don't they have the right to land in Israel, they barely have the right to land in the Occupied Territories and don't have the right to freedom of movement (not just into Israel, but from city to city in the Territories), safety, security, schooling, food, water, electricity, trials, not to be imprisoned indefinitely without charge, not to be extra judicially assassinated, not to have tanks roll over your possessions at will, not to be fired at indiscriminately, not to have your house taken over by the IDF for a base, not to have your house bulldozed, the list goes on. So when I hear about Israelis being sad they cannot go to a discotech or café (teen hood stolen??) I get a little mad. It seems like such a silly thing to complain about when you look at the other side. I mean in relative quiet, three times as many Palestininas die as Israelis, and in conflict, 1000 more Palestinians die. I know that it would be hard to be an Israeli parent, but what about Palestinian parents?? No one ever asks this. The media is always putting us in the shoes of Israeli parents, comparing our feelings after 9/11 with Israelis who get attacked so much more. Of course they has the right to defend themselves. No one ever talks about a Palestinian's right to defend himself and his family. If we were in the Palestinians' position, what would we do? Perhaps more people should think about that.

He feels the difference between him and his kids was his kids grew up after Israel had made a serious offer and accepted a two state solution. He also made a big deal about the fact that Israel offered to share Jerusalem. Those gestures made him feel the guilt of occupation largely was removed. (???) That it's the Palestinians' fault now. He also said- and this is the part that got me- his kids had an advantage because they weren't guilty Israelis. Similarly, he proudly said he was conflicted in his service and his son wasn't. Proud of the rage he said his son felt, proud of the lack of empathy. He was glad his son felt like he had no choice and that he was doing the right thing because that's what you need to win. That's one thing if he feels Gaza is necessary, but why does this change the past? So he's ashamed or regrets feeling empathy for Palestinians who defended themselves with rocks against guns??? Regardless of morale, they really should have been able to "win" against rocks. That should tell them that violence isn't the solution. Oppression, in a way, makes resistance stronger. Israeli Jews should really look to their history to relearn that lesson. Did Jews in Nazi Germany roll over and die? No, they did what was necessary to survive.

He feels Israel tried to prevent the recent Gaza action; it's not a war of choice. This makes no sense. I have addressed this before, I think. If I haven't, there are tons of analyses out there now.

Another rather disturbing thing was that he feels conflicted with his reconciliation work and defending Israel. This shouldn't be, unless with his hawkish attitude comes the Zionist racism of the right as well. A person who desires peace, regardless of how optimistic they are about it, should be able to work on the individual level with Israelis and Palestinians, Muslims and Jews, to connect the people, appreciate that all the civilians suffer, promote dialogue, or whatever his reconciliation work is about. I don't see how he is conflicted unless he blames the Palestinian civilians for everything that's going on and is a big racist. Or, perhaps deep down, he knows and asks the questions the real Israeli left asks, the hard, self-critical questions. Maybe he knows Israel is guilty of some of the things it's accused of, feels guilty for that, and blames Palestinians for that.

Yossi in his analyst mode:
http://wamu.org/programs/dr/09/02/11.php#24677

Articles by the actual left:
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1063597.html
http://newmatilda.com/2009/01/12/jailer-state
http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/en/channels/avnery

http://www.icahd.org/icahdukdev/eng/articles.asp?menu=6&submenu=2&site=UK&article=380

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1037879.html