Israel’s US Funding Rests on Nuclear Secrecy

TMO 

The United States, United Kingdom, Russia, China, France and Germany (known as the  P5+1) have a meeting scheduled in Geneva on October 15 and 16 to hear new, concrete proposals from Iran designed to assure the peaceful nature of its nuclear program. In return, Iran would get some relief from economic sanctions, reports Walter Pincus in the Washington Post. He then wonders, “Behind closed doors, do the P5+1 acknowledge Israel has nuclear weapons?”

Victor Gilinsky and Henry Sokolski in the New York Times similarly note: “While the world endlessly discusses Iran’s nuclear capabilities and the likelihood that it will succeed in developing an atomic arsenal, hardly anyone in the United States ever mentions Israel’s nuclear weapons. Obama, like his predecessors, pretends that he doesn’t know anything about them.”

If this October 15 meeting would bring up the subject of Israel’s leaking nuclear reactor and Israel’s stockpile of atomic weapons, it will be a happy birthday for Mordechai Vanunu, who lives under permanent house arrest in Israel. He turns 59 on October 13.

Vanunu, a former Israeli nuclear technician, worked from 1977-1985 at the Negev Nuclear Research Center near Dimona, an Israeli facility that develops and manufactures nuclear weapons. Just before he was fired (for advocating Palestinian rights), Vanunu secretly took 57 photographs of the Dimona facility in 1985.

On October 5, 1986, the British newspaper The Sunday Times ran the story with photos on its front page under the headline: “Revealed: the secrets of Israel’s nuclear arsenal.” In this interview with Peter Hounam, Vanunu gave detailed descriptions of lithium-6 separation required for the production of tritium, an essential ingredient of fusion-boosted fission  bombs. Vanunu described the plutonium processing used, giving a production rate of about 30 kg per year, and stated that Israel used about 4 kg per weapon. From this information it was estimated that Israel had sufficient plutonium for about 150 nuclear weapons.

With the help of a female secret agent, the Mossad kidnapped Vanunu, who was subsequently imprisoned for 18 years in Israel, 11 years of which he spent in solitary confinement. But it was too late to stop the press. The world now already knew that Israel possesses nuclear weapons.

Upon his release in 2004, Vanunu immediately began speaking to the media despite being ordered by Shin Bet not to talk to any foreigners. He has been re-arrested several times since then. Vanunu continues to call for Israel’s nuclear disarmament, and for its dismantlement as a Jewish state.

In July 2004 he warned the London-based Arabic-language newspaper Al Hayat that the Dimona reactor endangers millions with its radioactive pollution. Vanunu advised the Jordanian government to prepare for possible leaks from the reactor, since the reactor operates mainly when “the wind blows toward Jordan.”

But by then, this was already old news. On February 6, 2000 the London Sunday Times had quoted Professor Uzi Even, formerly a senior scientist at the reactor, saying, “The Dimona reactor is old and dangerous; It should be closed.” Another scientist, who was not named, stated that the structure of the reactor has been damaged as the result of radiation and is now “vulnerable and dangerous.”
Furthermore, Dimona’s buried nuclear waste has resulted in skyrocketing cancer rates in Palestinian and Bedouin villages near Southern Hebron and Negev. The leaking reactor in Dimona has now been active without any foreign inspection for 50 years.

However, closing Dimona wouldn’t stop Israeli nukes, said Dr. Daniel Rohrlich, a research physicist at Tel Aviv University.

“In August, 1998, Israel joined an international initiative to cut off production of nuclear materials, i.e., plutonium and enriched uranium… But Israel only pretended to join… One day, a treaty to cut off production of fissionable materials will be ready for signing, and Israel will have to decide whether or not to go along. Signing a cutoff treaty would oblige Israel to demonstrate that it does not produce fissionable materials. If Israel is unwilling to open the Dimona reactor to international inspection, it has another option: to close and dismantle the reactor once and for all.

“It does not need the reactor. Israel already has enough fissionable material for hundreds of nuclear bombs. Over the decades, the reactor has produced hundreds of kilograms of plutonium. A cutoff would not affect this supply. Since the half-life of plutonium is 24,000 years, this plutonium would remain at Israel’s disposal for thousands of years,” said Rohrlich.

Walter Pincus reports in the Washington Post, “Back in the 1960s, Israel apparently hid the nuclear weapons program being carried on at its Negev Nuclear Research Center (NNRC) at Dimona. It deceived not only the international community but also its close U.S. ally. It repeatedly pledged “it would not be the first to introduce nuclear weapons into the area.”

In early 1966, at the time of a U.S. sale of F-4 fighter-bombers to Israel, the Johnson administration insisted that Israel reaffirm that pledge. “Foreign Minister Abba Eban told Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara that Israel did not intend to build nuclear weapons, ‘so we will not use your aircraft to carry weapons we haven’t got and hope we will never have,’” according to the State Department’s Foreign Relations of the United States, 1964–1968, Volume XVIII.

“America is locked into covering up Israeli nuclear bombs because of a 1969 agreement between President Richard M. Nixon and Israel’s prime minister, Golda Meir,” write Victor Gilinsky and Henry Sokolski in the New York Times.

“If Washington wants negotiations over weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East to work — or even just to avoid making America appear ridiculous — Mr. Obama should begin by being candid. He cannot expect the countries participating in a conference to take America seriously if the White House continues to pretend that we don’t know whether Israel has nuclear weapons, or for that matter whether Egypt and Israel have chemical or biological ones.”

So why is Israel so hesitant to admit its capabilities, which have long been public?

By not acknowledging possession of nuclear weapons, Israel avoids a US legal prohibition on funding countries which proliferate weapons of mass destruction. Open possession of nuclear weapon capabilities would prevent Israel from receiving over $2 billion each year in military and other aid from United States’ taxpayers.

Patience Is Struggle

TMO 

It’s hard to believe that tomorrow is the first day of Spring, I think as I trudge through slippery snow and slush. It seems almost like time has stalled, as the world waits for hope. This week marks ten years since Rachel Corrie inspired the world with her act of selfless martyrdom to (unsuccessfully) defend the home of a Palestinian doctor.

Since then, the news of the day continues to be painfully frustrating.

Palestinian hunger striker Ayman Sharawna has been released but deported to Gaza. He is banned from visiting with his family in the West Bank for the next ten years. 

Meanwhile, Palestinian prisoner Samer Issawi waits for death. He stopped taking liquids on the 241st day of his hunger strike. He refused the Israeli offer to deport him to Gaza: 

“We are fighting for the sake of freedom of our land and return of our refugees in Palestine and diaspora, not to add more deportees to them.

This systematic practice through which Israel aims to empty Palestine from Palestinians and bring strangers in their place is but a crime.

Therefore, I refuse being deported and I will only agree to be released to Jerusalem as I know that the Israeli Occupation is aiming to empty Jerusalem of its people and turn Arabs to become a minority group of its population. The issue of deportation is no longer a personal decision, it is rather a national principle. If every detainee agrees to be deported outside Jerusalem under pressure, Jerusalem will eventually be emptied of its people. I would prefer to die on my hospital bed to being deported from Jerusalem.”

The Israeli Magistrate Court of Jerusalem issued a sentence of 20 months in prison for Medhat Issawi, the brother of Samer Issawi, on charges of organizing solidarity activities with prisoners inside Jerusalem and being a member of the DFLP (Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine).

Their mother wrote a moving plea for help to President Obama on the occasion of his visit to the Holy Land:

“I am a Palestinian mother. Like thousands of other Palestinian mothers I ache and suffer. I am the mother of Fadi who was assassinated by Israel in 1994 in the spring of his life, and the mother of Medhat who is now in Israeli prison and the mother of Ra’fat whose home Israel demolished and left his family homeless; I am the mother of Shireen, Firas and Shadi who could not avoid the repeated detention and torture. We are a family that Israel deprives from water and would have deprived us food and medicine if they could.

“You, who comes to the land of Peace after being crowned with a Nobel Peace Prize and whom through his long four years of presidency failed to accomplish a single pursuant for peace or lift the grievances off a person, this is your chance to save Samer from the canines of this brutal occupation. So as not to wonder with millions of others in the world (I ask): Why did you come to us?”

To her earnest plea, there is no response, just bitter news that the US is planning on boycotting the UN Human Rights Council’s debate on illegal Israeli settlements.

Two young sisters, Sawsan and Nasim Shaheen began hunger striking together on February 20 in a tent in front of the United Nations building in Ramallah. They have joined the Palestinian hunger striking prisoners in order to demand the liberation of political prisoners incarcerated by Israel, reports Palestine Monitor.

While westerners debate the pros and cons of boycotting Israel, the mother of Ibrahim Baroud protests alone on a road in Gaza. Traffic drives around her but a message is sent by her eyes: “Please dear world, feel for a mother whose son is in prison for more than 25 years, what is still left in my life but to hug him, tell me?”

Israel has suspended family visits to prisoners from Gaza for three weeks for Jewish holidays, the International Committee of the Red Cross said Monday.

“Verily, with hardship, there is relief” (Quran 94:6).

A British convoy to Gaza, named after the Turkish humanitarian aid ship sank by Israeli gunships in 2010, is now stranded. Activist filmmaker Iara Lee reports:

“Mavi Marmara is sailing on wheels from UK to Gaza. Our convoy’s members are stuck at this moment at Libya/Egypt border, suffering extreme heat during the day, extreme cold at night, with no food nor water… They left London and drove south through France and Spain, crossed to North Africa and travelled through Morocco, Tunisia, Libya, and finally tried to cross Egypt to reach the Rafah crossing into Gaza. The whole trip was expected to take about two weeks, but as past experiences, we have been encountering a lot of delay!”

“Libya has granted the UK aid convoy exit and no return, but Egypt doesn’t want to grant them entry!!! After traveling over 4,000 miles so far, there are neither toilets nor shower facilities… only a cafe nearby… Convoy crew is stuck in no man’s land since they can’t return to Libya nor proceed to Cairo/Rafah in Egypt. The saga continues…”

Ten years ago, Rachel Corrie demonstrated that there is no power in the world greater than Patience. When the Israeli bulldozer came towards her, she did not flinch. She stood there like a beautiful flower facing a lawnmower.

The late Edward Said explained in 2003 that “the Meaning of Rachel Corrie” is that victory comes to those who maintain their dignity.

“Palestinians have refused to capitulate or surrender even under the collective punishment meted out to them by the combined might of the US and Israel… Under the worst possible circumstances, Palestinian society has neither been defeated nor has it crumbled completely.”

And so we wait, and we wait for freedom. The silent endless nothingness of the stalled life, the isolation, that cramped feeling, needing to stretch, wanting to explode, wishing to wake up in a life that we could enjoy, but not knowing how to escape the pressures closing in, the darkness, the damp cold. Hopes and dreams postponed for a future time when we might find a way forward. One might feel like one is being crushed to the point of disintegrating. One might feel like one is about to crack! Yet this must also be the feeling the seed goes through as it comes to life, pushing through the cold mud.

Just remember in the winter
Far beneath the bitter snows
Lies the seed that with the sun’s love
In the spring becomes the rose.

(Bette Midler)

Egypt Sentences Israeli to 2 Years

On Monday, March 4, 2013 an Egyptian court sentenced an Israeli to two years in prison for sneaking into the Sinai in an alleged attempt to enter Gaza. Andre Pshenichnikov, 24, was detained on Dec. 31, Egyptian security sources said.

The family of Andre Pshenichnikov told Israeli website Walla News they were surprised by the verdict, noting the maximum penalty for infiltration is normally six months. Egyptian security officials claim Pshenichnikov was filming security installations in Sinai and asking drivers for information.

The 23-year-old Jewish immigrant from Tajikistan already made headlines last summer when he was detained by Israeli police for residing illegally in the Deheishe Refugee Camp near Bethlehem. There he told police that he wants to break all ties with Israel, give up his Israeli citizenship and obtain a Palestinian one instead. “I hate Zionism,” he told the Associated Press in June 2012. “I want to be part of the Palestinian resistance.”

According to Pshenichnikov’s girlfriend, when he attempted to enter Egypt, Israeli authorities detained him for three days for no reason. After his release from Israeli detention, he crossed into Egypt and was then arrested by the Egyptian police. Svetlana Pshenichnikov, Andre’s mother, told Army Radio that he’d received a visa to enter Egypt last week, but that he’d encountered “a problem with his documents.”

Pshenichnikov was held in an Egyptian prison for over a month until he was ordered to be released and deported. However, he was back behind bars the very next day, after the Sharm al-Sheikh public prosecutor ordered a retrial of the left-wing activist. An appeal of his two year sentence is planned for later in the week. Meanwhile, his case arouses a great deal of speculation. Is he an Israeli spy? Commentator Israel Shamir believes the young man is rather an innocent idealist:

“Andre did the impossible. He crossed the biggest chasm there is. Imagine a white boy from Philly, picking cotton and living with blacks in a cabin on a Mississippi plantation in the days of Jim Crow. No Freedom Rider went that far. He broke an important taboo: so many Israelis are convinced that the Palestinians would kill them on sight, at first occasion. By his example he refuted this fantasy. He renounced apartheid personally by living with Palestinians… He did not go there to explore Palestinian way of life, or to write for a newspaper; he was not looking for publicity, he did not hide nor emphasize his Israeli identity. He did not act as an activist, marching at demos and enjoying popularity. He just rented a room, worked at a building site or waited tables in a tourist restaurant just like any Palestinian youth of his age in Deheishe, lived with ordinary people on his salary.”

“Though his actions were reckless, his intentions were noble, and we need such people,” Shamir concludes.

Shamir has advocated for a long time in favor of a One State Solution for Israel and Palestine. He does not believe people should wait for governments to decide their fate. Israelis themselves should go make friends with Palestinians and voluntarily dissolve the Jewish State.

“I signed a separate peace treaty with all my neighbors in the Middle East. As for me, Syrian children may come and swim in the Sea of Galilee, and children of Palestine are welcome to amusement parks of Tel Aviv, while I shall sip Lebanese arak at Bardaouni in Ramallah. The refugees of Gaza may come back to the fields they owned before 1948, and deal directly with the few old Polish Jews who “privatized” the lands. Keep me out of it.”

However, this recent incident shows that at this point in time, Arabs are not yet willing to protect a Jew who renounces Zionism and comes to live with them without official invitation or permission. Each time Pshenichnikov was arrested, it was the Palestinians or the Egyptians that handed him over to the authorities. Because of his openness in supporting the Palestinian cause, he was instantly mistrusted and considered to be stirring up trouble.

Former Israeli jazz musician Gilad Atzmon has also received a lot of opposition from Diaspora Palestinians, who have excluded him from the debate about Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) of Israel, at the request of Jews in the BDS movement who feel threatened by Atzmon’s views on Jewish identity politics. Many other deep thinkers have been told that they are not welcome to hold hands with the Palestinians. Even this author has at times been alienated by those who fear that my outspoken support could cause them more problems.

Obviously, it’s a control issue. People who renounce their country, or their religion, or their social and political brainwashing, are free radicals, anarchists. If society accepts their right to question the status quo, other people will start questioning the status quo too. But each person will do it in their own unique way, without any organizational goal or structure. Peace is very dangerous in the sense that no one can control it, just like no parent can control a son who fell in love. In medical terms, a “free radical” is an agent that causes cancer. It infects a living organism and if it is not neutralized, it will disrupt the system and eventually cause it to die. If peace were to erupt, existing governments would no longer be needed.

Of course, there is also the very real problem of infiltration and instigation by spies posing as free radicals, who are actually agents of the enemy, as we have seen time and time again with FBI informants trying to set people up for fake terrorist plots.

Pshenichnikov, whose mother is a Christian, will not receive much sympathy from any Palestinians or Egyptians simply because he is an Israeli immigrant and therefore not to be trusted. He will not receive much sympathy from Israelis, since he is an enemy of Zionism. The Russian government has reportedly taken interest in his case. It will be interesting to see if they decide to negotiate his release.

BDS Panel at Brooklyn College Draws Crowd: Detractors Humiliated

Judith Butler began her February 7 talk at Brooklyn College in support of Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) against Israel by saying, “Usually one starts by saying that one is glad to be here, but I cannot say that it has been a pleasure anticipating this event. What a Megillah! I am, of course, glad that the event was not cancelled, and I understand that it took a great deal of courage and a steadfast embrace of principle for this event to happen at all.”

In response to the public furor of last week, the Mayor of New York spoke out in defense of Brooklyn College.

Bloomberg said he “couldn’t disagree more violently” with the BDS movement, but “if you want to go to a university where the government decides what kind of subjects are fit for discussion, I suggest you apply to a school in North Korea.”

“The last thing we need is for members of our City Council or State Legislature to be micromanaging the kinds of programs that our public universities run and base funding decisions on the political views of professors,” said the mayor. “I can’t think of anything that would be more destructive to a university and its students.”

Bloomberg’s decisive words effectively ended the New York City Council’s campaign against Brooklyn College for holding the Students for Justice in Palestine event.

Political Science teacher at Brooklyn College Robin Corey reported delightedly: “Now that the mayor, the New York Times, and just about everyone else have come down hard on all the government officials and politicians who tried to force my department to withdraw its co-sponsorship of the BDS panel, the “progressive” politicians have issued a second letter to Brooklyn College President Karen Gould, in which they backpedal, backpedal, backpedal pull back from their earlier position. No longer, it seems, must we “balance” this panel or withdraw our co-sponsorship.”

BC Philosophy professor Samir Chopra sighs, “That it took a billionaire mayor to explain these simple matters to our progressive leaders is, well, what can one say?”

“While it was gratifying to see Dershowitz forced into retreat it is important not to exaggerate Bloomberg's role,” writes commentator John Halle.

“Some of those targeted by Dershowitz turned out to be experienced organizers and more than a little media savvy, deluging the twitter accounts of the officials, demanding answers from them and circulating via facebook a petition which quickly received over 2,500 signatures. Within days those local officeholders concerned with maintaining their reputations among their liberal constituents withdrew their names from the Fidler letter clearing the way for Bloomberg and the Times to issue ringing endorsements of academic freedom. And so what began as a potential fiasco ended as an inspiring lesson in grassroots organizing.”

As the instigator of the threats against Brooklyn College, Alan Dershowitz found himself at the brunt of not only mockery but the public shredding of his arguments.

Opined fellow New York attorney David Samel on Mondoweiss: “People often comment that Dershowitz is a clown who does not deserve the time and effort to discredit him. I could not disagree more... His brazen hypocrisy and serial dishonesty should be challenged regularly.”

“The outside agitators, like Alan Dershowitz, did us a favor. If they hadn’t tried to shut it down with City Council members, it would have been just another ho-hum event on campus,” said Jane Hirschmann, a member of Jews Say No (to occupation).

As a result of all the publicity, the panel discussion between Judith Butler and Omar Barghouti drew hundreds to the audience, filling the room to capacity, with more people turned away.

Butler exclaimed, “I thought it would be very much like other events I have attended, a conversation with a few dozen student activists in the basement of a student center.”

Gail Sheehy reported in the Daily Beast that “the forum went off without a single hateful word. At most, 100 protesters stood across from the Student Center... Police, out in force, were confined to directing traffic.”

BDS, the largest pro-Palestine civil movement, states three goals: end the occupation, end apartheid, and guarantee the right of return of Palestinians to their homeland. When Barghouti characterized the Israeli apartheid as more brutal than what American blacks went through before Martin Luther King Jr., he received a standing ovation.

Chemi Shalev reports in Haaretz, Israel: “Overzealous Israel defenders used a five-megaton bomb to swat a fly, and it blew up in our faces...The result of all of this surfeit and excess was a clear-cut, perhaps unprecedented PR coup for BDS and a humiliating defeat for Israel’s interests... the “pro-Israel camp” found itself, not for the first time, portrayed not only as heavy handed but a bit unhinged as well.”

Shalev concludes that “far too much of the public discourse on Israel has been dominated and dictated by super-conservatives and ultra-nationalists and the billionaires who fund them... who view any measured or nuanced debate about Israel as treason, who are hell bent on making their observation that liberals are turning away from Israel into a self-fulfilling prophecy... and will eventually erode the genuine bedrock of support that Israel enjoys in America.”

Professor Chopra is not so sure. “The pressure brought on Brooklyn College from the outside was an attempt to regulate discourse on campus. And in that, I fear it has succeeded in many ways. For one, this event does not make the controversial panel discussion on campus more likely. It makes it more unlikely. Which department or university administration wants to go through this fiasco again?”

This author does not share Chopra’s pessimism. For decades, BDS and other Palestine Solidarity groups have been kicked off campuses around the US due to angry threats from pro-Israel activists. The academic attack on Brooklyn College is standard. What is new is that the administration remained strong and refused to cancel the event.

Meanwhile, Gaza farmers are renewing a call for boycott of Israel to protest the destruction of their land and property as well as the 2006 Israeli ban on Palestinian exports, which devastated Palestinian agriculture, reports Electronic Intifada.

Palestinian farmers joined together with protesters Saturday to plant olive trees on Israeli-razed farmland and to implore international supporters to join the boycott of Israeli agricultural produce. They say the boycott is the “only hope for justice for Palestinian farmers being targeted by the Israeli army and oppressed by Israel.”

“We hope that it will put pressure on Israel to stop targeting us and allow us to farm our land as we used to.”

Boston Sixth Graders Need a New Textbook on Ancient World History

Due to social pressure, great strides have been made within the past 50 years to include women and non-whites in the picture of the past. However, American students still have an extremely warped view of world history and how it relates to current events because of the way Jews and Israel are discussed at school, and the way Arabs and Islam are excluded from mention, even when the topic is ancient Canaan.

I am deeply concerned about my daughter's 6th grade social studies textbook, which I believe violates the law by teaching Bible history (Zionist mythology) instead of sticking to the facts when discussing ancient Canaan and Jewish history. I truly feel like David facing Goliath when bringing up these issues with the school administration.

The textbook I am concerned about is “History Alive! The Ancient World” by the Teachers' Curriculum Institute. There are six units: Early Humans and the Rise of Civilization, which discusses Mesopotamia; Ancient Egypt and the Middle East, which includes two chapters on Judaism; Ancient India, which introduces Hinduism and Buddhism; Ancient China, which discusses Confusionism, Daoism and Legalism; Ancient Greece, which discusses Democracy and Greek contribution to the modern world; and Rome, which discusses Christianity and Rome’s legacy in the modern world.

The chapters present artifacts, archaeological evidence, cultural traditions and photos of these regions in modern day. They piece together a scientific understanding of history based on what we know - all except those relating to Canaan! There is no excuse for this omission of facts and evidence from the Middle East Section, because Canaan is full of artifacts, ancient ruins, and traditional culture.

“The narrative doesn't recognize the importance of the actual geo-political history of the region as part of the indigenous timeline from Syrian Phoenician Nabatean Arabian 'Judaism' to 'Christianity' and then to 'Islam' all as part of one continuous history,” notes Oxford scholar Lilia Patterson.

Instead of a rich discussion on history, the chapters on Canaan contain only Bible stories told from a radically Judeo-centric perspective. For example, Abraham is mentioned as the father of Judaism but the textbook neglects to mention he had two sons, Isaac and Ishmael. That is why Muslims refer to Jews as their “cousins.” It would have been so easy to add a statement saying that Arabian historical legends also date back to Abraham, but this topic is carefully avoided to the point of absurdity.

Many different people lived in ancient Canaan besides Israelites. Over time, these many tribes intermarried with each other. Canaanite scholar Mazin Qumsiyeh explains, “The Palestinians of today, Muslims and Christians, trace their descent to all the peoples who have lived on this land from the time of the Canaanites.”

The exclusion of Arabic history from the section on the Middle East creates a textbook that is not only biased but wildly inaccurate. The history of Canaan needs to be told in a secular, scientific way based on archaeological, cultural and linguistic evidence, just like all other histories are taught. Bible stories are not supposed to be taught as historical fact. Many paragraphs start with "The Hebrew Bible says..." (then proceed to misrepresent what the Bible says), while several actually present legend as fact.

The Jewish connection to the Middle East is presented as a continuum dating back to the ancient times, ending with their expulsion by the Romans in the first century after Christ, even though historical evidence finds no proof of any major migrations. Instead, what has been found is that most of the descendants of the ancient Israelites accepted Christianity and eventually embraced Islam.

“Archeologists at Tel Aviv University showed that city states and kingdoms were routinely made and obliterated in the ancient land of Canaan while the natives survived and continued to live.” The various Canaanite groups “lived, fought, interacted and collaborated, but no group was obliterated in history,” writes Qumsiyeh.

Established by the Jebusites (not by King David) in 3000 BC, Jerusalem has always been an international city with a multi-ethnic and multi-religious community. After King Solomon’s death, the majority of the Israelites no longer considered Jerusalem their capital. Yet, the textbook refers only to Jerusalem as the Jewish capital of Israel.

The textbook’s discussion of the Temple of Solomon and its importance to Jews is also completely inadequate because again, it relies exclusively on Biblical mythology and omits extremely important facts about the Arab history of the region.

After the Romans expelled the Jews in the 1st century CE, they also destroyed the Temple of Solomon. All that was left was a small remnant of a wall. It could barely be seen as the area was used as a garbage dump.

The first goal of the first Muslim generation after the death of the Prophet Mohammed in the 7th century CE was to liberate Jerusalem and rebuild the Temple. Islamic Caliph Umar lifted the ban on Jews living in Jerusalem for the first time since 70 CE. The new Muslim government and the Jewish community worked together to clean up the garbage and build a new house of worship on the Temple Mount, incorporating the Wailing Wall, which Jews hold sacred. Karen Armstrong writes:

"As soon as the platform had been cleared, Umar summoned Ka'b ibn Ahbar, a Jewish convert to Islam and an expert on the isra'iliyat or as we would say, "Jewish studies." It came naturally to the Muslims to consult the Jews about the disposition of the site that had been sacred to their ancestors. Both the Jewish and Muslim sources make it clear that Jews took part in the reclamation of the Mount."

When European Crusaders took over Jerusalem, both Muslims and Jews were persecuted and banished from the city. When Saladin reconquered the city in the late 12th century, Jews and Muslims were invited back into the holy city. Jerusalem became known as the “City of Peace” where Muslims, Christians and Jews could worship freely.

These are important details to omit. Instead of facts, the textbook dishonestly presents the history of modern-day Israel as the “return” of exiled Jews to their “homeland.” It is simply wrong to teach two chapters on Judaism, one chapter on every other religion, but not one sentence mentioning the Abrahamic origins of Islam. When I complained, I was told that this is because Islam is not an ancient religion.

However, all of the other chapters attempt to create a picture of the modern day that relates to the past. Even the chapter on Mesopotamia includes a photo of modern day Iraq. The textbook includes photos of a synagogue in Czechoslovakia, and many other scenes of European Jewish life which, while interesting, have no historical connection to ancient Canaan whatsoever. Since this Ancient World textbook devotes an entire chapter to Jews in modern times, it makes no sense not to mention once that in modern day Mesopotamia, Syria, Canaan, and Egypt, most people are Muslim or Christian and they speak Arabic.

Our exposure to information at a young age sets the tone for all future understanding. This textbook reflects an outdated, Bible mythology-based world view that is racist, historically inaccurate and absolutely inappropriate for use in a public school.

Burma Adopts “Tea Party” Tactics

In November, 2012, President Obama became the first US president to visit Burma since 1955. Human Rights activists felt this goodwill gesture was premature, given the very recent government abuses concerning the Muslim minority in addition to other things, but Obama is anxious to make an Asian friend who might create a counter-balance against China’s influence in the region. Burma has very recently dissolved military rule of the country and is transitioning over to “democracy.” Unfortunately, Burma has embraced some of the uglier aspects of majority rule, namely the genocide of the minority Muslims. 

The campaign against Myanmar Muslims by the Buddhists is very different than the Israeli campaign against the Palestinians. It is much more personal and gory, involving rape and mutilation of corpses, even hanging of children in their own homes. The Israelis prefer to just bulldoze a family under the rubble or fry them from the sky rather than cut off their sexual parts. The Buddhists of Burma have taken the word “monster” to an entirely new level. Nevertheless, it comes as no big surprise that the Israelis have been providing weapons to Burma to help ethnically cleanse the Muslim population from the region.

The politics have taken on the familiar tone of the Tea Party rhetoric against Mexican immigrants to the US. Burma’s Muslims, who have been there for generations and centuries, all of a sudden are being accused of being illegal immigrants from Bangladesh. The Buddhist government and mainstream majority want the Muslims to be killed or expelled from the country. However, Bangladesh is only willing to take on a limited number of refugees.

Muslims whose homes have been destroyed have been rounded up into concentration camps, with very little aid. They cannot leave the camps to buy groceries because Buddhist monks have declared a boycott against selling to Muslims. 

The BBC reports that Buddhist complaints against Muslims have been primarily focused on concerns about population growth and not any kind of group level of criminality. Like the Christian Orthodox in Serbia complained about the Bosnians, the Buddhists feel “threatened” by the feeling that they are surrounded by increasing numbers of Muslims, who lead different lifestyles than themselves.

In truth, there is not that much difference between a Buddhist and a Muslim. They both wake up pre-dawn to perform prayer and prostrations; the only difference is that Buddhists pray towards a statue while Muslims pray to a direction determined by a GPS. Both cultures value compassion, chastity, self-denial and generosity.

As has been the case with India, it is reasonable to assume that Zionist propagandists are working hand in hand with the genocidalists to create a media war against the Muslims to facilitate their demonization, marginalization, murder and expulsion from the region.

The communal rioting has been invigorated by the internet distribution of photos of corpses, with both enraged Buddhists and Muslims claiming the dead as their own. However, there really are not two sides to the “story.” Muslims are being forced from their homes by the hundreds of thousands and Burma’s government is participating.

It is more than possible that Obama’s interest in Burma friendliness has to do with replacing the world heroin supply in the event of a Taliban victory in Afghanistan.

“Indeed the pending departure of the US from Afghanistan and the return of the Indigenous Taliban to power will mean a repeat of the Taliban destruction of the Afghan opium industry in 2000-2001 and the consequent need for Neocon America to boost opium production in SE Asia for profit and continued, evil, opiate-based destabilization of Iran, Russia, Central Asia, African America, Latin America and China,” writes Gideon Polya.

Myanmar Muslims have been targeted for ethnic cleansing based on the assumption that the Muslims might join with a global political Islamist movement and seek foreign aid in order to get their issues addressed. Until this point, the Myanmar Muslims have not engaged themselves in political alliances or violence. However, the attacks on their population have created an unavoidable need for foreign aid and interference. 

American Muslims are in a primary position to lend a voice to this awful situation. Obama has stated that he wants Burma to be a friend of the US, and that he is trusting Burma to go forward with reforms on human rights issues. Unfortunately, the US is taking the usual “blame both sides” approach to genocide, thereby taking zero responsibility for the outcome. Nevertheless, US Muslims are now in a position to act as American ambassadors to promote a win-win solution in the region, if they choose to do so.

Since nobody actually has a plan, whoever comes up with one and seeks to implement it will be at an advantage. Basically, Muslims in Burma are asking to be treated as human equals and to be granted citizenship in Burma, a right they had previously enjoyed. The situation is similar in Greater Israel, where many Palestinians live without any citizenship. 

Americans are in a unique and wonderful position at this time in history, to apply the lessons learned from our civil rights movement in order to solve political problems in the world. The basic solution for most communal violence situations remains that the oppressed group should be given equal rights and citizenship, the right to vote, and they should be integrated in society. 

There really is no other way. Breaking up the world into smaller and smaller pieces of land where the people there agree with each other or share DNA just is not reasonable nowadays.

Massachusetts Candidates Differ Only Slightly on MidEast

While President Barack Obama and former Governor Mitt Romney have dominated presidential election coverage, the Massachusetts Senate race may be the second-most important race in the country. The Senate elections are crucial for President Obama. A return of a Democratic majority may unite the divided government he has had to work with the past two years.

Harvard Law School professor and consumer advocate Elizabeth Warren has prided herself on going after Wall Street banks and being “for the people.” The Democratic candidate, who enjoys a slight lead over Republican Scott Brown, made a splash in the most recent televised debate when she said, “I want to be blunt; we should not be fighting about equal pay for equal work and access to birth control in 2012.” 

When it comes to Israel, one could hope that Brown’s Republican values of lower taxation and less government spending – or Warren’s 99% values – would end our forced taxation by Israel. Sadly, not only do both candidates support Israel unconditionally, but they maintain a racist position encouraging and sponsoring the violent policing of non-Jews in the region.

Brown brags that he supported the Senate’s resolution which “reiterated Israel’s right to defend itself during Operation Cast Lead.” He writes, “I also firmly support the security barrier erected by Israel.” Brown states: 

“I unequivocally support the recently executed ten-year memorandum of understanding between the US and Israel which will provide $30 billion in military aid to Israel until 2017. Since the vast majority of that aid is spent on American products, it is good for both American employment and the American economy.”

Aren’t Republicans supposed to support free enterprise? Using taxpayer money to support specific businesses, most likely Jewish or Zionist-owned corporations like Starbucks and Home Depot to supply Israeli settlements and cities would certainly not help the average American small business owner. 

Warren is less clear on exactly how much of American taxpayers’ money she is willing to fork over to Israel but makes it clear that she will be spending US money to protect apartheid in the Holy Land: “To me, it is a moral imperative to support and defend Israel, and I am committed to ensuring its long-term security by maintaining its qualitative military edge. Israel must be able to defend itself from the serious threats it faces from terrorist organizations to hostile states, including Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah, and others…” 

Warren claims that Massachusetts benefits from high tech businesses owned by dual citizen Israelis. “There are approximately 100 companies in Massachusetts with Israeli founders or based on Israeli technologies – creating $2.4 billion in value and thousands of jobs for our economy.” However, Israeli companies, indirectly subsidized by US taxpayers, suck money away from the very working class citizen base that Warren appeals to. American high tech companies, which are not Jewish-owned, have a harder time competing for contracts when the US government practices such favoritism. 

Scott Brown’s foreign policy statement relies heavily on racist soundbites obviously borrowed from some unnamed “Talking Points Memo,” even maligning the Goldstone Report on Israeli war crimes. Elizabeth Warren phrases her own foreign policy statement in a more pleasantly ambiguous way but clearly accepts behavior that is violently racist in favor of Jews against Arabs and Muslims, and appears to draw from the same “Talking Points Memo.” 

For example, regarding Palestine, Brown emphasizes that his support for a two-state solution for peace is “premised on security for Israel and is not imposed by outside parties,” while Warren clarifies, “I do not believe that a lasting peace can be imposed from the outside.” What does this mean, other than that Israel’s decision to stop committing genocide against Palestinians must be purely voluntary? That the US has an obligation to arm Israel but no other country or group may arm Palestine? Both candidates clearly view Israel’s security as more important than the security of the United States by keeping us involved in this conflict.

Warren openly opposes the Palestinians’ application for UN membership. She claims to believe in a two-state solution but opposes the recognition of Palestine as a country. How can two countries negotiate when only one country is recognized as a country? This is one of many bizarre mental cliff leaps Warren’s political position takes. Brown’s logic also ventures into bizarro-land as he sloppily copies “Israel’s unconditional right to live in peace is equal to that of all other nations of the world” from the same “Talking Points Memo” – as if any other nation on earth enjoyed any “unconditional right to live in peace!” The racist tyrade continues as Brown reiterates the age old anti-Palestinian canard that there are no leaders to negotiate peace with: 

“I stand with Israel and the majority of leaders in support of a two-sate solution… However, with the Palestinian leadership now divided by a terrorist entity (Hamas) and the Palestinian authority, we do not yet have the fundamental requirements in place to begin negotiations… Until there is a non-terrorist entity on the other side of the table, negotiations cannot start.” 

Both Brown and Warren also oppose the non-existent Iranian nuclear bomb threat. Warren supports economic sanctions against Iran: “Like the President, I believe that the careless talk of rushing to war is unhelpful, and, like the President, I believe the United States must take the necessary steps to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.” When a blogger recently mentioned to her that Iran is not even working on a nuclear weapon according to US official sources, Warren answered that she would have to “look into it.” Warren’s ignorance and arrogance against Iran seems almost palatable compared to the nearly psychotic ranting on Brown’s website: 

“Iran, the brutal theocracy run by a cabal of mullahs and President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, represents an existential threat to Israel and a menace to United States interests. With visions of regional domination and international troublemaking, Ahmedinejad has stated with great clarity that the Holocaust did not occur and that Israel should be ‘wiped off the map.’”

Not only does Scott support divestment from Iran but he would make it illegal to do business with any country that does business with Iran. He continues: “I also would work to restore funding for the Iran Human Rights Documentation Center (IHRDC ) which was recently cut by the Obama administration and support continued intelligence sharing by the Mossad and the CIA.”

Regarding both Massachusetts Senatorial candidates, it would seem that they are largely struggling over who can agree with the same positions more forcefully, except that Warren prefers to starve Iranians rather than kill them with bombs, and that Scott seems to enjoy personal ties with the Mossad.

Congress Hears Testimony on Islamism

On June 16, the US House of Representatives held another panel on Radicalism in the Muslim-American community, sparking outrage that the probe is a witch hunt akin to the 1950s anti-Communist campaign. It is unfortunate that any Muslims at all participated in such a demeaning event. No Muslim representative should or could ever explain to some authority what Islam means to me, or to anyone else. Especially when the judges in this particular tribunal are guilty of mass murdering Muslims in various countries via unprovoked war and war funding.

The Congressional discussions were premised on the obnoxious assumption that al Qaeda committed 9/11, and that al Qaeda is stepping up its efforts to recruit Americans for jihad using prison chaplains and the internet. My guess is that the 5% of Muslims said to hold positive views of al Qaeda are referring to their role in helping the US defeat the USSR, and do not believe that al Qaeda had anything to do with 9/11, like many Americans. During the Reagan era, the Afghans were referred to–by non-Muslims–as “freedom fighters,” not “terrorists.”

What American officials don’t understand, is that when Muslim-Americans talk about extremists in our mosques, we are talking about people who have narrow-minded viewpoints on things. For example, when I tried to publish an article questioning the farming background of Islamically slaughtered livestock in my local mosque’s newsletter, several local business owners intervened to prevent the publication of my article. So yes, every community organization has people who behave in a controlling way. They don’t like people who criticize or disagree with them. They don’t even like people who agree with them too loudly.

This is not the same thing as being guilty of terrorism.

“The greatest threat (to America) … is actually a theopolitical ideology that is hijacking my faith: … Islamism,” Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, president of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy told the House Homeland Security Committee hearing chaired by Rep. Peter T. King, New York Republican. Mainstream American Muslim groups are “in denial” about extremism, “claiming victimization,” Jasser said.

I am in total agreement that Islamism is the worship of Islam, while true Islam is the worship of God. What Muslim-Americans don’t seem to understand, though, is that when the US Congress asks you whether or not you are an “extremist,” they mean: Do you accept Israel as a Jewish State?

Zuhdi Jasser, who served as the primary expert witness for this panel, and has connections with famous Islamophobes such as Robert Spencer, has made a career of trying to force pro-Israel and pro-war viewpoints on the Muslim-American public. According to Wikipedia, “Jasser is an outspoken supporter of Israel, and believes that Muslim organizations and leaders need to be held to a litmus test to see whether they recognize Israel as a state, specifically condemn groups such as Hamas and al Qaeda, and governments such as the Saudi and Syrian dictatorships. ‘If they don’t … then you have to wonder where their allegiances are,’ said Jasser.”

Jasser is a Syrian-American. So basically, it sounds like he is saying, if you are from an Arab country, and you are not working with the US to overthrow your former government, then you don’t belong here. Given the intimidation of Muslim intellectuals regarding the pro-Israel litmus test, a Muslim-American activist or politician can’t be considered “moderate” unless they accept Israel as a Jewish State.

Jasser and the US government are actually creating a boundary between Muslim-Americans and their fellow Americans, preventing meaningful political interaction. They talk about “democracy,” but what they really fear is that Muslim-Americans will join their neighbors in political activism. Because no American wants to pay taxes to Israel.

It doesn’t matter if they are left wing or right wing. We all have bills to pay, we hate to see dead children, and giving money to Israel simply makes no sense.

As usual, the Muslims avoided the elephant in the room and debated between accusations of militancy and pleading innocence. Not a single person raised the issue of why Jewish-Americans are regularly sent to Israeli Army summer camp to help enforce a murderous racial apartheid no American would tolerate at home.

Opposing Israel makes perfect sense, if you’re an American. It has nothing to do with being Muslim. A future two-state solution is unlikely to happen, and even if so, it would involve the ethnic cleansing of the entire region and would probably be worse than anything we have ever seen before in Palestine. Remember, when India and Pakistan separated on religious grounds at the same time when Israel was created, 6 million people died as they were forced out of their homes to relocate in the religiously appropriate location.

Still, India has almost the largest Muslim population in the world, so the ethnic cleansing was entirely useless. It really makes no financial or moral sense to separate Jews and Muslims into separate governments.

The most American option, which would probably go over well with the majority of Americans, is an equal rights solution like eventually happened in the US and South Africa. This argument is so persuasive that there is really no rational counter-argument. This is why pro-Israel lobbyists are working very hard to tell Muslim-Americans that they should join the pro-Israel camp against the American people, by giving them the false story that they need to accept Zionism in order to be a socially acceptable member of society. Yes, friends.

It’s all about Israel. We Americans already know you are innocent of 9/11.

Israel Releases Player, Protests Continue

Palestinian soccer player Mahmoud Al-Sarsak (L) is greeted upon his arrival in Gaza City July 10, 2012. Israel released the Gaza soccer player on Tuesday in a deal to end his intermittent four-month hunger strike after he spent three years behind bars without being put on trial, officials said.


“I thank God and all the athletes in the world,” Mahmoud Sarsak told a Ma’an reporter as he was transferred to Shifa hospital in Gaza City for medical attention after being released in a “rapturous welcome” to relatives who were gathered in great celebration at the Palestinian side of the Israeli Erez crossing in northern Gaza on Tuesday. ESPN reports that “Islamic militants” fired rifles in the air in a rousing homecoming for a beloved member of the Palestinian national soccer team who was released by Israel after being held for three years in prison without charge, trial, or contact with his family.

South African Archbishop Desmond Tutu, American author Alice Walker and others had chimed in to support his release. Sarsak, the jailed Gazan soccer star, freed on July 10, 2012 due to massive international attention, had been detained on his way to a national team match on the West Bank in 2009. While participating in a hunger strike by 2,000 Palestinian prisoners, Sarkar lost almost half of his body weight.

Shuaib Ahmed commented in the Morning Bark that “the world remains, as it always has been – hesitatingly observant.”

The Palestinian plight was brought to world attention by the campaign to free Sarsak. Palestinian National Team players are often blocked at checkpoints, jailed, or even killed. Sarkar’s arrest was part of a broader effort to degrade his “national team without a nation.”

British comedian Mark Steel joked in the UK’s Independent that the Palestinians “were employing that old terrorist tactic of becoming the national football team, then qualifying for the World Cup finals from where it’s a simple step to start an insurrection.”

Energetic protesters in the stands in Scotland added to the 8-0 humiliation of the Israeli national women’s team in a European championship match on June 17. The Israeli national anthem was also booed before kick-off. In Wales, Israel lost 5-0, and in France, protesters actually invaded the pitch to pressure Israel regarding Sarkar’s life.

An Israeli Embassy functionary responded that Sarsak was a terrorist and that calling him a “young Palestinian footballer” was “insulting to footballers.”

FIFPro, the international federation of professional footballers, stated that no other Palestinian footballers should have to go through what Sarsak has experienced. Yet there are two other Palestinian football stars held in indefinite detention, prevented from playing for Palestine.

President of the Palestinian Football Association, Jabril Rajoub, asked UEFA president Michel Platini to remember Olympic squad goalkeeper Omar Abu Rois and Ramallah player Mohammed Nimr, detained without charge by Israel.

“For athletes in Palestine, there is no real freedom of movement and the risks of being detained or even killed are always looming before their eyes.” Since Israel is in “direct violation of FIFA regulations and the International Olympic Charter,” Rajoub implored, “we ask Your Excellency to not give Israel the honour to host the next UEFA Under-21 Championship 2013.”

A similar plea was sent by 42 Palestinian football clubs based in Gaza, home to many of the world’s best football players.
Platini continues to ignore requests from concerned citizens, stating, “We cannot hold the Israeli Football Association responsible for the political situation in the region or for legal procedures in place in its country.”

What I want to understand is, if you knew that your country imprisoned a fellow athlete, how could you play for your country? I mean, given the obviousness of the treachery your playing would imply. How could any Israeli footballer, in good conscience, agree to play under these circumstances? And if you were an Israeli that chose to play, how should we look at you? Should we applaud your gains and cry for your losses, knowing that you didn’t care about simple obvious human rights issues regarding fellow players living close to you? Why are the Israeli teams not refusing to play another game? I would, if I were them.

For an explanation, let us look at the recent past.

In June, 2012, 12 year old Gazan Mamoun Hassouna was killed while playing football.

In 2011 Palestinian players flying in from a game in Thailand were prevented entry into the West Bank. Mohammed Samara and right back Majed Abusidu therefore missed the return game at home five days later.

In 2010, Gaza and West Bank winners had to postpone their cup final because the Gazan team was refused permission to travel. Also that year, Israel refused to allow six members of the Palestinian national team to travel from Gaza to Jordan for a match against Mauritania.

Ahmed Keshkesh was prevented from returning home for months.

During Operation Cast Lead in winter 2008-9, Israel was responsible for leveling much of Gaza including the Rafah National Stadium, and killing football players Ayman Alkurd, Shadi Sbakhe and Wajeh Moshate, as well as over 1400 other citizens.

In May 2008, the national team was not able to attend the AFC Challenge Cup, denying them qualification for the 2011 Asia Cup.

In 2006, Israeli missiles destroyed Gaza’s only football stadium.

Palestine had reached the top of their group in the qualifying rounds for the 2006 World Cup. They failed to qualify after the Israeli authorities refused permission for five key players to travel to a match against Uzbekistan in Qatar on September 7, 2005.

In 2005, while playing football, Ashraf Samir Ahmad Mussa and Khaled Fuad Sahker Ghanam, and Hassan Ahmad Khalil Abu Zeid, were shot dead by Israeli soldiers.

There are countless other such incidents. None of that is really news, just banality of evil. What is news is that international pressure freed one Palestinian prisoner. Dave Zirin reports in the Nation: “Not only does Sarsak live but the movement lives as well. It’s been strengthened by Sarsak’s survival and the revelation for many that the thankless, frustrating and often devastating work of international solidarity with political prisoners can actually work.”

Was Israel Premeditated?

“You get punished for Holocaust denial, even if you are just revising; yet if you are a Nakba denier, your Israeli organization gets rewarded with German and American tax money. In fact, the Nakba was far more of a deliberate genocide than the Holocaust, in how carefully and openly it was premeditated.”

I posted this on Facebook the other day and as expected, I was rewarded with heaps of abuse from the under-informed. Note that I neither denied the Holocaust nor tried to quantify who has suffered more.

My post was related to a recent article in Haaretz on the proposed ‘Nakba Bill,’ which aims to withhold state funding from academic institutions that commemorate the Palestinian Nakba. Commemorating the Palestinian Catastrophe or celebrating the Israeli Independence Day as a Day of Mourning is viewed as an activity that “opposes the existence of Israel as Jewish-democratic state.” This is interesting, since in the US, Thanksgiving has been commemorated as a Day of Mourning for decades by many Native Americans and others, but nobody even blinks.

The point I was making however is that it is curious how competing historical narratives are legislated. “The victor writes the history.”

If a competing historian happens to be German or Austrian, they can expect to die in prison simply for writing a book.

From what I can gather from my now un-friends, it is taboo to compare or relate the Holocaust with any other human tragedy. Even many of those who claim sympathy for the Palestinians feel a need to reserve a special place for the Holocaust, despite the political use of the concept of “unique suffering” to give Jews special rights, including the right to commit genocide during our lifetime without comment. An Israeli Facebook friend and alleged peace activist posted:

“Palestinian people suffering does not amount to the whole sale industrial attempt to physically kill an entire people which was close to being totally successful in Europe.”

While nobody denies that millions of Jews perished in World War II, along with tens of millions of Christians and others, the number of 6 million has been reduced to 3 million in recent times by mainstream historians. Death inside German concentration camps was widespread, but in most cases, prisoners died of disease and malnutrition.

However, people tend to fixate on the belief that 6 million Jews were gassed to death in a systematic method by the German government with the same amount of passion that Christians hold for the Crucifixion.

In truth, there is no evidence that Hitler ever ordered all Jews to be killed. These beliefs are based on the Hollywood movie, the Holocaust.

The historical Hitler actually worked hand in hand with the Zionists, helping Jews emigrate to Palestine. There was even a Zionist (Jewish) faction of the Nazi party. Edwin Black’s book, The Transfer Agreement, the standard text on Nazi-Zionist collaboration, makes clear that the transfer of funds from Nazi Germany under this agreement made the Jewish State possible.

As WWII progressed, the German government had to deal with the problem of Jewish sympathy for the USSR, and with traitors giving away government secrets to Stalin with the same shamelessness with which US government secrets are leaked to Israel today, and Jewish organizations rallying to the cause of the traitor. Most people agree that this problematic situation in Germany was handled poorly.

What is almost never discussed is the context. The USSR, whose party leaders were largely Jewish or else influenced by secular Jewish philosophers such as Karl Marx, was an imperialist government that started annexing land in the 1920s, mass murdering tens of millions of Christians and burning churches. Millions of people were brutally tortured and died in Soviet prisons. It is safe to say that during the 20th century, Russia killed more people than Germany did. The US was also guilty of incinerating entire German cities as well as torturing prisoners. All in all, war is an ugly and cruel enterprise. World War II reduced the European population by 25 to 30%.

The idea that Nazi Germany is uniquely evil and that Jews in particular have suffered uniquely is a cornerstone of the creation of the State of Israel. For this reason, the State of Israel and several other countries actually mandate by law that no one can ever question the Holocaust, even if just to reduce the number to 5 million. If popularly accepted Jewish history were to be revised in the way that all other people’s histories have been revised in the light of researched evidence, the entire basis of Israel’s existence would come into question.

Yet even if we were to accept that 6 million Jews were gassed to death by Germany, it still doesn’t make any sense why Palestine should be wiped out order to create Israel. In 1934 Arab leaders offered asylum to European Jews fleeing the Nazis and presented a plan for legal Jewish immigration to Arab countries. Israeli Founding Father David Ben-Gurion refused the offer. “One cow in Palestine is worth more than all the Jews in Poland,” stated Zionist leader Izaak Greenbaum.

While the imprisonment of Jews and political dissidents in Germany can be attributed to wartime hysteria, Hitler did not run his election on an anti-Jew platform (unlike today’s politicians running on anti-Muslim platforms). By contrast, Zionist genocidal goals were openly discussed as early as 1897, at the first Zionist Congress in Basel, Switzerland, where they discussed how to physically remove Palestinians from Palestine in order to create a Jewish State. Today in 2012, we are still experiencing debates on whether the existence of Palestinians can even be mentioned in public.

Palestinian Soccer Player Nears Death

While President Obama awarded Israeli president Shimon Perez with a medal last week, world outrage about Israel’s treatment of Palestinians has escalated exponentially as professional footballer Mahmoud al Sarsak nears death from his hunger strike of over 90 days in protest of his illegal incarceration. Thousands of other Palestinian prisoners, including 20 children, have joined his hunger strike. Despite a media blackout, the word has been spreading globally through Facebook and Twitter.

With Sarsak, Akram Al-Rikhawi, a prisoner for 8 years on his 57th day of hunger strike, wrote in a letter to the world: “This is an urgent and final distress call from captivity, slow and programmed death inside the cells of so-called Ramle Prison hospital, that you know that your sons and brothers are still struggling against death and you pay no attention to them and do not remember their cause…You are the ones able to support us for victory in our battle.”

Sarsak, a 25 year old from Rafah, in Gaza, was arrested at a checkpoint while on his way to the West Bank to play with the Palestinian national team in 2009. Since then, he has been detained without charge or trial, and has not been allowed to see his family.

He is being held under the Unlawful Combatant Law, which allows Israel to detain Palestinians from Gaza indefinitely without charge or criminal proceedings being brought to court. As with every other Palestinian prisoner held by Israel, Mahmoud was transferred to a prison outside of the Occupied Territories. This is illegal under Articles 49 and 76 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which prohibits the transfer of prisoners from an occupied territory to that of the occupying state. 2,000 prisoners, according to Palestinian prisoners’ rights group Addameer, are held as administrative detainees without a chance of trial.

UN Special Envoy to the Occupied Territories, Richard Falk, has called for the 25 year old’s release, saying that ‘he has suffered immensely.’ Sarkar has lost 33 percent of his body weight. After three months without food, Physicians for Human Rights-Israel issued a warning that he could die at any moment.

There are huge demonstrations expected in Scotland on Saturday, where Israel’s women’s soccer team is to play against Scotland. Mick Napier, chairman of the Scottish Palestine Solidarity Campaign (SPSC), explains: “There should be no business as usual for Israel’s national teams while Israel denies Palestinians the same privileges.”

Meanwhile, dozens of professional athletes have been rallying to Sarsak’s cause, sending out twitters to fans. “In the name of sporting solidarity, justice and human rights, we declare our support for Palestinian footballer Mahmoud Sarsak. As European sportsmen, we believe that every person has the right to a fair and independent trial,” wrote Marcelo del Pozo, an Argentinian player for Spain.

Seville striker Frédéric Kanouté posted on his website: “In the name of civil liberties, justice, and basic human rights, we call for the release of Mahmoud Sarsak.” Kanouté gained international fame when he lifted his team jersey to reveal a shirt with the word “Palestine”after scoring a goal during a league match at the height of Israel’s January 2009 attack on Gaza, an action for which he was fined $4,000.

Other supporters include Nicolas Anelka, former player for Arsenal, Paris Saint-Germain, Chelsea and Real Madrid, and French sailor Jo Le Guen. Prominent figures such as former France and Manchester United midfielder Eric Cantona, film director Ken Loach and American philosopher and activist Noam Chomsky have urged Israeli authorities to release Sarsak. Protests under the banner “Let Sarsak Live” took place in London’s Trafalgar Square last week to raise awareness of his ordeal. In a letter to The Guardian, former UK Member of Parliament John Austin called on the Union of European Football Associations (UEFA) to “reconsider its decision to hold its under-21 championship in Israel in 2013.”

Amnesty International also proclaimed that Sarsak, “who is at risk of death after more than 90 days on hunger strike in protest against his detention by Israel should immediately be admitted to a civilian hospital or released so that he can receive life-saving medical care.”

Philippe Piat, vice-president of FIFPro, the global organization which represents professional footballers said, “freedom of movement is a fundamental right of every citizen. It is also written down in the FIFA Regulations that players must be allowed to play for the national team of their country. But actually for some footballers it is impossible to defend the colors of their country. They cannot cross the border. They cannot visit their family. They are locked up. This is an injustice.’

As the Israeli Asaf Harofe Hospital announced that Sarkar’s death could come within hours, the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) became heavily involved in pressing the Israelis for Sarsak’s release. On June 20, Mahmoud Sarsak rejected an offer from negotiators and lawyers to be released to Norway or Sweden.

Mahmoud wants to be free to go to his home in the Gaza Strip only.

Gaza TV News reported on June 21: “After 91 days on Hunger Strike, Mahmoud Sarsak is to be released on July 17th. We will post further news as it reaches us.” This report has not yet been confirmed, so it is vital that the public continue writing letters and making phone calls of support.

Should We Boycott Israeli Art?

Sarah Gillespie started an interesting debate on deliberation.info with her article, “The BDS Cultural Boycott and Integrity.” BDS stands for Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions against Israel. She opposes the call by the BDS to sabotage or ban any mode of expression delivered by state-enforced Israeli artists, musicians and thinkers because “art has the capacity to transcend the binary world of ‘placard politics’ (‘for’ this or ‘against’ that) and deliver the transforming might of pathos, spirit, sadness and beauty… We should boycott Israeli products, not art, spirit and ideas.”

While I share her reservations about why only Israeli-born Zionists are being boycotted, the inevitable ethical inconsistencies that arise in trying to avoid supporting any type of organized violence, especially when that would include boycotting one’s own country, and the funding by George Soros of the BDS movement, I disagree with her that “Art” is something that should never be boycotted.

Art is a luxury product. Jewish gift stores give a lot of legitimacy to Israel’s folk narrative by selling Israeli made handicrafts and clothes. People who shop there are usually buying those products in order to help support the financial existence of illegal settlers in Occupied Palestine.

Likewise, the Israeli government purposely promotes Israeli artists and musicians, considering them ambassadors for the legitimization of the Zionist State of Israel. The Shakespeare play shown in London, which Gillespie opposed boycotting, was not only funded by the State of Israel but was rewritten in order to generate more sympathy for the Jewish character, transforming it into a standard work of propaganda.

Boycotters make exceptions for those Jewish Israelis who are openly opposing Zionism, yet it would be ridiculous not to assume that all Israelis who are selling us products whether art or plastic storage boxes are participating in Zionism. In any case, they are paying taxes to the Israeli government and are at the very least in that way participating in genocide.

If we apply the same morals to Jews as we do to others, all Jews as a group, if they do not consciously defect from the Zionist racist movement, are guilty of participating in Zionist aggression, preventing public comment, or letting racist violence happen without comment.

It is quite standard to revile an artist or academic if he has ever been a member of any other racist organization.

For example, mainstream media consistently refers to former Congressman David Duke without his Doctor title as a way of belittling him, even though he has claimed that the KKK in his town was nothing more than a neighborhood organization. Nobody starts jumping up and down fuming at the mouth when someone condemns or boycotts a former member of the KKK, insisting, “But not all KKK members are violent!” Most people simply accept that the KKK is a purveyor of racist violence and try to avoid supporting it, even indirectly.

Yet we are asked to distinguish carefully between a non-violent Zionist and Zionism as a movement, even though all Israelis are required to serve in the Israeli military and are thus guilty of participating in organized crime.

The question of whether or not boycotting a theater production would ever end the Israeli state needs to be looked at in context of the American Jewish lobby. Any Palestinian poet who tried to book a show in New Jersey would automatically find himself canceled and playing outside the cafe in the street due to a deluge of angry phone calls from Zionist Jews, even if his poster had a picture of a dove on it.

It would probably be wise for more Americans to become similarly aggressive about getting Zionist performances cancelled. That way, the theater will learn to either avoid all controversial performances OR they will be forced to adopt a more balanced approach (for example showing both Palestinian and Israeli art productions). What happens when only Jews protest, the Jews get what they want while others just stew.

It is impossible to boycott entirely a country in which you live, but you can still make wisest choices about how to spend your money. I would only encourage a foreigner to spend money on American artists if I knew for sure that this artist’s world view supported something that person could morally accept. Paintings are a dime a dozen. If all you want is a pretty picture, frame a calendar photo. You should buy a painting because you are supporting a revolutionary movement – you want to give money to a particular artist because you want them to continue in their struggle for truth and beauty.

There are Israeli musicians and writers I support because they are outspoken anti-Zionists. But if some random Israeli musician was playing at my children’s elementary school I would oppose it, because that would be giving a public message that Israelis are cute and cuddly, that we should bond with them emotionally and give them our tax dollars and feel sorry for them because they are such good musicians.

The main idea behind a boycott is to delegitimize the fake Zionist narrative. There were a couple kids in my elementary school whose parents forbade them to participate in Israeli folk dances and it made long lasting impressions on their fellow students. At first we did not understand why these students opposed Israel, but eventually we figured it out.

One can only imagine with trepidation a world where no one ever spoke truth in the face of power and privilege.

Methodists Vote on Israel-Palestine Question

On May 2, 2012, the United Methodist Church held their annual General Assembly in Tampa, Florida, where they voted on the issue of divestment from the State of Israel for its treatment of Palestinians by boycotting companies such as Caterpillar, Hewlett Packard, and Motorola, who profit from the Israeli Occupation. The New York Times reported that:

“After an afternoon of impassioned debate and several votes, the delegates overwhelmingly passed a more neutral resolution calling for ‘positive’ investment to encourage economic development ‘in Palestine.’

“However, the Methodists also passed a strongly worded resolution denouncing the Israeli occupation and the settlements, and calling for ‘all nations to prohibit the import of products made by companies in Israeli settlements on Palestinian land.’”

Susanne Hoder, a Methodist from Rhode Island and a spokeswoman for a group for divestment, the United Methodist Kairos Response said that even though at the General Assembly,  divestment was defeated by a 2-to-1 ratio in two separate votes, four geographic regions of the Methodist Church — Northern Illinois, California Pacific, New York and West Ohio — had already voted to pull out their own investments. “We expect that more United Methodist conferences will do this,” she said.

The Presbyterian Church USA will also hold a similar vote at their upcoming conference in June. In 2004, the Presbyterians voted for divestment but voted against it at their next general assembly two years later.

Many are disappointed and frustrated by such wishy-washy positions and watering down of perfectly reasonable, non-violent approaches to defeating injustice, resulting in statements of support without any meaningful action towards supporting justice.

Sadly and predictably, 2 out of 3 Methodists succumbed to the twisted logic of 1,200 rabbis accusing them of “singling out” Israel for criticism, warning that supporting divestment would “damage the relationship between Jews and Christians.” This overused lobbying tactic nearly always triggers instant shame and self-questioning in White Christians, for cultural reasons that have long passed their time of relevancy.

Anglican Archbishop Desmond Tutu, who was a leader of the anti-apartheid movement in South Africa responded strongly to the pro-Israel rabbis’ tainting of the divestment efforts in an article published in the Tampa Bay Times:

“While they are no doubt well-meaning, I believe that the rabbis and other opponents of divestment are sadly misguided. My voice will always be raised in support of Christian-Jewish ties and against the anti-Semitism that all sensible people fear and detest. But this cannot be an excuse for doing nothing and for standing aside as successive Israeli governments colonize the West Bank and advance racist laws.

“I recall well the words of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. in his Letter from a Birmingham Jail in which he confesses to his “Christian and Jewish brothers” that he has been “gravely disappointed with the white moderate … who is more devoted to ‘order’ than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: ‘I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action;’ who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom. …”

On a brighter note, the resolution that passed voiced support to “end all military aid to the region.”

Jewish Voices For Peace was unsurprisingly the most active group pushing for divestment, along with the interfaith group Fellowship of Reconciliation. While they failed to convince the Methodists that “divestment from the Israeli occupation is neither anti-Semitic nor anti-Jewish,” important lessons were learned by the outreach experience.

One thing that became clear to activists was that the targeted companies are fully aware and unrepentant of their role in aiding Israel’s crimes against the Palestinian people. Thus, they can move forward now with clear certainty that there is no point in further negotiating with these corporations.

JVP reported that the General Secretary of the General Board of Church and Society of the UMC, Jim Winkler, recently stated:

“As someone who has been involved in the discussions by UM agencies and ecumenical partners with Caterpillar for six years, I would like to share critical issues we have repeatedly raised with the company.

Regrettably, in all of these meetings, including one last week, Caterpillar has told us it has no intention to change any of its business practices relating to the occupied Palestinian territories.”

Another important development in the struggle for justice is that what was once considered “unthinkable” is now being spoken. Tutu writes:

“If we do not achieve two states in the near future, then the day will certainly arrive when Palestinians move away from seeking a separate state of their own and insist on the right to vote for the government that controls their lives, the Israeli government, in a single, democratic state.”

There are still those who would recoil from the idea of Palestinian and Israeli sharing a land in equality as “antisemitism,” but within the American political context this is a pretty uncomfortable position to maintain. For this reason, opponents of equality have worked hard to stifle debate by reframing the issues using emotional language and veiled threats.

White churches have a lot to lose by upsetting the status quo, while Black churches usually have more pressing local concerns. Church involvement in the divestment movement, even if totally supportive, would be more symbolic than effective for major change. However, it is vital to continue to bring the debate into the general American public in these and various other ways.