Showing posts with label occupied Palestine. Show all posts
Showing posts with label occupied Palestine. Show all posts

Tuesday, July 29, 2014

Open Letter to the Conscience of Humanity

by Roger Tucker Editor and Publisher, One Democratic State
 

It is only right and fitting that a proper response be made to the OpEd written by Moshe Feiglin, Deputy Speaker of the Knesset, and head of the Manhigut Yehudit ("Jewish Leadership") faction of Israel’s governing Likud party, entitled My Outline for a Solution in Gaza http://www.voltairenet.org/article184845.html and published in Arutz Sheva on July 15th, 2014.

1. An international commission should be established to bring Israel and its supporters to account for its ongoing genocide of the Palestinian people, dating back to the first terrorist attacks on Palestinian and British targets in Palestine by the Irgun and other Jewish terrorist organizations starting in 1937. This near century long crime can properly be termed a holocaust, as its ruthlessness, intensity, longevity and destruction of lives and property is on a par with, or exceeds, the crimes of those prosecuted by the Nuremberg and Tokyo war crimes trials.

2. The first task of this commission would be to identify the most culpable of the Zionist criminals still living, not to exceed one thousand people. Millions are guilty but bringing those most responsible for the suffering of the Palestinians, the Lebanese, the Iraqis, the Libyans, the Iranians, the Egyptians, the Syrians et al and the many millions of other direct and indirect victims of the Zionist project, would best serve the cause of justice.

3. Those people so identified should be drawn from the various sectors of society that have been primarily responsible for the heinous war crimes and crimes against humanity committed over these years, regardless of their countries of residence, particularly among the politicians, the military, the media, the financiers, the public intellectuals, academics, the religious leaders and the leaders of Zionist organizations. Those found guilty would be sentenced to a minimum of life in solitary confinement without parole.

4. In addition to those specifically indicted, all of those people who have actively provided material, organizational or public support for this genocide should be rounded up and interned in camps designated for this purpose. Given the very large numbers of such people, the so-called FEMA camps in the United States would be suitable for this purpose. An alternative site could be constructed in the Siberian Oblast set aside by the Soviet Union for the Jewish people. An appeals process would be instituted to ensure that only the clearly culpable would remain in these camps. Those adjudged guilty would be consigned to hard labor and re-education designed to eventually make them suitable for re-entry into human society, if that is at all possible.

5. Given the impotence of the United Nations, due to the veto power and influence of those countries that have historically aided and abetted the aforesaid crimes, such a commission could not be instituted through its auspices. The UN must first either be reformed to make it a truly representational international body, or it must be replaced by a new organization that represents the highest norms and values of humanity, rather than merely an instrument of control by the victors of the last world war. The International Criminal Court would be the ideal venue, if the jurisdictional problems (the US and Israel are not signatories) and the political will can be mustered.

6. The greatest obstacle to the realization of such a process is the current tribal Jewish hegemony over the Western democracies and their allies in the Arab world. But there is nothing absolute about this power. Many Jews, not to mention others, are beginning to understand the fate that will inevitably befall them if they don't join the struggle against Zionism and its lackeys. The historical pattern is perfectly clear.

6. Finally, it goes without saying that Palestine would be returned to its rightful owners.

Roger Tucker
-------

Note: please make sure to also check the interview I did with Roger in 2008

Wednesday, July 31, 2013

Debunking the nonsense about the upcoming "final" negotiations between the Israelis and their Palestinian puppets

According to the BBC:
"Israeli and Palestinian negotiators will aim to reach a "final status" agreement over the next nine months to end their long conflict, the US secretary of state has said. John Kerry said another meeting between the two sides would be held in either Israel or the Palestinian territories in the next two weeks. This, he said, would begin the process of formal negotiations.  Mr Kerry said "all issues" would be on the table for discussion.  "They are on the table with one simple goal: a view to ending the conflict, ending the claims."
Over the past 20 years we heard the same grand declarations over and over and over again.  Remember the Madrid Conference (1991)? The Oslo Accords (1993)? The Camp David Summit (2000)?  The Taba Summit (2001)? The Road Map For Peace (2002)? The Arab Peace Initiative (2002-2007)?  They *all* failed, none of them yielded any tangible result.  So why would anybody put any hope at all in the latest "final" talks?!  What, if anything, has changed recently?

Actually, something did change: the Palestinian leadership in essence committed a "strategic suicide" when it decided to side with the USA and Israel and against Syria, Iran and Hezbollah.  This betrayal of those who for years supported the Palestinian struggle at great cost for themselves will go down in history as an act of truly unparalleled infamy.  It was also just about the dumbest thing the Palestinians could have done.  Sure, siding with Saddam Hussein in 1991 was dumb enough, but to side with the US, Israel and the Gulf Fat Cats who have been financing the war against Syria will also go down in history as an act of truly unparalleled stupidity.

Abba Eban supposedly once said "the Palestinians never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity".   He might have been understating the problem.  It appears to me that the Palestinians never miss an opportunity to make the wrong choice and side with the wrong party.  As a result, all the current Palestinian organizations, with the notable exception of the Islamic Jihad Movement in Palestine (IJMP), have now become puppets in the hands of the Zionists.  This is why the US is now feeling that the time has come to try to obtain some kind of "final agreement": the Palestinians have *already* comprehensively surrendered to the Zionists.

So what could happen at these negotiations?

Well, let's first look at what will not happen.  What will not happen is the creation of two states separated by the 1967 borders.  The main reason why this will not happen is not even that the Israelis have exactly *zero* incentive to make any concessions, the main reason why this will not happen is simply because it is impossible.  Physically impossible.  Impossible because the West Bank is not full of Israeli enclaves which have permeated it like metastasized cancer invades an organ.  No country can be made of many small parts separated by highways, concertina wires, many small walls and one big Wall.  At this point in time, the various chunks of territory which would be left to the Palestinians would not even be worthy of being called Bantustans.  You think I am exaggerating?  Check out this map and see for yourself:
 
But it's not just the Zionists metastasizes which make a Palestinian state impossible.  Even if the Jews withdrew from the West Bank (which they won't), they would give it exactly the same degree of "independence" as what they gave to Gaza: zero.  Didn't do them much good in Gaza,  but they would also attempt to "remote control" the West Bank from outside.

Furthermore, in order to reach a settlement, the two parties would have to engage in lengthy negotiations on each of the crucial points.  However, it is no great secret that you do never want to negotiate from a position of weakness.  And yet, once these negotiations will begin, the Palestinians will be negotiating not from a position of weakness, but from a position of irrelevance.  Yes, that's right.  The Palestinians have made themselves irrelevant.  Think for yourself: what kind of arguments could the Palestinians bring to the table?  What promise?  What concession?  What implied threat?  That's right: nothing.

At this point in time both Fatah and Hamas are de-facto controlled financially by the Gulf States and politically by the USA.  Worse, Abbas - who is supposed to represent the Palestinian people - has *zero* legitimacy (his mandate has long expired).  Egypt, which had the potential of being a crucial ally for the Palestinians is busy sliding into a civil war in which both sides are skillfully manipulated by the same Gulf States and the USA.  Kind Abdullah II of Jordan is a total US lackey and nobody in the wider Arab or Muslim world will do anything meaningful to help the Palestinians.  As for those who could have meaningfully support the Palestinians (Iran, Syria and Hezbollah), the Palestinians have back-stabbed them (I think of Hezbollah and Iranian trained Palestinian units fighting on the side of al-Qaeda/al-Nusra in Syria).

Sure, Iran and, to a lesser extend, Syria and Hezbollah will continue to provide some forms of help to the Palestinians, if only because they support the Palestinian people themselves.  I suppose that they will try to get most of that aid to the IJMP, but at least at this moment in time, the IJMP is too small and still too weak to really make a difference.  Besides, by virtue of not being a puppet of the US CIA the IJMP is also not an acceptable "partner" for any US sponsored "negotiations" (the Americans only negotiate with their own puppets, hence all the "pre-conditions" to any US sponsored/approved "negotiations").

So what will the upcoming "negotiations" be about?

They will be about how much Abbas can overtly give up without triggering an insurrection by his own people.  This is really crucial: as long as Abbas can pretend to be negotiating for some kind "final settlement" with the Israelis, and as long as the details of this final settlement remains amorphous, the Palestinian elites can continue pretending like there is something to be gained by negotiating.  But if Abbas openly and comprehensively caves in to Israeli demands, then the corrupt and wealthy elites of Ramallah and Nablus will risk facing a popular revolt.  So keeping up the fiction of negotiations is crucial to maintain the current Palestinian power structure in power.

What about the Israelis, what do they want?

Basically, they want all the land, just enough Palestinians to serve as a cheap work force (slaves), and enough Gulf money to pay the Palestinians to shut up and not cause any further trouble.  Most of that, they already have.  What they don't have and still want is some kind of international recognition and acceptance of the current situation: just like nobody seriously pesters US diplomats or businessmen with the fate of Native Americans (Indians), the Israelis don't want to be constantly pestered about the Palestinian issue.  What they want is just turn the page and let's get on with business as usual.

Needless to say, the Israelis probably understand that the Palestinian people will not just vanish into thin air with a "pop!" nor will they all agree to live in exile.  They probably suspect that by the time they realize that their own elites sold them out to the Israelis, there will be some kind of reaction, probably a violent one.  But when that happens, the Israelis will be able to wave the "final" agreements of 2013 or 2014 and say that "all parties", including "all" the Palestinian factions (except, o f course, for the ones labeled as "terrorists" such as the IJMP), the Quartet on the Middle-East, the Arab League and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation had accepted this *final* agreement that there was nothing left to negotiate.  At which point they will unleash the usual Jewish bloodbath against the resisting Palestinians but, this time, with the blessing of the so-called "international community".  From the Israeli point of view, any "final" agreement will thus be a license to kill.

Again, it did not have to be that way.  Some Fatah factions and Hamas definitely had the potential of turning into a meaningful resistance against the Zionist occupation of Palestine.  Sadly, however, the Palestinians did it to themselves by their betrayal of the other members of the Resistance.  Now there will be A LOT of very bad "karma" to pay for that betrayal.

Does that mean that the future has not hope for the Palestinian people?  Maybe, but not necessarily.

The good news for the Palestinians is that their current "enemies" - Iran, Syria and Hezbollah - are going nowhere and, in fact, there is a very good chance that the Syrian government will prevail in the current war.  Such a "victory", even if relative, will immensely strengthen Syria and Hezbollah and it will further strengthen the international position of Iran and even Russia (though the Russians really don't care much about the Palestinians, their concern if far more for the Syrians and, even more so, for Iran).  Furthermore, sooner or later the Palestinian people will come to their senses and understand that they have been conned by their own elites and that their only real allies are Iran, Syria and Hezbollah.  If such a realization comes to them at a time when the US Empire will be even weaker than it is today and/or at a time when the al-Qaeda Wahabi-types will begin to seriously threaten the Gulf monarchies (say as a backlash to a lost war in Syria), there is a real change that a meaningful Palestinian resistance will begin to slowly reassemble itself, but around a different ideology (not the corrupt pseudo nationalism of Fatah or the reactionary Islamism of Hamas) and, of course, completely different leaders.  I don't know that this will happen, but I want to believe that this is still possible.

The other good news for the Palestinians is that the existence of a state based on a theocratic pseudo-democracy focused on an overtly racist world view with strong elements of self-worship is not just a Palestinian problem, or even a Middle-Eastern problem.  Its a world-wide problem.  Anybody doubting this should ask himself was a country whose nuclear deterrence policy is centered around the Sampson Option is working on increasing the range of its nuclear weapons far beyond the limits of the Middle-East.  The answer is self-evident: if the "Jewish state of Israel" should ever fall, it will take a maximal number of goyim with it.  And that is, of course, a planetary problem (I would also add that the very existence of an overtly racist state is also a disgrace for all of mankind).

Just like Wahhabism, Rabbinical Judaism (which should really be called Rabbinical Phariseism since all the modern forms of "Judaism" are really the direct descendant of the Sect of the Pharisees as described in the New Testament) and modern Zionism (which, unlike its historical early form, has now turned into a secular version of Phariseism) are religions based on hatred of the "other".  These are ideologies/worldviews which neatly breaks up all of mankind into two categories: the chosen ones and the hated ones.  The Wahabis see themselves as the only real Muslims and everybody else, including all other non-Wahabi Muslims, as Kufar (unbelievers) while Pharisees see themselves as the only "humans" and everybody else as semi-beasts with a hatred for Jews deeply embedded in their DNA (that is their cop-out explanation for what they call "Antisemitism").  The Wahabis want to kill all the "others" while the Pharisees want to subjugate them all and, I kid you not, even "fix" creation.

Now, not to sound like Dubya, but I would strongly suggest that no form of peaceful coexistence is possible with these two ideologies.  Remember, we are dealing with folks who sincerely believe that they have a God-ordained mission to either convert all of mankind or subjugate it.  Departing from such a mission is, in the minds of these people, a form of apostasy and both religions consider apostasy as a capital crime.  Therefore, this combination of 1) a "mandate from God Himself" and 2) a mission to transform all of mankind by logical necessity creates what can only be considered as an existential threat for all of mankind.  Simply put: regardless of what "we" (all other "others) do or do not do, these folks (the Wahabis and the Pharisees) will not leave us alone.  Ever.

As long as these sick ideologies were confined to a small section of the Arabian desert or a few small shtetls in Eastern Europe their existence was really no big deal.  I mean - really - how many evil crackpots and sick ideologies has this planet seen since the dawn of mankind?  Lots! And most of them remained within very local confines and only affected their immediate vicinity.  In our case, however, we have to add a third component which make both Wahabism and Rabbinical Phariseism such existential threats to the rest of mankind: both of these ideologies have now metastasized  far beyond their initial confines and they now have an undeniable world-wide reach.  Of course, this was unfortunately made possible by the crucial role of the United States which saw both of these forces as playing a crucial, albeit different, role in its plans for global domination of the planet.

What all this means for the Palestinians is that pretty much regardless of what they will do, their enemy - the Zionists - is literally constantly generating its own antithesis (in a dialectical sense) in a never-ending process: the more powerful the Zionists become, the more powerful the resistance against them becomes (and herein, of course, lies to real cause of "Antisemitism" in human history).  It might take a long time, but sooner or later mankind will firmly and resolutely "push-back" against this evil.  And both Islam and Christianity teach that when eventually some form of evil (we do not know for sure which form this will be, a current one or a yet unknown one) will succeed in subduing the entire planet, then Christ Himself will return to save mankind.

Whatever may be the case, the Zionist regime which is currently "occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time" (to quote Ayatollah Khomeini) and will be replaced by some kind of non-racist state of its citizens.  In other words, the liberation of Palestine is inevitable.  The problem is that as a consequence of the Palestinian betrayal of the Resistance this might take much, much longer that one could have hoped for.

For the time being all what we will see is this: in the short term  US-sponsored pseudo-negotiations to formally legalize all the illegal land grab made by the Zionists in Palestine and in the longer term the granting to the Zionists of a license to kill anybody opposed to this legalization.  That's it.  And if even that fails, the Israelis will yet again have an opportunity to say that they made some great offers which the Palestinians refused.  That too is a license to kill.

The much advertised "final status" is really a "final solution".  Everybody knows it, but nobody dares to openly say it.

The Saker

Friday, November 23, 2012

Is the Palestinian Islamic Jihad becoming the core of the Palestinian resistance?

Tonight, an anonymous poster, to whom I am most grateful, drew my attention to two very interesting pieces by Amal Saad-Ghorayeb:
One of the articles also references this article:
This is all very interesting. 

According to its Wikipedia entry, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) only has about 1000 members.   I would have to assume that the military wing of PIJ, called the al-Quds Brigades (aQB) would be even smaller.  One "terrorism study" website claims that the aQB receive about 2 million dollars from Iran annually but does not give any sources or fact in support of that figure.  Either way, 2 million dollars annually for an organization of less than 1000 is really not very much.  And yet, this is what representatives of the aQB have declared during a press conference today:

"The Brigades fired 620 rockets on the occupied territories including dozens of Grad missiles and Fajr 5 rockets in addition to Fajr 3 rockets during the operation “Blue Sky”.  It added that its fighters used for the first time Kornet rockets, anti-warships missiles and advanced rockets launchers
Meanwhile, the spokesman stressed that al-Quds Brigades’ military depot was fine, adding that the resistance didn’t use but a simple amount of its abilities.  “The enemy had acknowledged that dozens of its occupation soldiers have been killed and injured as a result for the qualitative operation, in addition to destroying communication networks.”  “The intelligence weapon was also engaged during this war. We were able to penetrate 5000 mobiles for Zionist officers and soldiers took part in the offensive on Gaza,” the spokesman said, adding that ten mujahedeen (fighters) were martyred during the offensive.  “Today, one of the rounds of the conflict with the Israeli enemy has ended. In this round the resistance dictated its word, will and determination.  In this round the resistance dictated a new style of confrontation and a qualitative weapon that has changed the deterrence equation,” the statement said.
If this is true - and I have seen no other source supporting these claims - this is quite amazing.  The hacking into the Israeli phone network is a typical Hezbollah tactic, as is the use of the advanced Russian Kornet anti-tank missile (which can defeat even the most advanced versions of the Israeli Merkava tank).  I did not see any reports of anti-ship missiles fired from Gaza, but that does not mean that this is not true.

Of course, at this point, the firstpriority is to check how much truth there is to these claims, or whether this is again an example of the type of empty grandstanding we have so often seen from various Palestinian groups.  My gut feeling is that these claims will prove to be true and, if that is the case, then indeed something very interesting might be happening: the appearance of a sophisticated and mature Palestinian resistance movement, something which the Palestinian people desperately need.

A request to all of you now:

PLEASE, IF YOU FIND ANY INTERESTING INFORMATION ABOUT THE PALESTINIAN ISLAMIC JIHAD, THE AL-QUDS BRIGADES, OR ANY GOOD ANALYTICAL MATERIALS ABOUT THIS TOPIC, PLEASE FORWARD IT TO ME

Many thanks in advance and kind regards,

The Saker

PS: I found some recent footage of today's declaration by the aQB along with some footage of aQB rocket launches:


Thursday, November 15, 2012

Palestinians are now reaping the bitter fruits of their own miscalculations

Amongst the many calamities which have befallen the Palestinian people one of the worst ones is being systematically led by incompetent and corrupt leaders with no strategic vision and a true knack for always choosing the wrong side in a conflict.  From their misguided alliance with all kinds of unsavory terrorist groups in the 1970s, to their support for Saddam, to their naive participation in the Oslo Accords, to today completely misguided support for the NATO-Wahabi insurgents in Syria - the Palestinian leaders seem to never miss an opportunity to shoot themselves in the foot.

The fact that the Israelis have successfully split the Palestinians into three separate groups (Israeli citizens vs West Bank residents vs Gaza residents) is certainly the most glaring example of how easily the Palestinian elites can be manipulated.  And each time, there is hell to pay by the Palestinian people for such mistakes by their leaders.

Look at the situation in Syria.  What have the Palestinians done to themselves this time?  By siding with the NATO-Wahabi insurgency, they have essentially turned against Hezbollah and Iran, their only true friends in the region.  In contrast, the Israelis have carefully succeeded in completely isolating Hamas and now they can afford to safely bomb and kill as many people of the Gaza strip as they want.

And what can Hamas do in retaliation?  Fire some rather useless rockets at Israel and hype the rhetoric about "opening the Gates of Hell" for Israel which, of course, is utter nonsense.  The truth is that the Israeli Iron Done does a halfway decent job shooting down many Palestinian missiles and even when the Palestinian missiles actually succeed in killing a Israeli family (like what happened today), it only serves the political agenda of the Israeli government.

In May of this year I wrote a piece I entitled Clueless Arab and Palestinian leaders and pundits: "¡Que se vayan todos!" expressing my despair and disgust with the Palestinian leadership.  Since May, things only got worse, and innocent Palestinians are dying again as a direct consequence of the mistakes and miscalculations of the Palestinian leaders.  And this really begs the following question: how many more Palestinians will have to die before the Palestinian people realize that they are led by a clique of completely incompetent leaders which do not make things better for the Palestinian people, but only worse, much worse.

The Saker

Thursday, March 29, 2012

The New Mandela

by Uri Avnery

MARWAN BARGHOUTI has spoken up. After a long silence, he has sent a message from prison.

In Israeli ears, this message does not sound pleasant. But for Palestinians, and for Arabs in general, it makes sense.

His message may well become the new program of the Palestinian liberation movement.

I FIRST met Marwan in the heyday of post-Oslo optimism. He was emerging as a leader of the new Palestinian generation, the home-grown young activists, men and women, who had matured in the first Intifada.

He is a man of small physical stature and large personality. When I met him, he was already the leader of Tanzim (“organization”), the youth group of the Fatah movement.

The topic of our conversations then was the organization of demonstrations and other non-violent actions, based on close cooperation between the Palestinians and Israeli peace groups. The aim was peace between Israel and a new State of Palestine.

When the Oslo process died with the assassinations of Yitzhak Rabin and Yasser Arafat, Marwan and his organization became targets. Successive Israeli leaders – Binyamin Netanyahu, Ehud Barak and Ariel Sharon – decided to put an end to the two-state agenda. In the brutal “Defensive Shield operation (launched by Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz, the new leader of the Kadima Party) the Palestinian Authority was attacked, its services destroyed and many of its activists arrested.

Marwan Barghouti was put on trial. It was alleged that, as the leader of Tanzim, he was responsible for several “terrorist” attacks in Israel. His trial was a mockery, resembling a Roman gladiatorial arena more than a judicial process. The hall was packed with howling rightists, presenting themselves as “victims of terrorism”. Members of Gush Shalom protested against the trial inside the court building but we were not allowed anywhere near the accused.

Marwan was sentenced to five life sentences. The picture of him raising his shackled hands above his head has become a Palestinian national icon. When I visited his family in Ramallah, it was hanging in the living room.

IN PRISON, Marwan Barghouti was immediately recognized as the leader of all Fatah prisoners. He is respected by Hamas activists as well. Together, the imprisoned leaders of Fatah and Hamas published several statements calling for Palestinian unity and reconciliation. These were widely distributed outside and received with admiration and respect.

(Members of the extended Barghouti family, by the way, play a major role in Palestinian affairs across the entire spectrum from moderate to extremist. One of them is Mustapha Barghouti, a doctor who heads a moderate Palestinian party with many connections abroad, whom I regularly meet at demonstrations in Bilin and elsewhere. I once joked that we always cry when we see each other – from tear gas. The family has its roots in a group of villages north of Jerusalem.)

NOWADAYS, MARWAN Barghouti is considered the outstanding candidate for leader of Fatah and president of the Palestinian Authority after Mahmoud Abbas. He is one of the very few personalities around whom all Palestinians, Fatah as well as Hamas, can unite.

After the capture of the Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, when the prisoner exchange was discussed, Hamas put Marwan Barghouti on top of the list of Palestinian prisoners whose release it demanded. This was a very unusual gesture, since Marwan belonged to the rival – and reviled - faction.

The Israeli government struck Marwan from the list right away, and remained adamant. When Shalit was finally released, Marwan stayed in prison. Obviously he was considered more dangerous than hundreds of Hamas “terrorists” with “blood on their hands”.

Why?

Cynics would say: because he wants peace. Because he sticks to the two-state solution. Because he can unify the Palestinian people for that purpose. All good reasons for a Netanyahu to keep him behind bars.

SO WHAT did Marwan tell his people this week?

Clearly, his attitude has hardened. So, one must assume, has the attitude of the Palestinian people at large.

He calls for a Third Intifada, a non-violent mass uprising in the spirit of the Arab Spring.

His manifesto is a clear rejection of the policy of Mahmoud Abbas, who maintains limited but all-important cooperation with the Israeli occupation authorities. Marwan calls for a total rupture of all forms of cooperation, whether economic, military or other.

A focal point of this cooperation is the day-to-day collaboration of the American-trained Palestinian security services with the Israeli occupation forces. This arrangement has effectively stopped violent Palestinian attacks in the occupied territories and in Israel proper. It guarantees, In practice, the security of the growing Israeli settlements in the West Bank.

Marwan also calls for a total boycott of Israel, Israeli institutions and products in the Palestinian territories and throughout the world. Israeli products should disappear from West Bank shops, Palestinian products should be promoted.

At the same time, Marwan advocates an official end to the charade called “peace negotiations”. This term, by the way, is never heard anymore in Israel. First it was replaced with “peace process”, then “political process”, and lately “the political matter”. The simple word “peace” has become taboo among rightists and most “leftists” alike. It’s political poison.

Marwan proposes to make the absence of peace negotiations official. No more international talk about “reviving the peace process”, no more rushing around of ridiculous people like Tony Blair, no more hollow announcements by Hillary Clinton and Catherine Ashton, no more empty declarations of the “Quartet”. Since the Israeli government clearly has abandoned the two-state solution – which it never really accepted in the first place – keeping up the pretense just harms the Palestinian struggle.

Instead of this hypocrisy, Marwan proposes to renew the battle in the UN. First, apply again to the Security Council for the acceptance of Palestine as a member state, challenging the US to use its solitary veto openly against practically the whole world. After the expected rejection of the Palestinian request by the Council as a result of the veto, request a decision by the General Assembly, where the vast majority would vote in favor. Though this would not be binding, it would demonstrate that the freedom of Palestine enjoys the overwhelming support of the family of nations, and isolate Israel (and the US) even more.

Parallel to this course of action, Marwan insists on Palestinian unity, using his considerable moral force to put pressure on both Fatah and Hamas.

TO SUMMARIZE, Marwan Barghouti has given up all hope of achieving Palestinian freedom through cooperation with Israel, or even Israeli opposition forces. The Israeli peace movement is not mentioned anymore. “Normalization” has become a dirty word.

These ideas are not new, but coming from the No. 1 Palestinian prisoner, the foremost candidate for the succession of Mahmoud Abbas, the hero of the Palestinian masses, it means a turn to a more militant course, both in substance and in tone.

Marwan remains peace oriented – as he made clear when, in a rare recent appearance in court, he called out to the Israeli journalists that he continues to support the two-state solution. He also remains committed to non-violent action, having come to the conclusion that the violent attacks of yesteryear harmed the Palestinian cause instead of furthering it.

He wants to call a halt to the gradual and unwilling slide of the Palestinian Authority into a Vichy-like collaboration, while the expansion of the Israeli “settlement enterprise” goes on undisturbed.

NOT BY accident did Marwan publish his manifesto on the eve of “Land Day”, the world-wide day of protest against the occupation.

“Land Day” is the anniversary of an event that took place in 1976 to protest against the decision of the Israeli government to expropriate huge tracts of Arab-owned land in Galilee and other parts of Israel. The Israeli army and police fired on the protesters, killing six of them. (The day after, two of my friends and I laid wreaths on the graves of the victims, an act that earned me an outbreak of hatred and vilification I have seldom experienced.)

Land day was a turning point for Israel’s Arab citizens, and later became a symbol for Arabs everywhere. This year, the Netanyahu government threatened to shoot anybody who even approaches our borders. It may well be a harbinger for the Third Intifada heralded by Marwan.

For some time now, the world has lost much of its interest in Palestine. Everything looks quiet. Netanyahu has succeeded in deflecting world attention from Palestine to Iran. But in this country, nothing is ever static. While it seems that nothing is happening, settlements are growing incessantly, and so is the deep resentment of the Palestinians who see this happening before their eyes.

Marwan Barghouti’s manifesto expresses the near-unanimous feelings of the Palestinians in the West Bank and elsewhere. Like Nelson Mandela in apartheid South Africa, the man in prison may well be more important than the leaders outside.
-------
Commentary: With all due respect for Uri Avnery I have two points of major disagreement with his article above: first, I don't believe in the so-called "Two State Solution" (a total non-starter in IMHO) and, two, I am very much concerned about whether Marwan Barghouti will not be turned into Israel's last chance to resurrect the otherwise dead and already decaying Fatah and the Two State Solution.  Still, I think that Avnery's point of view deserves to be looked into, and Barghouti himself might prove to be more of a patriot than a party man.  Lastly, considering the quasi total absence of a halfway decent Palestinian leadership, almost any leader with some intelligence and wisdom might be better the the current no-mans-land of corrupt Fatah stooges and clueless Hamas kindergärtners.

"We stand with you": Pink Floyd’s Roger Waters announces Palestine solidarity forum in Brazil

The Electronic Intifada reports:

Legendary UK musician, Pink Floyd’s Roger Waters, has reiterated his strong support for the Palestinian campaign for self-determination in a statement announcing a forthcoming conference in Brazil to support and expand the global movement for Palestinian rights.

Waters’ is a long-standing supporter of the Palestinian campaign to boycott, divest from and sanction Israel.

The World Social Forum Free Palestine will take place in November 2012 in Porto Alegre.

The object will be to create an international gathering there,” said Waters, “that will encourage the basic human instinct in all men and women of good faith to unite in support of the Palestinian people in their struggle for self determination.”
Waters visited Palestine in 2006 and painted graffiti on Israel’s apartheid wall in the occupied West Bank.

The visit, and Waters’ support for BDS, came after Palestinians appealed to Waters to cancel a concert in Tel Aviv, an appeal the artist heeded.

Since that time, Waters observed in his statement, “All over the world, our movement is growing.”

Full statement by Roger Waters

Rio de Janeiro Wednesday 28th March 2012
Since visiting Israel and the occupied territories in 2006, I have been part of an international movement to support the Palestinian people in their struggle for freedom, justice and equality.
I am honored to have been asked by the Palestinian BDS National Committee, to announce an initiative, to hold the World Social Forum Free Palestine in Porto Alegre, Brazil in November of this year, in cooperation with the Brazilian social movement and international civil society networks.
The object will be to create an international gathering there, that will encourage the basic human instinct in all men and women of good faith to unite in support of the Palestinian people in their struggle for self determination.
All over the world, our movement is growing.
Encouraged by events like the one coming here to Brazil, our voice will grow.
We will continue our call for an end to the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land, for the tearing down of The Walls of colonization and apartheid, for the creation of a Palestinian state with its capital in Jerusalem, for the granting of full and equal rights to the Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel and for promoting the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes as required by the Geneva convention, as stipulated in UN resolution 194, in 1949 and as restated by the International Court of Justice on the 9th of July 2004.
I find myself greatly encouraged by the growth of this movement in Israel, particularly among young Jewish Israelis, not least ‘Boycott From Within,’ With whom I am in contact.
We stand with you.
Events in Israel and the occupied territories are not widely or accurately reported in the west. The coming World Social Forum Free Palestine in Porto Alegre will help to break down The Walls of misinformation and complicity.
I urge people of conscience to support this forum and help make it a turning point in the international solidarity with the Palestinian people.
The truth will set us free
In Solidarity,
Roger Waters

Friday, September 23, 2011

Why Mahmoud Abbas' speech matters a lot

I just finished listening to Mahmoud Abbas' speech at the UNGA and I have to say that I was very impressed.  God knows I am no supporter of Abbas, but listening to him the thought crossed my mind that maybe the old man decided to redeem himself as much as possible at the 11th hour of his career?

I am under no illusion about what this speech can or cannot achieve.  First, neither Israel nor its subservient bouncer-thug (the USA) give a damn about international law, the UN or anything else besides brute force or money.  The reality is that neither the UNGA nor even the UNSC have any kind of power over the "only democracy in the Middle-East".  Hezbollah does.  The UN does not.  Hezbollah can force the Zionists out of the land they conquered (they did it twice, already), whereas over 120 UN resolutions had exactly zero impact on the crazed minds of the Zionist leaders.

And yet, what Abbas did today will fundamentally change the game.  Not the recognition, or not, of Palestine by the UNGA or UNSC, but the recognition within the 1967 borders including the Arab part of Jerusalem.  Yes, I know, not only does international law specifically mandate these borders (since no state can change any border by means of war, even a defensive war), numerous UN resolutions have also affirmed and upheld this fact.  However, for the first time in many years the PA and the OLP have specifically re-stated this demand, thereby overturing all the semi-official compromises they had offered or hinted at.  Not only that, those countries who will vote in favor of a recognition of Palestine as a state in the 1967 will make it impossible for the Israelis to ever try to "legalize" their colonies.

Now, I personally do not believe at all in the so-called Two State Solution.  The only solution which can bring peace to the Middle-East is one which comprehensively rejects any form of racist separation (or Apartheid) and which fully upholds the principle of one man one vote in a united, non-confessional, Palestine.  However, the value of Abbas' move is not in the 'solution' is advocates as it is with the crisis it will now trigger for the last racist regime on the planet.

Yes, Abbas says that he is not attempting to delegitimize Israel (why not?  But nevermind that); he only wants to delegitimize the settlements.  But what are the settlements if not the material expression of the very core of what the state of Israel really has been built on and stands for: violence, racism, expropriation, violation of human rights, violation of civil rights, violation of international law, etc.  Whether Abbas understands this or not, there cannot be any "Jewish state of Israel" without settlements and without the mindset and policies which made them possible in the first place.

For Israel to give up these colonies means to give up its fantasy of being a only-human Chosen People who can ignore the beast-like sub-human goyim.  It means to give up the fallacy of using the text of the Old Testament as a real estate deed.  It means to give up the dream of having a racially pure Jewish state.  In other words, this means giving up on the very essence of what the "Jewish state of Israel" stands for.

So this is what the UN will really be voting for.  A choice between two models.  One, as racist as Nazi Germany or Apartheid South Africa, and the other, the humanist idea that humans cannot be discriminated against on the basis of race or religion.  On one hand a model which says that "might makes right", and on the other, that the rule of law must be upheld.  These are not trivial issues, they are civilizational core questions which define the kind of world we all live in.

The other beautiful thing which Abbas' speech will achieve is an embarrassingly shameful isolation of the USA and a few of its puppets and colonies.  I mean, really, how can anybody with just a basic ounce of civilization seriously stand behind the ugly and crazed policies of the Zionists?  Voting with the last openly racist regime on the planet is now tantamount of sticking a sign on your back saying "I am a prostitute paid by the Zionist regime and its lobbies worldwide".  Sure, many will still do it, but this will be exquisitely disgraceful for all of them.

I still don't like Abbas and everything he stands for.  But I think the Palestinians who dismiss it all as a useless farce are quite wrong.  There will be a 'before' and an 'after' what happened today at the UN.

What we are witnessing is the hammering of yet another nail in the (admittedly large) coffin of the last openly racist state on the planet and its ugly ideology.

Congrats Palestinians!  You deserve it.

The Saker

Tuesday, September 20, 2011

A Formal Funeral for the Two-State Solution

by Ali Abunimah for Foreign Affairs via ICH

The Palestinian Authority's bid to the United Nations for Palestinian statehood is, at least in theory, supposed to circumvent the failed peace process. But in two crucial respects, the ill-conceived gambit actually makes things worse, amplifying the flaws of the process it seeks to replace. First, it excludes the Palestinian people from the decision-making process. And second, it entirely disconnects the discourse about statehood from reality.

Most discussions of the UN bid pit Israel and the United States on one side, fiercely opposing it, and Palestinian officials and allied governments on the other. But this simplistic portrayal ignores the fact that among the Palestinian people themselves there is precious little support for the effort. The opposition, and there is a great deal of it, stems from three main sources: the vague bid could lead to unintended consequences; pursuing statehood above all else endangers equality and refugee rights; and there is no democratic mandate for the Palestinian Authority to act on behalf of Palestinians or to gamble with their rights and future.

Underscoring the lack of public support, numerous Palestinian civil society organizations and grassroots leaders, academics, and activists have been loudly criticizing the strategy. The Boycott National Committee (BNC) -- the steering group of the global Palestinian-led campaign for boycott, divestment, and sanctions against Israel that has been endorsed by almost 200 Palestinian organizations -- warned in August that the UN bid could end up sidelining the PLO as the official representative of all Palestinians and in turn disenfranchise Palestinians inside Israel and the refugees in the diaspora. A widely disseminated legal opinion by the Oxford scholar Guy Goodwin-Gill underscored the point, arguing that the PLO could be displaced from the UN by a toothless and illusory "State of Palestine" that would, at most, nominally represent only Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

Others, such as the Palestinian Youth Movement -- an international coalition of young Palestinians -- declared that it stood "steadfastly against" the UN bid because it could jeopardize "the rights and aspirations of over two-thirds of the Palestinian people who live as refugees in countries of refuge and in exile, to return to their original homes." Many, like the PYM, fear that unilaterally declaring a state along 1967 borders without any other guarantees of Palestinian rights would effectively cede the 78 percent of historic Palestine captured in 1948 to Israel and would keep refugees from returning to what would then be recognized de facto as an ethnically "Jewish state."

Of course, there may be no clearer evidence of the distance between the UN bid and the actual will of the Palestinians than the secrecy of the process. Today, just days before the application is filed with the UN, the Palestinian public remains in the dark about exactly what the PA is proposing. No draft text has been shared with the Palestinian people. Instead the text is being negotiated with the Palestinian Authority's donors as if they, not the Palestinian people, are its true constituency.

More fundamentally, though, the entire discussion of statehood ignores the facts on the ground. For starters, the PA fails the traditional criteria for statehood laid out in the 1933 Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States: it controls neither territory nor external borders (except for the tiny enclaves it polices under the supervision of Israeli occupation forces). It is prohibited under the 1993 Oslo Accords from freely entering into relations with other states. As for possessing a permanent population, the majority of the Palestinian people are prohibited by Israel from entering the area on which the PA purports to claim statehood solely because they are not Jews (under Israel's discriminatory Law of Return, Jews from anywhere in the world can settle virtually anywhere in Israel or the occupied territories, while native-born Palestinian refugees and their children are excluded). The PA cannot issue passports or identity documents; Israeli authorities control the population registry. No matter how the UN votes, Israel will continue to build settlements in the West Bank and maintain its siege of Gaza. As all this suggests, any discussion of real sovereignty is a fantasy.

Nor is the strategy likely to produce even formal UN membership or recognition. That would require approval by the Security Council, which the Obama administration has vowed to veto. The alternative is some sort of symbolic resolution in the UN General Assembly upgrading the status of the existing Palestinian UN observer mission -- a decision with little practical effect. Such an outcome will hardly be worth all the energy and fuss, especially when there are other measures that the UN could take that would have much greater impact. For example, Palestinians would be better off asking for strict enforcement of existing but long ignored Security Council resolutions, such as Resolution 465, which was passed in 1980 and calls on Israel to "dismantle the existing settlements" in the occupied territories and determines that all Israel's measures "to change the physical character, demographic composition, institutional structure or status of the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, or any part thereof, have no legal validity" and are flagrant violations of international law.

Ultimately, any successful strategy should focus not on statehood but on rights. In its statement on the UN bid, the BNC emphasized that regardless of what happens in September, the global solidarity struggle must continue until Israel respects Palestinian rights and obeys international law in three specific ways: ending the occupation of Arab lands that began in 1967 and dismantling the West Bank wall that was ruled illegal in 2004 by the International Court of Justice; removing all forms of legal and social discrimination against Palestinian citizens of Israel and guaranteeing full equal rights; and offering full respect for Palestinian refugee rights, including the right of return. Palestinians and Israelis are not in a situation of equals negotiating an end to a dispute but are, respectively, colonized and colonizer, much as blacks and whites were in South Africa. This truth must be recognized, and pushing for such recognition would resonate far more with the Palestinian public than empty statehood talk.

Indeed, such a strategy has worried Israel enough that it has enlisted the U.S. in the fight against what Israeli leaders term "delegitimization." "Delegitimizers" are supposedly not seeking justice and full human and political rights for Palestinians, but rather seeking the collapse of Israel -- much like East Germany or apartheid South Africa -- through political and legal assaults. According to Israel and groups supporting it in the United States, virtually all Palestine solidarity activism, especially BDS, is "delegitimization." Some Israelis, including even former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, have warned that fighting a movement calling for universal civil and political rights would only make Israel look more, not less, like an apartheid state, worsening its situation. But Israeli elites have come up with no plausible response to the reality that within a few short years -- because of Palestinian population growth and Israeli settlement construction -- a Jewish minority will be ruling over a disenfranchised and subordinated Palestinian majority in a country that cannot be partitioned.

The plans for truncated and circumscribed Palestinian statehood, which successive American and Israeli governments have been prepared to discuss, fall far short of minimal Palestinian demands and have no hope of being implemented (as the dramatic failure of the Obama administration's peace effort in its first two years underscores). Even President Obama, in his speech to the Israeli lobbying group AIPAC last May, called the status quo "unsustainable." But he offered no
new answers.

These, then, are the lines along which the battle for the future of Palestine are going to be fought, no matter how many U.S. envoys head to Ramallah and Jerusalem to try to revive negotiations in which no one believes. Meanwhile, the UN bid should be seen not as the means to give birth to the Palestinian state but as the formal funeral of the two-state solution and the peace process that was supposed to bring it about.

ALI ABUNIMAH is the author of One Country: A Bold Proposal to End the Israeli-Palestinian Impasse. He co-founded the Electronic Intifada and is a policy adviser to Al-Shabaka, the Palestinian Policy Network.

Wednesday, September 14, 2011

Hamas opposes ‘tactical’ Palestinian statehood bid at UN


The Islamist Hamas movement said Wednesday that President Mahmoud Abbas' plan to approach the United Nations for recognition of Palestinian statehood was a "tactical" move, part of a negotiations process, and therefore could not be backed.

The move was not based on principles and "Hamas and other factions are not part of this step and do not support it," Salah al-Bardaweel, a senior Hamas leader in the Gaza Strip, told a workshop in Gaza City.

Hamas, which seized control of the Gaza Strip in the summer of 2007, opposes the general line adopted by Abbas, and in particular peace negotiations with Israel.

The movement is under a Western diplomatic boycott for refusing demands to renounce violence, honor past Israeli-Palestinian agreements and recognize Israel's right to exist.

Al-Bardaweel told the workshop that the consequence of getting the UN to recognize a Palestinian state would also be recognition of Israel's boundaries.

"Going to the UN draws the borders of Israel, which was established on stolen lands and still has no borders," he said.

Abbas' UN bid, he explained, would mean that the Palestinian state would exist only in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, the territories captured by Israel in the 1967 war, and not in all of historic Palestine, as Hamas wants.

Moreover, he said, once a Palestinian state is ratified, "the Palestinian resistance won't be allowed to fire one single gunshot at the Israeli occupation."

Abbas said last week that he intends to submit the Palestinian's UN bid once he arrives in New York on September 19 for the General Assembly session.

Saturday, April 30, 2011

Questions about "Hamas-Fatah reconciliation"


Big news today about a reported “Hamas-Fatah reconciliation” deal. What does it mean? First, here’s what we know from Reuters:
Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas’s Fatah movement has struck an agreement with bitter rival Hamas on forming an interim government and fixing a date for a general election, officials said Wednesday.

The surprise deal was brokered by Egypt and followed secret talks between the two sides, who fought a brief civil war in 2007 that left the Islamist Hamas in control of the Gaza Strip and the Western-backed Abbas in charge of the West Bank.

Forging Palestinian unity is regarded as crucial to reviving any prospect for an independent Palestinian state.

“We have agreed to form a government composed of independent figures that would start preparing for presidential and parliamentary elections,” said Azzam al-Ahmad, the head of Fatah’s negotiating team in Cairo. “Elections would be held in about eight months from now,” he added.

Ordinary Palestinians have repeatedly urged their leaders to resolve their deep divisions, but analysts had long argued that the differences between the two sides on issues such as security and diplomacy were too wide to bridge.

Mahmoud al-Zahar, a senior Hamas leader who participated in the talks, said the agreement covered five points, including elections, forming an interim unity government and combining security forces.

“We also discussed activating the Palestinian Legislative Council, the PLO (Palestine Liberation Organization) as well as forming a government consisting of nationalist figures to be agreed upon,” Zahar told Al Jazeera television in an interview.

He also said Hamas and Fatah agreed to free prisoners held by each side.
What does any of this mean? At this point, neither side has published the text of an agreement - and certainly Palestinians have a right to see one; they have had enough of secret deals and understandings.

Some immediate questions that come to mind and give rise to skepticism:
  • If there is an agreement on a joint “government” how can it possibly function without Israeli approval? Will Israel allow Hamas ministers be able to operate freely in the occupied West Bank? Will PA officials be able to move freely between the West Bank and Gaza? Israel is effectively at peace with the current Abbas wing of the Palestinian Authority and at war with Hamas. Impossible to see how such a government can operate under Israeli occupation. If anything this proves the impossibility of democracy and normal governance under Israeli military occupation.
  • In The Palestine Papers, the main concern of Ramallah officials was always to maintain Western financial aid to the PA, and not to make any agreement with Hamas that would jeopardize American and European financing for the PA. Has the Abbas PA overcome that fear, or have they reached understandings with donors that would allow Hamas to join a Palestinian Authority “government”?
  • Integration of security forces. Currently, Hamas in Gaza and the Abbas-run PA in the West Bank operate rival security forces. The Abbas security forces cooperate openly with the Israeli occupation including “welcoming” and hosting the Israeli chief of staff, as described by the PA’s Nablus governor yesterday. The Abbas forces are financed and supervised by the United States and their purpose has explicitly been to fight Hamas. Hamas’ forces by contrast are viewed as an enemy by Israel, and are frequently subject to military attacks and extrajudicial executions by Israel. Can such opposing forces really be combined without the Abbas side either renouncing its close ties to the Israeli military, or the Hamas side abandoning any commitment to resistance?
  • Elections: What is the point of having elections in the West Bank and Gaza Strip once more under conditions of brutal Israeli military occupation, siege and control? Neither the West Bank government nor the Gaza government are truly in control of the fate of Palestinians. The power lies in Israel’s hands. As I wrote recently, such elections only further the illusion of self-governance while doing nothing to challenge or change actual Israeli control. And, when there is so much political repression in the West Bank, and indeed in Gaza, how can we have a guarantee of free elections?
  • Reform of the PLO: If Hamas and Abbas made a deal to reform the PLO which just includes adding Hamas to the dead body of the PLO how will that serve the Palestinian people? What about elections for the Palestinian National Council that include ALL Palestinians, including the majority which does not live in the 1967 occupied territories? A deal where Abbas and Hamas make a cozy deal to share seats in an undemocratic PLO is simply unacceptable.
  • More broadly, the goal for Palestinians should not be “unity” among factions, but unity of goals for the Palestinian people. What is the purpose and platform of the planned “transitional government” other than merely to exist? A real Palestinian strategy that unites all segments of the Palestinian people has been articulated by the BDS movement:
(a) an end to occupation and colonization of the 1967 territories; (b) full equality and an end to all forms of discrimination against Palestinians in the 1948 areas (“Israel”); and (c) full respect and implementation of the rights of Palestinian refugees.

Notably neither Fatah Abbas nor Hamas have endorsed this campaign, and neither has articulated a realistic strategy aimed at restoring the rights of all Palestinians.

Your thoughts? Comment below!

Update

The White House has now commented on the reported “unity” deal. From Reuters:
“The United States supports Palestinian reconciliation on terms which promote the cause of peace. Hamas, however, is a terrorist organization which targets civilians,” White House spokesman Tommy Vietor said in a statement.

“To play a constructive role in achieving peace, any Palestinian government must accept the Quartet principles and renounce violence, abide by past agreements, and recognize Israel’s right to exist,” he said.
This indicates that the US position opposing Palestinian unity except on terms acceptable to Israel and the United States, has not softened. Given this, it’s very difficult to see this going very far.

Friday, March 4, 2011

Coexistence- An absolutely beautiful photo!

A member of Neturei Karta (Torah Jews), a fringe of ultra-Orthodox movement within the anti-Zionist bloc in Israel, talks with a masked Palestinian youth as he shows his support during clashes with Israeli police in the Arab east Jerusalem neighbourhood of Silwan on April 25, 2010. Palestinian protesters clashed with Israeli police as dozens of ultra-nationalist Jews carried Israeli flags through Silwan to assert Jewish sovereignty of all of Jerusalem, according to the organisers of the march.


Sunday, June 20, 2010

Cutting Through the Confusion about Israel/Palestine

by Richard Forer
[A letter I wrote to a college student who had written the Coalition to Stop $30 Billion to Israel asking the group to remove a billboard that said "Tell Congress. Stop Killing Children. No More Military Aid to Israel." The billboard was erected in Albuquerque in the Spring of 2009 after the Gaza catastrophe. I was the spokesperson.]

Hi J,


Thank you for your letter. First, I assume you are Jewish. Is that correct? Before I get into the specifics of your letter I want to talk about a few things you might find interesting. I do so because everyone involved in the Israel-Palestine issue has the potential to change the world from an arena of Us against Them into one of peace and respect. But that requires undeviating self-honesty, which leads to compassion, clarity and understanding. Most people do not take up the challenge of looking deeply within for fear of what they might find. They revert to the safety of their presumed identity and the beliefs and images that make up and reinforce their identity. Attachment to a limited or exclusive identity always carries with it the consciousness of Us against Them. The consciousness of Us against Them requires that there be unending conflict.

Perhaps you have it within yourself to look beyond what you currently see as all sides of the issue. I hope so because the lives of those who suffer on either side of the conflict depend upon people like you. Peace is only possible when we care for people on both sides equally. We do not have to like the other but we have to recognize that he is just as entitled to self-determination as us, that he has the same human needs for respect and dignity as do we. We also have to begin to understand and ask why the other acts as he does. Does his motivation arise in a vacuum or does it arise in relationship to our own behavior. Have we played roles in inciting his behavior? Until we take responsibility for the parts we play in the drama of human suffering and as it relates to the Israel-Palestine conflict, peace has no chance; and the people we claim to care about will continue to suffer and die, now and into the bloody future, in Israel, in Palestine and throughout the world. They will die and suffer because our true goal is not their well being; our true goal is to maintain our presumed identity; it is to confirm the beliefs and images that we incorrectly associate with our personal and collective identity.

As long as we believe in a world of Us against Them we will see a world of Us against Them. Our emotions, our attitudes toward others, the way we interpret events, what we notice and what we don’t notice will mirror our world view, thereby confirming and reinforcing it. In short, individually and collectively, we create the world we live in. Thus, the great struggle all of us must take on, if we truly want peace and respect between peoples, is to transform our consciousness from Us against Them to one of tolerance and understanding.

To be honest your letter can only fully be answered with a comprehensive look at the history of the Israel-Palestine conflict. The book I have completed would be a good reply but that is beyond the scope of our discussion for now. Obviously you are very passionate and concerned about this situation. With that in mind I have included at the end of this letter a list of some well-researched books on the subject. Most of these writers have come to similar conclusions. Most of them are Jewish. Cypel and Hirst are famous journalists from France and England respectively. Cypel lived in Israel for ten years and his father was a Zionist leader. Ben-Ami, a historian and former Minister of Foreign Affairs and Internal Security, was Barak’s chief negotiator at Camp David. Pappe, Shlaim, Segev and Morris are all famous Israeli historians and among the group known as “new” or “revisionist” historians because of their access to the primary archives and their refutation of common Zionist myths. Reinhart and Kimmerling were two of the most renowned and courageous sociologist/historians in Israeli academia. King is an expert on collective non-violent action who has worked with Martin Luther King (no relation) and Jimmy Carter. Swisher was a VIP security guard at the Camp David talks in 2000. He interviewed many of the participants. Baltzer, an American, is one of the most compassionate people I have ever had the honor to meet. She is brilliant, fair and honest. She cares about Israelis as well as Palestinians.

And even though he is particularly controversial, Norman Finkelstein, despite his blunt critique of Israel’s defenders, is included because of his genius and meticulous research. You can watch him on YouTube. I researched a great deal of the claims he makes by reviewing his sources. In every case he checks out perfectly. I saw no distortion, obfuscation or deceit. Additionally, one cannot ignore the sources he cites. Truthfully, if one wants to criticize Israel, deceit is unnecessary. The words and confessions of Israeli leaders are more than enough.

Again, before I respond to the points you make about Gaza, let me tell you a little about me. I was born a few months before Israel declared its statehood. Both of my parents were first generation Americans. My mother lost 17 relatives in the Holocaust. My father and his family never discussed anything about that horror. My younger brother is president of one of the largest Jewish congregations on the east coast. My identical twin brother is an ultra-Orthodox Jew who lived for a few years in Israel. Both of his daughters are married with children and live in Jerusalem. Some of their friends are militant Jews from Hebron and other messianic communities, who believe that the sixth commandment, which they translate as “Thou shalt not commit murder,” cannot be violated by killing any Arab, since Arabs are inherently predisposed to want to murder Jews; and Arabs are not human anyway. One of my brother’s sons recently served in the IDF. I have a friend who lives in Ma'ale Adumim, in occupied territory outside of Jerusalem. She was a member of Kach (Meir Kahane's group) for 15 years. She now holds Palestinian-Israeli dialogue groups and prefers a one-state solution.

I was extremely "pro-Israel" my entire lifetime. I was utterly supportive of Israel's invasion of Lebanon in the summer of 2006. I joined AIPAC and donated to the Jewish Federation. Midway through the war in Lebanon, after arguments with close friends who were critical of Israel, I decided to actually engage myself in a real study of the Israel-Arab conflict. My purpose was to alleviate my suffering and to find more historical arguments to refute the claims my friends were making. Up to that point in time I had only read Joan Peters’ highly influential book From Time Immemorial, a book that I learned has been universally debunked and called a “hoax,” “phony,” “worthless,” “recycled Zionist propaganda,” “previously modified and discredited Zionist propaganda,” etc. by scholars from Israel, Europe, the U.S. and the Jewish World Congress. I had used Peters’ research to justify my claim that there never were a Palestinian people; that Israel had always treated the so-called Palestinians kindly and had always bent over backwards for peace.

During my research that began in the midst of the Second Lebanon War I chose to study Jewish scholars only, knowing that if I studied the subject from the perspective of any Arab or Muslim scholar I would suspect bias. My study became a full-time and daily practice to this very day. As mentioned above, many of the scholars I studied had access to the most primary of sources, among them the Israeli state, IDF, Ben-Gurion, Haganah, Palmach, and Central Zionist archives. I read the arguments of many Israeli officials, including a number of heads of Shin Bet (Israel’s Internal Security Agency) and I read numerous respected international publications (none Arab) including the Jerusalem Post, Haaretz and Yediot Aharonoth. I also studied the websites of the Israeli ministries of Defense, Internal Security, Foreign Affairs and Health as well as respected Human Rights organizations such as B'Tselem, HaMoked (Center for the Defense of the individual), Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, OCHA (The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs), UNICEF, the International Red Cross, National Lawyers Guild, Goldstone Report, etc., all of which (including the two Israeli NGO’s) at one time I would have suspected of being anti-Semitic. I read from both sides of the divide including Alan Dershowitz, Aaron David Miller, Dennis Ross, Shlomo Ben-Ami, New York Times, Wall Street Journal and more. If I wasn't sure who a source was I checked it out. I discarded anyone whose claims I could not verify through further research and I discarded anyone who appeared anti-Semitic and/or seemed to be promoting their own prejudices without, at the very least, solid proof from reputable sources. I also randomly checked the sources of virtually all of the articles, books and publications I examined to make sure the author was not taking quotes out of context, was not distorting the real message his source was conveying or was not simply lying. All of the actual historians checked out well; and the human rights organizations, independent of each other are of a very similar mind. I doubt there has ever been a more solidly documented conflict in world history than the Israel-Palestine conflict.

Other than Peters the one author who was clearly distorting history for his own purposes is Alan Dershowitz. Anybody can debunk The Case for Israel. At one time Dershowitz was someone I admired but his spiteful and slanderous participation in the Israel-Palestine issue has only inflamed Zionists and given them apparent justification for their unjustified verbal attacks against not only Palestinians but honest and courageous scholars as well as Jimmy Carter, who is committed to a fair peace between both sides and without whose help in brilliantly brokering the Camp David Accords Israel would not exist in its present form. Remember, Dershowitz is not a historian; he is an attorney and his book is written with the mind of an attorney. He ignores and distorts evidence that could convict his client; and he obfuscates where obfuscation clouds any issue that could also convict his client. Unlike historians who start out with a hypothesis and do research to confirm, modify or deny the hypothesis, and who allow the facts to determine their conclusions, Dershowitz decides on the conclusions and then researches (or not) accordingly. To cite only two examples out of many, on page 184 he quotes Raji Sourani:

Even Raji Sourani, the director of the Palestinian Center for Human Rights in Gaza and a strident critic of Israel, says that he remains “constantly amazed by the high standards of the legal system [sic].” [Dershowitz cites Greg Myre, “Trial of Palestinian Leader Focuses Attention on Israeli Courts,” NY Times, May 5, 2003].

Here is the actual quote from the NY Times:

Despite his many frustrations with the Israeli courts, Mr. Sourani says he remains “constantly amazed by the high standards of the legal system.” “On many issues,” he said, “when the courts are dealing with purely Israeli questions, like gay rights, I admire their rulings. But when it comes to the Palestinians, these same people seem to be totally schizophrenic’” (emphases added).

On page 42 Dershowitz says the following without citing source material:

The developing clash between the Jews of Palestine, led by David Ben Gurion, and the Muslims, led by the uncompromising Jew-hater, Haj Amin Al-Husseini, was not over whether the Jews or Muslims would control all of Palestine . . . . Instead, it was – realistically viewed – whether the remainder of Palestine was to be given exclusively to the Muslims of Palestine or whether it would be fairly divided between the Jews and the Muslims of Palestine, each of whom effectively controlled certain areas.

What is particularly egregious about this quote, which is nothing more than Dershowitz’s own made-up version of history, is that his primary source, Benny Morris, shows that Ben-Gurion’s intention was the opposite of what Dershowitz attempts to deceive his reader into believing. Dershowitz quotes Morris’s Righteous Victims 59 times in the first 83 pages of his book. He quotes Morris a total of 87 times within the 244 pages of the book. Here is what Morris (who is a Zionist and believes that Palestinians are “psychopaths” and “serial killers”) says in Righteous Victims, p. 138:

[Weizmann and Ben-Gurion] saw partition as a stepping stone to further expansion and the eventual takeover of the whole of Palestine . . . . [Ben-Gurion] wrote to his son, Amos: ‘[A] Jewish state in part [of Palestine] is not an end, but a beginning. . . . Our possession is important not only for itself . . . through this we increase our power, and every increase in power facilitates getting hold of the country in its entirety. Establishing a [small] state . . . will serve as a very potent lever in our efforts to redeem the whole country.

The above passage by Ben-Gurion expresses a common intention that he and the majority of Zionists shared for more than a decade before 1948. Confirmation of this can be found in many books on the subject.

Even though I am going to disagree with you I appreciate the fact that you are doing your own research. One bit of advice that I think is important for everyone is: Do not believe a thing anyone tells you about this issue. Find out for yourself through the most objective research possible, as I did and be sure to do it out of a sense of integrity. Do not demean yourself by selectively researching the subject in order to prove to yourself that what you believe is accurate. Otherwise you will never discover your role in the suffering of others, nor will you discover how to alleviate that suffering. And you will never resolve your own anxiety and suffering. As a Jew you will always be left with the dilemma of victimization: Why does the world not understand my people and why is the world anti-Semitic juxtaposed against compelling evidence that is impossible for all but the willfully deaf and blind to ignore.

J, all that I am going to say here can be found in the many sources I list above or in sources available in my forthcoming book. I cannot divulge these readily available sources at this time because I want to protect the integrity of my book. I also want you to know that I have provided more than twenty Jewish supporters of Israel with evidence similar to what I provide in this letter. I have asked them to examine my evidence and to read one book to either confirm or deny the beliefs they take for granted. Not one has been willing to read a book. Not one was willing to challenge his beliefs. All claim concern for their Jewish brethren, yet none have compassion for the Palestinians. I try to impress upon them that as long as people continue to distort the history of the Israel-Palestine problem and character assassinate the Palestinian people – as has been going on for over sixty years – peace will not be possible. Their response is to ignore me or accuse me of being anti-Israeli. Denying reality, perpetuating an illegal and brutal occupation, character assassinating the people you need to make peace with is a road to more suffering, not just for the weak but also for the strong. Acknowledging the truth and working to restore integrity is indeed a road to peace. Who really cares about Israel and who really cares more about holding onto false and unexamined beliefs?

You start your letter with the statement that “we must look at both the Palestinian side and the Israeli side.” I agree but you have not really looked at the Palestinian side. Take, for example, the letter you quote from Tom Adam of Sderot. Yes, he has had to deal with fear of rocket attacks but why? Without condoning these rocket attacks we have to ask: Why have Palestinian groups launched these rockets? Has Israel incited them? Is the launching of these primitive rockets the only way they know to let the world know that their parents, grandparents and children are being oppressed from birth to death? What about Palestinian children, whose lives are at the mercy of the Israeli military? Many of these kids have seen their father’s beaten by Israeli soldiers, their mothers humiliated and called “whores,” have seen violence committed by Israeli soldiers or settlers on a regular basis, yearn for a glass of uncontaminated drinking water, are malnourished, maimed, deaf, blind, paraplegic, amputees, have endured Israeli sonic booms that cause all kinds of trauma including bedwetting, nausea, miscarriages, nosebleeds, anxiety, muscle spasms, temporary loss of hearing, heart and breathing problems. These Palestinian children are the lucky ones because they are not dead, the victims of rockets, bullets, white phosphorus and Israel’s common refusal to allow medical supplies into Gaza. Also, you should know that Israel fortified public buildings and constructed shelters to protect its Jewish population in the line of rocket attacks. You should also know that Israel did nothing to protect its Palestinian-Israeli citizens in their villages in the line of these same attacks.

You say the $30 Billion Coalition “depicts Israel as the perpetrator and sole cause of the atrocities committed during Operation Cast Lead.” I do not agree that the Coalition depicts Israel as the “sole cause of the atrocities,” the vast majority of which were in fact perpetrated by Israel. Rather they see Israel as the primary cause. Israel, as military and civil and illegal occupier, whose force is thousands of time more powerful than the Palestinians, is the party that has the power to make peace. What is particularly counter-productive is Israel’s refusal to abide by international conventions and laws, which are designed to bring about a degree of civility between peoples.

Speaking of peace I will mention only one example of Israel’s continual sabotage or ignoring of peace proposals since 1948. That is the 2002 Roadmap for Peace that the Palestinians accepted in full. Israel “accepted” but with fourteen prerequisites. Among them:

[C]essation of incitement against Israel, but the Roadmap cannot state that Israel must cease violence and incitement against the Palestinians.” “The waiver of any right of return of refugees to Israel; No discussion of Israeli settlement in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza or the status of the Palestinian Authority and its institutions in Jerusalem; No reference to the key provisions of U.N. Resolution 242.

Any objective research leads to the inescapable conclusion that Israel has never wanted peace; what Israel has always wanted is more territory. Israel’s greed has necessitated the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people in order to grab their territory.

You may not be aware, for example, that Israel conspired with the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood in 1987 to create Hamas. Israel also armed Hamas. It wanted an alternative to the PLO. The First Intifada began in 1987. It was primarily nonviolent on the part of Palestinians (not Israelis). Israel arrested or deported most of the nonviolent leaders while allowing Sheik Yassin, Hamas’s spiritual leader, to distribute anti-Jewish hate literature calling for the violent overthrow of the Zionist government. It is far easier for Israel to portray the Palestinians as psychotic killers in order to divert the world’s attention from its strategy of land theft and ethnic cleansing and thereby deceive the world into believing the Israeli army is merely defending itself than it is to justify land theft and ethnic cleansing of Palestinians when their resistance is nonviolent.

You need to do a lot more research if you want to discover, as close as possible, the truth. Your research looks like it comes from either public Israeli government sources, which are notoriously unreliable, or Israeli apologists who have a record of justifying virtually anything Israel does. You also need to more carefully review the Goldstone Report. Israel committed terrible atrocities against civilians. Just because Hamas is also guilty of terror (to a significantly less extent than Israel) does not exonerate Israel of anything.

Israel has a National Information Directorate whose purpose is to coordinate the various sectors of the government apparatus into disseminating self-serving messages (propaganda) to the public. I do not trust the Israeli government to publicly admit to their crimes. To do so would hurt their image to Jewish supporters around the world who still believe in Israel’s “purity of arms” and it would implicate its leaders in war crimes for which they could eventually be prosecuted. Israel has always lied about its actions. Its history of lies is astonishing. I prefer to rely on sources that have nothing to gain and everything to lose with their admissions of honesty. Benny Morris:

For decades Ben-Gurion, and successive administrations after his, lied to the Israeli public about the post-1948 peace overtures and about Arab interest in a deal. The Arab leaders (with the possible exception of Abdullah) were presented, one and all, as a recalcitrant collection of warmongers, hell-bent on Israel’s destruction. The recent opening of the Israeli archives offers a far more complex picture. *

Akiva Eldar:

Without lies, it would be impossible to talk about peace with the Palestinians for 36 years while at the same time seizing more and more Palestinian land. Without lies, it would be impossible to claim that there is no partner for the road map, while at the same time injecting more and more money into outposts that the road map calls for dismantling. Without lies, it would be impossible to promise “painful concessions” in exchange for peace, while at the same time terming people who concluded such an agreement “traitors.”

Former Israeli Chief of Military Intelligence, General Yehoshafat Harkabi:

We must define our position and lay down basic principles for a settlement. Our demands should be moderate and balanced, and appear to be reasonable. But in fact they must involve such conditions as to ensure that the enemy rejects them. Then we should manoeuvre and allow him to define his own position, and reject a settlement on the basis of a compromise position. We should then publish his demands as embodying unreasonable extremism.

Moshe Dayan:

[The state of Israel] must see the sword as the main, if not the only, instrument with which to keep its morale high and to retain its moral tension. Toward this end it may, no – it must - invent dangers, and to do this it must adopt the method of provocation-and-revenge. . . . And above all - let us hope for a new war with the Arab countries, so that we may finally get rid of our troubles and acquire our space.

You say that the “fundamental truth is that this is a two-way conflict.” The Palestinians could end the conflict by lying down and allowing Jewish settlers, with the support of their government, to overrun them, allow them to take the remainder of their agricultural lands, their villages and their homes, and drive them out of the country into generations of poverty and homelessness. Is that a real peace? The fundamental truth is that Zionism, and the lies perpetrated by its founders, leaders and supporters from the days of Theodore Herzl on, has initiated and perpetuated this conflict. If someone attacks you, tries to steal everything you own, abuses and humiliates your children and then tells the world that you are a liar who never owned the land in the first place would you accept that?” I do not know any person or country in the world who would passively accept the theft of their land. In 1948 Jews owned about 6% of the land of Palestine. They now control 78% of the land outright, which both the PLO and Hamas have de facto accepted as irreversible. Additionally Israel has illegally seized or controls about half of the West Bank. And Israel maintains land, sea and air control over the Gaza Strip. In short the Palestinians subsist on about 10% of their indigenous homeland.

Mostly Ashkenazi Jews fought the British and the Arabs for a Jewish National Home. Their connection to the land called Palestine was far less than the connection Palestinians had and still have to that same land. Yet I know of no Jewish supporter of Israel who does not applaud the acts of the Haganah, Irgun and even Stern Gang for their roles in establishing Israel. I know of no Jewish supporter of Israel who resents the uprising of Polish Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto against their Nazi oppressors. In order to dissociate Palestinian resistance from Jewish resistance Israel supporters have to make up myths to portray the Palestinians as not a real people, as inherently anti-Semitic, as murderous and hateful, as not the real owners of the land, as a psychotic society etc., etc. These myths are designed to deceive all of us. They deprive Jews and others of their natural intelligence and compassion. Palestinian resistance, while mostly nonviolent, is similar to the resistance of any occupied people throughout history.

Israel did kill almost 400 children in Operation Cast Lead. I am not saying that Israel’s leaders said “let’s go kill Palestinian children” but there is no question that Israel’s leaders knew perfectly well that hundreds of Palestinian children and other civilians would die. Gaza is, after all, the third most densely populated place on earth, with 50% of its inhabitants less than sixteen years of age. Gaza has been a closed military area since 1967. Its citizens have nowhere to go to flee Israeli bombs and rockets. I suggest you look up Israel’s Dahiya Doctrine (or Strategy), which is designed to punish a civilian society for the actions of its leaders (a war crime). As General Gadi Eisenkot said after Lebanon:

We will wield disproportionate power against every village from which shots are fired on Israel, and cause immense damage and destruction. From our perspective, these are military bases. This isn’t a suggestion. This is a plan that has already been authorized.

Israel’s most eminent military strategist, Zeev Schiff said: “the Israeli Army has always struck civilian populations, purposely and consciously... the Army . . . has never distinguished civilian [from military] targets ... [but] purposely attacked civilian targets.” Former chief-of-staff Mordecai Gur, a moderate, admitted that Israel always targeted civilians (see Hirst). Rafael Eitan, chief-of-staff during Israel’s destruction of Lebanese society in the early 1980s was an extreme hawk who served for years as Ariel Sharon’s second-in-command. He was responsible for the murders of hundreds of Egyptian POWs at the end of the Suez War. He proposed that for every incident of stone throwing Israel should build ten settlements. He said “the only good Arab is a dead Arab.” He was founder of the extreme right ultra-nationalist Tzomet party (Movement for Zionist Renewal). Later in life he admitted to ordering his troops to brutalize prisoners and impose collective punishment upon Palestinians (both war crimes). He said: “I don’t believe in peace, because if they had done to us what we did to them we’d never agree to make peace.” Think of the implications of that statement. Yitzhak Rabin admitted that “ruling over another people has corrupted us.”

Operation Cast Lead was not “a reaction due to the Islamic Resistance Movement.” It was collective punishment designed to intimidate a people into rejecting Hamas; and it was a reestablishment of the deterrent force Israel relinquished to a certain extent in Lebanon. Ephraim Halevy, former head of Mossad and former National Security Director said: “If Israel’s goal were to remove the threat of rockets from the residents of southern Israel, opening the border crossings would have ensured such quiet for a generation.”

Yuval Diskin, head of Shin Bet, acknowledged that Hamas is willing to accept a long-term ceasefire on the 1967 borders.

Amira Hass reported in Haaretz: “The Hamas leader in Gaza, Ismail Haniyeh, said on Saturday his government was willing to accept a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders.”

Jimmy Carter:

But one of the things that they [Hamas] committed to me that was very significant, and they announced it publicly, by the way, to Al Jazeera and others, was that they would accept any agreement that's negotiated between the Israelis and the Palestinians if it's submitted to a referendum in the West Bank and Gaza, and the Palestinians approve it. That means they would accept Israel’s right to exist if that’s in the agreement and so forth.

Roger Cohen of the New York Times:

Henry Siegman, the president of the U.S./Middle East Project, whose chairman is [Brent] Scowcroft . . . told me that he met recently with Khaled Meshal, the political director of Hamas in Damascus. Meshal told him, and put in writing, that although Hamas would not recognize Israel, it would remain in a Palestinian national unity government that reached a referendum-endorsed peace settlement with Israel.

Regarding Hamas’s use of hospitals the Goldstone report states: “The Mission did not find any evidence to support the allegations that hospital facilities were used by the Gaza authorities or by Palestinian armed groups to shield military activities and that ambulances were used to transport combatants or for other military purposes.”

In 2006 Israel made a similar claim that Hezbollah embedded their forces within civilian areas in order to attract Israeli firepower. That claim was debunked by Human Rights Watch which clarified that most of Hezbollah’s rockets were “stored in bunkers and weapon storage facilities located in uninhabited fields and valleys.

You are correct that “Eighty percent of the weapons used were precision guided, and 99% of all strikes hit their targets.” Yes, these precision guided rockets destroyed or killed civilians, whole neighborhoods, minarets where there was no room for any fighter to hide and launch rockets, and UN buildings. B’Tselem reported: “Whole families were killed; parents saw their children shot before their very eyes; relatives watched their loved ones bleed to death; and entire neighborhoods were obliterated.”

A United Nations General Assembly report quoted the ICRC (International Committee of the Red Cross): “The Israeli military ‘failed to meet its obligation under international humanitarian law to care for and evacuate the wounded.’ Israel made no effort to allow civilians to escape the fighting.”

The Goldstone report is particularly damning. Again, please read through it. Goldstone rejected the HRC’s request to investigate possible war crimes by Israel until they altered the wording to include Hamas as a possible perpetrator. The Israeli government acknowledged his “record of impartiality.” His findings are in line with the numerous human rights groups I mentioned earlier in the letter. IDF soldiers have testified to deliberately killing civilians, just as they have testified to similar brutalities in Hebron. The evidence is overwhelming. If Goldstone had not been head of the Mission there is a high likelihood that the Report would have been even more critical of Israel.

Goldstone, as any reasonable person knows, is not an anti-Semite. Eliyahu Yishai was Deputy Prime Minister during Operation Cast Lead. At the beginning of the invasion he urged the IDF to “bomb thousands of houses, to destroy Gaza.” Nine months later, as Minister of the Interior, Yishai slandered Goldstone as an “abominable anti-Semite” for heading a mission that concluded that the IDF did exactly what Yishai wanted them to do. Yishai is not a reasonable person.

Israel’s internal investigations were designed to cover up their atrocities. Chief-of-Staff Gabi Ashkenazi is not going to implicate himself or other Israeli officials in possible war crimes and crimes against humanity. Amnesty International responded to the IDF “internal investigation:”

The information made public only refers to a handful of cases and lacks crucial details. It mostly repeats claims made by the army and the authorities many times since the early days of Operation “Cast Lead . . . . It does not even attempt to explain the overwhelming majority of civilian deaths nor the massive destruction caused to civilian buildings in Gaza. . . . [T]he army’s claims appear to be more an attempt to shirk its responsibilities than a genuine process to establish the truth. Such an approach lacks credibility.

Regarding rocket and mortar fire, from 2000 through 2008 Palestinian groups launched 8,088 unsophisticated rockets and mortars against Israel. From 2001 through 2008 eighteen Israelis were killed as a result of these attacks. Contrast those figures with the 7,700 sophisticated rockets that Israel launched against Gaza in nine months, between September 2005 and June 2006. From 2005–2007, 1,290 Gazans, including 222 children, were killed as a result of these kinds of attacks. Who is the perpetrator and who is the victim?

Your statement that “Israel warned the Palestinian people that election of Hamas to the head of the Palestinian Authority (PA) would only cause more conflict” is a reflection of an authoritarian mentality that places one party in control over the lives of another. It is the same mentality that is at the root of this conflict. Hamas was elected in a fair election that the U.S. pushed for. Who is Israel to decide for the Palestinians who their leaders should be? Hamas is not monolithic, is not particularly corrupt as is Fatah, and is not a collaborator with the Israeli government. That is why they were elected and that is why Israel wants them removed. Hamas makes the continued dispossession of the Palestinian people more difficult. What you call Israel’s warning was actually a threat. Hamas has repeatedly stated its willingness to establish a long term truce. Ephraim Halevy and American strategists said that Israel and the U.S. have the ability to strengthen Hamas’s moderate wing and engage them in a peace process. But, as Moshe Dayan states above, Israel is not interested in a peace process.

If you honestly are looking for the truth your study of Operation Cast Lead is simply not thorough or objective enough. With regard to the ceasefire, if you read the analysis of The Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center at the Israel Intelligence Heritage and Commemoration Center (IICC) you will learn that “The lull was sporadically violated by rocket and mortar shell fire, carried out by rogue terrorist organizations, in some instance in defiance of Hamas (especially by Fatah and Al-Qaeda supporters). Hamas was careful to maintain the ceasefire.”

Israel never really adhered to the ceasefire. They only allowed the average number of trucks entering Gaza to increase from seventy per day to ninety, not the five hundred per day that crossed before Israel instituted its blockade. On November 4, 2008 IDF troops entered Gaza and killed six or seven Hamas soldiers because they were allegedly digging a tunnel for the purpose of kidnapping Israeli soldiers. Hamas said its members had been digging the tunnel for defensive purposes. On November 5 Israel sealed all crossing points into Gaza. Yossi Alpher, former Mossad official and former adviser to then Prime Minister Ehud Barak:

[The blockade is] collective punishment, humanitarian suffering. It has not caused Palestinians in Gaza to behave the way we want them to, so why do it. . . . I think people really believed that, if you starved Gazans, they will get Hamas to stop the attacks. It’s repeating a failed policy, mindlessly.

On December 14 a high-level Hamas delegation met with Egyptian Minister of Intelligence Omar Suleiman who, as mediator, had helped negotiate the June to December ceasefire between Hamas and Israel. Hamas offered to end all rocket attacks in return for Israel ending its raids into Gaza and re-opening the border crossings. Suleiman conveyed Hamas’s proposal to Israeli authorities. On December 19, Robert Pastor, a senior adviser at the Carter Center, met with Khaled Mashaal, who made the same offer. The next day Pastor passed Mashaal’s offer on to a “senior official” in the IDF, who told Pastor he would get back to him. He never did. As for the Egyptian offer, it is unclear whether Israel ignored the offer or rejected it outright. At an Israeli cabinet meeting on December 21, Yuval Diskin, said: “Make no mistake, Hamas is interested in maintaining the truce.” Diskin said that if Israel ended the blockade, Hamas would restore the ceasefire.

If you’ve gotten this far, I can tell you the billboard you object to was taken down by Lamar Advertising on April 28, 2009. It was designed to provoke reaction from a mostly apathetic public in the wake of a brutal invasion. Calls from AIPAC supporters influenced Lamar’s decision. Rather than seeing themselves and Israel as victims these AIPAC people would be far more effective if they took the time to actually look at the evidence. None whom I have met have any intelligent knowledge of the actual history. For them, the childhood myths they were raised with supersede years of honest and objective research. Their attitude is identical to fundamentalist Christians who believe non-Christians will go to Hell for their failure to accept Jesus Christ into their lives. They claim to care about Israelis but their continued support of a brutal occupation only demeans an entire people and perpetuates conflict for both sides of the issue. It also paints Judaism, once known for its commitment to ethics and justice, as a religion and culture of hypocrisy and bigotry.

Please do not fall into the trap that so many who remain unconscious of their participation in the suffering of others have fallen into. Please do not allow bigotry to influence you as it has influenced them. I urge you to avoid losing your humanity. Commit yourself to the truth. It is the only path that will free you of your own suffering and free others less fortunate than you of the suffering imposed on them by others. Sincerely, Rich Forer

BOOK LIST

Anna Baltzer, Witness in Palestine: A Jewish American Woman in the Occupied Territories

Anna Baltzer, DVD: Life in Occupied Palestine: Eyewitness Stories and Photos

available at www.AnnaintheMiddleEast.com. Excerpts on YouTube.

Shlomo Ben-Ami, Scars of War, Wounds of Peace: The Israeli-Arab Tragedy

Jimmy Carter, Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid

Sylvain Cypel, Walled: Israeli Society at an Impasse

David Hirst, The Gun and the Olive Branch: The Roots of Violence in the Middle East

Norman Finkelstein, Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict

Norman Finkelstein, Beyond Chutzpah: On the Misuse of Anti-Semitism and the Abuse of History

Baruch Kimmerling, Politicide: Ariel Sharon's War Against the Palestinians

Mary Elizabeth King, A Quiet Revolution: The First Palestinian Intifada and Nonviolent Resistance

Benny Morris, Righteous Victims: A History of the Zionist-Arab Conflict, 1881-1999

Ilan Pappe, The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine

Tanya Reinhart, The Road Map To Nowhere: Israel/Palestine Since 2003

Tanya Reinhart, Israel/Palestine: How to End the War of 1948

Tom Segev, The Seventh Million: Israelis and the Holocaust

Tom Segev, 1949: The First Israelis

Avi Shlaim, The Iron Wall

Clayton Swisher, The Truth About Camp David: The Untold Story about the Collapse of the Middle East Peace Process


* Abdullah was king of Jordan.

Richard Forer is the author of the forthcoming book Breakthrough: Transforming Fear into Compassion - A New Perspective on the Israel-Palestine Conflict. He can be reached at rich_forer @ yahoo.com. Please email him if you wish to be notified when the book is available.