The Ojai Post

Today, it is the two weeks of this horrible war. Last Saturday was the worst day of all. When I woke up in the morning one of my friends called. His voice sounded strange when I asked, “How are you?”
He answered “Fine, but have you heard any news about any of your friends?”

I was really scared, and asked him, “What’s wrong?”

He told me Christine died. I went into a state of shock. I still don’t believe it. I threw the phone and started crying. I called some of my other friends to make sure, and all of them were grieving. Christine has been my friend for almost four years. We used to go to school and to the YMCA together. I’m sad, afraid, and worried all at once, because she could have been my sister. I feel very sorry for her and her family.

Her parents did the best they can do, but it wasn’t enough, so the result was death. What if my parents can’t protect me and give me the support I need...will I die too?

My future is almost destroyed.

An Israeli rocket hit my school a few days ago, and the school was destroyed completely. I really can’t imagine why they’re bombing religious and educational places such as mosques, schools, and universities.

With every explosion we feel our house shaking and about to be destroyed; what about the people that already lost their homes?
I’m crying for the loss of one of my friends... what about the people that lost five of their relatives or more?

Depression and fear are filling our souls and surrounding our homes…what’s next?

I don’t wish for anything as much as I wish that this war will end soon and that the Palestinian people can live like any other people and Palestinian children can enjoy their childhood like any children in the world.

Help us—because we are all human beings!

Nour Kharma is in the 9th Grade. She lives in Gaza City and can be reached at: nirmeen.elsarraj@gmail.com

Published on Tuesday, January 13, 2009 by CommonDreams.org
Peace is the New War
by Randall Amster

What is war good for? Absolutely nothing -- unless you're a military profiteer, torture fetishist, media mogul, or fearmongering politician. I'm tempted to add Peace Studies professors to this list, since war seemingly provides a raison d'etre to our work, but that only captures half the field -- namely the basic abolition of war that we call "negative peace" -- and misses the more interesting and challenging aspect of what "positive peace" actually looks like in practice.
People across the political spectrum are war-weary by now and ready for that positive new option. Certainly we need to contest warfare and militarism, but how many different rhetorical ways are there at this point to condemn such practices? Aside from the list of benefactors above, does anyone still need to be convinced that war is wasteful and devastating on innumerable levels? The knowledge is solidly there; now all we need is the political will. This short list may be of service in connecting the dots from thought to action:

1) The Peace Dividend: There's much consternation about the so-called "bailout," and rightly so, but consider that the war machine sucks up nearly this much annually. Hundreds of billions of dollars each year are spent on obsolete equipment, unaccountable no-bid contracts, and implements of destruction. Imagine those resources being conscripted instead for utilization in health care, education, green energy, the arts, food security, urban renewal, and more. It's sometimes said that war is good for the economy, but as we've seen recently those numbers simply do not add up. Investing in peace, by contrast, promises to pay dividends for generations to come.

2) Moral Equivalency: Over a century ago, William James began a landmark essay with these prescient words:

"The war against war is going to be no holiday excursion or camping party. The military feelings are too deeply grounded to abdicate their place among our ideals until better substitutes are offered than the glory and shame that come to nations as well as to individuals from the ups and downs of politics and the vicissitudes of trade."

What James suggested was that we need something akin to war in its drama, challenge, and sense of purpose in order to fashion a substitute, or a "moral equivalent." It's unreasonable to expect people to abandon a familiar narrative, even one that's unpopular or destructive, without offering something in its place. James imagined a "public service" or "public works" mandate, and we can speculate about what else might fit this bill -- there's certainly no lack of an enterprising spirit in the modern marketplace of ideas.

3) All Power to the Imagination: The ways of war have been variously referred to as "a bad cultural invention" and "a failure of the imagination." War is not a path to peace and never has been -- after all, we're still fighting wars after centuries of continuously doing so -- and if war could somehow bring an end to war it would've done it by now. A.J. Muste once said that "there is no path to peace -- peace is the way," and the inverse is also true that war is a means only to its own end. Sometimes this is called "blowback;" Malcolm X referred to it as "chickens coming home to roost," Isaac Newton described an "equal and opposite reaction," the Bible counsels that "violence begets violence," and Hindus reflect on the processes of karma. Choose your guru but the message is the same: war cannot and never did bring peace, whereas peace brings more of itself. Imagine that.

4) Sticks and Stones: Albert Einstein once observed that "peace cannot be kept by force," and when asked what kind of weapons World War III would be fought with he responded that he didn't know, "but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones." In this sense, war is retrogressive and reactionary; it contributes to entropy and a downward spiral of cultural evolution. Proponents will sometimes talk about technological "spin-offs" from the military as being beneficial to society -- but what one hand giveth, armaments can taketh away. There's more than enough impetus to push the frontiers of science and philosophy without war being part of the equation, and it would surely be an interesting sight to behold the innovations conceived outside the mentality of militarism.

5) The Green Revolution: I've heard that "green is the new black," and all signs point toward a "greening" trend in both consciousness and consumption. While some doubt whether late capitalism can ever be sufficiently "greened" to forestall climate change and other global calamities, many embrace the notion that a more widely held environmental ethic can be an important component of moving the current paradigm toward something more just and sustainable. A peace economy is intimately connected to a peace ecology, in the sense that the ways in which we manage our relationship to the earth and its resources reflect how we manage our interactions and exchanges with each other. People are getting this, and a sustainable worldview is emerging. War ruins not only human lives but the environment itself, and folks aren't buying it anymore.

6) Kids Are Smart: War is, like, so old school, and young people are a lot savvier about these things than we often appreciate. Despite being inculcated into a martial culture through media, education, and technology, the sensibility of the up-and-coming generations is more pacific than one might suspect. Many are more interested in exploring what they can make rather than what they can destroy. They've grown up in a post-9/11 world of financial instability and resource conflicts, and aren't anxious to extend and replicate these scenarios. As a teacher and father of two young boys, I try to see the world through the eyes of these next generations, and the dominant sense often appears to be a mixture of fear and hope. War stokes the fear and peace holds the hope, so I'm opting for the latter -- for the kids' sake and ours.

7) The Logic of Survival: Life wants to be lived and the survival instinct is innate. President Kennedy once urged that we "must put an end to war, or war will put an end to" us. Whatever your spiritual views, creation is a positive attribute and the future matters. Leaving behind a world on the path to peace, including both the tools (hardware) and ideas (software) to promote and sustain it, ought to be among our overarching missions during our brief time here. They say that "history is written by the winners," but the future is an open book that we're all entitled to take part in writing.

We can't afford to wait for the military-industrial complex to magically abdicate power. We also can't rely solely on top-down leaders to bring the change we seek, lest we wake up to a rubric that suggests "Obama is the new Bush" or "Afghanistan is the new Iraq." There's an old bumper sticker you've probably seen: "If the people lead, the leaders will follow." This is the essence of democracy, and it's our best hope for peace as well.

Randall Amster, J.D., Ph.D., teaches Peace Studies at Prescott College, and is the Executive Director of the Peace & Justice Studies Association. His most recent book is Lost In Space: The Criminalization, Globalization, and Urban Ecology of Homelessness (LFB Scholarly 2008).

Masters Of War

Come you masters of war
You that build all the guns
You that build the death planes
You that build the big bombs
You that hide behind walls
You that hide behind desks
I just want you to know
I can see through your masks

You that never done nothin'
But build to destroy
You play with my world
Like it's your little toy
You put a gun in my hand
And you hide from my eyes
And you turn and run farther
When the fast bullets fly

Like Judas of old
You lie and deceive
A world war can be won
You want me to believe
But I see through your eyes
And I see through your brain
Like I see through the water
That runs down my drain

You fasten the triggers
For the others to fire
Then you set back and watch
When the death count gets higher
You hide in your mansion
As young people's blood
Flows out of their bodies
And is buried in the mud

You've thrown the worst fear
That can ever be hurled
Fear to bring children
Into the world
For threatening my baby
Unborn and unnamed
You ain't worth the blood
That runs in your veins

How much do I know
To talk out of turn
You might say that I'm young
You might say I'm unlearned
But there's one thing I know
Though I'm younger than you
Even Jesus would never
Forgive what you do

Let me ask you one question
Is your money that good
Will it buy you forgiveness
Do you think that it could
I think you will find
When your death takes its toll
All the money you made
Will never buy back your soul

And I hope that you die
And your death'll come soon
I will follow your casket
In the pale afternoon
And I'll watch while you're lowered
Down to your deathbed
And I'll stand o'er your grave
'Til I'm sure that you're dead

Copyright ©1963; renewed 1991 Special Rider Music

"The number of victims in Gaza is increasing by the day... The situation is untenable. It's genocide."

Miguel d'Escoto
President, UN General Assembly

from Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miguel_D%27Escoto

Relations with Israel

D'Escoto has for years been a harsh critic of Israel's treatment of the Palestinians and the relationship between Israel's representatives and D'Escoto has been difficult.

[edit] Ahmadinejad embrace and dinner

On September 17, 2008, Israel's Ambassador to the U.N. to refer to d'Escoto as an "Israel-Hater"[23] because D'Escoto embraced Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad after Ahmedinedjad's speech to the UN assembly. Ambassador Shalev is quoted saying that d'Escoto:

"dedicated a whole paragraph to Israel, saying that the UN's great failure is the fact that a Palestinian State was not established in 1947, as part of the partition plan. The man is known for his dislike for Israel, to put it mildly, and those who heard the speech could think that Israel is the most important country in the world, as if there are no other problems or hotbeds of terrorism in the world. [...] I heard that the Iranian president's address was followed by loud applause, and that d'Escoto warmly embraced him. He was also expected to join a dinner with Arab leaders to mark the end of Ramadan, with Ahmadinejad also in attendance."[24]

D'Escoto responded saying that he didn't "want anyone to be wiped off the map - not even any individual, much less a state."[25] D'Escoto's spokeman also responded:

"He will join the dinner because he believes in dialogue, an issue which he had highlighted, and thinks that he should deal with all member states."[26]

[edit] Apartheid comparison

Main article: Israel and the apartheid analogy

D'Escoto, reported the Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz, "likened Israel's policies toward the Palestinians to South Africa's treatment of blacks under apartheid. ... Brockmann stressed that it was important for the United Nations to use the heavily-charged term since it was the institution itself that had passed the International Convention against the crime of apartheid."[27][28][29]

[edit] Boycott call

On November 24, 2008 D'Escoto called for the world to support the international campaign of “boycott, sanctions and divestment” which aims to pressure Israel to change its current treatment of the Palestinians.

[edit] Crucifixion mention

D'Escoto also accused Israel of “crucifying our Palestinian brothers and sisters." [30]

D'Escoto mention of crucifiction promoted a number of reactions:

* Abraham H. Foxman, the national directory of the Anti-Defamation League, condemned D'Escoto for his remarks, stating that: "It is outrageous that the president of the General Assembly could accuse Israel of 'crucifying' Palestinians, knowing full well that this is a term loaded with symbolism and history. For centuries, the charge that the Jewish people were responsible for crucifying Jesus was used as an excuse for pogroms and other violence against Jews. It is irresponsible, indeed unconscionable for a world leader to stand up and to charge Israel with, in essence, 'doing it again.'"[31]

* The Argentine branch of the Simon Wiesenthal Center released a statement calling for D'Escoto's dismissal, stating that "D'Escoto Brockmann's statements, promoting anti-Semitism and the destruction of a Member-State of the United Nations, are an abuse of the honorable position that he holds.[32]

* The World Jewish Congress (WJC) also assailed Brockmann's comments, with WJC President Ronald Lauder said the accusations were "false and without basis

Some excerpts from today's NY Times:

Israelis United on Gaza War as Censure Rises Abroad

By ETHAN BRONNER
JERUSALEM — To Israel’s critics abroad, the picture could not be clearer, yet here in Israel very few, at least among the Jewish population, see it that way.

Since Israeli warplanes opened the assault on Gaza 17 days ago, about 900 Palestinians have been reported killed, many of them civilians.

But voices of dissent in this country have been rare. And while tens of thousands have poured into the streets of world capitals demonstrating against the Israeli military operation, antiwar rallies here have struggled to draw 1,000 participants. The Peace Now organization has received many messages from supporters telling it to stay out of the streets on this one.

As the editorial page of The Jerusalem Post put it on Monday, the world must be wondering, do Israelis really believe that everybody is wrong and they alone are right?

The answer is yes.

“It is very frustrating for us not to be understood,” remarked Yoel Esteron, editor of a daily business newspaper called Calcalist. “Almost 100 percent of Israelis feel that the world is hypocritical. Where was the world when our cities were rocketed for eight years and our soldier was kidnapped? Why should we care about the world’s view now?”

Israel, which is sometimes a fractured, bickering society, has turned in the past couple of weeks into a paradigm of unity and mutual support. Flags are flying high. Celebrities are visiting schoolchildren in at-risk areas, soldiers are praising the equipment and camaraderie of their army units, and neighbors are worried about families whose fathers are on reserve duty. Ask people anywhere how they feel about the army’s barring journalists from entering Gaza and the response is: let the army do its job.

Israelis deeply believe, rightly or wrongly, that their military works harder than most to spare civilians, holding their fire in many more cases than using it.

Because Hamas booby-traps schools, apartment buildings and the zoo, and its fighters hide among civilians, it is Hamas that is viewed here as responsible for the civilian toll. Hamas is committed to Israel’s destruction and gets help and inspiration from Iran, so that what looks to the world like a disproportionate war of choice is seen by many here as an obligatory war for existence.

“This is a just war and we don’t feel guilty when civilians we don’t intend to hurt get hurt, because we feel Hamas uses these civilians as human shields,” said Elliot Jager, editorial page editor of The Jerusalem Post, who happened to answer his phone for an interview while in Ashkelon, an Israeli city about 10 miles from Gaza, standing in front of a house that had been hit two hours earlier by a Hamas rocket.

“We do feel bad about it, but we don’t feel guilty,” Mr. Jager added. “The most ethical moral imperative is for Israel to prevail in this conflict over an immoral Islamist philosophy. It is a zero sum conflict. That is what is not understood outside this country.”

It is true that there are voices of concern here that the war may be outliving its value. Worries over the risk to Israeli troops and over even steeper civilian casualties as the ground war escalates have produced calls to declare victory and pull out.

Polls have shown nearly 90 percent of Israeli Arabs support the war thus far, and street interviews confirm that Israelis not only favor it but do so quite strongly. The country’s leaders, while seeking an arrangement to stop Hamas’s ability to rearm, do not want a face-saving agreement. They want one that works, or else they want to continue the war until Hamas has lost either its rockets or its will to fire them.

Boaz Gaon, a playwright and peace activist, was livid at Hamas, both for what it had done to its own people and civilians in the south, and for its impact on the Israeli left.

“Hamas has pushed Israeli thinking back 30 years,” he said. “It has killed the peace camp.”

“Rockets from Hamas could eventually reach all of Israel,” he said. “This is not a fantasy. It is a real problem. So there is a gap between actual images on the screen and the geopolitical situation.

“You have Al Jazeera standing at Shifa Hospital and the wounded are coming in,” he continued, referring to an Arab news outlet. “So you have this great Goliath crushing these poor people, and they are perceived as victims. But from the Israeli perspective, Hamas and Hezbollah are really the spearhead of a whole larger threat that is invisible. Israelis feel like the tiny David faced with an immense Muslim Goliath. The question is: who is the David here?”

The war, of course, is portrayed differently here and abroad. What Israelis see on the front pages of their newspapers and on their evening broadcasts is not what the rest of the world is reading and seeing. Israeli news focuses on Israeli suffering — the continuing rocket attacks on Israel, the wounded Israeli soldiers with pictures from Gaza coming later. On a day last week when the foreign news media focused on Red Cross allegations of possible war crimes, Israeli news outlets played down the story.

But the Israeli news media are not so much determining the national agenda as reflecting it. Even the left and what was long called the peace camp consider this conflict almost entirely the responsibility of Hamas, and thus a moral and just struggle.

“By this stage in the first and second Lebanon wars, there were much larger street demonstrations, vigils and op-ed pieces,” said Janet Aviad, a former sociologist and peace activist. “But in this case, the entire Israeli public is angry at the immoral behavior of Hamas.”

The writer A.B. Yehoshua, who opposes Israel’s occupation and promotes a Palestinian state, has been trying to explain the war to foreigners.

“ ‘Imagine,’ I tell a French reporter, ‘that every two days a missile falls in the Champs-Élysées and only the glass windows of the shops break and five people suffer from shock,’ ” Mr. Yehoshua told a reporter from Yediot Aharonot, a Tel Aviv newspaper. “ ‘What would you say? Wouldn’t you be angry? Wouldn’t you send missiles at Belgium if it were responsible for missiles on your grand boulevard?’ ”

What a sad, terrible way to begin this promising New Year...both sides are "right," and both are "wrong"....

[Norman is the son of Holocaust survivors]

The record is fairly clear. You can find it on the Israeli website, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs website. Israel broke the ceasefire by going into the Gaza and killing six or seven Palestinian militants. At that point—and now I’m quoting the official Israeli website—Hamas retaliated or, in retaliation for the Israeli attack, then launched the missiles.

Now, as to the reason why, the record is fairly clear as well. According to Ha’aretz, Defense Minister Barak began plans for this invasion before the ceasefire even began. In fact, according to yesterday’s Ha’aretz, the plans for the invasion began in March. And the main reasons for the invasion, I think, are twofold. Number one; to enhance what Israel calls its deterrence capacity, which in layman’s language basically means Israel’s capacity to terrorize the region into submission. After their defeat in July 2006 in Lebanon, they felt it important to transmit the message that Israel is still a fighting force, still capable of terrorizing those who dare defy its word.

And the second main reason for the attack is because Hamas was signaling that it wanted a diplomatic settlement of the conflict along the June 1967 border. That is to say, Hamas was signaling they had joined the international consensus, they had joined most of the international community, overwhelmingly the international community, in seeking a diplomatic settlement. And at that point, Israel was faced with what Israelis call a Palestinian peace offensive. And in order to defeat the peace offensive, they sought to dismantle Hamas.

As was documented in the April 2008 issue of Vanity Fair by the writer David Rose, basing himself on internal US documents, it was the United States in cahoots with the Palestinian Authority and Israel which were attempting a putsch on Hamas, and Hamas preempted the putsch. That, too, is no longer debatable or no longer a controversial claim.

The issue is can it rule in Gaza if Israel maintains a blockade and prevents economic activity among the Palestinians. The blockade, incidentally, was implemented before Hamas came to power. The blockade doesn’t even have anything to do with Hamas. The blockade came to—there were Americans who were sent over, in particular James Wolfensohn, to try to break the blockade after Israel redeployed its troops in Gaza.

The problem all along has been that Israel doesn’t want Gaza to develop, and Israel doesn’t want to resolve diplomatically the conflict, both the leadership in Damascus and the leadership in the Gaza have repeatedly made statements they’re willing to settle the conflict in the June 1967 border. The record is fairly clear. In fact, it’s unambiguously clear.

Every year, the United Nations General Assembly votes on a resolution entitled “Peaceful Settlement of the Palestine Question.” And every year the vote is the same: it’s the whole world on one side; Israel, the United States and some South Sea atolls and Australia on the other side. The vote this past year was 164-to-7. Every year since 1989—in 1989, the vote was 151-to-3, the whole world on one side, the United States, Israel and the island state of Dominica on the other side.

We have the Arab League, all twenty-two members of the Arab League, favoring a two-state settlement on the June 1967 border. We have the Palestinian Authority favoring that two-state settlement on the June 1967 border. We now have Hamas favoring that two-state settlement on the June 1967 border. The one and only obstacle is Israel, backed by the United States. That’s the problem.

Well, the record shows that Hamas wanted to continue the ceasefire, but only on condition that Israel eases the blockade. Long before Hamas began the retaliatory rocket attacks on Israel, Palestinians were facing a humanitarian crisis in Gaza because of the blockade. The former High Commissioner for Human Rights, Mary Robinson, described what was going on in Gaza as a destruction of a civilization. This was during the ceasefire period.

What does the record show? The record shows for the past twenty or more years, the entire international community has sought to settle the conflict in the June 1967 border with a just resolution of the refugee question. Are all 164 nations of the United Nations the rejectionists? And are the only people in favor of peace the United States, Israel, Nauru, Palau, Micronesia, the Marshall Islands and Australia? Who are the rejectionists? Who’s opposing a peace?

The record shows that in every crucial issue raised at Camp David, then under the Clinton parameters, and then in Taba, at every single point, all the concessions came from the Palestinians. Israel didn’t make any concessions. Every concession came from the Palestinians. The Palestinians have repeatedly expressed a willingness to settle the conflict in accordance with international law.

The law is very clear. July 2004, the highest judicial body in the world, the International Court of Justice, ruled Israel has no title to any of the West Bank and any of Gaza. They have no title to Jerusalem. Arab East Jerusalem, according to the highest judicial body in the world, is occupied Palestinian territory. The International Court of Justice ruled all the settlements, all the settlements in the West Bank, are illegal under international law.

Now, the important point is, on all those questions, the Palestinians were willing to make concessions. They made all the concessions. Israel didn’t make any concessions.

I think it’s fairly clear what needs to happen. Number one, the United States and Israel have to join the rest of the international community, have to abide by international law. I don’t think international law should be trivialized. I think it’s a serious issue. If Israel is in defiance of international law, it should be called into account, just like any other state in the world.

Mr. Obama has to level with the American people. He has to be honest about what is the main obstacle to resolving the conflict. It’s not Palestinian rejectionism. It’s the refusal of Israel, backed by the United States government, to abide by international law, to abide by the opinion of the international community.

And the main challenge for all of us as Americans is to see through the lies.

Norman Finkelstein is author of five books, including "Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict", "Beyond Chutzpah" and "The Holocaust Industry", which have been translated into more than 40 foreign editions. He is the son of Holocaust survivors. This article is an edited extract of the views of Finkelstein given at DemocracyNow.org. His website is www.NormanFinkelstein.com

try Thomas Friedman's take on the "eternal conflict"

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/07/opinion/07friedman.html?_r=1

It's not just about poor Gazan children.
It's about Iran, the modern West and the future of the world.
If you don't fully understand this then you actually are not well informed and you risk looking foolish when you are out at the "Y".

Whoever keeps posting full articles, please knock it off. It violates fair use. Excerpt two or three key paragraphs and link to the full article.

Hey Moses:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/07/gaza-israel-palestine

"How Israel brought Gaza to the brink of humanitarian catastrophe"
Oxford professor of international relations Avi Shlaim served in the Israeli army and has never questioned the state's legitimacy. But its merciless assault on Gaza has led him to devastating conclusions.

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/robert-fisk-why-do-they-hate-the-west-so-much-we-will-ask-1230046.html

If Israel's concern about Iran and the Western world is truly on the forefront, the country MUST take responsibility for its actions over the last several decades that have fed the rise of Islamic extremists in the region. What has Israel done to make Hamas irrelevant to Palestinians? The embargo shattered the economy there -- what better way to give power and voice to anyone who will fight back?

Hamas sees itself as a resistance movement -- much of the world sees it as a terrorist organization. Israel sees itself as a democratic state -- how much of the world sees it as a terror organization? For someone like my friend who lived in a basement as Beirut was blown to bits 1982, there's not a lot of mystery.

There are truths and lies in all these perceptions, and a three thousand year history of tension. And a whole lot of people who just want to live their lives get caught in the crossfire. Literally.

Best,
Leigh

Leigh-
Interesting link, but make sure you also digest:

http://jewishrefugees.blogspot.com/2005/08/inside-mind-of-avi-shlaim.html

before you go around trying to influence anyone

Moses -- what I was trying to say is that there aren't clear good guys and bad guys here -- this is a deeply complicated problem with ancient roots and horrific modern consequences.

You can find impassioned arguments on every side of the fence here -- and there are nuances and truths, as well as misconceptions and falsehoods in pretty much all of them.

Israel calls the 1948 Arab-Israeli war "The War for Independence," Palestinians call the same war "The Catastrophe." As neither a Palestinian nor an Israeli, I can see that they both are right in their perceptions. Therein lies the problem.

My second point was that if Israel is positioning itself as the moral authority here, defending itself against terrorism and potential threats, it must take responsibility for its own brutality. And in the same way that the US needs to take a good look at our own international policies that have supported the rise of Islamic extremism, Israel must take ownership in their contributions to the kind of situations that make groups like Hamas look like good solutions.

In 1982, Israel managed to disrupt the PLO in Lebanon. But that war is credited for spawning the growth of Hezbollah. And the cycle continues, and the hatred grows deeper, with new generations learning to fear and hate one another...

If there is anything the conflict in this region has shown, it's that military conflict doesn't bring resolution. Most people just want to live and thrive in peace -- both sides, Israel and its varying Arab enemies, have been partners in sustaining the conflict.

But in the case of Gaza, it's clear where the asymmetry lies in terms of military and monetary power. Gaza has been starved by Israel while Hamas has built schools and clinics. Does this mean Hamas is suddenly a totally benign organization? No! But it sure doesn't mean the state of Israel is, either.

Bottom line, from 1948 onward, wars have not worked to solve the tensions in the region. If Israel really wants safety and security, the country's leaders must work for peace - if Israel was putting its resources into finding peaceful solutions with respect for ALL residents of the area, I'd understand the outrage about groups like Hamas much more clearly.

Best,
Leigh

Leigh-

There are 2 things I tell people:
1. Study the situation.
When you have a comprehensive understanding of the legal, political, geo-political historical, moral,judicial and international judicial (might as well throw in biblical) issues then I may pay attention to what you have to say.

2. One does not HAVE to have an opinion on the matter.
My orthodox cousin who lives in Flatbush, Brooklyn with his daughter-of-a-rabbi wife and 4 live children and 4 who died in the womb, surprised me when he declined to have an opinion on the middle-east situation.
"I don't live there, it's not my business" was his answer to my disturbing confusion about how I should feel.
It was very liberating.

Moses, that's great. Go be liberated if you'd like.

A little tidbit for you to take with you:
People can be well informed and still come to conclusions that are different from yours.

I've seen this play out in other threads that touch on Israel. You make Pro-Israel statements. Other people take a different position (yes, there are more than two!) sometimes citing a good deal of historical, political, psychological and other types of evidence. Your response is to either:

a) Talk a lot about the suffering of Israelis as if someone was disputing that Israelis suffer b) Run about saying none of us understand the complexity of the situation.
c) Mock those who don't agree with you.
d) All of the above.

I rarely see you actually engage with what is being said.

thank you Tanya, for whatever you just said

Hi Moses --

I have done a fair amount of reading about what's happening in Israel and Palestine over the years. Am I an expert? Nope. Am I pulling crap out of thin air? Nope, either.

And there are a lot of people who DO have lifetime expertise in that area who are saying that warfare isn't the answer. Certainly more expertise than me, and I'm willing to bet more than you.

And while I respect your cousin's response to you, you'll note I didn't say one faction was more or less "right" than the other. I took Israel to task because of the asymmetry of the action and the moral high ground they've taken against terrorist organizations.

Ultimately, I think having an opinion about who's right and who's wrong is ultimately a lot less important than having an opinion about this needing to get resolved peacefully. And I do think that's an important opinion to have, regardless of one's faith or ethnicity, because what happens there ripples out through the world.

For example:

1. What happens in Israel, in Palestine, in the Middle East in general has enormous potential impact in the US. Part of Friedman's argument was the implications of alignment with Syria and Iran. We're been making a LOT of rumbling noises about Iran. Yes, this impacts us directly. If Iran gets drawn into a war with Israel, there could be huge implications for the US.

2. Osama Bin Laden has called for jihad against Israel because of what's happening in Gaza-- what happens if Al Quaeda springs into action against Israel? How is the US going to be involved?

3. Since the mid 70's financial support to Israel has cost the US trillions. This has both economic implications for the US (and that's a big deal right now, in case you've not noticed), and has political implications when other Middle East countries look at how the US interacts with the region.

4. US policy makers have been engaged with this process all along -- and we've helped make it worse in a whole variety of ways.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/251/story/58812.html

And then there's that little dying civilians issue...regardless of who their government is, or what god they worship, or who wins the "we were here first" battle, either historically or mythologically. Right now, people are dying -- they can't get out, they can't get to safety, and they've not lifted a finger against anyone.

At that's simply wrong. Period. Whether its Jews in the ghettos of Poland or Palestinians in the refugee camps of the Gaza Strip. Or anywhere else in the world.

Leigh

Thank you, Tanya!

A much better response than mine -- don't know why I feel compelled to try and reason with people who refuse to actually engage in the conversation...

...you'd think I would have learned my lesson with the spritely Dennis/Denise in all of his/her confusion...

Best,
Leigh

Tanya- to the point

1. I never or at least hardly ever talk about the suffering of the Israelis.
Matter of fact Israel is one of the most vibrant countries I have ever been to.
2. You are correct- most of "you" including me, have a VERY limited understanding of the true complexity of the situation.
There are a few middle east scholars who understand a lot of it and someone like spk has a pretty firm grip on the politics. Leigh is trying
3.Well I don't really "mock". I do call into question hackneyed responses and not very well thought out answers.
4. None of the above.

Your turn to further the "dialogue"

Thank you Leigh! Thank you Tanya!

So, I've been away for awhile....Is Moses El Anonimo?

is he
is she
izzy...

only the real anonimo nose...

Well, there's my answer!

Comment #14 most certainly gave you away. I may not have a "comprehensive understanding of the legal, political, geo-political historical, moral,judicial and international judicial" understanding of much (as you kept trying to tell me on that other thread) but I've got a helluva memory! :)

welcome back LTOR
where u bean?

all peoples are deserving of life and self-determination.

none are deserving of violence, or of begetting violence.

none are deserving of land ownership, to the exclusion of others, for the ravaging of life divine.

the nation-state system -- of offense against the poor, of offense against other cultures, of offense against sacred nature -- must end, is ending.

the war in Jerusalem will end when the war machine is outlawed everywhere on Earth, particularly in the USA where it has been institutionalized as our bread and butter.

will end when those whose heads are thick from the bread and butter understand that life, sanity (and food) will become many times more plentiful in a global economy of cooperation, a global economy of nonviolence, a global economy based on permaculture, a global economy based on the return (growth!) of the wetlands and rivers, forests and rainforests, oceans and atmosphere ... Mother nature.

any other 'Obama' jobs program is a fraud, another bankster buyoff, and a furthering of the war against the women and poor and indigenous, against all peoples, against the Earth.

only in healing the Earth can the people be healed.

only in healing the people can the war end,

can Spirit be heard again.

all our sacred relations ...

haku LTOR!

mt-
i agree with you on the nation-state thingie.
last time i crossed the border from Tajikistan into Afghanistan i really couldn't tell a difference.
but then i had to high-tail it back to Kazakhstan because the girls are dark-skinned and more beautiful (to my eye).
really, the only difference.
not worth fighting a war over.

luv ya, mk!

Aww, thanks guys. As busy as I get, I will ALWAYS return to get my OP fix!

The intelligence, wit, compassion, insight, generosity and, of course, the verbal slugging-it-out just can't be beat. You rock, Ojai Post!

Before I veered off topic (sorry), I had wanted to mention to evan and Tanya (for their part in organizing this vigil): GOOD FOR YOU! It's determined, moral activism (and dare I say - social bravery) like this that has been lacking for all too long with regard to this issue! I commend everyone who ends up participating!

LTOR,

Just FYI, I'm not the Tanya who is the organizer of this vigil, though I am the one that posted earlier in this thread and the one who posts on this site in general.

thanks to all for your participation, and for bringing your best understandings to the table! as the evan who IS helping to organize the vigil (thank YOU, LTOR!), i want to be clear about my position:

• i do NOT understand the intricacies of this ages-old conflict. i rely on many of you for that, and you never let me down.

• i DO know that people are killing and being killed. they are all my brothers and sisters, and i want for the violence and destruction to stop. some of you are going to call that fuzzy and juvenile, some of you may claim that it cannot possibly be that simple. you are totally right and totally wrong.

• doing something is better than doing nothing, in ways that we often cannot quantify or measure. that's faith in activism.

because you are a sincere guy, may i ask:
1. can something be totally right and totally wrong at the same time?
2. is doing nothing sometimes better than doing something?
see "Don't Just Do Something, Sit There" by Osho Rajneesh

be safe tomorrow.
watch out for islamic militants, fanatic jews or aryan brotherhoods to spoil the protest.

Moses,
I'm so sick of your attitude that no one can know enough about this.

I know enough to know that detonating phosphorous bombs over heavily populated CIVILIAN targets is wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong.

So now there is confirmation that the IDF is dropping white phosphorous on an open air prison with women and children trapped inside. I do understand the history of Israel and the region quit well. I also understand that dropping white phosphorous on civilian populations is a clear war crime.

How sad, or brainwashed,that we can critisize any country in the world , except ISRAEL, THEN WE BECOME ANTI SEMETIC

please cite the source of the confirmation

so Henry, I mean El Anon, ur Moses ...

do you, or the New World Order, offer an alternative to the status quo?

an alternative to the Police State -- with its expanding legions of police and soldiers to enforce and protect the whims of the aristocracy, the violence and predation upon women, the indigenous, and the poor worldwide? and their perverse teachers and media and lawyers to continue dumbing down the world, to maintain (again) the institution of sickness and ignorance?

is there anyone amongst the World Government (the Monarchy, the Bilderbergers, the Rothschilds, the Rockefellers, the CFR, IMF, G8, Worldbank, Israeli Illuminati, the Vatican, Club of Rome, Trilateral Commission, the Free Masons, the Priory of Sion, etc. etc.) who has a vision of ending the pyramid of predation ... who has a vision, and is publicizing and empowering it, of enabling ALL the people -- of protecting them from the victimization by the Corporations and Governments -- of empowering every single nonviolent individual planetwide -- of giving them sovereignty and self-determination, and an EQUAL role in local, regional, continental, and global decisionmaking that could apply to them?

so far I have seen NO proposals for sanity by these banksters. no proposals to end the abuse by the institution of men over women.

take for example the program given to former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, to create a new global patriarchal Church, to further the dis-empowerment of women, to further the sacrilege of Church and State against sacred spirit -- against the tens of thousands of spiritual traditions and peoples worldwide -- and against our best known divinity, Nature, aka Mother Earth.

are there any amongst these fraudsters who are not re-enacting the millennia of black karma?

proposing to end the Secret Government, the Evil Privileged Security State. proposing to immediately dis-empower every guild and institution of deception, predation and violence?

any who have a rudimentary self-worth of intelligence and enlightenment, and are proposing to enable a global economy of healing and harmony?

until we honor women, the indigenous, the poor, and all peoples -- protect them and their cultures and spiritual traditions -- and enroll them in the global intelligence, and global decisionmaking -- until then it is all downhill for planetary sanity, productivity, and economy.

only in enabling our global heart, mind and body can we grow our world economy (beyond recognition).

and to do that we must create a healthy planet, reforest and heal HER.

spread a world-wide permaculture of returning life to the land.

in healing our Mother, we end THE WAR, enable all cultures.

in enabling culture, we return the divinity of artistry and humanity ...

economy beyond 'conception' ...

Confirmation -
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article5521925.ece

Israel is denying the use of wp though, so it depends on who you trust more I guess.

How about Rupert Murdoch's own Times of London

JINX Tanya

UN headquarters in Gaza hit by Israeli 'white phosphorus' shells ...

The main UN compound in Gaza was left in flames today after being struck by Israeli artillery fire, and a spokesman said that the building had been hit by shells containing the incendiary agent white phosphorus.

The attack on the headquarters of the UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) came as Ban Ki Moon, the UN Secretary-General, arrived in Israel on a peace mission and plunged Israel's relations with the world body to a new low.

The Veil is lifting....

1200 Palestinians, mostly civilians, dead. And counting. They're locked down and walled in, lacking the basics, huddled down praying a bomb or bullet does not take them out in the next thirty seconds.

Nine Israelis, including five soldiers by friendly fire, dead.

The world's fourth strongest military all-out assaulting a civilian population locked down and enclosed within walls.

Pretty simple, actually.

Apologists like "moses" would like to change the subject. They champion in-laws who say "not my business, I don't live there."

Moses, if your neighbor is smoking pot, or reading Ayn Rand, I agree - do nothing. Please. Mind your own business. Live and let live.

If your neighbor is murdering children, it's a little different. Don'tcha think?

Do you really believe in live and let die?

In Gaza, its U.S. munitions, U.S. funds, and U.S. patronage that is fueling the slaughter. It is our business. But maybe you are right: If "we" truly would "do nothing," that might also be a solution. Because Israel would be unable to perpetrate this horror if our government were not actively supporting, supplying and providing cover.

Courageous leaders, leaders elected with moral and ethical briefs, such as Bolivia's Evo Morales, are cutting off relations with Israel and calling for condemnation and accountability for what they straightforwardly label genocide.

What are you doing? Your urge, "nothing." But not really. What you really want is for us to keep sending over phosphorous bombs, keep blocking meaningful international action, keep sending money and arms over there on the Israeli side - and just do "nothing" when it comes to the atrocities Israel is committing with our munitions.

Again, its pretty simple.

Unfortunately, when Israel is the perpetrator, hard truths that apply to anyone else simply cannot be broached. Thomas Friedman in the New York Times yesterday was justifying Gaza as a legit strategy of collective punishment. He called it "education" of Palestinians. The lesson? Pray tell, Mr. Friedman. I'm all ears.

The real lesson is that collective punishment and targeting civilians are barred by the Geneva Conventions and deemed war crimes, beyond the pale, for very good and very strong historical, philosophical, ethical, moral and humanitarian reasons. We should not lightly brush them aside.

Millenium-
Here is my alternative (#38):

go about your daily business creating as much joy for yourself and others as possible.
through the simple process of global "oz-moses", you will find the terrain completely transformed

http://www.independent.com/news/2009/jan/16/jewish-organizations-hold-peace-vigil/

I've caught some flak for my position that hardly anyone knows most of the whole picture.
Here is a link that I first got from a yosemite sam pecos bill type character who is a postperson up in San Rafael.
Then my german friend redirected me to it.
Frankly I am surprised that none of you have discovered it to further discredit the Israeli position.
I have no idea how accurate or whether it is accurate.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=11680

Israeli Invasion of Gaza Gas Fields

...

Israeli soldiers that refuse to serve and why:

Story here

The League of Nations, United Nations, European Union, North American Union, BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India and China) or any other similar effort is sponsored by our current de facto “leaders,” regardless as to time (past, present or future). They all lead to the same thing: One World Government as a pyramid structure with all the power held on the top by just a limited few privileged families believing they hold a “higher station.” This is what people like Mirko Bagaric are strongly promoting. It’s truly time to awaken and see that a World Government is inevitable – either for the pure satisfaction of ultimate power or for the very survival of Mankind. The only question is, “Are we going to just sit back and allow a de facto World Government to be created via this game of power dominoes and allow it to be ruled by an elite group of privileged family members, or are we going to rise to the occasion and take the reins of destiny into our own hands – forming a de jure government of the People?”

I believe people generally have a fear of a world government (as well as local government) because they have been mistakenly taught the purpose of government structures. Most were taught that the structure of government was the Sovereign and had control over the People. However, when the People awaken, they will see that they are the Sovereign collectively. This makes them the Government and the structures of government administration they create are their servants. The People mustn’t be afraid of themselves – either on a local level or a global level. I think we may need to start educating the People about how to think together as a Collective Sovereign. But, when the education is completed and the talking is completed, we need action.

So, what is this new action that we need to embrace? As in any other emergency, it’s time for those who can take action to take action.

Many of us who have been trying to impress upon government the need to properly and responsibly address important issues have, up to this time, been restricted to a large degree because of a certain belief system.

That belief system is thinking, or having been told by government servants, that we must convert the masses to the importance of our issue before we can see any results. Some politicians have even been so bold as to say that we would have to demonstrate a 100% acceptance among the people before they considered it to be the ‘will of the People.” Our obstructive government servants would love to see us continue on this impossible and totally non-productive path.

That is why many people are beginning to see the significance in transitioning to "organising" the informed via a community-approved decision-making method. All politicians understand it is their duty to implement the will of the People – but the People have never been able to properly or formally organize to create and project their will before this time.

For example, if in America the People were to formally agree to the use of one specific decision-making method, and the method allowed only 1% of the population to make important responsible decisions, that would be about 3 million people. The concept that must be sold to the American People is that if they select a decision-making method that allows the potential for 3 million responsible neighbors or more to make a decision and deliver it to their elected officials as an order (the formal will of the People) – not a petition, the People would have a higher degree of trust in this method than allowing the 538 Lobby-influenced Congressmen in DC to make the decision for them. In this respect, 1% is no longer a small number, and the trust is attainable - thus allowing us to concentrate on making a decision rather than converting the masses. It may be time to take a serious look at www.upworldgov.org.

If we do nothing due to our fear of a world government, there is no doubt that the de facto world government will succeed. Now that we are aware, it’s the People’s choice.

The People in the Byron Shire, NSW Australia are soon to choose their decision-making method via the new Byron Shire Symposium Network starting in April 2009. What's your community doing about it?

blessed Ricardo,

I will forward your message around.

Note that the World Bankster Government, inclusive of Japan, China, most of Asia, most of the Middle East -- focused on the culture of the UK-Europeans -- has been in dominant operation for two decades now.

It is up to us, if we wish, to end its secrecy and power and privilege -- and open it up to universal participation -- in the information, knowledge and decisionmaking -- by all peoples, all cultures, all spiritual traditions, every single child, woman and man on the planet.

End Secret World Bankster Government -- enable a ten times greater perma- and multi-culture economy -- by honoring the women and indigenous peoples, and healing our Mother Earth.

with and for all our sacred relations,

Millennium Twain

cursed millenioum,
you make "0" sense, but your mullet looks bitchin...

mullet yesterday, mullet today,

and blimey, if it don’t look like mullet again tomorrer.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090118/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_israel_palestinians

Interesting exchange between Bill Moyers and the ADL.

Tyler-

thanks for the link.
The ADL of course is extremely sensitive to confronting any trace/hint of anti-semitism (even to the point of perhaps occasionally being "hyper-sensitive").
Moyers, of course is an intelligent liberal-leaning reporter and media personality who is interested in reportage as well as ratings.
I am a fan of both and hope we can learn something new from their dialog.