Nonviolence


Essays/Opinions & Social Justice & Nonviolence & Respect For Diversity & Personal and Global Responsibility & foreign policy05 Sep 2007 02:15 am
by Angry White Liberal

The below was received from someone who wishes to remain anonymous.  As I understand it, this essay was part of an ongoing dialog with someone else.

The story of the mother of the young Israeli girl, killed in a suicide terrorist attack, was very sad and poignant. If we look at this tragedy in and of itself, the only conclusion that any decent person can draw is that the perpetrators of such an act are not fully human. “Savages” and ”barbarians” are the words that quickly come to mind. However, if we step back to see the bigger picture, the question arises, why do the Palestinians hate Israel? Is it simply a case of being born with an anti-Jewish gene? Is it, as Bush simplistically explains away 9-11, “they hate us for our freedoms”?

I grew up in a predominantly Jewish neighborhood in Brooklyn in the 1950s - Brighton Beach - and as a young child I saw the blue numbers engraved into peoples’ arms. The image of Jews that we had was marching to the cattle cars and into the death camps like sheep. So when the 1967 war came, and 6 days later little Israel had destroyed the air forces of Egypt, Jordan and Syria and captured and occupied so much land, we were all proud -finally, Jews that fought back!
But Vietnam and the Civil Rights Movement created a crisis of cognitive dissonance for me. I learned in school and fully accepted that America stands for freedom and justice, yet we were bombing the hell out of this little country half way around the world that never attacked us, and were using fire hoses and attack dogs to put down peaceful, nonviolent protest against segregation while the KKK was murdering people - with the connivance of the FBI !
This forced me to face up to the painful fact that school, TV, movies - everyone was lying, and that I had to go out and do the intellectual legwork necessary to come up with some semblance of the truth. So I intensively studied US history and learned for the first time about the African Holocaust, the Native American Holocaust, the theft of the northern half of Mexico in 1846, Manifest Destiny, the rise of Jim Crow in the 1870s and especially, the ugly side of US post WW 2 foreign policy. My quest eventually led me to Israel - why would the US government - the only government to actually drop atomic bombs on civilians, supporter of dictators around the world, the same government that refused to open the doors of immigration to desperate Jewish refugees fleeing Nazism in the 1930s and 40s - why would the US support Israel? And what was the quid pro quo for Israel to get this support?
For me, the original sin of Zionism was the attempt to build a Jewish state in a land where Jews were outnumbered by Palestinians, 12:1 in 1917, 8:1 in 1922 and 3:1 in 1947. The slogan was “a land without people for a people without land” but there were people. Perhaps not 50 million living in an urbanized and industrialized society, but a population of about 700,000. And it wasn’t a desert, but a mostly agricultural society with citrus orchards, olive groves, and fig and date trees known throughout the world. Trade, crafts, textiles and cottage industries flourished there.
A “Jewish state” obviously means a state by and for the Jews, where Jews will enjoy certain rights and privileges that non Jews won’t have, otherwise it wouldn’t be called a Jewish state but a state, a democratic state or a non-religious, secular state. If the Pat Robertsons and Jerry Falwells get their wish, someday the US will be “a Christian state”. How would Jews and all other non Christians feel about that? With good reason, they’d feel that this state wasn’t going to represent and stand up for them, and that they were going to be second class citizens. Now if Palestine was truly a land without people, no one would’ve been hurt by this project of creating a new Jewish nation - an unoccupied land would’ve been peacefully occupied and settled. But a Jewish state in an already occupied country of non Jews would be impossible if Jews were a minority simply because the majority would  oppose rights and privileges exclusively enjoyed by a minority. The task of Zionism was thus to undo this negative demographic - to de-Arabize or in today’s parlance, “ethnically cleanse” Arab Palestine so that Jews could become the majority in a Jewish state. As Theodor Herzl, the founder of political Zionism prophesized,
“we shall spirit the penniless population across the border and procure employment for them in neighboring countries, while denying it to them in ours”.
As Joseph Weitz, the head of the Jewish Agency’s Colonization Department wrote in 1940,
“Between ourselves it must be clear that there is no room for both peoples together in this country. We shall not achieve our goal if the Arabs are in this small country. There is no other way than to transfer the Arabs from here to neighboring countries - all of them. Not one village, not one tribe should be left.”
In the 1930s, the Labor Zionists (David Ben Gurion, Golda Meir) sought to achieve this with a policy of “buy Jewish/hire Jewish” which aimed at economically choking the Palestinians and driving them into such misery that to survive, they would have to abandon Palestine.
Also in the 1930s, masses of Jewish refugees from Nazism sought to come to the West, mostly the US, but the doors were closed to them due to anti Semitism, which US Zionists never protested against. David Ben Gurion, speaking to a meeting of Labor Zionists in Britain in 1938 -
” If I knew that it would be possible to save all the children in Germany by bringing them over to England and only half of them by transporting them to Eretz Israel, then I opt for the second alternative”.
Obviously, if European Jews had a choice and chose the US, who would “Judaize” Palestine? So they were not given the choice, and out of desperation, these people came to Palestine. By 1947, the Jewish population had swelled to almost 31%. But the Palestinian Arabs were still there and were still the overwhelming majority. And after decades of trying to buy the land, the Zionists still only owned less than 6%, according to the Jewish National Fund’s own archives.
The Zionists in 1947- 1948 turned to the violence and brute force that extremists like Vladimir Jabotinsky, an admirer of Mussolini, had predicted would one day be necessary, back in the early 1920s. There were massacres such as the one at Deir Yassin, a small village outside of Jerusalem where on April 9, 1948, 254 men, women and children were murdered in cold blood by the Zionist terrorist group Irgun. The Irgun leader, Jabotinsky-protege Menachem Begin bragged about it in his book, The Revolt: Story of The Irgun. This is the same Begin - “terrorist #1″ as the British called him, that became Israeli Prime Minister in the 1970s.
Fearing more massacres by Zionist terrorists like the Irgun and the Lehi/Stern Gang (headed by another future Prime Minister, Yitzhak Shamir), the Palestinians did what all non combatants have done throughout human history during war - they fled temporarily until peace was restored and then fully intended to return to go on with their lives. But they weren’t allowed to return. Between 700-900,000 people were declared “absentee property owners” and their lands and other property were declared the property of the new State of Israel. Imagine having to evacuate your home because of a nearby train derailment involving a toxic substance, or a fire on your block, and then not being allowed to return and losing your possessions while strangers moved in!
Deir Yassin was just one of many massacres and threats of massacres designed to create mass hysteria to achieve ethnic cleansing of Palestine. When Israeli state archives containing plans and memoranda of that time were opened to the public in the late 1980s, historians discovered that the stories of Arabs getting on the radio and telling the Palestinians to leave temporarily so that the Arab armies could come in “to wipe out the Jews” were falsifications of history. These so-called Revisionist historians (revising the founding myths) documented in detail Zionist leaders’ plans to drive out the non Jewish population (Plan Dalet). In fact, the leading Revisionist historian, Benny Morris criticized the Zionist leaders not for ethnic cleansing but for not being thorough enough, leaving “too many” Palestinians, about 20% of the Israeli population, as a future “demographic time bomb” given their higher birth rate.
For 59 years these refugees have been denied the right to return, but Jews from all over the world are given that right. The Palestinians have steadfastly refused to assimilate into other Arab societies because they refuse to sever their connection to Palestine. In 1967, another 700,000  were driven out when Israel occupied the Gaza Strip and the West Bank and created a policy of establishing settlements and building civilian infrastructure - illegal under international law. The world, blinded by the enormity of the Nazi Holocaust ignored the plight of these people. Worse, the Palestinians were made to appear as no more than the latest in a long line of tormentors of the Jewish people, the most recent victimizers of the greatest victims of the greatest crime of the 20th century. But the Palestinians had nothing to do with Auschwitz, Dachau, Bergen-Belsen, Treblinka and the rest. Why, they ask should they have to lose their country and pay for the crimes of Europeans? If the Jews wanted a nation of their own why, after WW 2 didn’t they demand of the UN and world public opinion that Germany and Austria pay by ceding a part of its territory for a Jewish state?
International law maintains that a people under occupation has the right to use force to resist which means more than just singing We Shall Overcome. So the Palestinians seek to resist. Suicide bombings are certainly a horrific tactic which I oppose, but the Palestinians don’t have an army, a navy, or an air force equipped with Apache and Black Hawk helicopters and all the other high-tech instruments of death provided free, courtesy of US taxpayers. And they don’t possess the 200-300 nukes that Israel has. In the past six years alone, wrote the historian Ilan Pappe, “Israeli forces have killed more than 4,000 Palestinians, half of them children”. Reporting on a four-year field study in occupied Palestine for the British Medical Journal, Dr Derek Summerfield wrote that “two-thirds of the 621 children killed at checkpoints, in the street, on the way to school, in their homes, died from small arms fire, directed in over half of cases to the head, neck and chest - the sniper’s wound”. Isn’t this terrorism?
When looking at the current situation in Palestine, an observer will find an illegal Israeli occupation that has been festering for 40 years, combined with illegal ethnically-exclusive colonies built on stolen Palestinian land, and the world’s only ethnically-segregated road network, where many routes can only be accessed by Jews. An internationally-illegal apartheid barrier surrounds Palestinian towns and villages, not only cutting them off from one another, but also cutting off farmers from their lands, children from their schools, patients from their hospitals and workers from their jobs. If this wall was really there to protect against Palestinian terrorism, it would be built on the Green Line between Israel and the West Bank, not 80% within the West Bank. It’s nothing more than a naked land grab, seeking to make a future Palestinian state impossible. Israel controls all of the Palestinians’ openings to the outside world, stifling not only Palestinians’ freedom of movement, but also their economy and trade.
Winston Churchill once said that “war is terrorism by the rich and terrorism is war by the poor”. Is this why, when the US killed between 3-4 million people in Southeast Asia by dropping napalm, Agent Orange and carrying out ”saturation bombings” in the 1960s and 1970s and the CIA murdered over 20,000 civilians in its notorious Operation Phoenix program, it was called “war” and not ”terrorism”? Why isn’t the CIA’s overthrowing of democratically-elected governments in Iran (1953), Guatemala (1954), Iraq (1963), Brazil (1964), Indonesia (1965) and Chile (1973) called “terrorism”? Why wasn’t Reagan’s support for death squads in Angola, Mozambique, Nicaragua, El Salvador and Guatemala in the 1980s with hundreds of thousands dead and “disappeared” called “terrorist”? Is this why the US sanctions program of the 1990s against Iraq which took the lives of over 1 million civilians including 1/2 million children was labeled “war” and not “terrorist”? And why can Israel blow up houses, carry out “targeted assassinations”, imprison 11,000 people without filing charges against them and denying them the right to be visited by family and attorneys, torture some of these prisoners, bomb water filtration plants and electric generators last year as they did in Gaza and Beirut last summer and drop one million cluster bombs over Lebanon that will explode when farmers plow their fields and little children pick them up, thinking that they’re toys — why can Israel do these things and yet it is the Palestinians who are the “terrorists” the “inhuman savages”?
Israel developed a tactic that was soon named ‘targeted assassination’. According to the new Israeli military doctrine, all that was needed was some intelligence on the ground, which would be followed by a single Israeli jet launching an American guided missile in highly populated Gaza. The achievements were rather clear. In many cases targeted Palestinians were assassinated - in very many cases they found their death alongside innocent civilian bystanders who were unlucky enough to be in the proximity. These unfortunate people -  “collateral damage” - were in the wrong place at the very wrong time. In many other cases the pilots just missed or were misled by intelligence. As a result, many Palestinian civilians, old people, women and children found their death.
In the 2006 Israeli-Lebanon war, Hezbollah fired over 4,000 Katyusha rockets into Israeli cities, killing a total of 43 Israeli civilians. By contrast, Israeli bombing of Lebanon killed an estimated 1,100-1,200 Lebanese civilians. Israel reportedly used white phosphorus chemical weapons against civilians with impunity, and in light of strong international protest. If Hezbollah’s terrorist acts killing over 40 Israelis are deplorable, what about Israel’s killing of 28 times as many civilians? Why does the US media, unlike the Israeli media neglect to report this? Because when the Israelis kill, it’s “war”, when the Palestinians kill, it’s “terrorism”? And why is it that anyone daring to point out this gross racist hypocrisy is demonized, denigrated and dismissed with the label of being a “Jew hater” or “self hater”???
suggested readings -
Statistics not trumpeted by US media
Non violent resistance of Palestinians not covered by US media
Benny Morris -
The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem Revisited
Righteous Victims - A History of the Zionist-Arab Conflict, 1881-2001
Ilan Pappe
The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine
Avi Shlaim
The Iron Wall
Baruch Kimmerling
Politicide - Ariel Sharon’s War Against the Palestinians
Norman Finkelstein
Beyond Chutzpah - On the Misuse of Anti-Semitism and the Abuse  of History
Social Justice & Nonviolence & Personal and Global Responsibility & foreign policy & peace30 Jul 2007 02:14 pm
by Angry White Liberal

Rice, Gates to Discuss Arms Sale Plans with Gulf States, Egypt and Israel

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice formally announced today that the United States intends to provide billions of dollars in arms sales and assistance to six Gulf states, Egypt and Israel to boost security against Iran.

Rice made the announcement hours before she and Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates left the United States to travel to the Middle East, where they will meet Arab and Israeli leaders to discuss the arms packages, as well as efforts to stabilize Iraq and possibilities for generating new movement in the Arab-Israeli peace process.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/30/AR2007073000623.html?hpid=moreheadlines

Well, there you have it folks:  Shrub plans to promote peace…by rearming everyone to the teeth!  Is the Man a hypocrite?  Or is he merely delusional?  I do know that he is a first class S.O.B.

j'accuse & Social Justice & Grassroots Democracy & Nonviolence & Decentralization & Personal and Global Responsibility & foreign policy22 May 2007 06:58 am
by Angry White Liberal

This just goes to show yet again that you cannot trust the mainstream media to tell the full story if it conflicts or undermines the U.S. elite’s policy goals.

I received the following from Steven L. Robinson via Green Alliance’s Green All Views Listserve.

U.S. Imperial Ambitions Thwart Iraqis’ Peace Plans
by Joshua Holland & Raed Jarrar
AlterNet
May 21, 2007.
Iraq’s resistance groups have offered a series of peace plans that might put an end to the country’s sectarian violence, but they’ve been ignored by the U.S.-led coalition because [the resistance groups are] opposed to foreign occupation and privatization of oil.
***********************************************************
An online search shows that the peace plan was largely ignored by the Western commercial media.
That’s par for the course. While every nuance of every spending bill that passes the U.S. Congress is analyzed in minute detail, the Iraqis — remember them? — have proposed a series of comprehensive peace deals that might unite the country’s ethnic and sectarian groups and result in an outcome American officials of all stripes say they want to achieve: a stable, self-governing Iraq that is strong enough to keep groups like al Qaeda from establishing training camps and other infrastructure within its borders.
Al Fadhila’s peace plan was not the first one offered by Iraqi actors, nor the first to be ignored by the Anglo-American Coalition.
**********************************************************
But these plans are unacceptable to the Coalition because they A) affirm the legitimacy of Iraq’s armed resistance groups and acknowledge that the U.S.-led coalition is, in fact, an occupying army, and B) return Iraq to the Iraqis, which means no permanent bases, no oil law that gives foreign firms super-sweet deals and no radical restructuring of the Iraqi economy. U.S. lawmakers have been and continue to be faced with a choice between Iraqi stability and American Empire, and continue to choose the latter, even as the results of those choices are splashed in bloody Technicolor across our TV screens every evening.
**********************************************************
As early as 2005, the University of Michigan’s Juan Cole reported that the Sadrist movement — named after the father of the nationalist cleric Muqtada al-Sadr — had gathered a million signatures on a petition demanding a timetable for occupation forces to withdraw. More recently, the Arabic press reported that as many as a million Iraqis — a million Shia and Sunni working together — had protested the continuing occupation in Najaf on the fourth anniversary of the fall of Baghdad last month.
********************************************************************************

One of the few laws left on the books from the Saddam Hussein era is one that severely limits the rights of Iraqi workers to organize. As journalist
David Bacon reported in the winter of 2003, coalition forces “escalated their efforts to paralyze Iraq’s new labor unions with a series of arrests”
that left one of the few surviving segments of Iraq’s once-vibrant secular civil society toothless.

j'accuse & Social Justice & Grassroots Democracy & Nonviolence & Personal and Global Responsibility22 May 2007 01:24 am
by Angry White Liberal

Paramilitary Ties to Elite In Colombia Are Detailed

Commanders Cite State Complicity in Violent Movement

Top paramilitary commanders have in recent days confirmed what human rights groups and others have long alleged: Some of Colombia’s most influential political, military and business figures helped build a powerful anti-guerrilla movement that operated with impunity, killed civilians and shipped cocaine to U.S. cities.The commanders have named army generals, entrepreneurs, foreign companies and politicians who not only bankrolled paramilitary operations but also worked hand in hand with fighters to carry them out. In accounts that are at odds with those of the government, the commanders have said their organization, rather than simply sprouting up to fill a void in lawless regions of the country, had been systematically built with the help of bigger forces.

Is it any wonder that Columbia is a poor country?  (click here for article)  These elites find it second nature to rape the country’s natural resources and to ignore the plight of the poor.

j'accuse & Social Justice & Nonviolence15 May 2007 04:57 pm
by Angry White Liberal

These people are bastards. Who the hell do they think that they’re kidding? These guns will be on the street in no time.

Raffle Being Held In Government Building in Fairfax

“I guess it’s a free country, and people can make mistakes in judgment all the time,” Kaine said. “When I read about a group doing this, it just makes me wonder what makes them tick.” *****************************************

The raffle Thursday night at the Mason District Government Center in Annandale has angered Fairfax County officials and heightened attention on Virginia’s gun laws a month after a 23-year-old college student from Fairfax fatally shot 32 people and himself at Virginia Tech.

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

“It is not the place for government to interfere with a private raffle,” Attorney General Robert F. McDonnell (R) said through a spokesman.

House Majority Leader H. Morgan Griffith (R-Salem) said gun control advocates frequently use government property to hold gun buyback events.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/14/AR2007051401526.html?nav=hcmodule

Social Justice & Nonviolence & Personal and Global Responsibility10 May 2007 11:28 am
by Angry White Liberal

Attorney General Warns of Charges

Attorney General Robert F. McDonnell is warning New York to stop, by the summer, sending private agents into Virginia to look for illegal gun sales, saying that the agents could face legal action.Because of a Virginia law that goes into effect in July, New York Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg (R) and his agents could be charged with a felony if they continue to target Virginia gun dealers with undercover sting operations, McDonnell said.

McDonnell (R) has sent Bloomberg what amounts to a cease-and-desist letter.

“This was a courtesy letter to the mayor to advise him about a change in Virginia law of which he should be aware,” McDonnell said Wednesday.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/09/AR2007050902573.html?nav=hcmodule

Ecological Wisdom & Social Justice & Nonviolence & Decentralization & Community Based Economics & Respect For Diversity & Personal and Global Responsibility & Future Focus/Sustainability & Living Wages and Affordable Housing & Environment & global warming & foreign policy01 Apr 2007 03:14 am
by Angry White Liberal

Forests Destroyed in China’s Race to Feed Global Wood-Processing Industry

The Chinese logging boss set his sights on a thickly forested mountain just inside Burma, aiming to harvest one of the last natural stands of teak on Earth.He handed a rice sack stuffed with $8,000 worth of Chinese currency to two agents with connections in the Burmese borderlands, the men said in interviews. They used that stash to bribe everyone standing between the teak and China. In came Chinese logging crews. Out went huge logs, over Chinese-built roads.

About 2,500 miles to the northeast, Chinese and Russian crews hacked into the virgin forests of the Russian Far East and Siberia, hauling away 250-year-old Korean pines in often-illegal deals, according to trading companies and environmentalists. In the highlands of Papua New Guinea, Indonesia and Africa and in the forests of the Amazon, loggers working beyond the bounds of the law have sent a ceaseless flow of timber to China.

Some of the largest swaths of natural forest left on the planet are being dismantled at an alarming pace to feed a global wood-processing industry centered in coastal China.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/31/AR2007033101287.html?nav=rss_email/components

j'accuse & Social Justice & Nonviolence & Personal and Global Responsibility26 Mar 2007 02:31 pm
by Angry White Liberal

…and no, this isn’t it.
Getty ImagesClick here to see the photographs in question.

Politics & News & Nonviolence17 Nov 2006 10:38 pm
by karma432

The annual protest of the U.S. Army’s School of the Americas at Fort Benning, Georgia grows each year, hitting nearly 20,000 last year.  This year simultaneous protests will take place in Santiago, Bogota, San Slavador and several other Latin American cities.

Since 1946, the SOA has trained more than 60,000 Latin American soldiers.  The Pentagon has acknowledged that in the past the SOA used training manuals advocating coercive interrogation methods and extra-judicial executions. Many SOA graduates have subsequently been linked to many of the worst human rights abuses in Latin America.

In recent years, reformist governments have brought to power many people who were at one time thrown in prison and tortured.  These governments are cutting their ties to the SOA and rethinking their relation to the US military.  Roy Bourgeois, the Catholic priest who founded SOA Watch has met with government officials in Caracas, Montevideo and Buenos Aires, encourging these countries to abandon ties with the SOA, and plans to visit five more countries next year.

Although the Bush administration has made public plans to further militarize Latin America, Democrats in Congress hope to cut funding for the SOA.   Increasing public awareness will be an important factor determining whether they succeed or not.

GP Maryland & Politics & News & Think this through with me & Grassroots Democracy & Nonviolence & Maryland Issues & campaigns08 Sep 2006 03:40 pm
by OnBackground

As the primary season draws to a close in Maryland, there’s been a lot of talk about who should be included in debates and while it is a tough question with no easy answer (if you include everyone who files in the primary season than you’ll have a debate that isn’t substantive, but when you start to narrow the field it gets arbitrary), it gets tougher when a semi-public entity supported by taxes, in this case Maryland Public Television, is making the decision.

Allan Lichtman’s supporters put up a couple of videos of his recent arrest while trying to get into a debate between the two “leading” Senate candidates. Amidst all of the rhetoric, tension, and even action (between 1:20 and 2:20 is where things get energized and Lichtman gets arrested), the most interesting question isn’t really explored. You know this will be a question we get into in the general.

The real question is, who controls the public space, both literally and figuratively? What happens when public television staff decide who gets to be on tv? And what happens when security staffers keep Lichtman or really anyone out of a particular publicly funded and controlled (i.e. by your tax dollars) space, namely the MPT studio? Lichtman asks under what authority they are trying to drive him out and then, under what authority they are arresting him. He asks what laws were violated, what right they have to arrest him. And it’s a good question.

Who decides who can come on public property and what they can do there? And is it just the fact that they are government employees that the police can arrest someone? I don’t think so. Lichtman’s letter from jail and the presence of Kevin Zeese outside the studio (yes, he’s on camera), suggests we need to grapple with this. How far will some go with power if we don’t question them?

I write a blog and organize a generally progressive, collaborative Maryland politics and policy blog (that is looking for more progressive voices).


Home | News | Issues | Meetings | Get Involved | Links | Contact Us | Blog

Powered by WordPress