October 1992, Page 53, 54

Other People's Mail

Some letters by or to other people are as informative for our readers as anything we might write ourselves.

Humiliation at Kennebunkport

To President George Bush, Aug. 12, 1992

I was flabbergasted and greatly humiliated for you when I opened the newspaper today. I had already been shocked and personally violated to see you yesterday on all TV stations give in to Israel and tumble down like a house of cards in front of Yitzhak Rabin, the American people and the whole world. You broke your promise, Mr. President, and shattered your fair and courageous Middle East policy. Thus you broke our hearts and our great faith in you.

Sir, a year ago, you firmly proclaimed that there will be no loan guarantees to Israel unless it stops all settlements in the occupied territories. The Israeli government-Shamir's and now Rabin's-has never stopped building new settlements. Actually, "moderate" Rabin (compared to Shamir) has resumed erecting some 11,000 settlements he had halted for some days to allow the cameras to capture the standstill and hence deceive the international community. Moreover, Rabin is openly committed to building more settlements in Jerusalem, the Golan Heights and the Jordan Valley.

Mr. President, today I read in the newspaper what the TV stations had chosen to hide yesterday. I read with utter disbelief how you spoke warmly of Israel as "a democracy surrounded by countries that aren't." How could Israel be a democracy when half of its inhabitants are either enslaved or third-class citizens who are constantly and heartlessly stripped of their civil and basic human rights?

Then, sir, you added that the Israelis have "been loyal and staunch friends. . . and nobody knows where the next crisis could come from." It is a fact, sir, that Israel is the threat to peace, stability, security and prosperity in the Middle East with its more than 300 nuclear bombs and its unquenchable appetite for colonialism. Israel constantly bombards, raids, kills and destroys innocent Lebanese families in their villages, not to mention the atrocities or the daily horrors it inflicts on the helpless, defenseless Palestinians and their children.

Mr. President, on Aug. 11, 1992, you sold us out, along with our shared glorious dream of real Middle East peace based on justice and freedom to all people. You betrayed us, sir, like Judas betrayed Jesus Christ. The tragic Judas got his money, but you will get nothing. You will not win the pro-Israel voters. They have already chosen Bill Clinton and poured all their influence and money into his campaign because he is cheap, slick and sleazy!

Fortunately, dear president, it is never too late. Please convince us that you are still a man of integrity and principles. Personally, if I allow myself to think otherwise I'll go crazy. That's why I'd like to believe that your drastic turnabout was based on political considerations and not, as you put it, "doing what is right." Doing what is right, sir, is what you were doing before your fall-standing tall and fair against human bondage and human rights violations.

I still hope and pray, dear Mr. Bush, that you are re-elected. The U.S. and the world will be safer, stronger and a better place, with you as president of the greatest nation on earth. A Clinton-Gore administration would be a catastrophe. Our free and brave America would become, under their Israeli-supported and misguided leadership-along with most of the media, the press and the Congress-just like Palestine, south Lebanon and the Syrian Golan Heights: "Israeli-occupied territory."

With greatest respect and expectations.

Mrs. Nuha Marchi, Orlando, FL

From AIPAC, in a Plain Wrapper

To the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, July 12, 1992

As subscribers to the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, we were not surprised to learn of the dirty tricks program which you have been running, nor even that you are so ashamed of the operation that you send Activities in a plain wrapper without any attribution as to who the publisher of this Red Channels-type periodical is.

If you are old enough to remember Red Channels, it was an annual directory of suggestions for blacklisting individuals suspected of being Communists or fellow-travelers. Moreover, Red Channels had a sister weekly called Counterattack. It was published by two former FBI agents who had access to J. Edgar Hoover's files. One of these agents, John F. Keenan, was my father's lawyer. As such, I was privy to all the dirt that this rag was spreading in the McCarthy era. Many of its blows were aimed at liberal and left-oriented Jews. Now we find AIPAC engaged in the same smear tactics some 40 years later. At least Counterattack and Red Channels never tried to hide who issued its publications.

Marjorie Hope and James Young, Wilmington, OH

Evenhandedness

To the Columbus (OH) Dispatch, May 17, 1992

In a recent letter, Richard Schottenstein of Jerusalem criticized President Bush's stated policy of treating Israel and the Arab states evenhandedly. I accept Schottenstein's premise that Syria is a militaristic dictatorship. I cannot accept his definition of Israel as a free democracy.

Israel is a socialist church-state that offers full citizenship to members of only one faith. It has a poor track record for its treatment of its minorities. Its origin in 1948 was marked by a combination of naked terrorism, massive illegal immigration and ruthless, competent military conquest.

The argument that Israel is the only player in the Middle East aligned with American values ended when Egypt left the Soviet camp. Most Arab countries would welcome closer relations with the United States. Their hard feelings toward us can be traced to their perception of our continued support of a country that was formed, and continue to expand, on land stolen from their midst.

James F. Craig, Thornville, OH

Unconstitutional Aid to Israel

To the Chicago Tribune, Dec. 4, 1991

Stephen Chapman states in his column of Nov. 21 that school prayer violates the First Amendment's ban on any law "respecting an establishment of religion." Fine.

What then are we to make of the billions of dollars given the state of Israel since 1948? Is it not a religious state? By our actions, are we not respecting and honoring the Jewish religion? Celebrating a religious culture and heritage?

Our government says to its citizens: no money for parochial schools, no prayer in public schools, no celebration of Christianity on public property at home. Overseas, however, we economically underwrite and support a religious state. Is that legal? Are we not violating our own Constitution?

James A. Henderson, Wauwatosa, WI

Spread-Eagled for Israel

To the Los Angeles Times, Aug. 26, 1992

Well, George Bush can finally enter himself in that pantheon of U.S. presidents who have spread-eagled themselves for Israel ("Bush OKs Israel Loan Guarantees," Aug. 12). At a time when U.S. residential foreclosures are at record highs and our own people are homeless in horrifying numbers, Bush is pledging $10 billion of our tax money to subsidize construction in territories that Israel has illegally occupied for 25 years, in brazen defiance of the U.N. Presumably future taxpayer grants to Israel, which is by far the largest recipient of U.S. aid, will be used to pay off the very loans we are now co-signing.

I doubt if we would accord similar treatment to Iraq if it proposed to build settlements in Kuwait.

Randall Smith, Del Mar, CA

A Candidate's Fund-raising Letter to Jewish Friends

Dear Friend, (undated)

For months, President Bush has used a veto threat and his White House "bully pulpit" to refuse to extend to Israel loan guarantees to help secure the funds needed to absorb hundreds of thousands of Soviet and Ethiopian Jews within Israel. His action to block any action on loan guarantees until Israel behaves as he wishes is reprehensible.

The loan guarantee is not a foreign aid appropriation, nor is it an actual loan of money. Rather, it is simply a guarantee so that Israel can borrow money at the lowest possible interest rate to meet a pressing human need.

For years, the Congress and presidents, through the Jackson-Vanik Amendment, denied "Most Favored Nation" status to the Soviet Union because of its refusal to allow Soviet Jews to leave. Now, Jews are leaving, and the president's action has held hostage Israel's ability to absorb them until he gets what he wants-whatever that may be. This is unconscionable for a U.S. president.

President Bush should remember that he asked Israel to stay out of the Gulf war-and she did so at her peril. She has always been able to defend her citizens and was ready again-but agreed to the president's demand.

Now, Bush says that Israel owes him because she did what he wanted. This move by the president is terrible treatment of America's staunchest ally in the Middle East and a blow to her ability to absorb the large number of immigrants within her tiny country.

I ask you to join me in urging Congress to act immediately to expedite the loan guarantee legislation and, if necessary, to override the president's veto. It's time to put an end to economic blackmail.

Dianne Feinstein, candidate for the U.S. Senate, San Francisco, CA

See What Rabin Delivers

To the Los Angeles Times, Aug. 26, 1992

The new government of Yitzhak Rabin promises much, but the U.S. government should wait and see what he delivers before underwriting any loan guarantees. On at least two occasions an Israeli government promised an American president that it would stop settlement construction in occupied Palestine, but subsequently continued with construction.

The new Israeli government does not actually intend to halt construction, just not sign new construction contracts: 10,000 housing units will be completed, and approximately 40,000 Jewish settlers will move into occupied Palestine within the next year, representing a 40 percent increase in the Jewish population in the occupied areas (excluding the Jewish population of Jerusalem). The U.S. government must insist that these housing units not be completed, or if they are finished, then Palestinians must be allowed an equal opportunity to buy them. Furthermore, Rabin's freeze will also permit the development of new settlements as long as the government declares them "security settlements."

Israel and its American supporters quickly reassure us that Israel will be able to repay the loans. As proof, they cite Israel's perfect debt repayment record. The sole reason Israel has a perfect record is that the American taxpayer repays Israel's debt to the U.S. government. Since 1984, a U.S. law, sponsored by Sen. Alan Cranston, has stipulated that economic assistance to Israel shall not be less than the interest and principal that Israel owes to the United States. Without this law, Israel's debt repayment record would be among the worst in the world. Norman Kempster observed (Aug. 12) that by granting the loan guarantees Washington has "surrendered its leverage over Israeli settlement policy for most of the rest of the century." There is no guarantee that the Rabin government or a future government will feel compelled to abide by the terms of the agreement.

Arch Miller, Arcadia, CA

Israel's Privileged Aid Deal

To the Times-Picayune, Aug. 27, 1992

Apropos of the $10 billion loan guarantee for Israel soon to come up for a vote in Congress, Times-Picayune readers may be interested in an Associated Press story released May 9, 1990 (which the Picayune's editors elected not to print). Here is the substance of the story: With its economy in dire straits, Israel came to the United States in 1982 for a favor: Would the United States pay a full year's $910 million in economic aid all at once instead of the usual quarterly installments? The government said yes.

Eight years later, the Israeli economy is in better shape, yet the unique arrangement for Israel's aid remains part of U.S. law. Not only does Israel get its aid money upfront each year, but since it does not need it immediately, it uses it to buy U.S. Treasury bonds, lending the United States back its own cash and earning an additional $76.7 million in interest. And to make immediate payment to Israel each year, the United States borrows the money at an additional interest cost of up to $70 million. Thus the AP story.

U.S. law is suffused with such special treatment for its Middle Eastern ally. Israel is the only country permitted U.S. aid without oversight or accountability of any kind. The Israeli government is permitted simply to certify that it has spent the money, and there is no USAID mission in Israel to supervise its use.

As for the $10 billion loan guarantee, the claim is made that Israel has a top credit rating and has never defaulted on a loan. The fact is that Israel's credit rating is D (on a scale from A to F) by the Export-Import Bank. Standard and Poor's gives Israel a triple B-minus, the lowest rating on its index.

Technically, Israel has never defaulted because of the Cranston amendment, first passed by Congress in 1984 and attached to each foreign aid bill subsequently passed by Congress. It stipulates that U.S. economic aid must cover the total annual interest Israel owes on its debt to the U.S. government.

Because Congress eventually forgives all U.S. Treasury loans to Israel, Israel in fact has never repaid a loan to the U.S. government without further U.S. assistance.

This information is necessary if Times-Picayune readers are to give an informed judgment to their congressional representative when the $10 billion loan guarantee comes to a vote.

Norma M. Hynes, New Orleans, LA

< Prev		Next >