Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, May 2000, pages 43-46

Other People’s Mail

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

The Ciralsky Dispute

To Ms. Lesley Stahl, “60 Minutes,” CBS Television, New York, NY, Feb. 9, 2000.

The lead report on the Sunday, Feb. 6, edition of “60 Minutes” demands a response.

Your report of the dispute between the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and attorney Adam Ciralsky, who was effectively terminated by the agency because of his alleged personal ties to Israel, seems to have been designed to obscure rather than to illuminate one of the most awkward political realities of our time. But as history has shown, in the case of U.S. Navy counterintelligence specialist Jonathan J. Pollard, the first loyalty of some officials of the United States government, has been not to the United States of America, but to a foreign government, that of Israel.

Your report seemed to struggle for the appearance, at least, of balance and objectivity. But it failed on both counts. The most glaring and telling omission came with the mention that the CIA hired the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) to provide sensitivity training to its counter-intelligence agents.

Your researchers, like all of your knowledgeable viewers, must be aware that the ADL, or some of its members, for many years has appeared to be more than peripherally involved in Israeli intelligence gathering operations in the U.S. Investigative journalist Robert I. Friedman’s reports during the ADL spy scandal of 1993-94 revealed that much. And since the Sept. 27th settlement of a class-action lawsuit resulting from the spy scandal, the ADL has been under the order of a federal judge, permanently enjoined from spying on Arab-American, anti-Apartheid, and other civil rights groups in the United States. Moreover, a court-appointed Special Master is removing from the ADL’s files materials obtained illegally by ADL “fact-finders” through their “official friends” in government and law enforcement across the United States.

This is the same ADL that the CIA has hired to provide sensitivity training for its counter-intelligence agents. Have I missed something, or have you? Did producer Richard Bonin fail to mention these facts to you? Did you think your viewers would not be interested in the ADL’s recent history regarding ethnic sensitivity?

The combination of irony, hypocrisy and absurdity in the situation your report so adroitly avoided exploring in full is truly remarkable. The report would be downright laughable, but for the fact that it attempts to obscure pervasive bias, deceit and corruption at the highest levels of government. What has happened to the commitment to objectivity and balance Mike Wallace once brought to your program when reporting on matters such as these? Must we add “60 Minutes” to the long list of American organizations, institutions and government agencies that smile, nod and toss coins into the ADL’s cup while the organ grinder seems to be cranking out the tune from Mossad headquarters in Tel Aviv?

Michael Gillespie, Ames, Iowa

A Senator’s Answer About USS Liberty

To Ms. Emily Smith, Alexandria, VA, Feb. 15, 2000.

Thank you for contacting me concerning the USS Liberty.

I share your horror over this incident and the resulting casualties and loss of life. In 1967, I was assigned to the Marine Corps Barracks in Washington, DC, and I remember the shock I felt when hearing about the tragedy. While I have not seen any evidence which indicates that this was anything but a tragic mistake, I have forwarded your request for a congressional investigation to the chairman and vice chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Senators Shelby and Kerrey, respectively. Again, I appreciate your interest.

Senator Charles S. Robb (D-VA), Washington, DC

Another Senator Heard From

To Mr. Welby P. Campbell, Frankfort, KY, Feb. 18, 2000.

Thank you for taking time to contact me with your concerns regarding the attack on the USS Liberty in 1967. I appreciate your interest in this matter.

As you know, the USS Liberty was attacked on June 8, 1967 by Israeli forces. The Israeli government claimed that the Liberty had been fired upon in error, but a U.S. Navy Court of Inquiry produced evidence that Israeli armed forces had ample time to identify the vessel correctly. In response, the Israeli government paid separate claims to the United States on behalf of the families for costs incurred by the attack.

Again, thanks for contacting me.

Mitch McConnell, United States Senator, Washington, DC

Use the Same Standards for Our Servicemen

To President William J. Clinton, Washington, DC, Feb. 21, 2000.

In November 1999 you signed H.R. 1175, which requires the secretary of state to continue to raise with the governments of Syria, Lebanon and the Palestinian Authority the matter of missing Israeli soldiers who also happen to be U.S. citizens. The version, as signed, urges you, Mr. President, in deciding on U.S. policies toward these Arab countries, “to take into account their willingness” to help find and return these soldiers.

Mr. President, will you apply these same standards to the Israeli government and, sad to say, our own government with reference to the June 8, 1967 attack by Israel on the U.S. intelligence ship, USS Liberty? Mr. President, it’s been over 32 years that crew members of the USS Liberty have been waiting for their day in court. The attack which took the lives of 34 crewmen and wounded 171 others has never been investigated by our government. The attack has been, to date, covered up by the United States government. If you are “worried” about Israeli soldiers who happen to be U.S. citizens, then I ask you also to show your concern for AMERICANS who were murdered by Israel. They, the crew, have waited long enough. I ask you, Mr. President, to do all that is necessary prior to your leaving office to correct this injustice. If you are so concerned about Israeli soldiers then surely you can show that same concern for your fellow Americans. What do you say, Mr. President? Will they have closure to this event in their lives?

Richard G. Schmucker, Brock, NE

Report on Liberty Left Out Some Vital Points

To Channel 9 News, WUSA TV, Washington, DC, Feb. 25, 2000.

I am writing to thank you for your interesting piece on the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty in June 1967. Yours was the first mainstream news feature I have ever seen on this appalling incident and I want to applaud you for your decision to carry the story.

There were, however, a number of points that I think you might have been well advised to mention. First, the attack on the USS Liberty was the ONLY case in U.S. naval history where an attack on an American ship has not resulted in a congressional investigation. One can only speculate that the reason for this is the government’s desire to shelter our “ally” from the criticism it was due.

Or perhaps the investigation would have revealed that the USS Liberty was attacked by weapons provided to Israel by the American government as part of the many “military aid” packages paid for by American taxpayers. I cannot imagine that the reason, whatever it is, is of any consolation to the families bereaved in this brutal, unprovoked attack. Second, it might also have been worth mentioning that the captain of the Liberty is the only recipient of a Congressional Medal of Honor forced to accept this honor, not by the president, and not in the White House as dictated by tradition, but hidden away in an unpublicized ceremony at the Washington Navy Yard. No mention was made in his commendation of the fact that the attack was committed by Israel. Most remarkably, his award was only given after assurances from the Israeli government that they had no objections!

I was also extremely disappointed by anchor Gordon Peterson’s closing explanation of possible Israeli government motives for destroying the ship of its ally (and benefactor) was that Israel did so in order to stop the Liberty from gathering intelligence on an imminent Israeli attack on “the Syrian-held Golan Heights.”

The Golan Heights in 1967 were not held by Syria any more than New York is held by the United States or Paris is held by France. The Golan Heights were an integral part of Syria. Israel’s 1967 invasion was a gross violation of international law and was condemned by the international community in U.N Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, which call for Israel’s withdrawals from lands it occupied in 1967 in return for Arab acknowledgment of Israel’s right to exist within secure and recognized boundaries. Israel has flagrantly ignored these resolutions and continues to occupy the Golan Heights today. Your implication was that the Golan was temporarily in Syrian hands when Israel attacked. This is untrue and dangerously misleading. I therefore urge you to avoid such inaccuracies in the future.

Monica Tarazi, Washington, DC

Tragedy of Attacks

To The Orlando Sentinel , Feb. 10, 2000 (as published).

Regarding the Feb. 7 and 8 horrific air attacks on civilian targets in Lebanon, resulting in heavy casualties and extensive destruction of the re-rebuilt infrastructure: After Israel strikes first and the Hezbollah freedom fighters fight back—sticking to the “April Understanding” not to attack Israeli civilians—Israel strikes again in the heart of Lebanon, which has nothing to do with the Israeli-Hezbollah crisis.

I talked to my sister in Beirut. I cried hard with her, her physician husband and two student sons. It was night there, and they were all huddled around a candle in the darkness and freezing temperature. None had left the house, and normal life was at a standstill.

My sister was sobbing and shouting, “Why doesn’t your U.S. government act justly and instantly and force Israel to stop terrorizing the unfortunate Lebanese and instead return to the constructive peace process?”

Nuha Marchi, Orlando, FL

Middle East Violence

To the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Feb. 25, 2000 (as submitted).

Reader Dr. William Bilek asserts that “Arabs can safely walk the length and breadth of Israel, explore the streets of Tel Aviv or sit on the beach in Netanya risking, perhaps, an extra inspection, or being asked for identification. Such profiling is understandable in a country that has suffered hundreds of civilian deaths at the hands of suicide terrorists and is threatened daily by new atrocities. Jews, with or without hair, cannot freely visit Nablus or Jenin, or even Arab neighborhoods in their own country. They do not risk, as was suggested, simply ‘a cold shoulder.’ Rather, they risk a knife between the shoulders, as has also happened repeatedly.” (Feb. 25, 2000).

Dr. Bilek’s assessment of the risks facing Palestinians and Israelis is clearly based on stereotypes, rather than facts. According to the Israeli human rights group B’Tselem, since the beginning of the Palestinian uprising in 1987, until Jan. 31, 2000, a total of 1,515 Palestinians had been killed by Israeli settlers, soldiers and police. In the same period, 287 Israeli civilians have been killed by Palestinians. In addition, tens of thousands of others, particularly children, have been hurt or permanently maimed by Israeli bullets, both live and of the plastic-coated steel variety.

In addition, Israelis, unlike Palestinians, do not face the daily risks of having their land confiscated by Israeli soldiers and settlers, or their houses demolished and their families evicted into the street. Israelis do not step out of their front doors to see Palestinian troops controlling every aspect of their lives and movement.

An honest assessment of the situation would not place on the same plane the occupier, whose violence is planned and organized by the state, and the occupied, the vast majority of whom continue to endure their plight without resorting to violence.

Ali Abunimah, Chicago, IL

The Weapons That Failed

To USA Today , Feb. 29, 2000 (as submitted).

I am responding to yesterday’s front-page story by Andrea Stone about costly weapons. You quoted the General Accounting Office and readers as outraged at the $10,000 cost for one of two weapons mentioned. But that’s peanuts compared to paying Israel $1 million for each AGM-142 made by Rafael, an Israeli firm.

Our Air Force does not want these faulty weapons, but Congress has bought these weapons for 10 years knowing them to be worthless. An American-made weapon costing $14,000 does the job that the million dollar Israeli weapon will not do! Does Congress represent the United States or Israel? Ask them!

Thanks to CBS’ “60 Minutes,” this complete story was on TV on Jan. 11. You can buy the video, phone (1-800) 848-3256 or transcript (1-800) 777-8398. I urge all to get this CBS story. A great present to yourself or a friend.

I consider USA Today the best American paper, but your refusal to publish this story could jeopardize your good name and prestige. Refusal could also give the impression of collusion between Congress, Israel and the news media overall. And some would think of this as another secret or hidden means to give Israel more money, while Congress gets more campaign contributions.

Carl Greeley, Researcher, Barefoot Bay, FL

A Palestinian Poet

To The New York Times, March 10, 2000 (as published).

Re “Poetry of Arab Pain: Are Israeli Students Ready?” (Ramallah Journal, March 7):

The Israeli education minister has announced that the Palestinian poet Mahmoud Darwish’s work will be included in a new high school multicultural literature curriculum.

Right-wing critics are calling for a halt to the idea, saying that Mr. Darwish is an Israel-hater and that his poetry has no place in Israeli schools. But by studying literature that focuses on the pain of Palestinian exile, perhaps the next generation of Israelis will develop a greater understanding for their Arab neighbors.

A poem will not destroy Israeli culture or strength, nor will it undermine a people. But a liberal education may infuse more sensitivity in the minds of young Israelis and lead to a healthier situation for all sides.

Jason Margolis, Berkeley, CA

“So Offensive”

To The Washington Post, Feb. 21, 2000 (as published).

A big hurray to Zainab Alkebsi and her father [“Just So Offensive,” Metro, Feb. 17] for protesting the book suggested to young readers in Earl B. Wood High School in Rockville, MD. The book stereotypes Muslims, has a lot of wrong suggestions on Muslim beliefs and is not at all fit for the students to read. Thumbs down to the school authorities for not taking prompt action on this on the basis that students already read it! Shame.

Roya Parsay, Alexandria, VA

Scapegoats for Terrorists

To The Washington Post, Nov. 18, 1999 (as published).

Contrary to Stephen M. Flatow’s remarks [“In This Case, I Can’t Be Diplomatic,” Outlook, Nov. 7], the 1996 Antiterrorism Act does not grant citizens the right to “sue foreign governments that sponsor terrorist acts.” In fact, the law allows lawsuits only against those governments that have been identified a priori as “state sponsors of terrorism.”

Although no amount of money can replace the life of his daughter, Mr. Flatow’s $247.5 million judgment against Iran will do nothing to stop terrorism because it does not address its underlying causes. If anything, this law encourages terror by directing attention away from the criminals and toward scapegoats with deep pockets.

The Senate is considering legislation that would allow Mr. Flatow to seize Iranian diplomatic properties and other funds, practices that would interfere with U.S. foreign policy.

Recently, Iran passed a law allowing Iranians to sue the United States for harboring or supporting terrorists, so the Iranian government appears prepared to retaliate in kind. Mr. Flatow may choose to be undiplomatic, but he has no right to exercise foreign policy on my account.

Bradley J. Hernlem, Martinez, CA

Palestinian Water Cisterns

To Mr. James C. Nance, III, Baskerville, VA.

Thank you for your card regarding Palestinian water cisterns and reservoirs. I have forwarded your postcard to the State Department for their official comment.

Senator Charles S. Robb (D-VA), Washington, DC, Nov. 12, 1999.

Robb To State Department

To Ms. Barbara Larkin, Asst. Secretary of Legislative Affairs, U.S. Dept. of State, Nov. 15, 1999.

I recently received this card from Mr. James Nance, III of Baskerville, Virginia expressing concern regarding Israeli-Palestinian relations. I have enclosed a copy of his correspondence. Please give his comments your attention and time. Your response is greatly appreciated. Many thanks for your consideration.

Senator Charles S. Robb, Washington, DC

An Answer from State Dept.

To Senator Charles Robb, Washington, DC, Dec. 20, 1999.

Thank you for your Nov. 15 inquiry forwarding correspondence from your constituent, Mr. James Nance, III concerning allegations that Israeli authorities are bulldozing Palestinian water cisterns and reservoirs built without permits.

We are unaware of any recent specific cases where Israeli authorities have destroyed Palestinian cisterns or reservoirs. We would note that water is one of the issues which Israel and the Palestinians have agreed to consider under the Permanent Status negotiations. Other issues, including Israeli settlements, borders, the status of Jerusalem, and refugees also will be included in these talks.

In the Sharm El-Sheikh Memorandum, signed on Sept. 5, the two sides agreed to finalize a Framework Agreement on Permanent Status issues no later than Feb. 13, 2000 and to conclude the Permanent Status negotiations themselves by September 2000. These historic negotiations are now underway, having begun in early November. The United States has urged both sides to avoid taking unilateral steps that might pre-judge or pre-determine any of these Permanent Status issues.

We would also note that the Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement of Sept. 28, 1995 established the Joint Water Committee to address water management issues. In recent months, bilateral Israeli-Palestinian cooperation in this Committee has been excellent.

Since 1994, the United States has focused significant amounts of its assistance to the Palestinans to improving the availability of fresh water resources in the West Bank and Gaza. We recently dug two wells in the West Bank and several more are expected to be dug soon. These wells will increase fresh water availability to 250,000 Palestinians by 50 percent. We have also addressed serious problems of waste water in Gaza by constructing treatment facilities that have stopped the flow of raw sewage into Gazan homes. The need to increase the availability of fresh water for the residents of the West Bank and Gaza is great. It is for this reason that we have made water resources a top priority in our assistance to the Palestinians.

We hope this information will be useful to you in responding to your constituent. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you require further assistance.

Barbara Larkin, Asst. Sec’y. Legislative Affairs, Dept. of State, Washington, DC

Robb to Constituent

To Mr. James C. Nance, III, Baskerville, VA, Jan. 23, 2000.

Enclosed is a copy of the response I have received from the United States Department of State concerning my inquiry on your behalf.

If I can be of assistance to you in the future, please let me know. Again, thank you for writing.

Sen. Charles S. Robb, Washington, DC

A Confrontational Attack

To Mr. John Blewett, President, The Wanderer Forum Foundation, c/o The Wanderer , St. Paul, MN, Feb. 28, 2000.

An exception to the general policy of fairness and charity observed by the Wanderer was the report by Arthur J. Brew in the Feb. 10 issue of The Wanderer, of Frank Shakespeare’s talk on Islam at the Wanderer Forum held in mid-January at Carmel, California.

Why does Shakespeare pick on Islam? The reporter, Arthur J. Brew, adds fuel to the fire by concurring with Shakespeare’s talk and by referring to it as “an outstanding talk on Islam and how it affects the Western world.”

Catholics are expected to lead the human race in response to their gift of the spirit of truth. Conversion to the faith depends upon it. Instead, without fanfare, Muslims are leading the human race by their forbearance and temperance. Frank Shakespeare’s talk, as reported by Arthur Brew, is pitiful. Frank Shakespeare and Arthur Brew do not make me “proud to be a Catholic.”

Frank Shakespeare’s statements against Islam: 1) defame, 2) arouse suspicion, and 3) incite unrestrained anger and violence. None of Shakespeare’s statements purporting ill intent by Islam can be successfully substantiated.

The source of the perversity about which Shakespeare speaks is within Shakespeare, not within Islam. His flamboyant imaginings are presented not in the spirit of cooperation, but the spirit of confrontation and condemnation; not the spirit of building bridges of communication, but the spirit of building walls of separation, conducive to fear, suspicion and paralysis.

Nevertheless I am grateful to The Wanderer for its 133 years of journalistic excellence and its efforts to bring before the general public views that should be made known, analyzed and discussed.

Charles E. Maria, San Diego, CA

Open Letter to Burger King

To Mr. Dennis Malamatinas, CEO, Burger King, Tampa, Florida, Feb. 23, 2000.

I write to you on behalf of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC), the nation’s largest Arab-American grassroots organization, to express our concern over persistent reports that the “Burger King” in Ma’ale Adumim in the occupied West Bank remains open. This is in spite of your courageous and principled decision to instruct Burger King’s Israeli franchisee, Rikamor Ltd., to remove Burger King’s name from its restaurant in this Israeli settlement.

It is our understanding that Burger King was never properly informed of the location of Ma’ale Adumim, and was led to believe that this is a part of Israel rather than occupied territory. We were reassured that Burger King did not knowingly participate in illegal settlement and was deceived by its Israeli franchisee. We were also reassured that Burger King quickly moved to order the closure of the Ma’ale Adumim restaurant as a Burger King.

We are disturbed, however, that Rikamor appears to be ignoring your instructions, and seems to be maintaining its restaurant in Ma’ale Adumim as a “Burger King.” We urge you to take all necessary legal steps to ensure that Burger King is no longer operating in the occupied territories. Your statement on the issue last summer rightly pointed to the importance of Burger King’s reputation, which was restored by your commitment to remove Burger King from Israeli settlements. Please bear in mind that the settlement movement represents an extremist viewpoint at odds with U.S. policy and the consensus of the international community and international law.

We thank Burger King for having acted promptly to correct this situation once the full facts and implications became clear, and we sincerely hope that you will continue to take all necessary legal steps to ensure that your instructions to your Israeli franchisee are, in fact, carried out. We look forward to hearing from you soon regarding this important matter.

Hala Maksoud, Ph.D., President, American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, Washington, DC

(Washington Report editor’s note: Readers should also see Jerusalem Journal on p. 23 for an update on the Burger King boycott.)

Iran’s Nuclear Ambition

To The New York Times, March 2, 2000 (as published).

Re “American Relations With Iran” (editorial, Feb. 25): Both the United States and Israel are concerned about Iran’s nuclear ambition. But the issue of nuclear weapons must be de-coupled from development of nuclear energy, just as one would distinguish chemical weapons from pharmacology.

United States sanctions aim to contain Iran and prevent Western countries from offering safe nuclear reactor technology, leaving Iran at the mercy of unsafe Soviet-designed reactors and other suppliers. As long as other countries in Iran’s neighborhood pursue or possess the nuclear option, Iran has no choice but to pursue its independent objective.

The solution lies in a comprehensive regional interdependent approach based on universal principles of nonproliferation, safeguards, test ban and international inspections.

Najmedin Meshkati, Los Angeles, CA (The writer is a professor of engineering, Universitiy of Southern California.)

Iraq, “A Land in Limbo”

To The Washington Post, Feb. 24, 2000 (as submitted).

Howard Schneider’s “Letter from Iraq; a Land in Limbo, Sinking Ever Lower” (Feb. 23, 2000) paints a sobering picture of an Iraq drifting into Third World conditions.

Schneider talks about the “controversial estimates of ‘excess deaths’ attributable to the [sanctions].” Thus, Schneider terms the well-documented evidence of an increase in child mortality as “controversial,” a term usually deployed to cast doubt. But not even the United States government has contested the findings of the 1999 UNICEF survey which found that 500,000 toddlers and infants have died because of the sanctions.

Schneider also refers to the “recurrence of diseases due to poor sanitation,” yet why does Schneider fail to mention that the “poor sanitation” is largely because the United States deliberately destroyed Iraq’s civilian infrastructure, including water treatment and power plants, in complete violation of the laws of war and without any plausible military necessity? Furthermore, because of the sanctions, this critical infrastructure has not been restored.

Hans Von Sponeck, the latest U.N humanitarian program coordinator in Baghdad to resign in protest at the human rights catastrophe created by sanctions, recently stated that the situation in Iraq is getting worse: “We have increasing evidence on many fronts. When you look at the mortality situation you could see there is a rising trend.” (Reuters, Feb. 17.)

Despite this evidence, Schneider, echoing the official U.S. government line, asserts that some conditions in Iraq are “improving.” The most critical indicators—including health and education—clearly are not.

While Schneider does allow the reader to gauge some of the devastation caused to Iraq, he is careful to excise any suggestion that Western governments have played a role in creating and perpetuating this situation, a role that was highlighted most recently by U.S. House Minority Whip David Bonior, who described the sanctions as “infanticide masquerading as policy.” Surely it is time to take the mask off once and for all.

Rania Masri, Coordinator, Iraq Action Coalition,Washington, DC

Another Egregious Case

To Attorney General Janet Reno, Washington, DC, Feb. 16, 2000 (abridged).

Once again I find myself having to write you about a case involving secret evidence. This time the case involves Anwar Haddam, the Algerian parliamentarian who in December 1999 marked three years of political imprisonment without charge in the United States of America, a nation that prides itself with being a land of liberty and justice for all. His case is even more egregious than that of Nasser Ahmed, the Egyptian-born Muslim released from 3 years of political imprisonment without charge in November of 1999.

Earlier last year, in the course of a round-table presentation, Dr. Graham Fuller (a political scientist at the RAND Corporation, and former vice-chairman of the National Intelligence Council at the CIA) perceptively referred to the detention of Anwar Haddam in the following words: “It is scandalous that he is still in prison. I think things are now finally coming to a close; the case has been moving along very, very slowly. There has not been an adequate case made against him, and my understanding is that the State Department has generally been supportive of his case, as opposed to the Justice Department.”

This observation on Anwar Haddam’s case was shared by Dr. Fuller almost a year ago, but despite his optimism, Haddam’s open-ended political detention without charge grinds on with, unfortunately, no end in sight.

The fate of Anwar Haddam in America is inextricably tied to the fate of Algeria and its people. The carnage in Algeria, and the Islamic Salvation Front’s (FIS) alleged ties to this carnage, has been the device used to try and justify the miscarriage of justice imposed upon Haddam and his family. And yet, Anwar Haddam, as president of the FIS Parliamentary Delegation Abroad, has forcefully and consistently called for an impartial and thorough investigation into the source of the massacres, and punishment without favor for any and all persons found responsible. Conversely, the Algerian government (with Western support) has consistently opposed such an investigation.

Despite such opposition, however, truth has a power of its own. An illuminating 1,473-page “Inquiry into the Algerian Massacres” has been published in Geneva, Switzerland. This impressive tome is actually a selection of 30 papers on different aspects of the Algerian crisis, authored by academics, lawyers and human rights advocates; edited by Youcef Bedjaoui, Abbas Aroua and Meziane Ait-Larbi—with forewords contributed by Professor Noam Chomsky and Lord Eric Avebury. A must read for anyone genuinely seeking the truth.

Senator Carl Levin has urged your office to suspend the use of secret evidence in immigration proceedings until the Dept. of Justice enacts new regulations governing its use. We feel that the only solution would be to abolish this selectively used, unconstitutional device altogether; coupled with the immediate release of all political detainees being held as a result of its use, beginning with that freely elected member of another nation’s parliament, Anwar Haddam.

El-Hajj Mauri’ Saalakhan, Director, The Peace and Justice Foundation, Inc., Silver Spring, MD

< Prev		Next >