Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, June 2000, pages 70-73

Other People’s Mail

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

A Plea to an Admiral

To Admiral Jay L. Johnson, Chief of Naval Operations, Washington, DC, Feb. 25, 2000.

In the latest issue of NavNews, item NSSO903, “Sailors are Navy’s Top Priority, CNO Tells Congress,” you stated, and I quote, “We must continue to convey to them in word and deed that our country truly depends on them for its security, and we treasure their service and sacrifice.”

Admiral, with reference to the above, would you join with the crew of the USS Liberty in asking Congress to investigate the June 8, 1967 attack on their ship by the nation of Israel? There has been, to date, a 32-year cover-up. As you may know, 34 crewmen were killed in the Israeli attack and 171 were wounded. To date they have not had their day in court. Would you please put action to your words and ask Congress to investigate the attack and give the crew closure to this event in their lives?

Admiral Thomas H. Moorer, one of your predecessors and, subsequently, a former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, stated on June 8, 1997, “I have never believed that the attack on the USS Liberty was a case of mistaken identity. That is ridiculous.” He also said that Congress to this day has failed to hold formal hearings for the record on the Liberty affair. This is unprecedented and a national disgrace.

Sir, please join us and ask for a congressional investigation into the attack and let the surviving crewmen and their families know you really meant it when you say, “we treasure their service and sacrifice.”

Respectfully, Richard G. Schmucker, Brock, NE

Media Chooses Not to See Israeli Terrorism

To The Keene (NH) Sentinel, Feb. 16, 2000 (as published).

Question: “When is terrorism not terrorism?”

Answer: “When it is done by Israel.”

The truth of this has been vividly demonstrated recently with the bombing of civilian targets in Lebanon by Israeli warplanes. This resulted in blacking out most of Beirut with many tens of millions of dollars worth of damage and civilian deaths.

When Palestinians set off a two-bit bomb in an Israeli city at the cost of several fatalities and almost zero physical damage, the media goes into spasms of outrage over this “terrorist” act against civilians. But now the media has no outrage. They never use the word “terrorism” in connection with this Israeli violence. Our “statesmen,” fearful of the pro-Israel lobby, speak only in the most hedged tones.

That these were civilian targets there is no doubt. Listen to what Timur Goksel, spokesman for the U.N. Interim Forces in Lebanon, has to say, “These are civilian targets absolutely.” The Israeli bombardment “is seen here as an unjustified attack against a civilian target for domestic political reasons.”

In doing so, Israel broke an agreement made in 1996 when Israel and Hezbollah both agreed not to target civilians. This agreement was made after a particularly vile massacre by Israel on a U.N. compound in the Lebanese village of Qana where 103 civilians were killed, mostly women and children.

Israel complains that its soldiers in Lebanon are being killed. The sad fact is that they are fair game, just as Nazi troops were fair game in occupied Norway and France.

And let’s not forget that Israel is occupying southern Lebanon illegally. They were ordered out 20 years ago by U.N. Resolution 425 after their invasion of that country that was every bit as brutal as Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait.

To paraphrase George Orwell, “All nations are equal but some are [one is] more equal than others.”

Rev. David D. Van Strien, Petersborough, NH

Such Blatant Propaganda

To CBS Television, March 29, 2000.

Bob Simon’s report on “60 Minutes II” on March 27, about Israel’s soldiers in occupied southern Lebanon, was the most blatant piece of propaganda I have seen on U.S. television in years.

The whole purpose of the piece was to portray Israel’s occupation forces in southern Lebanon as victims of a conflict they did not choose, and the Lebanese, who are defending their own land, as the agressors. There was not even a cursory mention of the true victims of this conflict, the people of Lebanon who have endured a brutal occupation for 22 years. The report used all the trickery of television and emotional manipulation that is its stock-in-trade to make us feel sympathy for the lost Israeli soldiers and their families, and to feel that this justifies the brutal occupation of another country. There was no mention of the brutal treatment the “SLA” metes out to residents in the occupied area, if it suspects them of aiding the resistance or refusing to cooperate with the occupiers. There was no mention of the Khiam torture and detention camp where hundreds of Lebanese civilians are held as hostages by Israel, despite the fact that this camp has been condemned repeatedly by Amnesty International and even the U.S. State Department.

There was absolutely no mention of the fact that Israel’s occupation persists in violation of U.N. Security Council Resolution 425 of 1978, among many others, which orders Israel to “withdraw forthwith” all its forces and to cease its attacks and threats against Lebanon.

If the Israeli public has lost support for this occupation, then it is because they know that the “security” it brings is an illusion and a lie. Since Israel’s first invasion of Lebanon in 1978, tens of thousands of Lebanese have died as a result of Israel’s deeds in that country, from the massacres at Sabra and Shatila to the butchery at Qana. With the wounds of these massacres not yet healed, Israeli shells and bombs continue to rain on Lebanese villages. To the extent that Lebanese people were portrayed, it was as vicious “extremists,” whom it is okay to kill, because they feel no pain, deserve no sympathy and are worth nothing next to one precious Israeli life.

It is a fact, though you certainly would not know it from Simon’s “report,” that the Lebanese guerrillas fighting the occupation do not attack northern Israel, unless Israel first attacks Lebanese civilians. Since the beginning of the year, the Lebanese have not retaliated against northern Israel even when Lebanese civilians have been attacked, because of their improved ability to hit the occupation forces on Lebanese territory. Israel, by contrast, uses its might to turn the lights off in Beirut and all over Lebanon, a country which poses absolutely no military threat to Israel and has no means to defend itself against these air raids.

Many in Israel have realized that Israel has lost the propaganda war, and the real war. It is shocking and disgusting to see that CBS is still fighting it. This sort of appalling propaganda has no place in any outfit claiming any allegiance to fairness and truth.

Ali Abunimah, Chicago, IL

Of Israel and America

To the Whittier (CA) Daily News, Feb. 28, 2000 (as published).

On Feb. 2, you published an open letter to me (“Leave Israel Alone”) that demands a response.

Many books have been written on this, and I have read quite a few of them over the years. Decades ago, I earned a bachelor’s and master’s degree in history, and I continue to try to study, using the standards of scholarship I was trained in and believe in, including concern with sources.

One of the main difficulties with studying the Middle East is the excess of misinformation, disinformation, lies, manipulations, biased books and movies, over-simplified textbooks, unbalanced reporting, half-truths, myths, legends and other forms of deceit. Anyone who in one way or another learns the truths and tries to tell them is suspect and labeled. Lies can be accepted by their longevity, and solutions to problems become impossible when realities are denied.

I believe the following facts might be helpful. I did not “try to provoke an anti-Semitic reaction” in my letter. Instead, I urged others to obtain information about an important and serious subject and then to express their views to Congress. Billions of American taxpayer dollars are involved and I had thanked William Safire for revealing in his earlier column that the Camp David accords had cost Americans $100 billion and the expenditure continues. Current negotiations could involve additional billions.

It is not a fallacy that Israel has done illegal things. Illegalities include expropriations, annexations, invasions, incarcerations, death squads, assassinations and mistreatment of people living under occupation. They’ve all been documented, reported on at times and are impossible to deny.

American support in many forms (U.N. vetoes, Jackson-Vanik Amendment, Lavi, Cranston Amendment, financial, special privileges, etc.) is so obvious that it is impossible for me to understand when my critic wrote that America “utterly hates Israel and has labored from the start to destroy the Jewish nation.”

President Truman, during the 1948 presidential election campaign, was the first to recognize Israel when it was founded, even though members of his cabinet objected, including the well-respected Gen. George C. Marshall, who was Truman’s secretary of state.

I resent in particular the unfair labeling of me, while recognizing the tactic. As a young girl, I learned about Goebbels and others and the dangers of propaganda, lies and deceptions, including the tactic of labeling and mislabeling your opponents in an effort to intimidate, frighten and silence dissenting voices.

Jonathan Pollard was a spy (see Wolf Blitzer’s Territory of Lies). The USS Liberty was in international waters when attacked by Israeli forces in 1967 and had been ordered there by those in command forced by growing fears of events and decisions that could easily have led to World War III. (See Assault on the Liberty by James Ennis, Jr.)

In this age of victimization, I too am a victim to an unquenchable love of reading and learning and living in a period when historians, journalists, authors, scholars and archeologists throughout the world, especially Israel, are researching archives, old land records, memoirs, documents, archeological evidence, letters, journals, appointment books and all the rest, and then publishing their findings. The interviews of past participants, whether bragging or trying to ease guilty consciences or for various other reasons, has been particularly helpful.

Under present circumstances, it is impossible to maintain the web of lies, the inconsistencies, the use of myths and legends, the twisted logic, the efforts to deceive and deny reality. The evidence is too strong and truths are being revealed. Too many are suffering under present conditions. I agree with the many Israelis who want peace and are willing to give up the illegally occupied territories. They recognize the price Israelis pay for their occupation of Arab lands and want to end the stress and agonies of being unwanted occupiers.

These are serious issues that require attention. I would not have written at such length if I did not sincerely believe this.

Florence Richards, Whittier, CA

Aching for an Antidote

To Al-Ahram Weekly, April 6-12, 2000 (as published).

In reference to your article titled “Appeal for Social Peace” (Al-Ahram, Feb. 24-March 1): As an Egyptian, I stand tall and applaud the 100 intellectuals who put their names on a list of recommendations to eliminate future sectarian strife in Egypt. I will stand much taller and applaud even louder when officials and the nation as a whole truly address and cure this “hidden disease,” as it was called in the People’s Assembly fact-finding committee report on the 1972 Al-Khanka Church attack. The remedy for this disease is long overdue. In the past 25 years alone, there have been 40 sectarian clashes in Egypt, not to mention the lives, property, churches, businesses that were lost or destroyed due to this hideous disease.

We as Egyptians, regardless of our religion and profession, need to stand up and participate in what is right and fair. We must not be biased, whether these immoral acts of violence against Egyptian citizens affect us directly or indirectly. Then maybe this disease of hate and prejudice will not spread; hopefully it will die from isolation.

Ihab Azmi, Alexandria, Egypt

Commendation for Danziger Cartoon

To the Los Angeles Times, March 25, 2000 (as submitted).

I highly commend the Los Angeles Times for the kind of honest political cartoon I never thought I would ever see in a U.S. newspaper. The wonderful “Drawingboard” cartoon by Danziger in your March 24 issue is a classic gem of truth.

Israel truly needs to apologize to the Palestinians for what it has done to them since 1948.

Israel imprisons Palestinians without cause, systematically bulldozes their houses and orchards, confiscates their land, imposes 24-hour curfews on villages and towns, taxes Palestinians but does not allow them to have the quality schools and health care Jewish citizens receive, prevents West Bank and Gazan Palestinians from entering Jerusalem, and strips Jerusalem Palestinians of their right to live in East Jerusalem. The examples of bias, economic destruction and maltreatment are too many to enumerate.

Samir Twair, President, Arab American Press Guild, Los Angeles, CA

(Washington Report editor’s note: The Danziger cartoon was reprinted on p. 42 of this magazine’s May issue.)

No Hero

To Washington Jewish Week, April 13, 2000 (as published).

It was almost exactly two years ago that I wrote to your newspaper, challenging the misstatements made by one of your readers in defense of Jonathan Pollard. That reader and other Pollard apologists are at it again, and nothing really has changed. Efforts to picture Pollard as some kind of heroic figure, the beleaguered victim of an anti-Semitic plot aided and abetted by a corrupt American judicial system, are no more valid today than they were two years ago.

The facts are that Jonathan Pollard, an American citizen entrusted with his country’s secrets, betrayed that trust and sold highly classified, sensitive information to the agents of a foreign government. Arguments about the quantity of information are meaningless; it is the quality and sensitivity that counts. The nationality of the agents who paid for and received those secrets is immaterial; it matters only that they were the agents of a foreign government.

Pollard admitted to that, was sentenced in a court of law and sits in jail. He has been eligible to apply for a presidential pardon, which would permit him to emigrate to Israel where he would receive a hero’s welcome and would be able to live off the very considerable fortune that has been socked away for him by the Israeli government.

As a Jewish American who has proudly spent his entire adult life in the service of his country—and who will steadfastly honor his commitment to the Constitution and people of America until the day he dies—I am disgusted.

Sumner Shapiro, Rear Admiral, USN (retired), McLean, VA

Some “Facts” Are Different

To the Washington Jewish Week, April 6, 2000 (as published).

The “facts” about the Pollard case as alleged by Mssrs. Jacob Seidenberg (WJW, March 9) and Pesach Lerner (March 16) differ considerably from the articles and books by responsible journalists (such as Wolf Blitzer and Seymour Hersh), from documents of the Justice Department that are publicly available and from statements by public officials.

Both letters have self-contradictory statements that call both writers’ arguments into question. For example, Seidenberg wrote, “While Pollard may not have known what intelligence was being provided to Israel, he evidently knew what promised intelligence was being withheld.” How could he have known what was promised? And if he did not know what was being provided, how could he have known what wasn’t?

Similarly, Lerner wrote, “Pollard has been held in prison far longer, and under far more severe conditions than any other person convicted of spying for a friendly country.” The reference to a friendly country must refer to the Soviet Union, our close ally and one of the Big Three during World War II. Of the several Americans arrested and tried for passing secrets to the USSR during the war, Ethel and Julius Rosenberg were executed, Morton Sobell served 18 years, and Harry Gold was paroled after 15 years. How long has Pollard been imprisoned?

But most disturbing—and frightening—is Seidenberg’s comparison of the condemnation of Captain Alfred Dreyfus and Jonathan Pollard. Dreyfus was completely innocent: he was a loyal citizen and soldier. Pollard is an admitted thief, who stole secret documents that he had sworn to protect; he stole them for his wife, to help her get a job, and he stole them to sell to another country.

Finally, I take strong exception to Seidenberg’s statement about “the officials for whom he speaks—as surely he does…” this is a libelous statement; I have never been asked by anyone, in or out of the government, to write or to speak on this subject.

Norman Polmar, Alexandria, VA

Your Idea Should Be Scotched

To Ambassador Martin Indyk, American Embassy, Tel Aviv, Feb. 20, 2000.

You have been quoted as recommending that the U.S. and Israel enter a mutual defense pact by which U.S. forces would defend Israel against an attack by Syria.

I don’t think you realize how this looks to a lot of us out here in the “hinterlands.” You’re talking about my two grandsons, now coming of military age, to say nothing of the future relations of the U.S. in the Arab world. Incredible!

If this report is incorrect, please disabuse me of the notion that I must begin to plan to picket the White House.

Can you imagine U.S. forces having to cooperate with someone such as Amos Yaron, who assisted in the massacre of refugees in Lebanon? He is Israel’s defense minister! Can you imagine an American public that would find it acceptable to see Lt. Calley work his way up to that position in the U.S.?

I have written President Clinton to urge him to scotch your idea, if it is true, as soon as possible.

James R. Hanson, Columbus, OH

Israel Won’t Look for Defense

To Mr. James R. Hanson, Columbus, OH, March 7, 2000.

Ambassador Indyk has asked me to respond to your Feb. 20 letter on prospects for a mutual defense pact with Israel.

Discussions of arrangements following the conclusion of a peace agreement between Israel and Syria are at a very early stage. At a minimum, these arrangements are likely to include security guarantees, as they have for other agreements concluded between Israel and her Arab neighbors. As a major participant in all of these peace treaties, the United States—together with its European, Japanese and other partners—has and will continue to underwrite the conditions necessary to implement them.

In the case of Egypt, for example, the United States has been a leading participant in the Mulitlateral Force and Observer mission, which has been the keystone of security arrangements with Israel for almost 20 years.

In the negotiations leading up to these peace treaties, Israel has never expressed an interest in participating in a mutual defense pact with the United States. While Israel has always welcomed U.S. dependability as a source for the defense equipment it needs to ensure its own defense, it has also made clear that it will not look to other nations to provide military personnel to help provide for its defense.

Thank you for writing.

John F. Scott, Deputy Chief of Mission, Acting, Embassy of the United States, Tel Aviv

Ruling Won’t Do Much to Benefit Israeli Non-Jews

To The Journal News, NY, March 22, 2000 (as submitted).

“Israeli Court Says Arabs Can Buy Land in Jewish Communities.” One cannot escape having mixed feelings after reading this story (March 9). While this is a step in the right direction, the fact remains that it is unlikely that this ruling will end 52 years of land-distribution policy based on discrimination against Christian and Muslim Israeli citizens.

It took the court more than four years to deliver its ruling and only after mediation failed to reach an out-of-court settlement. Also, the price of the plot in question was raised from the equivalent of $17,000 to $80,000 to deter the non-Jewish buyer.

Furthermore, not only did the court make it clear that this ruling applies only to the specific case of Katzir, but a legislator from the Labor Party said he would submit legislation to try to bypass the ruling.

More than 90 percent of Israeli land is state-owned land controlled by the Jewish Agency, a national agency which oversees almost all land sales in Israel. Commenting on the court ruling, the head of the agency, Sallai Meridor, said “Areas within Israel adjacent to the Palestinian entity could over time and under pressure become less Israeli.” This simply means that Israelis who belong to the Christian or Muslim faith are less Israeli than their Jewish compatriots.

Unless Israel abolishes its discriminatory laws like those pertaining to land purchase or the Law of Return and mandates equal rights for all it will remain an apartheid state.

Medhat Credi, Elmsford, NY

No Angels in Sudan

To Ms. Martha Williamson, CBS’ “Touched by an Angel” Staff and Cast, Hollywood, CA, March 19, 2000.

Ever since we learned last fall that you cooperated with and allowed Sen. Sam Brownback (R-KS) to use your program to propagandize the viewing audience to further his personal political agenda and foreign policy goals, we have alerted our friends, co-workers, neighbors and associates to beware of “Touched by an Angel.”

It has not been surprising to receive their feedback ever since your “Brownback” program and learn that the majority of those we have discussed the matter with have completely stopped watching your program. It has also been gratifying to learn that they, too, have continued to alert others.

It is regrettable that you sold yourselves, your integrity, and your ethics for political (and financial?) gain. By so doing you have made your show a sham, and instead of portraying “angels” supposedly doing the will of God you have shown yourselves to be hypocrites indulging in blasphemy.

Who is this God of yours who supports terror bombing, enforcing economic sanctions on powerless and defenseless men, women and children in the less developed and as yet “non-commercialized and non-privatized” foreign countries while our political leaders promote and support rebel forces and insurgencies to overthrow their government and “open it up to market forces” and giant profits for U.S. corporations?

Wouldn’t it be rewarding to see a program where your “Angels” opened up the hearts of the bombers and militarists, the deceivers, the sanctioners, the war mongers, the racists and hypocrites who control our government and foreign policies, and taught them that the Ten Commandments the God of the Holy Bible gave us has the word “Not” in every commandment? Start with the first Commandment.

The Nels Bacon Family, via the Internet, California

Brownback Alienating “Angels” Audience

I agree completely with the complaint sent to you by the Nels Bacon family in California and have reproduced their message above my own message as well as quotes from you as to your working with Brownback and writing a script to make him look like an Angel.

There was a time, Ms. Williamson, when I told all my friends that they must watch your series, “Touched by an Angel.” It is rare that I watch a program which is based on fiction, but I did, nevertheless, enjoy this series very much. When I learned that you had acceded to Sen. Sam Brownback’s request to do a program attacking Sudan alleged as having slavery, I became and am so angry I will not watch your program again unless and until you correct, if you can, the enormous damage you have done. Brownback and the owners and producers of this show had no intent other than to smear Arabs and Muslims and for no other reason. Brownback’s actions are acts of treachery.

This country, the United States of America, bombed an innocent pharmaceutical factory in impoverished Sudan. The Clinton administration claimed that Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussain were assisting this factory in Sudan to make chemical weapons. This bombing was done and the allegations made despite the fact that British engineers had been to Sudan and told this administration that there was no way this factory could be making chemical weapons.

MSNBC staff conducted and reported recently on their in-depth investigation of this factory. Their staff traveled not only to the Sudan but to Afghanistan as well. Not only did the staff find no evidence of the manufacture of chemical weapons, but there was substantial evidence that it was not possible to produce such at this factory.

The poor people of Sudan and their animals have suffered tragically at the loss of this factory, especially because it was either the only or the primary factory in Sudan which provided their much needed medicine. I read of one person who was seriously injured by our bombs. His skin was so badly burned that he was unable to turn in any direction without severe pain. I do not know if he is still alive, but the description of his pain and suffering will not leave me.

After the bombing, the United States confiscated the money which the owner of the factory had deposited in this country using our banks. (He lives in this country, but he should have put that money in the Sudan, where it would do good for their economy.) Following a lawsuit against the United States by the owner of the factory, the administration released the money to the owner, but never was an apology issued or restitution made.

How can you live with yourselves and pretend that you are on the side of God?

Betty Molchany, Attorney at Law, Alexandria, VA

“Peace Stalled By Small Patch of Shoreline”

To The Toronto Globe and Mail, April 1, 2000 (as submitted).

Re: “Peace Stalled By a Small Patch of Shoreline” by Paul Taylor, March 31. Syria’s refusal to alter its position on Israel’s withdrawal from the Golan Heights is entirely justified. By now demanding that the border with Syria run 100 meters east of the northeastern shore of Lake Tiberias (Sea of Galilee, Lake Kinnert), Israel is reneging on previous commitments to withdraw from the Golan Heights up to the frontier that existed on June 4, 1967, i.e., the banks of Lake Tiberias.

In a lecture delivered at the Royal Institute of International Affairs (Chatham House), London, on Nov. 23, 1999, Patrick Seale, a British writer and Middle East expert, stated the following:

“The record shows that there were in fact three commitments [by Israel]: a commitment to full withdrawal from the Golan made by Rabin in August 1993; a ‘clarification’ given by Rabin in July 1994 that by ‘full withdrawal’ he meant withdrawal to the June 4, 1967 lines; and, following Rabin’s assassination, an endorsement of this commitment by Peres in December 1995.”

Mr. Seale also noted that President Clinton was fully aware of Israel’s commitment:

“On June 6, 1995, Clinton sent [Syrian President] Assad a message through [Dennis] Ross: ‘As I told you in Damascus, and as I assured your foreign minister, I have a commitment in my pocket from Prime Minister Rabin for full Israeli withdrawal to the June 4, 1967 line…’”

Gary D. Keenan, Vancouver, BC, Canada

Deir Yassin Remembered?

To Australian Prime Minister The Honorable John Howard, March 29, 2000.

When you visit the Holocaust memorial at Yad Vashem and are reminded by your hosts of the suffering of the Jewish people, we hope you will look to the north and to the green trees to the right of the water tower. That is the location of the village of Deir Yassin, the site of the most famous massacre of Palestinians by Jewish terrorists in the catastrophe, or Nakba. The Deir Yassin massacre occurred on April 9-10, 1948 and marked the beginning of the depopulation of over 500 villages and the ethnic cleansing of over 750,000 Palestinian Arabs who were never allowed to return to their homes.

Although Israeli school curricula have recently begun to mention the massacre of over 100 men, women and children at Deir Yassin, it has always been of paramount significance in the 20th century history of Palestinians, who now comprise 46 percent of the people living within the borders controlled by Israel. You will find it ironic that in Israel, a land of memorials and a country whose history is steeped in remembering, that Deir Yassin has been systematically and deliberately forgotten by Zionists, even as it lies in the shadow of Yad Vashem where the main message is to “never forget.” While most of the original Deir Yassin buildings still exist (and are being used today as a small psychiatric hospital), there is not even a signpost indicating that this was once a thriving Arab village.

Our organization has been formed with one simple objective: we, both Jews and non-Jews, are working to build at Deir Yassin a memorial to the Palestinian victims and to promote the human side of a people who have been the victims of the Zionist colonization of their lands and of the apartheid conditions under which they now live.

Your recognition of Deir Yassin at the same time and place when you are asked to acknowledge the suffering of the Jewish people will help our cause and will help both sides to recognize each other’s history. We hope that you will include Deir Yassin in your remarks for the press. But if you only see Deir Yassin and recognize it as such, you will have helped our struggle.

Daniel McGowan, Deir Yassin Remembered, e-mail < This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it >

< Prev		Next >