ZIONIST, THE ANTI-JEW -
A PERSONAL PERSPECTIVE.
By Ghassan Ghraizi ©
Two years ago, I met a Jewish woman at an Atlanta
store working for a national hair-cutting concern that I
had frequented. I yielded to my immediate mistrust of her
views about my native country, and I avoided
talking to her. That might have been the only time I'd
ever avoided anyone ,
but I now avoid even discussing my native land - the one
thing that takes up the majority of my unemployed
thoughts, with the majority of Jews.
I was born Lebanese and Israel had personified my
childhood's bogeyman.. However, Jews hadn't become
synonymous with Israel until I erroneously thought
American Jews could distinguish my experiences with
Jewish Israel from my ignorance of Judaism. I paid dearly
for that mistake in high school in Dallas, Texas.
To this day I have a hard time believing that my natural
distrust of Jewish views is not irrational...as I still
have a hard time believing that Jews do not automatically
see a terrorist in my image. I have as quickly tried to
explain this tendency as my own problem - for I still
hate what the Zionists
have done to Palestine, and relatively few Jews
distinguish themselves from Zionists. This, in no small
measure, may explain why I have recently started to avoid
discussing my life with most Jews.
I am not one to avoid discussing politics and religion
and my thoughts on these subjects occupy most of my
personal time. I don't recall ever shying away from
speaking my mind, even at the cost of physical harm.
Perhaps I am now more considerate of other's feelings,
perhaps more fearful of injury, and so avoidance has
become my way of being less foolhardy.
Until someone can devise a non self-destructive way for a
mere Lebanese born mortal to continuously turn another
cheek to insults, I have little recourse than to avoid
obviously passionate points of contention. I've even
started to avoid Hollywood's action flicks in fear of
their contagious hate. Hollywood's unwavering demon
portrayal of Arabs might ironically answer in part
America's delirious question, "Why do they
hate us?" The age of irony might have just
begun.
But I cannot avoid seeing the news. I have family living
in the Middle East. America's crusade in support of
Zionism threatens to wreak destruction on the whole
region. I am an American and I cannot quietly watch my
countrymen support this.
Ignoring the ethnic profile that Americans continue to
openly scrutinise as a complete whole; ignoring my bland
walk in another's shadow, that I know should pale to the
racially attributed darkness around the name Mohammed;
ignoring my own trials, every time I am casually asked by
anyone about my accent, especially at airports ; ignoring
the general loathing among Americans of Arab descent to
appear anything less than patriotic; ignoring the fickle
definition of "we" and "them", which
is as easily replaceable as icons and idols, I
nevertheless know that the United States is a country
ruled by Law !
Ignoring the question of who, and when, will they come
after me?. since they question all resident Arabs in the
United States on suspicion of them being . Moslem, I
remain my neighbour's, my friends' and my brother's
keeper, where brotherhood is also, but not solely, blood
thick. Family in the same way includes parents,
uncles and aunts, cousins and nephews, and grandparents.
My neighbourhood is also my village. Humanity remains
part and for all of us.
I am not a journalist. I am an author, a writer and a
poet.My self-consciousness around many Jews could be
attributed to an irrational complex I might have suffered
through the years. Or it could be attributed to a Jewish
militancy that has adopted ethnocentric socialism as the
basis
for its ideology.
I have taken pains to accommodate Zionists' points of
view, but I have not been able to separate the ideal Zion
from its very real and brutal incarnation on a sliver of
land along the Mediterranean.
While many may argue against Israel's socialist identity,
how can anyone deny the openly advertised quest to
protect Israel's Jewish character, its ethnocentricity,
in the ironic twist for those who had suffered one of
modern history's most vile acts of ethnic cleansing ?
Ariel Sharon requested one million Jews to immigrate to
Israel, in a talk with American Jewish leaders last year.The
American Zionists who cheered his call represented the
Who's Who in American politics.
The power of the Israel lobby in the United States is not
a secret. American citizens belonging to this lobby are
often called "Israel Firsters". The danger that
these zealots pose to the Middle East has been documented
and reported to the American public, but to no apparent
avail.
One can better understand President Bush's silent
endorsement of Sharon's atrocities (until they became a
hindrance to Bush's Iraqi campaign) by understanding some
of the President's men presiding in key positions of
influence.
When Douglas J Feith, Undersecretary of Policy at the U.S.
Department of Defence joined the ranks of the
hawkish Deputy Secretary of Defence, Paul Wolfowitz, he
had already co-authored a paper in 1996 with Richard
Perle, now Chairman, Defence Policy Board, Dept. of
Defence, titled "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for
Securing the Realm.", advising Benjamin Netanyahu to
break away from the Peace Process with the Palestinians,
and reject the "land for peace" proposals.
Feith went further in his "A Strategy for Israel",1997,
to propose a "detoxification" from Oslo, by re-occupying
the West Bank and Gaza completely; noting, almost
prophetically, "the price in blood would be high."
Scratching the surface of the Zionist influence on
Washington, I, therefore, have little need to accommodate
the Zionist point of view. I should really be more
concerned whether Zionists are able or willing to
accommodate my point of view.
Many Arabs are consequently led to National Socialism or
other ethnocentric ideologies in an effort, either to
live along with, or to oppose Zionism. In this apparent
synonymy of Judaism and Zionism, where Jewish
philanthropy is almost directly correlated with pro-Israel
activities, Arabs are hard-pressed to distinguish between
Jews and Zionists, and I have noted Arab anti-Jewish
sentiments that cannot be completely dismissed as
irrational.
While I categorically reject any ideology that
proposes to establish a master race or a homogenous
entity at the expense of others, I propose that any Arab
ideology built upon a National Socialist platform
focusing unity on the outright rejection of Jews will
only vindicate Zionism.
The acceptance that Jews must be inherently wrong is as
objectionable as the idea of Judaism saving the world.
There are too many world-saving religions in the world to
accept and promote the dominance of one, and no one can
ignore or deny the positive affect Jewish people had in
promoting U.S. civil rights. Dr. Martin Luther King's
defence of Zionism might have only
represented a small token of gratitude.In other words one
cannot propose to save humanity by eliminating human
diversity.
Zionism's incarnation, as opposed to a spiritual Zion, is
inherently intolerant of non-Jewish Arabs. Accepting its
legitimacy legitimises opposition in the form of
extremism. That is where I perceive Jews and Zionist
should have parted.
But where can non-Jewish Arabs draw a distinction between
Judaism and Zionism ?
At the "Conversion to Judaism Homepage" found
at http://www.convert.org/index.html , Jewish
converts are encouraged to read "The Theory and
Practice of Welcoming Converts to Judaism: Jewish
Universalism" by Lawrence J. Epstein.
Obtaining this book, I read in Part I,sub.J, as follows:"
The role of the nation of Israel in accomplishing the
Jewish mission is vital."..."A powerless
minority is not an attractive group to join..The reality
of Israel (now) frees the Jewish people to turn again to
their mission with the physical security necessary ...
Israel's birth has changed gentile perceptions and can
change them even more. History has not forsaken the Jews.It
was their exile and not their sovereignty that was
ephemeral. A people who could pull off such a
miracle as national re-birth after two thousand years is
a much more attractive people to join."
Palestine and the Palestinians are not addressed. The
omission speaks volumes about the idea of
Universalism.the author capitalizes on a Jewish sense of
vulnerability, sanitizing national re-birth, and
that is where Zionism and Judaism ironically find common
cause. As the world witnesses Sharon's current
campaign of ethnic cleansing to accommodate new Jews in
settlement on the West Bank and Gaza and I read Epstein's
glorification of Jewish militarism I cannot merely blame
an irrational suspicion as I avoid communication with
some Jews. I have had to ask myself where in the world
did the Palestinians, or other non-Jews, fall within
God's gift to humanity. My ideals are opposed to Zionism
not because I hate Jews, I do not, but because I fear
Zionists and Zionism's determined goals do not appear
defensive. Everything I have read about Zionism indicates
that the ideology that sought the kingdom of God on earth
by force, will not peacefully retard its mission. I
ironically feel that I represent more of a threat to the
Zionists by embracing Jews than by rejecting them.
According to Epstein, God's noble goal for humanity, via
Judaic Universalism, is to achieve unity.wherein will
result "the eradication of all injustice, ..the
deliverance from fear, the halt to oppression against the
powerless" In view of Jewish history in the
United States, I would wholeheartedly agree with Epstein.
According to the Zionist goals outlined by Epstein, I
believe that Palestinian refugees can only find justice,
and the occupied Palestinians can only find freedom, by
converting to Judaism. Israel, however, is now debating
against the acceptance of Jewish "converts".
And a mass Palestinian conversion to Judaism will only be
dismissed as a cynical attempt to destroy Israel by any
means. Supposing conversion to Judaism can achieve the
desired Zionist effect, where will Zionist goals end ?
What will God's gift to humanity do if more people
convert to Judaism than Eretz Israel can sustain, and
what if Eretz Israel's neighbours do not wish to achieve
redemption as Jews ?
Zionists have not yet failed in finding fault with every
Arab peace initiative. Even Sadat's peace initiative had
been condemned prior to Jimmy Carter's Camp David.
Accordingly Zionists might cynically propose that my
choice to embrace Jews, for example, comes about because
I cannot threaten Zionism with violence. The cycle of
distrust will revolve !
I agree that Zionists are too strong; but I am more
interested in seeing Jews, and non-Jews, take a
courageous stand to end the cycle of intolerance. I pray
for the day when the majority of Jews denounce Zionism
within a republic that upholds and protects the human
rights of all participants. Why has an intolerant
ideology found so much praise among Jews ?
While these are questions and concerns, Israel's history
provides some answers that do not bode well for long-term
peace. Nevertheless I would like to end this long winded
perspective with a hopeful note. There is a difference
between Jews and Zionists.
I met the Jewish hairstylist at the Atlanta store last
January. While I could have avoided talking to her, since
she'd obviously forgotten me, I didn't. I told her
that I knew her and she was very friendly. And yesterday
when she took her turn to cut my hair again she asked the
inevitable question: "Where are you from ?" I
stated that I was born Lebanese and when she proceeded to
share some of the Arabic she knew, I reflexively asked:
"Are you Israeli ?" She told me that she has
been married to a Lebanese man named Mohammed for two
years, and that they are expecting their first child..
People with an agenda might try to create a conflict
here, but I pray that their union withstands the storms.
Ghassan Ghraizi ©
The American Constitution Society
Presents
A Panel Discussion: The War on Terror:
Will Civil Liberties Be a Casualty?
12 pm, Tuesday, April 2nd, 2002
The College of Law Auditorium
504 E. Pennsylvania Ave, Champaign, IL
Featuring:
Professor Francis Boyle, Authority on Human Rights
Law :
[Boyle, Francis]
George W. Bush was never elected President by the People
of the United States of America. Instead, he was anointed
for that Office by five Justices of the United States
Supreme Court who themselves had been appointed by
Republican Presidents. Bush Jr.'s installation was an act
of judicial usurpation of the American Constitution that
was unprecedented in the history of the American Republic.
Had it occurred in a developing country, such a
subversion of democratic process would have been greeted
with knowing derision throughout the West. What happened
in America could only be likened to a judicial coup d'état
inflicted upon the American People, Constitution, and
Republic. There should now be no doubt that the United
States Supreme Court is governed by raw, naked, brutal,
power politics. Justice has nothing at all to do with it.
This Supreme Court's constitutional sophistry proved a
harbinger of the new administration's disrespect for the
Rule of Law, whether domestic or international.
Bush Jr.'s Constitutional Coup D'Êtat From
the Supreme Court's installation of Bush Jr. as President
to the Ashcroft/Federalist Society post-September 11
regime of police state "laws," the politico-legal
functioning of America is increasingly resembling that of
a Banana Republic. Since September 11th, we have seen one
blow against the U.S. Constitution after another. For
example, Attorney General John Ashcroft unilaterally
instituted the monitoring of attorney-client
communications despite the Fourth Amendment ban on
unreasonable searches and seizures and the Sixth
Amendment right to representation by Counsel in criminal
cases. He just went ahead and did it, without even
bothering to inform anyone.
Over 1100 aliens have been picked up and "disappeared"
by Ashcroft and his Department of Injustice. The American
People have no idea where most of these people are. They
are being held on the basis of immigration law, not
criminal law, for a period of detention which has not
been defined. Ashcroft proclaimed another ukaze that
these immigration proceedings must be held in secret. The
phenomenon of "enforced disappearances" is
considered to be a crime against humanity by Article 7(I)(i)
of the Rome Statute for the International Criminal Court.
It appears that many of these aliens have been
deprived of their basic human rights to consular
notification and access as set forth in the 1963 Vienna
Convention on Consular Relations, to which the United
States is a contracting party and which even the U.S.
State Department concedes constitutes binding customary
international law. Apparently Bush Jr.'s left hand does
not care about what his right hand does. Yet another
international convention set at naught.
The one characteristic these detained foreigners
have in common is that they are mostly Muslims, Arabs,
and Asians. Everyone needs a scapegoat for the 11
September tragedy, and it looks like we have one, both at
home and abroad. Thousands more such aliens are being
moved into the pipeline for the Ashcroft gulag by the FBI.
Ashcroft is now planning to reinstate the infamous
COINTELPRO Program, whose atrocities against the civil
rights and civil liberties of the American People have
been amply documented elsewhere. It is just a matter of
time before the Bush Jr. Leaguers unleash the newly-augmented
powers of the FBI, CIA and NSA directly against the
American People. And we already have 2 million Americans
rotting away in prison -- the highest rate of
incarceration in the world, a disproportionate majority
of whom are Americans of Color, victims of the Nixon/Ford,
Reagan/Bush, and Clinton administrations' racist "war
on drugs," which is really a war against People of
Color. The American Police State has already arrived for
People of Color!
Ashcroft's Police State
This brings the analysis to the Ashcroft Police
State Act. There are no other words to describe it. While
Bush failed to get a formal declaration of war that would
have rendered him a constitutional dictator, clearly
Attorney General John Ashcroft and his right-wing
Federalist Society lawyers took every piece of regressive
legislation off the shelf, tied it all into what they
called an anti-terrorism bill, and then rammed it through
Congress, giving it the appropriately Orwellian name of
the U.S.A. Patriot Act. According to one report,
Ashcroft's first draft would have had Congress suspend
the ancient Writ of Habeas Corpus - the necessary
prerequisite for imposing a police state in the United
States of America. Many Members of Congress publicly
admitted that they did not even bother to read the
Ashcroft Police State Act. Another Congressman said
basically: "Right, but there's nothing new about
that." Interestingly enough the so-called liberal
Democrats in the House and the Senate were willing to
give Bush Jr. and Ashcroft more police state powers than
the conservative Republicans in the House. But there are
no real differences that matter between Republicans and
Democrats when it comes to promoting America's self-proclaimed
"Manifest Destiny" to control the World and now
Outer Space too.
Bush's Kangaroo Courts It would take an entire law
review article for me to analyze all the legal and human
rights problems with the Bush Jr.'s proposed military
commissions. Here a cabal of Federalist Society Lawyers
in the White House got President Bush to sign an
Executive Order on 13 November 2001 which, when
implemented, will be widely recognized to constitute a
grave breach of the Geneva Conventions and establish a
prima facie case of criminal accountability against the
President himself. It is emblematic of this particular
war that right towards its very outset President George W.
Bush personally incriminated himself under both
international criminal law and United States domestic
criminal law. The Bush Jr. administration has severely
undermined the integrity of the Four Geneva Conventions
of 1949. By doing this, the Bush Jr. administration has
opened up U.S. Armed Forces and civilians around the
world to similar reprisals, which has already happened.
As a licensed attorney for 25 years, a law
professor for 23 years and someone who has done a good
deal of criminal defense work in U.S. Federal Courts, I
am appalled by the insinuation of these Federalist
Society Lawyers that America's Federal Courts established
by Article III of the U.S. Constitution cannot hold
accountable those responsible for the crimes of 11
September 2001. This is an insult to all Federal Judges,
Federal Prosecutors, Federal Public Defenders and all the
Lawyers who are Officers of these Courts.
In one fell stroke these Federalist Society lawyers
have besmirched and undermined the integrity of two
Branches of the United States Federal Government
established by the Constitution - the Presidency and the
Judiciary. So far the U.S. Congress has supinely gone
along with the Bush Jr. police state agenda. If and when
these Bush/Ashcroft police state practices make their way
to the U.S. Supreme Court, many of them will probably be
upheld. After all, a 5 to 4 majority of the Supreme Court
already gave the Presidency to Bush Jr. We need to
seriously consider whether they would strike down laws
and practices that would give Bush Jr. a Police State as
well.
Philosophers have taught that a People get the type of
government they deserve. If the American People permit
the Bush Jr. Leaguers to impose a Police State at home in
the name of furthering Pax Americana abroad, we will have
deserved it by abnegating our responsibilities as
Citizens living in what is supposed to be a
constitutional Republic with a commitment to the Rule of
Law. The same thing happened to the Romans and to the
Athenians. The United States of America is not immune to
the laws of history. Sic transit gloria mundi!
Francis A. Boyle ©
|
