Terrorism Works

While Wayne State students have been on spring break this past week, there has been quite a bit of action happening around the world. And since none of us want to be caught on Jay Leno’s Jaywalking segment looking like an idiot, let’s do a quick run through of last week’s events.

Terrorism is huge in the news this past week. Starting our review with the attack on the trains in Madrid, Spain, we see that terrorism works. During Thursday morning rush hour, ten bombs went off simultaneously (those clever terrorists) killing at least 190 people and wounding another 1,500. This attack took place just three days before the national elections in that country. Supposedly the Abu Hafs al-Masri Brigades, terror organization aligned with al-Qaeda, carried out the attack because they were unhappy that Spain was an ally to the United States in the “war against terror.” Possibly because of the attack, the Party helping the U.S. lost the election, and the new party in Spain will be bringing their troops home from Iraq. So what have the terrorists learned? They’ve figured out that if you kill enough people, governments will cave into any demand asked for. This is equivilant to begging a bully not to hit us anymore. Wonderful.

And of course the biggest news over the last couple days was that Israel did the world a favor. Not that the world has realized it yet, because they haven’t. Israel killed Sheikh Ahmad Yassin, the head of the Hamas terrorist organization. Hamas has been responsible for the murder of hundreds of civilians as well as thousands more who were wounded because of their attacks. Americans have been among those who have been murdered. Americans like us who attended Hebrew University in Jerusalem on an academic exchange program.

Funny enough, after the bombings in Spain, Russia’s president Vladimir Putin called for “the entire international community” to unite against terror, the entire international community certainly has united. (news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/world/europe/3504046.stm) However, it was not against terror - but in support of it.

When Israel cut the head off the snake of Hamas, many world leaders except for the United States condemned the action. Javier Solana, foreign policy chief of the European Union, stated that, “These type[s] of action do not contribute to dialogue and peace in the region...” (Jerusalem Post “World Blasts Yassin Killing” jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/Printer&cid=1079929448131&p=1078027574121) Really? Yassin was a man who had dedicated his life to the destruction of the Jewish People. There was no talk of peace from Yassin - only suicide bombings. But yet, he is mourned by the World. When both Britain and Iran agree on an issue, there is something to wonder about. 

Americans wonder if the government had information about earlier opportunities to kill Bin Laden prior to 9/11. If the government did have a chance to get rid of him and had saved those 3,000 lives but didn’t, they would be as responsible as Bin Laden. But America didn’t know. Israel had an opportunity to kill a man who had the blood of hundreds on his hands. Not to kill him would be irresponsible and only let Yassin continue in his planning and mass murder. Israel took that chance and is paying for it in world opinion.

What have we learned from this past week’s events? We have learned that terrorism works. Spain is a quick study. Israel is another. World reaction is telling. Words are cheap. Words such as, “Let us all unite against terrorism”. But when it comes to actions -- goodness, we must forbid anything that resembles self-defense against murderers.

Guilty Until Proven Innocent?

In these days of corporate scandals and wrongdoing, it is always nice to see the bad guys taken down from their pedestals. Kenneth Lay of Enron, Scott Sullivan and Bernard Ebbers of WorldCom are just a few. Most recently, we have been hearing Martha Stewart’s name among the wrongdoers of the worst kind.

The government had originally charged her with stock fraud, for selling her stock of ImClone before it lost money. But this main charge was dropped because of a lack of evidence. Secondary charges against her included, obstruction of justice, false statements, and conspiracy to obstruct justice.

When looking at the main charge of stock fraud the secondary charges make sense. Of course anyone who is charged with stock fraud is going to do what they can to stay out of jail. However, when the primary charge is dropped, these secondary charges are ridiculous.

In truth the only thing that Martha Stewart did wrong was maintaining her innocence throughout the entire case against her. “I have done nothing wrong, I believe in the fairness of the judicial system and remain confident that I will ultimately prevail.” (U.S. News & World Report 3/15/04 “Not a Good Thing”) This is what the federal government calls an “obstruction of justice.” By sticking by her word that she did nothing wrong, the government went ahead and has spent 10 million dollars of our taxpayer money to make sure Stewart went to jail even though there was no case against her.

Business Weekly associate editor, Diane Brady commented that, “The Securities & Exchange Commission has a powerful arsenal....[but] using the criminal justice system to make the point -- or to deter others -- is overkill.” If she had done something wrong the SEC could have fined her or kept her from serving as a director of a public company. Why go to the criminal court system?

Is this an instance where a powerful woman gets taken down where powerful men do not? A N.Y. Post reporter commented, “Nothing infuriates a jury like a woman who refuses to cry, to cave, to kneel before them.” While no feminist myself, it might be something to think about.

Another point to consider is the damage that has been done to the American public. Very little. Enron changed their books to show that they were making more money than they were in reality. Kenneth Lay and the bigwigs of Enron even looted their own company. Billions of dollars were lost by shareholders of that company. And hundreds of jobs along with it. Quoted in Business Week, Thomas Dewey, a securities litigator said, “It is hard to see what harm has been visited on people by her actions.”

The case against Martha Stewart from beginning to end was an opportunity by the Federal Government to make an example of someone rich and famous. There is nothing more to it. Unfortunately, the American public is cheering. So much for justice.

Journalism is Dead

It has finally been said. Journalism is dead. Supposedly journalists are there to help us regular citizens understand and make better sense of the world around us. And they have failed.

The old adage, “if it bleeds, it leads” still rings true. Stories do not actually have to be news worthy to lead the program, instead it just needs to be able to hold the audiences attention. And the sorry part of this is that we as consumers of television viewing see this as normal and acceptable. We have become complacent.

Real fact finding journalism started back in the Progressive Era when many issues facing the public were not being addressed by those in charge. Over time we’ve moved away from this noble duty. We now have people who call themselves “journalists” and pander to the lowest common denominator.

During this election year, instead of actually giving the American citizens of the country a real picture of all the candidates, the media has chosen our Democratic nominee months before the actual Democratic convention. Senator John Kerry has been crowned king by journalists from almost all the news outlets.

What about Senator John Edwards? He is still running for the nomination. Why haven’t we heard anything about him over the last month? Because the media has chosen Kerry and are not interested in any other candidate. As a result, the American public has lost their chance to even ponder another option for the Democratic nomination. But don’t worry, journalists and the news media know best.

Okay, so if the news media know best, then perhaps they’ve given us some background information on Senator Kerry? Of course not. The fact that Kerry has been a senator for the last 20 years and no journalist has taken a look at his voting record is obscene. One might think that it would be important and possible essential to analyze a potential presidential candidates past record. But of course, journalists and the news media know best.

So the fact that Senator Kerry voted numerous times to cut funding to national intelligence is no big deal. In 1994 and1995 Kerry proposed bills cutting $2.5 billion from intelligence over the following five years. Both bills never made it to the floor for a vote. (S.1826,Introduced 2/3/94), S.1290, Introduced 9/29/95) That same year Kerry also voted to cut FBI funding by $80 million. (H.R. 2076, CQ Vote #480, 9/29/95.) That vote passed.

The funny part about Kerry attempting to cut intelligence funding is that after 9/11 he spoke about the weaknesses in American intelligence. “And the tragedy is, at the moment, that the single most important weapon of the United States of America is intelligence...And we are weakest, frankly, in that particular area. So it’s going to take us time to be able to build up here to do this properly.” (CBS Face the Nation 9/23/01)

While one might applaud the media for following the story about George W. Bush’s stint in the National Guard during Vietnam, the media does not bother to follow other stories that may hurt their own interests. Of course, The Washington Times confirmed Bush’s version of the story, but never mind that (The Washington Times 2/11/04 washingtontimes.com/functions/print.php?StoryID=20040211-121217-6595r). Since the media has crowned Kerry as the Democratic nominee, they have not bothered to follow a story that may interest many voters, namely an intern problem.

General Wesley Clark broke to the press that “Kerry will implode over an intern issue...” How has this not made the evening news? European newspapers have it on their front page. Even according to Craig Crawford of the Congressional Quarterly, this allegation of an affair was the reason why in 2000 Al Gore did not choose John Kerry as a running mate. (worldnetdaily.com/news/printer-friendly.asp?Article_ID=37102) Why has the American public not heard about this? Simply because the media does not want to admit that they are wrong about Kerry. According to journalists, you would think that Kerry will the savior of the United States in 2004, against the devil incarnate Bush.

Journalists and the media are setting the agenda of the American people. We will only know what’s told to us, packaged nicely in a 30 second blurb on the evening news. And of course, don’t worry, the media knows best.

Bedtime Nightmare

I don’t have any little relatives to tell bedtime stories to, but there is a bedtime story that I would tell them that has become a nightmare.

Bedtime Nightmare

Shira A. Drissman

Feb. 3, 2004

This story starts a long, long time ago, in a far away country. Imagine this country as a beautiful place, somewhere you would spend your vacation. A place full of palm trees, and beaches, and of course a never-ending sea, stretching as far as the eye can see.

The natives were a friendly bunch of people. They had everyday sort of jobs. Some were teachers, doctors, carpenters, bricklayers, business owners and some were religious leaders. These natives were happy being natives, living in their land, living their everyday lives.

Then one day, the happy natives found themselves under attack by a country from beyond the sea. The next thing the natives knew was that their holy temple which they worshipped at was destroyed and burned to the ground. Along with the temple, a million of their fellow tribesmen were massacred with their blood flowing knee high in the streets. It was a sorry time for the natives.

The natives found themselves taken to far-away places. Places they had never imagined existed. They served as slaves across the world. One would have thought that over time the pain of being separated from their land would have dulled and become non-existant. But this was not to be. The pain grew stronger in every generation. The unhappy tribe even created a prayer book to pray from three times a day to remember their special land and temple.

At first, the tribespeople were segregated and oppressed. There were even wholesale massacres. Millions of these natives would be murdered and no one would stop the slaughter. But the natives persevered, and were thankful to their god. Over the many years, the natives became members of the societies they lived in across the world, but never fully trusted. People would do business with them with a smiling face, but at home spoke about how they were cheated.

The natives didn’t like this situation. They just wanted to be accepted and be left alone. They realized that it was time to go home. So many of them put their possessions in their bags and bought a boat ticket to their promised land. They left with the visions they last saw; the palm trees, the beaches, and the never ending sea.

Finally after months, and even years of traveling, they landed and were quite disappointed. There was nothing left. No grass, no trees, no flowers, nothing there to remind them of what they had left behind. They traveled for days looking for anything they might recognize. After days and days of traveling northward, the natives saw something in the distance. Could it be? They moved faster now. Yes, it was some of their fellow tribesmen. After speaking to their kindred spirits, the natives were told that there were many more of them who were able to survive the horrible times of the past.

The natives were excited. They were home. They decided to rebuild better than before. To rebuild so that they wouldn’t have to wander the world ever again. To trust themselves and not have to depend on the world’s mercy. At first these natives depended only themselves for the building projects. However after a while, a new tribe from across the mountain range on the east came over and began helping them. This new tribe asked nothing in return, they were happy to have jobs in this new land.

The natives were happy with their progress. They now had homes, and even a new government. They even offered this new tribe citizenship in their new government. The new tribe accepted such a generous offer since they had only been there to help so recently.

But soon, something strange happened. This new tribe from across the eastern mountain range began to spread lies. To the natives surprise the new tribe started telling their brothers and cousins that the natives land was their own!

The scariest part of the story was that the brothers and cousins believed the new tribes story. The natives didn’t know what to do. The brothers and cousins started threatening the natives. “It’s time for you to move out!” they said.

This nightmare story has no ending. But is this really just a “story”? The natives are the Jews and the new tribe are the Arabs. We have yet to see a happy ending to this story and we won’t until the lies stop.

Welcome to the 21st Century

It is time to applaud the Kingdom of Saudia Arabia on taking its first steps toward the 21st Century. Since the middle of October, they hosted both an economic forum - where women were allowed to attend, and its first human rights conference. But don’t get too excited yet.

Freedom in general and freedom of speech and religion in particular are not standards of society in Saudi Arabia. In fact, there are no protections for any minority religious group in that country. According to the U.S. State Department, “Islam is the official religion, and all citizens must be Muslim.” Public practice of other religions are prohibited. (www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2002/14012.htm) Since the Saudi family is Sunni Wahhabi, it practices and requires its citizens to practice a strict sect of Islam, where even Shi’a Muslims are discriminated against, never mind other religions.

Somehow Saudi Arabia managed to conduct its first human rights conference in the capital city of Riyadh. However, during the conference, there was a peaceful protest of several hundred people calling for political reforms in the country. Even women were part of the protest, which is impressive since they are not even allowed to drive. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3191996.stm) The demonstration was quickly broken up since it is against the law to protest against the government. 83 of those protesters were arrested and turned over to the Sharia (Islamic law). (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3306477.stm) The reaction of the Saudi government was great. “What happened was just a limited gathering...this won’t happen again.” So much for freedom of expression, there isn’t any. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3194500.stm)

On a positive note, it’s a good day for those detained by the Saudi government. There’s is a brand new criminal code in place. Torture isn’t allowed any more and they’re even permitted to have a lawyer during questioning and trial. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3191996.stm). They’re moving right along into the 21st Century. Alright, so they haven’t had elections since the beginning of the country in 1932, but I suppose that progress moves slowly.

During the economic forum hosted last week in Saudi Arabia women were allowed to attend. They were allowed to participate and actually speak to the group. Hang onto your seats. Lubna al-Olayan, a leading businesswoman, spoke without wearing a head scarf. Women were even allowed to mix and discuss business with the men in attendance. But surprise, the religious establishment was very unhappy. The highest religious authority of the land, Grand Mufti Sheikh Abdul-Aziz al-Sheikh commented, “I severely condemn this matter and warn of grave consequences...What is even more painful is that such outrageous behaviour should have happened in Saudi Arabia, the land of the two holy shrines (Mecca and Medina).” (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3415757.stm)

Now the question that all of us need to ask ourselves is why we care about Saudi Arabia. Most of us would answer that we don’t. Let them be a dictatorship, let them treat religious minorities as criminals, let them crush demonstrations, let them treat women as second class citizens, that’s fine with me. The most important part of not caring is that they live far away from us. But this is where we are wrong. We need to start caring about the Saudis because they are exporting their mentality across the world.

According to the Washington Times, The Saudis have sent and funded Wahhabi religious clerics across the world to spread the word of Wahhabi Islam to build mosques and medrassas (Koranic studies exclusively) This word includes anti-American and Western ideals. These schools are subsidized by the Saudis and some schools even offer free room, board, and food. Most of the 2000 mosques in the United States were started by Wahhabi Muslims. (http://washingtontimes.com/commentary/20030715-094951-6104r.htm) A Wahhabi expert explained that Wahhabism is a “death cult; it is supremacist in that it puts Islam ahead of all other religions. It stands for the proposition that Muslims are the natural rulers over all other religious communities.” (http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/11/24/170535.shtml)

By exporting this attitude across the world; to Southeast Asia, to Europe and the United States, Saudi Arabia has undermined what Western civilization has strived and fought for over the last two hundred years. They are undermining the tolerance and civility that we have worked so hard to have toward our fellow man. They need to grow up and join us in the 21st Century.

Back from Iowa!

I’m back from Iowa! You know, that state just west of Illinois (in which Chicago is located). I had an opportunity to go to the Democratic Caucus. While not a Democrat, I jumped at the opportunity to go. This was a chance to see the process first hand, and I’m glad I went.

I had a great time. I went with a van load of people, two of whom I knew beforehand; my brother and a friend of mine from the Political Science Department. The rest of my fellow travelers I met on the way. Originally my group was meant to go to Iowa City, but instead we ended up in Dubuque. Take a look at a map and see if you can find it.

This was a wonderful experience. I was there volunteering and campaigning for John Edwards the United States Senator from North Carolina. We were put to work talking to local people in the city and outlying areas. We tried to make sure that they were coming to the caucus in their precinct to support John Edwards.

What is a caucus? To be honest, I had no idea until I was in Iowa and found out what this was all about. Caucuses are held all over the many different precincts of Iowa. This meant was that on this past Monday night Iowans would show up to a YMCA in their area, or a school gym, or the local union building, which is where I was. There they would find tables located in the different corners of the room with signs indicating which candidate was positioned there. If you knew who you wanted to support, you’d sit yourself in that corner. If you did not know, you would continue to sit in your chair in the middle of the room. The Chairman running the caucus gave a certain amount of time for all the different groups representing the candidates to try and convince the undecideds in the middle of the room to come to their candidate’s corner. This was the most interesting part of the caucus. These people were actually discussing ideas and policies. They weren’t throwing slogans around without thinking. The undecideds wanted to know what the candidates would do for them before putting themselves in a particular corner.

This was just the beginning. If your group didn’t have at least 15% of the people at the caucus, you had to disband and find another candidate to support. This gave the viable groups a chance to convince the disbanded to join them. Delegates were given to viable groups according to how many people were standing by their candidates sign. Those delegates will go onto a County Convention as well as a State Convention.

Finally, by the end of the process, and the exciting insanity that went along with it, everyone in the room had found a candidate to support. Dick Gephardt and Dennis Kucinich’s groups were not viable and had to find another candidate. In my precinct, many of the Gephardt group came to support John Edwards, and many Kucinich people went and supported John Kerry.

The results of the caucus were very interesting. Senator John Kerry came in first, and Senator John Edwards came in a close second. I had been watching the news over the weekend, and all the political commentators had been saying that the candidates with the most money and best organization almost always won. That would have meant that Dick Gephardt and Howard Dean were shoo-ins. It didn’t happen that way.

The candidates personal style seems to have won or lost the race for them. Dean with his “speak first, apologize later” style really turned people off. Also the fact that he was the first to run negative advertisements against his opponents didn’t do him any good. Dean had plenty of paid volunteers all over Dubuque. But, while he was once on top in the Iowa race, the local people were sick of his supporters always being in their faces.

One also would have thought that the Union support behind Gephardt would have propelled him to victory. But that was not the case. Many people had thought that his time had come and gone, that he had been in Washington too long and had lost as a candidate for president back in 1988. It didn’t seem that he had the power to win against George W. Bush if he got the Democratic nomination. He dropped out of the Presidential race this past Tuesday.

So now after the Iowa caucuses are over, it seems that the political talking heads were wrong. It didn’t come down to the money or the huge organizations. In the end it came down to personality, qualifications and the ability to win against President Bush. Both Kerry and Edwards have great qualifications. Edwards has real personality and has not supported any attack advertisements, unlike Kerry. This will be a fun race to follow.

Iowa was great. The people were the friendliest I’ve ever met, and since we overlooked the Mississippi River, it was also a really pretty spot to be. Who would’ve thought that Dubuque, Iowa would be the place to hang out for the weekend?

Talk is Cheap

A poor man was going door to door asking for money. He stopped at the first house on the block and knocked. The door opened and a man looked out at his visitor. The poor man looked down at his shoes and asked for a few dollars. The homeowner reached into his pocket and handed the man on the porch a twenty dollar bill then closed the door.

The poor man walked over to the next house and knocked on the door. The door opened and before he knew it, the poor man was sitting on the living room couch. This homeowner asked him about his life and his family and the two men found themselves in a conversation. Finally after an hour, the homeowner walked the man to the door and handed him two dollars.

The question must be asked: Which homeowner is the better person? The answer is the first one. Life comes down to action. Talk is cheap.

The issue of race was raised this past week during the Brown and Black Forum, the last debate before the Iowa Democratic caucus. Candidate Al Sharpton criticized Howard Dean for not having any Black or Hispanic people in his cabinet while being a six-term governor of Vermont. Sharpton said to Dean, “It seems that you discovered blacks and browns during this campaign...if you want to lecture people on race, you want to have the background and track record in order to do that.” (newsmax.com/cgi-bin/printer_friendly.pl?page=http://newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/1/12/95659.shtml)

Al Sharpton has hit the nail on the head. In order for someone to have credibility in a subject, they have to have a good track record. The same holds for political parties. If they are going to have credibility, there needs to have been action in the past. We need to follow the two major political parties historically to see what action they have taken to move civil rights forward.

Beginning way back with the first Republican president Abraham Lincoln, we know that while the Civil War was not initially fought to free the slaves, freeing the slaves became the rallying cry for the North. After the War, Reconstruction of the South became a new battleground. This meant that former slaves needed to be integrated into society, and the former Confederacy needed to be integrated back into the Union - not an easy process.

The Republican Party became the party for the freed slaves. The Republican Congress of the time passed the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments to the Constitutions, declaring that Blacks were now a free people and official citizens of the United States whose right to “vote shall not be denied or abridged...on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude (15th Amendment).”

The problems enforcing these new Amendments came from the Democrats. Violence was rampant in the South, and the federal government was unable to stop it. Once the Democrats took a solid hold on the South, it was all over for Black equality. (www.bbc.co.uk/history/society_culture/protest_reform/civil_rights_reconstruction_print.html)

Let’s skip ahead. We see from the voting records that since 1933 Republicans have had a more positive record on Civil Rights than the Democrats. “In the 26 major civil rights votes after 1933, a majority of Democrats opposed civil rights legislation in over 80 percent of the votes. By contrast, the Republican majority favored civil rights in over 96 percent of the votes.” (www.congresslink.org/civil/essay.html and www.yale.edu/ynhti/curriculum/units/1982/3/82.03.04.x.html)

Moving into the 1960s. Democratic President John Kennedy only became interested in civil rights after realizing the country was behind the idea of equality, and not before. The 1964 Civil Rights Act was only passed with the help of the Republicans. House Republicans voted for this Act 138 to 34. Democrats supported it 152-96. Republicans were in favor of this bill in a higher proportion than the Democrats. (newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/12/13/194350.shtml)

According to Jon Kyl, an Arizona senator, quoting a former New York Times columnist, the Republican Nixon administration had “accomplished more in 1970 to desegregate Southern school systems than had been done in the 16 previous years, or probably since.” In addition, the Reagan administration was supportive and pushed for different ways to attract business to the inner cities. (http://truthnews.com/world/2003010033.htm).

Our current President has moved along the same lines. President Bush’s cabinet is the face of America. He has Black, as well as Japanese, Chinese and Arab Cabinet members. In fact, the face that the United States shows to the World is Black. Secretary of State General Colin Powell and National Security Advisor Dr. Condoleezza Rice.

The point here is simple. When deciding who to vote for this November don’t vote blindly. Look into each candidate and the party they represent. Remember, just because they talk the talk doesn’t mean anything. We know that talk is cheap.

A Government by the People for the People?

Israel News : Jerusalem Post Internet Edition

Brilliant insight! A democracy run by the People? You must be joking...

In Tel Aviv, Israel today, there was a massive demonstration attended by 100,000 people protesting against Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's idea of unilaterally leaving Judea/Samaria (aka the West Bank).

Sharon: If the Arabs cannot control their terrorists, we will give them their own country. Wow, idiocy and insanity bound up in one person. Did I miss the logic somewhere?

Back to the demonstration of 100,000 people. Mind you -- there are only 6 million people in the entire country of Israel. One hundred thousand is not a minor group of people that can be or should be ignored.

But then again, let us not underestimate the Prime Minister. The Jerusalem Post reported on Sharon:

"PM Ariel Sharon commenting on the attendance of cabinet members in what is essentially a protest against government policy, said "Israel is a democracy, and decisions are made not by protesters [but] by the government.""

Whoa! We've got brilliance. I think he needs a basic government class.

Sharon: A democracy isn't run by the people! What could they be possibly be thinking? A democracy is run by the government! A democracy hasn't anything to do with the People...no, no, no. Protesting is totally irrelevant to this system of government. We don't need to respond to the demands of the People... What kind of government do you think we're running here? We're going to commit national suicide whether you like it or not...

Note to G-d: Anytime you want to send Moshiach would be great...Thanks.

Good-bye

Today I found out about the death of Dr. Otto Feinstein who passed away last week on Tuesday, December 30th. He was an amazing person who I had the honor and privilege to meet and work for over the last year and a half at Wayne State University. I wish his family my condolences and that they be comforted among the mourners of Zion. I will miss him.

Let 'Em Die

The brilliant thinking award goes to the Iranians who would rather let their people die than to accept any help offered by the "Zionist" enemy. Good going...20-70,000 people are supposed dead by an earthquake -- but NO! we won't accept help from the Jews.

Anyone else notice that the Israeli offer for help that Iran turned down didn't make it to the mainstream news? Big surprise there.

Equality?

Yup, another suicide bomber. I love it, the evening news tonight equated the death of a terrorist from the Islamic Jihad to the murder of civilians in Tel Aviv.

My Apologies...

It has been brought to my attention that the Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. quote I used in my “White Supremacy” article printed last week was made up. I quoted from another source that was not aware that it was not a true statement. I am certainly grateful that the editors and readers of The South End are checking the sources of my articles. I pride myself in doing research for my writing and it is very important that I give accurate information. I am quite disappointed in my error.

The excerpt I used was from a “Letter to a Anti-Zionist Friend” supposedly written by Dr. King. While we now know that this letter was never written, it is important to see in what other place this letter has shown itself. According to the media watchdog CAMERA (Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America, www.camera.org), this letter is not found anywhere prior to 1999. On the other hand, they did find a copy of it in the book “Shared Dreams” by Marc Shneier whose preface was written by Martin Luther King III. Obviously Dr. King’s family was also unaware that this “Letter” was a hoax.

Actually, there is plenty of evidence to show that Dr. King was a strong supporter of Jews and Israel. In fact, when he spoke at Harvard University in 1968, he was quoted as saying “When people criticize Zionists, they mean Jews, you are talking anti-Semitism.” (“The Socialism of Fools: The Left, the Jews and Israel” by Seymour Martin Lipset; Encounter magazine, Dec. 1969, p. 24).

U.S. Representative John Lewis, a Democrat from Georgia worked directly with Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. during the Civil Rights movement of the 1960s. Lewis wrote in the San Francisco Chronicle January 21, 2002 about Dr. King and his relationship with the State of Israel. Lewis explained that Dr. King saw a strong connection between the Jewish and the African-American communities. He saw that both peoples had been oppressed and murdered just because of who they were. Dr. King was one of the first to bring attention to the persecution of Jews in the former Soviet Union. “I cannot stand idly by....For what happens to them happens to me and you, and we must be concerned.”

Dr. King saw the creation of the Jewish State in 1948 and the miraculous six day victory of Israel over its neighbors in 1967. He saw when Israel took the historic lands of Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) back and was clear about his vision for the State of Israel. On March 25, 1968 he stated that, “peace for Israel means security, and we must stand with all our might to protect its right to exist, its territorial integrity. I see Israel as one of the great outposts of democracy in the world, and a marvelous example of what can be done....Peace for Israel means security and that security must be a reality.”

Again, I apologize for the mistake I made in last weeks article in The South End, and I appreciate the opportunity to correct that mistake. Dr. King was a great man, and it would be a dishonor to him to misquote his message of brotherhood between the Jewish and African-American communities.

(www.jewish-history.com/mlk_zionism.html)