|
Letters to the Editor July 2002 |
||
|
|
Dear Readers:
We welcome your contributions. Send us your questions, thoughts, ideas, comments, or articles. We will publish them without censorship (except for impolite words, they will be removed), according to our policy summarized in the Mission section. This means that they have to be void of slander, attacks, or ethnic slurs. Our objective is allowing a civilized dialogue between Arab and Muslim readers on one side, and readers from other cultures who are interested in cross-cultural understanding. We apologize for not publishing letters that do not achieve this noble objective. We also welcome any other suggestions, not intended for publication. WARNING: Messages that contain threats may be used to press legal charges against their senders. The editor, Dr. Hassan A. El-Najjar, appreciates it if readers use their names instead of using numbers or symbols. This enhances the credibility of the opinions and issues discussed. Write to us on our email address: editor@aljazeerah.info Or you can send materials by mail to our address: Editor, Al-Jazeerah Information Center, P.O. Box 724, Dalton, GA 30720, USA.
From the Editor
To: BOUTALEB hadj ALI (Clip 7), 7/30/02 We are not a match-making agency. If you have been reading aljazeerah, you would not have sent that message. Your second message (7/31/02) apology accepted. From: Sara Empey (7/31/02) Subject: Confused about Hamas I stumbled upon your website a few months ago and have been reading it fairly regularly. I do think it is important to get other points of view regarding the situation in the Middle East. I have a BA in Political Science and emphasis in International Relations. However, that emphasis seemed to be more towards Asia. So I have been playing catch up regarding the Middle Eastern situation for about the last nine months. So I hope you will bear with me. Several times I recall reading on this site the statement that if the Palestinians are able to gain their own State and Israel returns to it's pre 1967 boarders, that the violence in that region will stop. Today I have been reading about the newest bombing, at Mount Scopus University, which Hamas claimed responsibility for. From what I have read so far, Hamas is dedicated to eradicating Israel. That it does not matter if Israel returns to the lands it occupied in 1948, they will still attack Israel until Israel is gone. So I guess I am deeply confused as to how this violence is ever supposed to stop. If Palestine does get it's own state (which I think it will and that it should) how does that really stop the violence? Doesn't a Hamas attacking a neighbor that is literally across the street from Palestine, make it impossible for the Palestinians to have a stable country of their own? Also, I read the article that Dr. El Najjar posted regarding the bombing of Mount Scopus. While I disagree with many of the tactics and policies of Ariel Sharon and do not think he is really Israel's best hope for peace, I cannot believe it is the goal of the Israeli government for these sort of attacks to be continued against it's own population. It was also stated in that particular article that the US Media and President Bush were silent regarding the Gaza Massacre of 7/23/02. This is factually untrue as that attack was covered and global condemnation was shown in the televised and print media. And I specifically remember reading an article in the New York Times where President Bush called the attacks "heavy handed". And I believe as a result of the Gaza Massacre, there is a current review underway within the US government concerning the use of US made weapons against civilians, as this practice is prohibited by law in the United States. Editor: First, I am so happy that you read Al-Jazeerah regularly and I am also happy for your long message, which contained several points and questions. It is our mission to educate about the US foreign policy towards Arabs and Muslims and I hope that readers will benefit from the questions and the exchange between us. Second, concerning your confusion about Hamas, and actually other Palestinian organizations, Israel has not withdrawn yet. In fact, the Israeli military occupation since Sharon has come to power is more brutal than ever before. The Hamas statement of today said that they retaliated for the Israeli massacre in Gaza, last week. So, what they did was not initiating hostilities but reacting to Sharon's brutal action. The Israeli occupation is 35 years old, and for Palestinians, Israelis do not want to withdraw. They want to continue building settlements on Palestinian lands. The test for Palestinian organizations will be after the Israeli withdrawal from the Palestinian territories and after the establishment of the Palestinian state. You cannot judge their behavior on basis of their reactions to Sharon's bloody tactics. Third, concerning your skepticism about "the goal of the Israeli government for these sort of attacks to be continued against it's own population" (your words), what would you say the goal is? We have a record here. Every time Israelis assassinate Palestinian leaders or activists, Palestinians retaliate (react). Both sides target civilians. When you know in advance that your actions will bring retaliation against your own population, and you still do it, what does that mean? It means that you don't care about those who are killed in both sides. That is what has been happening and that is what I said. Fourth, concerning condemnation of the Israeli massacre of Gaza, on 7/23/02, we say that there has been no condemnation of the massacre as a "terrorist" act. Targeting civilians on purpose is terrorism. President Bush, US senior officials, and the US media have all been very fast condemning Palestinian actions against Israeli civilians as "terrorism." However, they have not yet used the same word to describe Sharon's massacre in Gaza, which he knew in advance that it was targeting civilians in a residential neighborhood. We are talking about one standard for justice. I challenge you to tell me if any American official in the government or the main media dared to describe Israeli killing and injuring of Palestinian civilians as "terrorism." Finally, I hope that you have read Alain Gresh's article about Ehud Barak's infamous proposal to Arafat that contributed to the present suffering of Palestinians and Israelis, you asked me about it before. From: Dr. James A. Stevenson (posted on July 29, 2002) To: Nick Young (the writer/journalist) and Sara Empey Subject: Further readings about bias in the US media and about Ehoud Barak's proposal that was rejected by Arafat, in 2000. Nick: You may want to read the 3 part series by Edward Herman about anti-Arab/Palestinian bias in the U.S. media. You'll find them in the Opinion Editorial Section. Sara: You may want to read about Ehoud Barak and the failed peace negotiations in the article written by Alain Gresh. It's also found in the Opinion Editorial Section. From: Tariq, UK (7/28/02) Subject: The need for an international Arab-Islamic TV in English
My family and I watch Aljazeera
regularly. Though we don't understand much as Arabic is not our
language but being Muslims we prefer to watch this channel (that)
we like in UK.
Since the technology has advanced so
much, we strongly wish for Aljazeera channel to use the facility
of "Sub Titles" in English with your programs especially
with news and knowledge about shariah. In addition to the benefit
to Muslims since the media has strong control on the world
population, therefore, Sub Titles in English will let the world
(non Muslims) know the news of the other side.
Being Muslim I believe Islam does
not prohibit from the use of technology especially when Muslims
are being crushed and are categorized as Terrorists without regard
to actual terrorists. English being international language people
believe whatever CNN and BBC shows and tell them. To counter it,
my family and I strongly recommend the use of sub title facility
in English.
We are looking forward to have a
positive response from you soon.
Editor: I agree with you. There is a need for an all English channel that communicates Arab-Islamic stories to the world. We (aljazeerah.info) may be able to start broadcasting news in English shortly, in our internet website aljazeerah.tv, as a first stage. But this is not related to the Arabic Aljazeera satellite channel. From: James Pyland (July 27, 2002) Subject: Hate mail Hello,
so glad to see your website, it must be new?
Our
system is based on money and special interest politics.
The corporate media sells it, and we live the role. I
noticed your note about threats.
I’ve seen some very nasty anti-Arab messages recently.
I presume you have probably received some of them.
If so, I want to say that I am glad you are here, not
because of race or gender or religion, but because we are human
beings. It’s what needs to be said. I
may be presuming too much. If
not I hope you think of this letter the next time you get hate mail. Edit: Thanks Jim, I'm glad you're here too because people like you make our efforts worth it. Yes, you're right we have received hate mail from some of the people we want to educate. I'll always remember your message and I hope that we receive messages that ask questions or explain issues instead of hate mail. From: The Editor To: Soltan N. You and other readers are welcome to explain Islam, in the "Islam" section, within the folds of the Qur'an and the Sunna.
From: Sohail 'Mazdak' (July 26, 2002) Subject: Genocide of Muslims in India (Gujarat) Long Live the Unity of Muslims - for the benefit of all mankind. You're entitled to your own view about President Abul Kalam. However, you cannot claim that he is not a Muslim unless you have evidence that he has announced that he is not. We welcome your contributions about Indian Muslims. From: Pat Fitzgerald Shreveport, LA., USA (July 25, 2002) # 1 Subject: Is there hope for Palestinians?
Do Palestinians REALLY believe that one day they will have a state
west of the Jordan river? given the balance or power in that part
of the world, it seems they are fighting out of habit and hatred
just like my relatives in N. Ireland.
Editor: Absolutely, yes. And it will be the first stage. Ultimately, Palestine and Israel will become one country when Zionists concede to democracy and accept the universal principle of one vote for each person, irrelevant to his or her religious belief. Jews, Muslims, Christians, and people of all faiths and creeds are living in harmony in most countries, including the US, why not in Palestine and Israel? Palestinians fight for their freedom from the Israeli military occupation. When this ends, there will be no fighting. It's not out of habit or hatred. Concerning the balance of power factor, it is important now but it doesn't continue. Where is the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, and Fascist Japan? All are gone. Where is Great Britain and colonial France? They are small countries in the European Union now. Israel will not be an exception. This is the law of history. Nations are born, they grow, age, and die. Read Ibn Khaldun. +++++++++++++++
From: Pat
Fitzgerald, Shreveport LA. USA (July 25, 2002) # 2
Subject: One more question: What will force the Zionists to change? Your answers to my question about the future of the state of Palestine was very interesting and I thank you for your answers.
One more question and I will leave you to something more important.
what is the pressure that will force the Zionists to change when
they have nukes and are willing to use them?
Editor: First, their own fatal mistake of making more enemies than friends. The same mistake that brought all mentioned above aggressors down. In 1990/91, when the Soviet Union collapsed, it had enough nuclear weapons to destroy Earth several times (Russia still has most of them). Yet, these weapons were of no use to the collapsing system. Second, the society that allows itself to oppress other societies will ultimately reach the stage of moral corruption that all previous aggressor societies reached. At that moment, all weapon systems become obsolete. Nobody uses them because nobody would be loyal to that corrupt system. Third, and most important is the fact that Israel can never rationally use nuclear weapons against Palestinian cities and communities because they are so close to the Israeli cities and communities that using them would be a certain suicide (Most Israeli and Palestinian cities are few miles apart). The same applies to other weapons of mass destruction that Israel has, that is chemical and biological weapons. So, there is no other and better alternative than a peaceful resolution to the conflict that recognizes the rights of the Palestinian people, including their right for their own state. Finally, the Israeli peace camp is small and is on the defensive now. But sooner or later, it will prevail. Israelis will reach to the rational conclusion of a peaceful resolution when they realize that the military option lengthens the conflict for ever and does not bring peace to them. All these factors interact and they are not necessarily in sequence. Pray with me that the change is fast so no more blood is sheded and no more suffering is inflicted on the innocent. From: mpk123 (July 25, 2002) Subject: Al-Jazeerah's position Hello I'm just curious on the stance of Aljazeerah in regards to the accusations of Osama Bin Laden, alquaeda, and the taliban. Are you in agreement that these organizations are responsible for the terrorism? If so what is your position, do you think there was any justification for the terror of 9/11, or how about a justification for the hundreds and hundreds of suicide bombings in Israel. Is there a justification for that? It starts getting really confusing when one condemns acts of terror and suicide bombs hundreds of the same innocent lives. What is your take on all this? Editor: Once more, I urge you and other readers to use real names. How do you want other people to be clear about their opinions and you hide your name? When you use your real name, your words will be more credible. It would also be better if you provide your address for a reply or a contact with you. For Al-Jazeerah's position, it is stated in the Mission section. We promote peace and cross-cultural understanding. Violence begets violence. We should work hard to spread peace in the world through encouraging dialogue and the use of peaceful means to resolve conflict. The fastest way to achieve that is through justice. Palestinians have been under Israeli military occupation for 35 years. This is the source of violence on both sides. However, the origin of violence lies in the Israeli occupation, not in the Palestinian reaction to that occupation. Peace-loving people all over the world should work towards putting an end to the Israeli occupation, which would be an end to the greatest injustice in recent history. There is no justification for killing innocent civilians, irrelevant of their religious beliefs or national origin. From: Ron Allen (July 25, 2002) Subject: Balanced views First,
I would like to introduce myself. my name is Ron Allen, I am an American
of half white and half Asian. You ask for balanced views, and the help
of any congressman who speak for Palestine & Muslims in general, but
your own view is 100% anti Israel. Your
group of people are (impolite word) never bring peace to the middle east
for "the good Muslim You
must contact congressman Mckinney & the rabbi and more people like
them to have more American support for peace, then you will win peace. Editor: Ron, we published pictures of Israeli victims of suicide bombs every time there was one. This time, July 23, 2002, there was an Israeli state terrorist attack on a building in a Palestinian Gaza residential neighborhood. You saw the pictures of the victims: children, men, and women. There was no suicide bomb that day. Do you want us to show previous incidents for the balance to happen? I was surprised that you were not moved by seeing the pictures of these innocent Palestinian children. We are trying to show people anywhere in the world, particularly the American people, what the government of Israel is doing with the money and weapons it receives from the US. We hope that people like you will start thinking about the ongoing injustice and do anything they can to stop it. Palestinians
are not against Israel. They are against the Israeli occupation of
Palestine. Don't confuse the two issues. They actually recognized Israel
since 1993, but the Israeli government has not met its obligations,
particularly ending its military occupation of the Palestinian
territories. From: Gene Warech (July 15, 2002) Subject: Zionism is Racism Should Israel follow the lead of the 22 Arab countries in their treatment of their Jewish citizens? Oh wait, there are no Jews in those Arab countries. Their money and land was stolen and they were ejected. Hundreds of thousands of Jews, including those in the West Bank when Jordan conquered it by force and then annexed it. You will note that the bill was not even introduced into the Knesset.Meanwhile 1.2 million Arabs, mostly Moslem. are Israeli citizens, vote, sit in Parliament, receive pensions, volunteer in the Israeli army. When the 22 Arab nations declare equal rights for Jews, then they may speak about racism with authority and in the most powerful way- by example. Editor: I agree with you 100 percent about Arab Jews. They should go back to their original countries, if they so decide. They should be able to regain their property and citizenship rights. However, there is no connection between the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homeland and Arab Jews who have no problem going back, particularly to Morocco and Egypt. The problem of racism here affects the Palestinian Muslims who are Israeli citizens, and who would be negatively affected by the racist bill. Racism is bad and should not be defended. From: Sara Empey (July 15, 2002) Subject: US media bias in favor of Israel I read the article that you posted on your website entitled "Is it the Media or are they just plain prejudiced?" by Laila Yaghi. I am an American and find the author's statements in the article to be completely false and misleading. The article asserted that the United States as a whole seems to only care about Israel and that we are indifferent at best and accomplices at worst to the plight of the Palestinian people. As a person who has lived within the United States for twenty six years, I can tell you that this is completely false. I have seen the pictures of the bombed out homes and towns. Have read about the curfews that must make life miserable for the Palestinians and have seen the pictures of Palestinians who have been killed. I am not indifferent to this. I care about the fact that the Palestinians are suffering. How can they ever hope to form a viable nation state from such chaos? Everyone in my country that I have spoken to does support the formation of a Palestinian State. However, that does not mean that we support suicide bombings. Not only does this action not help the Palestinian people, but it seems to be keeping them from their ultimate goal of having their own State. Neither do we support moving into the Palestinian settlements and bulldozing them to the ground. Another great puzzlement to myself at least, is why Arafat did not sign the Dayton Accords. Would this not have given the Palestinians about 95% of what they are asking for now? Without the useless shedding of Palestinian and Israeli blood? In my opinion the entire conflict is a sad waste, for both of these peoples. In the article the author also criticizes the United States for being racist against it's minorities. This is true and no American can deny it. America does have a history of racism, most specifically against the African-American's and the Native American's. But it is interesting that the author neglects to point out the great strides that America has made in stamping this out. The Japanese who were interned in camps in the United States during WWII were each given about $50,000 dollars and an official, written apology from the United States Government. Federal affirmative action programs are specifically geared toward the education, housing and job placements of all minorities and women. Several laws passed in this country, including the voting rights act and equal housing act and title 9 ensure that no person of any minority will be discriminated against. What other country has tried so hard to rectify the sins of it's past and be so inclusive to all it's citizens? Also not mentioned in the article is the fact that there is no nation on earth that is guilt free of these crimes. Just as many instances can be found of racism, discrimination and brutality in any countries' history, including middle eastern countries. The fact is, the middle east has an equally brutal history of repression, racism and out right murder. I point this out to once again say that no country is innocent of these crimes. The best that we can do is remember them however, so these senseless and terrible acts will not be repeated. I am just writing this in the hopes that someone may read it and take the time to understand that America is not against the Arab world. We do not stay up late at night thinking of ways to keep Yemen or Egypt down. We don't hate you. We don't wish for your destruction or the destruction of the Muslim religion. We only wish you peace. We wish that for all people. Editor: Sara, I salute you for your honesty and courage to express your good feelings towards Arabs and Muslims, particularly the Palestinian people and their plight. Your letter is full of important points. I'll address few of them this time. First, Laila Yaghi is an American like yourself, but she is partly Palestinian, which has enabled her to see and understand more than the average American does. Her article was about the media, not about what America did to rectify historical injustices. Second, concerning why Arafat rejected Barak's offer in Camp David, in 2000, the offer was not presented in good faith. It would not lead to a viable Palestinian state, which is the minimum the Palestinian people would accept. Barak wanted to isolate the Palestinian cities from each other, isolate the Palestinian state from the neighboring Arab states of Egypt and Jordan, keep major settlement blocks, and keep the walls and underground of the Islamic Al-Aqsa Mosque in Israel's hands. Most important of all was his denial of Israel's material and moral responsibility for Palestinian refugees. This is the essence of the Palestinian problem. Without solving the refugee problem, the conflict won't be resolved. These are people whose property was taken from them and given to Jewish immigrants. Then, they were pushed out to live in refugee camps without citizenship for 54 years. The UN resolutions gave them the right for repatriation and compensation. Third, I agree with you that many Americans feel and know the injustice the Palestinian people have been subjected to, since 1948, but the US government has taken the Israeli side wholeheartedly in the conflict. The US government is the only government in the world that supports Israel with money, weapons, and diplomacy. Without this support, Israel would not be able to continue its oppression of the Palestinian people and its aggression against other Arab states in the past 54 years. Hopefully, people like you would speak out to influence the US government to be less supportive of aggressive Israeli policies. Sara: You may want to read about Ehoud Barak and the failed peace negotiations in the article written by Alain Gresh. It's also found in the Opinion Editorial Section. From: Nick Young (July 15, 2002) Subject: American Media bias in favor of Israel I am an American journalist and as a journalist I consider myself to be open minded to the opposing points of view concerning the conflicts of the world. Myself and my colleagues use the same ethics and practices when covering a story. We do not write in an attempt to put our own opinions into the story. We are merely reporters describing the events of the world and we try to do so in an unbiased way. This is the journalistic code that I was taught and that I follow. I know of no journalists that go out of there way to spin a story as you have suggested when you cite the "Pro-Israeli Bias" in the US media. I have never witnessed any credible reporters writing a slanted story to deride the Palestinians and glorify the Israeli's. I have never witnessed or heard of an editor censoring a story because it was pro-Palestinian or anti-Israeli. Can you provide some examples for me of known cases when this has occurred? As I said before, we simply report events as we see them. You may not like the way that we describe an event but perhaps what you truly do not like is how people see Palestinian "Martyr's." In my opinion, which I state again, will never figure into the reporting of a story is that Americans have little compassion for Palestinians and their support of the suicide bombings of innocent Israeli's. This is not to take away from the numerous innocent Palestinians that are killed by Israeli soldiers for each loss of life is equally tragic to those personally affected. But from a distance when you hear of an "innocent" Palestinian teenage boy being shot for throwing rocks at an Israeli soldier and compare it to an innocent teenage Israeli girl being blown up while at a pizza parlor you will naturally side with the Israeli's. Now, as one journalist to another I applaud your passion for reporting. What I disagree with is your complete bias towards one side of an issue. If this was advertised as an editorial page then I would have no problem with what you were doing, at least in journalistic terms. The fact that you are reporting such biased accounts that only support one side of the issue is an abuse of your power of the press. You yourself are acting in the unprofessional way that you claim American journalists are acting! You are not reporting the issue for what it is, but for how you view it. This is proven in the fact that each story you run is in favor of Palestine or Islam and against Israel and the U.S. You have a great power to change the world, much more so than the average man. How will you use this great power that has been bestowed upon you? Will your legacy prove to be positive or negative? I sincerely hope that the entirety of my letter will be posted on your website. I have doubt for this due to the aforementioned bias against opposing opinions that I believe exists on your Al-Jazeerah site. If this letter is printed in its entirety my respect for you and for Al-Jazeerah will improve greatly. Despite my criticisms I want to thank you for your time and pray that peace be with you. Editor: No matter what you say, Israelis are the aggressors and the occupiers who have ruled Palestinians by force since 1967. They have American-made F-16s and Apache helicopters. They have about $4 billion in annual US aid. They use all this to oppress the Palestinian people. You can't be honest if you do not put the blame directly on the Israeli occupation and call for an end to it, which will end Palestinian-Israeli bloodshed right away. Al-Jazeerah is the voice of the oppressed, Palestinians, Arabs, Muslims, or any other group in the world. The Israeli viewpoint is expressed daily in the main US media, just watch Fox tonight or read about CNN's cheap shot at the photo of the Palestinian baby (Al-Jazeerah front page). Peace be with you. Nick: You may want to read the 3 part series by Edward Herman about anti-Arab/Palestinian bias in the U.S. media. You'll find them in the Opinion Editorial Section.
From: Farmijo
(July 15, 2002)
Subject: Israeli-Palestinian conflict Give peace a chance-- Sharon claims he needs a few weeks of no suicide bombings as a prerequisite to any negotiations between Palestine and Israel, why not try it? if anybody has any control over the groups that are sending the bombers, why not stop them to expose Sharon's hand.? If he really means what he says, after a few weeks no bombings , and Sharon has not moved to any attempts to start a peace process with Arafat, this should get the united states to pressure Sharon to start the peace process immediately. if Sharon does not comply to U.S. pressure , the U.S.. cannot help but to take the Palestinian side and get involved in forcing Sharon to meet the demands of the U.N. agreements, which have been agreed to in years past. The Israeli settlements that have been built since the '67 war must be torn down, and lands return to the Palestinian people, and the Palestinians must be allowed to seek their own destiny in their own lands. Once this has has been done, I would expect most countries around the world to assist financially and humanitarian aid in getting Palestine established as a free state to rule itself, and start taking care of building schools , hospitals, and getting the government established. There has been too much loss of life on both sides in the last two years, and so far nothing has changed. Is it not time to try a different approach ? There is nothing to lose except a few weeks of nobody getting killed for nothing. I would hope that the militant groups , if they really want peace and get Israel out of their lands, would also be willing to try to give peace a chance. Editor: I wish if you are the President of the United States because you have a very logical plan to resolve the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Anyway, there has been no suicide bombing for several weeks now. However, Israeli occupation soldiers and helicopters have continued attacking Palestinian areas, on daily basis. They kill Palestinians everyday, look at the casualties section of Al-Jazeerah. Actually, thus doing, the Sharon government wants to provoke Palestinians to react. So, Israel can continue its war and its occupation. The fact that you have not mentioned your name saddened me because it tells me that you are afraid to be identified as one who speaks out challenging the status quo. You shouldn't be afraid, you should be proud that you say the right thing. God bless you. From: John A. Marciano (July 9, 2002) Subject: A great majority of Americans do see that Israel has done a great deal of injustice to the people of Palestine. I would like to make a statement (that) a great majority of Americans do see that Israel has done a great deal of injustice to the people of Palestine. I as an American do not support the 'occupation' of Palestine. Editor: I salute you John for your courage to announce your opinion at the time politicians are scared to criticize Israeli atrocities. People like you give hope to humanity.
|