Letters to the Editor, December 29, 2003

In view of the horrific casualties suffered by Iranians due to the earthquake, it appears very short-sighted, and indifferent to the plight of the residents of Bam, on the part of Iranian officials to request aid from all countries except Israel. At a time of such terrible human devastation, one would think that political considerations could be put aside and primary attention be devoted strictly to the rescue and restoration of the victims.

This rejection also caused humanity to lose another opportunity - just a small one - to show what might be accomplished if adversaries were allowed to work toward a common good.

David Dolgin Tampa, FL USA

Editor: To better understand this Iranian official position, just remember last week's announcement from the Israeli Defense Minister, Mofaz, that Israel may destroy Iranian nuclear facilities. This is another example of how people perceive Israel because of the aggressive and oppressive policies of its leaders.

Iran calls for help in time of need

The horrifying disaster centred on Bam, in Iran, has shocked everyone. The desire to help in any way possible surmounts whatever disputes or disagreements there may have been or still are, with Iran. Humanitarian aid is the need of the hour, nothing else and it is notable that a number of countries have already rushed aid to Iran, as well as specialist equipment and sniffer dogs to help in finding those who are buried alive.

It is an unfortunate fact that Iran has much experience in dealing with such disasters; they have frequently been hit by massive earthquakes in the past. Consequently, the Iranian Red Crescent Association is one of the most skilled in handling crises of this nature. In the past the Iranian government has rejected offers of assistance when such calamities strike, maintaining, correctly, they have the ability and resources to manage themselves.

However, on this occasion so severe is this tragedy that the government has felt it necessary to call upon the international community for aid. There are already enough teams, both Iranian and foreign, assisting, what is now needed is aid: food, medicine, blankets, tents, etc.

It is a reflection upon Iran's new openness that they felt no compunction in calling for help. The international community will readily respond.

Gulf News

Irwin Cotler & Pratt

Greetings. Thank you for this very informative piece. I had serious reservations about the appointment of Cotler by PM Martin, but little did I have of all the background you provide. It is very clear that Cotler will indeed be a pipleline to Israel, and this is very bad news indeed. Lets see see what he does in the interim before the next election. If Martin heeds the concern that people have about Cotler, he will shed him as quickly as possible.

Another serious concern for many of us is the appointment of Pratt as Defense Minister, who agrees with the illegal war in Iraq. This does not bode well either. But in spite of these two, and perhaps others, I still believe (and hope!) that Martin will not cozy up to the US in tandem will Sharon's destructive polices. Thanks again for all this very important information.

Jack Lakavich, Kelowna, BC Canada

Dual Loyalties: A Response to the Christisons

By Terry Thurber

I enjoyed The Bush Administration's Dual Loyalties By Kathleen and Bill Christison, at aljazeerah.info. The authors connected the details and offered an informed understanding of political power structures. It was good to read an in depth analysis by seasoned professionals!

One issue: The article did not mention the so called left or liberal [dual] loyalties with Israel. The only choices Americans have are pro-Israel liberals, or pro-Israel neo-cons. There is no Anti-Israel politic. There is no Israel-neutral politic. All politics at the Federal level are pro-Israel.

The game with Israel reminds of the state lottery scheme. States receive federal dollars for human services. Checks are disbursed to the poor. The checks are cashed, and then used to purchase [state] lottery tickets. Our government sends billions to Israel. The money comes back to districts in states of supportive officials and into their campaigns with help from JIINSA or AIPAC.

In your CIA experience, have you ever reviewed a "situation" like the one America faces now? Voices are not heard. The government blatantly ignores constitutional and international law. And our representatives, because of successes in their bias for Israel, are not interested in change.

It's easy to make the case that all terror traces it heritage to the treatment of Palestine by Israel. Solve that problem - the world will have time and resources to deal with [truly] important global issues. But, for now: it is war - not dialog - not solutions.

Are there (historical) instances where a highly integrated and powerful economy, like ours, was able to "take" its government back. We vote - it doesn't [seem to] count. We say no - it doesn't matter. A Connecticut congressman (Shay?), on a C-SPAN televised town hall, told his constituents, despite his mail and web site reporting 75% against invading Iraq, [that] he had to make a "leadership" decision and go against their wishes.

Are there case studies, similar to the situation we find ourselves in today, where the middle and working class were able to get their elected officials [and media] to be more responsive. What are our options? How is it done? How have other nations faced similar circumstance? What did they do?

How do AIPAC and JIINSA do it?

Some citizens are functionally or academically prone to proffers of fear being sold by the dual loyalists. They are shamelessly vocal about it. Others see the pantomime of elected officials, yet remain quiet (fearing the brain police or a Stalin like purge:-) - feeling helpless - with few options.

Could you put together a case study and share it with us when you have time?

Terry Thurber can be reached at bos4@mindspring.com

Earth, a planet hungry for peace

The Israeli apartheid (security) wall around Palestinian population centers (Ran Cohen, pmc, 5/24/03).

The Israeli apartheid (security) wall around Palestinian population centers in the West Bank (Ran Cohen, pmc, 5/24/03).

Opinions expressed in various sections are the sole responsibility of their authors and they may not represent Al-Jazeerah's.

editor@aljazeerah.info