Je Suis Martin

For nearly two weeks – which in today’s 24-hour-news-cycle essentially makes the horrific events in Paris old news – I’ve been trying to write my “Je Suis Charlie” post, but it just wasn’t coming out right. I knew Je Suis Not Charlie, but I couldn’t properly explain why.

Of course I’m an ardent supporter of free speech even (sometimes especially) when it offends some people, and, I’m as sickened as anyone else by violent, self-righteous, self-serving Islamist Extremist terrorism. I also completely understand why millions of people in France and millions around the world wanted to express their outrage with a spirit of “Je Suis Charlie” support.

Still, however symbolic rather than sincerely specific that battle cry may be, I just couldn’t and still can’t get with it. But when I awoke today, Martin Luther King Jr. Day (for some a Day of Service, for others a Day of Shopping; yes, there are now King Day sales), I knew I had the right words within me.

I am infuriated that The Whackjob Brothers believed they had the right to murder the staff (and others) of a satirical newspaper for the “crime” of disrespecting the Prophet Mohammed and equally infuriated that their brother-in-arms felt entitled to invade a kosher supermarket and kill people for the “crime” of being Jewish. I’m glad they themselves were killed by police and I hope when they reach whatever afterlife they were so looking forward to that the Prophet Mohammed screams “Not In My Name!” and banishes them somewhere for eternity before they get to defile their quota of 72 virgins.

What Je Suis is opposed to hateful, violent intolerance. Je Suis also against religious and atheistic orthodoxy, and not knowing the difference between sophomoric, vulgar insult and sophisticated religious/political satire. Have you seen any quantity of the cartoons published by Charlie Hebdo? Take a look. For the most part, they’re disgusting and say nothing. The French have long been regarded as the global arbiters of style but nobody’s perfect. Let’s not forget that several generations of them adored Jerry Lewis and we have them to thank for the endurance of post-WWI mime.

People have the right to be disgusting and say nothing, and nobody has the right to kill them for it. Still, it’s worth noting that before the terrorist attack, Charlie Hebdo (which has been disgusting and saying nothing about all religions and politics since the 1970s) had a niche readership for its weekly print run of 60,000 copies. The issue published after the attack sold six million, obviously out of free speech solidarity. You gotta love the irony of that.

Quotations by smart people are one of my favorite things. Two at the top of my list are: “Who would you be and how would you behave if there were no praise and no blame?” (Quentin Crisp, about how he shaped his identity), and, “You can’t fight fire with fire, you have to fight fire with water,” (Martin Luther King Jr., on why he believed non-violence could triumph over violence).

Terrorism shows us the darkest side of who people are willing to be and behave if they don’t give a damn about what anyone thinks of them (especially when they're certain they're right). Terrorism also makes us wonder if the calming water of non-violence really has the power to defeat the scourge of terrorism. I think it may if an assortment of non-violent actions are employed.

For starters, the U.S. should get out and stay out of Muslim countries and let the chips fall where they may; our military presence helps nothing. Second, France and other countries with marginalized Muslim communities must bring them into the national fold through vastly improved education, economic opportunities, and the removal of discriminatory laws. If Muslim women want to wear their headscarves, let them. That's hardly the same thing as trying to impose Sharia law.

Most important, the vast majority of moderate Muslims who are also the vast majority of Jihadist victims must find the courage to stand up and speak out and, as they did in Paris, tell their crazies “Not In My Name!” until it finally sinks in. The world community must identify and remove Extremist sources of funds, weapons and day-to-day survival. Public relations (propaganda) on a massive, cooperative scale must counter recruiting and radicalizing efforts. Last but not least, the world community must use its best information technology to cut off the information technology of terrorists. And when/where necessary, spies and intelligence services everywhere should covertly kill terrorists. A little violence will, unfortunately, be necessary. It's like with Nazis. The water of non-violence will get you just so far.

Before ignorance, hatred, fear and violence took Martin Luther King Jr. from us all, he was beginning to talk about the undeniably connected dots of racial oppression, exclusion, poverty, ignorance, addiction, nutrition, anger, despair, injustice, and a huge rift in communication between disparate communities. On this day of celebrating his work, hope, dreams, and faith, it would be very helpful if we could enlarge our own capacities for those same strengths. That is what might ultimately defeat American racism. And maybe it can play a major role in defeating international Islamic terrorism, too.

In my best moments, Je Suis Martin. May we all be Martin together.

“There’s Somethin’ Happenin’ Here…

…And what it is ain’t exactly clear,” but it’s getting less fuzzy with each passing day. I haven’t written a post in quite a while (sorry about that), partly because I’ve been busy with other things, but mostly because the events of the past three weeks or so have left me uncharacter-istically speechless. I’m angry, confused, sad, and feeling rather hopeless – more so than usual. And as one who chooses not to keep up with today’s exceedingly mediocre pop culture (particularly during the Stupid Summer Film season), it wasn’t until Thursday night’s Sharknado attack that I realized much of the country must feel the same way. A critical level of Mass Ennui, a sense that everything is coming apart at the seams. America is having a nervous breakdown.

For sure, there have been hints coming from my circle (more of a long extended zig-zag line, really) of friends. One is coming undone, losing her sense of personal identity due to the injuries of a super-concussion and a host of huge related stresses. Another is feeling totally empty, pointless, worthless, also no clear sense of self because of PTSD, aging, and depression. Yet another is at the end of her rope from a job she loathes and a year’s worth of aggressive but fruitless job-hunting. Others are feeling generally desperate; still others are keeping frantically busy; most are burdened with pressing responsibilities and an obstacle course of additional problems. We’re all dumbfounded by the state of the nation, world events, and a hazy, unpredictable future. We’re all soldiering on, but most of us are ready to plotz.

Here’s a list (in essentially random order) of the things about which I’ve felt I have nothing new or important to contribute in the ongoing social and media conversations:

1) The inexplicable behavior of a fantastically do-nothing, primarily absent Congress led by a man totally lacking in courage or conviction about anything.

2) The increasing power of a wildly extreme right-wing minority fringe that is swallowing the already-unrealistic, heartless, GOP.

3) The frantic, disjointed, disheartened Democrats who are spread thin across a vast spectrum of urgent issues about which they can do essentially nothing.

4) A smart, even-tempered, President who is being attacked, disrespected, and disregarded at every turn, while he cheerfully attempts to cope with an unprecedented number of domestic and foreign crises with zero cooperation.

5) The plight of traumatized foreign refugee children, as well as the uncertain fate of the “dreamers” – American adults who were brought here illegally as children and may well be expelled from the only country they have ever called home.

6) The global anti-Israel (in many cases anti-Semitic) response to admittedly horrific violence against a rogue government whose stated goal is the utter destruction/obliteration of the Jewish State.

7) Vladimir Putin’s apparent belief that he can re-create the Soviet Union and establish a perception of himself as a great and mighty world leader.

8) Numerous planes falling out of the sky – some by accident, some by attack, all to the mortal detriment of ordinary civilians just trying to get from point A to B.

9) The increasing general madness and particular mayhem against women by Islamic extremists in the Arab world and Africa.

10) The deliberate marginalization of numerous Americans through racism, poverty, misogyny, unwarranted imprisonment, and both corporate and political greed and chicanery.

11) The dangerous consolidation of media, among both delivery systems and content providers/creators.

12) Inflation, Frankenfood, gentrification, unaffordable housing, old-school police brutality, and extreme weather.

All of which is why a cultural phenomenon like Sharknado could grab the country’s attention. It also explains film’s and television’s solid diet of zombies, vampires, werewolves, suddenly powerless super-powered saviors, and an inordinate number of movies by Tyler Perry. When the horrors of reality surpass the terrors of imagination, we’re left with the poorly crafted ridiculous.

And I don’t know what to say about any of this.

The Woman Issue

Since we’re just three weeks from Election Day, I think now would be a good time to remember that there are other important considerations besides The Economy (unemployment/debt/deficit/taxes) and the country’s biggest-ticket-items: Defense, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and health care.  Of course all this is critical – especially since the Presidential opponents have significantly different ideas about how to handle them.

But the “ancillary” issues that are dismissed in some quarters as "distractions" are in fact very important.  They literally define what our country is now and what it will be in the future: our culture, our values - not in some uptight religious sense, but having a collective, humane agreement about what matters.  Most of these issues have something to do with women, because the category of "woman" overlaps or underpins almost everything else.

All the major stuff, plus:
the future of the Supreme Court, green energy, effective foreign policy, youth and adult education, poverty, hunger, homelessness, the erosion of hard won civil- and voting-rights, Gay Rights and Marriage Equality, immigration and the Dream Act, progressive science, the environment, infrastructure, reforms and regulations, the arts and humanities, fighting voter suppression and the lie of voter fraud - all the things that are the essence of our democracy and literally civilize us and make us great.

Women’s rights, woes, and unbalanced status in America and around the world personify the very real culture clashes that define our times.  And it's an outrage that it's happening here in America.  After decades of struggle to earn the right to vote, not to mention personal autonomy, property ownership, professional opportunity, pay equity and more, women are now in real danger of losing control of our own bodies due to a growing lack of basic and preventive health care, and access to legal abortion and contraception, some of which require enduring intrusive, unnecessary medical procedures and stressful waiting periods.  The repeal of Roe v Wade is a very real possibility in a Conservative/Republican administration.

However, the greatest problem women face – to a much lesser extent here in America but to a vast extent around the world (particularly but not exclusively in the Muslim World) – is atrocious oppression, abuse and violence.  You’re no doubt aware of the 14-year old Pakistani girl who was recently shot in the head by a Taliban terrorist because she wrote a blog and spoke out against the Taliban and advocating education for women.  According to CNN’s Christiane Amanpour, “The United Nations mission in Afghanistan says it verified 34 attacks against schools in just the first six months of this year, ‘including cases of burnings of school buildings, targeted killings and intimidation of teachers and school officials, armed attacks against and occupation of schools, and closures, particularly of girls’ schools’.”

And let us not forget the routine honor killings, stonings, cutting off women's noses, acid attacks, indentured servitude, sexual slavery and rape as a tactic of war and cultural intimidation that are central to radical Islamic Shariah Law.  In addition, throughout Africa and elsewhere, female genital mutilation is traditional.  More recently, the gang rape of lesbians in order to “turn them into proper African women” has become common, as well as the rape of young girls (including infants and toddlers) because it’s believed that sex with a virgin will cure or prevent AIDS.

While most of this behavior is not an American issue per se, some of it is.  Rape, sexual slavery (of children and women) and severe domestic violence are very much American problems – particularly growing violence against girlfriends by teens and young men.  And there are millions of educated-but-ignorant young women who cluelessly ignore these matters and truly believe they're living a solid post-feminist reality.  The have no real understanding of history and are contributing nothing to the existing, still-valiant struggle - because "feminist" has become an old-fashioned, bad word.  They're the Starbucks Generation.

Which feeds in (you should pardon the expression) to America's benefits for the poor that so many people seem to bitterly resent: Welfare and Food Stamps.  Separately or combined, they barely provide the ability to survive.  Although many Americans picture Welfare recipients as burly black men laying around the house watching 60” televisions, and Food Stamps recipients as people using these benefits for non-nutritional purposes, like buying booze and frequenting strip clubs.  These stereotypes couldn’t be farther from the truth.  The vast majority of people on Welfare and Food Stamps are white women and their minor children and their lives are brutal.  These women are generally unskilled, under-educated to the point of illiteracy, and plagued by severe mental/ emotional problems, too.  (Abject poverty, constant worry and social disdain can do that to a person.)

Which brings us back to the fact that women’s health, safety, freedom and prosperity are very much an important part of the 2012 campaign – domestically and as a foreign policy issue.  Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has made great efforts and some strides in the area of women’s rights by vocally supporting education, professional opportunity and personal freedom, and forcefully speaking out against horrific violence and oppression of women.  Republican John R. Bolton – George W. Bush’s ambassador to the U.N. and a specialist on security and arms control – is said to be Romney’s top contender for Clinton’s post should he win the Presidency.  Do you imagine Bolton would make the crises and needs of women a top priority as he travels the world?

How women's issues are addressed – and whether they are addressed at all – will, for years to come, be a revealing part of what kind of country we are and strive to be.  I don’t believe that Romney/Ryan support heinous violence against women here or abroad.  But I also don’t think they have the awareness, sensitivity, and concern we need in the White House, Congress and Senate.  For example, important legislation that would have helped combat extensive sexual slavery in America has been defeated numerous times by Republicans.  They want small government, but they want it to be just big enough to control women, especially sexually.  How long can women here and abroad be denied, defiled, and controlled by men with much power and little compassion?

Human beings are more important than money, but ironically, a greater empowerment of women in all ways would be a genuine boon to our economy and those of developing countries who are nonetheless determined to keep women in the Dark Ages.  So gentlemen, please don’t forget your mothers, wives, sisters, daughters, and all the other women in your life when you vote next month.  And ladies, don’t forget the life and liberty you protect may be your own – and perhaps those of our sisters worldwide.

An Important Correction – and – a Word About Bad Political Judgment & Timing

Now it's time to discuss the political ramifications of yesterday's events.  In my post yesterday, I was incorrect in saying that Gov. Romney criticized the President’s initial response to the extremist attacks in Libya and Egypt.  That is not what the Republican/Conservative presidential contender did.  In point of fact, what Romney did was much worse and demonstrated a level of bad political judgment and timing that should give every American “independent” and “undecided” voter serious pause.  It wouldn’t hurt if it gave a few Republican voters pause, too.

What actually happened was this.  The American Embassy in Cairo got wind of possible pending attacks in response to a movie trailer that had appeared on the Internet.  In an effort to avert the attacks, the Embassy issued a statement on its own authority (e.g., without the knowledge or approval of The White House).  This is the statement they issued:

“The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims -- as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions. Today, the 11th anniversary of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, Americans are honoring our patriots and those who serve our nation as the fitting response to the enemies of democracy. Respect for religious beliefs is a cornerstone of American democracy. We firmly reject the actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of others.”

Right after Romney learned of the attacks and without the full facts about their resulting fatalities – and without waiting to hear to anything directly from The White House – he issued this statement:

“I'm outraged by the attacks on American diplomatic missions in Libya and Egypt and by the death of an American consulate worker in Benghazi.  It’s disgraceful that the Obama Administration’s first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks.”

Needless to say – or, rather, in this political climate, unfortunately necessary to say – this in no way was a reply to the President’s actual response (made later in the day after the facts were in), nor “the Administration’s” response.  This was an uninformed politician’s effort to make premature political hay out of a sensitive, dangerous, international event – thus proving that to Mitt Romney, understanding and speaking about America’s foreign policy really is “a distraction” (as he recently, stupidly said).

Some Republicans (to my surprise) have quickly spoken out against Romney’s untrue and untimely remarks.  Others (hardly to my surprise) are standing firm, parroting the “official” support statement.  As Gail Collins explained in her New York Times column this morning:

“The Romney campaign, according to CNN, helpfully passed out suggestions for supporters who might want to defend Mitt. (When asked whether he was too quick on the attack, loyalists were supposed to say: “No. It is never too soon to stand up for American values and interests.”).”

Folks, this incident may hurt Mitt Romney’s chances of winning the presidency, but it very well may not – because millions of Americans are still not paying attention and still think all politics and politicians are the same, and what they say or do makes no difference in their own lives or those of others.

I don’t know who or what is most disheartening: Mitt Romney’s clear lack of presidential intelligence, strategy and gravitas, or the American people’s clear lack of active citizenship by watching, analyzing, and engaging in the political process (voting!!!).  I fear that between both of them, we may all be seriously screwed.

Where Are the Moderate Muslims?

We are still just getting a clearer picture of yesterday’s attack on the American Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, that killed US ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three of his staff.  A similar angry, armed mob also attacked the US Embassy in Cairo, Egypt, which resulted in more general destruction, injury, vandalism and demonstrations of Muslim extremist hatred for America.  What we have not seen, as usual, nor are we likely to see, is a swell of protest against these actions from moderate Muslims – not in the Middle East, Europe, Africa, Asia, or most important, Muslim-Americans.  Why not?  Where are the Moderate Muslims?

I do not condone the sentiments and often the behavior of those who are Muslim-phobic in this country, and I fully understand that most Muslims worldwide are not extremists engaging in or supporting of terrorism and political violence.  But it becomes increasingly irritating to not see this larger Muslim World stand up to the extremists – the violent, ignorant, bullies – in their ranks.  As Martin Luther King, Jr. said, “He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it.  He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it.”

These most recent incidents were apparently set off by an obscure, amateur video that is extremely anti-Islam and, of course, deeply insulting to the Prophet Mohammad.  And as stupid as it may seem to us, the extremists believed the video was a blockbuster Hollywood movie that was going to be released to coincide with the 11^th anniversary of the September 11^th attacks.

According to today’s New York Times:

“The trailer was uploaded to YouTube by Sam Bacile, whom The Wall Street Journal Web site identified as a 52-year old Israeli-American real estate developer in California.  He told the Web site he had raised $5 million from 100 Jewish donors to make the film.  ‘Islam is a cancer,’  Mr. Bacile was quoted as saying.

“The video gained international attention when a Florida pastor began promoting it along with his own proclamation of Sept. 11 as ‘International Judge Muhammad Day.’  In a statement on Tuesday, the pastor, Terry Jones of Gainesville, Fla., called the film ‘an American production, not designed to attack Muslims but to show the destructive ideology of Islam’ and said it ‘further reveals in a satirical fashion the life of Muhammad’.”

Lest you’ve forgotten, it was Mr. Jones who, a while back, thought threatening to burn a copy of the Koran would be helpful in fighting terrorism and strengthening positive relationships between the US and Muslim nations.

I don’t want to devote too much space to noting that in today’s impossible 24-hour news and politics pace of life and governing, it is regrettable that Gov. Mitt “Foreign Policy is a Distraction” Romney felt both obliged and entitled to immediately criticize the President’s initial response.  After all, in the middle of The Campaign, everything is fair political game for a kick in the balls.  “America First,” indeed.

For the record, Obama’s “objectionable” statement was as follows: “While the United States rejects efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others, we must all unequivocally oppose the kind of senseless violence that took the lives of these public servants.”

No, I want to concentrate on the fact that contemporary, moderate, ordinary-folks-just-like-you-and-me-Muslims have never collectively done anything to disparage the brethren who are making them look bad and are doing nothing to make the world better – in general or for Muslims in particular – with their violence, hatred and, frankly, a complete lack of sense of humor about themselves and what they believe in.

If you really believe in what you say you believe in – whatever that may be – you don’t get crazy every time someone writes a book or draws a cartoon or makes a movie that offends you.  You let it roll off your back at the least, and peacefully protest about it at the most.  And it would also have been nice, in this instance, if the protesters had given the US some slack, given our support of the Arab Spring and our efforts to avert a Libyan genocide.

To his political detriment, President Obama has consistently tried to walk a fine line between improving relations and communication with the Muslim World and maintaining a consistently supportive policy with Israel.  For his efforts, he’s been accused by the radical American Right of being a Muslim; and rejected, even reviled, by American Jews for not doing enough for Israel.  Instead, Obama and the US have been attacked by Muslim extremists who have no understanding of a culture in which ideas are expressed that are not shared by government, religious leaders, or the populace at large.

If the vast majority of Muslims just want to live their lives and practice their religion in peace, they must show some collective gumption and stand up for sanity and order.  If they don’t, the extremists will make it even worse for them, as well as incur reprisals that would otherwise be unnecessary; it will be a self-fulfilled prophecy, realized in large part by those who stood by and did nothing.

The Challenges of Compromise

President Obama said what was necessary in his Middle East speech today. He spoke truth to the power of change. He spoke of an entire region in transition and the importance of U.S. and global support for peaceful revolution. It was not until the last ten minutes of his 50-minute speech that he addressed the unceasing Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and in that regard he talked about the necessity for compromise. Compromise sucks. Particularly if you have strong feelings about one side of an issue. That said, the fact that neither Israel nor the Palestinians are especially pleased with his remarks is proof that he found a practical middle ground.

Given what’s been going on in the Middle East for the past six months – and what continues to occur – it would have been impossible for the President to make entirely pro-Israel comments, and indeed, it would not have been in Israel’s best interest. Similarly, had he suddenly placed America in an entirely pro-Arab/ Muslim position, it would have been a terrible betrayal of Israel and, in this instance too, not a stepping stone to a viable peace.

Those who choose to maintain a completely anti-Obama position, such as whoever’s writing the hateful and slanted American Blood Eagle blog, which called him Imam Obama and said he’s an anti-Semite, would do well to get a grip. In general, it would be really helpful if people stopped flinging terms like racist and anti-Semite around as if they were just handy catch-all phrases for things they don’t like. These words and what they represent are very powerful and it’s vitally important to make a distinction between those who take positions with which one disagrees and leveling such strident accusations.

As you probably know by now, the thing Mr. Obama said that upset Israel’s most ardent supporters is that Israel should return to the borders it had prior to the 1967 War, and that "long-term occupation" was untenable. Yes, that stung. But compromise means giving up something you care about. The President also said that Israel’s security interests must be protected, called for a non-military Palestinian state, and acknowledged that it is reasonable for Israel to resist negotiating with parties openly committed to its destruction. Guess who's unhappy about that?

In my opinion, President Obama made the most honest, pertinent and all-encompassing speech about the Middle East ever uttered by an American President. The very fact that he discussed the region as a whole and not just the Israeli-Palestinian “issue” demonstrates that.

There are those who are already dismissing the speech as a campaign tool and disparaging the President’s wisdom and sincerity. This is both disingenuous and counter-productive. There is no denying that Barack Obama is a politician and that as such he has done many things over the past three years that have been a body-jarring jolt to the progressives who put him in office. In a number of important instances, he has given the idea of “compromise sucks” disheartening new meaning.

But with this most-recent speech on the Middle East, Obama has shown an intelligence, understanding and sensitivity regarding complicated issues in an increasingly shrinking and technologically-connected world that is nothing less than laudable. If he’s gearing up for a nothing-left-to-lose second term, presenting us with the Obama we thought we were getting in the first place, America, the Middle East and the rest of the world will be the better for it.

Nakba vs Never Again!

I’ve been wanting to write a post about contemporary American views of/positions on Israel, specifically in terms of the American Left and Right, for some time and today seems definitely the day to do it. That’s because, as the New York Times reports, “Israel’s borders erupted in deadly clashes on Sunday as thousands of Palestinians — marching from Syria, Lebanon, Gaza and the West Bank — confronted Israeli troops to mark the anniversary of Israel’s creation [in 1948]. More than a dozen people were reported killed and scores injured.” You should know that what Israel calls its anniversary, the Arab world calls “The Nakba,” the catastrophe. Sixty-three years later, it’s still a catastrophe to them.

When I was growing up in the `60s, the American Left – which really existed back then – was an ardent supporter of Israel, largely because of the strong support for civil rights on the part of most American Jews. Over the decades, as Jews – like most other white people in America – became increasingly afraid of increasingly militant blacks and “white flight” from the cities to the suburbs reconfigured the social structure of the country, support for Israel began to wane on the Left.

By the Reagan Democrat 1980s, the Christian Evangelical Right began to embrace Israel – not because they love Jews (they don’t), but because they champion the one Middle Eastern democracy that exists, and which happens to contain important Christian holy sites they want to see protected and to which they want to maintain access. Correspondingly, the Left discovered new-found compassion for the Palestinians, who then, like now, live largely in self-imposed poverty and a complete lack of social/infrastructural development, because all their energy (including the content of their middle schools, the madrasas) is focused on hating, demonizing, failing to recognize, and seeking to destroy, Israel.

In very recent years, most political quarters in Israel have been willing to make peace with those who despise them and support the creation of an independent Palestinian state. Their only terms have been that Palestinians and other Arabs officially recognize the State of Israel and accept its right to exist, rather than dedicate themselves to, as Hamas puts it, “pushing Israel into the sea.” This apparently is too much to ask. So, despite decades of effort on the part of the U.S. to broker a working, lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinians, as well as Israel’s other Arab neighbors, peace has been unattainable – because the mere existence of Israel, in their eyes, is a Nakba – a catastrophe.

Take a look at the map above, particularly if you haven’t taken a look at a map of the Middle East in a while. Look at the upper right-hand corner of Egypt. You see that little purple bit, scrunched in among Egypt, Syria and Jordan? That’s Israel. Keep in mind that Israel has no oil. Look at the size of Egypt and Saudi Arabia. They’re enormous. Even Syria and Jordan, which are none too big, are still larger than Israel. Look at Iran – which is credited with having helped organize today’s four-pronged attack on Israel. It, too, is enormous. Yet in 63 years, none of these Arab nations have offered to give any part of their lands to the Palestinians as a permanent homeland. Why do you suppose that is? Perhaps to keep old hatreds alive?

Instead, everybody (over there) wants to take a chunk out of Israel and over the years they have. This is largely because of Jerusalem, which is the third most-sacred city in Islamic history, practice and tradition. Indeed, Jerusalem holds some of the most sacred Islamic sites in the region. And it bears noting that, like the holy Christian sites, these places have always been open to Muslims who wish to visit and make pilgrimages there. In fact, Muslims who cannot make it to Mecca, for whatever reason, set their sights on Jerusalem, and they have never been made to feel unwelcome. (Just last night, by the way, some PBS stations ran a very interesting program entitled Jerusalem: Center of the World, which is also worth seeing.)

I want to take a moment to acknowledge that it is religion and religious history that have created much of the antipathy between Israel and its Arab neighbors. In addition, I acknowledge that the establishment of Israel was fostered by Britain and the U.N. as a compensation to the remaining European Jews who managed to escape murder in the Holocaust – and in truth, this land was not theirs to give. In the process, as today’s Times also explains, “hundreds of thousands of Palestinians lost their homes through expulsion and flight.”

This is not a petty matter and making comparisons between whose misery is/was greater is not productive. However, consider the fact that had the Palestinians demonstrated even a modicum of willingness to accept Israel, the Jewish State would have done everything possible to accommodate them and help them prosper. Throughout its short modern history, Israel has turned a tiny patch of the scorched desert into a luscious land of “milk and honey.” They would certainly have helped the Palestinians do the same. But that, apparently, does not matter.

What does matter is that anti-Semitism is alive and well the world over, and is in many ways the substance that feeds the Palestinians and their Arab comrades throughout the Middle East. Nonetheless, the Palestinian cause has captured the compassion of the American Left and others worldwide. I wouldn’t mind that per se, since I can understand how the Palestinians, compared with contemporary Israelis, can seem to be the Underdog, while the Israelis are cast as key allies of Right Wing America.

To the extent that that’s true, it’s unfortunate. But so long as Israel is hated because it is the Jewish State, and so long as Jews are hated, because…because they’re Jews!, it will be my opinion – and that of many other American Jews, as well as Israelis – that Never Again! trumps Nakba. It is time for the Arab world to accept Israel’s presence and its right to exist.

And it’s time for the rest of the world – including the U.N. and the American Left – to regain its knowledge of modern history and, for once, support the Jews. The Arab Spring will turn into a bitter cold Winter indeed if all it accomplishes is a massive new wave of anti-Semitism.

Independence Day in Egypt

I whole-heartedly congratulate the Egyptian people on their non-violent revolution – successfully deposing their despotic, thieving “president” and creating the opportunity for new lives in a free country. Watching your joy as you celebrated in the streets made me feel so happy for you. Thank you for giving the world something to admire and feel hopeful about. I wish you luck during what will likely be a difficult transition. And I hope, for your sake as well as Israel’s, that your future will give you a secular democracy, rather than new oppression by an Islamic Fundamentalist theocracy. You deserve to be rewarded for your courage, for giving up the devil you knew. You don’t deserve new devils!

Contemplating the Egyptian Revolution

Forget for a moment that [as I write this early Wednesday evening] an awesome volcano has rocked Japan, a massive cyclone is threatening Queensland, Australia, a killer winter storm has engulfed half of the U.S., and the largely Republican Senate is about to take its symbolic vote to repeal the health care bill passed last year – and let’s consider what’s happening in Egypt.

Since anti-Mubarak protests began on January 27^th – on the heels of the revolution in Tunisia as well as word going out about the Egyptian president grooming one of his sons for the presidency – I’ve been diligently following events in Egypt with great interest, and, somewhat to my surprise, with a huge sense of solidarity with the Egyptian people. With each passing day, the crowds grew in size and diversity, and what I saw was a true revolution by a united people who have been oppressed for the past 30 years. I saw courage and solidarity and a clear message: we won’t take it anymore. The lapsed hippie/activist in me has been thrilled.

As a Jew and an ardent supporter of Israel, I also saw the potential for danger, for further trouble for the continued (and universally accepted) existence of the Jewish State and the ongoing peace efforts with the Palestinians. As a result, I’ve been watching news coverage on a combination of networks: CNN and MSNBC, as well as FOX and PBS (primarily the NewsHour and Charlie Rose).

Not surprisingly, CNN and, to a greater extent, MSNBC, were also enthralled by the dynamism and legitimacy of the Egyptian revolt; they had very little to say about its impact on Israel or the USA. FOX, in turn, saw little more than turmoil and a radical Islamist threat to Israel and the world (more on that later). Only beleaguered little PBS provided truly balanced coverage, examining the event from all perspectives and with input from an assortment of news services and Middle-East experts. All the networks combined provided lots to think about and many ways to think about it.

As I considered President Obama’s untenable position, I was reminded of President Franklin D. Roosevelt, who said of Nicaraguan dictator Anastasio Somoza in the 1930s, “He may be a sonofabitch, but he’s our sonofabitch.” The U.S. has (and continues to) supported many a despot over the years, because we felt it served our national interest and/or that of our allies. Some people would call that realistic, practical politics. I’m not sure what to call it, but it seems to me we’ve often done this to our peril and inadvertent peril to our friends. I’m no expert, but that’s sure how it seems.

And it seemed all the more so today, after yesterday’s events. Yesterday, approximately two million people gathered peacefully on the streets of Egypt’s major cities and continued to call for the immediate departure of their president. (Indeed, things had been peaceful since Day 2, after the infamous “protective” police squads had been chased off the streets.) The Egyptian Army said it would not fire against peaceful protesters. President Mubarak made the clueless announcement that he wouldn’t run again and would supervise free and fair elections in September. President Obama said reforms must begin immediately, not saying (publicly at least) that our sonofabitch should step down now.

Then today, there was a major game change. Seemingly out of nowhere came a mass of Pro-Mubarak protesters, armed to the teeth, doing battle with the Opposition and attacking the international media. Mubarak denies that his regime instigated this. Again, as I write this, they seem to have taken control of Tahrir Square and other areas. What seemed inspiring has turned ugly, thanks to this turn of events. The U.S. is making impotent calls for an end to the violence. The Egyptian Army, still not taking sides, is trying to keep relative peace and protect the country’s historic treasures. Further unrest is bubbling up throughout the Mid-East and Northern Africa. No one knows what the hell will happen next.

Now, I want to return to the issue of American news coverage of this phenomenon, particularly by FOX, the only network so far to deeply focus on Israel’s position in the midst of all this. It was an education. Last night, I spent a stupefying hour with Glenn Beck, who explained the checkered past of The Muslim Brotherhood (a militant group long based in Egypt) and his belief that it is their intention to take control of Egypt and, along with other Muslim fundamentalist extremists, take over the entire Middle-East and destroy Israel. He explained that this would constitute a caliphate, which is unity among Arab and other Muslim countries. This has happened before, he said, most recently the Ottoman Empire of the 1920s. This seemed entirely plausible to me, and gave me pause about the goodness of the Egyptian revolution.

However, he then went on to describe what he felt would be the logical extension of this power, which would be a Muslim extremist take-over of Asia, Africa, Europe and, eventually, the U.S. This would be The Coming Insurrection, he said, and it would be possible because of the close ties between The Muslim Brotherhood and the well organized American Left (I had no idea there was a well organized American Left, but be that as it may…). Beck described the code words we should be wary of: social justice and change in particular. He warned about community activists. He called out the infamous Bill Ayers, nee the Weather Underground of the 60s, who he says is in a revolutionary bed with The Muslim Brotherhood. In addition, he spent a great deal of time explaining how this uprising would enormously effect the supply and price of oil in the U.S. and elsewhere. I began to feel like I was listening to a Scientologist.

In the end, I, like most of us, I think, don’t know what to make of all this anymore or what to think about it. All I know is that our government can’t talk about democracy and freedom from one side of its mouth and pillow-talk with despotic sonsofbitches from the other. I believe in the legitimacy of Israel and care about (and fear for) its survival. But I also know that millions of people throughout the Middle-East can’t continue to live under oppression – whether by Islamic Fundamentalists or secular rulers. Last but not least, it appears that, contrary to a popular song of the 70s, the revolution will be televised, and how Americans – and other citizens of the world – will respond to it remains to be seen.

Searching For Peace In the Time of Crazy

Once again, the confluence of current events and cultural activities has cast the conun-drum of creating something akin to genuine, peaceful co-existence in the Middle East into stark relief.

Yesterday, 88-year-old James W. von Brunn – a notorious anti-Semite/Holocaust denier, racist and hate site Webmaster – was politely helped into the entrance of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington DC by a security guard – whom he promptly shot and who died shortly afterwards. This elderly hatemonger, with the end of life well in sight, felt compelled to take his shotgun (which, as a convicted felon, he shouldn’t have had in the first place) and continue his vitriolic battle against all things Jewish and African-American. The FBI astutely labeled this an act of domestic terrorism and said “We know what he did, now we have to find out why he did it.” Duh?!

It is important to note that the guard – as much a hero as any soldier on the front lines of war – was named Stephen Tyrone Johns. He was black, 39-years-old, had worked at the Museum for six years, was known as Big John to his colleagues and was appreciated by everyone who works there for his courtesy and friendliness. He lived in Maryland, had gotten married about a year ago, and had a son. If he had not literally used his own body to stop von Brunn, one can only imagine how many of the thousands of Museum visitors von Brunn might have gotten.

This appalling incident came on the heels of President Obama’s Middle Eastern/European trip, during which he said and did some very sensible, sensitive, important and difficult things. But today, when he responded to the Museum shooting by saying he was “`shocked’ and saddened,” he confirmed for some Israelis and other Jews that on a fundamental level, he just doesn’t get it; he doesn’t understand that the most virulent kind of anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial are not only alive and well, but growing. Which is why the president’s call for peace and reconciliation between Israelis and Palestinians is not well received in some Jewish quarters, where the prevailing sentiment is that compromise is a direct road to annihilation. An excellent explanation of this position is expressed by Mitchell Bard in his essay Did Obama Learn the Lesson of Buchenwald? on the Encyclopedia Britannica Blog.

Although I champion the president’s position, I’m frankly shocked that America’s first black president, a man who understands language and uses it well, wouldn’t know better. Chris Rock, on his most recent HBO comedy special, talks about racism at one point. I’m about to paraphrase here, because I don’t have a transcript, but the “language” is accurate. He says it always surprises and irritates him when a black person says he’s “shocked” by a racist incident. “I’m ready for some kind of racist bullshit anytime, anywhere,” he says. “If I was being interviewed by Regis Philbin, chatting and saying `Yeah, I’m in Madagascar 2 and it’s great,’ and all of a sudden Regis jumped up and stabbed me in the neck yelling `Take that, you lousy nigger!’ I’d say to myself `I shoulda seen it coming’.”

Also yesterday, in the parallel universe of the arts, there was a program carried by many PBS stations, America At a Crossroads: Stand-Up Muslim-American Comics Come of Age. It was interesting and entertaining and, not surprisingly, a good deal of the humor was grounded in the difficulty of just being a Muslim-American in post-9/11 America, where everywhere they go, everyone they meet, thinks they’re a terrorist. And this weekend, on the PBS program Sunday Arts, there will be a segment about “Light of the Sufis: The Mystical Arts of Islam,” part of a current presentation at the Brooklyn Museum entitled The Muslim Voices, Arts & Ideas Festival. Apparently, politics, media and the arts are joining forces (synchronicity in action?) to give us a more positive, sympathetic image of Muslims in general and Muslim-Americans in particular.

Bill Maher, at the end of his wise and funny documentary, Religulous, says “Religion must die if humankind is to live.” As you no doubt know, Mr. Maher believes that traditional, organized religion is the root of all evil, violence and stupidity. But whether or not the world would be a better place without religion is a moot point, because it’s not going to happen. For the record, James W. von Brunn is not a Muslim or a person of any faith, so far as I know. But most people want and need a religion to make their lives manageable. Like it says in the old Scottish folk ballad, All My Trials, “If religion were a thing that money could buy, the rich would live and the poor would die.” People of all faiths want to practice their faith and preserve their history, their future – and their sanity in a crazy world.

Unfortunately, some people of some faiths want to obliterate all people of certain other faiths – and Jews have good reason to feel endangered in this regard. I think it’s a good, helpful thing for Americans, who are so often so ignorant about so many things, to learn more about Islam, the fastest-growing religion in this country (and the world) today. But it also wouldn’t hurt for more people to learn and understand more about Jews – including our well-intentioned president, who perhaps doesn’t fully comprehend the depth of Jewish fear and anger, and the potency of Israeli resolve.

Yes, Obama's Efforts Are Good For the Jews

There are many Jews who are not happy with Barack Obama tonight – Jews in Israel, in America, everywhere. There are also many Jews who are thrilled with the president – in Israel, in America, everywhere. Today, the President of the United States did a very ballsy, creative, politically risky thing: he stood on a stage at Cairo University in Egypt and made a speech about many serious, contentious, and ancient struggles related to the existence and security of Israel; the status and strategy of the Palestinians; and the violent antipathy between America and the Muslim World. He talked about terrorism and peace and freedom and communication and understanding and tolerance. He reaffirmed America’s support of Israel’s national integrity and security, but also criticized certain Israeli policies which, he believes, have been counter-productive in the efforts for peace. He talked about Muslims and Christians and Jews, and he quoted from the Koran, the New Testament, and the Torah. He was bold and straightforward and spoke truth to intransigence in all quarters. Needless to say, he got mixed reviews.

Thomas Friedman in today’s New York Times offered a pro-Obama op-ed that ended with: “An Egyptian friend remarked to me: `Do not underestimate what seeds can get planted when American leaders don’t just propagate their values, but visibly live them. …When young Arabs and Muslims see an American president who looks like them, has a name like theirs, has Muslims in his family and comes into their world and speaks the truth, it will be empowering and disturbing at the same time. People will be asking: “Why is this guy who looks like everyone on the street here the head of the free world and we can’t even touch freedom?”’ You never know where that goes.”

On Haaretz.com, the Web version of an independent Israeli daily newspaper that describes itself as having “a broadly liberal outlook both on domestic issues and on international affairs… founded in Jerusalem in 1919 by a group of Zionist immigrants, mainly from Russia,” there is a great deal of reportage and analysis, most in support of President Obama, but by no means in lockstep agreement. For further commentary in opposition to the President’s words and approach, check out Peter Daou’s fired-up essay on The Huffington Post.

The Jewish connection in my very mixed heritage is the strongest. I spent my earliest youth in Jewish neighborhoods on the Lower East Side and in the Bronx. I grew up at a time and place where the Holocaust was a recent trauma, not a distant memory; where Israel was viewed as a miracle, a dream-come-true, and an entitlement strengthened by Hitler’s considerable anti-Semitic, genocidal success; when people bought Israel Bonds and planted trees and sent care packages; when Jewishness and a fierce tie to Israel were synonymous, and Arabs on their massive lands surrounding the tiny Jewish Jewel in the Desert were viewed with suspicion, distaste and outright fear, as eternal enemies.

And, perhaps most politically significant, the Left were the great supporters of Israel, while the Right indulged in socially acceptable discrimination, restriction, and stupidity, the quietly hateful milieu faced by Gregory Peck in the classic film, Gentleman’s Agreement. One of my mother’s co-workers in a New Jersey factory, on learning that she was Jewish, asked to see my mother’s horns. In that world, the answer to any question, both jokingly and very seriously, was predicated on the answer to the primary one: Yes, but is this good for the Jews?

Fifty years later, the struggles and animosities in the Middle East may be much the same, but both there and here, the rules have changed. The Left have abandoned Israel and come to view it as an imperialist oppressor of the Palestinians, who are still portrayed as desperate, destitute youths fighting guns and bombs with rocks and moxie. The Right, largely for their own Fundamentalist Christian reasons, have come to embrace Israel as a holy land and a cherished democracy. Surely, this alliance epitomizes the adage, “with friends like these, who needs enemies?” For those who are not Jewish (in any way, shape or form), the importance of Israeli existence and security seems greedy and defensive; they don’t understand (or just don’t care) that for many Jews, Israel represents Jewish survival in the face of millennia of efforts to destroy us.

However, even in Israel, there is a growing consensus that the Palestinians cannot be defeated anymore than the Jews can, and peace can only evolve from a two-state solution and [albeit grudging] mutual acceptance. And even this imperfect solution cannot be achieved if the Muslim World sees America as its cultural, religious, mortal enemy. But like many Americans and other Westerners, I have huge problems with traditional/ orthodox Muslim attitudes towards and treatment of women, as well as anyone else whose views, behaviors and very existence are regarded as an affront to Islam.

I don’t know what the hell should be done about all this. But I believe, as I’ve said several times on this blog, that Barack Obama’s bi-racial, multi-religious heritage and even-handed personality make him a conciliator by nature. And while he appreciates the enormity of these issues, he also regards it as his presidential duty to try to craft peace, cooperation and co-existence out of this mess. He doesn’t hate Jews or hate Israel or want the peculiarities of the Muslim World to hold sway around the globe. He wants to find in this situation, as in many others, a workable middle ground.

So yes, I think it’s good for the Jews.