The Protocols of Rachel Corrie

[H2O Man]

Last week I had the opportunity to watch Marc Levin's documentary, "Protocols of Zion," on HBO. The 2005 film explores the myth that no Jews died in the Twin Towers on 9-11. It also exposes some of the anti-Semitism that remains, like a stubborn virus that infects our society.

Marc Levin is, in my opinion, one of the most talented artists in America. His 1993 film "The Last Party," about the Clinton campaign, was a treat for everyone who loves politics. In other works, he confronts controversial issues head-on; these include "Soldiers in the Army of God," and especially "The Execution Machine: Texas Death Row." But I think that "Protocols of Zion" is his most powertful film.

Levin allows everyone an opportunity to speak in the film. He goes well out of his way to seek out, and provide a fair chance for people to put forth their beliefs about the absolutely incoorect theory that "the Jews" were responsible for 9-11, and that they "took care of their own" by makingsure no Jews went to work in the Twin Towers that day.

Hatred is an illness. In the case of most illnesses, a person knows they are sick. In a few, such as drug addiction, the victim is not aware that they are ill, because the disease lies to them. Hatred of groups of people, be it for concepts like race, religion, sex/orientation, are likewise diseases that lie to the victim that plays host to them. Thus, those in Levin's film who are sick, are totally invested in the lie that eats their being like a cancer.

This type of disease is very dangerous, and not only to the hosts themselves. They pose a threat to the greater society, because they must deny the truth, as they spread their lies. And the denial of truth always leads to attempts to forcefully suppress those voices in society that speak the truth.

There may be no better example of this than what happened in 1967, when the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., spoke at the Riverside Church in New York City. In his classic sppech, "A Time to Break Silence " (aka "Beyond Vietnam"), Martin bravely spoke out against the war in Vietnam. He connected the hatred and violence that was taking place in SouthEast Asia, with the racial hatred and spiritual poverty found in the streets of America. And he attempted to expose the root causes of that hatred, as what he called "the giant triplets of racism, materialism, and militarism."

In "Let the Trumpet Sound," author Stephen Oates writes that King's "address provoked a fusillade of abuse from all sides. The Jewish War Veterans of America blasted it as 'an extremist tirade' that belabored an 'ugly parallel' with the Germans, revealed 'an ignorance of the facts,' pandered to Ho Chi Minh, and insulted 'the intelligence of all Americans.' The FBI claimed that Stanley Levison had shaped if not written the Riverside speech, and bureau documents denigrate King as 'a traitor to his country and to his race.' .... In media circles, Newsweek accused King of plunging in 'over his head' and mixing evangelical passion with 'simplistic political judgement,' which indicated that he had abandoned his dream of an integrated America in favor of a country 'in which a race conscious minority dictated foreign policy'." (page 421)

On March 22, 2006, Cindy and Craig Corrie attended a service at that same Riverside Church in Manhattan, for a memorial service honoring their daughter Rachel. Three years earlier, Rachel Corrie, 23, traveled from her home to Rafah, in the Gaza Strip, to engage in non-violent protest of the Israeli destruction of the homes of Palestinian families.She was crushed to death by a bulldozer.

Rachel's parents allowed her diaries and e-mails to be worked into a book and play, "My Name is Rachel Corrie." The play did very well in England, and was scheduled to come to the off-Broadway New York Theater Workshop. However, before it was staged, the theater canceled it "indefinitely," due to protests from sponsors and other groups. The details of what The Nation called "An American Inquisition" in their editorial, can be found in the article "My Name is Rachel Corrie: Too Hot for New York." (April 3,2006) There are also two very good articles in the May/June edition of Washington Report on Middle East Affairs. ( http://www.wrmea.com )

The Washington Report's articles are: {1} "We Are Them.They Are Us." A Celebration of the Writings of Rachel Corrie, by Laura Angela Bagnetto; and {2} Rachel Corrie: Will Americans Get to Hear The Voice of an American Anne Frank?, by Delinda Hanley. They are moving articles, that make a strong case that Rachel Corrie's voice is much like Anne Frank's. Hanley writes, "The story of Anne Frank's life and death resonate with people of all ages and backgrounds. Anne's diary provides a vehicle for people to learn from Europe's Holocaust and examine prejudice, persecution, discrimination, hatred and violence."

Rachel's words offer us that same opportunity. Sadly, like King's Riverside address, they also cause those infected with the disease of hatred to lash out in the same ugly way. The people who have worked to silence this brave and idealistic young woman's voice are no different than the hateful people in Levin's "The Protocols of Zion." I hope that Marc Levin will make a documentary on Rachel Corrie. It may be the most important work he could do today.

[Selatius]

1. Martin Luther King, Jr., was attacked because he was attempting to...

attack what he felt was the real big-picture problem: Capitalism.

Because he attacked such a fundamental aspect of America, he angered everybody who profited off the existing system, and they had to attack him in order to defend their own interests, even if it meant war profiteering and the exploitation of others for personal gain.

I believe King was killed because he was moving towards democratic socialism as a means to alleviate poverty and inequality.

[shance]

2. Good point.

n/t

[Just Me]

12. And, he became a influence that threatened those you speak of.

Christ, :cry: I saw a tape of his actual execution (and that is EXACTLY what it is was, an execution). He looked, his body as it was pierced by bullets, looked exactly like the common depictions of Jesus, dead, on a cross. That gripped my soul! The similarly I saw is a permanent stain on my mind and I don't proclaim myself, "Christian" (although I do confess Love for the message, the philosophy of Jesus Christ, as I do for many other visionaries of a humanity that CAN exist).

[Jim Sagle]

3. Moral equivalence is a dead end.

[H2O Man]

25. Interesting.

Many people, as noted, were upset by King's use of "moral equivalence" in his "A Time to Break Silence." Many others believe it was one of, if the the single most important speeches Rev. King made. I think that it remains valid, and would think those who use "moral equivalence" to dismiss the truth are the dead ends. But I recognize they have the right to their opinion.

[Jim Sagle]

26. So generous of you.

[H2O Man]

29. Thank you.

And of you.

[Ms. Clio]

4. so profound

I can't tell you how much this moves me. Thank you. Seeing those photos together is just so intense.

[Me.]

5. Truth Is An Antidote That Gets Watered Down Far Too Often These Days

The problem is that everyone has their own version of it, it seems, a watered down version of the universal ones, a truth that is more reflective of their fears, sometimes combined with a quest for power in the name of security.

*shadow government*

[Boojatta]

6. Was Rachel Corrie hiding? In some situations, it's safest to be visible.

... make a strong case that Rachel Corrie's voice is much like Anne Frank's.

[DoYouEverWonder]

33. There was no safety in visibility for Rachael

as a matter of fact that is why she was killed. She made herself too visible.

If you don't know the circumstances of her death, she was mowed down in broad daylight.

Here's a website with the pictures from that day:

http://www.anpicanavese.it/attualita/rachel/rachel-coriie.html

Edit: Here's one in English

http://electronicintifada.net/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/7/1248

[Phx_Dem]

50. It should be noted that those pics were taken hours

before the incident. Further, Corrie did not have that megaphone at the time and was kneeling, not standing, when she was run over by the Cat.

[peacetalksforall]

7. Every time I hear the name Mark Levin I freeze up. I wish they would

use middle initials.

I wasn't familiar with the Mark Levin whose documentary you praised, so I just checked out the internet and was relieved to learn that the Mark you wrote about and the Mark Levin that makes me shudder are not the same person.

The one who makes me shudder is the Mark Levin whose vile words we heard on tv throughout the 90's, the Clinton basher, the friend - guest of Rush and who now has his own right wing radio talk show, lawyer, author, right wing activist (emphasized), and caretaker of the Landmark Foundation which caretakes the Townhall website that provides navigation around the right wing world on the internet, plus vile news and articles.

p.s. fyi. I found the documentary maker on the website with a photo, but also with a review that wasn't so complimentary of the documentary. http://www.ejpress.org/article/culture/4984 = European Jewish Press.

I always thought hate was simple. Not so. I guess we just have to keep learning the intricacies to know how to defend and how not to adopt and spread.

Thanks for the background and references about King and Corrie.

[Just Me]

8. I have hated, not "a people", but rather a person, from time to time.

More accurately, I've hated a person's behavior. Nevertheless, feeling hate is worse than feeling anger, worse than the feelings associated with deep sorrow, worse than any feeling I've ever experienced. Hate literally eats at my mind and body. So, I simply can NOT hold onto it, hate.

Yet, others seem eager to consume and are driven by hatred. I don't understand that. It's a psychology/psyche I genuinely believe should be studied, although I'm pretty certain that I wouldn't have the inner strength to get inside that dark, destructive place in those who literally live in that state.

I have no doubt that "hatred" is a mental sickness humanity has failed to invest study, diagnosis and treatment. It's as if, "hate" is considered a "normal" human trait. I believe hate and hatred is an ABnormal human ill. The fact that it can be conjured and incited and spread to the point of human beings consciously engaging in the most horrific acts against fellow human beings is real-life proof that, "hatred" is a horrible sickness.

Just sharing thoughts about the subject.

I'll say one other thing: I've had numerous RWers joke about Rachel's death and I was absolutely horrified at that, feeling like I was confronting individuals who were without conscience, without any sense of their own humanity,...individuals who are akin to the character of a murderer.

[Phx_Dem]

51. just curious, who are the "others" your referring to. nt

[KoKo]

9. An interesting and "timely" read. Some perspective that

many will not be able to open their minds to...but thank your for saying it. Needs to be said.

Hate in whatever form ....only allows for manipulation of our minds. And, that's when the "propagandists" move in.

We must guard against being victims of our own pre-conceptions..and when we start to exclude "other possibilities" and we close our minds off we go down roads we might in the end, looking back...regret..

[Boojatta]

10. Rachel Corrie and Tom Fox both chose to protest in dangerous places.

It's true that Tom Fox was not a woman, so perhaps some people will be disturbed by similarities between the life and death of Tom Fox and the life and death of Rachel Corrie.

Rachel Corrie 1979-2003
Anne Frank 1929-1945
Tom Fox 1951-2006

The 2005-2006 Christian Peacemaker hostage crisis describes an event in which four human rights workers of Christian Peacemaker Teams (CPT) were held hostage in Iraq from November 26, 2005 by a group calling itself the Swords of Righteousness Brigade. One hostage was killed, and the remaining three rescued on March 23, 2006.

On March 10, the body of Tom Fox was found atop a garbage dump in Baghdad, killed by gunshot wounds to the head and chest.

The CPT response to Fox's death was a statement asking that the world not "vilify" or "demonize" the killers: "We forgive those who consider us their enemies."

Source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005-2006_Christian_Peacemaker_hostage_crisis

[Just Me]

11. They refused to spread the hatred.

In spite of the difficulty of understanding why Tom's life was extinguished, they still refused to spread the horrible disease that has led to the most horrific human behavior.

I admire that, greatly.

[kpete]

13. Those who have black holes in their hearts

try to fill them with hate...

[Just Me]

14. Another aspect,....stigmatism "making bad" taking a stand for ALL,...

,...human beings' right to receive respect.

Nominated to explore how and why human beings will engage in destructive behavior towards other human beings.

[bleever]

15. K&R.

Thank you.

[Stephanie]

16. that's not strictly accurate about NYTW

New York Theater Workshop is a very progressive, avante garde theater. They produced Mark Crispin Miller's project last year, a rant against the Bush administration. They didn't cancel the production, they postponed it after realizing that their subscriber base was going to need some preparation for something like this. The show had only been recently scheduled. The London producers had a different view of what happened, of course. But I don't think there were any protests by any groups or sponsors. I am in NY theater and I never heard of anything like that. And NYTW is a non-profit so I don't know what you mean by sponsors. I happen to believe that NYTW is a very courageous theater group and I tend to believe their version of the story. However I wish they had changed their minds and gone ahead with the production once the controversy emerged. So I think it's too bad that they didn't immediately go ahead with it, but I think they have been rather unfairly villified.

I was at the event at Riverside and it was very moving and the place was packed. This cancellation certainly brought more attention to Rachel Corrie's words and life than the actual production would have. The comparison to Anne Frank is apt. They have the same sensibility.

Here is an interview with Jim Nicola about it - he's the artistic director of NYTW:

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/03/22/1435259

[H2O Man]

17. The "indefinite postponement"

is a polite way of saying canceled. The theater people were on the Democracy Now program, and I felt bad for them. However, again, if anyone wants an accurate account of what happened, find the transcripts from that show, or read The Nation.

[Stephanie]

18. I just edited and posted the transcript while you were posting

and I really don't think that's fair. here's their view of what happened:

AMY GOODMAN: But now, you did agree to produce the play, and it was going to have its opening night tonight?

LYNN MOFFAT: And we still want to produce the play.

JAMES NICOLA: Yep.

LYNN MOFFAT: We still want to produce the play, and the word “indefinite,” we don't know where that word came from. We really – and we never canceled the play. We were having a conversation with our colleagues at the Royal Court about the difficulties that we were having, not only just with the research that we were doing about the project and about the play, but also about, you know, contracts and budgets and fundraising, and all that sort of stuff.

JAMES NICOLA: Visas.

LYNN MOFFAT: Visas. We were having a conversation with them, and then Katharine's letter appeared in the Guardian.

[H2O Man]

24. That's a small

section that really does not represent what was said by everyone on the show. The two folks from the theater may well be nice, but they were weak, unconvincing, and really were shown to have betrayed the play and the public. That doesn't make them terrible people, but it does indicate that they backed down from pressure from terrible people.

[Boojatta]

43. Do you forgive those who brought the pressure?

... it does indicate that they backed down from pressure from terrible people.

Do you wish that the world would not vilify or demonize the people who brought the pressure?

[Boojatta]

19. Maybe Rachel Corrie and Anne Frank both had the same sensibility

but there is no way to verify such a claim.

Anne Frank was born in Germany. Her family left Germany in 1933 and went to Amsterdam, which was initially a safe place for the family. Anne Frank wrote her diary while she was hiding with her family in Amsterdam.

Rachel died in Rafah. She was in Rafah volunteering for the International Solidarity Movement (ISM), a Palestinian-led movement of both Palestinians and internationals working together for an end to the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territory.

Did Anne Frank expect her diary to be published?

One irony is that if Anne Frank's family had escaped, then she could now have children in Israel.

Of course, that's not necessarily true. For example, if Anne Frank's family had escaped, perhaps her children would now be living in Libya. How many descendants of refugees from the Nazis are now living in Libya?

[Behind the Aegis]

22. Zero

1948 Jewish population: 38,000
2003: 0

The last Jew living in Libya, Esmeralda Meghnagi, died in February 2002. This marked the end of one of the world's oldest Jewish communities, which traced its origins to the 3rd century BCE..3

The Jews of Libya

[Stephanie]

27. I'm referring to Rachel's letters that were read at the Riverside event

They both had an abiding belief in the essential goodness of people. Both were proved wrong, of course.

[H2O Man]

31. It's something that

you can not, and indeed should not, explain. A person either gets it, or they don't.

[Just Me]

21. Even "progressive" can be threatened by those who fear exposure,...

,...of truths that are,...ugly.

The indefinite suspension of a production of this play,...says to me, a threat is being imposed upon the survival of even a "progressive" entity. That's NOT okay. That's another form of force.

If we are to be truly progressive, all human experiences must be allowed a stage of expression, even if uncomfortable or in defiance of an image or perception or illusion.

It's progressive to face the humanity of EVERY human being.

[Me.]

20. People's Hatred & Prejudices Can Also Be Used

in quite a cynical way. Saying someone is "racist" in some way, as a means of weakening their position is also becoming an insidious practice. My thought here involves the 3rd leaf of the clover who is using that tactic because the truth is cutting too close to the bone. Someone yelling fire continuously may find there is no help when the fire becomes real. This is equally sad because it makes a mockery of the truth in a different way.

[Tom Joad]

23. In the tradition of the freedom riders... and some of them paid with their

lives too.
Chaney, Goodman and Schwerner, died after being attacked by Klansman in Mississippi.
James Earl Chaney was a black Mississippian. Goodman and Schwerner were white Jewish kids from the comfortable homes hundreds of miles away. Like Rachel, they left the relative security of their homes because they felt the cause of Freedom & Justice, in Mississippi or Palestine was good and just. They all knew that "no man is an island". That "we are them, they are us" as anyone who has ever read the Sermon on the Mount or countless other spiritual writings should be able to discern.

Another unfortunate parallel is that justice for the freedom riders did not come until decades after they were killed. It was just very recently that the Mississippi Freedom Riders killers were prosecuted. There has yet to be an independent investigation of Rachel Corrie's death, except as undertaken by those allegedly complicit in the crime.

Someday there will be justice. May the people Rachel was protecting live in peace, live without fear, live without military occupation or attacks. Let's stop the Cat's that are destroying the homes of our neighbors in Palestine.

28. what a story she has

this would be a wonderful play. It is so sad that Israelis have developed such a strong advocacy for themselves and use it to silence others.

from Nation -
""Few knew that Corrie had been a dedicated writer. "I decided to be an artist and a writer," she had written in a journal, describing her awakening, "and I didn't give a shit if I was mediocre and I didn't give a shit if I starved to death and I didn't give a shit if my whole damn high school turned and pointed and laughed in my face.""


http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060403/weiss

[H2O Man]

30. It is a shame

to see the vile, ugly lies that a group of people tells about a 23-year old young lady who was following her conscience, and living according to the non-violent teachings of Gandhi and King. And it is a sin that their hatred has kept other people from hearing her story.

As the bulldozer that would crush her to death approached, Rachel Corrie yelled out, "Stop! What would your mother think of what you are doing?" There is something of the universal goodness of humanity in those words. And there is so much of the evil of society in the machine that killed her.

[Me.]

32. That Bulldozer Is A Chillingly Apt Image

For what not only happened to her but to what has been happening to the our country in the last 5. "bringing the earthmovers in".

*shadow government*

[Boojatta]

47. It's interesting that you mention Gandhi in this thread.

I've been reading a book that deals with 9/11, Gandhi, Israel, and Pakistan. There's a DU thread about the book here.

Below is a small part of what appears at the following link:
http://tariqali.org/ExtractClashPrologue.html

Jinnah (i.e. Mohammed Ali Jinnah) conceived of Pakistan as an amalgamation of an undivided Punjab, an undivided Bengal, plus Sind, Baluchistan and the North-West Frontier Province. This prescription would have yielded a Punjab 40 per cent Hindu and Sikh and a Bengal 49 per cent Hindu. It was a utopian solution. Once confessional passions had been aroused and neighbours were massacring each other (as in Bosnia fifty years later) it was difficult to keep the two provinces united.

‘I do not care how little you give me,’ Jinnah is reported as saying in March 1947 to the last viceroy, Lord Mountbatten, ‘as long as you give it to me completely.’

The price of separation was high. Two million dead. Eleven million refugees.

A year later, in 1948, a different but comparable process was to transform the Arab world. Another confessional state, Israel, was brought into being. Once again the particularist defeated the universal. In the case of both Pakistan and Israel, the founding fathers were far removed from confessional politics. Mohammed Ali Jinnah was a known agnostic who broke most of the taboos of his religion. Ben-Gurion and Moshe Dayan were self-proclaimed atheists. Yet religion was used as a central motif in the creation of these two states against the wishes of fundamentalists. The Jamaat-e-Islami and its Jewish counterparts opposed the formation of these states.

Gandhi is mentioned below:

(From same book by Tariq Ali)

The Second World War changed everything. India was included in Britain's declaration of war against Germany and the Congress Party was livid at His Majesty's government's failure to consult them. Nehru would probably have argued in favour of participating in the anti-fascist struggle provided the British agreed to leave India once it was all over, and London would probably have regarded such a request as impertinent. As it was, the Congress governments of each province resigned. Gandhi, who despite his pacifism had acted as an efficient recruiting-sergeant for the British during the First World War, was less sure what to do this time. A hardline ultra-nationalist current within the Congress led by the charismatic Bengali Subhas Chandra Bose argued for an alliance with Britain's enemies, particularly Japan. This was unacceptable to Nehru and Gandhi. But when Singapore fell in 1942, Gandhi, like most observers, was sure that the Japanese were about to take India by way of Bengal and argued that the Congress had to oppose the British empire, whatever the cost, in order to gain a position to strike a deal with the Japanese. The wartime coalition in London sent Stafford Cripps to woo the Congress back into line. He offered its leaders a "blank cheque" after the war. "What is the point of a blank cheque from a bank that is already failing?" Gandhi replied. In August 1942 the Congress leaders authorized the launch of the Quit India movement. A tidal wave of civil disobedience swept the country. The entire Congress leadership, including Gandhi and Nehru, was arrested, as were thousands of organizers and workers. The Muslim League backed the war effort and prospered. Partition was the ultimate prize.

Pakistan was born out of a struggle waged largely by middle-class Muslim professionals and traders who feared they would be orphaned after the British left India. The Hindus would dominate politics and economics. Without access to power and money, the Indian Muslims would die on the vine. The demand for Pakistan was initially devised by the Muslim League as a bargaining chip to gain maximum concessions from the imperial power. Pakistan was achieved largely due to a combination of the Second World War, Congress Party intransigence, and Britain's hasty departure. The Muslim League had supported the British war effort, while Gandhi and Nehru had launched a civil disobedience movement demanding that the British "Quit India." Pakistan was the consolation prize received by the League for standing shoulder to shoulder with the raj during the war. Till 1946, however, Jinnah (i.e. Muhammed Ali Jinnah) was prepared for a constitutional settlement that preserved the unity of India, while accepting the principle of provincial autonomy. Gandhi, too, favoured the deal, and was even prepared to offer Jinnah the prime ministership of a united India, but the Congress high command overruled him.

The Muslims had arrived in India as conquerers. They saw their religion as infinitely superior to that of the idol-worshipping Hindus and Buddhists. The bulk of Indian Muslims were nonetheless converts: some forced and other voluntarily, seeking escape, in Kashmir and Bengal especially, from the rigours of the caste system.

Muslim nationalism in India was the product of defeat. Until the collapse of the Mughal empire at the hands of the British, Muslims had dominated the ruling class for over five hundred years. With the disappearance of the Mughal court in Delhi and the culture it supported, they were now merely a large religious minority considered by Hindus as lower than the lowest caste.

[H2O Man]

49. I'm familiar with Gandhi's life.

I note that the information you posted has very little to do with Gandhi. I trust that you have other sources of information on his teachings. It appears that you are attempting to use his name for a vehicle for another message, one that has little to do with Gandhi.

[Boojatta]

56. Does red font help?

Note the title of this thread: "The Protocols of Rachel Corrie"

From the OP of this thread:

Three years earlier, Rachel Corrie, 23, traveled from her home to Rafah, in the Gaza Strip, to engage in non-violent protest of the Israeli destruction of the homes of Palestinian families. She was crushed to death by a bulldozer.

From the material that I quoted:

A year later, in 1948, a different but comparable process was to transform the Arab world. Another confessional state, Israel, was brought into being. Once again the particularist defeated the universal. In the case of both Pakistan and Israel, the founding fathers were far removed from confessional politics.

Perhaps you disapprove of Tariq Ali's efforts to illuminate the history of Israel by comparing it with Pakistan?

You mentioned Gandhi.

From one paragraph that I quoted:

Gandhi, who despite his pacifism had acted as an efficient recruiting-sergeant for the British during the First World War, was less sure what to do this time. A hardline ultra-nationalist current within the Congress (...) argued for an alliance with Britain's enemies, particularly Japan. This was unacceptable to Nehru and Gandhi. But when Singapore fell in 1942, Gandhi, like most observers, was sure that the Japanese were about to take India by way of Bengal and argued that the Congress had to oppose the British empire, whatever the cost, in order to gain a position to strike a deal with the Japanese. The wartime coalition in London sent Stafford Cripps to woo the Congress back into line. He offered its leaders a "blank cheque" after the war. "What is the point of a blank cheque from a bank that is already failing?" Gandhi replied. In August 1942 the Congress leaders authorized the launch of the Quit India movement. A tidal wave of civil disobedience swept the country. The entire Congress leadership, including Gandhi and Nehru, was arrested, as were thousands of organizers and workers. The Muslim League backed the war effort and prospered. Partition was the ultimate prize.

Do you really think that the information I posted "has very little to do with Gandhi"?

Note that the sentence "In August 1942 the Congress leaders authorized the launch of the Quit India movement" might have more than a little to do with Gandhi, even though his name doesn't explicitly appear in that sentence.

[Phx_Dem]

53. from the nation article

"Corrie was crushed to death when she stood in front of a bulldozer that was proceeding toward a Palestinian pharmacist's house. By witnesses' accounts, Corrie, wearing a bright orange vest, was clearly visible to the bulldozer's driver."

When there are real questions about the specifics, for this writer to make this stmt as an unequivocal fact is disingenuous to say the least.

[cali]

34. Sorry I can't totally agree.

Rachel Corrie was a courageous young woman and her story deserves to be better known, including the production of the play in NY. The people who pressured the NY producers were terribly wrong, but you have failed to establish that their motives were rooted in hate, either for Rachel or for Palestinians. What else could have motivated them? There's certainly a chance that they were motivated by fear; fear of public opinion turning against Israel and fear of what would happen should that occur. A misplaced fear to be sure and a pretty base motivation, but not the same as the hate exhibited in the 9/11 story that Israelis were behind the events of that day, and that Jews were warned to stay away from the WTC. That's a public calumny of an entire country and ethnic group. It should go without saying that the suppression of the play, is hardly in the same league as Zionist plots/Protocols stuff. You diminish your argument with the comparison.

You strongly insinuate that the people who pressured the producers of the Rachel Corrie play tell lies about her, but you fail to detail what those lies are. Hard to see how you'd know what was said.

I have no particular objection to Corrie being compared to Frank, but the real comparison being made is that there's an equivalency to the fate of European Jews and the fate of Palestinians. The circumstances of Palestinians are tragic, lives full of privation, endless small and large humiliations and the constant threat of violence in the form of rockets and military incursions. It is not, however genocide, or a policy of genocide. Not even a slow genocide as some have claimed. Demographics and statistics of fatalities make that clear. In addition, the Israeli Palestinian is a complex matter. It's not nearly as simple as many make it out to be. Would that it were.

It's a shame that you used Washington Report on Middle East Affairs as a source. I just read much of the most recent issue and found it sadly one dimensional. It's essentially heated rhetoric and propaganda- and rather crudely done, at that.

[H2O Man]

35. Any time that

two people think just alike, it indicates that only one is thinking. So there is no "sorry" in not agreeing, especially on a topic with so many areas that honest and sincere people can view the same set of facts, and come to differing conclusions.

It is true that I did not provide every detail on every single aspect of the numerous issues involved. It is not my goal to. I did list a number of sources that others can go to if they desire. I can only be responsible for myself, and I continue to read as many things as I can on the topic. I encourage others to do the same.

You mention "fear" ... fear that public opinion might be swayed. That fits in with what I was attempting to say. Hatred is a disease. It's symptoms include things such as fear, ignorance, and prejudice. That prejudice can be channeled against an ethic group, a "race" (which is a illusionary concept in itself), against a religion (or lack of religion), against men or women, or against people of a specific sexual preference. Those are symptoms, or components, of the disease of hatred, though not the "hatred" itself. There are no degrees of hate.

It is not a coincidence that Masters from Buddha to Jesus taught, "Do not be afraid." As Gary Snyder wrote in "Earth Household" : "To those who stubbornly argue 'it's against human nature,' we can only patiently reply that you must know your own nature before you can say this. Those who have gone into their own natures deeply have, for several thousand years now, been reporting that we have nothing to fear if we are willing to train ourselves, to open up, explore and grow." Some of us recognize this simple but profound message as being found in Rachel Corrie's message. Others, as you suggest, clearly fear the implications.

Regarding Washington Reports, probably no single magazine is perfect. I find it to be of value, however, to read the works of retired US foreign service officers who are attempting to provide the American public with a more balanced view of the conflicts in the Middle East than is found in the corporate media or from the vast majority of our elected officials. The newest edition, for example, has reports in both the magazine and the "Other Voices" newsletter, that gives information on just how much money AIPAC & co funnels to congresspeson's and senator's campaigns. Washington Reports also features a good bit on the work of George Ball, who was a voice of reason.

No single voice has all the answers. The more we discuss these issues, the better.

[Me.]

36. If Something Sounds One Dimensional

it can be because what is being refuted is one dimensional. The most one dimensional voice in the political and cultural discourse has been the voice of the WH and its allies.

[Boojatta]

38. Are two different people posting in this thread as H2O Man?

It's something that you can not, and indeed should not, explain. A person either gets it, or they don't.

Any time that two people think just alike, it indicates that only one is thinking. So there is no "sorry" in not agreeing, especially on a topic with so many areas that honest and sincere people can view the same set of facts, and come to differing conclusions.

Is disagreement okay, but incomprehension intolerable?

[H2O Man]

41. No.

Disagreement is fine. That is distinct from the fact that there are things that people either get, or don't get. That has nothing to do with disagreement. If a person is color blind, and perceives the color red differently that another, that is not cause for disagreement. Making it into a disagreement would be a sign of intolerance.

[Boojatta]

42. Disagreement is fine. Is incomprehension something that can be remedied?

[H2O Man]

45. Not through intolerance.

"Intolerance betrays a want of faith in one's cause." -- Gandhi

[cali]

48. "No single voice has all the answers. The more we discuss these issues,

the better." Now that we can agree on.

Yes I mentioned fear, and hatred is freqently rooted in fear, but it is not synonymous with fear, and you haven't made a case that it was hate that motivated the people that you condemn as haters. And yes, making a case when you level a grave charge is important.

You state " I did not provide every detail on every single aspect of the numerous issues involved." Alas, you provided no details on any aspect of any of the issues.

Regarding your defense of Washington Report, the dissemination of information about AIPAC doesn't justify the rhetoric and propaganda, which doesn't merely approach a line, it crosses it. If it represents what you characterize as " attempting to provide the American public with a more balanced view of the conflicts in the Middle East....", heaven help us. You can never bring balance to an issue by providing unbalanced coverage from another POV. Doing so merely compounds the problem, rather than redressing it.

I wish you'd addressed the issues I brought up in my first post, chiefly that you failed to explain why the actions of those who worked to suppress the play are equivalent to the Protocol type of calumny. Nor did you detail any of the lies you said these people are telling. They may be haters and liars, but then again they may not be, and a charge without evidence is not something that should be easily accepted.

[H2O Man]

52. There are several areas we

clearly disagree on. I believe I answered your questions, though I am under the impression that the answers are not those that you are looking for.

I mentioned that a person can google Rachel Corrie, and read lie after lie after lie about her. If you desire to read them, you are able to. If you believe everything that is being said about her, then in my opinion you are believing lies. It is not any different than the example that I gave about King, and how people who opposed his message at Riverside resorted to lies about him. Many people believed those; even Ronald Reagan said, when he signed the bill making Martin's birthday a holiday, that he questioned if King should be thus honored.

Regarding AIPAC, this is another area that we disagree on. I think that the AIPAC scandal is what crosses the line. Certainly you are entitled to feel that the Washington Report's articles on the AIPAC scandal are the real problem.

I find articles such as "FBI Investigation of AIPAC is Second Attempt to Curb Israel Lobby's Power," by Andrew Killgore, former Ambassador to Qatar (Washington Report; Jan/Feb 06) to be very informative. It details the legal case which was filed by seven individual Americans against the Federal Elections Commission for failing to require AIPAC to publish details of its income and expenditures. It seems like a fair objective.

When AIPAC officials are receiving and passing on classified military information to a foreign government, and it appears to be related to the growing conflicts in the Middle East, I think that US citizens should be interested. I find it interesting that some would disagree with that so strongly, and attack a magazine in an attempt to pretend it is the problem.

[Me.]

54. "But This Is Just Business As Usual, Goes On All The Time"

No big deal. Right?


"When AIPAC officials are receiving and passing on classified military information to a foreign government, and it appears to be related to the growing conflicts in the Middle East..."

"shadow government*

[cali]

55. Twisting my words. Not cool, not cool at all.

It diminishes your argument. It's a shame your initial spasm of civility couldn't be maintained, but straying into dishonesty, now that's the real shame. You said; "Regarding AIPAC, this is another area that we disagree on. I think that the AIPAC scandal is what crosses the line. Certainly you are entitled to feel that the Washington Report's articles on the AIPAC scandal are the real problem." I never said that the AIPAC issue wasn't important, or that their activities weren't deleterious. I said that getting that information out there does not justify Washington Report's use of heated rhetoric and propaganda. That's very different from your mischaracterization of what I said.

So what if you can google Rachel Corrie and find lies about her and hideous things said. It's a shame, but it hardly goes to your argument about the people who worked to derail the production of the play about her. One can google lots of public figures and find lots and lots of lies and unpleasantness. Again, that is NOT supportive of your argument. It's not even germane to it.

Did AIPAC have anything to do with the play not being produced? Could be, but suspicion alone is not enough for a credible argument. Evidence counts.

Of course, I never said that investigating AIPAC wasn't important. I've stated on several occassions in this forum that I find AIPAC's influence disturbing, and that I think our mideast policy is too entwined with Israel.

As for your statement that: "I find it interesting that some would disagree with that so strongly, and attack a magazine in an attempt to pretend it is the problem." Despicable little attempt to cast aspersions on my motives. I wasn't pretending anything. Washington Report and rags like it, whichever side of the dispute they're on, are part of the problem. WR edges very close to spewing hate. If you can't see that, the lens with which you view this conflict is hopelessly clouded.

[Me.]

37. I Question The Moving & Isolating Of This Topic

It is a big subject and should remain in a big forum. Shoving it in a corner isn't going to stop the questions and thoughts which motivated it.

[cali]

39. I second that.

It deserved to remain where it was originally posted. What a shame. (btw, I disagree with what you wrote in response to my post, but I lost my reply to your reply. I'll rewrite it.)

[Boojatta]

40. Keep in mind that General Discussion is a fast-moving forum.

Perhaps more people would see it in GD, but the thread would probably move off the first page of GD faster than it will move off the first page of I/P.

A friendly reminder of the rules we have all agreed to:

Questions about Democratic Underground policies should be emailed to the administrators. Discussion topics pertaining to specific enforcement actions by the moderators are categorically forbidden. Discussion topics relating to Democratic Underground policies, procedures, enforcement, etc., are sometimes permitted if they are respectful and not disruptive to the administration of the website.

44. hot potato topic - hmmmm

[H2O Man]

46. A 23-year old American

young lady upsets many people.

[Lithos]

57. Locking per I/P guidelines

Not based on a recent news or op-ed article

Lithos
I/P Forum Moderator