Re: [R-G] "Tikkun Community Reaffirms Its Commitment to UFPJ"

[Macdonald Stainsby <mstainsby@xxxxxx>]

At 05:01 AM 9/6/2003, you wrote:

> The following letter was sent to the Forward:
>
> Tikkun Community Reaffirms Its Commitment to UFPJ
>
> The Tikkun Community would like to clarify its position in regard to
> the alleged schism in UFPJ headlined in the September 5th article
> (Peace Front Faces Schism Over 'Right Of Return').  We have long
> espoused the principle that any solution leading to peace in the
> Middle East must provide for the viability of both the Israeli and
> Palestinian states.  That principle includes the terms of any right of
> return agreement that will eventually be worked out.

What exactly is there to work out? Palestine is not an exceptional case inh
the world where their rights are "negotiated". The right of return, even by
progressives who consider themselves anti-war, cannot be turned into a
phrase that should signal a simple request. This is not even a demand but a
simple fullfillment of a historical act of justice and repatriation as
recognized by the 1948 international convention of human rights and would
be just as applicable even without that document or without UN resolution 194.

As far as the following quote:

> Although Rabbi Lerner was correctly quoted as saying that the Tikkun
> Community would not be part of any coalition that demeans Israel or
> the Jewish people, he did not state that the thought that the
> leadership or the majority of UFPJ has taken that position.  To the
> contrary, he clearly stated that he was encouraged by the direction
> being taken by the leadership of UFPJ and felt that the extremist
> positions taken by certain elements in the coalition were in the
> minority.

It sounds like Lerner is trying to publically foister splits again. I know
many people iknvolved in Tikkun, and believe many of the membership are
sincerely trying to get to a better understanding of the siuation in
Israel, but now Lerner has taken up the following phrase (nothing new for
him) "...demeans Israel or the Jewish people". This sleight of hand should
give comfort to the Christian-Zionist establishment as it provides cover
for calling criticism of the apartheid state of Israel "anti-Semitism",
allowing those who stand up for the full rights of sovereign indigenous
peoples (not a negotiated parcel of these rights, to be surrendered by
Palestinians to their unique humiliation in the entire world) and against
the Settler state.

It is this which seperates this movement from one that is a flash in the
pan and one that has the staying power to create a world situation fit for
human beings: We cannot allow ourselves to misunderstand this question any
longer. It is the very misapplication of the colnial settler analysis that
holds people back in North America, where understanding the colonial
settler mindset that is still so very much alive in North America.

We cannot undermine the nature of defence of the Palestinian people as one
of indigenous sovereignty, not least of which because it undermines
understanding that this question still is at the very heart of how we see
the stolen settler colony all around us.

There are burning moral "compasses" of each period; suffrage movements,
black voter registration, apartheid in South Africa, racist immigration
laws. As well, is resistance to a racially built state. This uncompromising
stance must be taken by the anti-war movement. No apartheid, no
settlements, no ethnic cleansing, no two state farcical distraction and no
right to be taken seriously otherwise.

So long as Lerner pushes this while attacking the anti-war movement as
anti-Semitic in major media, such as the Wall Street Journal, he has no
right to be taken seriously at all. Further, he aids and abets the forces
of anti-semitism, who as we speak are rallying their forces around the
"Jewish=Israel" lie in order to peddle the filth of their white supremacist
and hate fueled anti-Judaism.

No, UFPJ may not have taken a clear enough policy to keep people like
Lerner out of their coalition. But the anti-war movement everywhere will
have an achilles heel in both credibility and effectiveness until the day
when Zionism is understood as the moral test for a generation. Zionism
means genocide in the real world. Zionism is the modern euqivalent of
chicken pox-infected blankets, alcohol and muskets. The so-called Road Map
was another ghost treaty forced on the peoples, it was another "final
agreement" to delay the resistance. It too, was never meant to be honored
but broken.

Macdonald


~~~~~~~
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.