'U.S. Credibility Hangs on Whether It Can Do Justice for the Palestinians'
Christianity Today 8/1/2003
A Palestinian Christian and former PCUSA moderator talks about his faith and critiques Bush's road map to peace in the Middle East. - An interview with Fahed Abu-Akel -- When Palestinian Christian Fahed Abu-Akel was elected moderator of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) in June 2002, he became the first Arab American to head a major U.S. denomination. His one-year term ended last month, but as pastor of First Presbyterian Church in Atlanta, he continues to speak frequently on the need for American Christians to recognize and listen to the Palestinian church.Abu-Akel was raised in Kuffer-Yassif, a Palestinian village 25 miles northwest of Nazareth. His earliest memory is leaving his village—and his mother—in 1948, when war broke out between Arab nations and the newly born Israel. Todd Hertz, assistant editor of Christianity Today, talked with Abu-Akel about his childhood, terrorist actions that fuel the Middle East conflict, and President Bush's road map to peace.What was your childhood like?The key spiritual nurturing for my life was my parent's love for the Word. They were both Palestinian Arab farmers. Their faith in Jesus Christ was very strong. Before we went to sleep each night my mother would recite [from memory] the Psalms, the Gospels, and other Scripture.The first thing I remember was the displacement of the Palestinian people. As a 4 year old, I left our home with my father, five sisters, and two brothers. At that age, you are closer to your mother than anyone. So I was searching for her as we left. I finally saw her standing on top of our home's roof waving her hand. We left her there and went to a neighboring village called Yrka. There we were put in a makeshift Palestinian refugee camp.Four Palestinian villages next to mine were destroyed. In fact, 400 Palestinian villages—Christian and Muslim—were destroyed by the Israeli military when Israel became a state in 1948. More than 900,000 Palestinian Arab Christians and Muslims became refugees out of these villages and towns.

Victims of a map
By Chibli Mallat, Daily Star 8/1/2003
The new “facts on the ground” created by the Israeli government by its construction of a separation wall have redrawn the map of the Middle East, eating away at Palestinian territory as it strives to fulfill the Zionist dream. Already, the spin masters are at work. In the same way they renamed Palestinian refugee camps “villages,” and the occupation “administration,” they now wish that the wall be referred to as a mere “fence.” Again, they have had their way: The New York Times already refers to the wall as a fence. The Israeli government seeks to minimize the effect of its latest monstrous production in the Arab-Israeli conflict. There have been various versions of the wall, including a notorious early book by Vladimir Jabotinski, although his wall was in the mind: There is no place for Arabs in Palestine, the book argues, and if there are any Arabs (as there obviously were), they should be secluded and ignored. As far as it can be traced, the present concept of the wall came in an article by Israeli military historian Martin van Creveld a year ago, suggesting construction of a wall so tight and high “that even birds would not be able to cross” to the other side. While van Creveld, as a “dove,” suggested that the wall generally follows the Green Line, it was “improved” by the Sharon government to the liking of the settlers and the shape of their concrete outposts: Maps clearly show the Palestinians would be left with less than half of the West Bank, reducing their share in historic Palestine to less than 10 percent. For Sharon and his supporters, the argument is that the intifada has produced intolerable violence originating from the West Bank and Gaza, and that the tightest physical wall is the best response. In the same way, a separation wall was built all around Gaza and within it, also shrinking it to half of the land while reducing violence coming to Israel from the south; the “fence” will do the same to the West Bank. In the words of Rafael Eitan back in 1982, the Palestinians would then be turned into “drugged cockroaches” in their small enclaves.

The Bug Exterminator Goes to Jerusalem
By Kurt Nimmo, Dissident Voice 7/28/2003
Tom DeLay, House Majority Leader and former bug exterminator from Sugar Land, Texas, wants you to know he stands "shoulder-to-shoulder" with accused war criminal Ariel Sharon and the Israeli occupation forces that killed Mohammed Kabha, 6 years of age, last week near Barta al-Sharqeyah, east of Ramallah. Mr. DeLay also wants you to know he supports Israeli settlers, even though on July 11 a settler ran over and killed Yazan al-Tal, a 13-year-old Palestinian child, south of Nablus. Naturally, DeLay wouldn't admit he's in favor of gunning down or driving over children. No, for DeLay and millions of other Christian Zionists, slaughtered Palestinians are but a fleeting tick on their moral compasses, if that. In fact, for Christian Zionists the Palestinians are all but invisible, except when they strike out in desperation. "The United States must stand with Israel against Palestinian terror because Israel's fight is our fight," DeLay told the influential American Israel Public Affairs Committee on July 23. "Israel's liberation from Palestinian terrorism is an essential component of victory in the war on terror. It's a 'liberation' we're talking about, not a mutually-agreed upon cease-fire." Unfortunately, Mohammed Kabha and Yazan al-Tal experienced this rapacious Israeli version of "liberation" firsthand. So have thousands of other Palestinians, the vast majority of who have little to do with Hamas or Islamic Jihad or even Yasser Arafat. Israeli liberation from so-called terrorism is so important that it requires the Palestinians to suffer the same rate of malnutrition as the people of Zimbabwe and Congo, according to the World Bank. So critical is Israel security in response to the above-mentioned militant groups that it requires the shattered Palestinian economy to suffer from a 53% unemployment rate. Israeli occupation soldiers and armed Jewish settlers are so alarmed over the security situation that they routinely attack Palestinian orchards and agricultural farms. In fact, the Israelis are so disturbed by security issues that when they destroy Palestinian vineyards and olive groves they often charge farmers for the use of bulldozers. For Tom DeLay and the Christian Zionists, the systematic destruction of Palestinian culture by radical right wing Israeli Zionists is part of God's Master Plan for the Holy Land. "And I will make of thee a great nation," the Lord told Abraham, "And I will bless them that bless thee and curse them that curse thee."

Tampering With Simple Principles
Arab News 8/1/2003
It seems the American Administration is either insisting on further fanning Arab feelings of hatred and anger over its foreign policy or its advisors are working intentionally or out of ignorance and on their own to put more fuel to a raging fire. The desecration of the dead bodies of Uday and Qusay, the two sons of Saddam Hussein killed by the American forces last week, and the way they have been shown on television is an outrageous, disgusting and unjustified act. The Americans seemed keen on showing every part of the bullet-riddled and mutilated bodies. Even if this action is viewed as lawful under man’s law it is completely against all divine laws. The American administration may use the incident politically, as it always does, but there could have been more than a thousand ways to convince the Iraqi people of the death of the two sons. The Americans could have shown their faces and corroborated this with testimonies from their relatives or selected and reliable individuals who know them. The disappearance of Uday and Qusay from the scene by death represents the most convincing proof that they were gone forever. The last thing we expected was this kind of mutilation and distortion of the two bodies, including the shaving and restructuring of the faces and severed parts. In short, every distorted part of their bodies was shown except the genitals. The Americans should have been told that under Islamic law once a Muslim dies his or her body is no longer a personal property and that our religion orders us to expedite the burial of the dead who head straight to be judged on every act, whether good or bad, they committed during their lifetime. They should have been told that human beings should be honored and respected whether dead or alive. They should have been told that the desecration of dead bodies represents a great crime.

That Gift!
By Maher Othman, Al-Hayat 8/1/2003
U.S. President George Bush offered his friend, "the man of peace," Ariel Sharon a map for "Eretz Israel," a plan that was drawn in 1678 that comprised the countries of the region, even Babylon and Assyria. He probably doesn't know that this map doesn't match any historical reality, even if Eretz Israel was mentioned in these legendary borders in some old religious text. There is no use to argue with President Bush, who doesn't even know his mother tongue, breaks its rules and derives words no one has heard of before him, about the insensitivity of presenting such a gift to the Prime Minister of a hostile nation, which has carried out in the core of the Arab world acts of terrorism, murder, slaughter, destruction of villages and farms and eviction of people from their homes. It seems that the President has very basic notions about the Middle East and Israel, convictions nurtured by many Likud supporters in his administration, especially the closest to him, such as his Middle East advisor at the National Security Agency, Elliot Abrams. The truth is that Bush's insensitivity in making this gift of Eretz Israel to Sharon translates his lack of knowledge in the history of our region for over 3,000 years. This gesture totally contradicts the Roadmap, which main part calls for the establishment of a Palestinian state on the Palestinian territories occupied by Israel in 1967, as well as for freezing the construction of settlements on Palestinian territories.What an American ally presents to his Israeli ally is not our business. What is our concern is the hope that the President of the sole superpower acts to serve peace, security and stability in our region. We don't necessarily want a warm and close friendship with the Bush administration; it would be enough to see it behave in accordance with the UN resolutions related to the Palestinian issue, and the Arab-Israeli conflict.

Selective accountability
By Imad Fawzi Shuebi, Al-Ahram Weekly on-line, 31 July - 6 August, 2003 8/1/2003
The Syria Accountability Act under debate in Washington is a model of American bullying tactics -- The complexity of relations between Damascus and Washington has climbed another notch as Congress debates the notion and substance of the Syria Accountability Act. If enacted, the bill would impose strict sanctions on Syria until it ends its troop presence in Lebanon. The Americans perceive their relations with Syria as a "clash of wills" on several levels. At the regional level, Syria rejects the notion of a great power meddling in the affairs of the region. Syria subscribes to the principle that the advancement of mutual interests should be pursued through peaceful interaction and the respect for national sovereignty, which is a defining aspect of a country's past and future. Syria has endured numerous sacrifices on behalf of these principles and it is not prepared under any circumstances to betray this legacy. At the international level, the Americans seek a unipolar order in which they have the exclusive right to veto. Towards this end, they are busily undermining the structure of international law built since the end of World War II. Accordingly, Washington seeks to establish a worldwide monopoly on violence as the global policeman, judge and executioner. A cardinal rule of American foreign policy is to promote agreements on the basis of realpolitik, rather than established rights, while reordering the universe to follow the laws of market forces. Under globalisation, the world is shaped by the will of the American people who themselves have no mystical attachment or historical ties to their land, a people whose very history is rootless, modern and extemporaneous. Syria has demonstrated itself more than willing to move its relations with Washington from a "clash of wills" footing to a "meeting of wills", and a sharing of the fruits of this convergence. This, however, is not how a series of contracts with US oil firms was portrayed in Washington, where the letters from 486 US companies to Congress urging it not to put the Syria Accountability Act to a vote are considered evidence of a policy of "tying the hands of the current administration".

The Road MAP: Political Ploy, or Path to Peace?
By Linda Heard, Palestine Chronicle 8/1/2003
Does the Roadmap towards a two-state solution for the Palestinians and the Israelis offer real hope, or is it a damp squib? The quartet, consisting of the U.S. the EU, Russia and the UN, devised it. The President of the most powerful nation on earth, the U.S., has seemingly adopted a hands-on approach toward facilitating its implementation, while the Palestinian leadership has unconditionally accepted its terms and conditions as drafted. Most of the Arab world approves of it and even the leader of the Occupier has voiced his approval (with 14 provisos). On June 25, Hamas, the Al Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades and Islamic Jihad agreed to a three-month suspension of attacks against Israelis, and so, the Palestinians should be out celebrating shouldn’t they? Not exactly The Palestinians have heard it all before. They’ve had their hopes raised and dashed too many times. For a decade, their leaders have been negotiating settlements, signing accords, the most notable of all being the now defunct Oslo accords, brokered by former American President Bill Clinton. Oslo’s demise: Oslo reached its climax in January 2001 during discussions between the Israeli and Palestinian sides in the Egyptian coastal town of Taba, but they were abruptly brought to a close when Clinton’s term of office ended and former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak was voted out. In their stead, arrived pro-Israeli George W. Bush, who knew next to nothing about Mid-East politics, along with Bush’s “man of peace” Ariel Sharon, known to others as “the Butcher of Beirut” due to his involvement in the Sabra and Shatilla massacres.

Victory?
By Howard Zinn, Palestine Chronicle 8/1/2003
"Rebellion often starts in the culture, which we are seeing today – the poets in defiance, the actors and writers speaking out, the musicians and rap groups taking a stand – a rebellion that is first ignored by the major media, and then becomes hard to ignore .." -- The “victory” over an already devastated and disarmed Iraq led Bush, Rumsfeld and their teammates into a locker-room frenzy of exultation and self-congratulation. I half-expected to see Bush joyfully pouring beer on Rumsfeld’s head and Ashcroft snapping a towel at Ari Fleischer’s derriere. But it turns out that they thought the Iraq game was over, when it was only the fifth inning. The war did not bring order to Iraq, but chaos, not crowds of cheering Iraqis, but widespread hostility. “No to Saddam! No to Bush!” were the signs, as Iraqis contemplated their ruined historic treasures, their destroyed homes, and the graves of their dead – thousands and thousands of civilians and soldiers, with many more men, women, children wounded. And it goes on as I write this in mid-June – an ugly occupation. I see a headline “U.S. Troops Kill 70 in Iraqi Crackdown”. With each passing day, the Bush administration’s lies are being exposed. There were the lies about war being necessary to destroy Iraq’s “weapons of mass destruction”. But an American army of 200,000, moving aggressively throughout the country, cannot find them. The only weapons of mass destruction in Iraq have been the bombs and missiles raining down by the thousands, the cluster bombs spewing out their deadly pellets, the arsenal of the greatest military power on earth visiting destruction on a country ruled by a murderous tyrant, but militarily helpless. There were the lies about wanting “self-determination” for the Iraqis, as the new officialdom, headed by wealthy exiles, is flown into positions of power, just as once Ngo Dinh Diem was flown into Saigon by the United States, proclaiming its intention that Vietnam should govern itself. Through all this there is a sinking feeling that most of Americans remain ignorant of these things, and so still support George Bush by a decisive majority. But consider how volatile is public opinion, how it can change (and has done so many times) with dramatic suddenness. Note the large majority support for George Bush the elder, and then the quick collapse of that support as the glow of victory in the Gulf War faded, and the reality of economic trouble set in.