Zionists Out of the Peace Movement

Interfaith Council for Peace and Justice Director Chuck Warpehoski writes in his August 16, 2006, "ICPJ Update:"

Last Friday the Muslim Community Association held a rally to call for a ceasefire in the war in Lebanon. ...

ICPJ co-sponsored the rally because we agreed with the message on the publicity, "Violence does not create lasting peace! It only creates future enemies." ...

As you may have read in the paper, some at the rally had a much more targeted message. (online at: http://www.mlive.com/news/aanews/index.ssf?/base/news-18/1155377435197340.xml&coll=2 ) [The link refers to the August 12, 2006, Ann Arbor News article, "Marchers protest war: Multiple speakers at rally highly critical of Israel" by Art Aisner] Many people there have friends or family in Lebanon who have been displaced or even killed, and their message targeted Israel for its military actions, which is a message different from ICPJ's.

I think it was helpful to have ICPJ's message of universal compassion and deep commitment to all human life at the rally, but I think in the future we will be much more careful in choosing what events we co-sponsor. As an interfaith group, we have a responsibility to help bring communities together for peace and justice, and that commitment to interfaith bridge building needs to be reflected in every action we take. ... [italics added]

Earlier this year, Chuck and the ICPJ Steering Committee suspended the Middle East Task Force and drove its chairperson--the only Arab and the only Muslim on the Steering Committee--to resign from the organization. Now, Chuck is all but announcing that ICPJ will no longer work with the Muslim community--as if they ever really did--when it "targets Israel for its military actions" because, well, um, that's a "message different from ICPJ's." Yes indeedy it is.

Since Chuck specifically mentions a particular newspaper article let's just see what could be so offensive. Here are some suspect quotes:

... "This is a colonial war and it's been in the U.S./Israel designs for decades,'' said Ann Arbor resident Nadine Naber, who also openly called for a boycott of Israel and said that true peace hinges on ending occupation.

Dawud Walid, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations for Michigan (CAIR), also said the root cause of the conflict was Israeli occupation of Lebanese, Palestinian and Syrian territory, not Islamic fundamentalist terrorists as the Bush Administration would prefer people to believe. He also told the cheering crowd that the interests of Israel are not the same as and should never supersede America's. ...

Along with neutral signs calling for ceasefire, pro-Palestinian activists carried messages such as "Israel commits atrocities,'' and "Israeli atrocities put blood on U.S. hands." ...

That's all folks. Pretty offensive stuff, huh? The article notes that, sadly, "members of the [Muslim Community Association] tried to drown-out the anti-Israel chants with their own cadence of peace mantras, shouting that anti-Israel slogans were not part of the event's theme."

However, the real offense is more likely that ICPJ's involvement offended the local cadre of the Zionist state terrorist infrastructure. You know the domestic fundraising, religious, propaganda, and political arms of apartheid Israel. From the same article quoted above:

... But Jeff Levin, executive director of the Jewish Federation of Washtenaw County, said there were several aspects of the rally he found disturbing, such as no stated condemnations of Hezbollah and no mention of local or international efforts for Israeli relief organizations to coincide with appeals for to help Lebanese refugees.

Levin, who watched the rally from afar with about a dozen other onlookers and pedestrians, said the event would have had more legitimacy as a gathering promoting peace if there were equal mention to the suffering of Israelis who are withstanding waves of deadly rocket attacks and the need for humanitarian aid. Without such, it's hard to call it anything but an "anti-Israel hate fest."

"If you want to have an anti-Israel, pro Hezbollah rally, fine. Just call it what it is," Levin said. "To my sorrow, the well-meaning people of Michigan Peaceworks and the Interfaith Council for Peace and Justice are being used and taken advantage of by people who do not share their values."

He also took exception to claims of Israeli-occupied land and propaganda signs that he said thwarted the stated goal of an even-handed appeal for peace. ... [italics added]

Yes, I'm sure Chuck got the message loud and clear. A July 31, 2006, Ann Arbor News article that was featured in this blog, mentioned an ICPJ intern:

But a complete cease-fire could be very dangerous to Israel, said Saline resident Becca Kurshenbaum, 22, who works for the Interfaith Council for Peace and Justice and held a banner in support of peace Sunday evening.

"If some people here had their way, all military aid to Israel would stop and leave them defenseless against Hezbollah; I don't agree with that," said Kurshenbaum.

No word from Chuck on whether ICPJ will be distancing itself from Kurshenbaum over her misgivings about a ceasefire and her support of the Israeli military.

Last revision: 8/18/06

Labels: Interfaith Council for Peace and Justice, Islam bashing, Michigan Peaceworks, Warpehoski

Ann Arbor News
LETTERS
Thursday, August 10, 2006
Interfaith Council has its own calling
[My comments appear in bold below]

I have read with respect Michelle Kinnucan's letter of July 19. I know her urgency to salvage the human and economic lifeline of Palestine, as I respect the unceasing effort of single-minded advocates such as Blaine Coleman and Henry Herskovitz.

As a former member of the Interfaith Council for Peace & Justice steering committee and Mideast task force, I have heard determined presentations on these issues. Michelle states that the ICPJ sacrifices justice for interfaith unity. The ICPJ has its own calling: to lead nonviolent action which unites people of faith and others who subscribe to the peaceful resolution of conflict. Its guiding principles include freedom of worship and respect for persons holding opposing viewpoints.

In the last two years, Pat Schock has attended only one to three of the monthly meetings of the Middle East Task Force (METF). Actually, what Michelle said was: "... the Interfaith Council for Peace and Justice sacrifices justice, peace, and its purported core value of 'Advocacy for the oppressed' on the altar of an expedient but immoral interfaith unity with supporters of Israel and 'suspends' its own Middle East Task Force."

The dissidents within the METF have no quarrel with the ICPJ's "calling," as Schock describes it, but just because you respect a person holding an opposing viewpoint doesn't mean that person belongs in the organization. For instance, would proponents of Christian Identity be welcome in ICPJ? Why are proponents of Zionism welcome? Is it because of misguided Christian guilt? Fear? If the "Interfaith" part of the ICPJ's name and mission trumps all else then for the sake of honesty "Peace and Justice" should be dropped from the group's name.

Picketing, even after sincere attempts at dialogue, aims to activate guilt and blame as tools. It disrupts the right of a person and a congregation to examine their soul and digest legitimate challenges, and so is incongruent with ICPJ principles.

This is an obvious reference to the Saturday morning protests of Jewish Witnesses for Peace and Friends (JWPF) although it is unclear why Schock brings it up here as the matter and letter in question had little or nothing to do with JWPF or the synagogue protests. One implication is that Schock is asserting that the METF was suspended because of the actions of JWPF but what sense does it make to punish a separate body for the actions of another group; unless, of course, you're into collective punishment and guilt-by-association, as Schock and the leaders of the ICPJ apparently are.

In any case, just how does JWPF's once-per-week protest outside the Beth Israel Congregation disrupt "the right of a person and a congregation to examine their soul and digest legitimate challenges." It is ludicrous to suggest BIC are somehow deprived of this "right" on Saturday morning or that they cannot engage in the described activities at any other time of the week. In fact, BIC has a Sabbath evening service every Friday.

Furthermore, I challenge Schock to show why "guilt" and "blame" should not be part of the ICPJ's tool box; those who are incapable of feeling guilt are known as psychopaths. Why is guilt verboten in the ICPJ? Merriam-Webster defines the word as follows:

Main Entry: guilt
Pronunciation: 'gilt
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, delinquency, guilt, from Old English gylt delinquency
1 : the fact of having committed a breach of conduct especially violating law and involving a penalty; broadly : guilty conduct
2 a : the state of one who has committed an offense especially consciously b : feelings of culpability especially for imagined offenses or from a sense of inadequacy : SELF-REPROACH
3 : a feeling of culpability for offenses

Supporters of Israel have every reason to feel guilty and those who are guilty should make amends and cease the actions or omissions from which their guilt stems. It seems likely that Schock is an exemplar of what William Sloane Coffin was referring to when he said, "I think the bright flames of Christianity are now down to smoldering embers, if not ashes, of feeling comfortable. The church is pretty much down to therapy and management." Doggone it, guilt and blame just don't make people feel good.

I also encouraged the dissolution of the Mideast task force because I observed that over the years this task force changed, recently accepting only statements representing Palestine's side.

Secular activists can work with the U.S. Committee to End the Occupation and groups advocating divestment of institutional cash from military investments. The ICPJ is not a secular group. Our limitations are like self-imposed gauze handcuffs. We believe that God sees our opponent as a person of value, and we hope to treat the opponent as God does. Our methods intend to reach to the hearts of those who now withhold justice.

Pat H. Schock, Ann Arbor

Who ever suggested ICPJ was "a secular group" and what has that to do with anything? Schock knows or should know that this is red herring. Some of the METF's opponents have tried to bludgeon the group with the assertion that its members are not "people of faith." This has never been a formal requirement of working with the ICPJ and, in fact, a majority of METF members are "people of faith." As the METF indicated in April:

In fact, at the April 4th meeting, nine of fifteen members indicated that they are "affiliated with a local faith community, i.e. a church, mosque, or synagogue" or other place of worship. In answer to a follow-up question, three of the unaffiliated Jews indicated that support for Israel is a key impediment to their joining a synagogue or temple.

At the July meeting, two-thirds of the members in attendance were part of some faith community and the remaining third consisted of Jews who had indicated in April "that support for Israel is a key impediment to their joining a synagogue or temple."

So, Schock is willing to tell "secular activists" to take a hike but proponents of the violence and injustice that is Zionism are welcome as long as they are "people of faith." Oy gevalt!

See also:

• First Statement of the METF to the ICPJ Steering Committee
• Second Statement of the METF to the ICPJ Steering Committee
• Reconciliation Resolution of the METF
• Fourth Statement of the METF to the ICPJ Steering Committee

Labels: Interfaith Council for Peace and Justice, Palestine, Warpehoski, Zionism

Tuesday, July 19, 2006
Interfaith Council sacrifices its core ideas

Tis a pity that J. Albert Baily's "most pleasant evening" was spoilt (The Ann Arbor News, July 4). His woeful tale inspired me to paraphrase Daniel Berrigan's meditation on the actions of the Catonsville 9:

Our apologies, good friends for the marring of your leisure, the distribution of paper and the uttering of words, the angering of the clergy and other guilty bystanders in the front parlor of the charnel house. We could not, so help us God, do otherwise. For we are sick at heart, with no rest from thinking of the 734 Palestinian children and 121 Israeli children blown up or shot to death since the beginning of the second Intifada in September, 2000. We worry about the thousands more Palestinian children dead or at risk of death from malnutrition from "a deliberate Israeli strategy of putting the lives of ordinary Palestinians under stress" or of disease from contaminated water now that there is no electricity in most of Gaza.

In the face of this, the Interfaith Council for Peace and Justice sacrifices justice, peace, and its purported core value of "Advocacy for the oppressed" on the altar of an expedient but immoral interfaith unity with supporters of Israel and "suspends" its own Middle East Task Force.

We lament with the late William Sloane Coffin that "we have mediocre politicians, and the clergy is pretty mediocre also. ... The greatest recession in this country is not economic; it's spiritual. And so the great biblical mandates of pursuing justice and seeking peace are shortchanged."

Michelle J. Kinnucan, Ann Arbor

Tuesday, July 4, 2006
Reader sets us straight on 'liberalism'

Good for Gary L. Evans in his Other Voices essay for pointing out what "liberalism" really is and stands for (The Ann Arbor News, June 30). This seems particularly pertinent in our own community as well as nationally.

I was prepared to write off Ann Coulter as a feminine voice on the Rush Limbaugh side. But then I read that she was a graduate of the University of Michigan Law School! We might consider suggesting an "undistinguished graduate award" to be given at U-M commencements. Ted Kaczynski, the "Unabomber," could easily be a nominee, too.

Mr. Evans' comments on demeaning and discounting verbiage was brought home to me recently when my wife and I attended a performance of dance and music by a group of Palestinian students at a local church. Though I did not agree with some of the political remarks in the introduction, we enjoyed some excellent dancing and music.

It would have been a most pleasant evening had it not been for the presence of a well-known local group. They distributed political materials and confronted members of the audience with abusive comments, apparently designed to put forward their points. Not only were church officials embarrassed, but the tone of the evening was marred.

I now read that one of the leaders of this disruptive group, known to those at Ann Arbor City Council meetings, is considering running for council. I'm sure Mr. Evans would agree with me that in the next election, we should vote "while there still is time."

J. Albert Baily, Ann Arbor

Labels: free speech, Interfaith Council for Peace and Justice, Israel, Palestine, violence

Here's how:

• Tell Congress to end all financial, diplomatic, and military aid to Israel
• Don't buy Israeli goods and tell businesses that sell Israeli goods to stop
• Support divestment from Israel
• Make sure you don't own Israeli bonds or stocks
• Get your retirement fund, union, and state and local governments to divest from Israel
• Educate yourself and then speak out against apartheid Israel and the racist ideology of Zionism
• Join a Palestinian solidarity group
• Buy Palestinian olive oil
• Work in the local peace movement(see below)
  

Tell the leaders of the Interfaith Council for Peace and Justice (ICPJ) to:

1. Remember the first principle of interfaith unity—adherence to an ethic that shuns violence and demands justice;
2. Develop "a campaign ... to encourage the [US] government to end its complicity in ... violations of human rights by suspending its military aid and arms sales to Israel, and to divest ... from all companies that manufacture or sell arms and other military hardware to Israel" as pledged in the ICPJ's resolution of May 13, 2003; and,
3. Lift their restrictions on the ICPJ's Middle East Task Force.

Tell the leaders of Michigan Peaceworks to:

1. Make Peaceworks a truly grassroots organization with a membership empowered to actively participate in Peaceworks' decision-making process; and,
2. Publicly acknowledge, and apologize for, the mistreatment of Teresa Al-Saraji and the physical assault committed by then-Peaceworks President Eric Van De Vort.

Tell Michigan Peaceworks and the Interfaith Council for Peace and Justice to endorse Palestinian civil society's July 9, 2005, call for boycotts, divestment, and sanctions against Israel and in support of:

1. Full equality for Arab and other non-Jewish citizens of Israel;
2. An end to the Israeli occupation of East Jerusalem, Gaza, the West Bank, and the Golan Heights; and,
3. The return of Palestinian refugees to their homes and property in accordance with UN General Assembly Resolution 194.

Labels: Interfaith Council for Peace and Justice, Israel, Michigan Peaceworks, Zionism

Approved by consensus of the Middle East Task Force at its regular meeting on October 3, 2006.

We wish to share our thoughts with you as you ponder the future of the Interfaith Council for Peace and Justice's (ICPJ) Middle East work. Although the mediation process that the Steering Committee committed itself to has barely begun, it nonetheless has begun. And, by all accounts—including the Dispute Resolution Center representatives, it is off to a promising start. Paul Versluis and Sheri Wander have agreed to serve as mediators and we are confident that they will be fair and honest.

We agree with Sheri Wander's statement in her proposal (PDF): "Unless ICPJ deals with both the presenting and underlying conflicts and issues of the current situation they can not truly move forward. The issues will continue to surface in the work of ICPJ, the relationships of members, and the relationship of ICPJ to the larger community." We also agree with the remarks of "Imagine Event" participant Arnold Stieber, who recently wrote to mediation committee members: "I agree with the 9/27/06 'Report from the Mediation/Conflict Resolution Committee' [PDF]. If the people from the METF are dismissed, and/or if the Olive Branch Alliance is a replacement for the METF, then nothing has been accomplished."

Also, as "Imagine Event" facilitator David Yamamoto notes (PDF):

It is my experience that good intentions often translate to premature implementation. I would caution against rushing into implementation. Careful planning and thoughtful action will-in the long run-increase the chances of a successfully [sic] implementation.

The challenge for ICPJ to initiate this new model rests, in my view, on two critical factors: The first, I have discussed in recruiting individuals who will carry out the spirit that founded The Olive Branch Alliance. The second, the engagement in a healing process that will allow everyone to move forward in a positive and supportive fashion in making the Alliance work successfully. [p. 17]

Thus, we urge you to support the mediation process and to postpone any action on the "Olive Branch Alliance" (OBA) proposal until after the mediation process has run its course.

We would also like to point out that the OBA is inconsistent with the traditions and core values of the ICPJ. The OBA proposal would shift the ICPJ's Middle East work from an open committee to one open only to those "appointed by the Steering Committee." We know of no precedent for such exclusivity in ICPJ history and note that this also conflicts with ICPJ core values of hospitality, generosity, peace, love, compassion, diversity, not using power to dominate, bringing people together, and finding common ground.

Furthermore, we note that the OBA proposal of a closed committee also violates the "Principles for Middle East Work (as adopted by [sic] board in August, 2005)." To wit, "ICPJ will work to create a framework for working for Peace and Justice in the Middle East that is welcoming to all wanting to work to end the occupation within our framework of respect and care for all" (emphasis added). The Middle East Task Force (METF) has always worked within a "framework of respect and care for all."

Some people seem to believe that because the METF, collectively and/or individually, has taken a stance against Zionism that this means we do not "respect or care for all." Respect does not mean only to hold one in high esteem, it can also mean to give one his or her due regard and consideration. We take the ideas, feeling, and actions of all people seriously and we can honestly say that we care deeply for the spiritual and physical wellbeing of all parties to the conflicts in the Middle East and elsewhere—it is this concern that impels us to do this work. Justice and compassion—even for an oppressor—are not mutually exclusive values.

In closing, we note that members of the "Imagine Event" reportedly found fault with us for, among other things, making "polarizing, value judgments of 'good' and 'bad' " and for "Moral absolutism." We plead guilty and happen to think that values and morals are of vital significance to "people of faith and people of conscience"—the ICPJ's self-defined constituency. Some things are good and some are bad. We leave you with these quotes to reflect upon:

Ah, you that turn justice to wormwood, and bring righteousness to the ground! … They hate the one who reproves in the gate, and they abhor the one who speaks the truth. … Hate evil and love good, and establish justice in the gate … let justice roll down like waters, and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream.

… let not the hatred of others to you make you swerve to wrong and depart from justice. Be just: that is next to Piety:

Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled.

We feel that love means inoffensiveness at all costs. …We may forget, in judging our own angers, that the love demonstrated by St. Paul and Jesus and Gandhi and Martin Luther King was a tough, firm, outspoken honesty that demanded the best from people, a love more accurately described by the Quaker injunction "speak truth to power" than by the passive acquiescence of "never make anyone unhappy."

We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented. Sometimes we must interfere.

Let no one be deceived: There is no survival for humanity without global peace! ... Let no one be deceived: There is no global peace without global justice!

… we have mediocre politicians, and the clergy is pretty mediocre also. But what’s honored in a country will be cultivated there. The greatest recession in this country is not economic; it’s spiritual. And so the great biblical mandates of pursuing justice and seeking peace are shortchanged.

See also:

• First Statement of the METF to the ICPJ Steering Committee
• Second Statement of the METF to the ICPJ Steering Committee
• Reconciliation Resolution of the METF

Labels: Interfaith Council for Peace and Justice, Palestine, Warpehoski, Zionism

The Middle East Task Force (METF) of the Interfaith Council for Peace and Justice (ICPJ) of Ann Arbor, MI, met at its regular time and place last Tuesday. There were twelve members in attendance. The Task Force adopted its fourth statement to the ICPJ Steering Committee and reaffirmed its September endorsement of the "The Jerusalem Declaration on Christian Zionism"--a statement by the Patriarch and local heads of churches in Jerusalem--with the recommendation that the Steering Committee (SC) of the ICPJ do likewise and publicize the statement among its members, the local faith community, and the media.

The METF also reaffirmed its September endorsement of the following resolution proposed for adoption by the SC:

Taking note of the Israeli government's recent decision to further expand its illegal settlement of Ma'ale Adumim, the Steering Committee of the Interfaith Council for Peace and Justice reaffirms its March 14, 2006, "Resolution On Withdrawal Of All Settlers From Israel’s Illegal Ma’ale Adumim Colony" and directs ICPJ staff to publicize the resolution among ICPJ members, the local faith community, and the media and to transmit copies of it to our local, state, and federal elected officials.

The METF decided to reaffirm its September actions because the matters were not brought to the SC at it September meeting as was requested by the METF.

Labels: Interfaith Council for Peace and Justice, Palestine

I was at the vigil described below and there were plenty of Muslim and Middle Eastern people present but except for a tiny blurb from Shirley Hogan (and she might be a Jew, too) all of the people interviewed for the article below are Jews. I guess no one else matters much.

The News reporter interviewed Jeff Levin before the vigil and printed his remarks even though they knew he wasn't going to attend. Fair enough. But they did they contact anyone from the local Muslim or Arab community? There's no evidence they did. Emphasis added in text below.

Ann Arbor News
Local peace vigil draws hundreds (Google cache here)
Demonstrators call for Mideast cease-fire
Monday, July 31, 2006
BY TINA REED
News Staff Reporter

Tim and Shirley Hogan of Ann Arbor say they wouldn't call themselves politically active.

But they found themselves holding candles on Main Street in Ann Arbor on Sunday evening, calling for the United States to demand a cease-fire in the 21/2-week conflict between Israel and Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed Lebanese militia.

"We're just ordinary citizens,'' said Shirley Hogan, who said she's been following all news about the conflict since it began. "I thought, finally, we have to make known our commitment to peace.''

They were among about 300 people who lined the streets in front of popular restaurants and stores along South Main Street, mostly between Liberty and Washington streets. People held candles and signs during the vigil for peace sponsored by Michigan Peaceworks and the Interfaith Council for Peace and Justice.

The vigil occurred the same day that an Israeli bomb hit a house in Qana, Lebanon, killing nearly 60 civilians, including at least 34 children. Since the conflict first began, more than 500 people have been killed in Lebanon and dozens have died in Israel.

Jeff Levin, executive director of the Jewish Federation of Washtenaw County, said that despite their noble goals, the demonstrators don't understand the complex reasons that forced Israel into the conflict. He said he would not attend the vigil.

"It seems to me that true peace activists would promote the destruction of terrorist organizations, rather than advocating policies that assure their preservation,'' Levin said.

The dispute is not a battle over territory, but one over Israel's right to exist, he said.

While the official goal of the vigil was to call for complete cease-fire, there was political disagreement among many at the vigil about how what needed to be done to achieve peace. At least one counterprotester stood with a handwritten sign during the event backing U.S. support of Israel and its right to attack in response to Hezbollah.

One demonstrator, Barbara Stahler-Sholk, said she has family living in Israel and friends who live in Lebanon. Although she believes Hezbollah provoked Israel into the conflict, she denounced Israel's response, which she says is killing innocent Lebanese civilians, and criticized the support given by the United States.

"They are using my tax dollars against my will,'' Stahler-Sholk said. "Israel is not upholding its promise to follow the Ten Commandments. Being Jewish, I am ashamed, outraged and feel betrayed.''

But a complete cease-fire could be very dangerous to Israel, said Saline resident Becca Kurshenbaum, 22, who works for the Interfaith Council for Peace and Justice and held a banner in support of peace Sunday evening.

"If some people here had their way, all military aid to Israel would stop and leave them defenseless against Hezbollah; I don't agree with that,'' said Kurshenbaum.

She said she supports a cease-fire that removes military aid from all sides in the conflict.

"I spoke with my aunt on the phone tonight and she said, 'You can't do anything, even if you go to 50 vigils.' It is going to take more than a vigil for peace, but its a good start.''

Despite varying views at the event, the shared idea was that the only long-term solution for peace is a cease-fire, said organizer and Michigan Peaceworks Executive Director Phillis Engelbert.

"There are stories on the news, more reports of carnage. It's madness,'' Engelbert said. The U.S. government needs to help negotiate every option toward a peaceful resolution, she said. "There's no excuse for the killing of innocents,'' she said.

But it's not that easy, Levin said.

"Any solution that does not add the root cause of this, which is the unprovoked aggression of Hezbollah against Israel, is a temporary solution at best,'' he said.

Tina Reed can be reached at 734-994-6828 or treed@annarbornews.com.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Labels: Interfaith Council for Peace and Justice, Israel, Lebanon, Michigan Peaceworks

You read it here first (probably ... because it's not in Chuck's 10/5 e-mail "Update" or on the ICPJ blog yet). Despite months of open hostility by some leaders of Ann Arbor's Interfaith Council for Peace and Justice (ICPJ) it turns out that a solid majority (17-9) of ICPJ members responding to a recent survey favor mediation between the ICPJ Board of Directors (formerly known as the "Steering Committee") and the ICPJ's Middle East Task Force (METF).

The METF was ordered suspended by the Board in May of this year and the Board later empowered a Muslim-free group that came up with a proposal--the "Olive Branch Alliance"--that would eliminate the METF. A smaller plurality (12-9; with 5 neither agreeing nor disagreeing) supported "moving forward" with the Olive Branch Alliance proposal. The issues were discussed at a special ICPJ membership meeting on September 28. At that time, members were asked to complete a short survey on the future of the ICPJ's Middle East work--the quantitative results appear in the table below.

ICPJ's Middle East Program 9/28/06 Membership Meeting Survey Results
	Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neither Agree nor Disagree	Agree	Strongly Agree
I support ICPJ moving forward with [the Imagine Program/"Olive Branch Alliance"] (check one)	7	2	5	5	7
I think [the Imagine Program/"Olive Branch Alliance"] is likely to succeed (check one)	7	2	7	5	4
I support ICPJ moving forward with [mediation] (check one)	7	2	0	3	14
I think [mediation] is likely to succeed (check one)	9	0	5	9	3

In written comments to the survey, local Zionists were solidly opposed to mediation--no surprise there. One of them, Rebecca Kanner, openly played the guilt-by-association and collective punishment cards:

As for the discussion on the middle east, I believe more strongly than ever (and I had believed pretty strongly before!) that ICPJ needs to make a break with [the] current group of people who constitute the METF in exile. Now. Not later, not another chance for mediation to drain even more time and energy from the board members and others. I can no longer separate the METF members from the picketers or the blog "Zionists out of the peace movement" [glad you're reading it but this is not an METF-controlled blog] ... And I'm sure if these groups/individuals merge in my mind/feelings then they also do for others. I may be especially sensitive as a member of Beth Israel, but I believe as an active member of ICPJ, a former steering committee member and president, and as someone who believes that the "I" in Interfaith is key to the organization, my views should be considered with other views. If the organization can't make a parting with the METFers, [then] I will have to re-evaluate my relationship with ICPJ. ...

What our friend is really concerned about is the "Z-is-for-Zionists" in "Interfaith" but these racists don't belong in an interfaith group that also includes justice and peace in its name and mission. Then again, I don't think Christian Identity folks belong, either.

Addendum: The issue of "the 'I' in Interfaith" is a red herring. When ICPJ leaders suspended the METF in 2006 they occasioned the resignation of the only Muslim on their steering committee or in any position of leadership in ICPJ. Furthermore, in April 2006, the METF informed the steering committee, in writing, that at its "April 4th meeting, nine of fifteen members indicated that they are 'affiliated with a local faith community, i.e. a church, mosque, or synagogue' or other place of worship. In answer to a follow-up question, three of the unaffiliated Jews indicated that support for Israel is a key impediment to their joining a synagogue or temple." In any case, formal affiliation has, apparently, never been a requirement to join or participate in ICPJ.

See also: "ICPJ Staff Suppress Embarassing Results"

Revised 10/10/06 (thanks to A.R. for pointing out an interpretative error in the text)
Revised 3/20/ 10 to name previously unidentified comment author, expand quote, add addendum concerning people of faith on METF, add link to follow-up post

Labels: Interfaith Council for Peace and Justice, Palestine, Warpehoski, Zionism

Under the leadership of its President, Joe Summers, and its Director, Chuck Warpehoski, Ann Arbor's Interfaith Council for Peace and Justice (ICPJ) has racked up a stunning record of disrespect to the local Muslim community this year. In May, despite repeated pleas for dialogue and mediation the ICPJ Steering Committee (SC) suspended the ICPJ's Middle East Task Force (METF), an action which resulted in the resignation of Farouq Shafie, the SC's only Muslim and only Arab member--he was also the chairperson of the METF.

On August 16th, Warpehoski sent a mass e-mail message concerning the "Stop the War in Lebanon Rally" that the ICPJ co-sponsored with the Muslim Community Association. He complained that many people at a rally "... have friends or family in Lebanon who have been displaced or even killed, and their message targeted Israel for its military actions, which is a message different from ICPJ's." Heaven (and the local Israel Lobby) forbid the ICPJ should criticize Israel for its military actions! Warpehoski then mused "... in the future we will be much more careful in choosing what events we co-sponsor." (See "ICPJ Shuns Muslims for 'target[ting] Israel for its military actions' " and "Juxtaposition").

Earlier this month, according to Warpehoski's September 25th blog entry (screenshot here), the ICPJ "convened a group of Jews, Palestinians, and others to 'imagine' how we could organize an effective, interfaith program for Middle East Peace." The plural "Jews" was right but there was only one Palestinian, Wadad Abed--a Christian--who took part in the "Imagine Process" and when Joe Summers discussed the process at a special meeting Thursday night he incorrectly said there was a Muslim member of the group. In fact, there weren't any! The ICPJ failed to find even one Muslim to participate.

While the Jewish community was very well--disproportionately so--represented, no Muslims and only one Arab attended Thursday's meeting, which ICPJ scheduled to begin about half-an-hour before sundown, thus, making it untimely for Muslims who had been fasting since sunrise in observance of Ramadan. So much for interfaith respect and sensitivity.

Muslims traditionally break their day-long Ramadan fast together with family and friends. And this writer knows of at least one local Muslim who did not attend the meeting because it conflicted with Ramadan. Although the ICPJ's long track record of kowtowing to local Zionists is undoubtedly an even greater impediment to Muslim and Arab participation in ICPJ.

In 1975-6, under the leadership of Barbara Fuller, the ICPJ joined the campaign against UN General Assembly Resolution 3379--"Elimination of all forms of racial discrimination" wherein the UN "Determines that zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination." According to a statement prepared by Robert Hauert, eschewing any substantive analysis, the ICPJ found "this resolution to be offensive" and "condemn[ed] the General Assembly action."

They declared: "The U.N. resolution ... is hypocritical because all peoples are not free from that attitude." By such bankrupt logic, it would be hypocritical to identify the ideologies of South African apartheid and Adolf Hitler as racist. Indeed, after a concerted, if not exhaustive, search of the 11-linear feet of ICPJ archives in the Bentley Historical Library, this writer could find no evidence that the group ever took a public stand against apartheid.

The current dispute between the SC and the METF stems in large part from the SC's refusal to engage in any substantive discourse about Zionism, let alone stand for justice and peace. More than a year ago by a vote of 13-0-0, the METF endorsed the July 2005 Palestinian call for boycotts, divestment and sanctions against Israel and the objectives of that call:

1. Ending [Israel's] occupation and colonization of all Arab lands and dismantling the Wall;
2. Recognizing the fundamental rights of the Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel to full equality; and
3. Respecting, protecting and promoting the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and properties as stipulated in UN resolution 194.

The METF also recommended the SC's endorsement of the call and the preparation of an action plan to support the call. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that these objectives are incompatible with a Jewish majority or Jewish supremacy anywhere in Palestine and, consequently, certain SC members worked to block endorsement and fomented a bitter split within the METF over the issue.

Continued Jewish supremacy in the 78% of Palestine (Cisjordan) violently seized in 1948 is a sacrosanct principle for some ICPJ leaders and the more than four million Palestinian refugees (according to the UN) from the 1948 Nakba alone are of significantly less concern. Perhaps, this is one reason why Wadad Abed was hand-picked to participate in the "Imagine Process."

Abed is part of an Arab and Jewish women's dialogue group called Zeitouna. According to a July 2003 article ("Refusing To Be Enemies;" links at bottom) in the Detroit Jewish News, Zeitouna's "ground rules to allow them to tackle tough topics like Israel's defensive actions in the West Bank, anti-Semitism and Israel's right to exist" and their "hard work yielded impressive results." For instance, Wadad Abed has embraced the Zionist narrative of Jewish "fear and concerns" and, consequently, "She now accepts Israel's right to exist, she says." Meanwhile:

The Jewish women, in turn, learned about Abed's emotional pain when they talked about going to Israel.

"American women talk about moving or living in Israel for a while and that upsets me," Abed says. "All Jews -- from the United States, Russia and Europe -- can have automatic citizenship in Israel, and I can't. Yet my family goes back for several generations there."

One of Abed's partners in the ICPJ's "Imagine Process" was Benita Kaimowitz, also a Zeitouna member. Another was Aaron Ahuvia and as one "Imagine Process" participant told this writer, Ahuvia declared to the group that he is a proud Zionist. In fact, Ahuvia is the national secretary of Brit Tzedek v'Shalom, which is affiliated with the Zionist, Israeli Meretz Party. As Jonathan Tilove writes, "Hadar Susskind, Washington director for the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, which represents many of the nation's largest Jewish organizations, ... counts Brit Tzedek members as good Zionists" ("Some Liberal Jews Break Ranks on Israel." Newhouse News Service. Aug. 3, 2006).

Brit Tzedek's task is to convince people that justice is served and peace will be achieved by maintaining a Jewish supremacist state in the 78% of Palestine violently seized by Jews in 1948 while creating a "viable" Palestinian state in some portion of the 22% of Palestine violently seized by Israel in 1967--just 19 years later. They don't want democracy and equality for everyone from the Jordan to the Mediterranean and they surely don't want millions of Palestinian refugees returning to what is now called Israel. They believe that in order to preserve the current Jewish supremacist state, Israel must jettison most of the territories occupied in 1967 and the Palestinians living in them.

Finally, as of this writing, of nineteen "approved international hunger-fighting agencies" eligible to receive funds from the ICPJ's upcoming annual Washtenaw County CROP Hunger Walk, two are Jewish (MAZON and the unabashedly Zionist American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee) and none are Islamic. I'll let you know when the ICPJ changes its name to the Judeo-Christian Council for Peace and Just Us.

Ramadan mubarak to all of my Muslim sisters and brothers!

See also Detroit Jewish News, "Refusing To Be Enemies" here or here.

Last revised: 10/4/06

Labels: Interfaith Council for Peace and Justice, Islam bashing, Wadad Abed, Warpehoski

The City of Ann Arbor's Human Rights Commission (HRC) was created in 1970 to, among other things, "Investigate, study, hold hearings and make recommendations to City Council regarding complaints from any class or group protected under the human rights ordinance" (Ann Arbor City Code §1:222(b)) The City has gradually gotten out of the human rights business by all but dropping "human rights" from the text of the relevant city code section (Chapter 112) and by eliminating the City's Human Rights department (HRD), which had several duties including providing staff support to the HRC, whose members are unpaid volunteers.

It is probably not coincidental that the HRD was eliminated after the HRC, led by Helen Fox and a Palestinian, Hani Bawardi, showed great courage and integrity in 2003 in adopting a "Resolution in Support of Ending U.S. Military Support for Israel" (text below). At the time, none of Ann Arbor's Zionized local 'peace' organizations--Veterans for Peace, Michigan Peaceworks, Interfaith Council for Peace and Justice, Jewish Voices for Peace and Justice--supported the HRC or endorsed its resolution. And Ann Arbor's Zionized City Council, led by Democratic Mayor John Hieftje, never even formally considered the resolution.

Although the HRC is still active, elected officials recently demonstrated their contempt for human rights and the integrity of the HRC once again. Less than a year after Israel's murderous assault on Gaza, in a sneak attack of his own, Mayor Hieftje appointed Neal Elyakin to the HRC, effective last year on December 7th ( "a date which will live in infamy," indeed). According to his LinkedIn profile, Elyakin is, among other things, a "Formation (founding) Member at Michigan Israel Business Bridge;" a Board Member of the Friends of the IDF, Michigan Chapter; and a Board Member of the Jewish National Fund (Michigan).

The Michigan Israel Business Bridge obviously aims at facilitating trade and business between Michigan and Israel, contrary to the Palestinian BDS campaign. As for Friends of IDF, well that speaks for itself, doesn't it? According to Adalah, the Jewish National Fund controls "over 2.5 million dunams of land, equating to 13% of the total land-space in Israel," the majority of which "was transferred to it by [the] state and was originally in the ownership of Arab refugees or internally displaced persons." In other words, the JNF controls land that was ethnically cleansed during the Nakba in 1948. The JNF manages these lands to create Jewish-only towns and neighborhoods in Israel; Palestinian citizens of Israel are prohibited from leasing JNF land and building houses on it. For these reasons, the JNF was singled out in the Cairo Declaration to End Israeli Apartheid of January 1, 2010, and has been the object of a campaign by the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee to strip the group of federal tax-exempt status.

Elyakin also has a blog. Concerning Israel's attack on Gaza, Elyakin wrote: "Let Israel do what it does; let Israel take on Hamas and the terrorist government in a way that will dismantle the infrastructure in Gaza that supports the terror state. Let it happen fast, let it take its course, and let us support Israel to once again tell the world that terrorism will not defeat her." On January 11, 2009, he wrote: "I know that hundreds of Gaza residents have died. I know that many non-combatants have died. I know that schools and mosques have been destroyed. ... I blame Hamas. ... I will support Israel in her campaign to keep her children free of terror, away from the bomb shelters, and secure in their own recognized country."

Here's part of what Elyakin wrote last June:

There was no Nakba in 1948. There was, though, a war for independence that Israel waged after being attacked on all fronts by pretty much the entire Arab world ... Most of the Arabs living in what is now Israel came during the early years of the century, enticed by the work offered as a result of the opportunities created by the early Jewish immigration ... Palestinian nationalism didn't exist prior to the UN vote, prior to the war of 1948, prior to the establishment of the State of Israel. ... For all intents and purposes, there was no Arab Palestinian movement. ... There is no Palestine. ... The area that was called Palestine is now called Israel. ... The borders of Israel are or will be what Israel determines them to be. ... Countries wage war; countries lose and countries win. Israel won. Get over it. [This excerpt is from Elyakin's blog as it appeared in January 2010 before he 'disappeared' some of his more blatant remarks--PM]

Two weeks after appointment to the HRC began, Elyakin wrote: "The myth most strongly reinforced, the biggest lie repeated over and over again, is that Israel threw people out of their homes and took over their lands; that Israel exists only because of what they did to the indigenous Palestinians ..."

It is, frankly, an outrage for a man with Neal Elyakin's record of denigrating the history and human rights of Palestinians and of supporting the racist institutions of apartheid Israel to be appointed to the Ann Arbor Human Rights Commission. What can one expect though in times such as these when the oxymoronic lie of "Israeli democracy" is a commonplace?



Proposed by the Ann Arbor Human Rights Commission on December 4, 2003

Whereas, the United States, by providing Israel with virtually unlimited diplomatic, economic, and military support, has made itself complicit in Israel’s 36-year old military occupation of Palestinian lands;

Whereas, the State of Israel’s building of a 25-foot Separation Wall that cuts through Palestinian communities, is further undermining chances for a peaceful resolution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict;

Whereas, construction of the Separation Wall deprives a significant proportion of the Palestinian people of all means for self governance, movement, commerce, and education on all levels, and makes the prospect of a viable independent Palestinian state unfeasible;

Whereas, the United States government has expressed its official opposition to the construction of the Separation Wall (President George W. Bush, London, Nov. 19, 2003) while at the same time refusing to use its unquestionable influence to prevent the Israeli government from proceeding with its construction;

Whereas, a majority of Jewish Americans support ending the occupation of Palestinian lands and dismantling of the Settlements (US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation, Sept. 23, 2003) and;

Whereas, the City of Ann Arbor has in recent months witnessed dozens of vigils, peaceful protests, teach-ins, lectures, and debates on behalf of the beleaguered Palestinian population;

RESOLVED, That the City of Ann Arbor urge the United States Federal Government to stop military aid to the state of Israel until such time that Israel ends its occupation of Palestinian lands; and

RESOLVED, That the City Administrator send copies of this resolution to our U.S. Congressional and Senate representatives, and the President of the United States.

Labels: Interfaith Council for Peace and Justice, Michigan Peaceworks, US politics, Zionism

Synopsis: Rabbi Robert Dobrusin puts on a good show of opposition to torture but, ultimately, it is clear that, in truth, he believes that torture can be "justified" as an "act of self-defense."

Have a good look at the photo at right. It is probably the only visible opposition to torture that you will ever see outside of Ann Arbor's Beth Israel Congregation (BIC). The banner is displayed by members of Jewish Witnesses for Peace and Friends (JWPF) in support of Torture Awareness Month, sponsored locally by the Interfaith Council for Peace and Justice (ICPJ).

The ICPJ is headed by none other than BIC member Ruth Kraut. All the evidence suggests that Kraut has been unable to persuade BIC members to join either the local ICPJ anti-torture campaign or the parent campaign by the National Religious Campaign Against Torture. Kraut has, apparently, been more successful in getting ICPJ to shun Sabeel's upcoming conference in Detroit. She reportedly told the ICPJ directors that "as a Jew" she felt uncomfortable with Sabeel. Indeed. In any case, none of Ann Arbor's other synagogues are on board with the anti-torture campaign, either. This is not surprising.

You see, Jews have a problem with torture--they support it. Not all of them, of course, but as Felice Gaer, director of the American Jewish Committee's Jacob Blaustein Institute for the Advancement of Human Rights, puts it: "There was a shocking silence of the Jewish community on the issue of torture, and there is still a lacuna on this vital issue, to my eye." One of the world's most prominent proponents of torture is Alan Dershowitz, a Jew and an ardent defender of the Jewish state. According to a 2006 scientific poll conducted for the BBC in 25 countries, Israel led the world in public support of torture with a majority of Jewish Israelis in favor of its use. Further, Israel is the only state in the world to have legalized torture. In the US, last November, three Jews in the Senate crossed party lines to save Michael Mukasey's nomination as Attorney General. Mukasey, "a believer and devout Jew," notoriously refused to state in confirmation hearings that the form of torture known as waterboarding was illegal under US law.

However, BIC's spiritual leader, Rabbi Robert Dobrusin, has not been entirely silent on the torture issue. He gave a sermon on the subject on June 7 whence he told the congregation:

At the Board meeting last month, the board of Beth Israel Congregation voted to join a new effort in the Jewish community called K'vod Habriot, respect for human dignity. This effort, was launched by Rabbis for Human Rights - North America, and begins as part of an interfaith effort to address one particular issue, an issue which is a critical one for our nation.

He doesn't say why BIC, apparently, stayed out of the two "interfaith effort[s]" I have mentioned above. Nor does he say what "nation"--"the Jewish people ... as a nation" or America--he is speaking of but that soon becomes evident.

The position is clear: that this country should not engage in torture of prisoners in any situation and that there should be no ambiguity to this prohibition. In the past few years, several different letters against torture have been produced, one of which was signed by hundreds of Rabbis across the political and religious spectrum. This month has been designated as Torture Awareness Month ...

When Rob Dobrusin talks about torture he means the United States and he means Americans: "... the K'vod Habriot network has been formed to make a statement to our government that United States sponsored torture is wrong and must be prohibited by law." The absence of any discussion of torture in Israel in Dobrusin's sermon, except indirectly by reference to an article by Yehezkel Dror, is striking ("torture" is not mentioned in Dror's op-ed--"When Survival of the Jewish People Is at Stake, There’s No Place for Morals").

It is striking because of the centrality of the Jewish state to Beth Israel, lit. "House of Israel". BIC is part of Conservative Judaism and here is some of what Ismar Schorsch, former chancellor of the Jewish Theological Seminary--the flagship institution of Conservative Judaism, has to say about "The Sacred Cluster: The Core Values of Conservative Judaism":

The centrality of modern Israel heads our list of core values. For Conservative Jews, as for their ancestors, Israel is not only the birthplace of the Jewish people, but also its final destiny. Sacred texts, historical experience, and liturgical memory have conspired to make it for them, in the words of Ezekiel, "the most desirable of all lands (20:6)." Its welfare is never out of mind. Conservative Jews are the backbone of Federation leadership in North America and the major source of its annual campaign. They visit Israel, send their children over a summer or for a year, and support financially every one of its worthy institutions. Israeli accomplishments on the battlefield and in the laboratory, in literature and politics, fill them with pride. Their life is a dialectic between homeland and exile. No matter how prosperous or assimilated, they betray an existential angst about anti-Semitism that denies them a complete sense of at-homeness anywhere in the diaspora.

Dobrusin echoed these remarks when he told his congregation in a sermon delivered on the most important day of the Jewish liturgical calendar that "the two most vital places of myth" in Judaism are "the State of Israel and the synagogue." He then described the "State of Israel" as "not only a haven ... but a place of inspiration for all of us" and declared that "As Israel faces difficult times, it is essential that we rally behind her to insure her survival as a Jewish state." On January 2007, he wrote in the Ann Arbor News: "Beth Israel Congregation affirms without any hesitation or equivocation the legitimacy of the existence of the State of Israel as a Jewish state". Furthermore, BIC reportedly displays the Israeli flag in the synagogue. They dissemble to visitors about JWPF. They send their kids to Israel and pose them with Israeli soldiers with the Rabbi's blessing. And when Israel turned Lebanon into a "free-fire zone" in 2006, BIC leaders responded by publishing on their web site a photo of four Israeli flags along with a statement of support for the "people of the State of Israel at this time of crisis" and stating that "We pray for the safety of those who defend Israel …"

So, Rabbi Dobrusin and BIC are not usually shy about speaking about Israel. Why, then, the recent reticence? Perhaps to speak truthfully about torture in Israel would be a shande far di goyim--an embarrassing exposure of the false pretenses of Israeli democracy and high Jewish moral standards.

Tellingly, the gist of Dobrusin's argument with Dror is not that he is entirely wrong in his premise: "When Survival of the Jewish People Is at Stake, There’s No Place for Morals." And he certainly does not object anywhere to Dror's manifest Jewish exceptionalism. Dobrusin's argument is that you can't or shouldn't openly commit to Dror's position in advance.

Dobrusin writes:

Professor Dror later says that: "... human history refutes the idealistic claim that in order to exist for long, a state, a society or people has to be moral." This, also regrettably, may be true. Unfortunately, it is not always clear that survival goes along with moral behavior for a nation or an individual.

But what his entire article misses is the difference in Jewish Law between lichatcheela and bidayavad, decisions we make "before the fact," intentional actions, and those which we must take in a given circumstance to face difficult realities.

He later says (emphasis added):

Some might ask: Doesn't making torture illegal tie the hands of our military in the event that an act of torture might possibly save thousands of Americans? Think about how we would respond if, God forbid, our family members were in danger. We would do what we thought we had to do, and then would seek to defend ourselves as having committed a justified act of self-defense. But we don't go into situations saying that morals don't matter in how we live our lives.

The implicit answer to the question Dobrusin poses is: No, "making torture illegal" does not "tie the hands of our military ..." It's obvious that he believes that torture can be "a justified act of self-defense." His beef with torture is not with torture per se but with the failure to maintain the pretense of morality--always say you're against it but torture if you have to. Not unlike the contortions of UM Regent Andrea Fischer Newman et al. this is simply a sleight of hand employed to dishonestly claim the high ground.

Not coincidentally, this is also the position the Israeli Supreme Court took when they ruled on torture in 1999 in The Public Committee Against Torture in Israel vs. The Government of Israel et al. To quote Alan Dershowitz, "the Supreme Court left open the possibility that a member of the security service who honestly believed that rough interrogation was the only means available to save lives in imminent danger could raise this [necessity] defense." This is exactly what Dobrusin has done--he has left open an ex post facto or bidayavad exception for torture.

As he explained elsewhere:

... there is a distinction in Jewish law between lichatcheela and bidayavad. Lichatcheela refers to something which is intended from the beginning. That is to say, can we plan to do a certain thing or is it prohibited? Bidayavad refers to something which is already done. Can we benefit in a certain way from something we have done for another purpose or something which we have done not knowing it was prohibited? Often times, actions which are prohibited lichacheela in Jewish law are permitted if it is in a bidayavad situation.

Torture to Dobrusin's mind is "prohibited lichacheela [sic]" but not necessarily "in a bidayavad situation" i.e., after it has already occurred. Thus, he cannot bring himself to clearly and consistently speak against torture anytime, anywhere, or for any reason. It would have been a simple matter to do so but he did not.

So, how does Dobrusin stand with respect to the "international law" he mentions? Where the Rabbi allows for torture as a "justified act of self-defense," the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment is unequivocal: "No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political in stability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture" Art. 2, Para. 2.

Rabbi Dobrusin's sermon is not a complete loss, though. After all is said and done, he arguably provides us with a fine example of the "art of moral anguish" that Barack Obama claims to have "learned ... from Jews" and that is surely worth something.

I'll close now with an aside about Yehezkel Dror's article. Much of the global Jewish community is claiming that Iran represents an existential threat to Israel. It is interesting then to read Dror saying (emphasis added):

When the requirements of existence conflict with other values, therefore, realpolitik should be given priority. From the threat of a disastrous conflict with Islamist actors such as Iran, to the necessity of maintaining distinctions between "us" and "others" in order to limit assimilation, this imperative ought to guide policymakers.

Dror just likened the "threat" posed by Iran to the "threat" of assimilation. Now, bear in mind that the title of his article is "When Survival of the Jewish People Is at Stake, There's No Place for Morals." So, how far is Dror prepared to go? He further writes:

... a people that has been regularly persecuted for 2,000 years is entitled morally, in terms of distributive justice, to be very tough in taking care of its existence, including the moral right and even duty to kill and be killed if this is essential for assuring existence — even at the cost of other values and to other people.

It requires no great leap in logic to justify killing to prevent assimilation per Dror's argument. You would kill to stop "The Holocaust," wouldn't you? Well, the "silent Holocaust"--assimilation--is "killing America's Jews," according to an op-ed by Ephraim Buchwald and published in the LA Times. But, Dror is just an isolated nut, right? Here's what his bio in the Jewish Daily Forward says:

Yehezkel Dror, the founding president of the Jewish People Policy Planning Institute, is a professor emeritus of political science at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. A recipient of the Israel Prize, he served as a member of the Winograd commission of inquiry into Israel's war with Hezbollah in 2006.

In my next post I plan to analyze the "Rabbinic Letter on Torture" signed by Rabbi Dobrusin and the "Jewish Statement Against Torture."

See also:

• Israelis No. 1 in Supporting Torture
• Jews and Torture
• Jews and Torture Update
• Chuck Don't Need No Stinkin' Facts
• Jews and Torture Update II

Labels: Beth Israel, halacha, Interfaith Council for Peace and Justice, Israel, Jewish supremacism, Jewish Witnesses for Peace and Friends, Obama, torture, US politics

I apologize, dear readers, for not reporting on this matter sooner. I have communicated now with several persons who attended the meeting and three weeks ago, a majority of the members of the Board of Directors of the Interfaith Council for Peace and Justice (ICPJ) of Ann Arbor voted to disband the organization's Middle East Task Force (METF). Led as it was by Joe Summers and Chuck Warpehoski, this heinous betrayal of the very values for which ICPJ purports to stand was not unexpected. It seems that popularity and dollars (see comment of Ian Macgregor at bottom) figure more highly than interfaith, justice, or peace in the ICPJ. Healthy doses of ignorance, dishonesty, and cowardice on the part of other Board members also contributed to the decision. In any case, now that the 'liberal' Zionists have been assuaged the cash and cooperation can flow more freely.

In May, the ICPJ Board, then called the Steering Committee, decided "to suspend the work of our Middle East Task Force while we pursue mediation." No mediation ever occurred and after a couple of preliminary meetings all pretense of a 'pursuit' was abandoned and the METF terminated. With the apparent exception of ICPJ staff member Jason Crosby, all of the attendees (of which I was one) of the pre-mediation meetings found them to be positive and productive. Two mediators were selected and a mediation proposal put forward but despite solid member support for it, mediation was nixed before it ever got started.

Below are the meeting notes of Henry Herskovitz of Jewish Witnesses for Peace and Friends.

Former METF'ers:

At approximately 1:05pm, Tuesday Oct. 10, 2006

Proposal: To disband the current Middle East Task Force and commit
ourselves to reconstitute a new group as soon as possible
By Lisa Dugdale
Second by Arlene Huff

Votes FOR:

1. Lynn Meadows
2. Joe Summers
3. Jan Wright
4. Lisa Dugdale
5. Tim Ziegler
6. Russ Fuller
7. Barbara Fuller
8. Irvin Green
9. Jason Crosby
10. Laura Spencer
11. Arlene Huff
12. Amy Rosenberg
13. Ruth Kraut
14. Chuck Warpehoski
15. Art Bublitz

Votes AGAINST:

1. Bob McMurray
2. Susan Jacobsen

Votes to ABSTAIN:

1. Odile Haber

These votes were recorded by Henry, and may not be the official tally. Irvin Green was asked his vote and confirmed his 'yea' vote.

Stream of consciousness note taking during the Go Around, prior to the vote:

Chuck: Describes Imagine group...lessons that didn't work before...Religious and ethnic diversity needed in new group. Quoted Wadad Abed: "Right people"... "don't fall into the same traps we've fallen into in the past"

Russ: We confess our failure... the time spent on this has been excessive ... there's no more time ... we should thank them and send them on their way [them = us - hh]

Irvin: If the new body is to be selected by the Board, then all Task Forces should be chosen like that ... groups should not be "hijacked"

Tim: new group needs to be truly interfaith... needs of the community - what are they? ... he "leans towards" Imagine

Laura: Way too much energy and time have been spent... likes Imagine ... should include other task forces in our decisions

Bob: favors mediation "very deeply"... ICPJ is a teaching organization ... tall order to be patient ... "faith" is what we can do together with God in the process ... METF is "OUR" name and ICPJ is identified with it

Arlene: Agrees with Russ' "failure" ... we should cut our losses ... Move on ... wants to terminate METF ... perhaps ICPJ is "not obligated" to deal with Israel/Palestine at this time

Amy: ...suspend (sic) METF

Ruth: End the METF ... to Russ: it's OK to fail ... if we mediate, who's on the 'other side'? ... people have "maligned me" ... "clean slate club" ... need breathing space

Odile: Reads from the Jerusalem Declaration on Christian Zionism [I had distributed that doc to all ...hh] ... I was maligned also, but still think we should mediate... the times now suggest that Divestment is an ok topic ... phyllis bennis says it is ... Gaza is desperate ... be practitioners of what we preach

Chuck: Mediation is driving people away ... it inhibits ICPJ ability to work on ME issues ... ad nauseum, let's refocus

Susan: My sister warned me to run away from ICPJ ... let's keep things clear

Jason: part of the mediation team "however"... practitioners of what we preach can also mean creating the space where people don't get hurt

Joe: Knew of the METF conflict before he joined ICPJ ... thought it would be an easy fix [laughter] ... I/P is core for me personally ... End METF and Reconstitute with "appointed members " on all task forces. I'm in favor of appointing members

Lynn: If we can't create peace here, how can we ever try to create peace in the world ... on the fence ... we need mediation ... but I like the Imagine Group

Lisa: need people to support each other ... METF can go out and do their own thing

Jan: "It's time to lay down the METF" ... don't have unlimited time and energy ... in favor of appointed members

Barbara: personal story of inital foray into Palestine issue way back when it wasn't on the burner

Art: We have a structure problem ... end mediation ... support appointing members

Henry: The issue has been framed thus: there's a problem dealing with ME issues, and people in the METF are the problem. The issue could have as easily been framed thus: Israel, the Jewish State, is supported by the local Jewish community. The Jewish community is part of the Interfaith community. I'm not arguing to throw them out - I identify strongly as a Jew - but instead use Bob's words to "own" the Jewish community, to recognize that they are acting badly in supporting Israel, and attempt to change that behavior. Shift the paradigm.

Bill: There has never been any communication between ICPJ and METF

Ian [Macgregor, the fund rasing expert]: The conflict with METF is affecting fundraising abilities. People are concerned about the conflict ... they ask what is the rift all about?

Labels: Interfaith Council for Peace and Justice, Wadad Abed, Warpehoski, Zionism

HURON VALLEY GREENS
548 S. Main St., Ann Arbor, MI 48104
http://www.hvgreens.org ph. (734) 663-3555


Adopted by consensus at the regular business meeting of the Huron Valley Greens on May 8, 2006.

WHEREAS the stated mission of the Ann Arbor-based Michigan Peaceworks (hereafter "Peaceworks") is: "Peaceworks is a grassroots organization dedicated to peace, democracy, civil rights, and civil liberties. To that end, we undertake education and action on local and state levels to influence U.S. foreign and domestic policy;" and,

WHEREAS the stated "major goal areas" of Peaceworks include: providing "accurate information and analysis about the 'War on Terrorism' and nonviolent alternatives;" fostering and promoting "a viable community organizing model (a philosophy, style of work, and goals that serve to mobilize community action);" and creating and maintaining "a safe space for dissent;" and,

WHEREAS the Ann Arbor-based Peaceworks is one of Michigan's largest organizations dedicated to peace; and,

WHEREAS based upon the overlap of Green values with the purported values of Peaceworks, there is likely to be a significant number of Greens attracted to or already supporting Peaceworks; and,

WHEREAS, based upon the testimony of persons with direct, personal knowledge of the matters described below, the Huron Valley Greens make the following findings of fact:

1. Peaceworks' predecessor, the Ann Arbor Area Committee for Peace (AAACP), was nominally a membership-based organization.
2. A struggle over internal democracy in Peaceworks (then AAACP) came to a head in late 2002 and early 2003 after Steering Committee members overwhelmingly voted against and refused to implement the group's "Call for Peace in the Middle East."
3. The Call was the result of months of work by a duly appointed subcommittee and was approved by 78% of voting members before the Steering Committee's action and committed the organization to supporting "the Israeli and Palestinian peacemakers ... who call on their fellow citizens to renounce violence" and "solidarity with all those working for peace in the Middle East."
4. The row led to the resignation of two Steering Committee members and the Call was removed from the Peaceworks web site in 2004-2005.
5. Sometime in 2004-2005, Peaceworks dissolved its membership and is now governed by a self-selected, as opposed to member-selected, Board of Directors.
6. In 2004, Peaceworks staged a march and rally on the first anniversary of the US invasion of Iraq and Peaceworks organizers imposed a gag rule on discussion of the Israel-Palestine conflict by invited speakers.
7. On short notice Peaceworks retracted its speaking invitation to Teresa Al-Saraji, the mother of a US soldier in Iraq, apparently, due to her association with the Blue Triangle Network, an immigrant rights group.
8. Ann Arbor City Council member Joan Lowenstein, a prominent local Zionist, was allowed to sit on the dais and speak at the 2004 rally.
9. Peaceworks has refused to endorse or publicize the City of Ann Arbor Human Rights Commission’s "Resolution in Support of Ending U.S. Military Support for Israel" and did not support an Israel divestment resolution put before the Michigan Student Assembly in March, 2005.
10. Peaceworks is not supporting the current campaign by University of Michigan faculty, students and staff to get the University Regents to appoint, under an apartheid-era Regents resolution, an advisory committee to investigate whether divestment from Israel is warranted.
11. This divestment effort has been endorsed by, among others: Bishop Thomas J. Gumbleton, Ann Arbor's Interfaith Council for Peace and Justice, Michigan Peace Team, Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Mairead Corrigan Maguire, and Nobel Peace Prize Nominee Kathy Kelly.
12. The 9/11 Commission Report and others have identified uncritical US support of Israel as a major source of anger and strife in the Arab and Muslim worlds.
13. There is significant evidence that the interests of Israel were a major factor in the Bush administration's decision to invade Iraq in 2003.
14. In 2005, then-President of Peaceworks Eric Van De Vort physically assaulted a fellow peace activist at the September 24th Peaceworks march because he didn't like the sign the man was holding.
15. According to the victim, who asked that his name not be disclosed, Van De Vort repeatedly shoved him, "slammed his body" into him, and physically impeded his attempts to evade Van De Vort.
16. The victim said he repeatedly asked Van De Vort to stop but he continued his attack until Peaceworks Board member Nazih Hassan intervened.
17. An eyewitness to the assault, Dr. Thomas Kaeding, has confirmed details of the incident.
18. Responding to a September 28th e-mail message sent to Van De Vort, Peaceworks staff, and the rest of the Board members, Hassan confirmed his knowledge of the incident and of the victim's identity. His only other response was: "If he has a complaint he can send it directly to the Board." Van De Vort and other Board members did not respond to another inquiry sent on October 8th
19. Neither Van De Vort nor Peaceworks has ever publicly acknowledged, nor apologized to the victim for, the incident; and,

WHEREAS "Greens believe in direct participation by all people in the environmental, political, and economic decisions that affect their lives;" and,

WHEREAS "Greens promote nonviolent methods to oppose practices and policies with which we disagree, and guide our actions toward lasting community and global peace;" and,

WHEREAS "Greens support a restructuring of social, political and economic institutions away from a system which is controlled by and mostly benefits the powerful few, to a democratic, less bureaucratic system;" and,

WHEREAS the "Green Party of the United States (GPUS) publicly calls for divestment from and boycott of the State of Israel until such time as the full individual and collective rights of the Palestinian people are realized;" and,

WHEREAS to "maximize the effect of the Green Party's support for divestment and boycott of Israel … The party calls on all civil society institutions and organizations around the world to implement a comprehensive divestment and boycott program. Further, the party calls on all governments to support this program and to implement state level boycotts."

BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that the Huron Valley Greens find that Peaceworks' structure and practices are inconsistent with its own stated mission and "major goal areas;" and,

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Huron Valley Greens find that Peaceworks' structure and practices are inconsistent with Green values and the policy of the GPUS; and,

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Huron Valley Greens discourage Greens and other people of conscience from supporting—financially and otherwise—Peaceworks until such time as it:

1. Becomes a truly grassroots organization with a membership empowered to actively participate in Peaceworks' decision-making process; and,
2. Publicly supports and works for a just peace in Palestine including:
1. Full equality for Arab and other non-Jewish citizens of Israel; and,
2. An end to the Israeli occupation of East Jerusalem, Gaza, the West Bank, and the Golan Heights; and,
3. The return of Palestinian refugees to their homes and property in accordance with UN General Assembly Resolution 194.
3. Publicly acknowledges, and apologizes for, the mistreatment of Teresa Al-Saraji and of the victim of Eric Van De Vort; and,
   

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution will be sent by the Recording Secretary by postal mail to Peaceworks; and,

BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Huron Valley Greens encourage the Green Party of Michigan to take actions consistent with Green values and this resolution to publicly censure Peaceworks.

Labels: Green Party, Michigan Peaceworks, Zionism

The following statement with minor changes was read to the audience at the recent annual meeting of Interfaith Council for Peace and Justice:

My name is [redacted], I am a member of the Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Ann Arbor and I have been asked by the Middle East Task Force to read the following statement:

Dear Friends,

Last October, the Steering Committee dissolved the ICPJ's Middle East Task Force. Nevertheless, the task force has continued to meet, primarily to pursue mediation with the ICPJ. Over the last many months, the Steering Committee and ICPJ staff have used the ICPJ's website and newsletter to tell their side of the story, we are grateful for the few moments granted to us tonight to tell our side.

In last month's newsletter, ICPJ members were told that the decision to disband the METF came "After two and half years of trying to resolve conflicts." Yet, last March an Executive Committee proposal referred only to "a year-long process of seeking common ground." Where the extra year came from we do not know. However, as we stated in April of last year: "We would welcome such a 'process;' however, from our perspective nothing resembling that has taken place, so far." In that same written statement we said:

We have acted in good faith all along and we affirm our willingness to continue to do so and also to seek common ground. We are also willing "to sit at the table together" with anyone who shares, as we do, the ICPJ's core values. Thus, we feel that mediation or some form of structured dialogue is the option that the SC should pursue concerning the METF at this time. We remain hopeful of the good faith of the SC, on this point.

In May 2006, the Steering Committee voted "to suspend the work of our Middle East Task Force while we pursue mediation." No mediation ever occurred and after a couple of preliminary meetings the METF was terminated. With the apparent exception of ICPJ staff member Jason Crosby, all of the attendees of the pre-mediation meetings found them to be positive and productive. Two mediators were selected and a mediation proposal put forward. At a special ICPJ membership meeting held on September 28th a solid majority (17-to-9) of ICPJ members polled by the ICPJ staff favored mediation. However, despite real progress and solid member support mediation was nixed before it ever got started.

Also in last month's newsletter it was asserted that the METF was disbanded because its members "did not share a number of ICPJ's core values including honoring diversity, taking an Interfaith approach to our work, and being committed to non-violence." These claims are all patently false. When they first emerged last year we responded to the SC immediately in writing noting that, for example, at our April 4, 2006 meeting, nine of fifteen members in attendance were "affiliated with a local faith community, i.e. a church, mosque, or synagogue." In answer to a follow-up question, three of the unaffiliated Jews indicated that they would be affiliated with a synagogue or temple if they could find one that was not Zionist.

Also, at that time, the METF was headed by the only Muslim member of the ICPJ Steering Committee--a man who resigned in protest after the METF was suspended. The truth is that before it was disbanded by the Steering Committee, the METF was probably one of the most diverse ICPJ task forces in terms of religion, ethnicity, and gender. Concerning non-violence, in our first response to this charge last year we affirmed, in writing, "our commitment to the core values of the ICPJ, which include nonviolence." The METF has never endorsed or condoned violence and only supported nonviolent efforts for justice and peace. We leave it to you to ponder why some ICPJ leaders continue to traffic in falsehoods.

Finally, we are committed to honoring and working with difference but we part paths with those who would compromise or abandon the ICPJ's core values of justice, advocacy for the oppressed, and honesty out of racism, greed, or cowardice. In his book Israel and Palestine: Out of the Ashes, Jewish theologian Marc Ellis describes Constantinian Judaism as: "militarized Judaism and Jewish life ... where Jewish energies, creativity, wealth and political power in Israel and the U.S. are placed in service to the [Israeli] state." The members of the METF--Jewish and non-Jewish--support justice and peace for all Jews, Muslims, Christians, and others in the Middle East and we, therefore, oppose Constantinian Judaism and its project of Jewish supremacy in Palestine. We see Constantinian religion, i.e. "militarized religiosity" in any form as incompatible with the core values of ICPJ.

This is the crux of the matter, this is why the METF was disbanded and we urge all ICPJ members to take steps to see that the ICPJ becomes faithful to its mission and core values. Just as people of good faith opposed Constantinian Christianity in the service of South African apartheid we believe today they must oppose Constantinian Judaism in the service of Israeli Zionism. Neither faithfulness nor justice nor peace is to be achieved by sacrificing advocacy and justice for Palestinians on the altar of interfaith unity with Constantinian Judaism.

We leave you with the words of Elie Wiesel and William Sloane Coffin. First, Elie Wiesel: "We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented. Sometimes we must interfere." This is from his 1986 Nobel Prize acceptance speech. In his book Credo William Sloane Coffin wrote: "Hope criticizes what is, hopelessness rationalizes it. Hope resists, hopelessness adapts." Thank you for your attention.

Labels: anti-Zionism, Interfaith Council for Peace and Justice