Gerald Ford 12-29-2006

29, December 2006 Gerald Ford

It is customary to look favorably on the life of a demised public figure. Thus, the accolades accompanying President Ford come as no surprise. Documents made public after his death now reveal that it was Fords’ close friendship that was instrumental in his decision to pardon Richard Nixon. It is also been revealed that Ford vigorously opposed the Iraq war. It is a great pity such high profile politicians choose to remain silent  and remain disconnected from the public debate allowing the Bush administration to railroad the American public in what can arguably described as the largest foreign policy debacle in US history. 

Also, largely unreported, was Gerald Ford’s decision to support the Indonesian invasion of East Timor which resulted in the slaughter of one-third of the Timorese population. Ford and his secretary of state, Henry Kissinger, offered unconditional military support to the Indonesian government and they appeared largely unconcerned of the appalling human tragedy that resulted from their decision (see www.nsarchive.org.) It is also prescient that Ford selected key advisors in his administration that were instrumental in shaping Bush’s current Iraq war - Donald Rumsfeld served initially as his chief of staff and then subsequently as Secretary of Defense. Dick Cheney also served as Ford’s chief of staff. Paul Wolfowitz served in the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency. However, Ford deserves credit for ordering the final withdrawal of U.S. troops in Vietnam and offering amnesty to Vietnam era draft resisters.

Jimmy Carter 12-17-2006

17, December 2006 Jimmy Carter
It is troubling that so many letters have recently appeared vilifying Jimmy Carter who had the moral courage to expose the appalling plight of the oppressed Palestinians in his recent book, ‘Peace not Apartheid’. Carter has justly earned the reputation of one of the foremost humanitarians for his tireless work with “Habitats for Humanity’, monitoring elections in newly emerging democracies, and for his efforts in bringing about a peaceful settlement with Israel and Egypt for which he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. 

Many of your readers are clearly outraged and stung with the dreaded label ‘apartheid’. Perhaps these same people could offer a more palatable description for Israeli polices which are aimed at destroying the means of survival of the Palestinian people by demolishing their homes, the centuries old olive trees, theft of their land and water, forcing them to stand for hours at check points facing Israeli tanks and guns and imposing an economic blockade .which is driving them to the brink of starvation. It is encouraging that more and more courageous Jews such as Rabbi Michael Lerner are voicing their support for Jimmy Carter. I urge readers to view the searing testimonies of former members of the Israeli Defense Force who confirm the brutal horrors heaped on the Palestinians (see ww.peaceworkmagazine.org/pwork/0410/041008.htm)
.
Finally, it speaks volumes when another great humanitarian with impeccable credentials, Rev. Desmond Tutu, was denied a visitor’s visa by Israel to conduct a fact finding mission to investigate the recent slaughter of Palestinian children.   

Robert Gates 12-5-2006

5, December 2006 Robert Gates

Listening to the confirmation hearings of Robert Gates, one might have assumed the Democrats were roundly defeated on November 7. So tepid were the questions, it appears that senators of both side of the aisle were suffering from self-induced amnesia. The Iran-Contra scandal which involved the sale of arms to Iran and subsequently to our good friend, Saddam Hussein, which should have resulted in criminal indictments of Gates and his superiors (William Casey, Ronald Reagan et al), were never raised. We the ‘good guys’ were supplying chemical and other weapons to Saddam Hussein which he used against the Iranians and Kurds for which he has been now been indicted as a war criminal 

The flirtations and demonizing of foreign leaders by our policy makers often resemble the eye catching headlines of the dalliances of movie stars prominently displayed at supermarket check stands. Forgotten or largely ignored were Gates close ties to defense contractors which raise potential conflict of interest concerns. Most important, Gates prior service with the CIA suggests that he is willing to manipulate intelligence to support administration policy decisions, aping the behavior of the discredited George Tenet. The Democrats have committed a monumental blunder in not demanding the hearings be delayed until January. This would have given them more time to gather critical evidence and summon witnesses to determine the suitability of Robert Gates as defense secretary.

Letter to Rep, John Conyers & Carter 12-3-2006

3, December 2006            Letter to Rep, John Conyers & Carter
Dear Rep. John Conyers,
I am writing to express outrage of your remarks criticizing Jimmy Carter’s use of the word ‘apartheid’ in his new book, “Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid." It was reported that as the incoming chair of the House Judiciary Committee, you urged Carter to change the title of the book, which you described as "offensive and wrong." I fear you and many other public officials continue to buckle under the pressure of the hugely influential Jewish lobby, AIPAC, which continues to silence critics of Israel’s polices. There is little doubt that such pressure was used to drag our nation to its unprovoked attack on Iraq with its attendant disastrous consequences. AIPAC and its US supporters, applied similar pressures  in silencing critics of Israel’s attack on Lebanon using US taxpayer funded weaponry. A cursory glance of a map of the Occupied Territories speaks volumes of the dispossession of Palestinian land. What is even more egregious is that our tax money has been used and continues to be used to oppress the Palestinians.  My letter to the local press on this important issue follows:   
3, December 2006,              Jimmy Carter
President Carter, a Nobel Peace Prize winner and architect of the Camp David Accords, is to be applauded for his moral courage exposing the apartheid policies of Israel. Carter is intimately familiar with the long simmering Middle East conflict and his insightful knowledge and comments demand serious attention. In his new book, "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid.", Carter accuses Israel of practicing institutionalized discrimination against the native indigenous population which in many ways exceeds the scourge of apartheid formerly practiced by white South Africa. Carter laments the self-imposed conspiracy of silence which permits such appalling injustice to continue. He comments, “oppression of the Palestinians by Israeli forces in the Occupied Territories is horrendous. And it's not something that has been acknowledged or even discussed in this country.” Carter argues that the intended purpose of oppressing the Palestinians and driving them to utter despair is to encourage them to leave their ancestral lands to provide more land for their colonial oppressors. He writes, "Israel's continued control and colonization of Palestinian land have been the primary obstacles to a comprehensive peace agreement in the Holy Land." Carter reserves some of his harshest comments on the apartheid wall and the complete strangulation of Gaza. Carter castigates the role of the United States “which is squandering international prestige and goodwill and intensifying global anti-American terrorism by unofficially condoning or abetting the Israeli confiscation and colonization of Palestinian territories." His views are vigorously echoed by another Nobel laureate, Desmond Tutu of South Africa. 
A similar letter was sent to Speaker Nancy Pelosi,  and a letter of appreciation to former President Jimmy Carter on 3   December 2006

Letter to President Carter 12-3-2006

3, December 2006          Letter to President Carter
Dear President Carter,
I am writing to express my profound appreciation for the moral courage you have shown in focusing the public spotlight on the appalling plight of the Palestinians in your latest book, “Palestine Peace Not Apartheid”. Predictably, many public figures, especially high-profile Democrats, were critical of your use of the word apartheid. However, ‘apartheid’ is a very apt word to accurately describe the appalling injustice, squalor, and brutal occupation endured by the Palestinians. Sadly, these politicians were more in mortal fear of offending the all-powerful Israel Jewish Lobby and its possible impact on their re-election prospects than advancing the cause of peace and justice. 

The diagram of the occupied territories with its numerous check points and apartheid wall, outlined in your book, encapsulates the enormous injustice heaped on the Palestinians by their colonial oppressors, the Israelis. It is unconscionable that the tools of oppression are financed by our tax dollars.  This brings up a question which perhaps you hitherto omitted in your public discussions of your book, namely do not oppressed people have a fundamental right to resist oppression and occupation?  Indeed the same question is applicable to our immoral and illegal occupation of Iraq. 

With all due respect, I do fundamentally differ with your characterization of Israel being a democracy where all its inhabitants, Jews and Arabs enjoy the same basic rights. This myth was pierced very effectively by Susan Nathan, an Israeli Jew who is on worldwide crusade to expose the sad plight of Arab Israelis, in her widely acclaimed book, ‘Other Side of Israel’. 

A few additional examples of the glaring disparities of Arabs and Jews living in Israel.
All Jews throughout the world enjoy all the privileges of citizenship in Israel – a privilege denied to the indigenous people, the Palestinians, For example, Avigdor Lieberman's, Minister in charge of "Strategic Threats to Israel, was born in a remote province of the former Soviet Union but was bestowed with all the rights of full Israeli citizenship under Israel’s law of return, when he moved to Israel as an adult.
Incredibly, Israel is not a state defined by its inhabitants but Jews worldwide. Its land is owned by Jews worldwide not by its inhabitants. Non-Jews are forbidden from access to state land which they formerly owned.  

Israel's newly revised nationality law, similarly, prohibits Palestinian citizens of Israel from marrying Palestinians from the occupied territories and living with their spouses in Israel. The same law does not apply to Jewish Israelis who marry Jewish settlers living in the occupied territories. Interestingly, similar legislation had been proposed in South Africa at the peak of Apartheid, only to be rejected by that country's Supreme Court. Israel's nationality law, however, was endorsed by Israel's High Court just this year.

I have included several letters I wrote to the local press on the subject of Israel’s relentless persecution of the Palestinians, including one acknowledging your recent publication. Once again, my sincere thanks for your noble efforts to bring about a just and lasting settlement in the simmering Middle East conflict.

Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid 12-3-2006

3, December 2006                 Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid

Dear Rep. John Conyers,

I am writing to express outrage of your remarks criticizing Jimmy Carter’s use of the word ‘apartheid’ in his new book, “Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid." It was reported that as the incoming chair of the House Judiciary Committee, you urged Carter to change the title of the book, which you described as "offensive and wrong." I fear you and many other public officials continue to buckle under the pressure of the hugely influential Jewish lobby, AIPAC, which continues to silence critics of Israel’s polices. There is little doubt that such pressure was used to drag our nation to its unprovoked attack on Iraq with its attendant disastrous consequences. AIPAC and its US supporters, applied similar pressures  in silencing critics of Israel’s attack on Lebanon using US taxpayer funded weaponry. A cursory glance of a map of the Occupied Territories speaks volumes of the dispossession of Palestinian land. What is even more egregious is that our tax money has been used and continues be used to oppress the Palestinians.  

My letter to the local press on this important issue follows:   

 3, December 2006                  Jimmy Carter Book critical of Israel

President Carter, a Nobel Peace Prize winner and architect of the Camp David Accords, is to be applauded for his moral courage exposing the apartheid policies of Israel. Carter is intimately familiar with the long simmering Middle East conflict and his insightful knowledge and comments demand serious attention. In his new book, "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid.", Carter accuses Israel of practicing institutionalized discrimination against the native indigenous population which in many ways exceeds the scourge of apartheid formerly practiced by white South Africa. Carter laments the self-imposed conspiracy of silence which permits such appalling injustice to continue. He comments, “oppression of the Palestinians by Israeli forces in the Occupied Territories is horrendous. And it's not something that has been acknowledged or even discussed in this country.” Carter argues that the intended purpose of oppressing the Palestinians and driving them to utter despair is to encourage them to leave their ancestral lands to provide more land for their colonial oppressors. He writes, "Israel's continued control and colonization of Palestinian land have been the primary obstacles to a comprehensive peace agreement in the Holy Land." Carter reserves some of his harshest comments on the apartheid wall and the complete strangulation of Gaza. Carter castigates the role of the United States “which is squandering international prestige and goodwill and intensifying global anti-American terrorism by unofficially condoning or abetting the Israeli confiscation and colonization of Palestinian territories." His views are vigorously echoed by another Nobel laureate, Desmond Tutu of South Africa.

A similar letter was sent to Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and a letter of appreciation to former President Jimmy Carter on 3   December 2006

Case for Impeachment of Bush & Close advisors 12-1-2006

1, December 2006 Case for Impeachment of Bush & Close advisors

Elizabeth de la Vega (EdlV), a former federal prosecutor, offers a compelling case for the impeachment of George Bush and his close advisors, in her new book, ‘United States vs. George W. Bush et al’.  EdlV argues that these officials committed high crimes by deliberately defrauding the United States. To buttress her case, EdlV has amassed an impressive set of testimonies from witnesses, public speeches of the accused, White House press briefings, interviews, official documents including Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and the 9/11 Commission. After examining all the data, EdlV concludes there is probable cause that the accused are guilty of violating Title 18, United States Code, Section 371.  EdlV is certainly not alone in presenting her arguments for impeachment. Her views are vigorously supported by experts such as Barbara Olshansky, David Lindorff, Michael Ratner, John Dean, and Elizabeth Holtzman. They collectively argue that President Bush knowingly misled the American public and the US Congress in waging an illegal, unprovoked war on Iraq and thus violated his oath of office to uphold the law of the land. 
The case for impeachment will require courage and political will from our lawmakers. Failure to hold the President and his advisors fully accountable will serve as a dangerous precedent, allowing high government officials to continue to act recklessly and with complete impunity.   Our lawmakers need to hear from we the People.  

Elizabeth de la Vega is a former federal prosecutor with more than 20 years of experience. During her tenure, she was a member of the Organized Crime Strike Force and Chief of the San Jose Branch of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Northern District of California. She may be contacted at ElizabethdelaVega@Verizon.net.