genocide – from the bog

BOG NEWS FOR APRIL ’24

Posted on April 24, 2024 by boggmann

THE DEMOCRATIC CITY COUNCIL REFUSES TO CONSIDER A RESOLUTION CONDEMNING GENOCIDE

In perhaps one of their most shameful moves (and there is a long list of those) the all “Democrat” Mayor and Council of Tucson voted 5-1 to refuse to even consider any resolution — courageously advocated by Ward 1 council member Lane Santa Cruz — for a ceasefire on the relentless bombing of militarily occupied and starving people in Gaza by an Israeli apartheid regime intent on the ethnic “cleansing” of indigenous peoples of the region.

When I heard about the proposed resolution I offered to bet anyone with15-1 odds that the issue would never pass. No one, wisely, took me up on my offer. In fact, it was only due to the consistently strong advocacy of Tucson’s peace community at the council’s call to the audience (at every meeting in the last 5 months) that the item was even placed on the agenda and that was only for discussion of whether to even consider it, showing once again, that our political “leaders” only do the minimum when they are forced to do so by public pressure. The council were forced to face the public pressure and explain why they wouldn’t consider a call for a ceasefire to the ongoing genocide. Each member of the council also revealed much during the discussion (where they try to discuss why they shouldn’t be discussing the topic!).

With true sheep-like acquiescence to the diktats of the two-party duopoly and their Wall Street arms profiteers, the majority mumbled and bumbled their way to try to justify the unjustifiable. Bewailing the “divisiveness” that the issue has caused, the majority did what they do best: they ran and hid. As skimpily articulated in the official City of Tucson official minutes, that after “introductory comments by Mayor Romero…”

“Council Member Lee … outlined her thoughts and beliefs saying the matter was complicated, nuanced and quite divisive for any one statement to capture all of the individual views of the Mayor and Council, as each one of them had the ability to express their position on the issue…” and that “as a Governing Body, they chose not to schedule or move forward with any resolution, and instead leave room for each of them to express and advocate their own positions if and when they see fit.”

“Leave room” to grant them the right to use their First Amendment rights. The official record does not actually reflect the real record on the meeting, as anyone who watches it will see (a link is provided below for access).

As someone who has not supported council member Lane Santa Cruz (LSC) in the past, I must admit I am duly impressed by her very personal account of why she supports a ceasefire resolution in spite of her Evangelical background and the pro-Israeli advocacy of her family, including trips to Israel, where people were taught that Jews were “the chosen people” but Muslims were not. She talked about her spiritual evolution away from the Judeo-Christian beliefs (yes, there too I am with you there sister!) and why the proclamation about “NEVER AGAIN” should apply to all people as opposed to a “fascist manipulation of the holocaust.”

LSC also mentioned that over 70 other cities have passed a ceasefire resolution (including the courageous City of South Tucson) and rightly called it a “disservice” not to take a stand against the “genocidal war that continues without accountability.”

The only self-identified Jewish member of the council, Paul Cunningham, got somewhat emotional when addressing the issue. He said each week his thoughts changed on the issue, how comments about “Zionism being a failure” made him feel that people were denying the Jewish Holocaust (?). He spoke of the emotional trauma he experienced with the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin and how that derailed the peace process(by an Israeli Zionist who would probably fit right in to the current Netanyahu one). One can see and feel Cunningham’s anguish on the issue, possibly because he was aware that he, as the only Jew on the council, might have influenced enough of the other council members to vote differently if he took a stand closer to his fellow co-religionists like those of “Jewish Voices For Peace” — instead refusing to take a stand in the face of genocide. Interestingly he was also the only one who didn’t believe the issue was now over.

Cunningham, suggesting that this was not the end of the issue, and that much more dialog is needed from the different sides of the community to “find a way to do a resolution together” since “we have to take a stand at some point.” These suggestions were ignored by a Mayor and Council that clearly does not want to ever talk about the issue again. But the man at least seemed to be open to further discussion. If so, he should be taken up on the offer.

Ward 5 member Richard Fimbres — who makes Diane Feinstein seem quaintly coherent — participated electronically, as he has done for several years, clearly to hide his obvious incapacities. While in the past the city staff’s recited transcription of his words duly edited (or liberally interpreted) to make minimal sense, his comments this time couldn’t be converted to anything intelligible, other than the comment “I support Lane…” before some unintelligible blather followed. The official record says he voted against LSC, but that is not what he said, at least not with the few words that could be understood. But Fimbres is little more than an oblivious wall flower, another toady who is there just to provide the majority with an extra vote, even when he doesn’t actually provide it as in this case. It is always amazing what the local press continues to intentionally ignore the obvious about Fimbres. Would they ignore his incapacities if he were a not a Democrat? Or does such a question make me a right-winger???

Mayor Romero took the mic and spewed forth the most inane pontifications that even superseded her usual lame-ass condescending sophistry. The main theme “La Reina de Chukson” employed would be echoed by each council crony: it is all “too divisive” … “too touchy” … “too complex” … “too nuanced” for them to take a stand against genocide. While La Reina talked about “the urgency of the moment” and “the crisis at hand” which “needs to end” because the “innocent are suffering,” she still opposed the resolution. Shouldn’t “thoughts and prayers” be enough? (Ask a starving child in Gaza).

La Reina justified her voting against genocide because supporting the resolution might offend some sensitive people — that by proclaiming her opposition to massive and indiscriminate bombing of civilians and total destruction of their neighborhoods, the forced displacement of over a million poor people, the intentional imposition of famine on a defenseless people, that to oppose all this could “trigger” some “hurt” for some people by taking such a stand! No, she is not talking about the “triggers” of the IDF).

This reminds me of when the great liberal icon, President Franklin Roosevelt, refused to take in exiled Jews escaping Hitler’s Germany because highlighting the attempted extermination might somehow encourage anti-semitism! So many Jewish refugees were sent back to Germany and the death camps.

(See the book: The Jews Should Keep Quiet: Franklin D. Roosevelt, Rabbi Stephen S. Wise, and the Holocaust by Rafael Medoff).

But the prize for the most embarrassing revelation was from Ward 3 puff-cake Keven Dahl who opened up with:

“I want to echo what you said Mayor, and just say ‘ditto.’ Which I often do after the Mayor speaks…”

As Chicanos say: “sin vergüenza.” What was Dahl’s main reason to oppose taking a stand against mass murder of tens of thousands of innocent Palestinians? Because, he said, making such a statement might “piss off some people.” Ah! What courage and conviction! God forbid he show some leadership instead of fear of criticism. (Perhaps he is angling for some AIPAC money in his next election? He may need it). Anyway, the Ward 3 councilman now has a new name: DITTO DAHL! Whatever the Queen says, he will bow to.

The majority of this council would probably have told John Brown and Frederick Douglass to keep their mouths shut about slavery — you know, so as not to offend any snowflakes out there. After all, slavery (like genocide) is a very “complex” and “nuanced” issue that is difficult to take a clear side on without creating divisiveness, ¿qué no?

Hopefully, the progressives left in Tucson will ditch their rose-colored glasses they have been gazing through with this council — but don’t hold your breath. If massive subsidies to their developer friends (through GPLET tax abatements), along with the utter lack of affordable housing stipulations for new development, the continued Rio Nuevo rip-off (money for everything: but housing), the absurd transportation plans clearly designed by mad men (and women), the continued lack of support for neighborhoods, massive pot-holed roads and crumbling infrastructure, and the council’s blatant disrespect for their city workers (from cops to bus drivers): if all of these things (and more) have not woken up the woke crowd here, their ignoring genocide is probably not going to change these D party sycophants either. From Genocide Joe Biden to Ditto Dahl, the pattern is the same. Obey the masters.

Of course it is not just Democrats who whore themselves out to AIPAC and other lobbyists. Both the national leaders of the Dem/GOP duopoly in the House of Representatives just voted to send another $95 billion to promote our proxy war with Russia in the Ukraine, another $26 billion to promote more genocide in Palestine, and — for good measure — an extra $8 billion to rattle our sabers against China over Taiwan. Because, you know it’s not like we need any money here right? So the Democrats on our city council match the warmongering partners in D.C. — at least all of their priorities are clear and consistent. And they all will all have tons of money from the corporate military industrial complex to run vigorous campaigns against any challengers.

Of course, this cowardly council decision is not the first or even most significant negative influence by the Israeli lobby in Tucson, just the latest. As outlined in the book “They Dare To Speak Out — People and Institutions Confront Israel’s Lobby”by former Congressman Paul Findley, the Ol’ Pueblo gets its own full chapter (8) entitled “Tucson: Case Study in Intimidation.”

Describing in detail how “Tucson’s long ordeal constitutes a noteworthy case study of the unrelenting commitment and resourcefulness of pro-Israel activists at the community level” he highlights a three year attack against the U.A.’s Near Eastern Center “that would culminate in the barring of outreach materials from local public schools and the resignation of the center’s director. The attack, orchestrated by local Jewish community leaders, succeeded despite the finding of a panel of nationally know Middle East scholars that charges of anti-Israel bias in the program were groundless.”

It is an amazingly interesting story, that anyone interested should research. It is clear by the council vote that the Israeli lobby in Tucson is still strong and effective in getting their way: even intimidating supposed liberals against condemning the genocide against a poor and defenseless people.

The Findley book mentions members of the TUSD board played an important part, including then board member Raul Grijalva. As indicated in the book, “it was no surprise when the Tucson Jewish community singled out for recognition several of the people prominent in the school district’s decision: Eva Bacal and Raul Grijalva.” Expenses paid trips to Israel followed.

In fact, if anyone checked (that is, if we had any semblance of a real news service here), a great number of our elected officials have probably gone on “free” junkets to Israel. (Funny how they never come back and talk about settler colonialism). It might be interesting to know how many of the Arizona legislators got trips to Israel also voted to make it illegal for Arizonan’s to support the boycott, divestment, and sanctions movement against Israeli products. (You can boycott Tucson, or Arizona, or the USA, but American’s are prohibited from boycotting Israel, thanks to our legislature).

So is the “special relationship” that Tucson has with Israel a factor in the appointment of the new city manager? Read on…

———————

THE NEW CITY MANAGER AND THE SHADY DEAL

Interestingly, it looks like the newly-appointed City Manager may already have some experience in dealing with the Israelis…

Before being the newly appointed Tucson City Manager Tim Thomure was one of the members of the Arizona Water Infrastructure Financing Authority (WIFA) who voted to approve Gov. Doug Ducey‘s midnight/backroom deal to issue a NO BID (non-competitive) contract to pay the Israeli-based IDE Technologies $5.5 billion to desalinate and pump water 200 miles from Puerto Peñasco, Mexico to Phoenix.

Quoting from a series of articles by Tony Davis of the ADS (bold and underlined emphasis mine):

“The water board agreed to start discussions with Israeli-based IDE Technologies with the authority serving as a financial backstop, asking the authority to put $750 million of $1 billion the Arizona Legislature appropriated for water augmentation projects into escrow … though the new board lacks criteria for how it will judge such ideas. The plant is proposed by a consortium of companies, including IDE and Goldman Sachs…

WIFA, changed its stance in the face of stinging criticism of its board’s December vote from a wide variety of people and interest groups. Legislators of both parties, environmentalists, Sonoran officials and other “public interest” organizations had decried they felt was a rush to judgment on the IDE proposal.

Board chairman David Beckham said at the time that the board needed to move quickly because the Arizona Commerce Authority Director, Sandra Watson, told him there was “urgency involved” to get the project moving. It turned out that much of the urgency stemmed from a desire by IDE officialsto garner a sign of support from the board the day before company officials were to submit a formal proposal to the Bureau of Land Management for review because the pipeline was to run through some BLM land.

But the board’s speedy action sparked suspicion among legislators and others that the arrangement smacked of a “backroom deal.” That was something legislative leaders had sought to avoid when they agreed in 2021 to spend up to $1 billion on building big water augmentation projects along with $200 million on water conservation projects.

Not only was the board affected by the public sentiment toward its speedy consideration of the IDE proposal last December, some board members agreed with the public’s view that the process was moving too fast, said board member Tim Thomure, who is [was] a deputy Tucson city manager and former Tucson Water director.

“I don’t think that anyone from the board would disagree with the public view that this seems rushed and we don’t know the rules of the game,” Thomure told the Star. “How could the board act on this proposal? We’d barely been seated as a board. We didn’t have an executive director. We had no direct policies or procedures. We responded to what was solicited to us. We put it in on a path that would lead to it getting vetted…The board members were in the same position as the public, with no prior knowledge of this proposal till the week it was submitted.”

Asked why the board would approve a plan to negotiate with IDE if he and other board members felt it was rushed, Thomure replied that the board had crafted what members thought was a path to acknowledge that proposal, “but not commit to anything and also to have the ability to consider it when the time was right… It turns out out now it’s better to put it into a process for establishing all proposals.”

Gee, Tim, do ya really think an open public process might be better than a back room deal? Are you sure now?

The intrepid Tony Davis notes: “Sen. Lisa Otondo, a Yuma Democrat who said the speed at which the project is moving “is completely irresponsible,” and “shows an utter lack of transparency and reeks of backroom deals,” and pointing out that the proposal was “lacking any detailed analysis of the project’s economics or environmental impacts…”

Karl Flessa, a University of Arizona retired geosciences professor who has studied the Colorado River’s ecology for 30 years, said the push for this project “seems to be an effort to get priority for considerationof this proposal without adequate review of the technology… It will scare away competing proposals. At best, this resolution is premature. It commits (the authority) to provide its staff to very substantial effortsto clear enormous hurdles facing this project.”

Thanks to people like Lisa Otondo and Karl Flessa — and the professional journalism of Tony Davis — the public objections have forced the state agency to change course and now seek open bids from all entities interested in building water-augmentation projects. You know, like a fair and competitive open-bid process. Too bad it took public pressure for them to try to do the right thing.

There is an excellent opinion piece on how wrong-headed the whole drive for imported water is by Brooks Keenan who was the head of Pima County’s Transportation Department and has many decades of engineering experience in the private sector as well as in the City of Tucson. He was also the lead individual in the county to blow the whistle on corruption in contract fixing, leading to a major overhaul in procurement procedures (and also costing him his job). Dan Eckstrom was never the same (he retired soon after the corruption was exposed and an F.B.I. investigation was launched). But that’s another story…

Stating that the billions of dollars needed to import water will result in a benefit for “real estate developers who will profit most” while “you and I, dear citizens, will foot the bill,” Keenan references the “$5.5 billion no-bid contract” and how the Arizona Senate Committee on Natural Resources, Energy and Water voted “to allow WIFA contract negotiations to be conducted in secret and be exempted from Arizona’s Public Records Law.”

Speaking as one who certainly knows, Keenan explains that “typically, the private company negotiates a price with a mid-level bureaucrat who has little to no experience with this type of project and no authority to cancel the deal. Commonly, the private companies make campaign contributions and wine and dine the politicians, to engender favorable treatment in the negotiations.”

WIFA eventually came to the enlightened conclusion (after widespread outrage) that maybe they should retract their unanimous decision for a non-competitive GIFT — er, I mean “contract” — but only after the people started raising hell from the profoundly odorous stench of it all.

For us community activists, it’s important to know the the new city manager actually can be responsive to community pressure if it is strong enough, because it sure doesn’t look like he is into doing the right thing without such pressure. (Which, dear friends, is very good to know).

And here are some final thoughts:

The WIFA group showed they were fine with decision making without adequate review of the economic or environmental impacts.
WIFA members were totally cool with engaging in shady backroom deals to promote no-bid contracts for a favored company.
WIFA showed an utter lack of transparency or accountabilityin a process that could have cost taxpayers many millions of dollars more than necessary.

So maybe these are the very reasons — based on his WIFA history noted above — that Timmy T may have shown that he has the qualifications they are looking for in their new Tucson City Manager: No review of facts or impact in decision making, no transparency or accountability, and a good hankering for backroom deals. The Mayor and Council must have felt he should fit right in at the City of Tucson!

————————————————

Notable recent letters to the editor of ADS on Desalination deal

Water policy in secret

“There you go again,” said Ronald Reagan, deprecating what he saw as dishonest claims of his opponents — but now look who’s trying to pull the wool over our eyes regarding water purchase and importation into Arizona. The AZ Senate Committee on Natural Resources, Energy and Water, by a 4-3 party line vote, has approved moving forward a bill to shield the Water Infrastructure Finance Authority (WIFA) from public scrutiny of their negotiations to buy water from any and all bidders.

These are the same folks that recommended a couple of years ago we contract with IDE technologies to build an unbelievably expensive desalinization plant on the Sea of Cortez to pipe water to Arizona, a plan which might still be in the works, for all we know. What new boondoggle will they come up with this time? Only transparency can preserve democracy: Write your senators to defeat this bill!

Suzanne Ferguson, Southeast side

Who has excess fresh water?

So, the Republicans want to establish publicly what they tried to do secretly under Republican Governor Doug Ducey: create a fait accompli agreement for Arizona to set up a desalination plant in Mexico and have taxpayers pay to subsidize developers for billions of dollars.

After all, from what state can Arizona import excess fresh water for the next half century (the time needed for the bonds to build such an endeavor)? New Mexico with its drying Rio Grande? Colorado and Utah with their billion-dollar plans to take more Colorado River? Nevada? California? Heck, the northern Great Plains and Missouri River basin just went through a winter without much snow. The Mississippi River is lower than normal. The northern Rockies can’t guarantee they won’t be affected by global warming. Mexico needs all their fresh water.

Nope. The whole plan is to get legislative okay to build a desalination plant in the Gulf of Mexico so Arizona taxpayers one day wake up to multi-generational debt.

It’s guaranteed failure, Republicans.

Matt Somers, Midtown

————————

TELL THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL: CEASEFIRE NOW!

Posted on April 3, 2024 by boggmann

AN OPEN LETTER TO THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL REGARDING THE CEASEFIRE RESOLUTION SCHEDULED FOR APRIL 9, 2024

There has been much clamor regarding the proposed resolution before the Mayor and Council in calling for a permanent ceasefire in the U.S./Israeli bombardment of Gaza. Tucson’s citizens, both for the resolution and against, have written numerous letters to the editor and spoken out in recent city “calls to the audience,” with the item supposedly set for the council meeting on Tuesday, April 9th. Those who oppose the ceasefire resolution have raised some objections that should be addressed.

Ceasefire opponents assert that our local city council should not be involving itself in world issues but stick to only local ones. But there is no unusual precedent being set here: past councils have adopted resolutions in support of South African human rights and against apartheid, adopting the Sullivan Principles. A few years later the City of Tucson endorsed the MacBride Principles in opposing investments in companies guilty of discrimination against Irish Catholics in the north of Ireland (a Celtic BDS movement!). It is impossible to think that any council-member who voted in favor of these past resolutions ever came to regret their decision considering the incredible positive changes that have transpired in both of these countries since then. Interestingly, both Ireland and South Africa have played leading roles in opposition to Israeli policies in Palestine. No doubt someday, people in the near future will look back at how we reacted today and wonder: how can anyone have opposed a ceasefire to the slaughter in Gaza?

As Aaron Bushnell, the U.S. serviceman who, in protest to U.S./Israeli policies, self-immolated in front of the Israeli embassy in Washington D.C., stated before sacrificing his life in opposition to genocide:

“Many of us like to ask ourselves: ‘What would I do if I was alive during slavery? Or the Jim Crow South? Or apartheid? What would I do if my country was committing genocide?’ The answer is, you’re doing it.Right now.”

One only has to look at the narrowly averted closure here of Las Alitas refugee center due to lack of federal funds to see how terrible international decisions can directly affect us locally. The Pima County Administrator cautioned that without the last minute Federal reprieve — that is still, hopefully, coming — our citizens should expect to experience “homelessness on steroids,” — as if our current homeless problem is not bad enough!Yet we continue to spend billions of our U.S. tax dollars in support of a criminal war against the Palestinian people.

The first priorities of the U.S. government always seem to be for more weapons and war, while the massive needs for adequate health care, decent education, affordable housing, and crucial infrastructure improvements in our country go mostly unmet. There is clearly a non-partisan agreement by both main political parties to try and out-war-hawk each other with the expected financial support of more campaign dollars from military contractors, AIPAC, or other lobbyists.

As the insightfully humorous George Carlin once noted: “The word bipartisan usually means some larger-than-usual deception is being carried out.”

This has never been so true as today.

For war, our rulers will readily, if ironically, slide the U.S. economy into multi-generation debt to China and others as we continue to outspend everyone else many times over in funding the military-industrial mega-machine. To promote more war, we see the Democrats willing to sell out long-standing principles on a humane immigration policy to try to ensure enough votes for more arms to a losing war in Ukraine and an immoral one in Palestine. The Republicans seem even more ready to supplant our national interests for foreign ones (hoping, perhaps, to see a move of our U. S. Capitol over to Jerusalem in preparation for their galloping aspirations for Armageddon?). And woe to those who question such madness.

During the anti-draft movement in the 60s (of which I remember well) many young men were being unjustly snagged and ceremoniously dumped into the far-off jungles of Vietnam, lessons from a loss which we have obviously yet to learn. At the time there was a critical anti-war slogan: “War is good business — invest your son!” These days it should be updated to read “war is good business — gamble with your future.” This is because, as we continue to play nuclear chicken with our nuclear armed adversaries while trying to scare our citizens into governmental compliance, crucial decisions are also now being made that will have huge consequences for future generations. These ramifications get worse every day the murderous U.S./Israeli ethnic cleansing of the indigenous Palestinians continues.

Some who oppose this genocide are being called “anti-semites” or terrorist sympathizers. In spite of the trigger name-calling mechanism employed, the stark humanitarian horror that is being inflicted on millions of innocent men, women, and children of Palestine is a defining moral moment for our country and the world. The responsibility for this murderous assault on a virtually defenseless people should NOT be laid solely on the despicable (if always supported) Bibi Netanyahu: for it is U.S. taxpayer money and U.S. governmental policy that has enabled these multiple violations of international law, violations that have been ongoing in the region for many decades.

The war against the Palestinian people did not begin last October 7th, and it is not going to end with shipping out more 2,000-pound bombs to be rained on the poor of Gaza, one of the most densely populated communities in the world. The war will only come to an end when the Palestinians are given their rights, their land, and their own national state, run by people who they themselves select to represent them. Without freedom for the people the resistance to occupation and repression will continue, no matter what formal name it takes: Hamas, Hezbollah, the PLO, or the Boy Scouts. Resistance by any other name is still resistance, and it is part of our human DNA to strive for freedom: and to support those who do.

What is the alternative? Perhaps we could continue funding and fostering war and division while keeping Raytheon and Boeing and their ilk all fat and happy. If the blowback to American adventurism means deploying even more U.S. troops to Iraq, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, Yemen (maybe even Israel), with more American lives lost in more endless war, are we expected to swallow that it’s all just part of the “cost of freedom”? Freedom for whom? Obviously, somebody other than the millions of Palestinians living under a long and brutal occupation. How does such support for massacre enhance our freedom? As the war continues and expands regionally and increases the likelihood of more direct U.S. involvement, we can all rest assured that the working class families who make the ultimate sacrifices for the benefit of corporate profits will get our sincere “thoughts and prayers” when their loved ones are returned in a box.

What is the justification for opposing a ceasefire after the mass killing of over 32,000 Palestinians (including over 12,000 children)? The answer we are given is that Israel has to “defend itself!” Really?

The largest military in the region needs to defend itself by bombing hospitals, universities, and even the “safe zones” that people were directed to go by the very Israeli Defense Forces that then bomb them there? We are to believe that Israeli security will somehow be secured by displacing almost two million of their neighbors through the indiscriminate carpet bombing of the Palestinian neighborhoods? This is really the only way a nuclear power can defend itself against a poor and imprisoned citizenry with no army, navy, or air force, but only a few rockets (that are easily shot down)? Really?

We are to believe that intentionally shooting starving people on line for flour is but a precautionary defensive operation? We are supposed to accept that prohibiting medical supplies (including anesthesia) for a beaten and battered people subjected to saturation bombardment is somehow protecting Israelis’ security? Does anyone really believe that by cutting off electricity at hospitals, killing babies on incubators and those dependent on medical devices, is a measured and appropriate response to Hamas? Are we to give any credence to the necessity for imposing a forced famine on a literally starving an already traumatized, displaced population? We are supposed to accept that these vicious actions are somehow protecting Israeli national interests? I mean really: who believes this nonsense?

For those of us asking such questions, we have been called anti-semitic or even holocaust deniers (I have the emails!). This is because, when one side can’t refute the obvious facts on the ground, they then revert to smearing their opponents to deflect attention from the reality. These are the same tactics that have been used for all the wars waged, where truth is always the first casualty. With the rise of social media (and its concentration of power in the control of the few) the U.S. government has been especially adept at “manufacturing consent” of the governed as needed for any acts of aggression against others.

It’s the same tired old pattern. Those who didn’t support the war of aggression against the Vietnamese people were considered unpatriotic (until they weren’t). If you questioned the rush to war in Iraq and the bogus evidence of weapons of mass destruction, they said we were being duped by Saddam Hussein who, we were again falsely told by our government and the “great” N.Y. Times, was somehow involved in the 911 attack. If you questioned why for 20 years we needed to be blasting Afghanistan back to the Stone Age for the 911 terrorist attacks NOT committed by them, you were called a conspiracist (or maybe prayed to the Koran?).

If anyone raises a concern today over the wisdom of engaging in a proxy war in Ukraine with the world’s other big nuclear power, they are labeled a “Putin puppet.” If you would rather see collaboration rather than confrontation with China, you are—a what? A Maoist? (or worse: a pacifist?).

And if we question the use of American tax dollars to promote, encourage, and financially enable the outright genocide of the Palestinian people, we are labeled despicable jew-hating anti-Semitic racists. Or it’s slanderously suggested that we support the rape of young Jewish concert goers when questioning why they were having a little Woodstock-like event held near the barbed wire gates of the world’s largest open-air prison, containing the longest incarcerated people in history. I mean, what could possibly go wrong? But to question the official US/IDF narrative, one must not only hate Jews but rock ‘n roll as well, no?

We were told by our media (and, shamefully, our President) of decapitation and babies were burned in ovens and that there was widespread systematic rape on October 7th. There has been no concrete evidence of this and even the N.Y. Times is starting to pull back on the fanciful narrative they once published. Legitimate questions by real journalists (i.e. those without a history of serving in the IDF) have been raised as to the veracity of these “reports” issued by the Israeli military. But the image has already been implanted in our minds. The Palestinians are all depicted as despicable “animals” and “vermin” as Israeli government officials have pronounced, in justification for Palestinians being treated as the subhumans. When it comes out later that these tales are outright lies or highly hyped up exaggerations, then — just like the “weapons of mass deception” in Iraq — it won’t matter. The initial outrage in response has been weaponized and the damage is done. And when the truth comes out, there will be no correction to the public record and no public apology by the U.S. to the people of Palestine — just as there has been none to the people of Iraq or Libya or Afghanistan or Vietnam, or anyone else we have so unceremoniously killed over false pretenses.

The question has rightfully been raised: does the slogan “never forget!” mean you forget about mass murder when it applies to anyone other than the Jews that were so horrifically murdered by the Nazis? Does the attempted extermination of a people, a culture, a society, become abhorrent only when it applies to self-proclaimed “chosen ones” who our leaders demand should always be exempt from any criticism? Are some semites — as Palestinians are a semitic people as well — to be judged more “equal” than others?

Charlie Chaplin, considered one of the greatest popular entertainers of his time, was run out of America in 1952 because of his “pre-mature” anti-fascist beliefs, which became unfashionable after WWII when our trusted Soviet ally suddenly became our existential threat and greatest enemy. Before exiled, Chaplin made a movie called “The Great Dictator,” which devastatingly mocked Adolf Hitler and the system that supported him. It ended with a speech warning about the rise and acceptance of totalitarianism in the “democratic” countries. As Chaplin remarked:

“One doesn’t have to be a Jew to be anti-Nazi… all one has to be is a normal decent human being.”

Likewise, one doesn’t have to be a Palestinian to oppose the attempted extermination of Palestinians. Indeed, many courageous Jewish organizations like Jewish Voices for Peace, IfNotNow, and Breaking the Silence all work for peace and justice for Palestinians. They are joined by a coalition of more than 70 interfaith and nongovernmental organizations calling for a ceasefire, including the American Baptists, the Unitarian Universalists, the Evangelical Lutherans, the Presbyterian and Episcopal Churches, the Mennonite’s, the National Council of Churches, theCatholic Maryknoll organization, the American Friends Service Committee, and the Catholic Worker Movement. They are joined by Amnesty International, Justice Democrats, the Working Families Party, Sojourners, and many others.

The Mayor and Council should vote as Charlie Chaplin would want you to — as normal decent human beings. This means you should vote against the mass slaughter of innocents, the intentional starvation of a defenseless people, the willful infanticide inflicted on the most vulnerable, the planned and continuous ethnic cleansing, the blatant and unrelenting war crimes, the massive land theft and documented violations of international law, the promotion of racial supremacism of settlers and the corresponding dehumanization of a colonized people, the calculated and purposeful destruction of a once civil society, and the forced displacement of men, women, and (especially) children.

The Mayor and Council should vote against this outright genocide of an oppressed people. Please vote in favor of the ceasefire resolution.

Sincerely,

Scott D. Egan

Barrio Hollywood

PS: Just as I was getting ready to send this, three additional horrific events have just occurred, continuing the victimization of innocents by the U.S./Israeli forces:

The destruction of Gaza’s largest Hospital (al-Shifa) by the IDF, “ripping out the heart of the enclaves healthcare system.

The IDF targeted murder of seven International food charity workers (including one American) while in three separate convoys for the World Central Kitchen.

3. The IDF bombing of the Iranian Embassy in Damascus, violating all international norms and further endangering the prospects for a wide-spread regional war.