Re: Concrete chasm, by Susan Taylor Martin, Oct. 12.
Susan Taylor Martin's report on the Israeli defense wall gives publicity to the complaints of those who are disadvantaged by the divider. Their complaints should be addressed to the fellow Palestinians who instigate the suicide bombers because they are the ones who force Israel to build the wall.
To be fair, Martin should now publish interviews with Israelis whose parents or children were killed by Palestinian suicide bombers, and how their livelihood is affected as a consequence of their loss.
-- Francis Dukes-Dobos, Clearwater
Security vs. rights
Re: A concrete chasm, Oct. 12.
Susan Taylor Martin vividly portrays the impact of the separation wall on the Palestinians whose towns and villages are surrounded and bisected by it. In addition to the human suffering the wall imposes, it has significant legal consequences.
In a recent report, B'Tselem (an Israeli human rights organization) listed several major classes of human rights violations generated by the barrier. These include infringements of the right to freedom of movement, the right to work and to earn a decent standard of living, the right to property, and the rights to education and health care (both of which will be disrupted by the barrier). Israel, as the occupying power in the territories, has the obligation to safeguard these rights, a position taken by both the Red Cross and the United Nations.
Further, U.S. credibility as a self-described "honest broker" for peace is severely undermined by its attitude toward the barrier. Despite some tepid reprimands by President Bush, no serious consequences have been attached to the continued construction. This double standard is widely ridiculed in the Arab world. It is unlikely that the president will criticize Ariel Sharon's behavior in a U.S. election year. This ensures that the wall can be completed without the threat of censure. By the time the United States re-engages with the peace process, it will be yet another "fact on the ground," and what politician, Israeli or American, will have the strength to tear it down?
No one who opposes the wall opposes the right of states to secure their borders. That is a legitimate part of the defense of their citizens. But security for some cannot come at the expense of the rights of others.
-- Daniel A. Weiskopf, St. Petersburg
A small nation's defense
Re: A concrete chasm.
In Susan Taylor Martin's article expressing sympathy and concern for the Palestinians affected by Israel's security fence, there are two phrases that deserve greater attention. The first is: "Work began in mid 2002" - that is, after more than 500 Israelis had been killed by terrorists crossing into Israel, and thousands more had their lives destroyed by shattering injuries. While the Arabs quoted by Martin attempt to portray the fence as a scheme by Israel to expand its borders, the fact remains that the fence was only begun in response to the refusal of the Palestinians to restrain the murderers among them from waging war on Israeli citizens.
The second phrase was right at the opening of the article, when Nabil Shraim of Qalqilya remarked that from his balcony he could see "all of Israel and, on a clear day, the Mediterranean sparkling in the distance." Think about that: From his roof in Palestinian territory he could look over all of Israel, to the Mediterranean. He is right; I have been there. At that point, the entire width of Israel is only eight miles.
In fact, it is the very minuscule size of the state of Israel that has tempted Arab armies four times in 50 years to attempt to push Israel into the sea, and which therefore requires Israel to maintain its strength and determination.
It is a sad truth - but a truth, nonetheless - that if the Arabs were to lay down their arms, there would be peace in the Middle East; if Israel were to lay down its arms, there would be no Israel.
-- Margot Benstock, Seminole
A land grab
Re: Concrete chasm.
Thank you so much for your article on "the wall." It is shocking to read the copy and look at the photos. The developing apartheid wall that Israel is building is just the latest in an increasingly transparent and provocative agenda to batter the Palestinians into submission. Only an Israeli government that is bent on total confiscation and appropriation of all or most of Palestine could create such a monstrosity and justify it in the name of security.
One only needs to look at the proposed path of the eastern section of the wall to immediately recognize a blatant "grab" for land and water resources. While there may be some justification in Israeli minds for the already built sections along the Green Line, even there the confiscation of West Bank land and the subjugation of the Palestinian population is brutally evident.
Your article rightly identified many in Israel who recognize the "occupation" as the problem. The violence that has been interminable for decades is about occupation and illegal settlement. Civil, political, national, economic, social and cultural rights are being violated by this occupation, which has been particularly harsh as imposed by Israel in defiance of Geneva Conventions and world opinion. What should be particularly upsetting to Americans is that our government is bankrolling this crime against humanity to the tune of almost $100-billion over the last 36 years. The United States has been and remains part of the problem and not part of the solution regardless of misguided attempts at drawing up "road maps."
A settlement evolving from the application of international law and observation of human rights is paramount to a fair and just solution. The occupation must end!
-- Gerald Heidel, U.S. Congressional District 10 Coordinator for the U.S. Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation, St. Petersburg
Misplaced blame
Re: HIV spreads under Bush Africa policy, Oct. 12.
The headline on Robyn Blumner's column implies that AIDS is growing in Africa because of President Bush's policy of cutting off family planning funds to organizations that have anything to do with abortion.
Now, you can argue whether that policy is good or not, but even the suggestion that it's to blame for the growth of AIDS on a continent where some 30-million people have HIV/AIDS (about three-fourths of those in the entire world) is laughable. She even described it, rightly, as "pandemic."
HIV/AIDS is terrible there, and getting worse, and it would do so regardless of whether there was a "gag rule" or not. Maybe it would be getting worse less fast, but maybe not. Your headline was unfair.
-- Ernest Lane, New Port Richey
Negative Nixon images
Re: Our checkered past, Oct. 12.
Last Sunday's Perspective section featured a story about former President Richard Nixon's influence on the modern political campaign, which I will not critique as it was produced by another newspaper. Instead I wish to point out the cartoonish way that St. Petersburg Times' editors choose to represent the former president's image in its pages.
Nixon, whether you appreciate him or not, was a colossus of 20th century American political life. In a manner not unlike Churchill, Roosevelt and Reagan, he left an indelible stamp on our country's relationships, and the way today's policymakers view our world.
-- To this day, Times stories about the late president are accompanied by unflattering images no doubt intended to alter the readers' view of his remarkable place in history.
Nixon easily was not the most photogenic of leaders, but in this reader's opinion that does not give license to liberal journalists who evidently still nurse a grudge over the success Nixon enjoyed in his career in public service. Evidently, some people cannot forget.
Watergate will be better understood in the passage of time. In the meantime, please show more consideration for the sensibilities of your readers.
-- Jim Parker, Tampa
Taking a cue from the best
Re: Dancing to the tune of Hell on Earth, Oct. 12.
Somehow this Times columnist is surprised that the media trumpeted the Hell on Earth suicide concert. You mean the way the media and Bush administration have played this entire country with imminent danger and WMD in Iraq? The band was just taking a cue from the best. At least we had the option of not buying a ticket to the concert.
-- Ed Verg, Tampa
So it goes
Re: Rummy is outmaneuvered by Condi, by Maureen Dowd, Oct. 10.
Sorry, Rummy. "Stuff happens."
-- Molly MacPhail, St. Petersburg
[Last modified October 19, 2003, 02:03:50]
