Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, July 1992, pages 5-6, 94-98

Letters To (and From) The Editors

(Comments are selected and edited on the basis of relevance, accuracy, taste and space available.)

Keep on Telling it Like it Is

I'd like to thank your executive editor for his magnificent and greatly informative article, "How Israel Gets its Way in the U.S. Media." Most "informed and caring" Americans, and all Arab Americans, agree with him, and are grateful and very thankful to him as a great person and writer.

Moreover, I have read two of his books—A Changing Image: American Perceptions of the Arab-Israeli Dispute and Stealth PACs: Lobbying Congress for Control of U.S. Middle East Policy. I was, frankly, amazed by his gigantic knowledge, his courage and his compassion for the oppressed, the voiceless and the wrongly "stereotyped," like the Palestinians, Arabs and Arab Americans.

Frankly, it's not only the media and Congress that are "Israeli-occupied territory." The Israeli Americans and their "lobbies" control almost everything here. Mind you, I don't include here the other American Jews. These are the best—compassionate, idealistic and very helpful, indeed, in wanting for the Palestinians freedom, peace, justice and the "pursuit of happiness." Thanks again and may God bless you all and our beloved magazine—the Washington Report.

Nuha Marchi, Orlando, FL

Tell Us About Ross Perot

I am surprised to find no mention whatever in your April/May issue of H. Ross Perot. Surely, in the June issue, you will explain the position of this independent candidate on the Israeli-Palestinian issue. I can't imagine he would favor our continuing to spoonfeed the "spoiled brats" of the Middle East to the tune of $6 billion annually, only to have them scream at us for more. Come November it is just possible the names Clinton and Bush will become irrelevant, the angered voting public having given Ross Perot and the independent party a clear majority. If not that, he will have robbed the winning party of its clear mandate to lead. In any event, keep yourselves and your readers informed—and watch out for the fireworks.

R.L. Bucknell, Seattle, WA

As you predicted, we did a piece on H. Ross Perot and the Middle East in our June issue. He has been zealous not to take discernible positions on anything controversial. It makes his supporters angry when he wastes his time dealing with "issues," he says. Nevertheless, he has from time to time repeated three brief statements in talking about the Middle East. Here's the longest formulation of them we've seen, from the transcript of a seven-minute May 12 speech at an American Jewish Committee dinner in New York: "Israel is our friend, Israel has been our friend. Israel proved in technicolor that it is our friend in the recent war. And you stand by your friends and it's just that simple." So now you're informed and you can decide what to do. It's just that simple.

Wanted: Election Guidelines

I am a Muslim, Pakistani-American medical student who just received your executive editor's book stealth PACs. I saw the ad by the Campaign for a Sound American Foreign Policy in the April issue of Harper's, and I responded with $75 for placing further ads in other journals and $25 for your book and a subscription to the Washington Report. In the letter to the Campaign for a Sound American Foreign Policy I checked the box regarding grass roots lobbying and "calls on Congress." I have not yet received the first issue of the Washington Report or the information on lobbying, but today after reading Stealth PACs, I ordered two more copies for relatives.

The book excels in its details of AIPAC's control over the political system. In an ideal setting, PACs would not exist to manipulate the foreign policy of the United States. However, as long as AIPAC does exert its influence to the detriment of U.S. foreign policy, I believe effort should be exerted to minimize its effects. Therefore, I would like to help fight the 100:1 or 1,000:1 ratio of money spent by AIPAC-affiliated PACs compared to Arab-American or American-Muslim PACs. As a student, my resources are limited, but I would like to help financially (with more as my income improves in the future), and with lobbying/letter-writing as time permits. Organized input is more effective than the occasional letters I now write to the president and various congressmen and senators.

I have five main questions after reading your book. 1. Would it help deflate some of AIPAC's money power if information on how much these PACs gave a candidate and how much came from outside the state were presented through paid political ads in the candidate's district? 2. I am registered to vote in New York City, where (as the book points out) my vote and any contribution is effectively meaningless. How can I help decrease AIPAC's influence in tight races around the country? 3. Some Arab countries have enormous resources. Are they allowed to donate money to candidates, buy political advertising, or support organizations that are political in nature? If so, why aren't they doing more? 4. Is it true that Governor Clinton's top adviser is part of AIPAC? 5. Does AIPAC contribute to races for state governors and legislators? I know that in New York State, the comptroller will not invest in any company that observes the Arab boycott, and I believe the state sponsors programs designed exclusively to help Israel.

Finally, I would like to thank you for writing Stealth PACs. It is well written, the research is excellent, and the tables present a wealth of information that is difficult or impossible to obtain otherwise. I was aware that the pro-Israel lobby is powerful, but had no idea of the extent of its power to manipulate our government. I also believe that your point that it is possible to oppose policies of the government of Israel without being anti-Semitic is a truth that is squelched in this country.

Umar Mahmood, New York, NY

You came to us via one of our books, but by now you're a subscriber and the only way we can answer individual letters is through the pages of this magazine. Here are brief answers to your five questions.

1. If voters in some states realized how much their representatives in Congress took from pro-Israel PACs it would be a turnoff. Such paid ads should be carefully considered, however. Six years ago one Arab-American group targeted Sen. Arlen Specter in Pennsylvania with ads telling Pennsylvanians about his strong support for measures that increased taxpayer support for Israel, and exported U.S. jobs. He in turn took these negative ads and prepared a fund-raising mailing to huge nationwide lists of contributors to Jewish causes and subscribers to magazines with an extreme pro-Israel editorial tilt. The result, we suspect, was a net plus for Senator Specter, who probably raised sufficient funds from those ads to more than offset the Arab-American group's effort. So the answer is yes, local advertisements in some campaigns could help but they should be sensitively handled in order not to hurt an opposing candidate you want to help. We will prepare some examples for the August issue of what activists can do locally.

2. By reading in our "election watch" column which candidates AIPAC-affiliated PACs or individuals are helping this year, our readers certainly can reach their own conclusions about where financial aid might make a difference. As an individual, you can give up to $1,000 to a candidate for a primary election and another $1,000 for the general election. Therefore, unless you are planning to give a single candidate more than $2,000, you don't need a PAC to do it. Just make your check to that candidate's campaign, and mention in a brief letter of enclosure why you are contributing. If you know whom you want to defeat but can't tell from our "Election Watch" column whether the opponent has a chance or merits your support, ask someone or some organization whose advice you trust. The ADC, NAAA and AAI all should be able to advise on these questions.

3. Foreign governments cannot contribute to candidates, campaigns or political organizations. If they tried to, it almost inevitably would boomerang and hurt the candidate or cause they wanted to help. Most Americans, when they learn about it, deeply resent efforts to influence elections on behalf of a foreign country. That's why it's good to shine the spotlight on candidates who take contributions from pro-Israel PACs. It's also a good time for foreign leaders to stay silent. Most important is for American Muslims and Arab Americans to make it very clear to their fellow citizens that, unlike Israel's American supporters, they don't expect candidates to tilt toward any foreign country or foreign interest. As their leaders pointed out, Arab and Muslim Americans, like Jewish American peace activists, just want the United States to follow an even-handed policy based on real U.S. interests as well as traditional American support for human rights, self-determination and fair play.

4. One of Gov. William Clinton's top presidential campaign directors is David Ifshin, who had a similar role in the Mondale campaign and who is "of counsel" to AIPAC, meaning he is one of several lawyers for that organization.

5. Pro-Israel PACs can contribute to state and local political races. We don't track this but would consider printing carefully researched and documented letters from readers exposing the role of pro-Israel organizations or major contributors at those levels.

Thanks for your thoughtful questions. The Campaign for a Sound American Foreign Policy will have passed your letter expressing interest in lobbying to whatever organization seemed appropriate according to the instructions in your letter, just as it passed your request for a subscription and copy of Stealth PACs to us. Direct contributions to the Campaign such as yours are used for additional advertising, when and where appropriate. We'll be happy to forward checks made out to them, just as they forward checks made out to us.

A First Amendment Violation

I am perplexed as to why you do not comment on my contention that giving billions to Israel yearly is a violation of the First Amendment. I am not a fanatic, a radical or an extremist. But I (and millions of other taxpayers) resent financially underwriting a sectarian state such as Israel, especially since it discriminates among its citizens based upon their religion, and therefore is not a true democracy. Such support for religious education would be illegal here at home. Please explain to me this apparent difference in our government's treatment of financial support to religious institutions at home and abroad. Or, if possible, open the discussion to Washington Report readers.

James A. Henderson, Wauwatosa, WI

The Anglican church is an "established" church in England and some European countries that also have received U.S. taxpayer aid in the past have "established" Protestant or Catholic denominations.

Some "Islamic" states (Morocco, Tunisia, Egypt) receive U.S. government economic assistance. The line of inquiry might therefore focus on whether any of those other aid-recipient countries actively discriminate among their citizens solely on the basis of religion, as does Israel. Since, as you suggest, we are "opening" the discussion to our readers, read on...

Challenging Aid to Israel

Please consider this suggestion for a concerted legal challenge against further U.S. financial and military support for Israel, based on the contention that such support for the State of Israel, founded and justified on a Biblical supposition, amounts to an establishment of religion.

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution explicitly states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion." Yet Congress continually enacts legislation, signed by the president, providing billions of dollars worth of grants, loans, weapons systems, and so forth for a country that is the embodiment of a religious premise.

There certainly would be no dearth of Biblical and religious references entered in the Congressional Record by senators and representatives to explain and justify their support for so many appropriations measures and various special privileges. Such documented statements would serve as evidence of "congressional intent."

For example, Sen. Jesse Helms (R-NC), ranking minority member on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, has stated that he is a "fundamentalist" who believes that "Judea and Samaria" belong to the "Children of Israel." I do not recall if that specific statement was entered in the Congressional Record, but, surely, similar statements have been made and could be located.

More than one president, upon signing such bills, has spoken of our "moral" obligation to support the state of Israel and I believe some political leaders have cited scripture to justify using American taxpayer funds on behalf of this political state. Also, certain prominent religious leaders are now accusing President Bush of defying the will of God as to who should live where by jeopardizing housing loan guarantees. Such criticisms, although obviously not official government statements, demonstrate a general perception about our support for this particular country being based on a religious premise. In addition, recent statements from Madrid about an "immemorial" right to occupy the "land of Israel" highlight what evidently is perceived in the United States to be an almost universally accepted premise about the existence and purpose of the State of Israel.

A suit to enjoin permanently any further such appropriations, which are in effect an establishment of religion, could be filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. No doubt, the legal battle will be long and arduous and possibly unsuccessful. However, presenting this perspective on the situation might encourage more healthy debate on the issue among the citizenry.

James W. Skovron, Washington, DC

Okay. We're willing to be a clearing house. Let's hear more on the subject, especially from lawyers.

What Should I Read Now?

The more I went through your April/May issue, first with the yellow marker, and then the lavender overmarking the yellow for items I really wanted to keep for future use, the more I came to the conclusion that almost all of my "collecting" of articles over the past 20 months has been "unnecessary." All I would have had to do is learn about the Washington Report, subscribe, read, become a human data bank, and proceed to act on the knowledge acquired. You know much more than I will ever be able to gather on my "chosen subject," your written results are far superior, and your thought processes more organized. I must confess to a certain sense of futility, a little embarrassment, a touch of despair, and a pinch of "where the hell do I go from here?"...Since I learned more from one issue of the Washington Report than from all of my days/weeks/months as a "hunter and gatherer" of information, what books do you recommend as "required reading" to supplement the magazine?

Richard Davies, La Palma, CA

For starters we recommend two of our own: A Changing Image: American Perceptions of the Arab-Israeli Dispute and Stealth PACs: Lobbying Congress for Control of U.S. Middle East Policy. We also recommend Paul Findley's They Dare to Speak Out, Elias Chacour's Blood Brothers and, for a very detailed account, Fred Khouri's scrupulously impartial The Arab-Israeli Dilemma. The first book mentioned has been cited by ex-Presidents Nixon, Ford and Carter for its balance, perceptiveness and overall usefulness and is used as a textbook or supplementary reading in many universities. The last mentioned is also a textbook for university courses in the Israeli-Palestinian dispute. Read all those and you'll know what we know, and from that point on we'll be exploring current history together.

We're also going to tell our other readers something you already know. We have excerpted only two paragraphs from your four-page, single-spaced letter typed on legal size stationary. That would be more than two full pages of text in this magazine. Our articles are seldom more than one page, and when we let them run over that, we know they are far less likely to be read. So, the first rule for readers to "communicate" is to try to keep letters short, confining them to one or, at most, two topics.

With our relatively limited circulation we get 200 letters a day. They all get opened and then they are sent to the circulation, book club or advertising managers as appropriate. If one seems very appropriate, a copy will go to the executive director for "Letters to the Editor" or to Donna Bourne for "Other People's Mail." Both are swamped. If a magazine with no more than 100,000 readers has a problem on that scale, just imagine what it's like for the "letters" editor of a newspaper with one or two million readers, or the office of a member of the House of Representatives, with 500,000 constituents.

If you write a letter to a newspaper or magazine editor, it should fit on one typed page or, at the very most, a page and a half. The same applies to letters to members of Congress. If the letters are long, they won't be read. If they are so long that the person who opens the mail can't tell at one glance what is the topic and what is your position, they won't even be counted. Then your effort is wasted. Media and congressional staffers live in a blizzard of mail and what hasn't been read by the close of business each day probably won't be—ever.

So don't fight it, go with the flow: Write lots of short letters, some of which will be read, and which therefore will be far more effective than are well reasoned, beautifully presented, original thinking that is too long to be digested in the time it takes you to digest one "sound-bite" on television, meaning between 30 seconds to, at most, two minutes. This response, alone, is about as long as reader letters should be. To communicate, condense. Otherwise you're just writing to let off steam rather than to be read, and the person who opens your letter will sense it immediately.

Bitter Reading

I have to force myself to read the Washington Report. The reason is that it sears by memory with its horror stories. I am still haunted by the face of the Palestinian farmer who was plowing his field and was set upon by Israeli IDF men who broke most of his bones so that he couldn't work anymore. Or the story of the Israeli prison officer who stood upon the broken hip of Mahmoud Najjar. Or the story of the small boy who was shot in the face by Israeli soldiers, and beaten and dragged through the streets, etc.

These scenes don't leave me. They need to be told, and I'm glad you tell them. No one else does. Do any Israelis read the Washington Report? I hope so.

Porter French, Grinnell, IA

The short answer is yes, some Israelis read the Washington Report.

Where it is available on newsstands in Middle Eastern countries, it is cheaper to purchase the magazine that way than to subscribe at the $55 overseas rate. And in some countries U.S. business associations have group subscriptions in the hundreds of copies. Leaving aside newsstand sales and group subscriptions, however, Israel ranks sixth on the list for individually paid subscriptions, behind Canada, Saudi Arabia, England, Jordan and the U.A.E. and just ahead of Kuwait, Qatar, France and Bahrain. We suspect some of the Israeli subscribers are think tanks, drawing from their "know your enemy" funds. Occasionally, however, we receive moving letters, almost invariably marked "not for publication," from Israelis who are deeply ashamed of the actions of their government and its agents—or enraged at funding of those actions by the American Jewish community and the U.S. government. It's too bad they fear retaliation if their letters are published. One such letter is worth 100 Anti-Defamation League diatribes in countering the growing revulsion in the U.S. against Israeli fascism and its American supporters that the ADL loves to call the "new anti-Semitism."

Through Children's Eyes

Such recent books in psychology as Stories for the Third Ear by Wallace, Symbol, Story and Ceremony by Combs and Freedman and Friedman's Fables suggest that behavior change is more likely to occur when language is child-like, and reduced to metaphor. Another book on learning (In the Mind's Eye by West, Prometheus Books) suggests some new ideas are implanted with imagery instead of words.

How about a children's centerfold to help us see through children's eyes? Children could gather stories of when Jews and Palestinians had good times together, and compare them with the present, using the idea that you can't create tragedy unless you first have beauty to destroy.

An idealistic Jewish activist recently told me they had four speakers, two young angry Palestinians, and two older men. The two young men had horror stories. The older men told how once they had good relationships, and that Jewish people had been best friends with Palestinians. My friend said, "It was when the older men told how it had been that I felt shame."

Miriam E. Hill, Stellacoom, WA

Yo! Artists! Great idea!

A More Active American Role

It is my belief that the Bush administration needs to play a more active role in the Middle East peace conference. I don't believe that the local actors will be able to make a compromise agreement on their own. If the peace process fails, the war process will begin again.

Howard H. Waldrop, Ann Arbor, MI

We agree, but this is an election year first in Israel and then in the United States. We'll predict that if President Bush is re-elected the administration will move rapidly on its five-year timetable for Palestinian autonomy. If rebuffed by Israeli extremists, we predict the U.S. will step aside and let the U.N. Security Council take action, with all that implies. (Ask Iraq's Saddam Hussain or Serbia's Slobodan Milosevic about it.) If a U.S. administration or the U.N. also are rebuffed by Palestinian extremists like Hamas or the PFLP, however, forget Middle East peace in our time.

Ignorance Is A Disease

Ignorance is a disease. It's the source of hatred, wars and bloodshed, which reaches overwhelming proportions when dealing with the Middle East conflict and the Palestinian problem in particular. An obvious example is the letter in which Barry M. Green from Texarkana, Texas, maintains that "the Israelites were promised their land and that God gave this land to the Jews," adding that "this is their homeland and it has been ever since Abraham."

It is a pity that in the 20th century there are people who dwell on myths based on misinterpretation of the Bible, just as if we still live in the Dark Ages. Historically, this land that the Israelis are occupying today by force is Palestine and belongs, as it has always belonged, to its own people, the Palestinians, for thousands of years.

Mr. Green must realize that Judaism is a religion, like Christianity, and cannot be a nationality. The unjust partition of Palestine and the Zionist occupation is basically a manifestation of Western colonialization and imperialism. It is a crime and gross mistake, and we are daily reminded of this when we hear of all the destruction and killing in the Middle East. Those who know God should desire and believe in peace for all humanity. It should be clear that the Old Testament must not be used to perpetuate war. An intelligent and just solution is to the advantages of all parties involved.

Tariq Khalid, Palma de Mallorca, Spain

A Style to Emulate

We'd Like To Point Out...

That for two months now we've been receiving two copies of the Washington Report each month, the second one arriving several days after the first.

It's Not That We Don't Like It...

On the contrary. We read it from cover to cover, and then pass it along to friends. We especially enjoy the Publishers' Page, and yearn for the day when we, too, might so cleverly imbed desperate pleas for money in an entertaining format.

But Enough's Enough.

Isn't it? Or do you want us to get two copies each month? It's not that we waste the extra issue: It too gets passed along to friends whom we think might be ripe for its message. But if we're getting double issues through a subscription list snafu, then you'll probably want to straighten that out.

Flippancy Aside...

We deeply appreciate the labors of your minds and hearts. Your magazine is one of two factors that have led us to a reconsideration of the "Israel is our friend and all Arabs are terrorists" mindset that we automatically assumed, growing up in middle-class, baby-boom America. The other factor is our having lived and worked in Arab countries for the past four years, and even getting to know—gasp!—some Palestinians as friends and neighbors. We think we've changed.

So Thank You.

Sometimes, you seem like very brave people to us. Oh, and heck, since the envelope's already addressed...

Here's A Check, Too.

It isn't much, but please use it for some worthy new subscriber.

Leslie P. Engelland, BUEC/UAE University, Al-Ain, UAE

An American in Cairo

As an American living in Cairo, I've been a bit of a snob about my knowledge (or what I thought was knowledge) about the affairs of the Middle East—particularly those of Egypt and the U.S., but also those of the Palestinians. It wasn't until I traveled back to the U.S. and saw a copy of your magazine at my doctor's office that I began to understand how little I really do know and how ignorant of the real issues I and many of my friends really are.

To thank you for opening my eyes, and in an effort to assure that many other eyes are opened, I am sending you a list of names of people I truly believe will want to know the truth. I wish I could pay for them all, and I am hopeful that next month when I send you more names I will find the wherewithal to do the same and pay for every one of them.

It is sometimes difficult to get packages through to me here, even using my stateside work address, but I have also enclosed an order for some of the beautiful work from the Gaza Community Mental Health Project. If some—or all—is not available, please forward the money to the project anyway.

This week I plan to visit libraries and schools here in Cairo to assure that all of them carry subscriptions to the Washington Report. Perhaps there are other things I can do from here. If so, please let me know, and I'll give it my all. Thank you for the incredible service you are rendering.

Theresa Rossiter, Cairo, Egypt

Thank you for the check and the names. Some of our subscription donors give us more money than names, so we'll use the leftover cash from donor Susan Weir of Goleta, CA to finish funding subscriptions to your list of more names than money. We'll contact you directly on the Gaza handicrafts, since they are having trouble (from you know who) getting them out to us as fast as our readers buy them. Finally, thanks to the "unknown reader" who put a copy of the magazine in the doctor's office where you found it. (We realize several hundred readers do this, so you can all take a bow.) It's a great way to recycle used Washington Reports. Your letter also got us to thinking. We'll happily add physicians, dentists and clinics to the opinion molder (libraries, media, educators, clergy) categories eligible for the $12.50 special rate subscription. However, we hope that readers who decide to donate subscriptions to their doctors, dentists, hospital and convalescent home reading rooms check first to make sure the donated subscriptions will end up on the shelves or the waiting room tables.

More From Minnesota

The June 1992 article by the Rev. L. Humphrey Walz entitled "Middle East and 'New World Order' Featured at Two Ecumenical Events" contains some misleading statements regarding the Minnesota Council of Churches and the recent visit in the upper Midwest of Dr. Gabriel Habib of the Middle East Council of Churches.

Our understanding was that Dr. Habib would be appearing in Minneapolis on the campus of the University of Minnesota, through the auspices of the campus chaplains. Because the Minnesota Council of Churches does not normally co-sponsor events it does not originate, the Jewish-Christian Relations Committee decided not to accept the invitation to co-sponsor Dr. Habib's appearance. No one "claimed to speak for Minnesota's Jewish community." No one objected to his proposed visit to the campus. No one asked to "study in advance the text of his talk."

The Minnesota Council of Churches is actively engaged in work for peace and justice. We are also engaged in cooperative efforts and dialogue with Jews and Muslims. Both are missions of the utmost importance.

I am pleased to hear that Dr. Habib was well received in Madison. I understand that a videotape of his appearance is available from the Wisconsin Conference of Churches. The Council will obtain a copy to use in our various arenas.

Margaret J. Thomas, Executive Director, Minnesota Council of Churches

Our religion editor cheers your Council's work for peace and justice and its pursuit of dialogue and cooperation with Jews and Muslims. He hopes you will report to his department any resultant developments pertinent to this magazine's scope. Your comments on his text he finds clarifying in several respects. Still somewhat puzzling to him, however, is how the final decision on co-hosting a general secretary—in this case an Arab—from another major council of churches should seemingly have come to rest with the Jewish-Christian Relations Committee.

Word Gets Around

Your organization was highlighted in a recent letter to the editor of the Manchester Union Leader signed by Mr. Carl Greeley of Barefoot Bay, FL, who wrote a most interesting article on the state of Israel. I would like very much to learn more about how Israel is so successful in bleeding us dry.

Bruce Reardon, East Derry, NH

You'll receive a sample copy of the Washington Report and, if you subscribe, we'll guarantee you will learn more about the subject. Our thanks, also, to Mr. Greeley.

Making a Difference

In response to your call on page 100 of the April edition of your magazine to "make a difference," I enclose a copy of a three-paragraph letter of enclosure I sent to every member of the Appropriations Subcommittees on Foreign Operations of both the Senate and the House of Representatives, along with a copy of the Washington Report article "Cutting Bush Down to Size: How Israel Gets Its Way in the U.S. Media." Also enclosed is a copy of a different three-paragraph letter to Secretary Baker, also enclosing the same article.

George E. Brown, Palm Beach Gardens, FL

We'll tell you why you are the way we make a difference. Every member of Congress gets at least one copy of the Washington Report and, thanks to reader donations, sometimes copies go to the congresspersons' local district offices, to their home addresses, or, separately, to the appropriate specialists on their staffs. Similarly, a large number of Washington Report subscriptions go to embassies and various State Department, Pentagon, CIA, Department of Commerce, and USIA offices. However, when readers ask us if we think what we write does get to the president, the secretary of state, or the key senators and representatives, we have to confess we're pretty sure none of them have time to sit down and look at all of our pretty pictures and read all of the adrenalin-churning letters on these pages. But when readers pick out what they consider to be a particularly important article and take the trouble to mail photocopies to appropriate leaders, the odds increase greatly that a member of that person's staff who doesn't have a separate agenda will pass it on to be read, or will include salient points in a briefing for the boss. These are very busy people, but by doing what you've just done, you and hundreds of our readers do make a difference, every month.

A Word Processor is a Terrible Thing to Waste

I am a devout reader and student of the Washington Report. I'm no radical but, as an 89-year-old retiree from U.S. Air Force engineering and well-seasoned son of American sod, I do believe all readers of the Report should be concerned with the "Holocaust Museum" being readied in Washington, DC. This will represent not only the most horrible aspect of a foreign war conducted 50 years ago, but a phase for which neither the United States nor of its citizens of that time bear responsibility.

If the U.S. Park Service is to provide such a site, there should be another museum alongside to depict the continuing atrocities committed against the defenseless Palestinian citizenry by the Israeli military, funded and equipped by the United States. Like the Holocaust Museum, it should have a four-foot wall to keep small children from seeing how mens' hands were crushed by stones in the rock quarry, how Palestinian children and mothers were shot in "open season," and a multitude of other abominable, inhuman atrocities.

If this matter does not rate a place in "Letters to (and from) the Editors" my word processor is going into File 13!

Frank J. Burris, Fallbrook, CA

Over the years we've received hundreds of letters concerning the Holocaust Museum. We haven't printed any of them because, we've said, it's basically not a Middle East story. Your letter comparing current atrocities against Palestinians in the Middle East with past atrocities against Jews in Europe, and U.S. responsibility for the former with lack of U.S. responsibility for the latter, qualifies for the letters column.

Let's say right here, to avoid a flood of letters, that the European Holocaust in which perhaps half of Europe's pre-war population of 12 million Jews died or were killed was on a far larger scale than what is happening to the Palestinians, of whom there are about 5 million inside and outside Israel. That said, injustice is injustice, and it's reasonable to ask what are the criteria for selecting which injustices are commemorated on U.S. government land. It's a subject we don't plan to pursue in this magazine, however, so, please, no more.

There is a mainstream press and it has much more space to devote to this subject. We hope this saves your word processor. You're much too young to stop putting it to good use.

Canadian Concerns

First off, I must tell you that it is very rare that I take a pen (or in this case keyboard) in hand and write to a magazine. However, after stumbling across some of your back issues I find myself having to compliment you. Your list of contributors is impressive. This is one of the few periodicals that tell the truth about the Middle East. I have entered my own subscription.

Your March issue had a feature on Canada's new ambassador to Israel. It is rare that our American counterparts take interest in Canadian foreign affairs. I agree with the observation that Mr. Mulroney's motive in the placement of Mr. Spector as ambassador to Israel and Barbara McDougall's appointment as foreign affairs minister was an attempt to secure the Jewish vote. Joe Clark, whose work as foreign affairs minister was beyond reproach, had spoken out a few times against the harsh treatment of the Palestinian youths involved in rock throwing. That was enough to take him off the list of ministers "beloved" by pro-Israel voters.

As for the claim of Mary Wainberg, president of B'nai B'rith, that there was an unofficial, though longstanding tradition that excludes Jews from high level diplomatic positions to Israel, a related tradition applies for most of the countries in which Canada has embassies. It is considered almost a conflict of interest to put into such a position a person whose ethnic origin is the country concerned. Send Mr. Spector to another country, but let Canada's ambassador to Israel be one whose heritage will not tempt residents or the government of that country to embarrass the diplomat by seeking to exploit that heritage. Michael Bell did an outstanding job in the post and should not have been used as a pawn to strengthen the Mulroney government's popularity with the Jewish community in Canada.

Nora Houssian, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

Can We Sue the Media?

I am enclosing letters relating to Israeli/Palestinian relations which I feel illustrate the extreme bias in favor of Israel of the media and most of the Congress. They include an answer to my letter from Rep. Ben Cardin (D-MD) making claims which are very close to outright lies. This is apparently a form letter being sent in response to all inquiries on the subject. Cannot Mr. Cardin be made to tell the whole truth?

Also included are copies of letters printed in the Baltimore Sun, one by William Hughes supporting Palestinian statehood and two rebutting his letter. These letters are typical examples of the Sun's pro-Zionist policy. I have written at least a dozen letters to the Sun over the past couple of years, and none have been printed.

Is there no recourse to counter this blatant bias in the media? Your magazine gives very fair and comprehensive coverage of Middle East affairs but, unfortunately, does not reach the public at large. All they hear or read is the Zionist point of view. Can the mass media be sued to force a more strict adherence to unbiased freedom of speech?

I have asked the local library to subscribe to your magazine. They said they had received no other requests, but would consider it. I'm not holding my breath for this to happen. Thank goodness for your voice. I just wish it could be heard by more people.

Doris Raush, Columbia, MD

Media bias, too, is protected by the First Amendment. The recourse in the case of your representative in Congress, as you know, occurs in November of every second year. As for making our voice more widely heard by the media, in libraries or by the general public, all we can suggest is donated subscriptions. We can't afford to advertise on any large scale but, usually, when a reader carefully selects an appropriate editor, library, or individual to receive a donated subscription to the magazine, they will renew on their own one year later. That's how we grow.

What Are The Total Donations?

A friend suggested that I write you regarding the donations to the State of Israel by the U.S. government. I'm trying to find out the total amount of donations for the year 1990. That would include military arms, cash donations, agricultural gifts and subsidies, and anything else you could find. Also, is there any estimate of tax deductions given to people who make gifts to Israeli organizations or purchase Israeli bonds? I am trying to get an idea of the verifiable expenses incurred by the United States government on behalf of Israel. Could you help me on this?

Harold N. Simpson, Chicago, IL

It's not simple, as the article by Frank Collins, "What Does Israel Cost U.S. Taxpayers," on page 27 of the June 1992 Washington Report demonstrates. He estimates the cost to U.S. taxpayers of direct grants, loans and interest on them from 1949 through Sept. 30, 1992 at $78 billion. This conservative estimate does not take account of tax deductible donations to Israel, which certainly total at least $1 billion annually, and which were considerably higher during the Gulf war in 1991. What they cost the U.S. Treasury, however, depends on the tax status of the donor. If there were a clear, uncontestable figure for the total cost of aid to Israel for each year since its establishment in 1948, you can be sure that we would have published it. Meanwhile, we'll stand on the Collins estimate, which he based upon figures compiled by the Congressional Research Service.

How To Vote?

As per attached, you can see that we were shocked to learn that North Carolina's own Senator Sanford favored the $10 billion loan guarantee for Israel. We have been urging people to write to him. Senator Helms—forget him—he is an impossibility! We spoke to Congressman McMillan last week and it was our understanding he'll tie guarantees to the settlements.

Who in the world will we vote for for president? (We are Democrats.) All the Democratic candidates favor giving the money to Israel. We have never refused to vote because of a single issue. But this issue (Arab/Israeli peace) is so important that we will not vote for anyone who is so pro-Israel that they refuse to favor a Palestinian state. Keep up the good work.

David and Margaret Marrash, Charlotte, NC

"Witness What's Happening!"

I am a Catholic priest working with students and teaching in a California state university. It was with amazement that I realized as I read the article by Eleni Katsoulakis, "Discovering the Victims of U.S. Aid to Israel" in the Dec. 1991/Jan. 1992 issue of the Washington Report, that I had met the young man she described in her story about two weeks after the incident took place.

Bishara Zablah is 14 years old and in the eighth grade. He is a Catholic and lives with his family in Bethlehem. His father is a U.N. employee. On Sept. 16, 1991 at about 7:45 p.m. he was returning home after visiting his grandmother. The day itself was the anniversary of the 1982 massacres at the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps in Beirut by Christian militiamen, with the seeming knowledge of the IDF.

According to Bishara, some kids he did not know were writing graffiti on the wall. He was asked to join them. The others were to watch for the soldiers. As he was writing on the wall, about 14 soldiers in two jeeps surrounded him as the other kids took off. He put up his hands, but from a distance of 1.5 meters they shot him and then beat him unconscious. The graffiti said: "We will continue to resist the occupation."

Neighbors heard the soldiers directly outside the window of their house shouting, "shoot him in the eye." When the neighbors tried to help, they were threatened with being shot themselves. Bishara was shot three times with rubber bullets. Two hit him in the nose and one grazed his ear. His jaw was broken when he was beaten by the soldiers with fists and rifle butts. When he regained consciousness the first time, the soldiers forced him to put his finger in the bullet hole in his nose, and he passed out again. Eventually he was force to dip his fingers in his own blood and use it to paint over the graffiti. A soldier hit by spurting blood yelled at Bishara, "don't let that dirty blood get on my uniform."

They tied his hands and continued to beat him. They tore his clothes and cursed Palestinians and the intifada. When Bishara asked the commander: "Why did the soldier shoot me?" he got the response: "I would have shot him if he hadn't shot you!" The interrogation continued as they took him in a jeep, not an ambulance, to the "civil headquarters," and not immediately to the hospital.

"What is your name?" "Well, Bishara Zablah, we have been waiting for you!"

"Who were you with?"

Their questions continued and there was no medical attention until after the interrogation. When he finally was taken to Haddasah Hospital, he underwent four hours of surgery. Further surgery is planned.

Bishara could not see for ten days as a result of the beating with the rifle butts. He is nervous about going outside his family home and has nightmares where he finds himself waking up screaming, "kill me, but don't beat me anymore."

During my visit, after an hour of conversation in the family's parlor, his mother said: "He raised his hands and they shot him anyway. Even a prisoner of war would not be shot." When I asked her what would be an appropriate action on my part, she told me: "Witness what is happening! See how we are living!"

So there we were in Bethlehem, birthplace of the "Prince of Peace," talking to a slight 14-year-old, who had broken the law by writing graffiti on the wall and had been shot and beaten by a group of 14 soldiers. I was offended and outraged by just hearing the story. Maybe you will be too.

The Rev. John K. Rogers, Diocese of Santa Rosa, CA

The Last Word on Recycling

Regarding the question of recycled paper and your magazine: Charles W. Baird, a professor of economics at California State University, writing in association with the Foundation for Research on Economics and the Environment (Seattle), says that "much environmental hectoring consists of gross exaggerations and sometimes...directly contradicts elementary scientific principles as well as readily available evidence." Without disparaging environmental values, which he regards as important and necessary, he says there already are more newspapers waiting to be recycled than the demand for recycled paper can absorb.

He adds that "the bleaches used to de-ink paper during recycling are toxic and present their own environmental problems." Since most paper comes from trees specifically planted for that purpose, he says that "if the demand for new paper is reduced by forced recycling, fewer such trees will be planted. Recycling of paper can be anti-green."

I think you should go back to using the paper you were using before, and use the $500 saved per issue to further the good work you are doing. While we should be concerned with environmental issues, other values such as freedom and property rights also are important.

Jean L. Baker, Lombard, IL

Yours will be the last word on recycling for this issue. We're in the throes of negotiating for the next year's printing, and we promise to take all of the opinions received from our readers into consideration in writing our next contract. Meanwhile, this issue, like the previous two, is on recycled paper.

Beware of Israel's Partisans

Congratulations again on what you have accomplished. You and your colleagues have made remarkable progress, but I have an uneasy feeling that Israel's partisans, now smelling danger, may succeed in galvanizing the troops. Enclosed is a contribution.

The article in your April/May issue about the press campaign to denigrate Bush without necessarily mentioning Israel struck a responsive chord. It is noticeable in The Wall Street Journal's economic columns and in the comments of David Gergen, Ronald Reagan's former press spokesman and ostensibly a Republican, on PBS.

Your publication Stealth PACs is particularly timely right now with the increased public and congressional criticism of PACs in general. How will AIPAC maneuver around this resentment? We will watch for your reports.

William Burdett, Gloucester, MA

Needed Facts on Iraq

I've been looking for a chronological record of our recent dealings with Iraq in order to prepare an abstract related to our supporting of Saddam Hussain's regime in its war with Iran and our complicated diplomatic exchanges and commercial transactions that lasted until his invasion of Kuwait. I wonder if it is possible that in one of your future issues you could compile the chronology of this very controversial period of our very recent history.

Les Giermanski, Lyndhurst, NJ

For starters, see the article on page 7 of our June 1992 issue: "In House Probe of Reagan, Bush, Saddam Ties, Where's the Beef?"

Other Kinds of Donations

Have you ever considered researching just who gives money to AIPAC? Who are the top 25 donors to AIPAC who voluntarily fund the hideous atrocities of the Zionists? What kind of business are they in, and where are their businesses located? A boycott and protest of their businesses to show a dislike of their support for Zionist crimes would be very effective, I would hope. Any light you can shed would be very helpful.

Judy Keller, Grand Rapids, MI

We publish names of our donors. AIPAC doesn't. Presumably some members of AIPAC's board of directors are major donors, although we believe their personal donations generally go to the political action committees in different parts of the country that so many of them founded with AIPAC coordination in 1984.

We believe that most of AIPAC's funding comes from money raised in the United States, ostensibly for Israel. Keeping 50 percent of those funds raised for Israel in the U.S. for use by organizations engaged in lobbying the U.S. Congress for massive U.S. taxpayer aid to Israel certainly would be an effective way to increase those funds geometrically. It's not something AIPAC would want widely known, however. If we're wrong on its funding, we'll let AIPAC set us straight. If we're right, or the story is even more interesting, we'd love to hear about it from readers in the know.

What to Read

I wanted to bring to your attention largely for your information but also with the suggestion you might be willing to reprint it, Tikva Honig-Parnass' essay, "Zionism's Cynical Choice."

In my view, the article states such a fundamental truth about the Israeli government's policies over the state's entire lifetime that it just must be said at this time. The essential credibility of this thesis, which I realize has been offered in your recent issues, is much enhanced by the fact that it comes from an Israeli writer and is published in News From Within, an Israeli journal.

Edna Homa Hunt, Winter Park, FL

Thanks to your suggestion, the article is reprinted on page 56 in "Other Voices," along with subscription information for News From Within.

Arab Women's Studies Institute

I have enjoyed reading the contributions of Executive Director Suha Sabbagh of the Institute for Arab Women's Studies to the Washington Report. It is important for people to know that women do play a significant role in the events and thinking that contribute to the nature of Middle Eastern issues.

Mona A. Bashir, Student Adviser, University of Nebraska at Omaha

We share quarters with the Institute, which right now is in even worse financial shape than our publisher, the American Educational Trust, if that is conceivable. Readers interested in learning more about the Institute are invited to contact Ms. Sabbagh at (202) 667-4540 or write the institute at P.O. Box 53391, Washington D.C. 20009.

Kind Words From a Retiree

As an old "Hummer" in the Angels' Choir in support of your excellent publication, I want to thank you for the work you have done. Years ago, my first issue of the Washington Report was about 16 pages. My latest copy is 96 pages, in color. Most important of all, it rips the hide off the Zionists, in a most understated, professional manner. Please continue my subscription.

Donald C. Braden (Ph.D, USAF Retired), La Quinta, CA

The first issue in April 1982 was 8 pages. This one is 104 pages, thanks to old hummers.