September/October 1994, Pages 3, 92-94

Letters to the Editor

Letters to the editor are selected, edited and abridged on the basis of relevance, accuracy, taste and available space. The editors do not have facilities to respond to individual letters, or to clear in advance published letters, as edited, with the writers.

What About Canada?

I want to let you know of my appreciation of your publication with its timely and valuable material, and to tell you how useful it has been over my career of study. I am currently half way through my Masters in War Studies at the Royal Military College, Kingston and information and quotations from the magazine have appeared in many of my essays, both graduate and undergraduate. I do have a couple of questions however: Is it possible to have the donated opinion molder subscriptions given to Canadians? While the WRMEA primarily focuses on the view from Washington, much of the information is applicable to opinion molders elsewhere.

A further question: May the library donations be given to Canadian institutions? Thank you and I look forward to reading WRMEA long into the future.

Chris Grimshaw, Kingston, Ont., Canada

The rate for donated subscriptions to Canadian opinion molders or libraries is US$20. Unfortunately that special opinion molder rate ends both for the U.S. ($12.50) and for Canada at the end of 1994 because, frankly, it's become so popular we no longer can carry the losses. From Jan. 1, donors of any kind of gift subscriptions, to opinion molders or otherwise, will pay $19 for U.S. addresses and US$30 for Canadian addresses, but each donation will entitle them to select one gift book (for themselves or for the subscription recipient) from the list on page 53 in this issue.

Basic Errors in the Attack

Kurt Holden's attack on the Middle East Quarterly (July/August) makes some basic errors. 1) My name is not Daniel Pipes, Jr. but Daniel Pipes. 2) The Quarterly is not Zionist, but as it proclaims from its masthead, it exists to "promote American interests." 3) The Quarterly is not published by the Middle East Council or the Foreign Policy Research Institute but by the Middle East Forum, a new organization. 4) It is not co-edited by Adam Garfinkle, but by Patrick Clawson, the senior editor. 5) Interviewing Martin Indyk in the first issue does not point to political bias on our part, no more than interviewing Tariq Aziz in the second issue or James A. Baker III in the third.

Shame on the Washington Report for publishing the only article about the Middle East Quarterly in which the author not only did not contact us for accurate information but clearly did not even lay eyes on the journal itself.

With best wishes, Daniel Pipes, Washington DC.

Our apologies to you and to your Sovietologist father, Richard Pipes. Apparently references to "the junior Pipes" lulled our writer into thinking of you as Daniel Pipes Jr. Our article in fact was written before the first issue appeared, and the quotes were based on pre-publication interviews you gave to AIPAC's Near East Report and the Philadelphia Inquirer.

If, as time passes, reassessment is called for, it probably will start with the same Near East Report which gave Middle East Quarterly such an enthusiastic pre-publication welcome. If its editors start complaining that perhaps yours really isn't different from other Middle East journals after all, perhaps we'll become your biggest boosters. Until then, what we see are a lot of editorial board members who might face the same difficulties you complained you face getting published in serious journals specializing in the Middle East, whose writers, Jewish and non-Jewish, as you pointed out, are "in widespread agreement that strong ties with Israel have harmed the United States."

Two More Years, Please

Please renew my WRMEA subscription for two more years. I apologize for a hurried, less than elegant letter, but please know how much you are appreciated. WRMEA is, perhaps, the only credible, responsible U.S. publication to tell the whole truth about Israel's shameful record of injustice and oppression toward the Palestinians. If not for the WRMEA (and publications like it), I would have little hope for American citizens' rights of freedom of speech when it comes to speaking out against the Israeli government's misdeeds. Keep up the superb job you are doing. Keep speaking out for all of us Americans who want an evenhanded U.S. policy in the Middle East that reflects America's—not Israel's—national interests. Keep speaking out for all of us U.S. citizens who are outraged that the Israeli lobby (and its network of supporters) has a stranglehold on our First Amendment rights to debate Middle East issues freely without fear of being intimidated, shunned and smeared by false accusations of anti-Semitism.Without the American Educational Trust's publication and all that it represents, I fear that our voices would be even more stifled, our rights to a free expression of our views crushed in the powerful gears of the Israeli government's public relations machine in the U.S.A.

Linda C. MacConnell, Abu Dhabi, U.A.E.

P.S. I would like to suggest an updated profile on Ellen Siegel (who lives in Washington), a surviving medical staffer of the Sabra and Shatila massacres. I recently saw a picture of her revisiting Palestinian camps. Without Ellen's courageous and inspirational example, I would long ago have lost hope that Jews and Arabs can live and work together peacefully in the Holy Land. We all need to be reminded of the heroic efforts of those Jews and Arabs who have dedicated their lives to the principles of justice and equality for all human beings.

George Ball's C-SPAN Interview

Re your "in memoriam" article on the late George Ball and his book The Passionate Attachment, did you know that Mr. Ball was interviewed by Brian Lamb on Booknotes (C-SPAN) around May 17, 1993? Perhaps you can make the video available through the AET Book Club. I obtained a copy for $35 from C-SPAN and gave it to a young person who devoured Ball's words. My informant says the book is better than the video, but your readers might want to judge for themselves. After reading your review of the book last year, I wrote heatedly to C-SPAN urging them to review it. They did, probably even before they received my advice.

Ruth Afifi, Fresno, CA

Readers can obtain the video by contacting C-SPAN Viewer Services, Dept. 53, Washington, DC 20055, (202) 626-7963.

Amazing Responses From Congress

I wish I had saved all of the responses from members of the House and Senate over the years to my requests that they explain why such a large portion of our foreign aid budget goes to one tiny country. They used to use such phrases as "to protect our vital interests in the Mideast," or, "Israel is our strongest ally in that part of the world," etc. Now they don't directly answer the question, but tell their constituents that "foreign aid makes up less than one percent of the federal budget."

You might suggest to some bright college student working on a masters thesis or doctoral dissertation in public policy or foreign relations to find people from perhaps 100 congressional districts to ask key members of Congress the same question and compare all of the replies (or non-replies) to determine if there is a "party line" on questions about aid to Israel. Does AIPAC provide members of Congress with suggested responses? Do letters from constituents on this subject get forwarded by the member of Congress to AIPAC, perhaps with a note that says "How do I answer this?" Wouldn't surprise me. Has any member of Congress put the aid to Israel question on any of those phony questionnaires they mail to raise funds? I doubt it.

One final thought. I hope your magazine noses into the issue of all of these state legislatures passing bills to allow their state governments to invest state pension funds in Israel bonds. I know you have mentioned a couple of states, but how widespread is it and what is the total dollar volume nationwide? You ought to consider having an observer at the National Conference of State Legislators in New Orleans this year. Every year there is a portion of the program set aside for the "Jewish Caucus" where hundreds gather as a group to get an update on what's going on in Israel and other Middle East issues. If you have ever wondered how so many supporters of Israel end up in Congress, take a look at the number who serve in state legislatures.

You may want to survey key members of state legislatures who have been on paid junkets to Israel. During the year hundreds of them are hosted on such trips and given the dog-and-pony show as well as red-carpet treatment while there. For the Jewish organizations that sponsor such trips it is a wise investment because many of those same state legislators end up in Congress.

Keep up the good work. You are virtually the only voice in America on this subject.

Name withheld at writer's request, OH

Maybe we're the real voice of America on the subject.

Hijacking the American Taxpayer

That the Clinton administration still pursues massive financial aid to Israel (about $5 billion a year, cumulatively $100 billion and possibly higher), and has even suggested increasing the annual subsidy when in no way is it in the national interest of the United States, demonstrates the unconscionable power of the American Zionist lobbies to hijack the American taxpayer even when the domestic economy is smarting from a decaying infrastructure and inadequate health care, and proposals to cut the federal budget, from medicare to welfare, are an everyday occurrence. But the mainstream media have been deafeningly silent on this national outrage. Has anyone ever heard a debate on national television on the issue of foreign aid to Israel? Put the issue to various referenda, town and gown, all over the country. The case is the American Taxpayers v. the Zionist Lobbies.

Robert Lyon, Professor Emeritus, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA

The only disagreement we have with your sentiments is that by our reckoning Israel is receiving $6.3 billion annually in grants and loan guarantees (see page 36).

A Mole in Your Midst

You must have a derailment specialist (or an Israeli mole) in your ranks down there.

Your June 6 letter, nudging me to renew my subscription (and back up this action with a check), just arrived in my mailbox this noon (today is July 2).

You'll be stunned to hear that I did this very thing back on March 29. Witness the enclosed copy of my check for $29 which you (or the aforementioned subversive) cashed at the Riggs National Bank on April 8 (anno domini 1994). I believe this sum entitles me to a few book discount credits as well as a continued subscription to the Washington Report.

Good to hear from you, even if only to be dunned. When you smoke out the culprit, let me know and I'll come down for the caning ceremony.

Richard D. Conly, Gladwyne, PA

The $12.50 book bonus certificate we owe you is in the mail. We seldom lose a subscriber except through acts of God, and we pretty much took it on faith that when we sent out renewal notices, people renewed. Our new circulation director, who used to be the business manager, wasn't so sure. So our publisher wrote personal letters to 6,000 subscribers for whom our records seemed vague. So far, about 1,500 have turned out to be paid in full (like you), but the notation from the business office where the mail is opened (and checks cashed) hadn't been recorded in the circulation files. Another 1,500 meant to renew or thought they'd renewed but hadn't. Some 150 had moved but hadn't notified us, another 150 didn't want to renew, 20, as we feared, were incapacitated, and we're still waiting to hear from the rest. The most common problem is that when people move, third class mail like our magazine is neither forwarded nor returned to the sender. You don't get your magazines, but we don't know you're not getting them unless you send a change of address directly to us. Our apologies to those who paid in full but were dunned anyway. Welcome back to those who were a little remiss with changes of address or re-up checks, and as for the missing 2,670—we're still waiting to hear from you, but probably not after this issue. Meanwhile, here are a few of the 3,330 replies received to date:

More About Renewals

I am paying a second time. My records show a March 25, 1994 check for $19 for one year. Can you check?

Pat Buchanan, McLean, VA

We did. You're right. We're returning your check.

Enclosed are copies of my checks for $100 and for $35. The $100 check was for my own and also several "gift" subscriptions, while the $35 was for my membership to ADC which may have my subscription included. Either of these checks would indicate my interest in maintaining my subscription for an indeterminate length of time.

If you are actually "fishing" for a pat on the back—which you certainly deserve—let me give you one. Your magazine with its slick paper (good looks and record-keeping power) is eagerly anticipated by me. It is the only magazine I receive other than the Aramco World that I save for my own library. As a matter of fact, I was hoping you may have binders for them. As for the contents of your magazine—it is food for my soul. Please keep up the good work.

Phyllis Mackaoui, Arroyo Grande, CA

Your check to us is more than enough. You would have had to add $12.50 to your ADC membership for a Washington Report subscription. (No wonder we all get confused.) So we owe you an apology plus thanks for your kind words.

You haven't lost me as a reader—I get a copy at the office so I'm dropping the subscription for home.

Laurie Engle, Holland, MI

This was first sent to me as a gift from a friend. I assumed the gift was renewed! It's a great magazine—so I enclose the cost for the past year, and the price for renewal. Thanks.

B.D. Rugh, Seattle, WA

I agree with your statement that I have received the Washington Report since December 1992 and I have not paid. To correct this I am enclosing a check for $45. When the account is even please cancel my subscription.

I agree with what you are trying to do, but I think it is mission improbable. I do not think your lobbying will reform politicians who support the murder of American servicemen by the Israeli government and who support the American law requiring Americans to pay Israel's debts each year. I do not think a few letters will reform a news media ever ready to defraud the American people on behalf of Israel. I believe that the relationship between our government and Israel is a criminal corruption problem and I do not think anything short of criminal prosecution will change the criminal's behavior. I have been watching this since the early '60s and I think that the criminals have won. Good luck.

Hugh M. Williams, Campobello, SC

The reason I discontinued my subscription was my moving from one state to another. I am glad that you sent me this as a reminder. This is a great magazine, and please send this kind of notice to everybody you know of or any address you have in the U.S. and around the world. Keep up the good job with your balanced, accurate and unbiased journalism.

Waqar Uddin, Athens, GA

Thank you for your letter of May 16, 1994. I was myself confused about my status with the Washington Report. Although I have been receiving only one copy of the magazine, I generally have been receiving duplicate mailings of everything else. With this in mind, I had ignored the first renewal notice but I thought I had renewed pursuant to the second notice. In any event, as you say, let's start from a clean slate. Here is my check for a one-year renewal. Please check to see that I am not listed twice in your computer. I have the deepest respect for your valiant effort.

Glen Allen, Baltimore, MD

I'm renewing. Great magazine, folks. How can I solicit subscriptions for you?

Neil Himber, Mason, OH

We'll talk about how to solicit for us on the publishers' page (p. 114). Space doesn't permit reprinting letters from the Catholic sister in a California convent who didn't have the money to renew (she'll receive a subscription courtesy of Ray Hanania of Orlando Lake, IL), the prisoner in New York who's about to be transferred to another jail, as yet unknown, and will renew when she gets there, and many others. We apologize for everyone's trouble, and although we really weren't fishing for compliments, we bless you all for sending them.

Media Targeting of Arab Americans

Anne Marie Baylouny's article, "ABC's Episode of Anti-Semitism," in the April/ May issue of the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, describes one facet of the propaganda siege against an entire ethnic group in order to further polarize public perceptions of ethnic Arabs and Jews.

I am no more surprised by television's exclusively negative characterizations of Arabs than by the exclusively positive depictions of Jews. In the latter instance, I refer to Picket Fences as standard-bearer for a host of shows that portray the current Jewish stereotype: The "old Jewish lawyer" on Picket Fences is kindly, intelligent, professional, witty, mildly eccentric, friendly, loyal to friends, family and religion, an upstanding citizen and defender of the common man. In the TV metaset, this character is diametrically opposed to "Dante Partou" on Loving, who, as your article notes, is depicted as Arabic, malicious, evil, and who engages in physical and emotional abuse of women, infidelity, kidnapping, drug use and sadistic revenge.

Just as Partou's image quickly moved from vague "European" ancestry to a wide and unmistakable range of negative defamatory Arab stereotypes, given television's pervasive bias there is every reason to suspect that ABC's new token "good" Arab-American character, "Officer Abboud," will eventually degenerate into a pimp, child molester, drug dealer, or similar deviant dressed, for the sake of contrast and emotional impact, in the official robes of justice. Because you are familiar with literature on the subject of negative Arab stereotyping in the U.S. media, you no doubt see the sustained effort to defame Arabs as a people and culture is not limited to the sporadic efforts of this writer or that producer. The American media follows Zionist intent with impunity and with complete and arrogant disregard for the cultural values or traditions of any American ethnic group. As a tax-paying American angered by Israeli manipulation of U.S. foreign policy in the Mideast, as an Arab-American victim of televised bigotry and hate-mongering, and now as an "Abboud" targeted by ABC for its new line of mass defamation, I have borne these insults with tolerance and even humor. The problem will not go away on its own, however, and will become more widespread as a tool for political intimidation and control until we put a stop to it.

Edward Abood, Vienna, VA

You Are Biased on Some Issues

I greatly admire your magazine for its factually accurate reporting on the Mideast. However, I fear that the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs is as biased on certain issues as it is objective on others. In the belief that we can all learn from each other, I enclose a letter on international double standards of morality. This should help your admirable magazine avoid the same mistakes it discerns in others.

William R. Wright, Walnut Creek, CA

We appreciate your study on the use of propaganda, mythology and false statistics in the creation of the former Republic of Czechoslovakia. Be assured that we have no intention of straying further into the Balkans or Eastern or Western Europe than the areas shared by Muslim and non-Muslim populations. Our interest there is solely to ensure that Prof. Samuel Huntington's prediction of a titanic 21st century "clash of civilizations" between the Islamic and Christian worlds does not come about. It should not, we believe, because most Muslims still espouse the tolerance of pluralism that characterized Islam's golden age and most North Americans espouse the diversity that can be seen in any U.S. or Canadian city street, and which has made both countries such dynamic and vibrant places to live. Certainly our writers (and editors) have their biases, but we will take pains to present both, or the several sides of controversial questions—making sure that the views least available to the American public get as much space as we can give them. We do this particularly in our presentations of two, four, six or more views on controversial issues in North American-Middle East relations. If you're doubtful, check the frequent discrepancies between our publishers' page, which carries our own "editorials," and the individual articles and departments in the magazine. We exist to inform, not propagandize, because we sincerely believe that if readers are presented with all of the facts, they'll find their own way to the right decisions.

Thank You, Grace Halsell

I have just finished reading Prophecy and Politics, written by Grace Halsell. I wish to thank the American Educational Trust and the Washington Report for making such an invaluable and precious book available to the American readers who seek the "truth," or just close to it.

The content of Prophecy and Politics is marvelous and, at the same time, ominous. It is marvelous in the way Grace Halsell unmasks the true nature of the unholy "Alliance" which exists between the New Christian Right in the U.S. and the Israeli political leadership. It is ominous in the way the "Alliance" uses Christianity and Judaism for fulfilling political goals for Israel. The end results of their unholy activities may lead to disaster for the U.S. and all humanity. Such an "Alliance" has nothing to do with theology.

Preachers who urge Israel to take more land by force from the Palestinians and other Arabs because those preachers believe that God promised the Jews such land, have reduced Him from the God of love, mercy and compassion into a mere real estate agent. Perhaps "they know not what they do."

If the God of TV evangelists, who support a militant Israel, is a God for slaughter and nuclear Armageddon, He is not my God. If their Jesus condones the slaughter of millions of people for His Second Coming, He is not my Jesus. If their Bible tells them to support Israel in its barbaric and inhuman confiscation of Palestinian and Arab lands, it is not my Bible. My God, my Jesus and my Bible are those of Grace Halsell's kind. If you wish to know what kind, read her book.

I deeply respect what Grace Halsell has accomplished in writing Prophecy and Politics. It is a book written with a clear conscience, compassion and love for all of humanity. Can any decent human being ask for more than that? Thank you Grace Halsell, wherever you are.

Ned Ammari, Westerville, OH

Grace Halsell, the author of more than 20 books, many based upon her personal "undercover" investigations as is Prophecy and Politics, is alive, well and busy in Washington DC, free-lancing for many publications including the Washington Report. Prophecy and Politics and her Journey to Jerusalem are described on pages 96 and 97 of this issue's AET book club catalog.

Problems Without Solution in Bosnia

In recent months, we had friends of long standing, from The Netherlands, as our houseguests. The issues that you articulate so skillfully were touched upon in the frank and friendly discussions between old friends. Their views leave me very troubled, particularly in addressing the problems without solution in Bosnia, but are equally applicable to involvement in civil wars anywhere else in the world. Their response, in essence, was "we realize that if it weren't for America, there would be no Holland today, but we will not allow our son to be put at risk or sacrificed for Yugoslavia." In effect, "don't count on us" in trying to correct the wrongs of the world. So much for the new world order, and mutual obligation, for the safety and well being of all mankind. Reality was accented with published photos of past sacrifices reflected in the overseas military cemeteries, with American gravestones extending over the horizon.

Was it not John Quincy Adams who said in 1820: "Wherever the standard of freedom and independence has been unfurled, there will be America's heart, her benedictions and her prayers. But she goes not abroad in search of monsters to destroy"?

In those few words are reflected the worth and preciousness of American lives—and in marked contrast to your own written standard, as stated in the "Bosnia Is About More Than Bosnia" article of June 1994. You cited America's "minor losses" in the Gulf war of "149 battle deaths and about the same number of accidental fatalities" and continued: "Had the whole half-million-person U.S. force stayed home, a greater number would have been killed in traffic over the same period." But "the U.S. had a role to play, played it and the world was a safer place."

The oil fields will likely be contested again. The lost lives are permanent losses. The monsters of the world are not on our conscience. To act otherwise is morally wrong and will be destructive of our binding fiber.

Daniel V. James, San Diego, CA

We certainly understand your point of view, perhaps deeply influenced by your own Vietnam experiences. Our viewpoint was formed by the leadup to World War II. America was isolationist then, only finally going to war in response to the Pearl Harbor attack. In our opinion that enabled the "monsters" to reach the proportions they did, creating a war in which 55 million died. In our opinion that was a war that might well have been prevented. The Balkan wars (which are not civil wars) which are brewing again can best be prevented from spreading by judicious collective action now, such as lifting the arms embargo which prevents only the victims, not the aggressors, from getting arms. Without such actions now, we believe, hundreds of thousands more will die. If that happens, Americans are more likely to become involved, just as they did in World War II, but no longer on our own terms. Up to now we have been asked only to continue the air shipments of food we began more than a year ago and, if we will, provide air support for the more numerous but under-armed ground troops of the Bosnian government. We continue to believe that when over-the-border aggression occurs, early international intervention to prevent the growth in strength of the aggressor forces is a way to save, not lose, lives.