[WCUSP] Apartheid as our frame? Dems Repudiate Carter Book

Fri Oct 27 12:04:47 CDT 2006

My focus remains the same, and so may all of yours.  I felt it necessary to 
say what I did.

I don't agree that it is the reality that turns people off -- one can't get 
to the reality when one starts with words that turn them off.

Libby

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tura Campanella Cook" <turacc at earthlink.net>
To: "Joyce McLean" <jmclean at jps.net>
Cc: "Libby or Mort Frank" <lmfrank1 at verizon.net>; <kzaidan at wilpf.org>; 
<wcusp at wilpf.org>; "Barbara Taft" <beejayssite at yahoo.com>
Sent: Friday, October 27, 2006 12:08 PM
Subject: Re: [WCUSP] Apartheid as our frame? Dems Repudiate Carter Book

>I am all for using the term apartheid and going with Kate's original 
>reasons which opened this discussion.  The word is shocking and then we 
>describe the situation on the ground.  The people we want to reach, Libby, 
>are turned off by the reality, not by the word (or would be turned off by 
>the reality if they knew it, also turned off by the mere accusation in the 
>word).  We want them to be turned off by the reality, and to demand change 
>in US policy.  What better way to capitalize on the discussion Carter is 
>generating?  Let's think about how to use outrage over the word as a way to 
>educate.  The letters to Pelosi and others are a good idea.
>
> The little maps Pat shared would be very helpful.  I am forwarding them to 
> the WCUSP list right after I send this.
>
> In peace,
> Tura
>
>
> On Oct 27, 2006, at 10:31 AM, Joyce McLean wrote:
>
>> can we begin with letters to Pelosi, Conyers, Dean etc......we've been
>> there....our sisters live there...we read the regs on who can come and 
>> who
>> can't and who can live where.....give us another term please that 
>> describes
>> this unjust situation....................
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Libby or Mort Frank" <lmfrank1 at verizon.net>
>> To: "Barbara Taft" <beejayssite at yahoo.com>; <kzaidan at wilpf.org>;
>> <wcusp at wilpf.org>
>> Sent: Friday, October 27, 2006 4:44 AM
>> Subject: Re: [WCUSP] Apartheid as our frame? Dems Repudiate Carter Book
>>
>>
>>> Okay, here's my personal opinion:
>>>
>>> Yes, I strongly agree that Israel is an apartheid state.  But there is 
>>> one
>>> good reason to not refer to it that way -- the need to reach people who
>>> will
>>> turn off when we use the term.  We must describe the awful conditions
>>> Israel
>>> is putting the Palestinians under, and do it in the strongest way
>>> possible.
>>> We can do it without using the term.
>>>
>>> The American Jewish community is a tremendous active force for much that
>>> is
>>> good in our country.  It also presents a tremendous obstacle to changing
>>> U.S. policy regarding Palestine and Israel.   That obstacle must be
>>> removed.
>>> A mass defection of American Jews from the current U.S./Israeli policy
>>> would
>>> be powerful.  We must be honest and frank in what we say, but find the
>>> ways
>>> of speaking that will reach that community and others who are allied to
>>> it.
>>>
>>> Libby
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Barbara Taft" <beejayssite at yahoo.com>
>>> To: <kzaidan at wilpf.org>; <wcusp at wilpf.org>
>>> Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2006 12:11 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [WCUSP] Apartheid as our frame? Dems Repudiate Carter Book
>>>
>>>
>>> I can think of two good reasons to call it apartheid:
>>>
>>> 1)  South Africans, both Black and White, have visited the Occupied
>>> Territories and
>>>    declared them to be "worse than apartheid".
>>>
>>> 2)  Many years ago, I heard a White South African speak about apartheid.
>>> He
>>> told
>>>    the audience that its correct pronunciation is "apart-hate" and that 
>>> it
>>> is
>>>    very descriptive.  He said, "You keep them apart because you hate".
>>> Especially
>>>    now, with the Separation Wall and Jews-only roads, it is an apt
>>> description.
>>>
>>> Barb T.
>>>
>>> --- Kate Zaidan <kzaidan at wilpf.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------
>>>    This article raises some interesting strategical questions in terms
>>> ofchallenging US policy in
>>> the Middle East. To me, it makes the case thatApartheid is a word that 
>>> the
>>> peace movement needs to
>>> adopt as theframe to describe the conflict.
>>>
>>> I think that we need to make the case to our legislators, 
>>> especiallythose
>>> that we consider
>>> "friendly", that the situation is indeedapartheid and that policy must 
>>> be
>>> constructed out of that
>>> framework.The US Government has taken a stand against apartheid before,
>>> andabsolutely would not
>>> have done so without the hard work of theanti-apartheid movement.
>>>
>>> Apartheid is more than a word. It's a story. Stories have the power
>>> toshape
>>> the way that our
>>> decision makers see the world. Apartheid is avector that carries this
>>> story
>>> and makes it such that
>>> we, as activists,don't have to understand every nuanced dimension of
>>> policy,
>>> we justhave to set
>>> the frame and make it such that policy is formed out ofthat frame.
>>>
>>> And from this article, it seems that the precedent has already been 
>>> setby
>>> a
>>> powerful political
>>> figure, and we, as activists should pick up theball where Jimmy Carter
>>> left
>>> off and take
>>> advantages of the existingtensions in the democratic party.
>>>
>>> I'll send out a brief history on the sanctions that the US
>>> Governmentimposed
>>> on South Africa
>>> separately.
>>>
>>> Kate
>>>
>>> Dems Repudiate Carter Book
>>>
>>> Jennifer Siegel | Fri. Oct 27, 2006
>>>
>>> Top Democrats are rushing to repudiate former President
>>> Carter'scontroversial new book on the
>>> Middle East, in which he accuses theIsraeli government of maintaining an
>>> apartheid system.
>>>
>>> Two key party leaders - Democratic National Committee Chairman 
>>> HowardDean,
>>> party chairman, and
>>> House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi - andseveral congressmen issued
>>> statements Monday saying that
>>> the book,"Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid," does not represent their 
>>> views
>>> on
>>> theJewish state.
>>>
>>> "It is wrong to suggest that the Jewish people would support agovernment
>>> in
>>> Israel or anywhere
>>> else that institutionalizes ethnicallybased oppression, and Democrats
>>> reject
>>> that allegation
>>> vigorously,"Pelosi wrote in a statement. "With all due respect to former
>>> PresidentCarter, he does
>>> not speak for the Democratic Party on Israel."
>>>
>>> Carter's book is being published by Simon & Schuster and is slatedfor
>>> release November 14. In an
>>> advanced draft copy of the work,obtained by the Forward, the former
>>> president asserts that
>>> Israel'scurrent policies in the Palestinian territories constitute "a
>>> system
>>> ofapartheid, with two
>>> peoples occupying the same land but completelyseparated from each other,
>>> with Israelis totally
>>> dominant andsuppressing violence by depriving Palestinians of their 
>>> basic
>>> humanrights." He argues
>>> that Israel's settlement policy is principally toblame for the failure 
>>> of
>>> peace initiatives in the
>>> Middle East.
>>>
>>> Dean also took issue with Carter's assessment.
>>>
>>> "While I have tremendous respect for former President Carter,
>>> Ifundamentally
>>> disagree and do not
>>> support his analysis of Israel andthe Israeli-Palestinian conflict," 
>>> Dean
>>> wrote in a statement.
>>> "On thisissue President Carter speaks for himself, the opinions in his
>>> book
>>> arehis own, they are
>>> not the views or position of the Democratic Party. Iand other Democrats
>>> will
>>> continue to stand
>>> with Israel in its battleagainst terrorism and for a lasting peace with
>>> its
>>> neighbors."
>>>
>>> Several Democratic members of New York's House delegation - Reps.
>>> SteveIsrael, Charlie Rangel and
>>> Jerrold Nadler - also have issued statementscriticizing Carter's book, 
>>> as
>>> did Rep. John Conyers,
>>> Jr., a MichiganDemocrat who is often criticized by members of the Jewish
>>> community forhis failure
>>> to support Israel in a certain instance. Last summer,Conyers was one of
>>> eight House members who
>>> did not vote for aresolution backing the Jewish state in the wake of the
>>> Hezbollahattacks.
>>>
>>> In his statement, Conyers said that Carter's use of the word"apartheid"
>>> went
>>> too far.
>>>
>>> "I cannot agree with the book's title and its implications
>>> aboutapartheid,"
>>> the lawmaker wrote in
>>> a statement. "I recently called theformer president to express my 
>>> concerns
>>> about the title of the
>>> book,and to request that the title be changed."
>>>
>>> Fri. Oct 27, 2006
>>>
>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Wcusp mailing list
>>>> Wcusp at wilpf.org
>>>> http://wilpf.org/mailman/listinfo/wcusp_wilpf.org
>>>> To post a message to all the list members, send email to 
>>>> Wcusp at wilpf.org.
>>>> To unsubscribe send a message to Wcusp-leave at wilpf.org
>>>
>>>
>>> __________________________________________________
>>> Do You Yahoo!?
>>> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>>> http://mail.yahoo.com
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wcusp mailing list
>>> Wcusp at wilpf.org
>>> http://wilpf.org/mailman/listinfo/wcusp_wilpf.org
>>> To post a message to all the list members, send email to 
>>> Wcusp at wilpf.org.
>>> To unsubscribe send a message to Wcusp-leave at wilpf.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wcusp mailing list
>>> Wcusp at wilpf.org
>>> http://wilpf.org/mailman/listinfo/wcusp_wilpf.org
>>> To post a message to all the list members, send email to 
>>> Wcusp at wilpf.org.
>>> To unsubscribe send a message to Wcusp-leave at wilpf.org
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wcusp mailing list
>> Wcusp at wilpf.org
>> http://wilpf.org/mailman/listinfo/wcusp_wilpf.org
>> To post a message to all the list members, send email to Wcusp at wilpf.org.
>> To unsubscribe send a message to Wcusp-leave at wilpf.org
>>
>
> 