The Israel/Palestinian Peace Plan that my Mid-East Poly-Sci class came up with ;)

* Please note that this document was part of a class simulation and does not necessarily reflect the views of all class members, instructor, or institution.

2009 Israel- Palestinian Peace Conference

Approved by a majority vote of PLSI 410 Spring 2009
Final Agreement

Territory/ Borders: Two-state solution. Israel must leave all current occupied territories. The Palestinian state will look like the following: extension of Gaza as well as the West Bank, but not to exceed the armistice lines “green line” in the 1949 agreement. Palestinians living within the new state of Israel can leave or they will become Israeli citizens and must obey Israeli law. Israelis living in the new Palestinian state have the option to leave, or if they choose to stay will become Palestinian citizens and subsequently will have to obey Palestinian law.

Water Rights: redistribute 50-50 water rights between Israel- Palestine with a joint water committee overseen by international organizations for five years.

Refugees/ Right of Return: Palestinians will have their own state (with full rights to establish a military) and not have a Right to Return to Israel. Palestinians choosing to not return to the state of Palestine will receive reparations on an individual basis. The Palestinian government will receive and distribute the reparations from those Palestinians who do chose to return to Palestine.

Jerusalem: city-state, free access to all. Dual citizenship either: Jerusalemites and either Palestinian or Israeli citizenship. Has its own two-house parliament overseen by a Tri-Judgeship representing the three dominant religions: Islam, Judaism, and Christianity. There is to be a committee to organize interfaith events to bridge dialogue between the religions and cultures; this includes an educational exchange program for Palestinians and Israelis living outside of Jerusalem.

Security: Abolish all walls between the two states as well as internal check points. Five year border control committee established which is equally made up (50-50) between Israeli and Palestinians. The committee will also regulate airspace between the two nations (there will be no crossing of airspace). A railway linking Gaza and the West Bank, and a visa passport program implemented within both Israel and Palestine.

25! that's crazy!!

1. i may be a bit delusional in this, but i feel super san francisco!

2. i love it when stereotypes that i didn't even know i had get shattered.

3. i love it when i make a true attempt to see something from all sides, not just the side i'm emotionally attached to.

4. i have a bleeding heart.

5. i believe in reincarnation.

6. i have something that comes close to true love for almost every religion i encounter.

7. i truly feel that my close friends are my family.

8. i was born with 4 great-parents and 4 grandparents and had most of them through my teenage years.

9. my first word was "light."

10. i have a serious addiction to ice cream.

11. i was clearly a chain-smoker in a past life. me and cigarettes are like fish to water.

12. thanks to suzi, i am a weaver.

13. i feel really very lucky that i grew up in galt.

14. i talk to quinlan on the phone probably between 8-12 hours per week.

15. i would love to fully potentialize my soul, though i doubt that will happen in this lifetime.

16. i'm horrible at time-management.

17. i love vodka and everything that can be done with it.

18. i'm glad to be web designing again, after taking a year and a half off.

19. i've had one energy reading in my life and the truth of it made me cry.

20. i am generally drawn to the paranormal and metaphysical.

21. i am so very lucky to live in this beautiful house with 6 amazing and inspiring roommates, and all 6 of their significant others who float in and out of the house as well.

22. i have a really hard time saying the word "boyfriend."

23. i love keith olbermann, rachel maddow and amy goodman.

24. my biggest priority in life is travel.

25. i have only felt like the minority one time in my life, and that was last night at the poleng lounge.

if you live in galt, or know anyone who still does, pls read!

If you live in Galt, or know anyone who still does, please vote for (or ask them to vote for) Doug Vanderkar for Galt School Board.

He is the Director of CBS (Community Bus Service) at Sac RT (where I used to work), and my friend. He's a really great guy and would be a benefit to any school board!!

Thank you, thank you!

REGISTER TO VOTE!!! Deadline is MONDAY!!

if you haven't done this yet guys,
seriously,
this is no joke...

get your ass registered!!

(unless you plan on voting for mccain)




thank you.

obama osama

The latest on the "Is Barack Obama a Muslim?" front is a church sign in Jonesville, South Carolina, which reads, "Obama, Osama, Humm, Are they Brothers?" It's unreal, the level of ignorance.



The Associated Press states that, "Pastor Roger Byrd said he just wanted to make people think when he put up a sign reading 'Obama, Osama — humm, are they brothers' in front of the Jonesville Church of God on Thursday." The pastor went on to say that, "His name is so close to Osama I feel he might be Islamic therefore he doesn't recognize Christ." On the news coverage I saw on MSNBC, the pastor was basically saying that since we don't know for sure if Obama is a Muslim or not, he wanted to encourage people in his town to really look into this question.

Luckily for Pastor Byrd, it's an easy question to find the answer to. Numerous news organizations have addressed this issue in depth. By simply typing "is barack obama a muslim" into the Google search, we find responses from CNN, the Washington Post, Forbes and the Times (U.K.), all debunking this idea. These articles were found on the first page of search results listed. On the same first page of results, a response to this issue posted by BarackObama.com can also be found, with a headline that states, "Obama Has Never Been A Muslim, And Is a Committed Christian." The first and second responses listed are from urban legend verification sites, UrbanLegends.com and Snopes.com – both clearly state that this is a myth. Of the 11 responses found on the first page of search results, eight of them make it clear that this is just a myth. The remaining three don't question his current faith, which they believe to be Christian, but the concern is whether Muslims consider him to be an apostate, which is a Muslim who converted to another religion. These last three posts are from news organizations much less known and trusted than the ones that discount this idea.

If Pastor Byrd, his congregation (who unanimously voted in Sunday service to keep the sign up) and the people of Jonestown, SC and the U.S. at large, really want to find an answer to this question, it couldn't be easier to find. Most people propagating this myth already know the truth and don't care, or have no real interest in finding the truth on this issue. It's much easier for them to call him a Muslim and be done with it. And worse, the sign does not only link him to Islam, but to the U.S.'s number one enemy within Islam, Osama bin Laden, thus linking Obama to worst of what Islam is in the eyes of the American public. This speaks to the larger problem here, which is that anyone who is Muslim in this country is consciously or sub-consciously linked to worst of what Islam represents – like linking all Catholics to pedophiles, Mormons to brainwashing and sexual abuse of children (in the form of polygamy), and fundamentalist Christians to domestic terrorism through the bombing of abortion clinics. All these things represent the worst of people, and can be found in all religions.

islamization

Geert Wilders, a member of the Dutch parliament who also dabbles in filmmaking, has recently made a short documentary film, titled, "Fitna." This film has caused controversy both in the Netherlands and throughout the Muslim world. I watched the film, after reading about it in an article. The point of the film is to outline the dangers of the "Islamization" of the Netherlands. The film definitely represents an extreme bias against the Muslim world. It's shocking to see a viewpoint this extreme aired in public, and even worse that the filmmaker himself is a member of parliament.

The title of the film, "Fitna," is an important word to Muslims, holding as much power and emotional charge as the word "jihad." Unlike "jihad," most non-muslims are not familiar with the word "fitna," or with it's meaning. Nahed Selim, a journalist from Trouw, a Netherlands publication, writes the following on the strength of this word in Islam: "Every Muslim knows the Arabic word fitna, says the leader of the Party for Freedom (PVV). 'It refers to situations in which the faith of the Muslims is put to the test. Everything that tests their faith is fitna: uncovered women, alcohol, non-Muslims, resistance against the authority of Islam. I use the term as a mirror image: to me the pernicious Islam is fitna.' Wilders was very pleased with his find, 'I was set on using a word from the Koran.'"

Some of the film is extremely graphic – we are given a warning of this at the beginning of the film and YouTube requires that we confirm our date of birth before giving access to the film on their site. It begins with scenes from 9/11 and moves into scenes of other terrorist attacks and anti-Jew rallies held by Muslims. It shows Muslims to be extremely anti-Semitic, carrying signs that say, "Be prepared for the real holocaust!" and "God Bless Hitler!" All the while, ominous music plays in the background. Among the graphic images is video from the Atocha bombing in Spain, which, again, has not been attributed to any Muslim organization, but to ETA, a Spanish separatist group from the Basque region. Recitation of the Qur'an in Arabic overlays some of the most gruesome scenes. Arabic is subtitled throughout the film, saying things like, "Throats must be slit and skulls must be shattered. This is the path to victory." As we've learned from experience, can these subtitles even be trusted?

The response to this film in U.S. media has been mixed, some recognizing the racism and hate being preached, while others seem to embrace Wilders' view. Roman Verzub, from the Cauldren, a University publication in Ohio, states that, "the film takes a straight look at the ideology of groups like Al-Qaeda, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and Hezbollah, among others." A "straight look" implies an unbiased viewpoint, but that's one thing that's definitely missing in Wilders' film. NPR, on the other hand, describes Fitna as "a short film… that portrays Islam as a violent, fascist-like ideology."

In defending the fear of Islamization, Selim states that, "The islamization of thought will mean the end of all creativity, originality and creative power, for creation is a divine quality patented by Allah. He will not tolerate competition from man. Islamization is the process by which Islamic values eventually gain the upper hand over all other value systems, in all aspects of life."

From what I have learned of Islam, Muslims have been one of the most creative and forward-thinking groups of people in the history of the world. Wilders' film does nothing to show this side of Islam and only promotes ignorance and intolerance of Islam, states of being that have been promoted by the general tone of the media throughout the western world. Until we can find appreciation for Islam, for all that it has to offer, films like "Fitna" will continue to find an audience that is more than willing to embrace these divisive ideas with open arms.

a fight to the right

Senator Hilary Clinton has seemed as republican lately as President Bush when it comes to her ideas about foreign security policy, and even more republican than Senator John McCain. From threatening to "obliterate" Iran to her recent campaign ad, titled "Kitchen," which flashes a photo of Osama bin Laden, she's taken fear-mongering to a new level for democrats. Republicans can't even get away with language or fear tactics such as these, but she has embraced them.

Watching the democratic presidential debate this past week in Pennsylvania was painful, for many reasons, but nothing surprised me more than Senator Clinton's pledge to defend the whole of the Middle East against Iran. Both Senators Obama and Clinton have surprised me more than once during this campaign with almost republican-like ideas of foreign security policy, but this really went too far. We're trying to get away from Bush policy, not continue it for another hundred years, as McCain would have us do. With this, it sounds like Senator Clinton would have the same thing.

The Jerusalem Post states, "It is within the United States' power to destroy Iran if it attacks Israel, warned Democratic presidential hopeful Senator Hillary Clinton in an interview on ABC television Monday night. 'In the next ten years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them,' said Clinton." Further, she didn't stop at saying that the U.S. would attack Iran if they attacked Israel; she went on to say that we would attack Iran if they attacked any country in the Middle East. Here is her quote from the debate: "I think that we should be looking to create an umbrella of deterrence that goes much further than just Israel. Of course I would make it clear to the Iranians that an attack on Israel would incur massive retaliation from the United States, but I would do the same with other countries in the region."

Senator Clinton made this statement on MSNBC's Countdown with Keith Olbermann: "If Iran were to become a nuclear power, it could set off an arms race. The countries in the region are not going to want Iran to be the only nuclear power." David Edwards of Raw Story, an online alternative news organization, responded to that statement: "Clinton's suggestion that Iran might trigger an arms race appeared not to take account of the fact that Iran's immediate neighbor, Pakistan already possesses nuclear weapons, as does India. Israel, which has refused to either confirm or deny whether it has a nuclear weapons program, is widely believed to have an arsenal of over a hundred warheads. Other nations in the region, such as Turkey and Saudi Arabia, have also been reported as interested in obtaining nuclear capability." Her statement was incorrect, so was she ill-informed or intentionally trying to mislead the American people? Eight years of that has been enough.

She also stated on Countdown: "I think deterrence has not been effectively used in recent times. We used it very well during the Cold War." This speaks directly to the point made by Edward Said in his book, Covering Islam: "With the end of the Cold War [Iran], and along with it 'Islam,' has come to represent America's major foreign devil." Said also states, in his documentary titled "On Orientalism," that it is necessary for the U.S. to maintain the impression of having serious enemies, so that it can justify its sizable defense budget, which is more than twice that of any other country.

When Democrats try to keep up with the Republican Right on issues of foreign policy, it can only drive them further away from their base of support. She openly admits to doing this and so states on Countdown: "We're going to have to go toe to toe with John McCain on national security." This may have worked in Ohio and Pennsylvania where the majority of Democratic voters are not college educated (only 38% of Democratic voters in Ohio and 46% in Pennsylvania hold college degrees, according to CNN), but by and large, I don't believe that Democrats will respond well to this type of message.