|
|
|
| A Larger View |
|
A Bi-Monthly Newsletter of the Inner Outer Partnership |
| Volume VII Edition 3 |
May/June |
2002 |
The Middle East
How We Got There?
As the impasse in the Middle East continues (for it is bound to go far
beyond the time of this writing) one searches to better understand how we
got there. Inevitably, one realizes that the present quandary would
benefit from a clearer grasp of a spiritually understood cause and effect.
It's a tall order involving much we as humans have not yet learned. and it
would therefore be useful for a reader to consider a stab at an answer
not in terms of accuracy but in those of hopefully pointing direction .
Israel attributes it's recent sending of tanks into the West Bank as a
response to Palestinian suicide bombings, acts which they call terrorism
on the order of the attacks on the World Trade Center. If that was their
reason, was it their real reason? Or, was using tanks to conduct a
search and destroy operation, as opposed to say commandos, only a visible
aspect of their cause?
In turn, the Palestinian Authority attributes the suicide bombings to
the Israeli occupation of it's territories, an occupation began following
their defeat in the 1967 war launched by several Arab nations challenging
the existence of the state of Israel. As a result, thousands of
Palestinians have been kept in refugee camps, and thousands of others as
second-class citizens subject to humiliation, suffering and often
deprivation on a daily basis. Could the occupation be a more fundamental
cause? Or more precisely could the lack of a Palestinian State be at the
root of the problem?
Much has been said to justify the position of each side: That Chairman
Arafat made mistakes, notably by refusing the Camp David peace proposal,
that his leadership is wanting and even that he may not want peace at all,
that Israel has the right to protect itself, that tanks are a more
restrained alternatives than bombs, that by rooting out potential suicide
bombers Israel is doing what Arafat should have done, that peace talks
cannot begin unless the violence stops, that the Arab world has not been
sufficiently active in it's support of the Palestinian cause, that both
sides are filled with distrust, fear, anger and despair... None seems to
alter underlying facts: That Israelis have a state and Palestinians do not, that what has
come to be called the Palestinian Authority has been a territory
considering itself occupied by Israel , that as such Palestinians are
resisting in whatever way they can, that which became Israel was
previously occupied by the British, that in order to free themselves
those who fought for an Israeli state engaged in bombings and other
violent acts which the British called terrorism, and that when the
partition of Palestine was voted on in 1948, the issue of a Palestinian
state was left hanging.
What gives credence to the cause of the Palestinians are precisely the
parallels. Ought there to be a double standard? Can Israelis be given a
state, and Palestinians be ignored? Are acts of resistance against an
occupying force only legitimate when Israelis commit them, not when
Palestinians engage?
From a political standpoint, seeking a fundamental cause
oversimplifies the issues, and identifying that cause as the lack of a
Palestinian state no doubt oversimplifies it even more. Yet how can the
problem be addressed and viable solutions found if the real causes are
not confronted?
If self determination and freedom are spiritual values, then
Palestinians need a state as much as the Israelis, and the current
devastation only sets back their cause. Israeli tanks may have in the
short run curtailed suicide bombings, but in the long run may have opened
the door for unprecedented resentment and probably violence. Viewed through
a spiritual lens, the present points to the increased difficulty for
Palestinians to now reach their due goal, and to the responsibility of
Israelis for their role in the set back.
Responsibility Must Someone Pay?
Two recent court decisions challenge our practice and understanding of responsibility. The first is finding Andrea Yates, the mother who drowned
her five children in Houston, guilty of first degree murder. While the
verdict acknowledged her mental illness, it still did not take it into
account. One could argue that given how the law is written, this was not
possible.
The second is the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court which ruled in late March against the residents of a housing project saying that people
living in public housing can be evicted if any household member or guest
engages in any kind of drug activity, even if that activity happened blocks
away and the tenant had no knowledge it was taking place.
In both cases harm was done, but are the individuals convicted truly responsible? Doesn't responsibility call for awareness, knowledge,
understanding of one's action? Andrea Yates knew she killed her children,
but the mental illness so distorted her thought processes that she wasn't
able to stop herself. The legal standard may have sanctioned the verdict
but that does not make it right. When harm occurs we are shocked and
dismayed and part of finding redress for those difficult feelings is to
ascribe blame. It ties up the issue in a neat package, and has legal
sanction, but is it spiritually sound? Similarly in the case of public
housing tenants, they are being held responsible for acts they may be
totally unaware of and over which they have no control.
Blaming the wrong person or pushing an issue so that a given person is
to blame is not spiritually defensible. A spiritual answer would make
something or someone better off, in this case only the illusion of
betterment is present. In these cases the people involved, the community,
society all seem to suffer.
Another Issue of Responsibility
In still another court case the issue of responsibility takes on another twist. Marjorie Knoller and her husband Robert Noel, San Francisco
owners of large Presa Canario dogs were convicted of second degree murder
and involuntary manslaughter respectively in the death of the woman their
dogs attacked. There is evidence they knew the dogs could attack, but what
makes the case noteworthy is that the jury was apparently swayed by the
fact that the couple had ties to the Aryan Brotherhood and did not appear
repentant during a Good Morning America interview the jury was shown.
It invites one to conclude that had the jury liked the defendants,
had they been more amiable in some way the verdict might have gone another
way. It is not a revelation, a liking or a dislike for one of the parties
influences jury decisions more often than we may care to acknowledge,
certainly it appears that O.J. Simpson benefited, and often jury
consultants are hired to exploit just such proclivities.
When all is said and done, it is up to us to see that though such
verdicts are entirely legal, they are nevertheless flawed, up to us to
recognize that emotions for good or ill do mar our decisions, and when that
occurs the higher values of the soul suffer.
Rehab A Serious Business
Delancey Street, an alternative rehab program it's founder Mimi Silbert calls a Harvard for losers, has just celebrated it's 30th anniversary. What
has made Delancey Street distinctive is it's no-nonsense approach and the
fact that it is solely run by it's residents. The Bay Area program which has
turned 14,000 multiple offenders into productive citizens, operates
several businesses including a gourmet waterfront restaurant in San
Francisco, a bookstore-cafe, a moving company and a catering center.
Everyone helps. "Even if you don't know much there's always someone who knows
less," said resident Gerald Miller.
Silbert prides herself on having succeeded without public money. This
was in part to keep residents on their toes, using the fear that their
lack of success would undermine their survival. Besides revenues the
program receives $10 million a year in donations. Silbert has now accepted
a one million dollar foundation grant, channeled through the Milton
Eisenhower Foundation and with the help of Sen. Dianne Feinstein, and for
the first time will be able to take the program nationally. She does not
expect it to be easy. First she will have to find inmates who are good
Delancey Street candidates, then convince local judges to grant paroles to
the program. At the same time she will also have to develop a program
ascertaining which local enterprises can make the most money.
If people like the convicts of Delancey Street can be transformed,
then almost anyone can be. Their example gives a harsh and difficult world
hope and proof that some inner qualities can conquer our lower ones.
Web Site Of Interest: www.ashastd.org
STDs Explained
The web-site of the American Social Health Association, as one might expect, contains much useful information about sexually transmitted
diseases, from HIV to herpes or any others one may need to know about. It
is the kind of site that reflects the strength of the Internet. It
provides anonimity in an area that requires it, thrives on it and benefits
from it. Aside from facts, the site has a section on books and
publication, and one on legislative advocacy. What may be most helpful
though is it's "iwannaknow.org" link, its site specifically for teenagers.
Facts and choices are clearly given without judgments, non only about STDs
but also about puberty, and includes a section called "sex on the brain"
which explains the difference between sex and love and suggests abstinence
may be best.
To Ponder On
The April 7th issue of the Los Angeles Times carried a small article
about hungry people on the outskirts of Dhaka in Bangladesh ignoring
warning signs and gathering at sewage ponds filled with dead fish.
Fearing that there was something toxic about the fish, authorities had
used an herbal extract to kill nearly 6 tons of fish at a sewage treatment
plant. Only a portion of the dead fish had been netted and buried by the
end of the day-- leaving hungry people to rush in and collect the rest.
|
|
