Thoughts on the future of society ... and science.
![]()
TEACHING THE ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN CONFLICT
Revised second edition, November 1993 PART III, LESSON THREE: FOUR TURNING POINTS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Teaching Strategy Students should be oriented to the concept of Historical Turning Points. They will do this by learning what happened in the four years featured in the Lesson. Use the Four Sevens gimmick to help them learn the dates. Question One in the Student Lesson (p. 45) lists specifics students should know. Review the maps of the Palestine Mandate (pre-1948), the UN partition plan of 1947, what Israel controlled after 1948, and what Israel controlled after 1967. Having these displayed somewhere in the room for others to see would be helpful. Someone might do a poster for extra credit. Feature population figures of Jews and Palestinians at various turning points. In the Jewish case, people are coming in, in the Palestinian case they are going out. Understanding the Palestinian situation can be enhanced if someone can generate a Palestinian population map to show where they live by proportion, across time. Perhaps a computer fanatic in class could generate a pie chart using the population figures provided. Alternately, a Shifting Ratio chart can show how the Jewish: Palestinian proportions changed across time (with dramatic shifts being indicators of fundamental historical turns; 1948 and 1967 would be critical). This could be put on a poster Time Line. Try to help students visualize the concept of political transformation as a measurable process. There are two Explanatory Models inherent in the Lesson: Ideology as a driving force, and Objective Conditions as a driving force. In a sense, these are opposing interpretations, but here we see that both contain some truth. Americans generally fall on the ideological side: we tend to believe historical outcomes occur because people of strong will and strong belief act on those beliefs. In other words, people debate and discuss, decide upon the best course of action, and act to modify or create reality. The alternative model suggests that people find themselves in situations they don't necessarily understand and didn't necessarily create, but they have to deal with the situation in front of them. Their actions and their beliefs are outgrowths of reality rather than causes of it. The determination of Menachem Begin to settle the Occupied Territories might be an example of the first model: Begin created facts, to use an Israeli term. The Intifada as an outgrowth of Israeli occupation might be an example of the second: political radicalization grew out of a situation, not out of some cultural or ideological desire to be radical. This is probably too complex to use as the focus of a classroom discussion, but you might be able to bring out these different explanations during your discussion. There are various UN documents in this Lesson. Reading those is informative. Also, students can discuss the role of the UN and of international law. We saw in Lesson One that the League of Nations functioned almost as a branch of British and French foreign policy, not as an independent neutral body. When students see the contrast between UN resolutions and UN policy, their first reaction is to think in moralistic terms, often using words like hypocrisy. Try to get them to think in terms of power: that nations do what they want to do and try to rationalize it later with moralistic statements of good motives. If we assume that power is the basis of politics, then why would the UN (or any government) say one thing but do something else? Would a dictatorship behave differently from democracy in this regard? The Jewish settlements are critical to current tensions and to future developments. You have maps of those settlements. Use them to show the difference between Labor and Likud (what Israelis call Strategic versus Political settlements). If you have a relief map of geographic Palestine, use that map to show how terrain is a factor in settlement. Use them to show how Jews and Arabs are now politically and physically face-to-face in a way that was not true in the past. You should decide whether you want to discuss the role of US funds, public and private, in this process. A considerable amount of US financial support goes to Israel each year: nearly $4.0 billion in regular aid, $2.0 billion in subsidized loans per year for five years, about $500 million a year in tax exempt monies raised through the United Jewish Appeal, $1.2 billion in Israel bonds, etc. There are also sometimes aid supplements to assist with special problems such as the Lebanon War of 1982, and the near bankruptcy of the state in the mid-1980s, the Gulf War, and the redeployment of Israeli soldiers out of Gaza. US policy is that none of this money should be used to support settlements in the occupied territories; the Bush administration alleged that this provision was not being honored. They said American monies were fungible in that once they got into a resource pool any expenditure for settlements constituted an American subsidy for settlements regardless of which specific dollar was being spent. The Anti-Defamation League, in a letter to its supporters about US aid, has also written that Israel's very survival is inextricably linked to America ... and how much it votes ... in the way of foreign aid. If you can raise this issue (or if students raise it) you must be careful in how you address it. The issue is important because students are asked in Lesson Five to discuss what role the US should play in this conflict, specifically the use of our aid. Students are also citizens who should be knowledgeable about public affairs so they can make informed decisions. This information facilitates both goals. Also, the US and Israel came to a near break in relations in 1991 and 1992 over settlements and whether the US should support a $10 billion loan through congressional guarantees. An organized effort by Jewish communities across the nation to influence Congress led President Bush to make a public statement against lobbyists who threaten the proposed peace talks. The President's statement upset Jews and caused some Israeli and Jewish leaders to call the President an anti-Semite. US funding and Israeli settlements are critically relevant to the whole conflict and should be discussed. At the same time, you must be careful about how you cover this sensitive topic. Several discussion questions ask students to think about the American interest and American motives. Most Americans are ideologically pro-Israel and anti-Arab. If you conduct these discussions, try to get students to analyze independent of their predispositions. Sometimes pointing out how people think can help students become detached from their ideology. Public opinion polls show that when asked if they are more supportive of Israel or the Arabs, Americans overwhelmingly support Israel. When asked if they support Israel or Arab country X, the balance becomes more equal, even when X is the Palestinians. What we learn from this is that Americans react ideologically to the word Arab, seeing it in hostile terms. We also have hostile views of Islam, seeing it as irrational, violent, and oppressive of women. As students generate ideas about American interests, put them on the board, with cultural and national interest points listed separately (and cultural support and cultural opposition also separate). Question 10 about possible US military intervention in 1948 could theoretically generate the following points: It would cost American lives, we should spend the money on our cities, it would strengthen America against Russia, America is a world power that has an obligation to help in areas where there are crises, we should help the Jewish survivors of the Holocaust, the Arabs were being driven out and we should have prevented that, the Arabs would have killed the Jews and we should not let them do that. These are a mixture of realpolitic/national interest reasons and cultural/moral reasons. Before teaching this, make sure you review the material from Lesson Four. It will be helpful and perhaps you can sneak in some coming information. Discussion Topic: The Intifada is triggered by a relatively minor traffic accident, in an atmosphere of extreme tension. Ask students to think of other cases where a minor incident triggers a mass reaction. Examples: In 1967 the Detroit riot (the most deadly in American history until 1992 in Los Angeles) was sparked by a routine police raid on an illegal after-hours drinking establishment (known locally as a Blind Pig). There was no police violence or abuse; the 1968 demonstrations that affected over 100 cities were sparked by the assassination of Martin Luther King; the 1970 student demonstrations that affected or closed most American campuses were sparked by killings at Kent State and Jackson State; finally, the 1992 Los Angeles riot was sparked by the jury decision in the Rodney King beating case. Teacher Background Suppose someone were writing a book on Protracted Intra-National Struggles (i.e., civil wars) rooted in ethnic, religious, or national communities. The book might have chapters on Northern Ireland, South Africa, Sudan, India, Sri Lanka. It would also almost certainly include a chapter on the Israel-Palestinian conflict. In each case, the author would probably outline for the reader the structure of the conflict and how that structure had changed across the decades. Such an outline would be devoid of any ethical or moral arguments about who is right or wrong. What follows is how such a book might describe the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The focus is mostly on what happened from the time of the creation of a Jewish state. The discussion also focuses upon Israelis and Palestinians rather than Israelis and Arabs (i.e., especially upon what happened inside historic Palestine). This means certain major events in Israeli-Arab history are barely mentioned (the Suez War of 1956 and the War of 1973), since they were Arab-Israeli clashes, not Israeli-Palestinian. It helps students to give them some focus in their study. There are four key turning points in this struggle (each ends with a 7, making it easier). The dates are 1947, 1967, 1977, and 1987. At each of these points, the nature of the struggle itself changed in such a way as to be fundamentally different from how it was before. These are forks in the road when history took a different path. Furthermore, in three of the four cases the change occurred in a way that can be measured, something that frees us from deciding who is right or wrong. Measured patterns are also not dependent upon personalities--whether Shamir or Rabin is prime minister of Israel, or whether we like Arafat. A Point of Confusion: Students tend to get confused about the term Palestine. There is reason for this confusion. In 1920 the British used the term Palestine to mean the area on both sides of the Jordan River including Jordan; from 1922 to 1948 Palestine meant everything west of the Jordan River, but not including Jordan; today it means the areas under Israeli occupation (though some people still use the term to mean the geographic area west of the Jordan River, including Israel and the Palestinian territories). In addition, the Occupied Territories have three parts: the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem. The maps show how these terms evolved. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- THE PARTITION OF PALESTINE: 1947 In 1936 Palestinians began what is called the Arab Uprising against British colonial authority in Palestine. By 1939, 2287 Arabs, 520 Jews, and 140 Britons had been killed (many scholars believe the true number of Arab deaths is much higher than reported). Also, in what to Palestinians is a double tragedy, Palestinian factions turned on each other later in the revolt so that many Arab deaths were at the hands of other Arabs. In 1937, Britain set up a commission to make recommendations. The Peel Report concluded that Jews and Arabs could never live peacefully together in one state and suggested that Britain partition Palestine into two states, one Jewish, one Arab, with an international enclave around Jerusalem, including Bethlehem. The report casually suggested that a large number of Palestinians (up to 250,000) be forcefully removed from the area of the proposed Jewish state. (The area was the Galilee. The reason Galilee would be Jewish was to give the Jewish state control of the headwaters of the Jordan River, an issue of continuing controversy and tension between Israel and its neighbors, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria). The report was very controversial and before anything could be done World War II intervened. As the war ended, Jewish leaders in Palestine--upset that Britain had limited the number of Jewish refugees that could go to Palestine during the war--began a military campaign to expel Britain. Although much weakened by the war, Britain shifted 80,000 soldiers to Palestine to control the situation but they were not successful. Jewish resistance culminated in the 1946 attack on Jerusalem's King David Hotel, which was used by Britain as its military headquarters. Eighty-eight British soldiers and military employees were killed in this attack, carried out by Menachem Begin and his Irgun Zvai Leumi (Irgun for short) guerrillas. It is hard to see how a war could have been avoided. As the British Foreign Minister said in February, 1947: There are in Palestine about 1,200,000 Arabs and 600,000 Jews. For the Jews, the essential point of principle is creation of a sovereign Jewish state. For the Arabs, the essential point of principle is to resist, up to the last, establishment of Jewish sovereignty in any part of Palestine. When the dust settled in January, 1949 a Jewish state was in place but no Arab state. Three things had happened to the land allocated to the Palestinian state: 1) during the fighting Israel had captured some of the Arab territory (for instance, the area around Lydda and Ramle--or Lod as it is now called). 2) Jordan held onto positions it had protected in what is today called the West Bank. In 1949 Jordan annexed the West Bank, granted full citizenship to the Palestinians therein, and changed its official name from Transjordan to Jordan. While some Palestinians agreed to this arrangement (for example the heads of the Nashashibi and Dajani families), other Palestinian nationalists were so offended by the annexation that they became bitter enemies of the Jordanian ruling family (the Hashemites). One Palestinian extremist assassinated King Abdullah in 1951; later militant groups attempted an uprising against King Hussein in 1970 (the famous Black September Uprising. 3) A small portion of Palestinian territory (the Gaza Strip) was held by Egypt after the fighting ceased and governed by it until 1967. Egypt never annexed Gaza. It was taken by Israel in the 1967 war and is today a part of the Israeli-Occupied Territory. The creation of a Jewish state resolved one of the major human and political problems of the modern era: the statelessness of the Jewish people. Never again would a Jew under attack be without a place to go for refuge. By 1964, 888,000 Jews came into the new state. Some of these were refugees from World War II; some were pious Jews from Arab states who simply wanted to live in the Holy Land (this was true of many from Morocco); some were pressured to leave by the fact that local Jewish populations in the Arab world were somehow blamed for Israeli actions against Arabs and were now viewed as a possibly disloyal fifth column; and some were Jews getting away from oppressive governments that abused both Jewish and non-Jewish citizens (this was the case in Yemen where a feudal government was still in power). To the surprise of some Zionist leaders, few Jews from America or Western Europe moved to Israel. Sixty-one percent of those who arrived between 1948-64 were from the Arab world. This created ethnic tensions between the Israeli leaders (almost entirely East European in origin) and the majority Sephardi population. Even today, the Sephardim are disproportionately in the working and lower middle classes. Few Sephardi politicians have achieved national prominence (David Levy was Foreign Minister under Shamir and Yitzhak Navon was President in the early 1980's. Both are of Moroccan origin). A Difficult Topic: The Iraqi Jews: The case of the 130,000 Iraqi Jews deserves a special note. They were an ancient, successful community concentrated in Baghdad. The authoritarian Iraqi government was very hostile to the new Jewish state and its supporters and passed a law requiring that Jews who wished to emigrate renounce their citizenship in writing before March 1951 or lose the right to leave. No more than 10,000 did so, some wishing to remain in the land of their birth, others fearing a trap to smoke out Zionists. When bombs exploded in Jewish neighborhoods panic set in and all but 5,000 left. No one ever proved who set off those bombs -- Iraqi extremists are one possibility -- but radical Sephardic Jews in Israel charged that Israeli agents were responsible. The alleged motive was to panic the talented Iraqi Jews into going to Israel to swell the population and help build the new Jewish state. These charges were publicized by a variety of sources from David Hirst, respected correspondent of the Manchester Guardian, to a militant group called the Black Panthers. The Black Panthers say that European Jews dominate Israel and that Jews from the Arab world are less than second class citizens. While these are not mainstream views, they are heard in Israeli political debates even today. Black Panther leader Charlie Bitton is still active in Israeli politics and Foreign Minister David Levy (of Jewish Moroccan origin) temporarily stepped down in 1992, alleging that racist Western Jews in Likud treated him like a monkey who just got out of a tree. The charges of Israeli complicity in the bombings have never been proven and one Israeli politician named in print as one of the alleged bombers won a libel case against the reporter. Still, the allegations reveal serious tensions that sometimes exist between Western and non-Western Jews. Since Jews of non-Western Sephardic origin constitute an absolute majority of Israeli Jews, the issue must be treated seriously but with sensitivity. Many Americans who have never heard these charges and who think of 1948 in terms of Jewish survival find it inconceivable that Jews could do such things to other Jews and are distressed by the very mention of accusations. At the same time, many Arab intellectuals are aware of the allegations and grant them credibility. Historians tend to dance around the legal issue by reporting the charges and avoiding conclusions of what is true. This is probably not a topic to raise, but if it comes up, perhaps the best approach would be to summarize the issues, say the allegations are denied by those involved but are still believed by some accusers, and point out that today the real significance of the debate is that it reveals deep fissures within the Israeli political system between Western and non-Western Jews. For more information on the Sephardic Jews of Israel, see Shlomo Swirsky, The Oriental Majority. For information on the Black Panthers, see Schnall, Radical Dissent in Israel. For summaries of the bombing allegations, see Segev in the bibliography and David Hirst, The Gun and the Olive Branch. Jewish Cultural Groups The Jews of European origin are called Ashkenazi, the Jews from the Arab word Sephardi (in both cases the plural is formed by adding the letter m to the end). In meaning, Ashkenazi refers to Germany and Sephardi refers to Spain. Both words come from references in the Bible which the rabbis decided referred to those two countries. Historically, the Jews of Germany were the most advanced Jews in Europe and spread their teaching and German dialect (Yiddish) throughout the continent; likewise, the Jews of Spain were the most advanced Jews in the Arab world and spread their Spanish dialect (Ladino) throughout the Arab world. There are other Jewish cultural groups (Persian for example) but the overwhelming number of all world Jews are from one of these two cultural sub-groups. Many Americans are not aware that Spain was once part of the Arab world, indeed, at one time perhaps the most advanced part of the Arab world. Muslims and Jews were expelled in 1492 when Spain was reunited under Catholic leadership and the power of the Arab leaders--called Moors--was broken. The last Arab province was Andalusia (or Granada) in the south. Palestinian Refugees There is intense rhetoric involving the tragic events of 1948. Palestinians have argued that there is a systematic campaign of mass expulsion by Israelis. Israelis have alleged that the refugees left of their own will, often with Israelis begging them to stay. They also say there was a plan among Arab states to move the Palestinians out during the fighting with the understanding that after the Jews had been massacred, the Palestinians would be allowed to return and take the vacated property. Claims that there were radio broadcasts from Arab capitals urging Arabs to flee Palestine have never been documented by independent scholarship. Regarding mass expulsion, this was definitely included in Britain's 1937 partition plan and was included in Britain's Labour Party platform of 1945. Recent Israeli scholarship shows several patterns of departure: 1. When the fighting began many wealthy families temporarily moved women and children across the border for reasons of safety. 2. Many poorer Palestinians fled the fighting or went to visit relatives in Jordan or elsewhere. 3. There were some forced evacuations. Around Lydda and Ramle 50,000 persons were forced at gunpoint to leave. Yitzhak Rabin acknowledged participating in this forced evacuation. 4. After the April 1948 massacre at Deir Yassin, near Jerusalem, there was mass panic. That was when 254 Palestinians--mostly unarmed women, children, and old men were killed at night in their village (the Israelis lost four). The assault was led by Menachem Begin's Irgun; panic came upon Palestinians amidst rumors that more massacres were to occur. Yigael Allon reported that he encouraged such rumors. (See Segev and Morris.) See also the memoirs of Golda Meir and Menachem Begin for differing Israeli perspectives. Meir says that in April, 1948 (when the massacre of Deir Yassin occurred) she personally stood on the beach in Haifa for hours and literally beseeched the Arabs of that city not to leave (p. 279); Begin's memoirs on the same time says reports of the Deir Yassin attack produced a maddened, uncontrollable stampede. Of the about 800,000 Arabs who lived on the present territory of the State of Israel, only some 165,000 are still there. The political and economic significance of this development can hardly be overestimated (p. 164). Hirst, The Gun and the Olive Branch, supports an expulsion thesis. Professor Walid Khalidi (Journal of Palestine Studies, Autumn, 1988) analyzes and reproduces Israeli military documents (Plan Dalat and Plan Gimel) that address these topics. The UNRWA uses the following definition of refugee for its administrative purposes: A Palestinian refugee is a person whose normal residence was Palestine for a minimum of two years preceding the conflict in 1948, and who, as a result of this conflict, lost both his home and his means of livelihood and took refuge in one of the countries where UNRWA provides relief. Refugees within this definition and the direct descendants of such refugees are eligible for Agency assistance if they are: registered with UNRWA; living in the area of UNRWA operations; and in need. Palestinians in Arab Lands In Jordan today perhaps 60% of the population are of Palestinian origin, and perhaps 20% of these live in refugee camps. In Lebanon, perhaps 10% of the population (400,000) are Palestinian. Even in the West Bank about 40% are refugees and in tiny Gaza the figure approaches 90%. The children and grandchildren of refugees have refugee status. Although most refugees are self-supporting (even in refugee camps), many still live in poverty and are dependent upon the United Nations for assistance. In many places they are politically vulnerable to hostile elements inside their host countries. Many Palestinians have been killed in Lebanon and Jordan, and the Israeli Occupied Territories. And as mentioned, only in Jordan has there been a broad grant of citizenship, so mostly they have little political voice and remain at the pleasure of their host country. During and after the Gulf War, 90% of those in Kuwait (over 350,000 in 1990) were expelled or forced to leave and not allowed to return or remain in liberated Kuwait. The Kuwaiti Palestinians were perhaps the most educated and wealthiest of all Palestinian communities. Note: a large percentage of the Palestinians do not want to accept another citizenship since it might suggest their claim to citizenship in a Palestinian state was being abandoned. The PLO has put its energies into getting internationally-recognized travel documents and non-discriminatory residency rights for refugees, rather than citizenship. As a rule those in camps are politically very militant. In 1970 they were involved in an uprising against King Hussein. This Black September uprising (so called because many Palestinians were killed in it) prompted the United States to prepare for military intervention to save King Hussein when Syria intervened on the side of the Palestinians. In Lebanon, the camps have likewise been the center of political militancy since 1970 when refugee soldiers from Jordan moved into Lebanon. In 1982 two camps--Sabra and Shatilla--were the center of brutal massacres conducted by Lebanese Maronite (Christian) forces at a time when the camps were under Israeli military jurisdiction. The Israeli Kahan Commission blamed key Israeli leaders for complicity in these killings for their failure to act to prevent them. Estimates are that more than 800 Palestinians were killed, with no losses to attacking soldiers (some estimates of Palestinian deaths reach 2,400). These massacres occurred after Palestinian guerrillas had been evacuated to Tunis under an international agreement negotiated and guaranteed by the United States. Marines went into Beirut twice: first to oversee the evacuation, second after the Sabra and Chatilla massacres. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- THE SIX DAY WAR: 1967 Results of Occupation This unit has steered away from stories of violence experienced by both sides, which may be inflammatory and detract from the goal of analysis and understanding. However, there are some aspects of the post l967 occupation that are important for students to know since they have shaped the perceptions of each side. Since l967 the Israeli government has taken control, through various methods, of land that was owned by Palestinians. Usually this has occurred without due compensation, and sometimes with forged documents. Palestinians often appeal against the confiscation of their land in Israeli courts, but the law is written in such a way that they have seldom prevailed. Over 52% of the land in the West Bank and close to 40% of the land in Gaza has come under Israeli control since l967. This has seriously affected the Palestinians' ability to earn a living since farmland that used to be available is now gone. In addition, houses were demolished if there was a suspected culprit. (The house could be blown up before a trial took place; recently the rules have changed so that a legal process should take place first.) Immediately after the end of hostilities, there were many forced expulsions of Palestinians to other countries. Most of the prominent leadership was included in the ouster (the Mayor of Jerusalem, the President of a University, the Head of the Islamic Waqf, an activist Episcopal priest [later a bishop], newspaper publishers, doctors and lawyers). They were spirited across the border, without a judicial process. Israel says that they posed a threat to the security of the state. Expulsion is a highly emotional issue for Palestinians. In addition, there have been many instances of what the Palestinians consider collective punishments, such as the closure of schools, and the long curfews, some for days at a time, which means that those with jobs cannot get to their jobs, those with farm animals cannot feed them, and those with crops cannot care for or harvest them. The Palestinians (and almost the entire world community) claim that the deeds mentioned above are all forbidden by international law (specifically the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, which Israel has signed). Israel claims that, while they support the Geneva Convention, it does not apply to their occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. It is important for students to remember that these problems started immediately with the occupation in l967, not with the Intifada of l987. By now there are many Palestinian families who have experienced personal tragedies. There are likewise many Israeli families who have reason to be afraid of Palestinians. Almost all young men and women in Israel serve in the reserves, and many have spent time in the West Bank and Gaza, where they experience daily hostility. Many come back with nightmares, and Israeli authorities are concerned at the increased amount of wife and child abuse, divorce, substance abuse, murder and suicide that has entered Israeli society, presumably because of the experiences of the soldiers enforcing the occupation. Similar problems are evident in Palestinians society. Who Started the 1967 War? There is still acrimonious debate over who started the war. This is no doubt about the first strike: Israel attacked and destroyed the Egyptian air force on the ground. As one Arab observer said, It was not a six-day war. It was a six-hour war. The Egyptian air force was destroyed by noon of the first day and then it was a five-and-a-half day mopping up operation. It was an exaggeration, but it made the point. The best we can do now is to summarize the issue and the perspectives of various combatants. In addition to issues listed elsewhere, three other factors are sometimes cited. Let us call them Pushing and Shoving, Verbal Belligerence, and Possible Israeli Territorial Desires. Pushing and Shoving: Two Events are often cited as setting the stage for war: Nasser's decision to remove UN forces from the Sinai and his decision to close the Straits of Tiran (the mouth of the Red Sea) at Sharm-el-Sheikh to Israeli shipping. To Nasser these were matters of Egyptian sovereignty: Egypt owned the Sinai and should not have UN troops in its territory. Also, the mouth of the straits were Egyptian territorial waters and Egypt should not be forced to allow ships from an enemy country (Israel) to pass through. To Nasser, these limitations were leftovers from the 1956 Suez war. In the nationalist environment of the day. Egypt considered them imperialist in nature. And, as Egypt pointed out, Israel had refused in 1956 to allow UN peacekeeping troops to be positioned on its side of the border. From Israel's point of view, a closure of the Straits would cut Israel off from its oil source in Iran and from much of its trade with East Africa and the Orient. This was not a fatal blow since most Israeli trade came through its Mediterranean ports and shipments could be rerouted. But closure and rerouting would cost money and would be a blow to Israeli prestige. Israel also noted that under international law, the Straits were to be open waters. Nasser's decision to order UN forces out of the Sinai and to seize Sharm-el-Sheikh was thus seen as hostile. Palestinian fedayeen (commandos) associated with Fatah had also been conducting raids into Israeli territory from Egypt and Jordan. The Egyptian-controlled PLO was verbally aggressive but was not primarily a military body. The creation of Fatah by Yasser Arafat and other changed this situation and introduced a meaningful armed struggle into Palestinian strategy. Israel reacted to Fatah strikes with strong raids into Gaza and Jordan. Since Israel blamed Fatah's host countries for the raids, their retaliation often struck national armies rather than Palestinian positions. Some of these strikes were criticized even in Israel for being stronger than necessary. These ongoing clashes caused loss of life on all sides and escalated tension. In the north, a face-off occurred. In the 1948 armistice created a neutral zone between Israel and Syria which was not to be unilaterally changed. This zone was at the base of Syria's Golan province bordering Israel's Huleh Valley. Israel had violated the agreement by introducing settlers into the zone. The Syrians had violated it by shelling the Huleh Valley and the more distant Galilee. Both parties claimed to be acting defensively but both were contributing to an environment that made war more likely. Verbal Belligerency: In the weeks before the war, verbal attacks escalated. On the Israeli side, there were statements suggesting that Israel had decided to attack Damascus itself. A May 12 UP story reported that a highly placed Israeli source said here today that if Syria continued the campaign of sabotage in Israel it would immediately provoke military action aimed at overthrowing the Syrian regime. The story of an anticipated Israeli attack on Syria was widely reported in the Arab world and was given credibility in Moscow, although not in the US. Credible or not, it put pressure on Nasser, the Arab Champion, to rally to Syria's defense. Nasser cited a desire to defend Syria as a reason why Egypt mobilized; the decision of Syria and Egypt to join their armies under one command was linked to this. For his part, Nasser made several statements that contributed to an environment of escalation. He said May 26 that the goal of the coming battle will be a general one and our basic objective will be to destroy Israel. On other occasions he spoke of returning to the situation before 1948. (See Laqueur, 89 and 380). Also, Egypt has long felt that having the Negev under Israeli control split the Arab world (Egypt and Jordan) and should be reversed. On the other hand Yitzhak Rabin, head of Israeli forces in 1967, told Le Monde later that I do not think Nasser wanted war. His forces were not sufficient. He knew it and we knew it. Did Egypt really hope to reverse the 1948 creation of a Jewish state or even drive the Jews into the sea? Did Israel plan to attack Damascus itself and overthrow the Syrian regime? Certainly all parties contributed to an environment of fear in which other were seen as mobilizing for some apocalyptic assault. In terms of students, this might be a good point how militant words can achieve a life of their own and can drive events beyond rational thinking. Allegations of Israeli Territorial Designs: Israelis have insisted that in 1967 there were forced into war and took land defensively. But not all Israelis were reluctant to expand their boundaries. The question historians must answer is whether Israel wanted to acquire the land they ended up holding: the West Bank, Gaza, Jerusalem, part of the Golan province, and the headwaters of the Jordan River, not to mention the west bank of the Jordan River itself. Certainly Israeli leaders felt their 1948 borders left them with scant breathing space and inadequate security. David Ben-Gurion had suggested in pre-Suez deliberations in 1956 that Jordan be partitioned with the West Bank going as an autonomous region to Israel and the east bank to Iraq. Lebanon would lose its territory up to the Litani River to Israel and certain other parts would go up to Syria with the remaining territory becoming a Christian state. A pro-Western leader would be installed in Damascus. Israel would also take Sharm-el-Sheikh at the tip of the Sinai peninsula from Egypt. (Neff, 1981: 342-43). Smith adds that in 1967 Israeli Prime Minister Eshkol if possible wanted to gain control of the headwaters of the Jordan River (p. 201). There were also Israelis motivated by religio-nationalist ideology who felt that land beyond the border belonged to the Jewish people as a birthright. Isaac says that the Revisionists (today Likud) had never fully accepted the boundaries established by the 1949 armistice and retained the motto Israel on both sides of the Jordan. Begin's Herut party as late as 1965 had an election plank that the right of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel in its historical completeness is an eternal and inalienable right, and Begin joined the ruling coalition just before the war. The famous Zionist Map used by Jewish leaders during post-Word War I negotiations to define their proposed boundaries included all the land between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River, north to include Lebanon's Litani River and Syria's Mount Hermon, east into Jordan up to the desert. Isaac says the greatest disappointment of these early Zionists was the loss of the Litani, for which Zionist leaders fought most stubbornly since it was to provide the water which could be channeled to make the deserts bloom and to create the power for industrial development. Until 1948 Shamir's party, now part of Likud, included the boundaries of Genesis 15:18 (the so-called Nile-to-Euphrates promise) in its platform (See Isaac, chapter 2). The Case of Jordan: A final issue is the role of Jordan. Jordan was the weak sister of the region, a small country surrounded by powerful neighbors. Nasser had been openly hostile to the Jordanian regime, speaking of King Hussein with contempt and questioning whether Jordan even had the right to exist. Jordan's inclination was to remain neutral, which it did at the beginning of the war. But Jordan had a defense treaty with Egypt and was obligated to enter the conflict. This entry cost them control of East Jerusalem and the West Bank. Three interesting anecdotes are relevant: First, the Israelis asked Jordan to stay neutral and said that had Jordan stayed out they would not have seized Jordanian territory, the West Bank and East Jerusalem. Second, King Hussein spoke to Nasser by bugged telephone to ask how the war was going. Nasser told him that Egyptian forces were advancing on all fronts and that the Israelis were falling back. In fact, Nasser knowingly lied . At the time he spoke the Egyptian air force was destroyed and Egyptian units were being crushed in the Sinai. Jordan entered a war that had already been lost. Third, King Hussein was asked in the mid-1970s what he felt was the greatest mistake of his reign. He cited two: entering the 1967 war, which cost him East Jerusalem and the West Bank, and staying out of the 1973 war, which denied him the right to be part of the post-war disengagement accords. There is no true answer to the question: Who was responsible for the war? We can only observe that there were a mix of motives on all sides, including legitimate defense and definite aggressiveness, and that an environment of belligerency and fear led to a war. Rather than deciding who was responsible, the unit focuses upon how this war between Israel and its Arab neighbors changed the nature of the domestic conflict between Israelis and Palestinians by reuniting historic Palestine, and putting Israelis and Palestinians face to face under a single regime. Other sources: Walter Laqueur, Road to War; Donald Neff, Warriors for Jerusalem; David Bowen and Laura Drake, The Syrian-Israeli Border Conflict, 1949-1967, Middle East Policy (V1, 1992). -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- BEGIN BECOMES PRIME MINISTER: 1977 The events of 1977 are called the earthquake by Israelis. The election of that year was won by Menachem Begin's nationalist Likud party. Begin had always been considered too militant and extremist for most Israelis. During Knesset debates David Ben-Gurion would not even refer to Begin by name but would speak of the member sitting next to Mr. Burg. Leaving aside what Israeli politicians call each other, Begin was different from previous Prime Ministers in his commitment to hold onto the Occupied Territories permanently, and to settle them with Jewish populations. He felt the land belonged to the Jewish people and always referred to it as Eretz Israel. His followers vigorously resist the term Occupied Territories. In cooperation with Ariel Sharon and various religious militants (the best known being Gush Emunim--the Block of the Faithful) he began an aggressive settlement campaign that by 1990 had taken half of the land of the West Bank, 1/3 of Gaza, and had placed 129,000 Jews in and around East Jerusalem in traditionally Palestinian land. (Source: US State Department). Jews also returned to traditional Jewish neighborhoods in old Jerusalem and Hebron. Settlements had started under the Labour government before 1977 but Labour policy was philosophically different from Likud. While Labour had sometimes cooperated with religious settlers, the thrust of their policy had focused upon security settlements along the Jordan River and on the strategic high points in the West Bank and the Golan province. Labour had carefully avoided the dense population centers of the West Bank and Gaza. For more information on this transition from Labour to Likud, see Ibrahim Mattar, Israeli Settlements in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, Journal of Palestine Studies, Autumn, 1981. Likud placed settlements in the very centers of population, particularly in the line running from Jerusalem north through Ramallah to Nablus, and in the line running from Jerusalem south past Bethlehem to Hebron. Settlements were often positioned in blocs (Gush in Hebrew) to surround key cities or to be on key roads. This was intended to facilitate military and territorial control. (On the settlement map in the student edition, look at settlements near the cities of Nablus, Hebron, and Bethlehem, and at the roads between key cities.) In the event of an uprising every road would be cut off and every Palestinian population center surrounded. As Raphael Eitan (former head of the Israeli military, now head of the Tsomet party) said, Palestinians would be like cockroaches in a bottle. Likud also began putting settlements into the Muslim and Christian Quarters of Old Jerusalem. Labour had expanded the borders of the city well beyond what they had ever been and had created an outer ring of settlements around the city. This in itself had been very controversial. But by traditional agreement among the religious groups, each Quarter of Jerusalem had some measure of self-government, and residence was limited to members of that religious community. Exceptions had to be approved by the religious leaders. Labour had not violated this Status Quo Agreement, as it is called. But Likud had used religious militants funded by government monies (and often private American contributions) to acquire numerous properties in the Old City. Sometimes purchases were fraudulent, with the Israeli purchaser knowingly buying from a collaborator who did not have title to the property. These acquisitions were confrontational and led to an escalation of tensions with Muslim and Christian Palestinians. To Americans the religious nature of the Quarters may seem discriminatory but that is not the logic of the agreement. Religion in Jerusalem is not just a matter of theology but also of community. While we Americans think of individual rights, in Jerusalem they are also concerned about group rights. Such rights have been traditionally recognized and are maintained by law. Because of the special nature of Jerusalem (holy to three faiths) cooperation is required and each group has to have areas that it runs in its own way. Someone who wanted to live in another Quarter (for example a Muslim who wanted to move into the Christian Quarter) could petition the Christian authorities for a waiver. Waivers are granted with the proviso that when property is re-sold the authorities have right of first refusal. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- THE INTIFADA: 1987 On December 8, 1987 in Gaza an auto accident occurred that took the lives of four Palestinians. An Israeli vehicle crashed into a crowd of people in Gaza's Jabalya refugee camp. Palestinians were convinced that the crash had been intentional and even reported that the driver had shouted at the crowd as he drove into them. Police investigation of the incident concluded that it was a legitimate accident with no malicious intent. In a sense the cause of the accident is irrelevant. When Trotsky started his famous revolutionary newspaper in the beginning of the century he named it Iskra (The Spark) for good reason. He said that when tension in a society reaches a certain level a small incident of no true significance can be the incident that sparks an uprising. People will point to the incident as if it if were causal, but it is not. The political environment and the level of social injustice are the key explanatory factors. Intifada is pronounced in-tee-fah-da, with the emphasis on the third syllable. The word means shaking off. A Palestinian poet used the following example to explain the root meaning of the word: imagine you are sitting in a chair and someone comes up behind you and puts his arms around your arms as if to restrain you. You jump up and throw your arms out to break the person's grip. This could be called Intifada. Ironically, the word was used in 1984 to describe the revolt of certain Fatah military commanders against Arafat's leadership. Palestinians also call it The Blessed Intifada. It is called this because it came at a time of much despair when Palestinian leaders had been driven out of the region into Tunis, when the Shamir government was pressing ahead with land confiscations and Jewish settlements, when America and Europe seemed willing to go along with what was happening, and when the Arab leaders seemed more interested in the Iran-Iraq war than Palestine. It was also admired because of the fact that Palestinian youth play a major role in resistance activities, and that initially at least, the Intifada relied upon mass protests rather than guerrilla attacks. The Intifada is one of the critical events in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Future historians will look back on it as a major turning point. Several things came out of the Intifada. Power in the Palestinian nationalist movement was shifted away from the armed groups overseas to the leadership in the Occupied Territories. Local leaders were far more realistic than some of the exiled leaders. There were five major parties or groups among local Palestinians: Arafat's Fatah, George Habash's Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, Naif Hawatmeh's Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, the Communist Party, and the Islamic Groups (mostly HAMAS and Islamic Jihad). For the first time, these came together into The Unified Leadership of the Uprising (although the Islamic groups soon dropped out). The Unified Leadership began to issue leaflets that would appear mysteriously in towns advising activists on theory and strategy. Radicalized populations: Previous resistance had been led by the usual suspects--unionists, student activists, urban militants. Merchants, rural people, and intellectuals had been less involved. The Intifada changed that. The merchants became one of the most supportive of all groups, holding regular strikes. Christians and other Palestinian minorities got involved, and the villages became the hard core. The settlement policy in particular had convinced all farmers that they were personally threatened. Their lost lands, and the threat of lost lands radicalized them so that the Intifada became a national uprising. In November, 1988 the PNC (Palestinian National Congress--the parliament of the Palestinian people and the major legislative body of the PLO) met in Algiers. After some debate the delegates voted 85-15% to accept the partition of Palestine based on UN Resolution 181, recognize Israel, renounce terrorism, and call for a negotiated settlement based on UN Resolution 242 and 338. They also declared Palestine to be an independent state. Various officials said that the territory of the state would be the West Bank and Gaza and that its capital would be East Jerusalem. While some radicals opposed this resolution--arguing that Israel was not serious about negotiating and would never agree to the partitioning of Palestine--the vote passed and the radicals agreed not to resist with violence. The US quickly opened up dialogue with the PLO (broken off some months later when armed Palestinians landed on a beach near Tel Aviv). While Israel is strong enough to defeat any coalition of enemy states the Intifada showed that Israel cannot control a mass Palestinian population that does not accept its authority. In short, the Palestinian territories are not governable, by Israel or Jordan. In 1988 Jordan repudiated any claim to the West Bank. The Israelis also soon came to realize the costs of occupation. At one time, there were more soldiers in the territories than it took to conquer them in 1967, and there were more soldiers based in Gaza than there were Jewish settlers. The financial costs of the occupation soared; serious US-Israeli tensions emerged over the settlements; hundreds of Israeli soldiers protested, and human rights groups criticized Israeli policies, as did some Jewish groups. Measurable social tensions increased among both Israelis and Palestinians, including spouse abuse, substance abuse, violence, suicide. In 1990-91 the Gulf War occurred and in October 1991, talks began at Madrid that brought together Israelis, Syrians, Jordanians, Palestinians, and Lebanese. Holding such talks was a major US policy goal and would not have started without vigorous and persistent urging by the US; however, they are not entirely the result of American pressure. (The talks are of two types: bilateral between Israel and Syria, Lebanon, Jordan and Palestinians, and multilateral on five functional issues: water, refugees, environment, economic development, and security.) The Israelis and Palestinians both have reasons for being interested in a settlement. While the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank are not powerful enough to expel the Israeli army, they are at the same time too powerful to be defeated. The occupation has become costly to Israel. Constant mobilization has damaged the economy; the conflict has polarized Israeli society into right and left wings and has generated domestic tensions; violence-prone Israeli vigilante groups defy the government; it has damaged Israel's overseas alliances. It is a mistake to think Israel is now negotiating because of US pressure. Its own agenda is a factor as well. Population of Jerusalem: In 1967 there were 266,000 people of whom 74% were Jewish; in 1990 there are 555,000 people of whom 72% are Jewish. Jews in East Jerusalem have gone from zero in 1967 to 135,000 in 1990. In the Old City itself there are 28,100 people including 2,600 Israelis in the Jewish Quarter, 19,000 Muslims, and 6,500 Christians. A Problem and a Resource American culture appears to have exceptional levels of anti-Arab and anti-Islamic prejudice, complicated by the fact that few Americans have Muslim or Arab friends. If you find this in your class, you might want to use the enclosed story by Wafa Unis Shuraydi on page 52. She was a refugee from Lebanon in the 1970s and is now a teacher in Dearborn, Michigan. Her simple yet profound story shows the natural modesty of Muslim girls and also the problems of Arab immigrants in America. Since she writes initially from the perspective of a girl of 15, your students can relate to her. Human Rights Issues Numerous groups monitor human rights issues throughout the world. Amnesty International (AI), which won a Nobel Peace Prize for its efforts, is one of these. AI reports serious human rights violations by Israeli authorities in the Occupied Territories. Below are some major areas of AI concern with explanatory discussion. The students have an excerpt from the report, and some data. Administrative Detention: These are persons arrested without ever being charged or even told that they violated a law. Many are political leaders. Some are professors, teachers, peace activists, reporters, doctors, union leaders. AI considers many of these to be Prisoners of Conscience, a special category that they reserve for people who have committed no crime but are under arrest for exercising rights (such as disagreeing with government authorities) that are considered normal under international law. Demolitions and Sealings: When a member of a family commits an act of sabotage or violence, authorities often demolish or seal the home of that person. (Sealing consists of cementing up doors and windows.) AI considers this a human rights violation since other members of the family did not commit whatever act occurred. About 90 demolitions/sealings occurred. There is an Israeli human rights group that protests demolitions by sending support delegations and assistance--blankets, food, etc.--to the families of those whose homes are destroyed. Deportations: Deporting Palestinians to other countries is considered unacceptable by AI. The Fourth Geneva Agreement (1949), which was signed by Israel although Israel denies that it applies to its occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, specifies that occupying powers should not deport populations. Observers who hear Israeli militants speak of mass expulsions fear that initial expulsions (for example the 415 deported in late 1992) might be just the beginning. To Palestinians, expulsion is their psychic nightmare drawn from the experience of 1948. They react to talk of expulsion the way Japanese may react to talk of nuclear war. Curfew Days: Frequently whole towns or even whole provinces will be put under curfew so that people cannot go out of their homes. During the 1991 Gulf War almost the whole of the Occupied Territories was under curfew for five weeks, almost uninterrupted. Such curfews are exceptional hardships on families, who could not plant or harvest, feed livestock, work, buy food, attend school, or attend to medical emergencies. Intra-Communal fighting: According to Palestinian sources, 170 Palestinians were killed by other Palestinians in various disputes. Israelis put the number considerably higher. Some of these are executions of alleged collaborators believed to work secretly for Israeli security forces. (In the past, Israel has acknowledged that about half of those killed did indeed have links to their security forces.) Other killings are factional disputes between supporters of different parties or military groups. The PLO has condemned these killings and tried to mediate between the factions. Population Figures: Population figures in the Student Section, p. 46, may be confusing. Here is an explanation of the sources. The first three rows are from the Israeli Statistical Abstract of 1992. The total population figures of 5,090,000 includes Israel proper and a combined (East and West) Jerusalem total of 578,000. Israel says 18.1% of its total population is non-Jewish and in Jerusalem 28% is non-Jewish. They say there are 130,000 Christians in all of Israel, including Jerusalem, and in Jerusalem itself there are 14,700 Christians. Since the Statistical Abstract does not distinguish between East and West Jerusalem, the East/West figures are extrapolations from other sources. Figures for East Jerusalem are from the Foundation for Middle East Peace (July, 1992). Israel estimates there are 1.6 million Palestinians in the Occupied Territories (not including Jerusalem). They estimate there are 120,000 Jews in the West Bank and 3,300 in Gaza. These figures exclude East Jerusalem. In the table, estimates for Israelis in the Occupied Territories are from the US State Department (1992). A study by Israel's Peace Now organization (1992) puts the West Bank figure at 115,000. Peace Now says 270,000 overseas Palestinians also have legal rights to return. These are not in the above totals. The State Department says Israel controls 50% of West Bank land and 33% of Gaza. Peace Now says the figures are 60% and 35%. Both studies exclude East Jerusalem. The Bak'aa Refugee Camp in Jordan Notes from a Visit Six camps were created after the 1967 war including Bak'aa. It is the biggest in the Middle East. About 80% are Refugees from 1948, the rest Displaced Persons from 1967. Many were forced out twice, from Israel in 1948 then from the West Bank in 1967. Bak'aa was built to hold 28,000 but has 100,000. It is Jordan's fourth largest city. People originally lived in tents but the Germans gave money to build shelters. Each family has 100 square meters. UNRWA provides 9 years of education in 16 schools. Jordan runs four secondary schools. There are 15,000 students in primary and 5,000 in secondary schools. There are two health centers: one for mothers and children, one for adults. There is a Physical Therapy center with colorful Disney characters on the walls. UNRWA covers 75% of the health bill. The camp has dirt roads and open sewers. There are many flies. A sewage system and electricity are under construction (I was told this in 1967). There is free lunch for kids under 6 and for older students in need. The size of the camp is 1.4 square kilometers. About 1000 families are on rations (average family size is 7.7). Those with jobs get no benefits. Many residents are from Nablus, Jerusalem, Jericho, Gaza. In the camp they have arranged themselves by village of origin. There are fourth generation refugees in the camp. If there were a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza, Displaced Persons could return under international law but not Refugees, who are from Israel proper. Most houses have 3 rooms--2 Bedrooms, kitchen, open courtyard. Five thousand of the inhabitants are Gulf War refugees. Streets are narrow and unpaved, about ten feet across except for the main street which is filled with businesses. The residential streets have open drains in the middle. Drains are about 6 inches across and 3-4 inches deep, probably for dish water, etc. The camp is on the side of mountain so the streets are hilly. During the rains the roads turn to mud. The main street is filled with cars, people, carts. There is a cacophony of sounds. It would be exciting and fun if not so tragic. Shops I saw: onions, bicycles, welding, tapes, books, TV repair, flour, clocks, lottery, shoes, video. Most stores are probably no more than 10 feet x 20 feet, with doors that pull down and lock at night. People have Jordanian citizenship and work inside and outside the camp. UN programs are run by Palestinians. Busses take people to cities to work. When people get wealthy, they often remain so there are a range of classes in the camp. They came as communities and want to remain as communities. We note several gold shops. There is no obvious security except locking the door at night. The family and religious structures are strong so there is no crime, robbery, drugs, alcohol, illegitimacy. As we walk past the police station, the officers are playing soccer. Small kids follow us around, laughing and asking us to take their picture. No one asks for money (but every child wants a ball-point to practice writing). We visit some houses. Most have popular pictures of Mecca or Jerusalem. One friendly woman offers us tea. One family has 8 persons. The mother works for the Ministry of Health as a cleaner. In another case two shelters are joined together and hold four families with 25 people. There is no running water, electricity, or toilet. The door is metal, hangs crooked, and does not close tightly. This is not a problem in the summer, but last winter Amman had two feet of snow. This house would be totally unprotected. In one house a very old man with a naughty laugh says that since his wife died he has been alone. Would my student marry him? Everyone laughs. Another old man walks up to us in some distress, motions to the surrounding situation and repeats Haram, Haram, Haram, which means sin. I note the absence of hostility and ask our UN escort. He says people want a settlement and are not hostile. But I notice some boys get chased away, and one escort says you are not safe among these people without elaborating. Later, a lady is very upset. A friend says She thinks you are Jews and says she wants peace. At one point a resident is discussing the camps when someone walks up. He looks like someone from an old gangster movie--thin face, unsmiling, sunglasses, cheap suit. The resident begins to speak glowingly of the wonderful plans the government has for Bak'aa--education, roads, electricity. It is obvious this person is secret police--mukhabarat. A friend says, you go to the camp on your tour, then I will take you. I suspect we are getting a sanitized version. I ask a resident if there was fighting here in 1970 during the Black September uprising and he says nervously of course! The government does not trust these people and probably has some under detention or surveillance. The government has a department of Palestinian Affairs. There is an elected camp Council. We met Mr. Abdul-Hadi, Council head and a PNC member. He is a distinguished gentleman in traditional robe. Speaks no English. He tells us: 1) Palestinians do not dislike Americans but dislike their policies 2) There is a double standard. UN Resolutions on Iraq are implemented but not on Palestine. The US vetoes efforts to help Palestinians. No American would sacrifice his home to foreigners. 3) The Gulf War was costly for America and will cost more in the future. Does the US administration have the courage to do what Eisenhower did in 1956 and force Israel out of occupied land? The answer is in the hands of the American people, not the government. 4) He asks that we tell Americans what he said and how Palestinians live. Comment: I have seen Palestinian camps in Jordan, West Bank, Gaza. I have walked Nairobi's Mathare Valley slum where children grow up in cardboard boxes: I have seen South Africa's Soweto, and have walked through Cairo's City of the Dead, where hundreds of thousands live in a graveyard. The Palestinian camps are not the most unhealthy or the poorest, but are the most depressing. As bad as Bak'aa is, the camps in the West Bank are worse, and the West Bank camps look like heaven compared to Gaza. The situation is a Thorn in the Eye of God. Personal Observations by Ron Stockton, 1992. Visits in 1987 and 1992. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- THE TRAGEDY OF LEBANON One of the tragedies of modern times is what happened to Lebanon in the 1970s and 1980s. Lebanon was traditionally called the Switzerland of the Middle East for its political neutrality, its sophisticated pluralistic culture, and its fame as a banking and business center. But its own domestic political tensions, compounded by the dispute between the Israelis and Palestinians, combined to create an explosion that tore the country apart. There is no time to review the background to those events, how the French in the 1930s created a government based on religio-ethnic groups, how the leaders of those groups agreed to divide key government positions up among themselves, and how their agreement to began to break down in the 1950s. What is relevant here is that the Lebanese Civil War began in 1976 when the killing of some Lebanese Christians near Beirut by persons unknown led to a retaliatory attack upon Palestinians. As the fighting escalated, Syria intervened to stabilize the situation (at the invitation of the Lebanese government and with an Arab League blessing, thus making their presence in Lebanon legal). The war flared for two years with many casualties and many refugees, both internal and external. The Syrians remained after the fighting diminished. In 1978, Israel penetrated southern Lebanon up to the Litani River. Their stated goal was to reduce what they saw as a threat from Palestinian fedayeen. (The word means those willing to make sacrifices. Guerrilla might be another translation.) The area south of the Litani is a culturally-mixed place with Christians as well as Shiites. Israel created a puppet army (The Southern Lebanese Army or SLA) under a Christian military officer named Major Haddad (succeeded by Major Lahd after Haddad's death from cancer). This so-called Israeli security zone is of undefined size but is roughly 5-15 miles deep and 35-50 miles wide. Israel and the SLA have been faced since then by furious Lebanese resistance led by the Shiite group Hezbollah, known in English as the Party of God. Hezbollah has received support from Iran. In June, 1982 Israel again invaded Lebanon. There had been a US-brokered truce along the border but the government of Prime Minister Menachem Begin and Defense Minister Ariel Sharon felt they saw an opportunity to crush the PLO, forge an alliance with Lebanon, and deal with the occupied territories under more favorable terms. The invasion occurred with the collaboration of a Lebanese government led by the Gemayel family and their Phalangist Party. According to Secretary of State Haig, Begin told the US his objective was limited: to drive the PLO back 40 kilometers, so that all our civilians in the region of Galilee will be set free of the permanent threat to their lives. It was said that the operation would last 3-4 days. But Begin had not spoken truthfully. In seven days Israel reached Beirut and occupied most of the country except for Beirut itself, the pro-government north, and the Syrian-controlled Bekka Valley. Then came an eighty-day siege of Beirut, where Yasser Arafat and the PLO were entrenched. Rather than enter Beirut with heavy losses, Israel conducted massive air raids, destroying much of the city. Thomas Friedman of the New York Times wrote of indiscriminate bombing, a word that angered Israel and its supporters. With television footage showing Beirut in flames, public opinion turned against Israel. President Reagan criticized Israel on several occasions, first expressing regret at civilian deaths, then outrage, then revulsion. In his memoirs, he described it this way: I decided to appeal personally to Begin to stop the fighting and abide by the (US-brokered) cease-fire ... I suggested to Begin that if he didn't, he could expect a drastic change in Israel's relationship with the United States ... Despite our appeals for restraint, the Israelis on August 12 opened a new and even more brutal attack on civilian neighborhoods in Beirut that sickened me and many others in the White House. This provoked me into an angry demand for an end to the bloodletting ... (in a call to Begin) I used the word 'Holocaust' deliberately and said the symbol of his country was becoming 'a picture of a seven month old baby with its arms blown off.' (Reagan, pp. 425-26). Under a US-brokered agreement, 800 marines entered Beirut on September 1 to evacuate 15,000 PLO soldiers. The US also guaranteed the safety of unarmed Palestinian refugees left behind. The marines withdrew after 17 days having successfully achieved the first part of its mission. The PLO moved its headquarters to Tunis. The second entry of the marines into Lebanon was more tragedy than success. Bashir Gemayel, youngest son of aging Christian Phalange leader Pierre Gemayel, was elected President of Lebanon in an election occurring during the presence of the Israeli army. Gemayel was widely hated for various incidents conducted by his militia over the years. On September 14, just prior to taking office, he was killed in a bomb explosion. What happened next is unclear. Time magazine reported that Phalange leaders and Ariel Sharon discussed the possibility of revenge. (Time lost a libel suit for being unable to prove its report). Whatever the details, Israeli troops entered Beirut and surrounded the Palestinian refugee camps of Sabra and Shatilla. On September 18, with Israelis securing the perimeter, Phalangist units went into the camps and conducted a massacre that left perhaps 800 Palestinians dead (some estimates put the numbers at 2400). The Phalange and Israelis suffered no losses. Three days later, US marines re-entered Lebanon, this time not fully neutral. By the fall of 1983, marines were firing on Lebanese units and the offshore battleship New Jersey later shelled Druze positions in the Shuf Mountains. On October 23 Western positions were attacked by bombers, killing 241 US marines and 58 French soldiers. Two weeks later, an attack on Israeli Lebanese Headquarters killed 29 Israelis and 30 prisoners. By December, 1983 Lebanon claimed 19,085 dead, Israel over 368. If America was shocked by its marine deaths, what followed was even more traumatic. In March, 1985 a group linked to the US attempted to kill religious leader Sheikh Fadlalla by placing a bomb in his apartment building. The sheikh escaped but 80 neighbors died (see Woodward and Wright for details). Then in April, Israel took 1200 Lebanese into Israel, telling the Red Cross these were NOT prisoners of war. The dead in the bombing and the prisoners were all Shiites. At this point, there were nine foreign armies in Lebanon: American, French, British, Italian, Israeli, Syrian, United Nations, as well as some returning Palestinian units and some Iranians. To the Lebanese it seemed as if their country had ceased to exist. To the Shiites of the south, their land had turned into hell. Soon violent resistance erupted. Shiite political groups began to kidnap western professors and religious leaders; planes were hijacked (Jordanian and Kuwaiti); assassinations occurred. Also, TWA 847 was hijacked by Shiite militants and kept on the tarmac at Beirut airport for over two traumatic, televised weeks. On the Israeli-Palestinian front, the Achille Lauro was hijacked (with one American killed); three Israelis in Cyprus suspected of being intelligence agents were assassinated; and Israel bombed the headquarters in Tunis, killing 80 people. (Arafat was jogging and escaped). Back in the US, Arab-American leader and peace advocate Alex Odeh was assassinated by individuals believed to be right-wing Jewish nationalists. By February, 1984, the US marines were completely out of Lebanon and in June, 1985 Israeli forces withdrew to their security zone in the south. But it was not for several more years that all American hostages were released. And for a decade after the Israeli invasion, the killing continued. A study by the Lebanese government released March 1992 found that between 1975 and 1990 144,000 Lebanese had died in the wars and invasions of that time. This figure does not include Palestinians. Sources: Alexander Haig, Caveat; Walid Khalidi, Conflict and Violence in Lebanon; Jonathan Randal, Going All the Way; George Schultz, Turmoil and Triumph; Ronald Reagan, An American Life; Ariel Sharon, Warrior; Bob Woodward, Veil; Robin Wright, Sacred Rage. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- cmenas@umich.edu The leering ugliness of the Israelis' Easter blitzkrieg is darkly illustrated by the news that, having marched into Ramallah, the IDF prepared a special Easter television broadcast for this historically Christian city: Porn movies and programs in Hebrew are being broadcast by Israeli troops who have taken over three Palestinian television stations of Ramallah, irate residents of the besieged West Bank town have told AFP …. The soldiers started broadcasting the porn clips – considered extremely offensive by most Muslims – intermittently this afternoon from the Al-Watan, Ammwaj, and Al-Sharaq channels, the residents said. 'The pornographic movies started on Al-Watan television at around 3:30 pm,' one 34-year-old Palestinian mother named Reema told AFP. 'I have six children at home, they have nowhere to go with what is going on here and can't even watch TV,' she said angrily. 'It's not healthy really. I think the Israelis want to mess with our young men's heads,' she said. CHEAP THRILLS As the Middle East descends into the political equivalent of a sado-masochistic orgy, the porn trope forms the perfect note trumpeting Israel's triumph. The IDF offensive, the invasion of Arafat's compound, the vaunted flexing of Israel's military muscle – all have the earmarks of some perverted ritual of humiliation and violation. As the IDF's idea of Easter programming attests, the Israeli offensive projects the essential character of the degraded Israeli democracy – a lust for domination. After all, why does a robber, having already looted the till and gone halfway out the door, turn and shoot his victim? Because he can. For one moment, he is a god, his power to inflict death, at will, is orgasmic proof of his omnipotence. However, for a certain type of killer there is no such thing as a clean kill: he must torture his victim until the last moment, extracting every ounce of perverted pleasure out of the experience. This sadistic impulse is what drives the IDF and the Sharon government forward – and gives their American amen corner a really cheap thrill. SICKO BLOGGERS Glenn Reynolds, the blogger -in-chief of the War Party, responds with a chortle to the news of the Easter Sunday porn offensive, echoing Australian war-blogger-cum-journalist Tim Blair 's snicker. And one can only imagine what the sight of those butch young IDFers with their leather boots on Palestinian necks will do to inspire Andrew Sullivan 's much -advertised libido . Flex those power glutes, Andy! PALESTINIAN KRISTALLNACHT The complete helplessness of the Palestinians before the Israeli onslaught was underscored by President Bush's endorsement of the rampaging IDF : I can understand why the Israeli government takes the actions they take. Their country is under attack. Every day there has been a suicide bombing, and every day the government sees the loss of innocent life. Asked if the storming of Arafat's office was justified, the President averred: Israel is a democratically elected government, and the government is responding to the will of the people for there to be more security.' Israel will make the decisions necessary to defend herself. Germany, too, was a democracy prior to World War II: Hitler was elected Chancellor, and was recognized as such by all the other powers. Did his democratic mandate ameliorate the crimes of Kristallnacht ? But in looking to the American President for a semi-coherent explication of US policy we are bound to come up empty-handed. Arafat could do more to rein in the suicide bombers, Dubya dumbly insisted, as the Israelis cut off the phones, the electricity, and the water in the PLO chieftain's compound. Duh-Duh-Dubya is clearly in over his empty head, and is reduced, in a moment that calls for leadership, to a ventriloquist's dummy, dutifully parroting the Israeli line. OFF THE TRACKS Meanwhile, as if to underscore this failure, the US delegate to the United Nations was voting for a resolution condemning the Israeli invasion and demanding the complete withdrawal of the IDF from Palestinian cities. This really brought home the sad truth of Zbigniew Brzezinski's incisive analysis on CNN the other day: You have shown some very dramatic footage, some very dramatic sound bites as well. And they give you a sense of the immediacy of the tragedy that's unfolding. But I think it's important to step back and to remember that yesterday was a day of historic opportunity in the Middle East as well as a criminal calamity. The historic opportunity is that, for the first time in 50 years, the Arab states have indicated they are prepared to live in peace with Israel. And they've indicated a more or less equitable framework, subject to negotiation, for such peace. The calamity, of course, is the criminal act of terrorism. I find it baffling that the United States is focusing almost entirely on the calamity. … [T]he [Bush] administration can't ignore the fact that for the last 10 years, Mr. [Prime Minister Ariel] Sharon has opposed the Oslo peace process, he has contributed to the political climate in Israel that subsequently led to the killing of [then] Prime Minister [Yitzhak] Rabin. He [Sharon] has been determined to dismantle the Palestinian Authority and he is using every act of terrorism as an excuse to try to destroy the Palestinian Authority. That is not the way toward peace. And the absence of any meaningful American strategy and a sense of direction is a part of this appalling reality that we are now watching. THE ISRAELIZATION OF US FOREIGN POLICY Lacking any coherence, American policy in the region is effectively placed in the service of Israel's present government. As American-bought tanks roll over the Palestinians, and Bush demands that Arafat – on the verge of being taken into custody or killed – stop the violence, Sharon's strategic goal has been effectively accomplished. It is now the US and Israel versus the entire Arab-Muslim world. What began as a war against an extremist fringe sect of Islam has turned into a religious and civilizational conflict. The unprecedented Saudi peace plan was met with a volley of spittle in Crown Prince Abdullah's face, coming not just from Sharon but from Bush. If one of the chief aims of the Israeli lobby in the US has been to provoke a final split between Washington and Riyadh, then the Easter offensive certainly accomplished that. Our war on terrorism – marketed, at first, as a war on Osama bin Laden and the perpetrators of 9/11 – has now become a war on a billion-plus Arabs and Muslims worldwide. It is a war in which the US will have few dependable allies: perhaps only Israel can be counted on. And that's just the way the Israeli lobby likes it. A NATIONAL DISGRACE It's a disgrace, really, how American interests are being ignored and derailed in the Middle East, while our policy benefits only the interests of a belligerent little settler colony based on religious obscurantism and an outdated paranoia. The Saudi peace plan, as an excellent piece in Reason pointed out , offered the Israelis what they have always claimed to want – normal, peaceful relations in the region: Thanks to the Saudis a political horizon now exists. What emerged from the Beirut conclave was an inventive offer that defied the tide of anger in the region aroused by the Intifada. Pointedly, it was directed at Israeli public opinion and came accompanied by a most amiable Saudi interpretation of the type of 'normal relations' the Arabs promised Israel. The Arabs are bluntly offering Israel what it has always demanded, concludes Reason contributing editor Michael Young. If Israel refuses, its quarrel may no longer be merely with its neighbors, but also with the US. I'm afraid Young is overestimating the Bush administration's willingness to face down Sharon and Likud's American amen corner. It was the libertarian journalist and polemicist Garet Garrett who, in 1952, presciently noted that no Empire is secure in itself: it's security is in the hands of its allies. Now, it appears, our foreign policy and our security has been placed in the hands of one particular ally, which is intent on dragging us into their war. THE NEW 'ISOLATIONISM' In declaring Arafat the enemy, Sharon announced that the purpose of surrounding and invading the PLO compound was to isolate him. With this act, the Israelis also succeeded in isolating the US. Brzezinski outlined the dangers well: I worry about the American national interest. I can see two major jeopardies ahead if we don't step into the breach. If the tragedy between the Israelis and Palestinians degenerates into total violence, if Arafat is killed, we'll probably see major uncertainty, major instability in the Middle East. We'll become more isolated in the war against terrorism because the Arabs will then unite against us. And we could even get an oil embargo with the Saudis, the Iraqis and the Iranians joining forces despite their disagreements. That's a very, very ominous scenario. THE WAR PARTY REJOICES Oh, but what a glorious scenario for the War Party! Why, just think, they can have all the melodrama of a World War II movie: rationing, grim determination, and the same self-righteous retort to all critics and other whiners: Don't you know there's a war on?! Andrew Sullivan will lecture us on the morally uplifting effects of fasting; Victor Davis Hanson will write an article full of classical allusions to Spartan self-sacrifice and the manly virtues of imperial Rome; Norman Podhoretz will exhort us not to engage in another Munich when the Arabs come up with another peace proposal; and Rich Lowry will stop denying he really wanted to nuke Mecca, admit it wasn't a joke, and ask well, why not? AS YE SOW… The line of the Bush administration and the Israelis is clear: the suicide bombings cannot be tolerated, and Arafat is responsible. Since 9/11, it's a whole new ballgame, and the Arabs had better get used to it, and get out of the way. Aside from the question of Arafat's responsibility, which hardly seems a credible contention when he can't even turn the lights on in his headquarters, what the American people don't know about is the degree of the Israeli government's own responsibility for the terror campaign now being unleashed on their civilian population. For, as Richard Sale, UPI's terrorism correspondent, noted, Israel gave major aid to the fundamentalist Hamas – the principal terrorist group coordinating the suicide bomber campaign: Israel and Hamas may currently be locked in deadly combat, but, according to several current and former U.S. intelligence officials, beginning in the late 1970s, Tel Aviv gave direct and indirect financial aid to Hamas over a period of years. Israel aided Hamas directly – the Israelis wanted to use it as a counterbalance to the PLO, said Tony Cordesman, Middle East analyst for the Center for Strategic Studies. Israel's support for Hamas was a direct attempt to divide and dilute support for a strong, secular PLO by using a competing religious alternative, said a former senior CIA official. Hamas was legally registered in Israel in 1978, as Al-Mujamma Al Islami, and funds flowed into its coffers without any interference from the authorities; funds slated for the secular and leftist PLO were embargoed. At the time of the Iranian revolution, Hamas began to pick up support, and, according to US intelligence sources cited by Sale, Israel was certainly funding the group at that time. One US intelligence source who asked not to be named, said that not only was Hamas being funded as a 'counterweight' to the PLO, Israeli aid had a more devious purpose: 'to help identify and channel towards Israeli agents Hamas members who were dangerous terrorists.' … SO SHALL YE REAP Hamas was rife with Israeli collaborators, some of whom were weeded out and executed – but not all. The secular nationalism of the PLO had merged Palestinian Christians and Muslims into a unified struggle against the Israeli occupation. Hamas had started out as an Islamic alternative to this structure, and so was encouraged by the Israelis. However, via the confluence of two factors – the rise of fundamentalism in Iran and the infusion of millions in Israeli funding (all of it US tax dollars, by the way) -- the group metastasized into a virulently murderous cancer that eventually turned on its creators. Yet, as Sale points out, Even then, some in Israel saw some benefits to be had in trying to continue to give Hamas support: 'The thinking on the part of some of the right-wing Israeli establishment was that Hamas and the other groups, if they gained control, would refuse to have anything to do with the peace process and would torpedo any agreements put in place,' said a US government official. 'Israel would still be the only democracy in the region for the United States to deal with,' he said. The degree to which Sharon and Hamas have goals in common, taken in context with a recent curious news story about one of these suicide bombers, leads us in a disturbing – but none too surprising – direction. As Associated Press account of the death of suicide bomber Murad Abu Asal appears, at first blush, to be merely baffling: A Palestinian suicide bomber threw himself on an Israeli vehicle parked close to the West Bank border Wednesday, wounding two members of Israel's Shin Bet security service who were sitting inside, police said. A statement from Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's office, which is responsible for Shin Bet, said the injured agents were on an operational mission when they were attacked. The bomber's body was left at the scene until explosives experts could check it for booby traps. Palestinian security sources and Israeli radio reports identified the bomber as Murad Abu Asal, 23, and said he had worked as a collaborator with Israel. … Palestinian security sources said collaborators regularly meet with Israeli security agents in that area. Israel's security forces have a wide network of Palestinian collaborators who provide intelligence. On second blush, however, this raises a few questions, at the very least, such as: what sort of operational mission were these two Shin Bet agents on when they met their fate? It would be pointless to speculate, but forgive me if I at least raise the possibility that they were up to no good, and that this was one collaborator who finally – and literally – went off on them. SHARON'S GAME Since 9/11, we are all supposed to empathize with the Israelis, because we allegedly know just how they feel, they who have to live every day of their lives with the specter of terrorism hanging over their heads. But the suspicion that the Israeli government may bear some responsibility for that threat – and not just indirectly, on account of the occupation – may yet alert Americans and Israelis to the twisted nature of Sharon's game. TWILIGHT WORLD In the black-and-white world of George W. Bush's war on terrorism, the idea that things are not always what they seem to be on the surface – especially when it comes to the murky relations between nations – is lost or glossed over. In the twilight world of covert action, however, where there are no allies and it's a war of all against all, moral parameters and boundaries are dissolved in the solvent of necessity, and it's hard to tell friend from foe. Which brings to mind a curious news item from the Bergen County (New Jersey) News, dated September 15, 2001…. A CURIOUS TALE The story paints a picture of a widening dragnet in the greater New York-New Jersey area designed to sweep up anyone and everyone connected to 9/11, including a raid on a business known as Urban Moving Systems: Investigators first became interested in the business after witnesses reported Tuesday that three men seemed to celebrate the World Trade Center explosions in Liberty State Park, then drove away in a company van. … Agents took pictures inside the company's office Thursday night and seized 13 computer hard drives. They also showed a keen interest in the roof, which had a very clear view of the World Trade Center until Tuesday. A half-dozen agents searched the roof with flashlights and appeared particularly interested in the sight lines from the roof toward downtown Manhattan. East Rutherford police stopped an Urban Moving Systems van on Route 3 Tuesday and detained five men inside, at least some of them company employees. The occupants said they were all Israelis. They were being detained because they are in violation of immigration regulations, and all have expressed a desire to leave the country on their own, according to an Immigration and Naturalization Service spokesman. An employee of Urban Moving Systems, who would not give his name, said the majority of his co-workers are Israelis and were joking on the day of the attacks. 'I was in tears,' the man said. 'These guys were joking and that bothered me. These guys were like, 'Now America knows what we go through.' At first, it seems like an anomaly that a bunch of Israelis would be cheering – literally jumping for joy – at the sight of the World Trade Cener, the pride of New York, brought down and humbled. But, then again, on second thought, it makes perfect sense, now doesn't it? Now America knows what we go through, indeed. In light of the growing scandal over Israeli spies in this country – who might have known something about 9/11 before the dawning of that fatal day – we all ought to be as bothered as that astonished employee of Urban Moving Systems by such a perverse willingness to go to any lengths to gain our sympathy. We have to ask: what wouldn't they do to keep it? Mr. Justin Raimondo is the editorial director of Antiwar.com Source: by courtesy & © 2002 Justin Raimondo & Antiwar.com |
by Edward Said
On 29 September, the day after Ariel Sharon, guarded by about a thousand Israeli police and soldiers strode into Jerusalem's Haram al-Sharif (the 'Noble Sanctuary') in a gesture designed to assert his right as an Israeli to visit the Muslim holy place, a conflagration started which continues as I write in late November. Sharon himself is unrepentant, blaming the Palestinian Authority for 'deliberate incitement' against Israel 'as a strong democracy' whose 'Jewish and democratic character' the Palestinians wish to change. He went to Haram al-Sharif, he wrote in the Wall Street Journal a few days later, 'to inspect and ascertain that freedom of worship and free access to the Temple Mount is granted to everyone', but he didn't mention his huge armed entourage or the fact that the area was sealed off before, during and after his visit, which scarcely ensures freedom of access. He also neglected to say anything about the consequence of his visit: on the 29th, the Israeli Army shot eight Palestinians dead. What everyone ignored, moreover, is that the natives of a place under military occupation - which East Jerusalem has been since it was annexed by Israel in 1967 - are entitled by international law to resist by any means possible. Besides, two of the oldest and greatest Muslim shrines in the world, dating back a millennium and a half, are supposed by archaeologists to have been built on the site of the Temple Mount - a convergence of religious topoi that a provocative visit by an extremist Israeli general was never going to help to sort out. A general, it's as well to recall, who had played a role in a number of atrocities dating back to the 1950s, and including Sabra, Shatila, Qibya and Gaza. According to the Union of Palestinian Medical Relief Committees, as of early November, 170 people had been killed, 6000 wounded: these figures do not include 14 Israeli deaths (eight of them soldiers) and a slightly larger number of wounded. The Palestinian deaths include at least 22 boys under the age of 15 and, says the Israeli organization B'tselem, 13 Palestinian citizens of Israel, killed by the Israeli police in demonstrations inside Israel. Both Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have issued stern condemnations of Israel for the disproportionate use of force against civilians; Amnesty has published a report detailing the harassment, torture and illegal arrest of Arab children in Israel and Jerusalem. Parts of the Israeli press have been considerably more forthcoming and straightforward in their reporting and commentary on what has been taking place than the US and European media. Writing in Ha'aretz on 12 November, Gideon Levy noted with alarm that most of the handful of Arab members of the Knesset have been punished for objecting to Israel's policy towards Palestinians: some have been relieved of committee work, others are facing trial, still others are undergoing police interrogation. All this, he concludes, is part of 'the process of demonisation and delegitimisation being conducted against the Palestinians' inside Israel as well as those in the Occupied Territories 'Normal life', such as it was, for Palestinians living in the occupied West Bank and the Gaza Strip is now impossible. Even the three hundred or so Palestinians allowed freedom of movement and other VIP privileges under the terms of the peace process have now lost these advantages, and like the rest of the three million or so people who endure the double burden of life under the Palestinian Authority and the Israeli occupation regime - to say nothing of the brutality of thousands of Israeli settlers, some of whom act as vigilantes terrorizing Palestinian villages and large towns like Hebron - they are subject to the closures, encirclements and barricaded roads that have made movement impossible. Even Yasser Arafat has to ask permission to leave or enter the West Bank or Gaza, where his airport is opened and closed at will by the Israelis, and his headquarters have been bombed punitively by missiles fired from gunship helicopters. As for the flow of goods into and out of the territories, it has come to a standstill. According to the UN Special Co-0rdinator's Office in the Occupied Territories, trade with Israel accounts for 79.8 per cent of Palestinian commercial transactions; trade with Jordan, which comes next, accounts for 2.39 per cent. That this figure is so low is directly ascribable to Israel's control of the Palestine-Jordan frontier (in addition to the Syrian, Lebanese and Egyptian borders). With Israel closed off, therefore, the Palestinian economy is losing $19.5 million a day on average - this already amounts to three times the total aid received from donor sources during the first six months of this year. For a population which continues to depend on the Israeli economy - thanks to the economic agreements signed by the PLO under Oslo - this is a severe hardship. What hasn't slowed down is the rate of Israeli settlement building. On the contrary, according to the authoritative Report on Israeli Settlement in the Occupied Territories (RISOT), it has almost doubled over the past few years. The Report adds that '1924 settlement units have been started' since the start of the 'pro-peace' regime of Ehud Barak in July 1999 - and there is in addition the continuing program of road-building and the expropriation of property for that purpose, as well as the degradation of Palestinian agricultural land both by the Army and the settlers. The Gaza-based Palestinian Center for Human Rights has documented the 'sweepings' of olive groves and vegetable farms by the Israeli Army (or, as it prefers to be known, Israeli Defense Force) near the Rafah border, for example, and on either side of the Gush Katif settlement block. Gush Katif is an area of Gaza - about 40 per cent - occupied by a few thousand settlers, who can water their lawns and fill their swimming pools, while the one million Palestinian inhabitants of the Strip (800,000 of them refugees from former Palestine) live in a parched, water-free zone. In fact, Israel controls the whole water supply of the Occupied Territories and assigns 80 per cent of it for the personal use of its Jewish citizens, rationing the rest for the Palestinian population: this issue was never seriously discussed during the Oslo peace process. What of this vaunted peace process? What has it achieved and why, if indeed it was a peace process, has the miserable condition of the Palestinians and the loss of life become so much worse than before the Oslo Accords were signed in September 1993? And why is it, as the New York Times noted on 5 November, that 'the Palestinian landscape is now decorated with the ruins of projects that were predicated on peaceful integration'? And what does it mean to speak of peace if Israeli troops and settlements are still present in such large numbers? Again, according to RISOT, 110,000 Jews lived in illegal settlements in Gaza and the West Bank before Oslo; the number has since increased to 195,000, a figure that doesn't include those Jews - more than 150,000 - who have taken up residence in Arab East Jerusalem. Has the world been deluded or has the rhetoric of 'peace' been in essence a gigantic fraud? Some of the answers to these questions lie buried in reams of documents signed by the two parties under American auspices, unread except by the small handful of people who negotiated them. Others are simply ignored by the media and the governments whose job, it now appears, was to press on with disastrous information, investment and enforcement policies, regardless of the horrors taking place on the ground. A few people, myself included, have tried to chronicle what has been going on, from the initial Palestinian surrender at Oslo until the present, but in comparison with the mainstream media and governments, not to mention the status reports and recommendations circulated by huge funding agencies like the World Bank, the European Union and many private foundations - notably the Ford Foundation - who have played along with the deception, our voices have had a negligible effect except, sadly, as prophecy. The disturbances of the past few weeks have not been confined to Palestine and Israel. The displays of anti-American and anti-Israeli sentiment in the Arab and Islamic worlds are comparable to those of 1967. Angry street demonstrations are a daily occurrence in Cairo, Damascus, Casablanca, Tunis, Beirut, Baghdad and Kuwait. Millions of people have expressed their support for the al-Aqsa Intifada, as it has become known, as well as their outrage at the submissiveness of their governments. The Arab Summit in Cairo in October produced the usual ringing denunciations of Israel and a few more dollars for Arafat's Authority, but even the minimum diplomatic protest - the recall of ambassadors - was not made by any of the participants. On the day after the Summit, the American- educated Abdullah of Jordan, whose knowledge of Arabic is reported to have progressed to secondary school level, flew off to Washington to sign a trade agreement with the US, Israel's chief supporter. After six weeks of turbulence, Mubarak reluctantly withdrew his ambassador from Tel Aviv, but he depends greatly on the two billion dollars Egypt receives in annual US aid and is unlikely to go any further. Like other leaders in the Arab world, he also needs the US to protect him from his people. Meanwhile Arab anger, humiliation and frustration continue to build up, whether because their regimes are so undemocratic and unpopular or because the basics - employment, income, nutrition, health, education, infrastructure - have fallen below tolerable levels. Appeals to Islam and generalized expressions of outrage stand in for a sense of citizenship and participatory democracy. This bodes ill for the future, of the Arabs as well as of Israel. In foreign affairs circles during the last 25 years, the word has been that the cause of Palestine is dead, that pan-Arabism is a mirage, and that Arab leaders, mostly discredited, have accepted Israel and the US as partners, and in the process of shedding their nationalism have settled for the panacea of deregulation in a global economy, whose early prophet in the Arab world was Anwar al-Sadat and whose influential drummer-boy has been the New York Times columnist and Middle East expert Thomas Friedman. Last October, after seven years of writing columns in praise of the Oslo peace process, Friedman found himself in Ramallah, under siege by the Israeli Army (and under fire). 'Israeli propaganda that the Palestinians mostly rule themselves in the West Bank is fatuous nonsense,' he announced. 'Sure, the Palestinians control their own towns, but the Israelis control all the roads connecting these towns and therefore all their movements. Israeli confiscation of Palestinian land for more settlements is going on to this day - seven years into Oslo.' He concludes that only 'a Palestinian state in Gaza and the West Bank' can bring peace, but says nothing about what kind of state it would be. Nor does he say anything about ending military occupation, but neither do the Oslo documents. Why Friedman never discussed this in the thousands of column inches he has published since September 1993, and why even now he doesn't say that today's events are the logical outcome of Oslo defies common sense, but it is typical of the disingenuousness that surrounds the subject. The optimism of those who took it on themselves to ensure that the misery of the Palestinians was kept out of the news seems to have disappeared in a cloud of dust along with the 'peace' which the US and Israel have worked so hard to consolidate in their own narrow interests. At the same time, the old framework that survived the Cold War is slowly crumbling as the Arab leaderships age, without viable successors in sight. Mubarak has refused even to appoint a vice-president, Arafat has no clear successor; in Iraq and Syria's 'democratic socialist' Ba'ath republics, as in the Kingdom of Jordan, the sons have taken over - or will take over - from the fathers, covering the process of dynastic autocracy with the merest fig-leaf of legitimacy A turning point has been reached, however, and for this the Palestinian Intifada is a significant marker. For not only is it an anti-colonial rebellion of the kind that has been seen periodically in Setif, Sharpeville, Soweto and elsewhere, it is another example of the general discontent with the post-Cold War order (economic and political) displayed in the events of Seattle and Prague. Most of the world's Muslims see the uprising as part of a broader picture that includes Sarajevo, Mogadishu, Baghdad under US-led sanctions and Chechnya. What must be clear to every ruler, including Clinton and Barak, is that the period of stability guaranteed by the tripartite dominance of Israel, the US and local Arab regimes is now threatened by popular forces of uncertain magnitude, unknown direction, unclear vision. Whatever shape they eventually take, theirs will be an unofficial culture of the dispossessed, the silenced and the scorned. Very likely, too, it will bear in itself the distortions of years of past official policy. Meanwhile, it is correct to say that most people hearing phrases like 'the parties are negotiating,' or 'let's get back to the negotiating table,' or 'you are my peace partner,' have assumed that there is parity between Palestinians and Israelis and that, thanks to the brave souls from each side who met secretly in Oslo, the two parties have at last been settling the questions that 'divide' them, as if each had a piece of land, a territory from which to face the other. This is seriously, indeed mischievously misleading. In fact, the disproportion between the two antagonists is immense, in terms of the territory they control and the weapons at their disposal. Biased reporting disguises the extent of the disparity. Consider the following: citing an Anti-Defamation League survey of editorials published in the mainstream US press, Ha'aretz on 25 October found 'a pattern of support' for Israel, with 19 newspapers expressing sympathy for Israel in 67 editorials, 17 giving 'balanced analysis', and only nine 'voicing criticism against Israeli leaders (particularly Ariel Sharon), whom they accused of responsibility for the conflagration'. In November, FAIR (Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting) noted that of the 99 Intifada stories broadcast by the three major US networks between 28 September and 2 November, only four made reference to the 'Occupied Territories'. The same report drew attention to phrases such as 'Israel . . . again feeling isolated and under siege', 'Israeli soldiers under daily attack', and, in a confrontation where its soldiers were forced back, 'Israelis have surrendered territory to Palestinian violence.' Highly partial formulations of this kind are threaded through network news commentary, obscuring the facts of occupation and military imbalance: the Israeli Defense Forces have been using tanks, American and British-supplied Cobra and Apache attack helicopters, missiles, mortars and heavy machine-guns; the Palestinians have none of these things. The New York Times has run only one op-ed piece by a Palestinian or an Arab (and he happens to be a supporter of Oslo) in a blizzard of editorial comment that favors the US and Israeli positions; the Wall Street Journal has not run any such articles; nor has the Washington Post. On 12 November one of the most popular US television programs, CBS's Sixty Minutes, broadcast a sequence which seemed to be designed to let the Israeli Army 'prove' that the killing of the 12-year-old Mohammad al-Dura, the icon of Palestinian suffering, was stage-managed by the Palestinian Authority. The Authority, it was said, had planted the boy's father in front of Israeli gun positions and moved the French TV crew that recorded the killing into position nearby - all to prove an ideological point. Misrepresentation has made it almost impossible for the American public to understand the geographical basis of the events, in this, the most geographical of contests. No one can be expected to follow and, more important, retain a cumulatively accurate picture of the arcane provisions that obtain on the ground, the result of mostly secret negotiations between Israel and a disorganized, pre-modern and tragically incompetent Palestinian team, under Arafat's thumb. Crucially, the relevant UN Security Council Resolutions - 242 and 338 - are now forgotten, having been marginalized by Israel and the US. Both resolutions stipulate unequivocally that the land acquired by Israel as a result of the war of 1967 must be given back in return for peace. The Oslo process began by effectively consigning those resolutions to the rubbish bin - and so it was a great deal easier, after the failure of the Camp David summit last July, to claim, as Clinton and Barak have done, that the Palestinians were to blame for the impasse, rather than the Israelis, whose position remains that the 1967 territories are not to be returned. The US press has referred again and again to Israel's 'generous' offer and Barak's willingness to concede part of East Jerusalem plus anything between 90 and 94 per cent of the West Bank to the Palestinians. Yet no one writing in the US or European press has established precisely what was to be 'conceded' or quite what territory on the West Bank he was 'offering' 90 per cent of. The whole thing was chimerical nonsense, as Tanya Reinhart showed in Yediot Aharanot, Israel's largest daily. In 'The Camp David Fraud' (13 July), she writes that the Palestinians were offered 50 per cent of the West Bank in separated cantons; 10 per cent was to be annexed by Israel and no less than 40 per cent was to be left 'under debate', to use the euphemism for continued Israeli control. If you annex 10 per cent, decline (as Barak did) to dismantle or stop settlements, refuse over and over again to return to the 1967 lines or give back East Jerusalem, deciding at the same time to hold onto whole areas like the Jordan Valley, and so completely encircle the Palestinian territories as to let them have no borders with any state except Israel, in addition to retaining the notorious 'bypass' roads and their adjacent areas, the famous '90 per cent' is rapidly reduced to something like 50-60 per cent, the greater part of which is only up for discussion some time in the very distant future. After all, even the last Israeli redeployment agreed at the Wye River Plantation meetings of 1998 and reconfirmed at Sharm el Sheikh in 1999, has still not occurred. It bears repeating, of course, that Israel is still the only state in the world with no officially declared borders. And when we look at that 50-60 per cent in terms of the former Palestine, it amounts to about 12 per cent of the land from which the Palestinians were driven in 1948. The Israelis talk of 'conceding' these territories. But they were taken by conquest and, in a strict sense, Barak's offer would only mean that they were being returned, by no means in their entirety. To begin with, some facts. In 1948 Israel took over most of what was historical or Mandatory Palestine, destroying and depopulating 531 Arab villages in the process. Two thirds of the population were driven out: they are the four million refugees of today. The West Bank and Gaza, however, went to Jordan and Egypt respectively. Both were subsequently lost to Israel in 1967 and remain under its control to this day, except for a few areas that operate under a highly circumscribed Palestinian 'autonomy' - the size and contours of these areas was decided unilaterally by Israel, as the Oslo process specifies. Few people realize that even under the terms of Oslo, the Palestinian areas that have this autonomy or self-rule do not enjoy sovereignty: that can only be decided as part of the Final Status Negotiations. In other words, Israel took 78 per cent of Palestine in 1948 and the remaining 22 per cent in 1967. Only that 22 per cent is in question now, and it excludes West Jerusalem (of 19,000 dunams there, Jews owned 4830 and Arabs 11,190, the rest was state land), (see note 1) all of which Arafat conceded in advance to Israel at Camp David. What land, then, has Israel returned so far? It is impossible to detail in any straightforward way - impossible by design. It is part of Oslo's malign genius that even Israel's 'concessions' were so heavily encumbered with conditions, qualifications and entailments - like one of the endlessly deferred and physically unobtainable estates in a Jane Austen novel - that the Palestinians could not feel that they enjoyed any semblance of self-determination. On the other hand, they could be described as concessions, making it possible for everyone (including the Palestinian leadership) to say that certain areas of land were now (mostly) under Palestinian control. It is the geographical map of the peace process that most dramatically shows the distortions which have been building up and have been systematically disguised by the measured discourse of peace and bilateral negotiations. Ironically, in none of the many dozens of news reports published or broadcast since the present crisis began has a map been provided to help explain why the conflict has reached such a pitch. The Oslo strategy was to redivide and subdivide an already divided Palestinian territory into three subzones, A, B and C, in ways entirely devised and controlled by the Israeli side since, as I have been pointing out for several years, the Palestinians themselves have until recently been mapless. They had no detailed maps of their own at Oslo; nor, unbelievably, were there any individuals on the negotiating team familiar enough with the geography of the Occupied Territories to contest decisions or to provide alternative plans. Whence the bizarre arrangements for subdividing Hebron after the 1994 massacre of 29 Palestinians at the Horahimi mosque by Baruch Goldstein - measures undertaken to 'protect' the settlers, not the Palestinians. Map One here shows how the core of the Arab town (120,000 inhabitants) - 20 per cent of it, in fact - is under the control of roughly four hundred Jewish settlers, about 0.03 per cent of the total protected by the Israeli Army. Map Two shows the first of what was intended to be a series of Israeli pullbacks made in widely separated - that is, non-contiguous - areas. Gaza is separated from Jericho by miles and miles of Israeli-held land, but both belong to an autonomous Area A which, in the West Bank, was limited to 1.1 per cent of the territory. The Gaza component of Area A is much larger mainly because, with its arid land and overpopulated and rebellious masses, Gaza was always considered a net liability for the Israeli occupation, which was happy to be rid of all but the choice agricultural land at its heart, the various settlements, retained until now by Israel along with the harbor, the borders, entrances and exits. Maps Two, Three and Four (Four was presented by Israel as an optimal withdrawal map at the Camp David summit, though announced earlier) show the snail's pace at which the hapless Palestinian Authority has been allowed to take over the large population centers (Area A); in Area B, Israel allowed the Authority to help police the main village areas, near where settlements were constantly under construction. Despite joint patrols of Palestinian and Israeli officers, Israel held all the real security of Area B in its hands. In Area C it has kept all the territory for itself, 60 per cent of the West Bank, in order to build more settlements, open up more roads and establish military areas, all of which - in Jeff Halper's words - were intended to set up a matrix of control from which the Palestinians would never be free. (See note 2) A glance at any of the maps reveals not only that the various parts of Area A are separated from each other, but that they are surrounded by Area B and, more important, Area C. In other words, the closures and encirclements that have turned the Palestinian areas into besieged spots on the map have been long in the making and, worse still, the Palestinian Authority has conspired in this: it has approved all the relevant documents since 1994. In October Amira Hass, the Ha'aretz correspondent in the Palestinian territories, wrote that in 1993 the two sides agreed on a period of five years for completion of the new deployment and the negotiations on a final agreement. The Palestinian leadership agreed again and again to extend its trial period, in the shadow of Hamas terrorist attacks and the Israeli elections. The 'peace strategy' and the tactic of gradualism adopted by the leadership were at first supported by most of the Palestinian public, which craves normalcy- and, I would have thought, a real ending of the occupation which, to repeat, was nowhere mentioned in any of the Oslo documents. She goes on: Fatah (the main faction of the PLO) was the backbone of support for the concept of gradual release from the yoke of military occupation. Its members were the ones who kept track of the Palestinian opposition, arrested suspects whose names were given to them by Israel, imprisoned those who signed manifestos claiming that Israel did not intend to rescind its domination over the Palestinian nation. The personal advantage gained by some of these Fatah members is not enough to explain their support of the process: for a long time they really and truly believed that this was the way to independence. By 'advantage' Hass means the VIP privileges I mentioned earlier. But then, as she points out, these men, too, were members of 'the Palestinian nation', with wives, children and siblings who suffered the consequences of Israeli occupation, and were bound, at some point, to ask whether support for the peace process did not also mean support for the occupation. She concludes: More than seven years have gone by, and Israel has security and administrative control of 61.2 per cent of the West Bank and about 20 per cent of the Gaza Strip (Area C), and security control over another 26.8 per cent of the West Bank (Area B). This control is what has enabled Israel to double the number of settlers in ten years, to enlarge the settlements, to continue its discriminatory policy of cutting back water quotas for three million Palestinians, to prevent Palestinian development in most of the area of the West Bank, and to seal an entire nation into restricted areas, imprisoned in a network of bypass roads meant for Jews only. During these days of strict internal restriction of movement in the West Bank, one can see how carefully each road was planned: so that 200,000 Jews have freedom of movement and about three million Palestinians are locked into their Bantustans until they submit to Israeli demands. To which one should add, by way of clarification, that the main aquifers for Israel's water supply are on the West Bank; that the 'entire nation' excludes the four million refugees who are categorically denied the right of return, even though any Jew anywhere still enjoys an absolute right of 'return' at any time; that restriction of movement is as severe in Gaza as it is on the West Bank; and that Hass's figure of 200,000 Jews in Gaza and on the West Bank enjoying freedom of movement does not include the 150,000 new Israeli-Jewish inhabitants who have been brought in to 'Judaise' East Jerusalem. The Palestinian Authority is locked into this astonishingly ingenious, if in the long run fruitless, arrangement via security committees made up of Mossad, the CIA and the Palestinian security services. At the same time, Israel and high-ranking members of the Authority operate lucrative monopolies on building materials, tobacco, oil etc (profits are deposited in Israeli banks). Not only are Palestinians subject to harassment from Israeli troops, but their own men participate in this abuse of their rights, alongside hated non-Palestinian agencies. These largely secret security committees also have a mandate to censor anything that might be construed as 'incitement' against Israel. Palestinians, of course, have no such right against American or Israeli incitements. The slow pace of this unfolding process is justified by the US and Israel in terms of safeguarding the latter's security; one hears nothing about Palestinian security. Clearly we must conclude, as Zionist discourse has always stipulated, that the very existence of Palestinians, no matter how confined or disemboweled, constitutes a racial and religious threat to Israel's security. All the more remarkable that in the midst of such amazing unanimity, at the height of the present crisis, Danny Rabinowitz, an Israeli anthropologist, spoke bravely in Ha'aretz (17 October) of Israel's 'original sin' in destroying Palestine in 1948, which with few exceptions Israelis have chosen either to deny or to forget completely. If the geography of the West Bank has been altered to Israel's advantage, Jerusalem's has been changed entirely. The annexation of East Jerusalem in 1967 added 70 square kilometers to the state of Israel; another 54 square kilometers were filched from the West Bank and added to the metropolitan area ruled for so long by Mayor Teddy Kollek, the darling of Western liberals, who with his deputy, Meron Benvenisti, was responsible for the demolition of several hundred Palestinian homes in Haret al-Maghariba to make way for the immense plaza in front of the Wailing Wall. (See note 3) Since 1967 East Jerusalem has been systematically Judaised, its borders inflated, enormous housing projects built, new roads and bypasses constructed so as to make it unmistakably and virtually unreturnable and, for the dwindling, harassed Arab population of the city, all but uninhabitable. As Deputy Mayor Abraham Kehila said in July 1993, 'I want to make the Palestinians open their eyes to reality and understand that the unification of Jerusalem under Israeli sovereignty is irreversible.' (See Map Five. Recent small arms fire directed at the new Jerusalem settlement of Gilo from the neighboring Palestinian village of Beit Jala has been unanimously reported in the media without anyone mentioning that Gilo was built on land confiscated from Beit Jala. Few Palestinians will forget their past so easily.) The Camp David summit in July broke down because Israel and the US presented all the territorial arrangements I have been discussing here - only slightly modified to give Palestinians back two 'nature areas', a euphemism for desert land, so as to increase their portion of the total land area - as the basis for the final settlement of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Reparations were, in effect, dismissed by the Israelis, although they are not an entirely alien idea to many Jews. I have seen no mention in the Western media of a long report on Camp David written by Akram Haniyeh, editor of the Ramallah daily Al-Ayyam, and a Fatah loyalist who, since his deportation by the Israelis in 1987, has been close to Arafat. Haniyeh makes it clear that from the Palestinian point of view Clinton simply reinforced the Israeli position, and that, in order to save his career, Barak wanted a quick conclusion to critical issues such as the refugee problem and Jerusalem, as well as a formal declaration from Arafat ending the conflict definitively. (Barak has since called for early elections as a way of staving off a total Parliamentary defeat.) Haniyeh's gripping account of what took place is soon to appear in English translation in the Washington-based Journal of Palestine Studies. It shows that the 'unprecedented' Israeli position on Jerusalem was in fact tailored to that of the Israeli right-wing - in other words, that Israel would retain conclusive sovereignty over even the al-Aqsa mosque. 'The Israeli position,' Haniyeh says, 'was to reap everything' - and to give almost nothing in return. Israel would have got the 'golden signature' from Arafat, final recognition and 'the precious end of conflict promise'. All this without a complete return of occupied territory, an acknowledgment of full sovereignty or a recognition of the refugee issue. Since 1967 the US has disbursed more than $200 billion dollars in unconditional financial and military aid to Israel, while offering blanket political support that allows Israel to do as it pleases. Britain, whose foreign policy is a carbon copy of Washington's, also supplies military hardware that goes directly to the West Bank and Gaza to facilitate the killing of Palestinians. No state has received anywhere near as much foreign aid as Israel and no state (aside from the US itself) has defied the international community on so many issues for so long. Were Al Gore to become President this policy would remain unchanged. Gore is uncompromisingly pro-Israeli, and a close associate of Martin Peretz, Israel's leading pro-rejectionist and anti-Arab rhetorician in the US, and owner of the New Republic. At least George W. Bush made an effort during the campaign to address Arab American concerns, but like most past Republican Presidents, he would be only slightly less pro- Israeli than Gore. For seven years, Arafat had been signing peace process agreements with Israel. Camp David was obviously meant to be the last. He balked, no doubt, because he had woken up to the enormity of what he had already signed away (I'd like to think his nightmares are made up of unending rides on the bypasses of Area C); no doubt, too, because he was aware how much popularity he had lost. Never mind the corruption, the despotism, the spiraling unemployment, now up to 25 per cent, the sheer poverty of most of his people: he fin-ally understood that, having been kept alive by Israel and the US, he would be thrown back to his people without the Haram al-Sharif and without a real state, or even the prospect of viable statehood. Young Palestinians have had enough and, despite Arafat's feeble efforts to control them, have taken to the streets to throw stones and fire slingshots at Israeli Merkavas and Cobras. What Israel has depended on in the past, the ignorance, complicity or laziness of journalists outside Israel, is now countered by the fantastic amount of alternative information available on the Internet. Cyber activists and hackers have opened a vast new reservoir of material which anyone with a minimum of literacy can tap into. There are reports not only by journalists from the British press (there aren't any equivalents in the US establishment media) but also from the Israeli and Europe-based Arab press; there is research by individual scholars and information gleaned from archives, international organizations and UN agencies, as well as from NGO collectives in Palestine, Israel, Europe, Australia and North America. Here, as in many other instances, reliable information is the greatest enemy of oppression and injustice. The most demoralizing aspect of the Zionist-Palestinian conflict is the almost total opposition between mainstream Israeli and Palestinian points of view. We were dispossessed and uprooted in 1948, they think they won independence and that the means were just. We recall that the land we left and the territories we are trying to liberate from military occupation are all part of our national patrimony; they think it is theirs by Biblical fiat and diasporas affiliation. Today, by any conceivable standards, we are the victims of the violence; they think they are. There is simply no common ground, no common narrative, no possible area for genuine reconciliation. Our claims are mutually exclusive. Even the notion of a common life shared in the same small piece of land is unthinkable. Each of us thinks of separation, perhaps even of isolating and forgetting the other. The greater moral pressure to change is on the Israelis, whose military actions and unwise peace strategy derive from a preponderance of power on their side, and an unwillingness to see that they are laying up years of resentment and hatred on the part of Muslims and Arabs. Ten years from now there will be demographic parity between Arabs and Jews in historical Palestine: what then? Can the tank deployments, road blocks and house demolitions continue as before? Might it not make sense for a group of respected historians and intellectuals, composed equally of Palestinians and Israelis, to hold a series of meetings to try to agree a modicum of truth about this conflict, to see whether the known sources can guide the two sides to agree on a body of facts - who took what from whom, who did what to whom, and so on - which in turn might reveal a way out of the present impasse? It is too early, perhaps, for a Truth and Reconciliation Commission, but something like a Historical Truth and Political Justice Committee would be appropriate. It is clear to everyone on the ground that the old Oslo framework which has done so much damage is no longer workable (a recent poll conducted by Bir Zeit University shows that only 3 per cent of the Palestinian population want to return to the old negotiations) and that the Palestinian negotiating team led by Arafat can no longer hold the center, much less the nation. Everyone feels that enough is enough: the occupation has gone on too long, the peace talks have dragged on with too little to show for them, the goal, if it was to have been independence, seems no closer (thank Rabin, Peres and their Palestinian counterparts for that particular failure), and the suffering of ordinary people has gone further than can be endured. Hence the stone-throwing in the streets, yet another futile activity with its own tragic consequences. The only hope is to keep trying to rely on an idea of coexistence between two peoples in one land. For now, though, the Palestinians are in desperate need of guidance and, above all, physical protection. Barak's plan to punish, contain and stifle them has already had calamitous results, but it cannot, as he and his American mentors suppose, bring them to heel. Why is it that more Israelis do not realize - as some already have - that a policy of brutality against Arabs in a part of the world containing three hundred million Arabs and 1.2 billion Muslims, will not make the Jewish state more secure? Notes: 1 These figures are taken from Jerusalem 1948: The Arab Neighbourhoods and Their Fate in the War, edited by Salim Tamari (Institute of Jerusalem Studies, 1998). 2 Halper has written the most impressive studies of Israeli territorial planning during the Oslo process; see, for instance, his study of the trans-Israel highway, 'The Road to Apartheid', in News from Within (May 2000) and 'The 94 Per Cent Solution: A Matrix of Control' in Middle East Report 216 (Fall 2000). The Dutch geographer Jan de Jong, who drew up two of the maps reprinted here, has also done important work in this area. 3 A sobering account of Kollek's golden era emerges from Separate and Unequal: The Inside Story of Israeli Rule in East Jerusalem by Amir Cheshin, Bill Hutman and Avi Melamed (Harvard, 282 pp., Pounds17.50, 1 June 1999, 0 674 80136 9).
Background: The Israel-PLO Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements (the DOP), signed in Washington on 13 September 1993, provided for a transitional period not exceeding five years of Palestinian interim self-government in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. Under the DOP, Israel agreed to transfer certain powers and responsibilities to the Palestinian Authority, which includes the Palestinian Legislative Council elected in January 1996, as part of the interim self-governing arrangements in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. A transfer of powers and responsibilities for the Gaza Strip and Jericho took place pursuant to the Israel-PLO 4 May 1994 Cairo Agreement on the Gaza Strip and the Jericho Area and in additional areas of the West Bank pursuant to the Israel-PLO 28 September 1995 Interim Agreement, the Israel-PLO 15 January 1997 Protocol Concerning Redeployment in Hebron, the Israel-PLO 23 October 1998 Wye River Memorandum, and the 4 September 1999 Sharm el-Sheikh Agreement. The DOP provides that Israel will retain responsibility during the transitional period for external security and for internal security and public order of settlements and Israeli citizens. Permanent status is to be determined through direct negotiations, which resumed in September 1999 after a three-year hiatus. An intifadah broke out in September 2000; the resulting widespread violence in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, Israel's military response, and instability in the Palestinian Authority are undermining progress toward a permanent settlement.
Gaza Strip Geography Top of Page Location: Middle East, bordering the Mediterranean Sea, between Egypt and Israel Geographic coordinates: 31 25 N, 34 20 E Map references: Middle East Area: total: 360 sq km land: 360 sq km water: 0 sq km Area - comparative: slightly more than twice the size of Washington, DC Land boundaries: total: 62 km border countries: Egypt 11 km, Israel 51 km Coastline: 40 km Maritime claims: Israeli-occupied with current status subject to the Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement - permanent status to be determined through further negotiation Climate: temperate, mild winters, dry and warm to hot summers Terrain: flat to rolling, sand- and dune-covered coastal plain Elevation extremes: lowest point: Mediterranean Sea 0 m highest point: Abu 'Awdah (Joz Abu 'Auda) 105 m Natural resources: arable land, natural gas Land use: arable land: 24% permanent crops: 39% permanent pastures: 0% forests and woodland: 11% other: 26% (1993 est.) Irrigated land: 120 sq km (1993 est.) Natural hazards: droughts Environment - current issues: desertification; salination of fresh water; sewage treatment; water-borne disease; soil degradation Geography - note: there are 25 Israeli settlements and civilian land use sites in the Gaza Strip (August 2000 est.) Gaza Strip People Top of Page Population: 1,178,119 (July 2001 est.) note: in addition, there are some 6,900 Israeli settlers in the Gaza Strip (August 2000 est.) Age structure: 0-14 years: 49.89% (male 301,288; female 286,481) 15-64 years: 47.32% (male 283,274; female 274,189) 65 years and over: 2.79% (male 14,121; female 18,766) (2001 est.) Population growth rate: 4.01% (2001 est.) Birth rate: 42.48 births/1,000 population (2001 est.) Death rate: 4.21 deaths/1,000 population (2001 est.) Net migration rate: 1.8 migrant(s)/1,000 population (2001 est.) Sex ratio: at birth: 1.05 male(s)/female under 15 years: 1.05 male(s)/female 15-64 years: 1.03 male(s)/female 65 years and over: 0.75 male(s)/female total population: 1.03 male(s)/female (2001 est.) Infant mortality rate: 25.37 deaths/1,000 live births (2001 est.) Life expectancy at birth: total population: 71.01 years male: 69.76 years female: 72.32 years (2001 est.) Total fertility rate: 6.42 children born/woman (2001 est.) HIV/AIDS - adult prevalence rate: NA% HIV/AIDS - people living with HIV/AIDS: NA HIV/AIDS - deaths: NA Nationality: noun: NA adjective: NA Ethnic groups: Palestinian Arab and other 99.4%, Jewish 0.6% Religions: Muslim (predominantly Sunni) 98.7%, Christian 0.7%, Jewish 0.6% Languages: Arabic, Hebrew (spoken by Israeli settlers and many Palestinians), English (widely understood) Literacy: definition: NA total population: NA% male: NA% female: NA% Gaza Strip Government Top of Page Country name: conventional long form: none conventional short form: Gaza Strip local long form: none local short form: Qita Ghazzah Gaza Strip Economy Top of Page Economy - overview: Economic output in the Gaza Strip - which comes under the responsibility of the Palestinian Authority since the Cairo Agreement of May 1994 - declined perhaps one-third between 1992 and 1996. The downturn was largely the result of Israeli closure policies - the imposition of generalized border closures in response to security incidents in Israel - which disrupted previously established labor and commodity market relationships between Israel and the WBGS (West Bank and Gaza Strip). The most serious negative social effect of this downturn was the emergence of high unemployment; unemployment in the WBGS during the 1980s was generally under 5%; by 1995 it had risen to over 20%. Since 1997 Israel's use of comprehensive closures has decreased and, in 1998, Israel implemented new policies to reduce the impact of closures and other security procedures on the movement of Palestinian goods and labor. These changes fueled an almost three-year long economic recovery in the West Bank and Gaza Strip; real GDP grew by 5% in 1998 and 6% in 1999. Recovery was upended in the last quarter of 2000 with the outbreak of Palestinian violence, which triggered tight Israeli closures of Palestinian self-rule areas and a severe disruption of trade and labor movements. GDP: purchasing power parity - $1.11 billion (2000 est.) GDP - real growth rate: -7.5% (2000 est.) GDP - per capita: purchasing power parity - $1,000 (2000 est.) GDP - composition by sector: agriculture: 9% industry: 28% services: 63% (1999 est., includes West Bank) Population below poverty line: NA% Household income or consumption by percentage share: lowest 10%: NA% highest 10%: NA% Inflation rate (consumer prices): 3% (includes West Bank) (2000 est.) Labor force: NA Labor force - by occupation: services 66%, industry 21%, agriculture 13% (1996) Unemployment rate: 40% (includes West Bank) (yearend 2000) Budget: revenues: $1.6 billion expenditures: $1.73 billion, including capital expenditures of $NA note: includes West Bank (1999 est.) Industries: generally small family businesses that produce textiles, soap, olive-wood carvings, and mother-of-pearl souvenirs; the Israelis have established some small-scale modern industries in an industrial center Industrial production growth rate: NA% Electricity - production: NA kWh; note - electricity supplied by Israel Electricity - consumption: NA kWh Electricity - exports: 0 kWh (1999) Electricity - imports: NA kWh; note - electricity supplied by Israel Agriculture - products: olives, citrus, vegetables; beef, dairy products Exports: $682 million (f.o.b., 1998 est.) (includes West Bank) Exports - commodities: citrus, flowers Exports - partners: Israel, Egypt, West Bank Imports: $2.5 billion (c.i.f., 1998 est.) (includes West Bank) Imports - commodities: food, consumer goods, construction materials Imports - partners: Israel, Egypt, West Bank Debt - external: $108 million (1997 est.) (includes West Bank) Economic aid - recipient: $121 million disbursed (2000) (includes West Bank) Currency: new Israeli shekel (ILS) Currency code: ILS Exchange rates: new Israeli shekels per US dollar - 4.0810 (December 2000), 4.0773 (2000), 4.1397 (1999), 3.8001 (1998), 3.4494 (1997), 3.1917 (1996) Fiscal year: calendar year Gaza Strip Communications Top of Page Telephones - main lines in use: 95,729 (total for Gaza Strip and West Bank) (1997) Telephones - mobile cellular: NA Telephone system: general assessment: NA domestic: rudimentary telephone services provided by an open wire system international: NA Radio broadcast stations: AM 0, FM 0, shortwave 0 (1998) Radios: NA; note - most Palestinian households have radios (1999) Television broadcast stations: 2 (operated by the Palestinian Broadcasting Corporation) (1997) Televisions: NA; note - most Palestinian households have televisions (1997) Internet Service Providers (ISPs): 3 (1999) Internet users: 23,520 (1999) (includes West Bank) Gaza Strip Transportation Top of Page Railways: total: NA km; note - one line, abandoned and in disrepair, little trackage remains Highways: total: NA km paved: NA km unpaved: NA km note: small, poorly developed road network Waterways: none Ports and harbors: Gaza Airports: 2 note: includes Gaza International Airport that opened on 24 November 1998 as part of agreements stipulated in the September 1995 Oslo II Accord and the 23 October 1998 Wye River Memorandum (2000 est.) Airports - with paved runways: total: 1 over 3,047 m: 1 (2000 est.) Airports - with unpaved runways: total: 1 under 914 m: 1 (2000 est.) Gaza Strip Military Top of Page Military branches: NA Military expenditures - dollar figure: $NA Military expenditures - percent of GDP: NA% Gaza Strip Transnational Issues Top of Page Disputes - international: West Bank and Gaza Strip are Israeli-occupied with current status subject to the Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement - permanent status to be determined through further negotiation
Quantum brain theory: splitting classical-physical reality..from the inside-out -5
It has long been believed that mind and body are separate, but the evidence is unambiguous -- However miraculous the illusion may be, mind is the product of ‘wholly physical processes.’ 1 This conclusion, expressed by neurologist Antonio Damasio of the University of Iowa, is a widely held perspective in the scientific community, although completely at odds with one of the founders of modern science who argued that mind and body are separate: Descartes. We all know what atheism is, but few can grasp that a comparable disbelief in the self is becoming common place among scientists and postmodern thinkers. To a great degree, Descartes programmed the minds of intelligent people for over three hundred years, and is best know for declaring that there is one undeniable reality: I think, therefore I am. Self-consciousness has its roots in Descartes' philosophy. News of the rebellion against Descartes’ scientific and philosophical ideas has been slow in reaching educated people. New ideas have been aired, but we have not yet been aware of their impact. Most people are still so thoroughly grounded in Descartes' paradigm that they cannot think of questioning it. He created the Cartesian co-ordinate system, which shaped modern concepts of spatial geometry, and is still fundamental to how many scientist's think about subatomic particles. More complex still is the movement away from Cartesian point particles to strings in contemporary mathematics and physics. But as with common sense and self-consciousness, it is not easy to shake old habits. The Cartesian co-ordinate system of points still defines reality in spite of all the promise of string theory. Penrose's twistor space does not focus on localized points, but rather presents the all-encompassing perspective of a global geometry.2 In a very real sense, we live in the past, in ideas that are so worn they can easily be re-shaped and turned against us. The physical origins of mind may still be a mystery to scientists, but of one thing they are sure, there is no physical justification for believing in the reality of something we might call a self. After more than a century of looking for it, brain researchers have long since concluded that there is no conceivable place for such a self to be located in the physical brain, and that it simply doesn't exist.3 Two of the best known social scientists advocating a mechanistic view of the human mind are Daniel Dennett and Steven Pinker. They are main stream thinkers in this field, and view the brain as a computer operating according to the principles of classical physics. In his book Consciousness Explained, Dennett describes a bowerbird building a nest instinctively without any awareness as to why it does what it does. Stranger still, are the human beings who create a self. The brain produces a self like a bird builds a nest, using words and language as its tools, but being no more aware of why it must create this self than the bird knows why it builds a nest.4 Dennett quotes from a deconstructionist novel by David Lodge titled Nice Work. According to Robyn (or, more precisely, according to the writers who have influenced her thinking on these matters), there is no such thing as the self on which capitalism and the classic novel are founded -- that is to say, a finite, unique soul or essence that constitutes a person's identity; there is only a subject in an infinite web of discourses -- the discourses of power, sex, family, science, religion, poetry, etc. And by the same token, there is no such thing as an author, that is to say, one who originates a work of fiction ab nihilo. . . . in the famous words of Jacques Derrida. . . il n'y a pas de hors-texte, there is nothing outside the text. There are no origins, there is only production, and we produce our selves in language. This is called semiotic materialism.5 Keep in mind that Dennett and the Postmodernists are taken very seriously by intellectuals. It is important that you understand how central language is to shaping not only human identity, but consciousness. Given this insight, I would ask that you not under-estimate the significance of how language is re-designed in the second half of this book. After a very mechanical discussion, Dennett acknowledges that his explanation of consciousness is not complete. He observes that his work is a fresh beginning in describing consciousness. What he has done is to replace familiar words and images with new metaphors to better describe one's mental experience. It's just a war of metaphors, you say -- but metaphors are not 'just' metaphors; metaphors are the tools of thought. No one can think about consciousness without them, so it is important to equip yourself with the best set of tools available.6 This kind of superficiality is reminiscent of Hawking's expectation that we will all be knowing the mind of God just as soon as the reductionists get the final theory worked out. The God Hawking describes is a result of his own way of thinking. It is not that we will someday understand the mind of God, or that we would cease to believe in God, but rather that our state of mind would be so changed that the concept of such a self comprehending such a God would not exist, nor would the question. The paradox, the mystery is resolved not by answering the riddles, but by changing our minds so fundamentally that we no longer think in such simplistic terms. Hawking and Dennett assume that a new science can be created by simply readjusting the theory on paper, restructuring our picture of the outside world. Dennett has focused on an important issue -- the self is an artificial construction --- but his thinking is wooden. Like Hawking, Dennett fails to realize that great ideas never lend themselves to mere clever invention; they overwhelm us in bursts of energy and leave us exhausted and transfigured. A radically new perspective requires changes in the observing instrument --- the mind, as well as the mechanical theory being used to analyze the world, which moves us from within without our realizing it. Such an arresting insight will have extraordinary consequences for all of us emotionally. Collective mind, which is the focus of the later part of this book, is an immensely powerful idea and no artificial construction; it is guaranteed to be a whole lot more persuasive than Dennett's toolbox of new metaphors. Seeing the mind as having physical origins is surely correct, but describing consciousness as a by-product of classical laws of physics serves a higher power than science: the State. The emphasis here will be on Penrose's view of the mind being governed by principles of quantum physics. But for the moment, notice that something revolutionary has happened: the self, so essential to post-war political and religious ideology, has been discarded by official social science. This is an unwanted consequence of the new physics. A robot-like intelligence is to replace the self. This is a hard product to sell; it just doesn't have sex appeal. The self could be associated with passionate, even religious feelings, but this robot brain leaves us cold. If you doubt it, try reading the first 300 pages of Steven Pinker's book How The Mind Works. If you have encountered one of these automatons, you understand that an open exchange of ideas is about as possible as a discussion of Jewish totalitarianism with the thought police of political correctness. These robo-cops developed from a view of man as a machine, where the brain is seen as the computer hardware and the mind is the programmable software. But even this mechanistic vision of human nature will cause heartburn for the high priests of social science. It is inevitable that any comparison of the brain to a computer will lead to a further understanding that the artificial intelligence of computers is an extension of the human brain. This comparison begs the association of the individual pc to the self-conscious mind, and the opening of the pc to a network of expanding awareness that we might think of as collective intelligence. The solitary soul, alone before his window on the world, becomes a contemplative in spite of himself. He is barely aware of a collective intelligence that is made real and enhanced by technology. Space travel and the colonization of new worlds is also becoming reality. People will find themselves isolated in distant, alien, and even hostile environments; instinct will lead them to turn inwards for comfort, as they seek contact with an uncanny Nature which will disclose an intelligence sure to astonish even the most rational of men. One such rational man is Francis Crick, of the celebrated Watson and Crick DNA team; he argues that the brain operates according to the principles of classical physics, but his reasoning is certainly suggestive of the cohesiveness characteristic of quantum physics. Crick argues that consciousness is the consequence of the synchronized firing of billions of neurons in the brain; It's the meshing of these frequencies that generates consciousness...,7 much as the instruments of an orchestra create the collective and unified sound we recognize as music. As has been seen from the fractals of chaos theory, nature repeats the same patterns at different magnifications. Collective consciousness would most likely involve some variation on this orchestra theme; this meshing web is not so unlike the net, or the apparent chaos of the stereogram. I hope you can see the significance of this reference to the stereogram; it is a remarkable idea that will become central to our thinking. This kind of collective mind theme does appear in science fiction, and invariably is portrayed as the ultimate evil in the universe -- The Borg of Star Trek for example. It is not that the media masters don't fully appreciate the power of mass communication, nor do they fail to realize that the Internet implies an electronic collective consciousness; it is a matter of control. Those who shape public opinion are not eager for grown-up children to break out of their hypnotic trance by discovering why it is so easy to media-wash them. But more of this later, after we have studied Durkheim. For now, let us focus on the human brain as organic, feeling tissue. Most of what is known about the brain and human consciousness has its origins in the study of disease. What we experience as mind cannot be identified with any specific part of the brain, and in that respect mind is not a thing which can be weighed and measured. Damage to the brain will not destroy this sense of mind, though it can limit its capacity to function.8 Some scientists think the brain makes effective use of an alternate re-routing of signals around damaged areas to keep mental activity functioning normally. When the brain is not able to supply accurate sensory information to complete the whole mental picture we call mind, the brain improvises -- it fills in the missing sensory data in the form of hallucinations. A familiar example of the brain’s trickery is the phantom limb phenomena, whereby a person who has lost a leg or arm feels that it is still there.9 Physical injury can damage memory, evidently by eliminating essential portions of the brain's memory architecture. But other sorts of shock -- strong emotion, for example --- can do the same.10 A prominent psychiatrist, Dennis Charney observes that 'Severe stress can change the way your brain functions biologically.' 11 Decades after emotional trauma occurs, changes in brain function are still evident to medical examiners. In short, feelings are real. As with consciousness, these intense emotions are not localized in one area of the brain. Damasio, of Iowa, has found that the process of rational thought depends on emotion. In fact, says Damasio, emotion is a key element of learning and decision making.12 The modern plague of drugs has certainly made it obvious to everyone that chemicals, including natural hormones such as testosterone and estrogen, radically effect brain function: ....scientists once believed sex hormones had very little effect on the brain.... ...Recent research, however, has shown that the entire brain, including the thought-processing cortex, is awash in sex hormones, even before birth.13 Humans, like other animals have powerful instincts that have not diminished however sophisticated or pious we may imagine ourselves to be; we must learn to appreciate our own primitive nature, as it combines with intelligence in creative ways, to protect our race from extermination. One of the most central themes in my own thinking is that emotions are essential to all significant creative thought, and in addition to that, emotion is shared energy which contagiously attracts compatible people who are instinctively drawn to one-another, forming a clan through an intensely felt state of mind Durkheim identified as collective consciousness. There will be no appeal to metaphysical forces, but rather to primate instinct; we shall discover that this intuition is the source of genius and is even more wondrous in man than in the other remarkable creatures of nature. Rather than appeal to some other-worldly spirits, we will awaken dormant human nature which contains within it far more real enchantment than all the miracles of this world's religions combined. The Spirit to which I appeal in this book is imagination, courage, and most of all an intense caring for others, a collective feeling of belonging. All that is asked of you is that you accept the reality that we are all creatures of this Earth. The sexual aspect of hormonally charged thought has primitive racial implications we will not even pretend to repress, however distressing this may be to aging social engineers of the Freudian school. As we have just mentioned, the injured brain fills in missing information to produce a cohesive image of our surroundings, but so also does the healthy brain. Dr. Rodolfo Llina, a neuro-scientist at N.Y.U. Medical School, makes some very startling disclosures concerning the way in which the brain shapes the reality we experience through our senses. We do not see and hear the real world; we experience our environment as it is interpreted by a human brain, which can very readily be over-whelmed by a flood of conflicting signals. ...Colors clearly don't exist outside our brains, nor does sound.14 Just ask anyone who is color blind, or try to hear one of those silent whistles that dogs respond to. Llina raises the classic question of whether or not there is a sound should a tree fall in the forest and no one is there to hear it. His answer is a resounding no! There can be no sound without a relationship between a transmitter and a receiver. If there is no receiver for television and radio signals, then the show does not go on. Its the same for the tree falling; if there is no one to hear it -- there is no sound. It doesn't mean the tree didn't fall, only that there was no sound. Much later, I will explain that in fact there was sound because the creatures of nature can hear, and their presence in the world is far more significant than our self-centered, urbanized, mechanized civilization acknowledges. But getting back to Llina, he concludes that consciousness is a dream-like state, which evidently also applies to mysticism, that only approximates something we call external reality. Given what we know of how the brain works, the concept of self can no longer be considered real. Crick writes about an astonishing hypothesis, which is more akin to a final theory than a theory of everything. Crick appears to be a reductionist much like Weinberg. His hypothesis merely states that whoever you think you are, is an illusion created by the firing of neurons in the human brain -- that's all you are, a pack of neurons15 and nothing more. It's this and nothing more attitude which makes people defensive, which diminishes their sense of worth as human beings. Quantum physics indicates that the whole is more than the sum of its parts. Because he sees the brain from the perspective of classical physics, Crick tells us we are only the parts, but intuitively we know what we are ....that we belong to the whole. People are intimidated by scientists like Crick because they have made the very foolish mistake of confusing the socially learned conscience of morality with Spirit, or what they think of as their unique soul. Spirituality is precisely the transcendence of self-consciousness, of individuality; it is a discovery of a wider collective awareness of feeling and understanding. The realization that the self is an illusion is fundamental to an authentic spiritual awakening called mysticism. So Crick's sophomoric atheism serves a purpose far nobler than his intent. While critical of most of the world's religions for fostering such unscientific beliefs as the immortal soul, like Hawking he finds Catholicism most offensive. He feels compelled to qualify his attack on religion by stating that: Some religions, such as Judaism, put little emphasis on life after death.16 I have always found it comforting to see high and mighty scientists, of the wrong faith, bend their knees to the raw power of The Chosen. But flexibility and quantum ambiguity are essential for survival in the academic world just as in the jungle. Crick too knows how to approximate reality. Like psychologists, physicists, artists, and everybody else, brain researchers are fascinated with illusions. Crick instructs his readers to stare at an illusion of a three dimensional cube: ...In this case there are two equally plausible 3D interpretations of the image, and the brain is uncertain which it prefers.17 The problem of multiple images which we encounter in quantum theory is linked to the way in which the human brain interprets information overload. Crick is eager to neatly dispose of illusions by placing them under the category of 'ill-posed problems.' 18 By the clever use of constraints, Crick believes he has accounted for the ambiguity of nature. Quantum physicists would probably not be persuaded by such a convenient solution to the paradoxes of their science. But evidently Crick's discipline is not as rigorous as physics. The brain processes as much of the environmental input it can make sense of -- treating it as a whole, and most of the time producing a non-ambiguous perception. This problem of complexity resulting from information overload and the resultant illusions has led some to conclude that a theory of everything is beyond the capacity of human intelligence to either discover or create because everything is outside the range of human perception. Others believe that the brain can effectively process highly complex information in the form of what we recognize as beauty. The solution to this problem is a matter of learning to incorporate ambiguity into how we think and express ourselves. The brain is a mystery to itself. It is inherently ambiguous because it is split into two hemispheres. At times, the left hand does not know what the right hand is doing. The stereogram discloses this complementarity which is built into the structure of those two schizophrenic I s staring both into and out of that weird mirror of quantum relativistic reflection. The study of the split brain has been instrumental in our understanding that the mind has its origins in this remarkable organ of intelligence, and that the self is a transitory creation -- a stereoscopic projection arising out of this living tissue. Penrose discusses a split brain experiment carried out in 1977 by Wilson.19 The procedure involves cutting the cord, the corpus callosum, which links the left and right hemispheres of the brain. Patients of such an operation are being treated for a debilitating disorder such as epilepsy. The patient in this case, called P.S., is initially only able to utilize the left hemisphere to speak, although both sides of the brain understand spoken language. In time, P.S. develops the ability to speak using the right portion of his brain. Penrose does not believe that conventional language is essential for consciousness, or even thinking. He is of the opinion that the two hemispheres of the split-brain patients are independently conscious, that there are two minds.... and there is a surplus of clinical evidence supporting the observation that duality... complementarity is hard-wired into human consciousness. Penrose imagines a procedure in which the two hemispheres are temporarily separated by use of freezing or an anesthetic drug. He considers the implications of rejoining the hemispheres so that one consciousness would be re-established. He then wonders how it would feel to have been two distinct selves, perhaps to have been schizophrenic. It is this self-contradictory situation which has led some thinkers to conclude that the concept of the unique self must ultimately give way to another, more persuasive model of consciousness. Thomas Nagel states that 'It is possible that the ordinary, simple idea of a single person will come to seem quaint some day’...20; while his intent was to diminish the significance of individuality, his conclusion can also point us in the unintended direction of collective consciousness, which enhances the quality of human life rather than impoverishing it. The split brain research is of critical importance to understanding human nature. We each have two brains, just as we all have two eyes, two hands etc. Yet, our two hands are more than just two of the same instrument. Used together, they can accomplish what the two right hands of strangers could never do. Our two eyes open to us: depth vision. Our two ears enable us to locate the source of a sound; and two legs make locomotion possible. This bilateral symmetry is rooted in a structure deeper even than our own biology. It is this complementarity within us as much as the ambiguity outside of us in the physical world which seems so confusing, even deceiving common sense perception. There are two channels broadcasting to human consciousness, one from the left brain and one from the right. It is this duality within our nature, like the positive and negative poles of a battery, which charges the mind with the energy of evolutionary change. The depth of human vision is only possible because the left and right hemispheres operate in tandem: they are truly capable of transcending their separateness, of opening out to bring in a whole world of collective experience. This ambidextrous quality we seek is capable of more than the logical discipline of the left hemisphere or the creativity of the right. It is this balancing of opposites, this complementarity of mind that is capable of an instinctive intelligence which is collective in nature.... giving a soul to the tin-man of science, a brain to the scarecrow of religion, courage to the cowardly lions of commerce trapped within a slave-State-of-depression amidst their material affluence -- but most importantly this opening mind gives us one-another. While no youngster, Francis Crick is a relative newcomer to brain research. John Eccles has been a pioneer in neuro-physiology long before it became the place to be. Unlike Crick, Eccles argues that quantum influences are likely during synaptic activity. The eye is part of the brain. Research by Hecht and Baylor indicates there are cells in the retina so sensitive to light that they can detect a single photon.21 This would be a quantum event occurring at the classical level. There is increasing reason to look for centers in the brain that are sites of quantum activity. We are about to engage in a brief, but complex discussion of brain function from the perspective of quantum physics, rather than from classical theory which is the official point of view. The two primary sources I will refer to are Roger Penrose and Danah Zohar. Zohar is an established popular writer in the area of quantum physics, but her relevance here goes beyond her own expertise. Her husband is Ian Marshall, and he is a fundamental researcher and theorist in precisely this matter under discussion. In July 1995, I heard a radio report announcing the discovery of a new state of matter. Einstein theorized in the 1920's that when approaching absolute zero, a new state would form which is distinctly different than solid, liquid, or gas. That state has been produced in the laboratory. Atoms clump together and act as a unit rather than as separate atoms. It is so cold that atoms do not move; this opens the possibility of producing perfectly efficient machines, such as lasers that do not lose energy as heat. The quantum mechanical phenomenon to be understood here is this: in a large group of similar molecules, qualities of individuality break down and the molecules merge together to form one entity called a Bose-Einstein condensate. One might compare this to individual voices that spread themselves throughout a large arena, seeming to be everywhere and nowhere in particular, blending into one collective voice. Such large-scale quantum synchronicity exists in and accounts for the special properties of lasers, superfluids or superconductors, but the importance of the type found in Fröhlich systems is that it exits at normal body temperatures.22 Zohar discusses the possibility that the brain may have properties of superconductivity. Fröhlich's 'pumped system' is simply a system of vibrating electrically charged molecules ('dipoles'--positive at one end and negative at the other) into which energy is pumped. The vibrating dipoles, (molecules in the cell walls of living tissue) emit electromagnetic vibrations (photons), just like so many miniature radio transmitters, as they jiggle.23 It was Fröhlich who showed that there was a threshold involved; once reached, surplus energy infused into the system resulted in ...molecules of that kind to vibrate in unison.24 The intensity of vibration increases until they form a Bose-Einstein condensate. Zohar indicates that the jiggling of molecules (emitting photons), caused by neurons firing in the brain, becomes synchronized at a critical frequency and that they begin beating to the same rhythm thus establishing themselves as a Bose-Einstein condensate -- having one identity.25 The many components of this highly ordered system do not simply work together sympathetically, ...but they become whole - their identities merge or overlap in such a way that they lose their individuality entirely.26 Zohar thinks that the formation of the Bose-Einstein condensate is the process which distinguishes the organized awareness of living beings from non-conscious matter. Evidence for coherent states (Bose-Einstein condensates) in biological tissue is now abundant, and the interpretation of its meaning lies at the cutting edge of exciting breakthroughs in our understanding of what distinguishes life from non-life.27 Penrose argues that an alternative to the computational simulation view of the brain described in terms of classical physics is needed in order to make sense of consciousness in terms of the physical structure of the brain. He suggests that neuro-physiologists examine the boundary where quantum and classical phenomena are most likely to overlap. The current focus of attention is on that location in the brain where quantum activity may occur, and inter-face with an area of the brain which is already understood in terms of familiar classical brain function. As of the late 1990s, researchers suspect .... that it is through the cytoskeletal control of synaptic connections that this quantum/classical interface exerts its fundamental influence on the brain's behaviour.28 According to this hypothesis, consciousness develops out of the inter-play of quantum and classical processes. It is significant that classical and quantum physics be reconciled in Penrose's biological twist on quantum theory. He argues that quantum activity is prevalent within tiny structures inside neurons. Neurons are then linked together like a classical network of computers, but the energy they transmit has quantum origins. The neurons function as a magnifying device in which the smaller scale cytoskeletal action is transferred to something which can influence other organs of the body -- such as muscles.29 The neuron activity with which we are familiar ....is a mere shadow of the deeper level of cytoskeletal action--and it is at this deeper level where we must seek the physical basis of mind!30 Evidence suggests that large numbers of cytoskeletons function in a collective way in the brain. Penrose draws on the 1989 research of Ian Marshall to advance the idea that even within the hot brain, it is biologically possible that a Bose-Einstein condensate could form -- this was the idea of Fröhlich, who anticipated finding quantum activity at the macroscopic level of the brain. It is hypothesized that a quantum coherent state engulfs a large area of the entire brain. It is thought that this process originates in a bundle of microtubules inside each cytoskeleton. From the cytoskeleton, the quantum coherent state spreads to include the whole neuron. Not only this, but the quantum coherence must leap the synaptic barrier between neuron and neuron. It is not much of a globality if it involves only individual cells!31A The end product of this quantum coherence enveloping the brain is a unified state of mind that scientists, such as Eccles and Crick, would recognize as human consciousness, and which popular culture confuses with a metaphysical belief long enshrined as the self . It is useful to compare this quantum coherent state of the brain being postulated here with Brian Greene’s description of a “coherent state of strings”. “And just as an electromagnetic field such as visible light is composed of an enormous number of photons, a gravitational field is composed of an enormous number of gravitons – that is, an enormous number of strings executing the graviton vibrational pattern. Gravitational fields, in turn, are encoded in the warping of the spacetime fabric, and hence we are led to identify the fabric of spacetime itself with a colossal number of strings all undergoing the same, orderly, graviton pattern of vibration. In the language of the field, such an enormous organized array of similarly vibrating strings is known as a coherent state of strings.”31B In the light of this comparison, the ideas of Marshal, Zohar, and Penrose should not seem quite so far outside the mainstream of contemporary scientific thought. Penrose is certain of two things: first, there is a non-computational activity, a quantum coherence, within the brain that is responsible for consciousness; and second, that consciousness has a global quality to it, which must be accounted for at the quantum physical level. What Penrose wants to do is describe consciousness as a quantum state. To do this, he reminds us of the collective quality characteristic of the quantum state of superposition in particle physics. He then extends this idea beyond particles to a large number of waves all suspended in the same quantum state hypothesized to be a Bose-Einstein condensate. The critical new idea introduced is that ...there is a coherence on a large scale, where many of the strange features of quantum wave functions hold at a macroscopic level.32... that is, at the level of the human brain. Consider this new hypothesis: consciousness is a direct consequence of quantum relativity, and we can visualize this process using a random dot stereogram as a model for millions of cytoskeleton microtubules in superposition ....and they in self-similar-fractal-like-form are magnified up-wards, across scale, as another random dot pattern spreading through-out the neuron ...which in turn integrates within a wave of random dot synapses forming the quantum relativistic globality of consciousness. One is conscious when the world of depth vision shifts into focus ....when quantum vector reduction appears to occur. Before the Energy of that quantum relativistic chaotic self-organization Materializes, there is just the quantum randomness of non-consciousness. As we examine this matter from different perspectives, you will begin to see that the quantum aspect of consciousness cannot be an individual local matter, that it must be collective ..IN NATURE -- that the random dot template of quantum-relativistic-stereoscopic-vision continues shifting-across-scale to the yet higher level of magnification we are calling collective consciousness ....and that the mechanism of that energy inter-change is contagious human emotion, very much amplified by the non-local energy and relativistic focus of the electronic media. All the ideas of this book will eventually converge on the concept of collective consciousness -- a theme that will unfold as the ideas of Durkheim and Jung are introduced. At this stage, what should be kept in mind is that the physical model for that concept will be the quantum relativistic random dot stereogram. Each member of a living community is like a random dot singer in a choir. As the random players gather and perform together, their voices and identities come into super-position -- undergoing a global existential …shift from individual consciousness to a quantum relativistic collective awareness of their common voice. The beauty and power of that choir’s collective voice might be compared to the shift from seeing random dots to the opening up of the depth vision of the stereogram. Each random dot member of the community is like One of the many shards of the shattered hologram – each little window opens-out on a whole world …enabling Everyman to live “inside the bubble – the collective consciousness” -- of that quantum relativistic stereogram “reality”. Those enveloped by this “vision” share an awareness that is their identity. Brain research is the great frontier of science in the twenty-first century, and is easily as important as nuclear physics was in the early twentieth century. It is difficult to imagine that, as more of nature's biological secrets are revealed, we will fail to notice that they are entangled with the physical principles of quantum theory and relativity. Let us expand upon and modify Penrose’s two concerns mentioned in the previous paragraph: quantum coherence and globality. First of all, significant thought occurs in quantum bursts, and is an organic, cyclical process, not merely calculated reasoning. Emotionally charged ideas are super-imposed upon the deductive logic characteristic of the established classical architecture we call reality. Second: total perspective. This concept appeals to the collective dimension of mind, to wholeness. I would like to present a model of wholeness ....of quantum coherence -- in the form of a random dot stereogram. Zohar explains that overlapping brain waves produce an electromagnetic field. This field arises from energetic activity within neurons, which she and others believe to be of a quantum nature. Zohar goes on to suggest that this field may possibly produce a Bose-Einstein condensate as Fröhlich had hypothesized.33 ...which we are visualizing as an array of highly energetic random-dot-cytoskeleton-microtubules. The two hemispheres of the brain focus over-lapping (super-imposed) quantum waves -- the stereoscopic vision of two eyes brings into focus one whole world. Consciousness is that quantum relativistic in-sight, and has its physical origins in the complementary structure of the split-brain. Furthermore, this depth perception is a consequence of the apparent reduction of the quantum state to a relativistic reality ...a concentrating, a focusing of quantum energy which I am arguing triggers the quantum relativistic phenomenon of consciousness -- something Ehrenwald has identified as an existential shift. As you must realize, I am neither a physicist nor a neuro-physiologist, and the above thought experiment is only a poor effort to re-organize and interpret the physically based observations of others in the hope of making some sense out of the conversion of energy into the barely tangible form we think of as consciousness. My talents and objectives are more literary and spiritual than scientific. The ideas from the new physics introduced thus far will never be too distant from whatever issues we are contemplating because they will be embedded within the poetry of the text; while the forthcoming outing of collective consciousness will involve us in the themes of chaos and self-organization briefly alluded to above, for the present at least, the limits of my own understanding necessitate that the focus of our attention shift toward matters for which I have a more intuitive sensitivity. Salvador Dali exaggerated the importance of the irrational. He claimed that genius must reject the reality factor. But this turned out to mean that he embraced decadence. Dali did pay a very real price for selling-out to the Jews: the corruption and consequent limiting of his genius. It is evident from what Dali discloses, if he was in fact accurately represented by the author of Unspeakable Confessions, that his understanding of everything was not only less than brilliant, it was ridiculous. Yet, his paintings remained impressive even into his seventies. They don't betray much sign of his aging. They are like the wonder of a newborn babe fathered by an old man. We can speculate on his private life through his written words, but we would be wise to measure Dali by his real genius, his paintings, and not by his writings or his philosophy -- for much as he may have seen himself as a universal cosmic genius, his only real works of enduring value are his paintings. Evidently, Dali was able to contain, or even draw upon the energy of his maddening perversion when he painted, but lost control of his genius when not concentrated on his work -- much as the depth dimensional image of a stereogram fades from view when the energy essential to attention wanes, or one’s self-induced hypnotic concentration is short-circuited by distraction. I would like to compare this situation to Beethoven because it enables us to introduce the ideas of a very interesting neurologist and psychiatrist: Jan Ehrenwald. The Existential Shift is a person's ability to switch his perceptual orientation, his motor and psychomotor responses and his whole behavioral repertoire from one mode or level of existence to another.34 Ehrenwald tells of Lord Russel's visit to Beethoven in 1821. He was not greeted by a sophisticated celebrity, but rather by a cranky, disheveled old man 'full of rude energy' . But it was not merely a matter of age having extinguished the light of a once great composer. This distinguished visitor was astonished to discover that 'The moment he was seated at the piano, he is evidently unconscious that there is anything in existence but himself and his instrument ' (Marek, p.566). This is indeed a graphic illustration of an abrupt transition from one state of consciousness to another, or rather of the global existential shift.35 What I am driving at is this: I believe that Dali was a genius only some of the time ...when he was inspired. Much of what he did was routine and of no particular interest, except that it is attributed to Dali. Our bias is that we assume a constant continuous personality, and that is a mistake. If we view Dali as a quantum relativistic intelligence, we may recognize that he continued to sometimes be Dali the gifted artist even into his later years. Many more youthful and less offensive geniuses have ceased to be of consequence altogether long before their seventies. As self-consciousness is transcended, so also is conscience, and with enlightenment comes a tremendous vulnerability to corruption. I would suggest that Dali was overwhelmed by his own genius, not only by his cowardice and greed. Nor should we discard Dali as a lunatic; for in spite of his periodic lunacy, he kept becoming Dali the artist. Ideas, including works of art and science, seem to have a life of their own; they exist at certain energy levels. Those creations of Dali, both artistic and literary, will struggle to endure over-time. I believe the quality work will persist, that the decadence and insanity will be all too easily forgotten. Despite the claims of today’s predatory gurus, we do not instinctively turn to a perverse irrationality as a model for shaping our minds. Dali was tormented by his own passions most of his life. This vulnerability of genius to self destruction is one reason we must move toward collective identity -- there is safety in numbers, as the mathematicians might say. Dali was Dali because he persisted in being a creative painter, and not just another sicko. Genius will always be a scandal to us. Much as we may despise the Jews, we have to confront the creations of their genius; reconciling ourselves with Dali will be a whole lot easier than deciding how to adapt ourselves to thousands of years of brilliant cultural deception aimed at our extermination. It is precisely this very hard issue with which we will wrestle throughout the remainder of this book -- creating a credible alternative to Christian spirituality. This non-constant consciousness adapts itself well to the theme of illusion, which plays on the expectation of constancy. We expect the external world to be continuous because I am constant, as God is unchanging. But chaos theory suggests that everything is relative and in a state of flux -- not just at the cosmic and sub-atomic levels, but on the macroscopic plane of human experience as well. This mystical ebb and flow ties in also with the peculiarities of time and relativity. The self is based on the common sense belief in the constant observer who endures forever with his eternal personal God. But if change is the hallmark of the physical world, then human self-perception must account for this reality in order to be in harmony with a world we must come to know inside and out; scientists need to understand this! We are capable of insight only sometimes, when our energy level stimulates the body-mind to wake up -- to grasp ideas intuitively, and not merely mechanically -- logically. I am referring to the need for inspiration -- this is what is meant by spirituality, and this is the kind of enrichment that a healthy culture can provide to even its' most intelligent scientists, soldiers, and business people. Without inspiration, thought is futile. All that can be done is to concentrate on boring background work. Compare genius to love and you will understand exactly what I mean, but if what you mean by love is the official love of the Christian Socialist then you won't. I am referring to the biological passion that over-whelms you, that leads you to desperately yearn for another person -- that flame of feeling which becomes the most cherished experience of your life. Genius crushes you like a lost love and burns you to cinders, and then creates the world again out of the nothing you have become. Nobody has the energy to be a passionate lover all the time; likewise, genius is as transitory and enduring as your deepest heart-break. It is this intensity of experience you sacrifice when you sign on to the love everybody equally policy of the multi-racial Super-State. You sell your heart and soul for security. This book is of no use to you if you are not emotionally troubled by it. Feeling-for-others is the electricity into which every quantum relativistic-vision plugs-in. We, like Beethoven, are literally different people, depending on the energy level at which we are functioning. This book can only be seen and understood if the observer is tuned to the same frequency at which it is transmitted -- we may share the same consciousness for as long as our energy holds out, as long as the music lasts. That is why I believe that much of this book should be spoken aloud as it is being read, to raise the energy level of the listener so that she can feel what is being expressed -- just as poetry is written to be sung, and music composed to be played. I write as though I were composing a symphony or a love song. What I can know fluctuates with my level of alertness, so at times I do not have access to the depth of half the ideas expressed here. At other times, you cannot imagine! Sometimes, I am simply not myself. But age and illness take their toll on awareness, and before you know it .....it is someone else’s turn to light the torch ....once again. Our mistake for centuries has been to assume the permanence of inspiration by making idols -- gods -- out of people who, for a time, did experience this transient state of genius. By worshipping the image of Jesus, not only have we failed to nourish the spiritual life of our own troubled souls, but embedded a messianic complex within the minds of the vulnerable. We cling to our beliefs because we need something firm to hold on to, so that this brief time we live will not slip too quickly through our fingers. We find time passing fearful, so we make time for ourselves in a heavenly after-life we call eternity. But is there a price to be paid for wishful thinking, which at worst appears harmless? By now we have learned the philosopher's lesson: don't trust appearances. Penrose argues that our psychological sense of time flowing is seriously mistaken. According to the laws of physics, time does not flow; this effect is entirely the product of human consciousness. In physics, time is viewed in much the same way as is space. ... we just have a static-looking fixed 'space-time' in which the events of our universe are laid out!36 What is to explain this feeling of time passing which modern man knows so well? My guess is that there is something illusory here too....37 It appears that the human brain imposes this effect on consciousness in order to produce a cohesive image which approximates the changing environment in which we exist. Because time passing is an illusion, it does not follow that change is an illusion. But change can have a quality of uncertainty about it which our sense of time only poorly approximates. The brain is flexible. If a society should re-structure its collective sense of reality more closely in tune with what science informs us actually occurs, I am convinced that the human brain will adapt -- producing new and persuasive sensations to give the totality of our experience coherence. Self-consciousness takes time; it slows us down so that we can take conscious control of events. Yet, at times, it is vital that we be able to act with the speed of reflexive instinct so that we might save a child from harm. We could learn to do this quite well if we were not so pre-occupied with being somebody. Self consciousness creates the illusion of time passing slowly (as opposed to quickly when having fun), but there is a price we pay for this illusion of having time, of protecting ourselves from the uncertainty of death. The value of a blade is the sharpness of its edge, how quickly and incisively one can think. Self-consciousness inhibits some kinds of thought; for example, Penrose complains that mathematicians and real scientists like Einstein think in visual images (geometrically) and not in words. We interpret our experience to ourselves through words, which is like shifting from light speed to the speed of sound. Yet, the child can see the beauty of a flower without uttering a word, without naming the rose. Self-consciousness dulls the blade of human intelligence! But how do we get out of this flatland in which we are trapped? There is a way out, but interestingly it is neither the after-life of the believer nor the dead-end of the atheist. We must confront both belief and disbelief. We must discover reality, of all things. Speaking personally, Crick admits that at times he cannot escape thinking of himself as some kind of metaphysical entity, even though he knows full well that all the magic he experiences has its origins in the neural firings of the brain and not in any separate 'I' independent of his physical body.38 He is surely aware of the incongruity of scientific facts and his self evident vanity.39 But his sense of self-importance and hostility to Christianity should not prevent us from hearing what he has to say. While he may attack traditional religious beliefs about the soul and the self, Crick is honest enough to acknowledge that religious experiences ...can be real enough, even if the customary explanations of them are false...40 As he sees things, The aim of science is to explain all aspects of the behavior of our brains, including those of musicians, mystics, and mathematicians.41 He believes that complex mental experience will be understood scientifically within a century's time. This is significant. My aim is to simply demonstrate that mysticism exists as a biological experience -- that it is not just sickness or mental illness; my purpose is not to support traditional metaphysical beliefs which may have grown up around mysticism, some aura of authority which is then used to legitimize corruptible real world power, such as that of Church hierarchies and television ministries. It is human Spirit that must be protected from the deadening power of the Slave-State. Spirituality concerns courage in the face of insurmountable odds. This is what we are trying to preserve, not only for the sake of resisting tyranny, but as our only hope of surviving this environmental holocaust which is a direct consequence of science in the service of intellect, greed and unbridled power. I know that science is used as a weapon, but I also understand that there is nothing inherently evil about science itself. To construct a New System of the World we need both inspiration and imagination, but imagination building on flawed foundations will, in the long run, fail to satisfy. Dream as we may, reality knocks relentlessly at the door. Even if perceived reality is largely a construct of our brains, it has to chime with the real world or eventually we grow dissatisfied with it.42 Much as I may mock scientists like Crick, Weinberg and so many of the Jews, I admit the inescapable necessity of facing facts when they are honestly presented. Too many of us cannot do this. That is why I am writing about quantum theory and the human brain, and not about the mythology of the master race, or the second coming of Christ. But what I have understood is that just as science ultimately discredits the wishful fantasies of the weak, so also does it expose the deception and corruption of the mighty. The degradation of our earthly environment cannot be explained away by some presidential scientific blue ribbon committee of Nobel laureates, or by some star-studded feel good media blitz. What both the pious and the merciless fail to anticipate is that a new intelligence is emerging which has little patience for either the ignorance of the victims, or the greed of the winners. The harm done by ignorance and good intentions is more dangerous than consciously malicious action because we don't know that we are acting destructively, and so we systematize and institutionalize such imprudence as celibacy and mercy missions to the third world. And finally, we pay the price: BIG TIME; but when the error of our ways becomes evident even to the pious, our old friend Miss-Guided-Goodness is no where to be found -- is never called to account for her stupidity. But new idealists are pounding on our doors demanding that once again we abandon intelligence for the sake of our Christian Socialist morality. But these rank amateurs are nothing compared to the high powered lobbyists from the nuclear weapons industry. Science has committed far more than its fair share of atrocities. The scientific observer effects his environment, much as he pleads detached innocence and objectivity. This observer has the wrong perspective; he cannot be outside the events he is observing -- he can only create an illusion of separateness. What we need as human beings is a feeling that we belong, that there is a place where-in we fit. This is precisely what we seek when making love, or creating a work of art; the quality of beauty we sense springs from the feeling of wholeness, inclusiveness, which creative products radiate. The brain fills-in missing information to create a sensational world, and in this way is the source of so much of the illusion which is at the core of these paradoxes that plague us on every side and at every turn. While the unreality of the quantum cosmos is beyond human perception, we can perceive more than the passive illusory projections of the brain. Quantum-relativistic-stereoscopic-vision is the creative capacity to see a limited aspect of our universe of experience as cohesive -- the focus here is on the all-purpose plug-in-dimension of a seeing flexible enough to make sense out of anything. This is very different than embracing the rigidity of objective reality or the permanence of the thousand year Reich. This book aims to introduce a new kind of thought. Instead of approaching a problem as an isolated phenomenon, surround the idea with something like a total environment of related and influencing forces, so that one's perspective is whole. Recall the chaotic background encompassing and penetrating the stereogram. All related ideas cannot be reconstructed, and many may be unknown; but what can be done is to create living tissue around your central concern so that, like a living entity, it can grow --connected to the fabric of real feeling, so that one is examining a living process and not a machine. This world is dying because we treat it like the all-purpose waste dump module of our system; and we do this out of the devotion to materialism we share in common with the tyrants who see us as inter-changeable components in their master game-plan. Their methodology is to isolate a problem into an artificially simple, and consequently dead, model. Our objective here is to confront difficulties in a living context. I belief that all dilemmas are so complex that they can be understood only when we are able to become emotionally involved with them.... Only when we care about our world and each other. There are forces controlling our lives which cannot be made simple. The totalitarian State over-powers us by replacing natural feelings with the market forces of greed and fear. We sacrifice our human nature by becoming robotic slaves to a political machine. The reason we are focusing so much now on our biological nature is this: in the past we made the profound error of seeing ourselves as bodiless spirits, but today's tyranny defines us as spiritless machines. A multitude of unlikely themes have been interwoven to illuminate a new perspective which discloses what totalitarianism is, in the very volatile imagery of today's most passionate conflicts. It is passion which distinguishes man from machine, and intelligence which links them together. Real thinking is always a great risk, and never merely mechanistic. Society creates a class of boring intellectuals whose primary task is to keep thinking safe. However, our endangered species is in such peril that we have no choice but to think dangerously and act courageously, for the good intentions of Christian Democracy and scientific technique have not only failed us, but marketed our children's future to the lowest bidder. Writing is one way to concentrate the mind, reprogram one’s brain. It takes days to get back into serious thought when one has suspended working for a time. The immensity of it all is astonishing. The aim is not only to inform, but to inspire ....to open minds, to set the imaginations of others alight -- to entangle reason and emotion. This language, these images and ideas are intentionally wild; it is hoped that they are sufficiently fresh to hold your attention, and lead you to wonder ..... Mechanistic thinkers such as Crick, Dennett, and Pinker attack a traditional sense of spirituality; and in an understandable way Eccles defends the integrity of the past much as he would stand up for his family's name. He is a good man. But I am not interested in this conflict, for my sense of spirituality is very different indeed. Crick bemoans that It would be comforting to believe that most people would be so convinced by the experimental evidence that they would immediately change their views. Unfortunately, history suggests otherwise.43 Crick is no-where near as radical in his thinking as he imagines. This battle over man’s immortal soul was fought and won by Charles Darwin around the time of the American Civil War. Crick does not grasp that it is the state of mind of people, their feelings, that must change, not merely the model of reality they use to interpret the facts. Scientists, such as Crick, are very eager to do away with God, Jesus, and Christian metaphysics. They are atheists. But should they be confronted with the horrifying reality of Jewish subversion and our enslavement ... our loss of freedom, it is remarkable how quickly their passion for the facts cools. Their problem is that they lack the courage to follow their atheism far enough; the scientific search for facts stops at the publisher's door or the funding office, where research grants are approved or denied by people who care nothing for truth. Money is power, and damn few scientists care more about scientific objectivity and integrity than they do about their own professional success. Crick views spirituality and morality as outdated. I am sure we can be absolutely certain that Crick is not too casual in his attitudes about the nazis, Jews, and racism. We can rely on him to march in lock step with such scientific giants as Hawking and Weinberg. But like Hawking, Weinberg, and Dali, Crick is sometimes a formidable thinker. It is passion which shapes the ideas we are capable of thinking, which determines whether or not we can even understand each other. When emotional commitments become irreconcilable, communication breaks down even between the most brilliant of men. All that is left is conflict. With so many of the Jews, like Weinberg, I believe that stage has been reached. But Crick seems to still have a soul, hidden somewhere safe within his crusty old scientific integrity. He raises questions a more ambitious man would ignore. Crick considers how religious ideas originate in the first place and concludes that they fill a basic human need for a wholly satisfying explanation of our lives and the totality of the universe. He thinks that the need for such shared unifying beliefs may have a genetic component. One factor is our basic need for overall explanations of the nature of the world and of ourselves. The various religions provide such explanations and in terms the average person finds easy to relate to.44 Religion has been in the theory of everything business for a long time. Crick comments that the brain evolved over many millennia during which human beings were tribal hunter-gatherers. Belonging to a group was necessary for survival, and so was belligerence with competing clans. A shared total view of the world distinguished one tribe from another. But Crick makes a far more astonishing observation here than in the central argument of his book. Regarding unifying belief systems, he concludes that ... It is more than likely that the need for them was built into our brains by evolution.45 He is arguing that the human brain may crave not only belonging to a group, but participating in a commonly held picture of the world in its totality. One might suggest from Crick's observations that we human beings have a need for collective identity ...that the physical design of our brains links us to one-another in a Jungian network of shared dreams and ideas..... We will find evidence for this argument some-what later in the recent research of the neuro-physiologist Vilayanar Ramachandran. Crick maintains that the defining characteristic of human beings is their talent for expressing complex concerns through language. A group is held together largely through the language they hold in common, whether it be spoken or the written and diagrammatic languages of mathematics and science. Eugene Wigner maintained that The best reason for hope that our species is intellectually capable of continued future progress is our wonderful ability to link our brains through language...46, but he was by no means certain that human minds have the capability of creating ideas adequate to express nature's wonders as a totality. Eventually, this book will take a decidedly linguistic turn as language becomes the unifying instrument drawing science and spirituality together into a collective intelligence as real as a stereogram. Remember that Crick presents his ideas concerning the brain as a hypothesis and not the certainty of dogma. This is what makes him a scientist ...as distinguished ..from a scientologist. He considers three possibilities regarding his hypothesis. The first is his astonishing hypothesis: you're nothing but a pack of neurons. The second possibility is that a perspective closer to a religious outlook will prove more credible. But it is the third possibility suggested which seems most likely: ... that the facts support a new, alternative way of looking at the mind-brain problem that is significantly different from the rather crude materialistic view many neuroscientists hold today and also from the religious point of view.47 I believe that the reconciliation of science and religion will be this third possibility, and the ground they share in common will be mystical. The object of the art of mysticism is one's programmed mind. The objective of the artist is to refine this inner being, much the way a sculptor can touch our hearts of stone. The task of the mystical artist is to see the depth dimension of our stereogram reality, not to learn dogma. Experience ...not belief. We can be certain that human nature is evolving -- that we have a collective destiny; but unless we choose to follow these mysterious promptings from no-where, the meaning of our lives will remain hidden like some illusion. Religion describes mystical experience as ineffable -- without content. I am saying there can be content: one sees through the hoax of this politically repressive system and recognizes another reality, the kingdom of the masters that is super-imposed upon the propaganda world around us -- much as the Disappearing Bust Of Voltaire exists in the same space as the Slave Market in Dali's painting. We frequent that bazaar ourselves, where souls are bought and sold by the hour. The difference between brainwashing and mysticism is this: the brainwashed person is entranced, hypnotized by an external force, such as the Media-State; the mystic is able to change his own internal programming by means of self-hypnosis, by turning off the TV world and tuning in to his instinctive intelligence for guidance. What we seek as unique human beings is contact with our own deepest natural instincts, with an ordering principle which holds everything together, which exists through each of us, and gives continuity to our lives. This is neither rhetoric nor mere poetics. Before too much longer we will return to chaos theory and learn something of strange attractors and self organizing systems in nature. For now, let it suffice to say that something in this universe seems to hold us in relation to one-another. Eccles believes that the self is a cohesive force within man, ordering his life and giving it meaning, direction and continuity. He argues that however disconnected the experience of a human being's life, one remains a cohesive self because of the continuity of human memory. There could be no elimination of a self and creation of a new self. Since materialist solutions fail to account for our experienced uniqueness, I am constrained to attribute the uniqueness of the self or soul to a supernatural spiritual creation...... This conclusion is of inestimable theological significance. It strongly reinforces our belief in the human soul and in its miraculous origin in a divine creation.48 It is unique individuality which Eccles argues necessitates concluding that the self is created by God. He rejects both genetic and environmental explanations for the development of identity. More important even than its own existence, this unique self points toward its Creator, both as the transcendent God Einstein acknowledged, and as the God we feel influencing our personal lives. What he then adds is quite surprising, for he expresses gratitude to the Creator for this marvelous Earth on which we live ,... each with our wonderful brain, which is ours to control and use for our memory and enjoyment and creativity and with love for other human selves.49 His emphasis on controlling one's brain is not the first thought that comes to mind when expressing a prayer of gratitude to God. It even suggests man can bring about his own salvation, without the intercession of a savior. It seems to me that Eccles is trying to introduce a rather radical idea on bended knee.... not a bad approach, and at least more sincere than Crick's genuflection. I believe that Eccles stretches the facts by over stating the capacity of mind to control the operations of the brain. He may be injudicious in appealing to traditional religious beliefs in a scientific context, but I believe that the awe he expresses is authentic as he bears witness, in the only words he knows, to the uncanny nature of the human brain itself. Eccles is by no means alone in recognizing the curious way in which creative people can apparently control the brain, at least to some degree. Like Ehrenwald, the psychiatrist Arnold Ludwig identifies a remarkable change taking place when artists get down to work. ...What is especially impressive about all these individuals is their ability to 'turn the power on' in their brains when they are involved in important tasks.50 In the event you want to know where all of this is heading, we are taking a turn toward creative genius. Postmodernists would argue that the self does exist, but only within the context of language. So to the extent that I speak, I create myself in my own words. Words are largely the medium of my expression. I need words for the kind of thinking I do, and more so for writing. I have to speak aloud as I write, so that I can feel the music and hear the beat of the logic as others will. I must be an outsider to my own creation. This concept of no-self from Zen is very misleading for one who is a writer. The nature of religious experience in the West appears to be largely verbal because of Christianity's focus on God's Word. But this fascination with the Logos is of Greek and not Hebrew origin. Genius is flexibility personified, and is able to accommodate itself to language in a way that Asian mysticism does not. I am suspicious of a Tao which leads people to silence. Repressive governments like religions that teach the people to be quiet, to be passive, to be docile like sheep. The genius is a lion and not a sacrificial lamb. Isaiah Berlin has argued that the genius is a risk taker who does not know his limits; he trusts only his intuitions, and leaps ahead of the practical man of caution without a thought to compromise. Berlin suggests that 'in the case of seminal discoveries -- say of imaginary numbers, or non-Euclidean geometry, or the quantum theory -- it is precisely dissociation of categories indispensable to normal human experience, that seems to be required, namely a gift of conceiving of what cannot in principle be imagined nor expressed in ordinary language.' 51 Words must be overcome by reshaping language into a visual form of illusion, and composing a symphony of sounds which conveys an energy unknown to formal grammar. Genius seeks a way around both Wittgenstein and the Tao, uttering the impossible silence of the unspoken, while the masses oriented spirituality of Asia and the West teach submission to God's will ....meaning the authority of Church and State. We must be careful about importing the spirituality of the East into our souls wholesale; ultimately, we must create a Soul that is uniquely our own because spirituality is that feeling of belonging which holds us together. We are enslaved by the Jews today because our ancestors were injudicious about taking a foreign God into the heart of the European people. We can learn from other cultures, but our most urgent mission is to discover ourselves. That is why this book returns to the pre-Christian focus on genius, which was at the heart of ancient Greek culture before we lost our minds, before Jesus saved our souls. Earlier, it had meant spirit, the magical spirit of a jinni or more often the spirit of a nation. Duff and his contemporaries wished to identify genius with the godlike power of invention, of creation,...52 Thus, genius once referred to the spirit of a nation, to the creative intelligence of a whole people. Genius is about profound change and total perspective. This sense of self Eccles refers to is a recognizable and very ordinary experience most people from our culture can identify. Eccles is not being forthright here in acknowledging the mystical nature of Einstein's God, nor recognizing the transcendence of self-consciousness characteristic of genius. This self Eccles is championing clearly is bound up with memory, and belief in God. It is this rational perception of God and self that Hawking and Dennett are attacking, and perhaps rightly so. Eccles does not have a profound enough sense for human identity and the collective dimension of consciousness. It is time for this old fashioned God and self to pass from the scene; Hawking and Dennett are well-suited undertakers for this mission. I don't mean to put Eccles down; he has done truly important work. I just think he is mistaken here because he forgets that memory can be lost, and along with it the self --- yet there remains a sense that everything holds together, not just my personal history, but all of creation; and it is this mystical sense of totality that replaces the self at the center of human consciousness by absorbing that personal identity into an infinitely wider collective awareness ....such as the universes of music, art, science, poetry, or sport. It may help you to make sense of the mysticism in this book if you think of a mystic as a rather intelligent person who has figured out how to function in the world without much short term memory. This loss of self, which is so central to mystical thought, serves a practical purpose here. Mental confusion and instability are often times associated with memory problems. For those approaching the age of fifty, loss of memory is a very real concern. However, the brain can function at a very sophisticated level, even as memory loss may increase with aging. I would suggest that as people age, those who have not developed the custom of thinking logically are much more prone to becoming confused and forgetful than those who have. Writing this book has taught a logical discipline that has evaded me for well over forty years. It is possible to learn new ways of thinking which can make sense of complex experience, that are not heavily dependent on the kind of short term memory which may fail us sooner than we expect. If no-self is too mystical a concept to grasp, and losing your mind is too fearful to contemplate -- then let us think in terms of being absent-minded. The brain is plastic and forever capable of changing its own wiring; we may think of this activity of the mind re-programming the brain as mysticism. Spirituality enters our lives as we mature, and it does so in very intelligent and practical ways. The wise old man is a symbol that our culture would do well to remember. I am no believer in gods and the mythology of religions, although I appeal to those themes as a means of awakening very real feelings that are still attached to ancient symbols ...much as physicists refer to quarks as though they really exist; my intent is to preserve spiritual feeling, not to defend Christian beliefs and the morality they imply. The brain is the source of spiritual wonder. Mystics through-out the ages have developed elaborate exercises to evoke the relaxation response. Meditation (Za-Zen), yoga, prayer, fasting, and self-chastisement all come to mind. Not long ago, the Jesuits still whipped themselves as part of their spiritual exercises, a harsh discipline originating with Ignatius Loyola -- a soldier turned missionary. This sort of thing can easily be taken too far and become distorted. Physiology is a prerequisite to spiritual experience. Mental effectiveness is strongly influenced by the level of tension in the muscles. Muscular tension is a very real source of physical pain and mental confusion. In my experience, swimming combined with a good-sized Finnish sauna has been a God-send, and is the most effective exercise for the tormented soul that I can imagine. I am completely convinced that I would never have matured as a mystic if it were not for this wet sauna (steam envelops the whole space as water is thrown on the hot stones). I was unable to practice this discipline for several weeks, and found that my mind and muscles were wound in knots. Once this exercise was resumed, my genius returned. The point here is that the spirit, the body, and one’s environment are a cohesive whole. It would be irresponsible not to mention that as I reached fifty it became necessary to minimize time spent in the sauna because of dehydration problems. What is therapy at thirty may be a harmful practice at the age of fifty ...so one must discover new ways of dealing with old-difficulties. Flexibility and not ritual is the standard of this very human spirituality. Everything has a wholeness about it, and once we can feel that, we can enter the circle of insight from which it becomes possible to solve a multitude of the problems that have over-whelmed us for too long. In practical terms, this means we need to have a feeling for what we are doing. The observer must see the process -- feel the flow of events, and intuitively recognize his cue to step in ..... to join the dance, without losing the beat of the music: to anticipate what must come next because one has figured out, one has felt out the code to nature's rhythm. A step in the right direction might be to follow the lead of a photographer who knows to not wait for people to pose, but to catch them just before they are ready.... when they are still behaving naturally. Timing is everything, not just for photographers, comedians and trapeze acrobats, but for scientists too. Not being on time, but timing: not structure alone, but process as well. The scientist must learn the art of physics, and instinctively recognize the primacy of beauty adorning systematic logic; he must discover perfection in whatever he is doing, for this is the essential quality of all that is -- and it is this instinct for beauty which binds the observer emotionally to the ongoing process and allows him to feel what is happening -- to tune the mind: to synchronize one's internal relativistic clock with the rhythms around us. This is the secret which can unlock the deepest mysteries of nature, and keep the human mind light years ahead of the artificial intelligence of computers and uninspired scientists. This may sound like Holy Roller hysteria to you, but as we begin our study of genius it will become evident that human nature is as weird as quantum physics. Keep in mind that: It is never an easy call telling the Holy Rollers from the high rollers when the good timers are rocking and rolling in their joints. Like Robert Oppenheimer, Richard Feynman was strange, a curiosity to his more normal colleagues. Thought was an intensely physical experience which he needed to express in ways that would have branded a less brilliant person with the label disturbed. Those who did know him, tell how he rolled around on the floor of his Cornell University dormitory room mumbling the mysteries that occupied the full attention of a very physical intelligence that could not be confined to any concept of mind.53 Above all else, Feynman was an extraordinary teacher. His legendary lectures and diagrams have been essential to any who seriously have tried to visualize quantum mechanics. Feynman is reported to have had a remarkable imagination which enabled him to vividly daydream about zipping around sub-atomic worlds astride electrons, creating clear images in his mind of the most abstract concepts known to man.54 In part the process of scientific visualization is a process of putting oneself in nature: in an imagined beam of light, in a relativistic electron.55 But how does one imagine one's self inside some relativistic electron? Lights should start flashing, and bells ringing. Of course: stereograms! Think of the well known magic eye images, such as the wallpaper illusion. It is a flat picture of no interest. Stare at it a minute or so and it reveals a multi-dimensional in-sight, such as a heart or an animal concealed in the wild. It seems as though you can almost reach inside this flatland picture into another dimension. What has your brain done? Some people evidently are fearful of falling into this pop-out art; all they are willing to visualize is the boring wallpaper. Anyone of the scientific persuasion is certainly obligated to carry out this visual experiment. But obviously Feynman and others before and after him have not all been studying stereograms. The question is this: what are you doing when looking into a stereogram? Self-hypnosis! That’s what genius has been up-to for a long time. Throughout the ages, people have created lots of ways to hypnotize themselves, others, and entire nations. Freud understood this, and made hypnosis central to his psycho-analysis. Hitler's memory is so feared because he had the gift of mesmerizing multitudes of Germans through his ecstatic oratorical style. As with the Jews, any group that aspires to shape public opinion must have control over a complete range of the mass media. I am not advocating totalitarianism, only disclosing that tyrants employ mass hypnosis as a means of brain-washing entire populations. Like TV advertisers, they don't call it brain-washing; they hire psychologists who speak in very sophisticated terms about their latest variation on classical conditioning. So many of us out here in TV-land are trapped inside stereo sounds, illusory scenes, and are unconscious of the whole song and dance ...unwilling, unable to break the trance. This is what brain-washing is! Getting out entails encountering chaos. Better to be a robot-in-step then bewildered, right? Think again! This gives insight as to why the duality games of the Jews are so important. They define the boundaries of our imaginations and lock us inside a world they can control. My aim is to teach you how to break out of this joint. Given this understanding, please bear with my interest in off-the-wall subjects such as hypnosis, mysticism, madness, genius, collective consciousness, and racism. I hypnotize myself by writing, and then reading the words back aloud again and again -- searching lines already written for the un-said ...re-writing all-the-time. This experience is mystical and as contagious as a love song; it is precisely this kind of emotional packing and out-pouring that has led me to conclude that human awareness is ultimately collective. Consider once again Dali's illusions or the stereograms. Notice that the process of shifting the I's focus so as to see the depth of the artistic mind seems to involve a kind of self hypnosis in which self-consciousness is suspended. The harder you try to see the vision, the more impossible it becomes. The trick to seeing it (besides starting with the picture flat against your nose and gradually moving it to arms length) is distracting your attention from what you are doing by talking about something entirely unrelated -- this is how psycho-analysis works; or listen to the music of someone you love speaking. You are doing something correctly only when you can do it so well that it is easy, or at least looks that way. Once your self-consciousness lapses, you are able to concentrate on this depth dimension of perception. Evidently what you are doing is learning to control how your brain works. You shift from using the left (verbal) to the right hemisphere; or even balancing both sides of the brain ...holding them together-while-apart in a tandem embrace -- the reason I suggest this is because depth vision is involved and this kind of perception appears to work only with two eyes. My technical explanation of this phenomenon may be simplistic or even inaccurate, but the basic thrust of what is Being-described is simply human experience -- it is phenomenological, not theological. The point is that we have a method for triggering mystical contemplation, a kind of trance. This was Dali's strength and weakness, his madness as well as his genius ...the self-transfiguring evolutionary instinct that got him so wrapped-up in multiple dimensions. If you see a picture of Dali, his eyes always look as though he is staring at something, that he is in a hypnotic trance. As we shall see, Dali was not unique in this affliction. Darwin's gardener is said to have responded once to a visitor who inquired about his master's health: 'Poor man, he just stands and stares at a yellow flower for minutes at a time. He would be better off with something to do.' Darwin's work was of an intangible nature which eluded people around him. Much of it consisted in just such standing and staring as his gardener reported. It was a kind of magic at which he excelled.56 This is basically what monks of long ago used to do when chanting psalms at four o'clock in the morning ...awaiting untimely visitation by the Eternal in the dead of night, or mystics meditating.... as in za-zen, staring, trance, autistic, catatonic, concentration, revelation, genius. This existential shift is very meaningful for those who are verbally-oriented. Some other spiritual discipline, such as long distance running, may be the exercise to your deliverance. You must strike-out on your own path to enlightenment. The objective seems to be to use both sides of our bilateral-brain, to use the whole brain. This idea is really quite staggering. The balanced brain seeks to perceive everything in depth, so much so that the observer is included inside this timeless multi-dimensional global vision, much in the way we may feel that we can fall in-two a depth dimensional illusion created by a skillful painter. The problem of observer and object is transcended not by an idea expressed in some formula, but by an actual change in how One perceives ..and is perceived by the world. My objective here is not to simply change your beliefs about God, yourself and nature, but rather to teach you how to change the way in which you encounter your own human Nature. This is the art of mysticism. In the 60's and 70's counter-culture heroes, like Bill Clinton, augmented their pacifist ideology with mind-altering drugs. Here, our objective is to use natural experience, even mental breakdown, to change our own minds about everything. Think of the mind as the control center for human consciousness rather than as a mirror for admiring or judging your self. This is by no means an unfamiliar topic for most of us. Practices such as hypnosis, meditation and biofeedback have captured the popular imagination for thousands of years. My only point is to emphasize that methods of re-programming the brain are fairly well established, not merely in lunatic fringe cults, but in responsible scientific, medical, and religious traditions. Just as we have had to learn how to use our heads to solve mechanical problems in a practical world, and whip our bodies into shape, we must learn to use exercises to re-wire our brains so we might open new dimensions of collective consciousness. Evolution doesn't just happen passively; it is a creative struggle. It is my own observation that the intensity of mystical experience is a consequence of new pathways being established in the brain during times of agonizing creative ordeals. One may have an unmistakable experience, preceded by years of confusion, in which well established, but inefficient habits of thought -- break down; one begins thinking in very logical patterns, where-as previously this has not been characteristic mental programming. It may be that for much of one's life, stepwise reasoning has been strained, even painful; unexpectedly, logical thinking simply happens and this feels like contact with the Mind of God. When a new circuit first opens up in the brain, this apparently causes a rush of sensation and a feeling of astonishing mental clarity and depth perception. One may not know the same rapture later while engaged in very concentrated reasoning, but the process is never-the-less characteristically self-reinforcing. When the energy of this transformation subsides, the change remains. It is also possible that the intense energy of the mystical experience is the cause for the new circuitry coming into Being. Either way, mystical experience serves a functional purpose heralding a breakthrough in perception, and this is no mere pipe dream. Try to recall these ideas when we discuss Ramachandran's brain research. Throughout human history, artists, mystics, and those without names, have discovered the secret of self-induced hypnosis. They instinctively strive to re-create themselves. Whether we speak in terms of self-reflection, meditation, concentration or some variation on this theme, there is only one fact to be understood: Hypnosis results in the gradual assumption by the subject of a state of consciousness wholly dissimilar to either wakefulness or sleep, during which attention is withdrawn from the outside world and is concentrated on mental, sensory, and physiological experiences.57a Joseph Campbell recognized The Hero With A Thousand Faces. Shakespeare wrote of A rose by any other name... The cultures of the world have created a multitude of symbols and sacred images to describe the same basic experience. We become confused because we fail to see the simplicity of human Nature. We fail to grasp the fact of the One-experience which goes-by a myriad of names. So the creative scientist, the mystic, the poet, the musician, the psychic, the Zen monk, the prophet, the genius, the natural athlete, etc. etc. and the moderately schizophrenic as-well -- are all encountering the same phenomenon: timeless hours when human Nature is without the burden of self-consciousness. The duality of schizophrenia is very revealing. The human being is discovering his other side -- everything he is not, so that he might become whole, so that he might belong. Ehrenwald discusses the importance of children being trained to develop ambidextrous sensory-motor skills57b. Learning to use both hands is important because to do so requires that we alter the way we are accustomed to favoring one side of the bilateral brain. Musical instruments augment this practice by introducing the quantum element of feeling. The boxer exercises his weaker arm. The surgeon must use both hands together, to recognize them as one instrument and not view them as two hands -- just as we use our eyes together and not separately. We have got to stop seeing double, stop counting ...to stop and smell the roses and hear the sound of oneness clapping. By learning to use the hands together, the conscious human being trains his brain to set up new and stronger neural pathways for this particular function. Repeated thoughts and reactions become 'hard-wired' into consciousness in the form of 'neuro-physiological reflexes.' 58 The brain is plastic and adaptive. The point is not simply to be able to use the two sides of your brain: What is of consequence is the depth of vision that results from exercising the brain's duality. Duality is just another name for complementarity -- the hallmark of the quantum world. Wholeness, unity arises out of this apparent split. This is the kernel of Jewish genius and their authority over us! This is how their brains work, how they think! ...attacking from the left and from the right, capitalists from above and communists from below. We must be narrow minded, but not in the way we think. Their power comes from a hidden duality ...which my words are repeatedly trying to evoke; but once deprived of the advantage of their concealed totalitarian game-plan, this empire of illusions would not deceive anyone. Bringing them out of concealment changes everything. Complementarity is the essence of Jewish mystical thought, and is so fundamental that exposure of this mystery makes it possible to understand them as readily as they understand us. My objective is to disclose how this duality operates through the way I write ...so the duplicity of the Jews will become familiar. Making chosen methods commonly recognized weakens their grip on us in a truly meaningful way. Most of us are specialists: I am a mathematician, a businesswoman, a chemist, a soldier, an athlete ... and I don't really think much about philosophy, politics, and spirituality. I am a writer, a teacher, an artist, a clergyman, a craftsman ..... and I don't really understand much about the complexities of engineering, modern technology, or computer networks .... . But the Jews do! They focus on the whole picture, on the One God who sees all. I don't know how many times or from how many different directions we can focus on this one still point: Everything fits together.... including you the observer within a cohesive quantum relativistic reality. We are in the mess we are in today because scientists don’t intuitively know what they are doing, nor do they care about our common environment, and the social implications of their technical work. They are just robots following orders. People in the humanities are so politically correct they have nothing of consequence to say to anybody. We must become beginners in that which we are not: challenge our own fundamental point of view. There is far more to gain than you can believe. What is most critical to understand is that there are ideas which deepen into an amazing intensity of beauty and organization. Feynman noticed that the deeper a thing is, the more interesting it becomes.59 This is a consequence of the wrapped concentration depth perception necessitates in order to see the wholeness of stereoscopic mystical vision. Such perception is much more than an interesting insight. The idea and the emotion that accompany it are astonishing. The stereogram is a good illustration of a fascinating experience that just continues to expand until it draws you into itself like the totalitarian God of the Jews. Still another is an awareness this book is moving toward ever so gradually: collective consciousness. Once you discover such a revelation, it reshapes your perception of everything. This kind of occurrence is not common place. It is genius. Einstein began such a rare transforming passage about the age of four when he first encountered a magnetic compass. This uncanny turn of events set the course for his life's work. Prior to his discovery of relativity theory, Einstein reports 'There was a feeling of direction, of going straight toward something definite.60 But what is this feeling of direction? It is a homing instinct which promises fulfillment, the gift of seeing one's world whole. As Crick suggested, this instinct is the origin of man's religious nature. |
|
![]()
If you like the buttons at left but you want any other link and there is no buttopn for it, just
email the Webmaster
and I'll see what I can do.
Webmaster. |