For Palestine

This is one of those topics, again, that I have a hard time voicing these days.  In 2008, I became very vocal about the treatment of Palestinians, both about what I had seen here in North St. Louis and the ways in which the violence in Israel was worded and addressed.

What shocked me most was who attacked my words and how vehemently (and, honestly, the amount of anger and lack of reason/facts behind it) they did so.  Even now, I find myself choosing words very carefully. I did so in an interview last night, and it struck me later how the interviewee perceived my words as perhaps two faced--or perhaps that's just my own frustrations with myself.

The data doesn't lie and while my advisor and others caution me against value coding, it must be said:  There was strong anti-"Arab" sentiment pre-9/11, especially in editorials and the adjectives and adverbs chosen in some news stories by some news correspondents (these can be located through use of LexisNexis Academic and a search of the Post Dispatch).  The overwhelming sense in all of these cases is that the writers are Pro-Israel, no matter what the situation.  Often, I refer to these persons--whether they are Christian or Jewish (as most fall into one of these categories)--as Zionist (believing that Israel rightfully belongs to Jewish persons because God gave it to them in the Torah/Old testament scriptures). Conversely, most of the editorials that reject this positionality are written by those within the Muslim community (and here in St. Louis, it was often someone representing CAIR--the Counsel on American-Islamic Relations).

Even in my lifetime, Israel has expanded its borders (http://www.annainthemiddleeast.com/photos/maps_media/2242/) most often without authorization from the UN, but has often been supported no matter what by the U.S.  In a very interesting speaking engagement earlier this year, Obama actually said that there had been too much loss on both sides, and pushed Israel to allow for a Palestinian state, and for borders to be returned to the 1967 agreement (http://www.annainthemiddleeast.com/photos/maps_media/2242/) He was met with immediate opposition, not only from Israel, but also from many in the US--and many are upset enough to not want to re-elect him, almost solely based on this policy or so it would seem (http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2011/09/13/is-israel-policy-an-election-problem-for-obama/)

Though the news on this is hard to find, my feeling is that it's not visible because those in power don't want it seen.  Much of the policy in the last decade has been justified by 9/11, but seems fueled by Zionism and Anti-Islamic sentiment coming from a particular portion of the population.  However, while there are solid social justice and basic human rights reasons to be Pro-Palestine, it's not a safe political stance to take often, and you can be painted as Anti-Semetic (there is a difference between disliking a country's actions and disliking an entire ethnic group, but blanket statements are often made surrounding the case of Israel) and even Anti-American.  I'll come out here and say it though--for many Palestinian Muslims who have been driven from their property and come to America, they're facing persecution in their home country and here--singling them out for religion reasons has been a way to justify their persecution under other motives.