October 24, 2000

Subject: Feedbacks on the Campaign For A New Jerusalem + Squeezing Blood From A Stone

Hello everyone

Aside from what is already written below, I do not have much to add - for now!

Jean Hudon
Earth Rainbow Network Coordinator
http://www.cybernaute.com/earthconcert2000

P.S. I received many more feedbacks on this Campaign and will include them in the next compilation.




From: MIKMIKL@aol.com
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000
Subject: Re: Miscellaneous Subjects #32: Campaign For A New Jerusalem

Declaration 2001 - The New Jerusalem
A declaration of more Hatred.

Why not make Blackpool in England a holy SHRINE. That has a great amusement
park. Or better still lets declare Disney World a World Spiritual Sanctuary
and Let the UNITED NATIONS take it over as a wholly Shrine.
This make much more sense than this NONSENSE

If you want to make a difference give up your home to the homeless Jean Hudon
and Michael Lightweaver.
See how that feels.
That is what you are asking Israelis to do.
Your hatred of the Jewish people shows though your Mask of SPIRIT.
Jerusalem is already a city where people from all over the world can pray
freely.

Peace comes from teaching love and Joy not Hatred.
You only aid hatred by this Declaration.

Michael Levy.

MY REPLY WAS:

I feel only feel hatred in what you wrote above.

I wonder what I will get from you after my next post to the ERN list - if you care to read it entirely.

As a matter of fact, I'm going to include below what will be its main feature.

And please understand that there is no judgement on my part - at least I hope! - and certainly no hatred of the Jewish people in forwarding this information to my list and you. Some facts about what is really going on in Israel need to be known and you must admit that we never get to hear that side of the story in any of our news misinformation media here in North America.

May I also point out that I do unreservedly support the existence of Israel and the rightful need for Jews to have a safe place on Earth they can call "Home". Unfortunately there is so much hatred against Jews in the arab world now precisely because many of them have not yet accepted this fact. But the apartheid regime Israel has been imposing upon the Palestinians - out of fear, most of it born from the numerous wars and acts of violence directed against Israel since its birth barely half a century ago, not to mention the torture and other human rights abuses done during all these years, has not been helping the Arab world to accept them either...

As long as Israel and those who blindly support its government - no matter what it does - will remain mirred in denial about this and will refuse to admit its mistakes and flatly apologize for them and quit being so ruthlessly violent, peace will not have a chance to take hold in the hearts of everyone living in the Middle East.

In the meantime all we can do is pray and meditate for peace and not shy away from looking at all aspects of this terrible human tragedy.

Sincerely

Jean Hudon

P.S. Of course you are welcome to provide me/us with other aspects of this whole situation that may have been overlooked so far.

AND MICHAEL REPLIED:

Dear Jean, I have no view as to who is right and who is wrong. In a war
nobody wins just some lose less. That was not the point I was making. You and
Michael are in favor of taking part of a countries land and handing it over
to the UN for safe keeping. Where is the Spirituality in that action? Let the
UN take over a USA City because the is murders on the Streets. How about
Northern Ireland Do you want the UN to take over there. There are many areas
of the world in conflict. Why single out the Jews. Here is an article sent to
me last week. I am not sticking up for anyone but this seems to balance your
one sided view. This is written by an ARAB journalist.

In Love and Joy

Michael Levy

See the article Michael recommends at http://www.worldnetdaily.com/bluesky_btl/20001011_xcbtl_myths_brmi.shtml
entitled "Myths of the Middle East"

and there has been a follow up to this article at:

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/bluesky_btl/20001023_xcbtl_more_myths.shtml
"More myths of the Middle East"

"My recent commentaries on the Middle East have touched off a virtual international firestorm on the Internet. Since writing "Myths of the Middle East" less than two weeks ago, I have been inundated with e-mail from all over the world -- at least 5,000 letters from Israel alone!"
CLIP




Squeezing Blood From A Stone: US Policy, Anti-Arab Racism and Israeli Arrogance May Be Greatest Obstacles to Peace.

Below is one of the finest articles debunking the US media's racism in portraying events in Israel/Palestine. The author is a Jewish person from the Bay area, who has traveled extensively throughout the occupied territories.

Eduardo Cohen

As the Persian Gulf War was raging I had what I felt to be the particular honor, as an American Jew, of being sponsored by the San Francisco Bay Area Chapter of the Arab-American Anti-Discrimination Committee on a fact-finding mission to investigate Israeli human rights abuses carried out against Palestinians under emergency measures declared during the war.

I had been reporting on US policy in the Middle East for more than ten years on KPFA and other California radio stations and I had been documenting and lecturing on anti-Arab racism in American popular culture and the news media After the delegations week of fact-finding was completed, I decided to spend more time on my own to dig deeper into what Israeli occupation meant for Palestinians

In the next two weeks my travels would take me from the sandy back roads, sweet smelling orange groves and fetid poverty ridden slums of Gaza to meetings with Palestinian and Jewish activists in Haifa, Tel Aviv and Jerusalem. And from the stifling heat of Jericho, where I interviewed Saeb Erikat under house arrest, to some of the West Bank's most remote hills where the isolated rural villages were controlled by the Islamic political organization known as Hamas. Coming back and talking with most Americans about what I had seen and learned there made me feel as if I had entered an episode of the Twilight Zone - an episode in which the main character can see a dangerous and foreboding presence that no one else can see. The protagonist points it out to them but as soon as they look, it has disappeared. They cannot see it. And pretty soon the increasingly desperate and frustrated character even begins to doubt his or her own sanity. But such was the gulf between what I had seen and experienced and what the American public perceived through the lens of the American news media. I couldn't help but conclude that the American public wasn't even getting a fraction of the information it needed to comprehensively understand and intelligently monitor it's own government's policies in the Middle East.

Now, almost ten years later, little has changed and the gulf in perception is just as wide. Perhaps that is understandable. The American news media are probably the most pro-Israeli in the world. Even the Israeli news media are more critical of the Israeli government than American journalists are. Perhaps this isn't surprising since the US is Israel's main benefactor and Israel receives more US aid than any other country in the world. But it is still disturbing to see how uncritically US news coverage seems to follow US foreign policy and how much the American news media protect Israel. If one never leaves the United States or reads the foreign news media, it is easy to be unaware of this incredible gulf between how the US media perceive and report on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and how it is viewed in much of the rest of the world. Even the next most pro-Israeli press, that of Great Britain, shows sharp contrasts with American reporting on Israel and the Occupied Territories. In American coverage of the recent Camp David meetings the American press obediently followed the Israeli and US government spin that while Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak made courageous concessions for peace, Palestinian unwillingness to compromise caused the meeting to fail. Never mind that Barak's courageous concessions consisted of allowing the Palestinians to have joint administrative responsibility over a couple of remote Arab neighborhoods of Arab East Jerusalem - pathetic crumbs tossed on the floor which Arafat was expected to gratefull y pickup. I had to read the British press to find out that, according to documents leaked from Camp David, Arafat reportedly made so many major concessions that they could endanger the possibility of creating a viable Palestinian state. According to a British newspaper, The Independent, Palestinian concessions at Camp David included the right of Israel to maintain a permanent military presence in the Jordan Valley, the presence of Israeli early warning stations on Palestinian territory, Israeli permission to fly over Palestinian air space, the right of Israel to use its army on Palestinian land if it fears a danger to the State of Israel, Palestinian agreement not to have an army, and permanent Israeli sovereignty over existing Jewish settlements - settlements which effectively cut off Jerusalem from the rest of the West Bank and which, including the giant Jewish settlement of Ma'aleh Adumim, effectively cut the West Bank into two pieces separated by Israeli territory. There are other important facts that I regularly see mentioned in newspapers from other countries that are rarely mentioned, if at all, in American newspapers and broadcasts. In the British and European press, readers are often reminded that the very existence of Jewish settlements in the West Bank and Gaza is a clear violation of international law, specifically the Fourth Geneva Convention, and that the continued occupation of Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem are in violation of UN Security Council Resolutions. Readers of British papers are also reminded regularly that what the Americans often characterize as an inflexible and radical Palestinian demand for full Israeli withdrawal from Gaza and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, is exactly what is called for in United Nations Security Council Resolution 242 which, according to the Oslo Agreement, signed by Israel, is exactly the framework on which final resolution is supposed to be based. Reporting on Camp David, American reporters obediently quoted Israeli Prime Minister Barak's statements questioning whether Palestinians are negotiating in good faith but failed to report ongoing Israeli actions in Gaza and the West Bank that raise serious questions about Israel good faith: continuing demolitions of Palestinian homes; confiscation of Palestinian water; expansion and construction of Jewish settlements in occupied territory; denial of building permits to Palestinian homeowners; and construction of Jewish security roads which cut 1/4 mile swaths through Palestinian land.

Not only have American reporters left out crucial information necessary to a comprehensive understanding of the conflict and the peace process, but for far too long they have demonstrated a mindlessly uncritical acceptance of even the most absurd Israeli arguments against making peace. Foremost of these is the oft used Israeli argument that Palestinian authorities must guarantee an end to terrorist attacks as a prerequisite to any Israeli agreements. It has always been a laughable argument, except to American journalists. If the United States government could not prevent the bombings at Oklahoma City and the World Trade Towers and the Israeli government could not prevent the assassination of its own prime minister, how can Yasser Arafat possibly guarantee the end of terrorist acts by Palestinian elements outside of his control?

There are other serious lapses in American coverage which make it difficult for Americans to understand, on an emotional level, the Palestinians anger and frustration that are now boiling over in the streets of the Occupied Territories and even within Israel itself. Recent violence has been attributed to Palestinian anger about the visit by Ariel Sharon, accompanied by 1,000 police and hundreds of supporters, to the sacred Islamic "Noble Sanctuary" where the Al-Aksa Mosque stands. See some of the frustration and anger that Palestinians feel when I spoke with a typical Palestinian farmer in the West Bank whose well of precious water, which he needed to irrigate his crops, had been confiscated by Israeli authorities so a nearby Jewish settlement could fill its swimming pools and water its green lawns. I sensed some of what Palestinians felt when I interviewed more than a half dozen Palestinians whose homes had been dynamited or bulldozed by Israeli tractors because a teenage member of the family had tossed a rock at an Israeli troop carrier or because they tried to build an extra room without the building permit they knew Israeli officials would never provide. It is almost ten years later and, again, the influx of settlers, the expansion of Jewish settlements, the building of Jewish roads, the demolition of Palestinian homes and the confiscation of Palestinian water all continue.

The factor of racism. American papers and American news networks offer Americans little opportunity to understand how much racism remains as one of the greatest obstacles to peace. I experienced some of the frustration that Palestinians must be feeling when I interviewed numerous Jewish-American settlers in the West Bank during the Persian Gulf War. Many of those I spoke with were from New York and, talking about Arabs, spouted some of the most hateful, racist diatribes that I had ever heard. I was reminded of the racism against Black Americans that I witnessed growing up in the American South. The images, often broadcast on American networks, of Palestinians chanting death to the Jews have given many Americans the impression that Arab hatred of Jews may be the greatest obstacle to peace. But that could be a wrong and dangerously misleading conclusion. In spite of those chants, my experiences in Gaza and the West Bank gave me some interesting insights into how deep those feelings go in at least some Palestinians who would be described here as fanatics or extremists. Clearly there are virulently racist elements within the greater Palestinian community... but I found a real difference between Israeli racism against Arabs, based on a feeling of racial superiority, and Palestinian hatred of Jews which is an understandable Palestinian response to the policies of the Jewish government of Israel and a continuing Jewish occupation. It is comparable to the difference between the hatred of Black Americans by Southern white racists during the Civil Rights Movement in the United States and the hatred many Black Americans felt towards whites as the result of the racist oppression they experienced. It is an important difference. Making no secret of my Jewishness, I traveled unarmed, without any police or military escort, and accompanied only by a sole translator, into remote mountain and desert areas in Gaza and the West Bank controlled by the militant Muslim organization called Hamas and where Israeli authorities told me I would probably be killed. I still remember the amazement of Palestinians there when they learned that I was a Jew investigating human rights abuses by the Israeli military and I was moved by how quickly I was invited in to their homes to share tea with them. And I will never forget the tears of appreciation streaming down the cheeks of so many Palestinians who were so genuinely happy to meet a Jew who simply saw them as human beings and as equals and who was willing to acknowledge their suffering and listen to their side of the conflict.

The only Jews they had ever seen in their villages were soldiers there to assert Israeli control. Far away from any Israeli protection, in the heart of areas controlled by Hamas, I felt no danger whatsoever. It was difficult to return to Tel Aviv and talk to Jews who would never allow an Arab to set foot in their homes, except perhaps to clean them, and who would explain to me with no doubt in their minds that it was impossible to reason with Arabs because they didn't share the same faculties of thought and reason anti-Arab racism in Israeli society was the much greater obstacle to peace.

And the evidence indicates that, ten years later, it hasn't changed. I was introduced to Israeli racism before I even left the grounds of Ben Gurion Airport outside Tel Aviv. Outside the entrance in an area where travelers wait for collective taxis which usually whisk them away to Tel Aviv or Jerusalem, a Jewish Israeli asked me where I was headed. "Jerusalem" I told him. "Where are you going to stay?", he asked. I told him that I planned to stay at the YMCA Hotel. "Oh, the one next to the King David Hotel?" he asked, assuming that I would be staying at the YMCA in Jewish West Jerusalem. "No", I responded, I'm staying at the YMCA in East Jerusalem." His face immediately twisted into a look of profound confusion and puzzlement. "I don't think it's going to be very clean he warned. He had almost certainly never been to the YMCA on Nablus Street but he had assumed it would be dirty simply because it was located in Arab East Jerusalem. That was just the first and mildest of many exposures to Israeli racism towards Arabs. Travelling through Israel I witnessed a deep, wide spread and racist contempt for Arabs that I now see as possibly the most serious, but seldom mentioned, obstacle to finding a just and lasting peace. Judging by statements by the Shas partys most prominent religious leader, not much has improved. Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, the spiritual leader of Shas, an ultra-Orthodox party which is the third largest party in the Israeli Knesset, recently described Palestinians as "snakes" whom God "regrets creating." Until just recently Shas had formed a major part of Prime Minister Ehud Baraks governing coalition. The anti-Arab racism that exists in Israel is not without its counterpart in the United States.

During that 1991 trip I visited the sacred Islamic site that includes the Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock. Just a few months before, in October of 1990, 19 unarmed Palestinian civilians had been shot to death by Israeli police. I interviewed eye witnesses and photographed bullet holes left in the side of the mosque by Israeli gunfire. Victims even included Red Crescent ambulance staff attempting to provide medical assistance to the wounded. In Great Britain, the conservative weekly news magazine, 'The Economist', used the term massacre to describe the slaughter. They called it a massacre on their front page, in their editorial, and in the headline of their news story. The New York Times didn't report a massacre but described an outbreak of violence about which there were "confusing" and "contradictory" accounts. But one of the most reprehensible displays of anti-Arab racism was provided by Time Magazine which characterized the massacre of 19 unarmed Palestinians with a headline which read "Saddams Lucky Break." This indefensible murder of Arab civilians was described as a "propaganda victory" for Saddam Hussein and even implied that he had more responsibility for the killings than the Israeli police who had pulled the triggers. There is a slightly more subtle version of anti-Arab racism that continues to permeate our news coverage of the Middle East and the Palestinian-Israeli conflict to this day. It is characterized in Judy Woodruff's words on CNN talking about the recent violence in Israel and the Occupied Territories in which more than 76 Palestinians have now been killed by Israeli police and soldiers: "The uprising that has shut down much of Northern Israel is blamed for as many as 50 or more deaths." According to CNN then, it is the uprising, not the decisions of the Israeli security forces to shoot at Palestinians with steel-jacketed bullets and anti-tank rockets that is responsible for more than 50 dead Palestinians. This racism is reflected in the Sacramento Bee headline "Riots Escalate in West Bank" with a smaller tagline mentioning "12 dead, hundreds hurt". It is present in the SF Examiner headline: "Death Toll Reaches 29 in Mideast Clashes." In none of these samples is it made clear how people died and who did the killing. Now we know, at the time of this writing, that more than 76 Palestinians have been killed. We should all know, deep in our hearts, that if 29 or 55 or 76 Israelis had been killed by Palestinians,the headlines would be screaming at us from the headlines of almost every newspaper '29 Israelis Killed by Palestinians' or 'Arabs Kill 76 Israelis'. The headlines would certainly not read 'Death Toll Reaches 29' or '76 Israelis Die in Mideast Violence' - headlines that fail to attribute any direct responsibility for the killing. A SF Chronicle story carried a headline which read, 'Palestinian Riots Spread Into Israel.' Three paragraphs into that story we are informed that 12 Palestinians have been killed. In a particularly egregious example, another Sacramento Bee headline reads, "Palestinian gunmen fire on Israelis" over a story that tells us that twelve more Palestinians have been killed." This is something that happens repeatedly in the American press and implicitly attaches one value to the lives of Israelis and a lesser value to the lives of Arabs. Israelis are "killed" but Palestinians ,"die." I am not alone in noticing these disturbing disparities that work to camouflage Israeli responsibility. Award winning British journalist Robert Fisk wrote in The Independent that when he reads that Palestinians have died in "crossfire" it almost always means that "the Israelis have killed an innocent person." So when he read on the Associated Press wire that 12-year-old Mohammed al-Durah was killed in Gaza when he was "caught in the crossfire", Fisk writes, "I knew at once who had killed him."

"Sure enough" Fisk confirms, "reporters investigating the killing said the boy was shot by Israeli troops." "So was his father who survived and so was the ambulance driver who was killed trying to rescue the boy." This failure of American editors and reporters to clearly attribute responsibility for the killing of Palestinian victims is just one of many ways in which the American press continuously devalues the lives of Arabs. This almost constant devaluation of Arab lives is reinforced by a popular culture that has made it safe to openly make the most racist statements about Arabs without fear of castigation or even condemnation. Just last month Bill Maher, host of ABCs Politically Incorrect, argued on his show that racial profiling "might be OK in some cases" like when you're on a flight to Israel and "some sweaty Arab" sits down next to you. Worse than the blatantly racist insult to Arabs was the fact that no one even noticed it. Anti-A rab racism is almost certainly a factor in continued American disinterest concerning a US driven embargo that has, according to UN agencies and several high ranking UN officials, caused the deaths of over 1,000,000 Iraqi civilians and continues to cause the deaths of 4,000 to 5,000 Arab children every month. It is telling that a policy that is killing as many as 5,000 Arab children each month didn't even merit a brief mention in the recent US Presidential debate. And despite the fact that Palestinian blood was literally flowing, as the Democratic and Republican presidential and vice-presidential candidates debated, from wounds inflicted by American supplied weapons including Apache attack helicopters, that too merited nary a mention by any of the candidates and neither of the two moderators. A clear but unspoken racist double standard permeates US policy in the region as well as its coverage in the US news media. We are bombing and economically strangling the Arab nation of Iraq for invading Kuwait and seeking to develop nuclear weapons.

But we have provided Israel with staggering and uninterrupted quantities of economic and military aid, despite its even more violent invasion of Lebanon, its refusal to respond to countless UN security council resolutions, and its continued building of what is already one of the worlds largest nuclear arsenals. And it should certainly be clear by now which side of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict the "honest brokers" of the Clinton Administration are on. Despite the well known role of East Jerusalem as the cultural and intellectual center of Palestine, the Clinton Administration continues to support Israeli sovereignty over most of Arab East Jerusalem. And in spite of a long list of major compromises, by the Palestinian negotiators, the administration blames only Palestinians for being inflexible and pressures them for yet more concessions. The results of Americas imbalanced policy choices are now playing out, in the streets of Israel and the Occupied Territories and the time has clearly come for an American President and his policy advisors to realize the responsibility they share for the death of a 12 year old boy in his fathers arms and the torrent of Palestinian blood that is now flowing.

President Clinton needs to be pressuring Israel, not the Palestinians to make more concessions for peace. As the larger and more powerful of the two entities, Israel clearly has more room to bend and it is the Palestinians, not the Israelis whose backs are truly against the wall. He could also make continued US aid contingent on Israeli compliance with international law and UN Security Council resolutions. Then all that would need to be negotiated, apart from a Palestinian right of return, would be when, not whether, Israel will return the occupied lands seized in 1967. Because of the major role that the United States plays in life and death issues in the Middle East, American editors and reporters have a special responsibility to constantly examine the fairness of their reporting and how critically they examine information they present to the American people. And they need to examine the possibility of their own racism and begin treating Palestinians and other Arabs as equal citizens whose lives carry just as much value as Jewish Israeli lives. Israelis need to examine their own racism and their arrogance in using their military superiority to wring yet more concessions from a people who are struggling to keep a mere 20% of what was formerly Palestine. They must realize that in forcing humiliating concessions on the Palestinians they are only planting the seeds of continued resentment, hatred and violence. Above all, Israelis need to realize that the creation of an economically, politically and geographically viable Palestinian state is inextricably linked with any prospect they might have of a peaceful and secure future. The Israelis apparent inability or unwillingness to recognize this basic truth may be the greatest single obstacle to a just and lasting peace...

To see previous messages sent before you joined the list, go to www.egroups.com/group/fr2 and click on any subject that interests you.




Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000
From: Suzanne & Daniel Keehn <dskeehn@pacbell.net>
Subject: IPC Concerns

Dear Jean, I have many concerns about Michael's Declaration some of which
are stated below. From my understanding of prayer and Spirit, we collective
have the obligation to pray for peace in the mid-East. We do know it is
not just something happening there, but a collective drama. We must be sure
to first work with ourselves to clear out prejudice, hatred etc. and etc.
then reach out, asking for the Highest Good for all concerned but not giving
a specific outcome. This used to be called outlining. Rest is below.

Many Blessings,

Suzanne Keehn (Creative Health Network)

-- Original Message --

Subject: [IPC] Concerns
Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000
To: Michael Lightweaver <Lightweave@aol.com>

Hi Everyone, Yesterday upon first receiving Michael's heartfelt letter and
then his Declaration, and quickly scanning it, I wrote to him and told him
it was wonderful and I would send it on.
Then last night I thought I better read the whole Declaration word for word
before I sent it off to CHN-Spirit etc.

I totally agree about Jerusalem becoming a city of peace, also that the
true temple of peace is within each of our hearts. I believe we build the
temple when we connect with our hearts reaching out in peace and love to all
other hearts. I also am in agreement with the vision Bill's brother where
spiritual leaders of all faiths go and pray on the Temple Mount, and like
Bill and Dick said, I may join them also.

Now for my concerns, at this time I do not think or feel that the U.N. is a
clear enough organization or politically free enough to really bring
universality of the highest level to this area. In fact I have heard, and I
do not dwell on this type of information, that the One World Order wants to
have the UN take over the Temple Mount.

Some of have had the feeling, insight, from meditations that many of the
people there are not grounded, connected to the Earth, so this old emotion
etc. can just keep going around and around. We have been working to help
with this grounding in various ways. I feel that we need to pray for the
Divine Plan of Peace to manifest there, that the way and the wisdom is
already there in the people, and in the Earth. Perhaps the understanding of
the temple in the heart will flower.

Also I am always leery of praying for a particular outcome because we are
still only capable of seeing a part of the story, not the whole. Could we
change the Declaration to something like:

"We know and trust that there is a Divine solution and healing for this
situation and we as co-creators call it forth now."

Our CHN friend Yossi Stiber did go to Australia with us and there was told
he had come there to remember what he knew from long ago and he was to bring
back the 'third' energy. As he meditated he saw that the people were
disconnected from Nature. So the third energy is the Earth energy. If
anyone is interested in some of the other meditations we have experienced we
will be happy to send them on.

Sincerely and with Many Blessings,

Suzanne Keehn

MY REPLY WAS:

Thanks Suzanne for pointing out this possibility that the UN might not be the best organization to be responsible for this delicate mission and that God knows best what it should be.

On the other hand, this initiative may also be part of God's plan to help move those involved away from their current view into a higher perspective that may then lead to the Golden Path towards peaceful coexistence and, indeed, true brother-sisterhood for all Children of Life in the Middle East.

Love to you

Jean

AND SUZANNE REPLIED:

Dear Jean, Not to argue, but in my training, you do not outline the outcome
so to speak. I agree anything may be used for good, but in the short run
this solution could cause more anger. Actually I think humanity should get
over all these 'special' sites and realize it is all special!

Blessings,

Suzanne




From: "Ursula" <nomades@skyinet.net>
Subject: Re: Campaign For A New Jerusalem: Declaration 2001
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000

Thank you, Jean,

I have been sending now all heads of state on the list the Declaration,
this was a wonderful initiative.

love
Ursula




From: Coevt@aol.com
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000
Subject: Re: Campaign For A New Jerusalem: Declaration 2001

Can we not call Jerusalem the city of GOD?---One God for All? I will send the
letter on to our email listserve of the NGOs for the Spiritual Forum at the UN...

Nina Meyerhof




From: ilyes@earthlink.net
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000
Subject: Re: Miscellaneous Subjects #32

Your posts seem to be bringing us worse and worse news daily -- our
environment is in heartbreakingly dire straits ... it's stunningly
unbelievable that The Powers That Be continue in their denial and
indifference and actual exacerbation of our collective problems ...
Don't they realize that THEIR kids and grandkids will be scrambling to
undo their criminal non-deeds of negligence? I just can't grok this
kind of psychotic apathy from those who've ostensibly chosen to
'represent the peeple' -- more, that The People haven't wakened enuf to
realize what's happened/happening, and really seem to LIKE and even
RESPECT puppet-Bush, and are ready to tolerate puppet-Gore ... such a
nation of dense, pathetic, self-destructive sheeps we've become ...

thanks for being there, kiddo







BACK TO THE FIRST HOME PAGE OF THIS SITE