Most Jews Support Egyptian Protests

News Advisory: Release Feb. 1, 2011  For interviews: call Mike Godbe at 510 644 1200 or mike@Tikkun.org

Why Jews Around the World are Praying for the Victory of the Egyptian Uprising

Rabbi Michael Lerner, editor of Tikkun Magazine and chair of The Tikkun Community, affirmed today (Feb. 1, 2011) that there is a growing upsurge of support for the Egyptian Uprising in the Jewish community.

Rabbi Lerner issued the following statement:

Ever since the victory over the dictator of Tunisia and the subsequent uprising in Egypt, my email has been flooded with messages from Jews around the world hoping and praying for the victory of the Egyptian people over their cruel Mubarak regime.

Though a small segment of Jews have responded to right-wing voices from Israel that lament the change and fear that a democratic government would bring to power fundamentalist extremists who wish to destroy Israel and who would abrogate the hard-earned treaty that has kept the peace between Egypt and Israel for the last 30 years, the majority of Jews are more excited and hopeful than worried.

Of course, the worriers have a point. Israel has allied itself with repressive regimes in Egypt and used that alliance to ensure that the borders with Gaza would remain closed while Israel attempted to economically deprive the Hamas regime there by denying needed food supplies and equipment to rebuild after Israel’s devastating attack in December 2008 and January 2009. If the Egyptian people take over, they are far more likely to side with Hamas than with the Israeli blockade of Gaza.

Yet it is impossible for Jews to forget our heritage as victims of another Egyptian tyrant—the Pharoah whose reliance on brute force was overthrown when the Israelite slaves managed to escape from Egypt some 3,000 years ago. That story of freedom retold each year at our Passover “Seder” celebration, and read in synagogues in the past month, has often predisposed the majority of Jews to side with those struggling for freedom around the world.  To watch hundreds of thousands of Egyptians able to throw off the chains of oppression and the legacy of a totalitarian regime that consistently jailed, tortured or murdered its opponents so overtly that most people were cowed into silence, is to remember that the spark of God continues to flourish no matter how long oppressive regimes manage to keep themselves in power, and that ultimately the yearning for freedom and democracy cannot be totally stamped out no matter how cruel and sophisticated the elites of wealth, power and military might appear to be.

Many Jews have warned Israel that it is a mistake to ally with these kinds of regimes, just as we’ve warned the US to learn the lesson from its failed alliance with the Shah of Iran. We’ve urged Israel to free the Palestinian people by ending the Occupation of the West Bank and the blockade of Gaza. Israel’s long-term security will not be secured through military or economic domination, but only by acting in a generous and caring way toward the Palestinian people first, and then toward all of  its Arab neighbors. Similarly, America’s homeland security will best be achieved through a strategy of generosity and caring, manifested through a new Global Marshall Plan such as has been introduced into the House of Representatives by Congressman Keith Ellison.

In normal times, when the forces of repression seem to be winning, this kind of thinking is dismissed as “utopian” by the “realists” who shape public political discourse. But when events like the uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt occur, for a moment the politicians and media are stunned enough to allow a different kind of thinking to emerge, the kind of thinking that acknowledged that underneath all the “business as usual” behavior of the world’s peoples, the yearning for a world based on solidarity, caring for each other, freedom, self-determination, justice, non-violence and yes, even love and generosity, remains a potent and unquenchable thirst that may be temporarily repressed but never fully extinguished.

It is this recognition that leads many Jews to join with the rest of the world’s peoples in celebrating the uprising, in praying that it does not become manipulated by the old regime into paths that too quickly divert the hopes for a brand new kind of order into politics and economics as usual, or into extremist attempts to switch the anger from domestic elites who have been the source of Egyptian oppression onto Jews or Israel which have not been responsible for the suffering of the Egyptian people. Such extremists could easily be marginalized were Israel to take definitive action to accept the peace terms offered by the Palestinians in 2007-8 and known to the world through the release of relevant documents by Al-Jazeera, and were the US in conjunction with Israel to announce a Global Marshall Plan with first location being the Middle East. Such a plan has been developed in some detail by the Network of Spiritual Progressives.

We hope that Egyptians will hear the news that they have strong support from many in the Jewish world.

Rabbi Michael Lerner is editor of Tikkun www.tikkun.org , chair of the interfaith Network of Spiritual Progressives, and rabbi of Beyt Tikkun Synagogue in Berkeley, California.  He can be reached at  RabbiLerner@Tikkun.org  To read details of the Global Marshall Plan, go to www.spiritualprogressives.org/GMP

NATE FT. CYCLONIOUS & DARK MATTER – BUILDING (OFFICIAL MUSIC VIDEO)

Poem of The Day – In Hate They Justify

In Hate
They Justify

Let’s love
And let hate and bitterness die
But when we sin
To hate
Gives us a reason why
It lets us justify
Yet, back in the deep woods
The truth lies
A beast we fear
We stay clear
When the light shines
We’ll see
We’ve sinned
With tears in our eyes
We will not be able to justify
Someday
The sun will come
The light will shine
They will find
I was not such a bad guy
With hands held out
I say
Lets love
And let hate and bitterness die
But I bet my hand’s slapped
They say I’ve sinned
I’m not perfect
But it is they
Not I
Who have sinned
And in hate and bitterness
They justify

By: Roger Harkness

Poem of The Day – Just Have A Drink

Just Have A Drink

If you care
You will be cared for
If you see
You will be seen
If you hear
You will be heard
If you feel
You will be felt
And if you could be just a little understanding
You could be understood a little bit

Love is a river
Watering the ground
It makes things grow
If you want some
Just take a chance
Have a drink
And know
If you won’t
Nothing will happen
You will never grow

By: Roger Harkness

Damaged Soldiers Forced To Redeploy

Soldier Suffering from PTSD Threatened with Redeployment

(FORT CAMPBELL, January 7) Less than two months after surrendering himself at Fort Campbell from AWOL status, Army Spc. Jeff Hanks awaits imminent redeployment to Afghanistan without having received treatment for war wounds.

Hanks, who has served in both Iraq and Afghanistan, returned to the U.S. on leave this past September suffering from symptoms of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and likely Traumatic Brain Injury. He sought and was denied treatment on two military bases before refusing to redeploy and going Absent Without Official Leave in order to get civilian medical attention.

Hanks has demanded that the Army respect his right to heal. With the help of the Operation Recovery campaign, he turned himself in to Fort Campbell on Veterans Day, ready to face the consequences but demanding treatment. Since then, he has been juggled between a series of military counselors who have provided no diagnoses, and proposals for long-term treatment have been denied by his commanders.

This week, Jeff Hanks’ commanders informed him he was scheduled to redeploy to Afghanistan on January 9. The Army’s mandatory pre-deployment mental health screenings denied Hank’s PTSD, contradicting positive diagnoses by four separate civilian therapists. Results of an MRI yesterday will not be available until after he is in Afghanistan. As increasingly reported by soldiers like Hanks, the Army behavioral health specialist who screened him suggested Hanks seek treatment while deployed in Afghanistan.

“Four different mental health providers have diagnosed Jeff with PTSD, have advised treatment, and he has been denied treatment every single time. I am very worried about him,” says Johanna Buwalda, a licensed clinical counselor working directly with Hanks and other veterans. “Our soldiers deserve the right to heal.”

Hanks’ lawyer reports that Jeff’s situation remains tenuous but all signs point to orders to redeploy. For now, it is unclear how Jeff will react if officially ordered to redeploy, but he continues to stress his demands for adequate treatment.

Operation Recovery is a national effort led by Iraq Veterans Against the War to stop the deployment of traumatized troops and the abuse of troops’ right to heal. For more information, go to:

http://www.ivaw.org/operation-recovery

Religion Not Terror

Tikkun to heal, repair and transform the world

Editor’s Note: We at Tikkun/NSP who often critique the extremism and violence that characterizes Israeli attacks on Palestinians and Arabs have an equal responsibility to critique the extremists in the Arab world. Ziad Asali, former chair of the ADC (Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee), was an honoree at a Tikkun/NSP conference in D.C. in 2004. Asali and Ibish present a critique of extremist ideas in the Arab and Muslim world that should be taken seriously by Arabs and Muslims around the world. And just as we resist any attempt to blame all Jews for the behavior of the Israeli government and its repressive policies against Palestinians, we resist any attempts to blame Islam itself or all Arabs or all Muslims for the violent assault on Christians (or Jews) that take place both in the discourse and actions of some Arab and Muslim extremists. Yet as we make clear in our analysis of some ideas in the Jewish world and as Asali and Ibish make clear in their analysis of some ideas in the Arab/Islamic world, both communities have an obligation to do more to critique the kind of thinking that gives support to ther extremists or justifies them because of the (alleged or real) “evil” of their enemies. –Rabbi Michael Lerner

Honesty and hypocrisy in facing terrorism

Ziad Asali, Hussein Ibish
The Huffington Post (Blog)
January 3, 2011 – 12:00am

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ziad-j-asali-md/honesty-and-hypocrisy-in-_1_b_8038…

The murderous bomb attacks against Christian communities in Egypt and Iraq have been roundly condemned by most political and religious leaders, commentators and public opinion in the Arab world. They have also been met with an outpouring of passionate condemnation by ordinary people who have taken to the streets to express anger and demand justice. People have sensed the danger to their whole society inherent in such atrocities. The Alexandria church massacre could be a wake-up call to reverse dangerous trends, or it may be the beginning of unraveling of the bonds that keep people of different faiths and backgrounds together as citizens.

However, the effort to place the blame solely on outsiders or extremists for these attacks glosses over a much deeper and more troubling context. While there is little sympathy for the outrageous crimes of the fanatic extremists outside of their own ranks, these murderous radicals are in fact taking some prevalent societal attitudes to a cold bloodied and logical, albeit extreme, conclusion. Emerging out of a pervasive reality of powerlessness and inequity, political trends in the Arab world have given rise to a belligerent chauvinistic sensibility that has increasingly valorized the Islamic identity and regarded the rest of the world, especially the West, with deep suspicion and hostility.

These attitudes are promoted from the top down, through government-sponsored media, educational and religious institutions, and from the bottom up, in the home at the dinner table and online through a social media echo-chamber featuring a radical chic discourse aimed at restless young people. The worst ideas generally come from Islamist religious institutions, leaders and political opposition groups, which frequently argue that there is not only a conspiracy against the Arabs to prevent their development, but a global campaign to destroy Islam itself. Moderate voices who view the world in political rather than religious terms are outnumbered and function outside the parameters and comfort of political correctness. They try valiantly to stand for universal values while having to contend with constant intimidation because of their principled opposition to extremism.

The hegemonic narrative of relentless victimization at the hands of an all-powerful West frequently focuses on the theme of double standards, to which Arabs certainly have been subjected. However, this same ideal of a single standard is rarely applied in an introspective or self-critical manner. The contribution of Arabs and Muslims to their own failures, powerlessness, socio-economic inequities and dysfunctional systems are mentioned without any serious pursuit of corrective measures. The real blame for the failure, however, is consistently laid at the door of a hostile and manipulative West, led by America, and their regional amorphous client elite.

The question of religious minorities is an ideal place to begin examining the double standard argument. When given the opportunity, Muslims keep flocking to the West, where Muslim communities are growing and thriving, although they also face an increasing threat of discrimination and cultural hostility.

Christian and other religious minorities in the Arab world, however, are generally shrinking and withering, and are now facing a murderous campaign of attacks that seem consciously designed to try to drive them out of the region, or at least certain countries, once and for all. The fact that the vast majority of the victims of Islamist terror have been Muslims must not belittle the distinctive brutality of these attacks on Christians. These people were killed simply because they were Christians, with the evident aim of scaring them away from the country and possibly the region. Muslims have generally been killed because they happened to be in the way of those who use terror to achieve power and political objectives, including significant intra-Muslim sectarian violence in Iraq that intended to force communities to relocate.

It can’t be enough for Arab and Muslim governments, and some media and organizations, to simply condemn obviously unacceptable outrages such as the recent massacres. In several Muslim countries religious minorities face discrimination, restriction of rights, laws against blasphemy, apostasy and “insults to religion,” prohibitive constraints against building and reconstructing houses of worship, and the aggressive state-sponsored promotion of not only Islam, but certain narrow versions of it. All these realities need to be opposed in a consistent manner by those who would credibly defend Muslim rights in the West without engaging in double standards of their own.

Without even addressing circular arguments about who is defending themselves against whose aggression, the work that must be done to counteract narratives of intolerance and exclusion everywhere must be performed officially and legally, as well as at the social and community level both here and in the Middle East. It would be almost impossible to find explicit support from Arab or Muslim Americans for wanton acts of violence against civilians, but easy to find echoes of the sentiments of victimization and self-righteousness from which they ultimately derive. Even among Arab and Arab-American Christians and other minorities it is readily possible to encounter such views.

Of course, others have a great deal of work to do as well. The problems of Islamophobia spreading in the West, and growing blatant anti-Arab racism in Israel, need to be confronted at every level, without fear or favor. Marauding lawless bands of Israeli settlers, and American religious and ideological fanatics who advocate racism, must be held accountable. It is vital that communities, identity groups and societies take more responsibility to proactively define boundaries regarding what will be accepted as “respectable” discourse or conduct and what clearly crosses the line and has to be confronted as socially and politically dangerous even, and perhaps especially, if that means breaching expectations of ethnic, cultural or religious solidarity.

Critics will complain that we are conflating apples and oranges, casting the net of blame too widely or being unfair. What we are in fact doing is the unavoidable task of drawing connections between words that begin with hypocrisy and chauvinistic bluster, continue on into the promotion of intolerance, fear and hatred, and finally, in the hands of the most extreme, erupt into unconscionable acts of violence. This progression needs to be addressed as much at its source as its outcome if the trend is to be reversed.

Too few voices and organizations in Arab and Muslim societies, and the Arab-American community for that matter, repudiate much of the rhetoric that ultimately, when taken to its logical conclusion by demented murderers, leads to this kind of appalling violence. Their default position is to cite various injustices and to ask others to understand the motives for violence by pointing to a double standard argument or other rationalizations. This approach means that most of Arab societies, and many in the Arab and Muslim American communities, are in effect opting for silence. This doesn’t mean that this silent or ambivalent majority condones murderous acts by extremist fanatics, far from it. But these massacres in Egypt and Iraq demonstrate that everyone has a responsibility to be more vigilant and to recognize that the language of hate and intolerance can ultimately lead to unspeakable violence and should not be tolerated and countered by responsible choices.

In our own country, the most vociferous proponents of the Arab and Muslim victimization narrative, those who blame the West, especially America or “the white man,” for all the ills that befall the Arabs and Muslims, and those who most loudly advocate against the legal and societal harassment of Arabs and Muslims in the United States, take full advantage, as they are entitled to, of the American system and find shelter in the comfort and security of its freedoms. The damage they do in being the loudest and most anti-American voices emanating from the vulnerable Arab and Muslim immigrant communities, who already feel besieged, is to provide ammunition to the demagogues and profiteers of racism and peddlers of hate and fear of Arab and American Muslims, and to empower and encourage the worst racist and chauvinistic tendencies in this country. Minorities in this country have achieved their communal and collective objectives by working the system as they redefine it, and gaining support and power by courageous but peaceful confrontation with injustices, by use of the law and the political system, and not by rejecting the system as inherently corrupt and uncorrectable. And certainly not by murdering unarmed military personnel or civilians, or by plotting to blow up planes or public squares.

For Arab and Muslim Americans silence is not a safe option. No group is more vulnerable to the consequences of the next terror attack, or to policies based on fear and exclusion. What happens, and does not happen, in the Arab and Muslim world matters here at home. This assertion needs no explanation after September 11, 2001. The relentless wars against minorities, and not just Christians in the Middle East, whether official, societal or even just criminal, waged by those who aim to divide the world into large, mutually-exclusive and warring religious and ethnic blocks is not just a threat to America and its values. It is a specific and imminent danger to Arab and Muslim Americans, who must, for their own urgent necessity, oppose such politics and rhetoric. They need to develop a higher degree of honesty in their discourse and demand that a more elevated sense of responsibility be conveyed and articulated by their elites and leaderships.

The present tragic course of events, with mal-distribution of power and resources in the Arab and Muslim world, and a deepening sense of victimization that is increasingly directed at the West, especially America, and its friends and allies, will eventually break through the coercive measures that have thus far maintained the intrinsically unstable status quo. If serious change is not effected in short order, this dam will burst and after that comes the deluge. Ideas, deeds, programs and a modicum of peace in Palestine are urgently needed to give a fighting chance to forces of moderation and sanity everywhere.

To survive, and to compete globally, Arab and Muslim societies need to embrace their cultural, religious and ethnic mosaics, and view their diversity as strength rather than weakness. They need to embrace a culture that values not only individual rights and foregrounds the role of the citizen in political and social life, but minority rights as well. The values of pluralism, peaceful resolution of disputes and inclusivity are the only effective antidote to the poison of extremism and extremist violence. Embracing these values will require a change in social and political culture, and for that, every Arab, and Arab and Muslim American, must take up their share of the responsibility. They must speak publicly and courageously for these values here and in the Middle East. The price of silence is prohibitive. The forces of fanaticism, violence and exclusion must not be allowed to prevail.
http://www.americantaskforce.org/daily_news_article/2011/01/03/1294030800_6

web: www.tikkun.org
email: info@spiritualprogressives.org

Poem of The Day – Off Track Racing

Off Track Racing

trains on the rail
hammer that nail
you have a secret
i can’t tell
isn’t that special
isn’t that swell
a branch from the tree
fell
and down
on one knee
i see the reflection
of disgrace
not willing to run that race
a flag stands still
a heart fill
and who let the water out
who knows
who gets out
and what’s all this running about
but you can’t get out
if you can’t get in
your mind says
again and again
somebody says its a sin
well i don’t know
did it hurt you so
that you just had to go

By:  Roger Harkness
3/3/2011

The Children of Iraq

JUST IN 1/3/2011

______________________________________________

Dear Friend of the IRC,

Thanks to you and thousands of other donors, we surpassed our matching gift goal — and raised more than $1.5 million to help refugees!

My colleagues and I are deeply grateful for your support.

Around the world, the crises affecting innocent survivors of war and disaster seem never-ending. Yet in the midst of the hardships, we help people find hope, in no small measure because of you.

Through your support and that of others, in the places where we work more young children will live healthy lives, more boys and girls will have the chance to go to school, and more families will heal from the physical and psychological wounds of war and disaster. In the United States, your donation means that we will be able to help more refugees begin life anew and gain self-sufficiency.

In the darkest of times, we witness humanity both at its worst and at its best, which is why we thank you for playing a compassionate role helping people on the journey from harm to home.

All of us at the IRC wish you a happy and peaceful New Year.

Sincerely,

George Rupp
President, International Rescue Committee

____________________________________________________________

Last night I dreampt that we had to help the children of Iraq, that they really needed our help. I did a small google search and didn’t really find any new organizations than what I was aware of. So I donated to the IRC, a group that helps thoughs who have been displaced by war, that ofourse includes Iraq.

Where We Work › Middle East › Iraq
The IRC in Iraq
The Iraq war has produced one of the largest humanitarian crises of our time. Several million Iraqis were uprooted and are in dire need of help.

Millions of Iraqis remain uprooted by the war and live in fragile, dangerous circumstances inside the country. They are unable to flee into neighboring countries or return home safely. Some live in cramped conditions with extended family, others crowd into small rented spaces, squat in abandoned buildings, or struggle to get by in make-shift shelters. A small number of people live in tent settlements or displacement camps. Most displaced Iraqis have lost their jobs or businesses and are living in poverty. Basic healthcare, shelter, education, clean water and sanitation services are difficult to access. Meanwhile, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis are living as refugees outside their country.

How We Help

The IRC provides support to uprooted Iraqis through its protection, shelter, and education programs in some of the most volatile areas of the country, including Baghdad, Anbar, Salahdin and Babylon. The IRC seeks to provide holistic programming to serve these vulnerable communities by providing legal services to returnees who wish to obtain necessary legal documentation and access to their government entitlements, helping returnees rebuild their damaged homes, and getting displaced children back into school. In the north, the IRC operates a Women’s Health Program to help combat violence against women. The program encourages local communities to discuss and re-evaluate their traditional attitudes and improves the response of local law-enforcement and service providers to women survivors of violence. The IRC also provides assistance to Kurdish refugees from Turkey in northern Iraq.

The IRC also delivers humanitarian aid to Iraqi refugees in Jordan and those who have been granted refuge in the United States.

http://www.theirc.org/where/iraq

Poem of the Day – Trees Grow Different

TREES GROW DIFFERENT

Stop and consider a moment
You can wear the right cloths
Drive the right kind of car
And say the right things
But who are you
Does anybody care
Don’t you think this is boring
To be in
Being Fav
or
To be in
Being yourself
Look at the trees
Their strong
Live long
But they all grow differently
Yet
When the wind blows
They all bend the same way

By: Roger Harkness

The Start Treaty

Tikkun Editor’s Note: In order to achieve this “deal,” the media told us for months, Obama “had to agree” to tens of billions in new funds for “modernizing” the US nuclear armaments. Feel safer?

“New START” Ratification Likely End of Obama’s “Disarmament Vision,” and of Arms Control Era, as New Political Alignments, Fresh Crises Loom

by Greg Mello,

Albuquerque, NM — What began as a business-as-usual replacement for a Cold War arms treaty, and then became a major legislative challenge for the Obama Administration, was finally ratified by the U.S. Senate today after unusually-involved negotiations with Senate Republicans. New START is a force-affirmation treaty, designed to clarify, but not change or disarm, U.S. and Russian nuclear arms. There is no disarmament required by the treaty. There is no indication that it is a “first step” toward “further” “disarmament.”

These negotiations resulted in extensive commitments by the Administration to new spending and upgrades to U.S. strategic armaments, including nuclear weapons and nuclear weapons infrastructure, missile defense research, development, and deployments, and continued development of conventional global strike weapons — much of which is applicable to nuclear delivery systems as well, being currently barred only by (mutable) law.

Ultra-accurate submarine-launched ballistic missile delivery systems have already been developed (but not deployed) under this last program.

The full cost of this treaty cannot yet be assessed, as not all the details of understandings reached have been made public, and the full import of some which have depends on future decisions and events. Just this week, and on top of announcements of two major increases in nuclear weapons spending, President Obama promised four senators (including two Democrats) that nuclear weapons complex spending would be exempt from any future fiscal austerity measures that might otherwise apply to appropriations in the Energy and Water subcommittees. The prior increases are posted here and analyzed here and elsewhere at www.lasg.org.

The long struggle to ratify the treaty, and its huge final cost in the very coin of arms control which the treaty purports to advance, signals just how weak the Cold War arms control consensus has become. Prospects for ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), for example, appear nil for the foreseeable future. The U.S. will ratify this treaty, if it does, only when its progressive ratification by other states has reached a point of embarrassment wholly incompatible with U.S. geostrategic ambitions.

The way forward for arms controllers is not clear. Russia has made clear on numerous occasions that it has no intention of pursuing further nuclear cuts and has halted the financially-driven erosion of its nuclear forces. With Russia now the world’s largest oil producer and the supplier of a controlling fraction of natural gas to Europe — a fraction that is expected to grow considerably in the coming years — Russia is not the weak negotiating partner that it was during, say, the START II negotiations. The reality of Russian power — and U.S. weakness vis-a-vis military operations in the oil- and gas-rich regions south of Russia — was not lost on Republican ratification opponents.

While on their face most of the Republican objections to ratification appeared foolish and ill-informed, these objections also conveyed a deep unease about the future of American global power, which is hardly misplaced.

The makeup of the incoming House and Senate (112th) is likely to be much more hostile to arms control than the (111th) Congress now concluding.

Looking ahead, prospects for conventional arms control appear worse. There are 23 Democratic Senate seats up for election in 2012, including 2 independents who caucus with the Democrats, compared to only 10 Republican seats. In 2014 Democrats are currently expected to have 20 seats up for election, and Republicans 13, although obviously this could change. For these and other reasons, prospects for conventional arms control measures appear bleak for the foreseeable future.

At the same time fresh and far more severe crises are looming, which, in their earliest manifestations, have already begun to capture Congress’s (and voters’) attention.

The implications for the New Mexico laboratories are complex. As noted here, they will suffer from an unprecedented infusion of cash — about six times the total scale of the Manhattan Project in New Mexico, measured in constant dollars. But will this bring better morale, better science, better community relations, a more wholesome community in Los Alamos — or even better stockpile management? That is very far from assured. The reverse, I think, is very likely true. The best days of Los Alamos are in the past, and if the day ever dawns when excavation begins on the giant plutonium complex slated to cost a factor of ten more any federal or state project ever conceived for New Mexico, save the Interstate Highways, it will be a dark day.

As Robert Oppenheimer put it on the 16th of October, 1945, “If atomic bombs are to be added as new weapons to the arsenals of a warring world, or to the arsenals of nations preparing for war, then the time will come when mankind will curse the names of Los Alamos and Hiroshima. The people must unite, or they will perish.”

Now we know that it may or not be atomic weaponry which kills them, but rather the distraction they have brought, and misprioritization of scarce resources they incur. Today’s treaty ratification is not an occasion of joy for the world, but rather a somber warning of the failure of our political system to understand and defend against the true dangers we face.

Copyright 2010 Tikkun Magazine. Tikkun is a registered trademark.

Get Adobe Flash playerPlugin by wpburn.com wordpress themes