In memory of Leonard Garment (1924 - 2013)

   This summer saw the passing of a great American attorney and public servant.  He was a colourful figure, a professional jazz musician, a Democrat who became a consultant to Richard Nixon.  It was due to his advice that the infamous tapes survived and the truth of Watergate came to light.

Later Garment became a member of the staff of Patrick Moynihan, US ambassador to the United Nation.  It was during that period of the mid 1970s that an alliance of Muslim and sub-Saharan Africa nations, under the tutelage of the Russians, proposed a resolution that would have declared Zionism to be a form of racism.  Although the resolution was never passed, the idea took roots and to this day people, without actually checking out facts, keep parroting it.  This unfortunately is enforced by statesmen like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, not to mention the likes of leaders of the Hammas and Hezbollah.

It is worth reproducing here Leonard Garment's statement on this issue presented to the United Nations General Assembly on October 17, 1975.

My delegation has read the new proposal before us. It is unusually straightforward. It asks to determine "that Zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination."

As simple as this language is, we are concerned that what may not be fully understood is that this resolution asks us to commit one of the most grievous errors in the 30-year life of this organization.

This committee is preparing itself, with deliberation and foreknowledge, to perform a supreme act of deceit, to make a massive attack on the moral realities of the world.

Under the guise of a program to eliminate racism the United Nations is at the point of officially endorsing anti-semitism, one of the oldest and most virulent forms of racism known to human history. This draft explicitly encourages the racism known as anti-semitism even as it would have us believe that its words will lead to the elimination of racism.

I choose my words carefully when I say that this is an obscene act. The United States protests this act. But protest alone is not enough. In fairness to ourselves we must also issue a warning.This resolution places the work of the United Nations in jeopardy.

The language of this resolution distorts and perverts. It changes words with precise meanings into purveyors of confusion. It destroys the moral force of the concept of racism, making it nothing more than an epithet to be flung arbitrarily at one’s adversary. It blinds us to areas of agreement and disagreement, and deprives us of the clarity of vision we desperately need to understand and resolve the differences among us. And we are here to overcome our differences, not to deepen them.

Zionism is a movement which has as its contemporary thrust the preservation of the small remnant of the Jewish people that survived the horrors of a racial holocaust. By equating Zionism with racism, this resolution discredits the good faith of our joint efforts to fight actual racism. It discredits these efforts morally and it cripples them politically.

The language of this resolution has already disrupted our efforts here to work together on the elimination of racism and it will continue to do so. Encouraging anti-semitism and group hostility, its adoption would bring to an end our ability to cooperate on eliminating racism and racial discrimination as part of the official work of the Decade.

Once again our failure to reason together has encouraged some delegations to exploit our collective shortcomings and individual vulnerabilities and impede our attempts to further the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms.

The United Nations, throughout its 30-year history, has not lived by the force of majorities; it has not lived by the force of arms. It has lived only—I repeat, only—because it has been thought that the nations of the world, assembled together, would give voice to the most decent and humane instincts of mankind. From this thought has come the moral authority of the United Nations, and from this thought its influence upon human affairs.

Actions like this do not go unnoticed. They do not succeed without consequences, many of which while only imperfectly perceived at the time soon become an ineradicable part of a new and regrettable reality. Let us make no mistake: at risk today is the moral authority which is the United Nations’ only ultimate claim for the support of our peoples.

This risk is as reckless as it is unnecessary. But it is still avoidable.

Accordingly the United States will support resolutions A and B. We support, without reservation, the work of the United Nations to combat racism and racial discrimination. We have taken part in these vitally important activities in the past and want to be able to do so without obstruction in the future. We will vote against the third resolution. We call upon other delegations to do likewise.

On its adoption the third resolution becomes inseparably linked to the first two. Therefore, if all three are sent to Plenary the United States will vote against all three at that time.


It is a pity Leonard Garment is not here with us any more to voice his most probable concerns about present day goings-on at The United Nations, a body that very rapidly looses its credibility in the eyes of the world.

Terrorists of London are actually victims

We have witnessed the latest terror attack in London, we saw the terrorists and the bloody results of their actions in Boston. They all eventually get shot by police, as true Jihadists are supposed to in order to reach Heaven to get their rewards from Allah. But, pray, think about it! Who are really the true criminals behind these acts?

In both cases the perpetrators were “home grown”. In the London case they were recent converts. So I ask everyone to ponder, where did they get those skewed ideas? How did these last two get so convinced that British soldiers go around chopping up poor innocent Muslims around the world that their righteous indignation forced them to do what they did? All the time believing that their action was rightful revenge. To quote : “We must fight them as they fight us. An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.”

They were ready to die and they got shot. Hopefully, though, they do not die before they will be fully questioned. Because the ones who truly deserve to die are those who go on “converting” people like these two, and filling their heads with propaganda of hatred so poinonous that the new converts become ticking time bombs, ready to sacrifice themselves at an opportune moment. How come we never hear of any of those mosque activists so busy with their conversions and teachings ever participating in these terror attacks themselves?

If you are someone who has been listening to an imam or activist lately who was encouraging people to become shahids, please, stop and think. How come he is urging you, yet deep in your heart you know that he would never do it himself? Aren’t you then a victim of the one who eggs you on? What if that imam is wrong and thus your action will be wrong in the eyes of Allah? Then what?

I call upon all those who still have their ability to reason. When you sit in that mosque or community centre and listen to a rousing speech about the evil West or the evil Jews, describing in gruesome detail how these are all enemies of your Muslim Ummah, think a moment – what IF this is not really all true? What IF it is not Allah’s wish for you to act the way the imam or that community activist urges you to act? What if the actual meaning of Jihad in the Qur’an is not the way these people want you to understand it? WHAT IF…. ?

Another ray of hope for the Middle East. A website (blog?) with contributors from fourteen countries from around the area, including Israel! I would have been even happier if the board of directors, which includes three eminent Arab members among the ten, would also include at least one with Jewish background in order to create a proper balance. In spite of that omission, the blog is one of the most balanced I have seen yet. Although articles still contain the occasional snipets of rhetoric, something that is extremely hard to get rid of given people's backgrounds, one can feel the efforts in them, trying to be as neutral and fair as possible. Worth following it and see how it will evolve.

Not much help in BC for children with mental health problems.

The Bradley family from Victoria, BC, Canada, are pleading to the public asking for help. They wish to apply pressure on the BC health system to change their approach regarding emergency in-patient cases when children have serious mental health crises. The Bradleys' 11 year old daughter, J., suffers from bipolar disorder which often manifests in extreme depression and sometimes violence towards other family members. After such episodes the children's feeling of remorse makes them hurt themselves, some even attempting suicide.

In the case of the Bradleys the family saught help from Victoria General Hospital three times this January. They were sent away all three times. After their case became known, countless other families came forward expressing their frustration and feelings of abandonment when their own children were refused hospitalization. The stress caused by such mental health crises is enormous. For parents to witness their child's anguish, for the whole family to put up with the physical aspects of the disorder that manifests in severe depression, often violence towards others or self-mutilation, can mean a life of living hell. Their daily lives revolve around the problem child, often to the point of needing constant nighttime vigils to protect the safety of the child or other members of the family. They are also often stigmatized by society for the problems, giving them no chance to have a social life or leisure time to relax.

Health officials admit that something needs to be done in the system. They themselves complain that the ratio of patients per health workers is not very healthy, sometimes up to eight children or adolescents per worker, with those that come into emergency on top of these numbers. Hospitals do not have specialized mental health units or simply enough mental-health staff to properly deal with emergency situations. As a result suicides are today the second leading cause of death for young people.

We cannot blame the government, they do try. There are programs offered by the Ministry of Health delivers, and more by the Ministry of Children and Family Development. But they are not properly co-ordinated. The action these affected families are taking, and I am referring to the petition they started, is to draw attention to the need for better organization, for a more efficient system that can improve the development of children and youth who suffer of mental illness, to improve their ability to live a productive life. And not the least, to provide the necessary support to the families so they can cope, so their situation will not affect their productivity at work, thereby helping society at large. If you feel that these issues are important, you can show your support by signing the petition I mentioned above here.