Published October 7, 2002
Brater clarifies position on prisons
More like this
To the Daily:
Thank you very much for your coverage of the 18th District state Senate race. I would like to clarify one point that appeared in your story on Oct. 3: I did not suggest "releasing" prisoners as a way of reducing the corrections budget. My point, rather, was this. Over the past decade, 15 out of 21 of Michigan's mental hospitals have been closed, and many former patients have ended up in the criminal justice system. Meanwhile, the 650 lifer law has meant that many drug addicts have swelled our prison population, without catching kingpins. Both people with mental illness, and substance abusers, if nonviolent, more appropriately belong in treatment in the mental health system. This would result in savings in the corrections system, where we are spending $20,000 per medium-security prisoner a year, plus billions in prison building.
Liz Brater Democratic nominee for the state Senate in the 18th District
Rationale for anti-Zionism matters
To the Daily:
The recent column on the divestment conference (Divestment Conference not about divestment, 10 /07/02) makes a critically incomplete deduction about the relationship between 'anti-Zionism' and anti-Semitism, beating the by-now tired rhythm that opposition to Israel (or more accurately, Israeli policy) means opposition to Jews and anti-Semitism.
What is key is not simply that someone thinks Zionism is a doctrine that is less than just or morally praiseworthy; what matters is - why - someone thinks that is the case. People draw issue with Zionism/Israel not because they dislike Jews, but because they reject the idea of racially or ethnically exclusive states. Showing displeasure through divestment campaigns (which are, as the article correctly notes, exercises in discussion and debate rather than practical implementation) is simply another means for showing displeasure with a situation and style of policy, including (but certainly not limited to) the policies of various Israeli governments, that have led to clearly unjust outcomes.
To put it differently, supporting discussion about divestment (or even if you wish to accept the piece's argument, being critical of Zionism) isn't about wanting to reverse history, but about seeking to ameliorate its injustices. The declaration that helped start it all, Balfour, didn't simply call for 'the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people;' a national home was premised on the idea that "nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine." And it's that second part that remains unfulfilled and demands continued focus and discussion.
Ali Ijaz Ahmad
Law School
Why Israel occupies the West Bank
To the Daily:
The article Palestinians discuss effects of occupation (10/07/02) in the Daily, though eloquently written, forgets to mention why Israel is occupying the West Bank and why Palestinian houses are being demolished. The "why" is usually considered a pretty important question in America.
The first answer is easy, in 1967 (19 years after Israel's independence), in what is called the Six-Day War, Israel was forced to defend itself in a pre-emptive strike. Israel won and significantly increased its land. However, practically the day after the war, Israel began trying to negotiate the land back for peace. This culminated at the Camp David negotiations in 2000, when Israel offered the Palestinians over 95 percent of West Bank and Gaza. Palestinians rejected, no counter-offer made. Ask why!
The second answer I had to look up to get the details. I wanted to make sure Israel isn't demolishing houses ran domly like Palestinian suicide bombers blowing up civilians on the street, randomly. The first result I got from Google by typing in "Israel house demolition" was representative and explained, "Israel's policy of demolishing the family homes of Palestinians who carry out attacks on Israelis is beginning to have a deterrent effect, Defense Minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer said," reported the Manila Times. Hmmm. So when Palestinians complain their homes have been demolished ... you should ask why. Israel also sometimes demolishes the homes of both Palestinians and Israelis who build houses without a permit in the West Bank. Regardless of what the reason, there usually is one and it's important. So ask!
Mike Givental
LSA senior
Minority groups and Daily should collaborate
To the Daily:
I am writing in regard to the recent rumors surrounding various boycotts of the Daily, but in particular those brought about by the various minority communities on campus.
