Recently, an OP-ED in the DAY by Republican Senator Kain criticized President Obama’s handling of the Syrian conflict. However, I don’t recall any actual votes, led by the Republican majority in Congress, as to how the wars overseas should be handled. Congress instead chose to let the President take responsibility  on his own as he attempted to limit US involvement where possible.

Now, Mr. Kain blames Mr. Obama for the Aleppo crisis. Did I miss something here?

We also have Congressional Members, including Democrats, criticizing the Obama Administration’s decision to abstain from the United Nations vote concerning Israel’s disputed annexation of Palestinian land. This also resulted in Israel’s Prime Minister trying to bully other UN members and openly criticize the Obama Administration…. not for the first time. And as we know, Israel continues to “bully” Pakistan…horribly.

Perhaps it is time for us to take a serious look at the large amount of financial support we provide to Israel on a regular basis. To my knowledge, this support has been a gift…and not a loan.

Enough, already.

Ed Johnson, Noank, CT

Despite its lobbying muscle and the amount of cash it dispenses to the political action committees of sympathetic lawmakers, the NSSF has managed to remain out of the media glare, working comfortably in the shadow of its more boisterous cousin, the NRA.

NSSF’s lobbying budget in 2012 — the year of Newtown massacre — was $810,000. The next year it was more than triple that, or $2.95 million, according to congressional lobbying disclosure forms culled from the Center for Responsive Politics’ opensecrets.org website.

Last year, NSSF actually outspent NRA on lobbying, $3.5 million to $3.4 million. And so far this year, NSSF has spent $2.9 million on lobbying, again outpacing NRA at $2.7 million.”

And again, money is the prime motivator for the political resistance, primarily by Republicans, against any reasonable efforts towards national gun control.

Part 3  –  What is an “ASSAULT RIFLE?” and “What is an ASSAULT WEAPON?”

A recent Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines “assault rifle” as “any of various automatic or semiautomatic rifles with large capacity magazines designed for military use.” Some firearms industry “authorities” argue with this definition, perhaps to downplay the lethality of the rifle, to benefit those companies that manufacture such weapons.

An older American Heritage Dictionary defines “assault” as a “violent attack” and “rifle” as being a”firearm with a rifled bore being fired from the shoulder.”

Wikipedia states:

“The term assault rifle, when used in its militarily functionality, has a generally accepted definition with the firearm manufacturing community. In more casual usage, the term assault weapon is sometimes… confused with the term assault rifle.

In the United States “assault weapons” are usually defined in legislation as semi-automatic firearms that have certain features generally associated with military firearms, including assault rifles. The 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban, which expired on September 13, 2004, codified a definition of an assault weapon. It defined the rifle type of assault weapon as a semiautomatic firearm with the ability to accept a detachable magazine and two or more of the following:

DIVIDED AMERICA: Gun views fractious even as fewer bear arms

By MATT SEDENSKY Associated Press

NEW YORK

Wherever you look in this nation born of a bloody revolution of musket fire, chances are there’s sharp disagreement over firearms.

Democrats war with Republicans, and small towns are against cities. Women and men are at odds, as are blacks and whites and old and young. North clashes with South, East with West.

“The current gun debate is more polarized and sour than any time before in American history,” said Adam Winkler, a constitutional law professor at UCLA and author of the 2011 book, “Gunfight: The Battle Over the Right to Bear Arms in America.”

In the midst of debate over the latest mass shooting, in Orlando, it’s easy to imagine that guns have always divided us this way. But a close look at survey data over decades shows they haven’t.

There was a time, not that long ago, when most citizens favored banning handguns, the chief gun lobbyists supported firearm restrictions, and courts hadn’t yet interpreted the Second Amendment as guaranteeing a personal right to bear arms for self-defense at home.

Today, in a country of hundreds of millions of guns, public opinion and interpretation of the law have shifted so much that outright gun bans are unthinkable. It’s true that large segments of the public have expressed support for some aspects of gun regulation — but when Americans have been asked to say which is more important, gun control or gun rights, they trend toward the latter.

That shift has come, perhaps surprisingly, as fewer Americans today choose to keep a gun in their home. The General Social Survey, a massive study undertaken by NORC at the University of Chicago since 1972 and one of the foremost authorities on gun ownership, found 31 percent of households had guns in 2014. That was down from a high of 50.4 percent in 1977.

“Institutions have repeated, ‘More guns, less crime. More guns, less crime,’ over and over again for almost 40 years, and it’s hard to turn that belief around in any easy way,” said Joan Burbick, an emeritus professor at Washington State University who wrote “Gun Show Nation: Gun Culture and American Democracy” and who owns a gun for hobby shooting.

Among the longest-existing measures of public gun sentiment is a Gallup poll question asking whether there should be a law banning handguns except by police and other authorized people. When it was first asked, in July 1959, 60 percent of respondents approved of such a measure. By last October, only 27 percent agreed.

Many point to a single date as crucial in the societal shift: May 21, 1977, when the National Rifle Association held its annual meeting at a convention hall in Cincinnati. “That was the moment, in one evening, when the gun debate in America radically changed,” said Winkler.

The turmoil of the country in the 1960s and 1970s roiled institutions of all kinds, the NRA included. The organization had fought gun laws in the past, but also had come to accept some, including the Gun Control Act of 1968. As the next decade wore on and the NRA entered its second century, it faced an identity crisis: Was it a coalition of sportsmen, or a political powerhouse?

Leaders were set on the former, drawing up plans to move its headquarters from Washington to Colorado and to retreat from politics. Some of its most fiery members disagreed, staging a revolt that night that stretched into the next morning, and remade the group’s leadership. Plans for a westward move were scuttled, and a rightward move politically was sealed.

The gun lobby’s increasingly powerful voice found receptive ears among a public that witnessed the country’s civil rights battles, assassinations of beloved leaders and growing lawlessness in cities. Over time, statehouses and Congress bowed to the influence of the NRA and its allies. And in 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court finally declared Americans have the right to a gun for self-defense.

“What they (gun rights advocates) did is a classic example of how you make constitutional change: They realized they needed to win in the court of public opinion before you could win in the court of law,” said Michael Waldman, president of the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University and author of “The Second Amendment: A Biography.”

Pew Research Center data provides a sketch of what the gun-owning populace looks like today:

—74 percent of gun owners are men and 82 percent are white.

—Those in rural areas are more than twice as likely as urbanites to own a gun.

—Ownership rates in the Northeast are lower than in the rest of the country.

—Gun owners are far more likely to identify with or lean toward the Republican Party.

Data from GSS shows gun owners are more likely to have higher incomes — and to vote.

Taken together, this is a description of a motivated and politically potent group. But their clout sometimes obscures a simple fact: Though polarization appears in broad questions on gun rights, far more consensus emerges on individual proposals.

A Pew poll released in August showed 85 percent of people support background checks for purchases at gun shows and in private sales; 79 percent support laws to prevent the mentally ill from buying guns; 70 percent approve of a federal database to track gun sales; and 57 percent favor a ban on assault weapons.

“The fact is it’s not divisive. The things that we’re advocating in the American public, when you’re talking about keeping guns out of dangerous hands, we all agree. We all agree on the solutions,” said Dan Gross, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, and whose brother was severely hurt in a shooting. “The only place where this is truly a controversial issue is, tragically and disgracefully, in Congress and in our statehouses across the country.”

In the wake of the Orlando shooting that claimed 49 lives, Democrats mounted a 15-hour filibuster in the U.S. Senate to try to break a stalemate on a gun bill — just as attempts to revive legislation have followed other recent mass shootings, though with little effect. Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, a moderate Republican, likened it to “Groundhog Day,” while Sen. Bill Nelson, a Democrat from Florida, said he couldn’t see how even the NRA could object to a bill such as the one being considered, to keep those on a terrorist watch list from purchasing guns.

There is little expectation that the Democratic bill will pass. “They are accustomed to getting their way around here,” Nelson said of the NRA.

The NRA did not respond to an interview request.

Gross sees signs for hope for gun control supporters. Social media, he said, has helped get out a message that his side, for years, struggled to spread against the deep pockets of the gun lobby. The Democratic presidential primary, in which Hillary Clinton made gun control a flagship issue in differentiating herself from Bernie Sanders, showed it’s not an untouchable political issue. And changing national demographics could further bolster the case of those who favor gun restrictions, because minorities are comprising a larger share of the populace and are less likely to own guns.

Still, this debate remains one of the most toxic in America.

Winkler, the UCLA professor, knows divisiveness. He worked on the defense teams of O.J. Simpson and Michael Jackson. His research has prompted impassioned debates on issues from free speech to campaign finance.

“Nothing has ever come close to the level of vitriol I have seen with guns,” he said. “Both sides feel that life and death is at stake.”

The fear expressed by many gun owners that the government seeks to confiscate their weapons harkens back to the time of the Constitution’s framers. When James Madison first proposed the right to bear arms, Waldman said, it was specifically seen as a right for gun ownership in the service of militias, which were seen as a bulwark against the possible tyranny and risk of overreach from a central government. That rationale for gun ownership still exists among many today.

“People were worrying about overreach from Washington when it was George Washington and not Washington, D.C.,” Waldman said.

Part 5 – from a RECENT COMBAT VETERAN

The following remarks from a recent Facebook post are made by a veteran who owns semi-auto pistols and an M-4 semi-auto assault weapon….although he does make the point that he considers it to be an actual assault rifle…..and his objective feelings about these firearms…..  ej

Brandyn Wayne

June 15 at 5:25pm ·

Hi. I’m Brandon and I am a responsible gun owner.

My weapons training began in college while in Army ROTC. While there, I enlisted in the Army National Guard Infantry. A few years later, I commissioned as an officer in the Army and in my career did tours in Afghanistan and Africa, was Airborne and Air Assault qualified, and commanded a support detachment for the 10th Special Forces Group (Airborne). I am now a civilian and hold concealed carry permits in the state of Florida and Colorado. I own two pistols and a (M16 variant) Colt LE6920 M4 “SOCOM” – a higher end ‘M4 model’ rifle with ‘military grade’ elements. It has a stronger barrel than the lower end models and it rotates the bullet more times in the barrel which results in a more accurate weapon.

In this weapon system, I pull the trigger and one round (bullet) fires. There is no manual reloading or charging required. It is semi-automatic and reloads a new round itself using the energy of the previously fired bullet and a spring at the bottom of the magazine to push another round into the chamber. The typical magazine capacities are thirty-round and ten-round. When I load a full thirty-round magazine, I have damn good accuracy to take down targets 300 meters away, thirty times. This is about three football fields away.

I don’t need this thing at all. However, I want it. It’s cool. It is an amazing piece of machinery that along with its other high-capacity semi-automatic rifle cousins have decided national boundaries. I want it because it is a very familiar tool that I feel a nostalgic connection to given how much training I have had with it. The other reason I desire this rifle is a fantasy of lugging it around in a post-apocalyptic zombie-infested world where accurate headshots (of zombies and humans) are the difference between living and dying. 1) It is cool 2) It is familiar and 3) zombie apocalypse. I say again… I don’t need it.

Along with anyone else who has been to war, I understand how dangerous it is. Given the past few years everyone else in the world should know as well. Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria… Newtown, France, Orlando… It is an instrument of war. It was made to kill large amounts of people… in war. Police forces have it because now civilians do. The police need to meet force with equal, comparable force. The militarization of police agencies is occurring but how much can we blame them when the populace has access to these kinds of weapons?

This is an assault rifle. I understand there is much derision in certain gun owner’s circles regarding this term, but that is the truth. This rifle was not made to go hunting. No one needs to take down thirty antelope inside of a minute to feed their family. This rifle was made to kill many people very quickly and it is very good at that one specific task. Handguns also fall into this category. They are made to put down people in close range very quickly. I own them because other people have them and I refuse to be in a situation where my life is in danger where I can’t nullify the situation. The question that remains, though, do I need a 10, 12, or 16 round pistol? Am I carrying that 16-round pistol to also protect myself from someone else carrying a 16-round pistol or three people carrying seven-round pistols?

How far does that literal arms race need to escalate?

Everyone should have the legal right to protect themselves from being assaulted. Everyone should have the right to shoot someone they feel is threatening their life. But the question we have to ask is, “Do we really want to live in a society where personal protection means being able to fire up to sixteen rounds in five seconds?” “Do we really want to live in a society where someone out of their mind can run into a dark, happy, loud environment and kill 49 people, injure 53 others, and not be stopped until a SWAT team sets off a diversionary explosion and has a shootout with the terrorist where one police officer takes a round to the helmet?”

This is our society. We can ask these questions. We can also answer them if we get our heads out of our asses.

If the laws change and this assault rifle I own became illegal, I would turn it in. I would turn it in to the authorities because as a responsible gun owner and citizen, I understand I live in a society that has rules. If I want to fight those rules, as a responsible gun owner and citizen, I will do so with words. As a responsible gun owner and citizen, I know that living in an atmosphere of paranoia of and isolationism from my government is the easiest path toward failing myself and my family.

It’s time to grow up and have the discussion on gun reform. It’s time to grow up and realize that the world is a very different place from when the Constitution was written. It’s time to grow up and realize that none of us have any business owning an M4 or other high-capacity human assault rifle.

—————————————————————————————

Read more here: http://www.star-telegram.com/news/nation-world/national/article84704207.html#storylink=cpy

Notes from the Old Noank Jail 3/14/16

W W II Veteran Receives Hospice Award

by Ed Johnson

On Sunday, March 13, 2016, Mr. Eugene Brustolon, age 95, of 29 Prospect Hill Road, Noank, received a recognition award, referred to as the “We honor Veterans Pining Ceremony” from the Hospice Veterans Partnership for the heroic services Eugene performed as a U.S. Army Private First Class during World War II. This award was sponsored by the Center for Hospice Care of Southeastern Connecticut, based in Norwich.

The ceremony for Mr. Brustolon at 2:15 PM EDT included the presentation of the Award “to honor what you gave to your country” by Mr. David Phillips of the Norwich Hospice organization, followed by a blessing performed by Hospice Chaplain Mark Porizky. Others present included Eugene’s wife Betty, his son Carl, his niece Cindy Casey, a contingent of four members of American Legion Post 115 led by Russell Fowler of Noank, another caregiver and several local family friends. Refreshments were served following the ceremony.

A highlight of this event included the brief history of Mr. Brustolon’s wartime experiences, as summarized by Mr. Phillips, of which many of us present had never been aware. Young Eugene was drafted into the Army in 1943, serving in the 533rd Engineering Battalion at Camp Devons and other US bases, ending at Camp Kilmer in New Jersey where he was preparing to join the active war in Europe. At the last minute, he was suddenly re-assigned to Fort Ord in California and from there was sent to the newer war now occurring in the Pacific.

Eugene became the helmsman of one of the landing barges that landed invasion troops on several island beaches in the Pacific Ocean, a very dangerous job. Following the end of the Pacific war, he visited Japan and witnessed the massive destruction from the bombs. Apparently, Eugene did not really enjoy being in the Army because it involved killing people, but he did perform his assigned duties without complaint.

Mr. Philips also related an amusing story about Eugene being cajoled into participating in a boxing tournament which involved fighting a much larger, stronger friend of his for two rounds. The “friend” beat up Eugene pretty badly in the first round. So, at the beginning of the 2nd round, Eugene raised his hand, looked up towards Heaven, uttered the cry “Lord, I need your help and I need it now!” and then came charging out fast, catching his larger opponent off guard and landing a classic one-two punch.

Private First Class Eugene Brustolon was the winner of that fight.

To Mayor Flax and Groton Town Council, et al as before… 1/11/16 Mon 11:30 AM EST

1) I have read the minutes of the Special TOG Council COW meeting of January 5, 2015 and most specifically the section concerning the Establishment of a Charter Revision Committee.

2) I note especially that there can be some agenda items which can delay any immediate attention to this subject, including the Town Budget. My concern is that the Charter subject not end up on the “back burner” of priorities.

3) I therefore strongly encourage the Council to address some concerns and try to come to some mutual agreement on those concerns as soon as possible. In that regard, for the upcoming special meeting on January 14th, I note the Mayor’s recommendation that Councilors “review the current charter and come up with initial comments and concerns.”

4) To assist and encourage the Council, I once again submit my previous comments and concerns below, which do include opinions from other Groton Taxpayers, dated 12/02/15, as priorities to consider.

Thank you, as always, for the time you spend serving the Groton Community.

Ed Johnson (address/contact info below)

——————————————————————————–
From: ERJRice@aol.com
To: ed_johnson@tvcconnect.net
Sent: 12/02/2015 7:24:45 P.M. Eastern Standard Time
Subj: Charter Revision Committee

To the Honorable Mayor Flax, Members of the Groton CT Town Council, Town Clerk and Town Manager, with copies to concerned citizens…

From: Ed Johnson, Noank Tuesday, December 2, 2015 at 6:50 PM EST

Subject: A request for the establishment (or re-establishment) of a Town Charter Revision Committee

1) This is not a new subject for many of you, including the newer members of the Council. I won’t go into long detail, but at this point will give you a brief summary of my own concerns and what I have also heard from other Groton citizens.

2) There are opinions that the existing RTM structure, although well-intentioned, does not necessarily represent the feelings and desires of many citizens. In addition, the present system of having the Town Manager and BOE Superintendent make separate presentations on budgets, etc. to the RTM and the Council appears somewhat repetitive and time consuming. Some folks have also mentioned that reducing the size of the RTM might improve efficiency.

3) With the gradual reduction of Groton businesses (which we all hope will change) and similar reduction in residential population (as evidenced by local school enrollment), there is more tax pressure on Groton citizens. There is a growing feeling among some of us that, as taxpayers, we will be trapped by rising costs and excessive taxes over which we have no direct control. Costs keep going up to maintain a governmental system which both the Council and RTM cannot seem to contain.

4) Coupled with # 3 above, we are also trapped by a state finance system that only allows a school budget to stay level or go up…..never down. Meanwhile, ironically, as taxpayers we are allowed to participate in a referendum process involving major school and town construction projects, but not the annual Town Budget. And when the concept of setting a tax increase limit that relates to the CPI is mentioned, we are told that such a relationship is not relevant, because, for example, “the CPI is a measure of a market price of consumer goods and services….and does not accurately reflect municipal acquisitions.”

5) Addressing # 4 above, I am a 75 year old senior citizen who receives Social Security. My SS income is tied to the CPI which this year will remain level and I will receive no increase whatsoever. Yet it is very likely that my property taxes will go up again this year because the Town operates with a different economic criteria not related to the CPI….in other words….by a different set of rules. What’s wrong with this picture? So, before my wife and I decide to leave Groton and move to Vermont or another state, as many people seem to now be doing, this entire situation needs review and reasonable tax increase limits need to be set (note that the “Levy” system does not really seem to address this).

6) “Taxation without Representation” is another Charter item that needs to be addressed. Again, this is not a new topic. There are a substantial number of Groton taxpayers who reside out of state who used to be able to participate by absentee ballot in local (not national) Groton elections and referendums. This legal right was taken away from them as a result of a previous charter “manipulation” during a revision process, and needs to be re-instated.

I’ll stop here.

Please re-establish a Charter Revision Committee.

Thank you for your time.

Edward R. Johnson, 87 Main Street, Groton, CT 06340 phone/fax 860 536 1589

A True Native Noanker

Notes from the Old Noank Jail,        by Ed Johnson

When my wife and I first bought our house in the early 1970’s, we were very conscious of the fact that we were newcomers to a village where a majority of residents had lived all their lives. We did our best to adjust to this and eased ourselves into the neighborhood quietly. There were some folks, of course, who very proud to be “true native Noankers” and occasionally let us be aware of this. Being newcomers from New Jersey, we never disagreed….at least, not then.

But we then became friendly with Della Kress (R.I.P.) who lived near us and whose family had lived and worked in this area for 3 generations. One day, Della announced to us that a “true native Noanker” could not be anyone born in the New London, Norwich or Westerly Hospitals, even if their family lived in Noank or even if they grew up and went to school in Noank.

A TRUE native Noanker…..had to start their life by being actually, physically BORN in Noank….at home. Anyone else making that claim was an imposter.

From that time forward, we occasionally enjoyed correcting folks that claimed the Noanker title, informing them that none other than Della Kress had indicated otherwise. Della herself did have a reputation of being rather “firm” in her opinions, so no one ever argued the point.

Older historians may know of previous Noank home births, but I know of at least two since 1978.

Ten years ago, with the assistance of Noank EMTs and others, the Stork delivered a baby girl, Madison Porter, in the kitchen of Mike and Trish Porter’s house on Prospect Hill. It was obviously a healthy delivery from all the family photos I now see on Facebook.

Recently, on the morning of January 7th, the Stork was assisted once again by Noank EMTs but most especially by “Grandma” Faith Dubrule Allen. This time it was at the home of Heather (Dubrule) and Randy Harris on Sylvan Street, and a healthy baby boy, Andrew Henry Harris, was the result. Both mother and son are safely at home today.

I should mention, in fairness, that both Madison and Andrew did make brief visits to a hospital right after the Stork delivered them, but apparently these were nothing more than “social” calls…..and in Andrew’s case, he arrived large enough so they may have him starting school next week…..!

So…..we now have at least these two kids who can officially claim the title of “True Native Noanker.” The rest of us are all just tourists…..

To the Honorable Mayor Flax, Members of the Groton CT Town Council, Town Clerk and Town Manager, with copies to concerned citizens…

From: Ed Johnson, Noank Tuesday, December 2, 2015 at 6:50 PM EST

Subject: A request for the establishment (or re-establishment) of a Town Charter Revision Committee

1) This is not a new subject for many of you, including the newer members of the Council. I won’t go into long detail, but at this point will give you a brief summary of my own concerns and what I have also heard from other Groton citizens.

2) There are opinions that the existing RTM structure, although well-intentioned, does not necessarily represent the feelings and desires of many citizens. In addition, the present system of having the Town Manager and BOE Superintendent make separate presentations on budgets, etc. to the RTM and the Council appears somewhat repetitive and time consuming. Some folks have also mentioned that reducing the size of the RTM might improve efficiency.

3) With the gradual reduction of Groton businesses (which we all hope will change) and similar reduction in residential population (as evidenced by local school enrollment), there is more tax pressure on Groton citizens. There is a growing feeling among some of us that, as taxpayers, we will be trapped by rising costs and excessive taxes over which we have no direct control. Costs keep going up to maintain a governmental system which both the Council and RTM cannot seem to contain.

4) Coupled with # 3 above, we are also trapped by a state finance system that only allows a school budget to stay level or go up…..never down. Meanwhile, ironically, as taxpayers we are allowed to participate in a referendum process involving major school and town construction projects, but not the annual Town Budget. And when the concept of setting a tax increase limit that relates to the CPI is mentioned, we are told that such a relationship is not relevant, because, for example, “the CPI is a measure of a market price of consumer goods and services….and does not accurately reflect municipal acquisitions.”

5) Addressing # 4 above, I am a 75 year old senior citizen who receives Social Security. My SS income is tied to the CPI which this year will remain level and I will receive no increase whatsoever. Yet it is very likely that my property taxes will go up again this year because the Town operates with a different economic criteria not related to the CPI….in other words….by a different set of rules. What’s wrong with this picture? So, before my wife and I decide to leave Groton and move to Vermont or another state, as many people seem to now be doing, this entire situation needs review and reasonable tax increase limits need to be set (note that the “Levy” system does not really seem to address this).

6) “Taxation without Representation” is another Charter item that needs to be addressed. Again, this is not a new topic. There are a substantial number of Groton taxpayers who reside out of state who used to be able to participate by absentee ballot in local (not national) Groton elections and referendums. This legal right was taken away from them as a result of a previous charter “manipulation” during a revision process, and needs to be re-instated.

I’ll stop here.

Please re-establish a Charter Revision Committee.

Thank you for your time.

Edward R. Johnson, 87 Main Street, Groton, CT 06340 phone/fax 860 536 1589

A brief summary of the conflict between Israel & Palestine, and a hope for Resolution

with comments by Ed Johnson, from the Old Noank Jail

Many of us who grew up in the USA after WW II during the ’50’s and ’60’s developed strong feelings favoring the support of Israel, largely due to the treatment by the media. To this day, it is likely that most of us who have read the book and especially remember the 1961 movie “Exodus” might still not be fully aware of both sides of what has become such a serious problem.

Last Tuesday 10/20/15 at 7:00 PM, the Noank Baptist Church hosted a “Tree of Life” seminar which featured Israeli Haaretz columnist Gideon Levy and young Palestinian student Aleen Masoud describing and confirming the outrageous behavior of Israeli forces toward Palestinian citizens. Maps confirm the continued aggression with Israel occupying more and more Palestinian land in the territory. Mr. Levy also reported that at one point he had even hired bodyguards to help protect him from possible assassination attempts by his own countrymen after receiving threats on his life for reporting the truth as he saw it.

Support from the USA to encourage proper treatment of the Palestinians is hampered by the fact that there is a large Jewish population that, until now, strongly favored Israel and continued to encourage financial support, even in excess of the established aid via the Marshall Plan. The irony is that, despite the horrible lessons of Hitler and the holocaust, history is repeating itself now, only with Israelis, of all people, persecuting Palestinians! Truly….two wrongs do not make a right.

The “Tree of Life” supports the concept of non-violent economic sanctions and withdrawal of financial aid to Israel in order to encourage peaceful negotiations with Palestine. They are also petitioning to fund educational scholarships for Palestinian students. More information can be found at:

http://www.tolef.org http://www.tolef.org/support http://tolef.org/pip-petition-form jpip-petition@tolef.org

or contact Rev. David Good at First Congregational Church of Old Lyme, CT at 860 434 5307

In order to understand the history of this situation better, the following excerpts from an article below, which was also distributed at the Noank Baptist Church seminar, are helpful. I therefore recommend supporting non-violent solutions to the conflict and do this with the knowledge that members of my own family have European Jewish heritage, including some distant relatives who escaped and survived….and some who did not escape and did not survive….the holocaust.

Ed Johnson, Notes from the Old Noank Jail, edwardjohnson610@gmail.com

———————————————————————————————————-
Synopsis of Israel/Palestine Conflict

The following is a history of this conflict, taken from a much more detailed account, “The Origin of the Palestine-Israel Conflict.”

For centuries, there was no such conflict. In the 19th century the land of Palestine was inhabited by a multicultural population – approximately 86 percent Muslim, 10 percent Christian, and 4 percent Jewish – living in peace.
Zionism

In the late 1800s a group in Europe decided to colonize this land. Known as Zionists, they represented an extremist minority of the Jewish population. Their goal was to create a Jewish homeland, and they considered locations in Africa and the Americas, before settling on Palestine.

At first, this immigration created no problems. However, as more and more Zionists immigrated to Palestine – many with the express wish of taking over the land for a Jewish state – the indigenous population became increasingly alarmed. Eventually, fighting broke out, with escalating waves of violence. Hitler’s rise to power, combined with Zionist activities to sabotage efforts to place Jewish refugees in western countries, led to increased Jewish immigration to Palestine, and conflict grew.

UN Partition Plan
Finally, in 1947 the United Nations decided to intervene. However, rather than adhering to the principle of “self-determination of peoples,” in which the people themselves create their own state and system of government, the UN chose to revert to the medieval strategy whereby an outside power divides up other people’s land.

Under considerable Zionist pressure, the UN recommended giving away 55% of Palestine to a Jewish state – despite the fact that this group represented only about 30% of the total population, and owned under 7% of the land.

1947-1949 War
While it is widely reported that the resulting war eventually included five Arab armies, less well known is the fact that throughout this war Zionist forces outnumbered all Arab and Palestinian combatants combined – often by a factor of two to three. Moreover, Arab armies did not invade Israel – virtually all battles were fought on land that was to have been the Palestinian state.

Finally, it is significant to note that Arab armies entered the conflict only after Zionist forces had committed 16 massacres, including the grisly massacre of over 100 men, women, and children at Deir Yassin. Future Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin, head of one of the Jewish terrorist groups, described this as “splendid,” and stated: “As in Deir Yassin, so everywhere, we will attack and smite the enemy. God, God, Thou has chosen us for conquest.” Zionist forces committed 33 massacres altogether.

By the end of the war, Israel had conquered 78 percent of Palestine; three-quarters of a million Palestinians had been made refugees; over 500 towns and villages had been obliterated; and a new map was drawn up, in which every city, river and hillock received a new, Hebrew name, as all vestiges of the Palestinian culture were to be erased. For decades Israel denied the existence of this population, former Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir once saying: “There were no such thing as Palestinians.”

1967 War & USS Liberty
In 1967, Israel conquered still more land. Following the “Six Day War,” in which Israeli forces launched a highly successful surprise attack on Egypt, Israel occupied the final 22% of Palestine that had eluded it in 1948 – the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Since, according to international law it is inadmissible to acquire territory by war, these are occupied territories and do not belong to Israel. It also occupied parts of Egypt (since returned) and Syria (which remain under occupation).

Also during the Six Day War, Israel attacked a US Navy ship, the USS Liberty, killing and injuring over 200 American servicemen. President Lyndon Johnson recalled rescue flights, saying that he did not want to “embarrass an ally.” (In 2004 a high-level commission chaired by Admiral Thomas Moorer, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, found this attack to be “an act of war against the United States,” a fact few news media have reported.)

Current Conflict

There are two primary issues at the core of this continuing conflict. First, there is the inevitably destabilizing effect of trying to maintain an ethnically preferential state, particularly when it is largely of foreign origin. The original population of what is now Israel was 96 percent Muslim and Christian, yet, these refugees are prohibited from returning to their homes in the self-described Jewish state (and those within Israel are subjected to systematic discrimination).

Second, Israel’s continued military occupation and confiscation of privately owned land in the West Bank, and control over Gaza, are extremely oppressive, with Palestinians having minimal control over their lives.[ Thousands of Palestinian men, women, and children are held in Israeli prisons.Few of them have had a legitimate trial; Physical abuse and torture are frequent. Palestinian borders (even internal ones) are controlled by Israeli forces. Periodically men, women, and children are strip searched; people are beaten; women in labor are prevented from reaching hospitals (at times resulting in death); food and medicine are blocked from entering Gaza, producing an escalating humanitarian crisis. Israeli forces invade almost daily, injuring, kidnapping, and sometimes killing inhabitants.

According to the Oslo peace accords of 1993, these territories were supposed to finally become a Palestinian state. However, after years of Israel continuing to confiscate land and conditions steadily worsening, the Palestinian population rebelled. (The Barak offer, widely reputed to be generous, was anything but. This uprising, called the “Intifada” (Arabic for “shaking off”) began at the end of September 2000.

U.S. Involvement

Largely due to special-interest lobbying, U.S. taxpayers give Israel an average of $8 million per day, and since its creation have given more U.S. funds to Israel than to any other nation. As Americans learn about how Israel is using our tax dollars, many are calling for an end to this expenditure.

———————————————————————————————————————————————–

More specific info and footnotes can be obtained concerning “Israel vs. Pakistan” but I include three of them below to emphasize the seriousness of the issues and to bring forth some facts of which most of us had no knowledge.

Again, it is likely that most of us who have seen and read “The Exodus” in the past might still not really be aware of both sides of the total problem.

Ed J
——————————————————————————–
Notes
(1) A number of authors have discussed Zionist connections with Nazis; for example: In “The Jews of Iraq,” The Link, April-May 1998, Naeim Giladi describes Zionist activities to push Jews to emigrate to Israel. He describes this in greater detail in his book: Ben-Gurion’s Scandals: How the Haganah and the Mossad Eliminated Jews: “I write this book to tell the American people, and especially the American Jews, that Jews from Islamic lands did not emigrate willingly to Israel; that, to force them to leave, Jews killed Jews; and that, to buy time to confiscate ever more Arab lands, Jews on numerous occasions rejected genuine peace initiatives from their Arab neighbors. I write about what the first prime minister of Israel called ‘cruel Zionism.’ I write about it because I was a part of it.”

(2) Norman Finkelstein, Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict; George W. Ball & Douglas B. Ball, The Passionate Attachment, on p. 29: quotes a message from future prime minister Menachem Begin, head of the Irgun Zionist terrorist group, commending them on the grisly massacre of women, children, and old men at the village of Deir Yassin: “’Accept my congratulations on this splendid act of conquest. Convey my regards to all the commanders and soldiers. We shake your hands. We are all proud of the excellent leadership and the fighting spirit in this great attack. We stand to attention in memory of the slain. We lovingly shake the hands of the wounded. Tell the soldiers: you have made history in Israel with your attack and your conquest. Continue thus until victory. As in Deir Yassin, so everywhere, we will attack and smite the enemy. God, God, Thou has chosen us for conquest.’”

(3) During the Six-Day War, Israel also attacked a US Navy ship, the USS Liberty, killing and injuring over 200 American servicemen. Many analysts believe that the fact that there were no consequences for this attack led Israeli leaders to conclude that they could commit any act of aggression without US complaint. While this attack has largely been covered up in the US media, it is discussed in a number of books, including James Ennes, The Assault on the Liberty; William Gerhard, Attack on the USS Liberty; Dr. John Borne, The USS Liberty, Dissenting History vs. Official History; Stephen Green ,

——————————————————————————————————————————–

End

NOTES from the OLD NOANK JAIL 9/16/15 – 12:20 AM

To our neighbors and more distant friends, especially those who live close to the water…..

1) Kim and I just finished watching a documentary titled “Merchants of Doubt” which describes, in rather grim detail, how public relations efforts have been applied by the coal, oil and gas industry to cast doubt on the realities of global warming.

The specific area of focus is whether the earth gradually getting warmer is due to human-made conditions or is simply due to natural changes in conditions beyond human control. These public relations activities are designed to lead us away from the concept that we humans are causing these changes and that therefore there is no need for us to make major changes in how we operate as a society….so let’s keep drilling for more oil to fuel our cars, etc.

Similar efforts were successfully made for some time, using the same techniques, by the tobacco industry. That’s what gave the coal/oil/gas industry the motivation to utilize these propaganda methods.

Basically, the “merchants of doubt” are lying to us and trying to obscure the realities of human involvement; they are being paid to do so in order to continue to allow the coal/oil/gas industry to mount huge profits. Political influence and lobbying efforts involving large “donations” of cash allow much of this to take place as well.

The moment we see any politician denying human involvement with the water rising, we can safely assume the politician has been “bought” in one manner or another.

2) A friend who lives on Groton Long Point wrote me tonight and states the following:

“High tide today, on a day with no storms or anything particular that I can determine, came up to the walls on both South Beach and Main Beach in GLP…. the rate at which water is now rising should be visible to all…. and our solution, as citizens of supposedly the greatest country in the world, is to elect Donald Trump as president…. ”

3) In the past, I have made jokes about the fact that our own house near Noank’s Town Dock will become far more valuable when we eventually, with no effort on our part, become owners of waterfront property. Now, I’m not so sure I want to keep making those jokes. More and more houses along the shore are being built or re-constructed with elevations below the living spaces. We are expecting trouble, and not just from hurricanes.

4) So, it seems clear to me that public consciousness, world wide, needs to be raised higher in order to get proper attention. Facts….irrefutable facts….are needed. And perhaps the best place for us to start is the area where we live…..and HOW we live.
a) IS the tide higher than it used to be? My friend from GLP thinks so.
b) HAS the water in our area gotten warmer? Some folks tell me that there used to be winter ice in the area off Noank that would allow a person to walk all the way to Ram Island.
c) WILL sand bags be needed along certain streets, such as Front Street near the Yacht Club, to prevent water coming across the parking lot? During “Sandy” there were floating docks lying on Front Street.
d) DO I HAVE to drive my car to so many places on errands, or can I reduce or consolidate the trips? Do I HAVE to leave so many lights on?……
…etc…..

I’m sure that those of you who have lived in this area longer than Kim and I (over 40 years) could tell stories about all the environmental changes you’ve seen.

5) In conclusion, I am proposing that we organize in our home areas, collect our opinions and most especially our facts, publicize our findings, follow up with local Town authorities, follow up with our states and push for a national reduction in use of fossil fuels…..HARD. In leading by example, maybe Russia, China and India (as examples) will pay more attention….because they won’t do it by themselves.

Germany, among others, is already doing this. They are (proportionately) way ahead of us in using solar energy, for example.

I would welcome any comments to: EdwardJohnson610@gmail.com . To media contacts, let me know if you want to do anything with this. In the meantime, I do recommend that as many of you as possible obtain and watch the documentary…..”Merchants of Doubt.”

Thanks for your time.

Ed J

Business closing, building sales could mean significant changes for Noank community