Laserfiche WebLink
Flores, Dora <br />From: liat_zilberman < <br />Sent: Monday, December 04, 2023 4:19 AM <br />To: eComment <br />Cc: Amezcua, Valerie; Lopez, Jessie; Phan, Thai; Bacerra, Phil; Penaloza, David <br />Subject: Agenda Item 19 <br />Dear Santa Ana City Council Members, <br />Please vote NO on the Ceasefire Resolution. For the reasons I'm about to explain, as it is drafted, this proposed <br />resolution is a reprehensible idea guaranteed to (1) harm the local Jewish population and (2) have absolutely no <br />impact on events in the Middle East. There is no ethical or moral justification for approving such a deleterious <br />measure ... unless the council's goal is to physically and mentally harm Jews, a minority group already <br />suffering from marked bigotry and discrimination. <br />Please note: (i) I am not able to find a copy of the proposed resolution online. I am therefore relying on a <br />summary provided by another resolution opponent. His summary might or might not be accurate or complete. <br />The unavailability of the text leads me to wonder whether the council has complied with due process and all <br />other legal requirements for promulgating resolutions. (ii) Why does the council think this is an appropriate <br />resolution subject for the City of Santa Ana? This city has lots of problems to address, but there are no bombs <br />falling in or near the city limits. Does the council have constituents who are Hamas members? Has the council <br />also weighed in on conflicts involving the Rohingya people in Myanmar, the Uyghurs in China, Sudan, <br />Venezuela, Colombia, Syria, Iraq, and Ethiopia? <br />ERRONEOUSTEXT <br />Assuming I have been adequately informed about the resolution content, the resolution contains several glaring <br />misstatements. Does this council really want to go on record as making erroneous statements of fact and law? <br />Error #1: I understand the resolution faults Israel for a war that was started by Hamas. Speaking as an attorney <br />specializing in international law, I can tell you that's an embarrassingly nonsensical, indefensible position. <br />Error #2: I understand the resolution uses the term "hostages" to describe inmates in Israeli prisons. These <br />inmates are (1) individuals convicted of crimes, e.g., bombings, attempted bombings, and stabbings of Israeli <br />citizens (21% of whom are Arab Israelis, and who, collectively, consist of a wide variety of races and <br />ethnicities) or <br />(2) administrative detainees (like U.S. terror suspects held at Guantanamo Bay). Under international law, these <br />inmates are not hostages. I don't know where you are getting your information about these matters, but you need <br />to vet your sources better. <br />Error #3: I understand the resolution uses the term "ethnic cleansing." While someone could righteously take <br />issue with the alleged number of civilian casualties in this conflict (a complicated topic), Israel is not doing <br />anything that qualifies as "ethnic cleansing." Here is a graphic that provides a simplistic but accurate illustration <br />of what is and is not ethnic cleansing. <br />[a chart] <br />Apartheid and Genocide: I do not know whether the proposed resolution uses these terms. If it does, then please <br />be advised that Israel is not doing either of these things. I can provide detailed legal explanations if anyone is <br />interested. <br />79 <br />