Correspondence - #19 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Alcala, Abigail From: Prose Cute Tricks < > Sent: Monday, December 4, 2023 1:55 AM To: eComment Cc: Amezcua, Valerie; Lopez, Jessie; Phan, Thai; Bacerra, Phil; Penaloza, David Subject: Santa Ana City Council Agenda Item 19: NO on Ceasefire Resolution Dear Santa Ana City Council Members, Please vote NO on the Ceasefire Resolution. For the reasons I'm about to explain, as it is drafted, this proposed resolution is a reprehensible idea guaranteed to (1) harm the local Jewish population and (2) have absolutely no impact on events in the Middle East. There is no ethical or moral justification for approving such a deleterious measure ... unless the council's goal is to physically and mentally harm Jews, a minority group already suffering from marked bigotry and discrimination. Please note: (i) I am not able to find a copy of the proposed resolution online. I am therefore relying on a summary provided by another resolution opponent. His summary might or might not be accurate or complete. The unavailability of the text leads me to wonder whether the council has complied with due process and all other legal requirements for promulgating resolutions. (ii) Why does the council think this is an appropriate resolution subject for the City of Santa Ana? This city has lots of problems to address, but there are no bombs falling in or near the city limits. Does the council have constituents who are Hamas members? Has the council also weighed in on conflicts involving the Rohingya people in Myanmar, the Uyghurs in China, Sudan, Venezuela, Colombia, Syria, Iraq, and Ethiopia? ERRONEOUS TEXT Assuming I have been adequately informed about the resolution content, the resolution contains several glaring misstatements. Does this council really want to go on record as making erroneous statements of fact and law? Error #1: I understand the resolution faults Israel for a war that was started by Hamas. Speaking as an attorney specializing in international law, I can tell you that's an embarrassingly nonsensical, indefensible position. Error #2: 1 understand the resolution uses the term "hostages" to describe inmates in Israeli prisons. These inmates are (1) individuals convicted of crimes, e.g., bombings, attempted bombings, and stabbings of Israeli citizens (21 % of whom are Arab Israelis, and who, collectively, consist of a wide variety of races and ethnicities) or (2) administrative detainees (like U.S. terror suspects held at Guantanamo Bay). Under international law, these inmates are not hostages. I don't know where you are getting your information about these matters, but you need to vet your sources better. Error #3: 1 understand the resolution uses the term "ethnic cleansing." While someone could righteously take issue with the alleged number of civilian casualties in this conflict (a complicated topic), Israel is not doing anything that qualifies as "ethnic cleansing." Here is a graphic that provides a simplistic but accurate illustration of what is and is not ethnic cleansing.