Israel's fanaticism is becoming more and more public. If you are not Jewish, you won't have any cultural rights to enjoy what is supposed to be your right by birth. Now, some groups are trying to cleanse Jerusalem, the capital of the three major sects, from anything non-Jewish, and they fought Christmas, to the bone. Christmas, is the season of giving and charity.
This is the link
MFL
PS: Merry Christmas Jerusalem
Friday, December 25, 2009
Friday, December 18, 2009
Hmmm... if that is not Fanaticism, then what is?
Israel accuses its surroundings of being fanatics, nevertheless, this group of people are considered then what? Assigning supremecy to the Torah over the civil republic can be just a little bit insane. I am glad Haaretz is publishing the stories of those fundementalists. Article is taken from here.
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Crazy Israeli police: Police shoot U.S. student's laptop upon entry to Israel
Well the article is taken from here, I think she is lucky because Palestinians are usually taken aside, tortured to admit they are terrorists, then imprisoned.
What makes the story funny is the comments of Zionists saying that range from "an honor to visit Israel" to "No to Peace Makers" bla bla bla
Zionism, I swear it, is a disease that needs to be cured.
What makes the story funny is the comments of Zionists saying that range from "an honor to visit Israel" to "No to Peace Makers" bla bla bla
Zionism, I swear it, is a disease that needs to be cured.
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Tony Cliff: Why socialists must support gays (1978)
Article Taken from here, written in 1978.
IN CLASS-INFESTED society there is oppressor and oppressed in all walks of life. Employer oppresses employee; man oppresses woman; white oppresses black; old oppresses young; heterosexual oppresses homosexual.
The true socialist is able to overcome all these divisions. An engineering worker who can only identify with other engineering workers may be a good trade unionist but he has not proved himself to be a socialist. A socialist has to be able to identify with the struggles of all oppressed groups.
We are all the children of capitalism, so we tend to conceive of the future - even the socialist future - in an ordered and hierarchical way.
It is as though the socialist revolution will be led by the Father of the Chapel in the print union, the NGA working on Fleet Street. Second in command will be an AUEW Convenor Section 1 from the toolroom in a big car factory. The lieutenants of the revolution will all be forty-year-old white male shop stewards.
If there is enough space then we'll allow blacks and women and gays to take part - providing they stand quietly at the back!
A lot of socialists still have difficulty believing that gays will be taking part in the revolution at all.
On the contrary we should took forward now to the first leader of the London workers' council being a 19-year-old black gay woman!
The system rules by dividing us. This means there is no natural way by which one oppressed group identifies with another. The most racist extremists in the Southern States of America are the poor whites - not the rich whites.
In the same way blacks do not automatically support women and women do not automatically support blacks. Gays will not automatically support other oppressed groups.
The Nazis sent thousands of gays to concentration camps. In Chile gays were castrated and left bleeding on the street.
But it is not true that, even given these facts, gays automatically become anti-fascist.
Tens of thousands of gays supported Hitler. Many were in the Brownshirts. After Hitler took power he turned on the gay support and slaughtered them in the Night of the Long Knives.
How can we explain gays joining the Nazis?
If you are an oppressed gay putting on a Nazi leather jacket and leather boots gives you for the first time a sense of power. It makes it easy to put down Jews, women and anyone else.
For any oppressed group to fight back there is need for hope.
If you are on the way down you feel despair. You look for a victim to kick.
If you are on the way up you look for a back to pat.
That's why only by building a socialist movement can you unite workers with oppressed blacks, women and gays.
And that's why it is so important for gays to organise for demonstrations like at Brick Lane and to feel able to identify themselves proudly as gays and - where possible - as revolutionary socialist gays.
Karl Marx wrote that capitalism unites the forces of opposition. But it also divides us. We have to struggle consciously for that unity.
We are one - all of us together - but only when we fight together.
IN CLASS-INFESTED society there is oppressor and oppressed in all walks of life. Employer oppresses employee; man oppresses woman; white oppresses black; old oppresses young; heterosexual oppresses homosexual.
The true socialist is able to overcome all these divisions. An engineering worker who can only identify with other engineering workers may be a good trade unionist but he has not proved himself to be a socialist. A socialist has to be able to identify with the struggles of all oppressed groups.
We are all the children of capitalism, so we tend to conceive of the future - even the socialist future - in an ordered and hierarchical way.
It is as though the socialist revolution will be led by the Father of the Chapel in the print union, the NGA working on Fleet Street. Second in command will be an AUEW Convenor Section 1 from the toolroom in a big car factory. The lieutenants of the revolution will all be forty-year-old white male shop stewards.
If there is enough space then we'll allow blacks and women and gays to take part - providing they stand quietly at the back!
A lot of socialists still have difficulty believing that gays will be taking part in the revolution at all.
On the contrary we should took forward now to the first leader of the London workers' council being a 19-year-old black gay woman!
The system rules by dividing us. This means there is no natural way by which one oppressed group identifies with another. The most racist extremists in the Southern States of America are the poor whites - not the rich whites.
In the same way blacks do not automatically support women and women do not automatically support blacks. Gays will not automatically support other oppressed groups.
The Nazis sent thousands of gays to concentration camps. In Chile gays were castrated and left bleeding on the street.
But it is not true that, even given these facts, gays automatically become anti-fascist.
Tens of thousands of gays supported Hitler. Many were in the Brownshirts. After Hitler took power he turned on the gay support and slaughtered them in the Night of the Long Knives.
How can we explain gays joining the Nazis?
If you are an oppressed gay putting on a Nazi leather jacket and leather boots gives you for the first time a sense of power. It makes it easy to put down Jews, women and anyone else.
For any oppressed group to fight back there is need for hope.
If you are on the way down you feel despair. You look for a victim to kick.
If you are on the way up you look for a back to pat.
That's why only by building a socialist movement can you unite workers with oppressed blacks, women and gays.
And that's why it is so important for gays to organise for demonstrations like at Brick Lane and to feel able to identify themselves proudly as gays and - where possible - as revolutionary socialist gays.
Karl Marx wrote that capitalism unites the forces of opposition. But it also divides us. We have to struggle consciously for that unity.
We are one - all of us together - but only when we fight together.
Arrest Warrant for Levni
Damn it, next time we will get that war criminal: article taken from here This is what I was talking about earlier.
A British court issued an arrest warrant for former Israeli foreign minister Tzipi Livni on war crimes charges but withdrew it on finding she had cancelled a planned trip to Britain, the Guardian newspaper reported.
Westminster magistrates court issued the warrant at the request of lawyers acting for Palestinian victims of fighting in Gaza earlier this year, the paper said in an article published online on Monday.
The warrant was later dropped after it was realized that Livni -- who had been due to address a meeting in London last weekend -- was not in Britain.
Human rights groups and UN investigators accuse Israel of war crimes in the Gaza Strip during a 22-day offensive against Hamas-led Islamist militants in which Palestinians say more than 900 civilians died -- a figure Israel disputes.
Livni, who is head of the opposition Kadima Party, played a key role in launching the offensive.
The Foreign Office said it was "looking urgently at the implications of this case."
"The UK is determined to do all it can to promote peace in the Middle East and to be a strategic partner of Israel," a spokeswoman said. "To do this, Israel's leaders need to be able to come to the UK for talks with the British government."
The justice ministry said it would not comment on individual cases and the interior ministry also declined to comment.
In September pro-Palestinian groups failed to persuade a London court to issue an arrest warrant for Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak, whom they also accuse of war crimes.
The court said Barak, who attended the ruling Labour party's annual conference and met Prime Minister Gordon Brown, had diplomatic immunity.
(Reporting by Kylie MacLellan and Peter Griffiths, editing by Tim Pearce)
A British court issued an arrest warrant for former Israeli foreign minister Tzipi Livni on war crimes charges but withdrew it on finding she had cancelled a planned trip to Britain, the Guardian newspaper reported.
Westminster magistrates court issued the warrant at the request of lawyers acting for Palestinian victims of fighting in Gaza earlier this year, the paper said in an article published online on Monday.
The warrant was later dropped after it was realized that Livni -- who had been due to address a meeting in London last weekend -- was not in Britain.
Human rights groups and UN investigators accuse Israel of war crimes in the Gaza Strip during a 22-day offensive against Hamas-led Islamist militants in which Palestinians say more than 900 civilians died -- a figure Israel disputes.
Livni, who is head of the opposition Kadima Party, played a key role in launching the offensive.
The Foreign Office said it was "looking urgently at the implications of this case."
"The UK is determined to do all it can to promote peace in the Middle East and to be a strategic partner of Israel," a spokeswoman said. "To do this, Israel's leaders need to be able to come to the UK for talks with the British government."
The justice ministry said it would not comment on individual cases and the interior ministry also declined to comment.
In September pro-Palestinian groups failed to persuade a London court to issue an arrest warrant for Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak, whom they also accuse of war crimes.
The court said Barak, who attended the ruling Labour party's annual conference and met Prime Minister Gordon Brown, had diplomatic immunity.
(Reporting by Kylie MacLellan and Peter Griffiths, editing by Tim Pearce)
Monday, December 14, 2009
The Step By Step Return of the "Palestinian"
Palestine may have been "temprarily" obliterated a by racist colonial movement that dates back to the 19th century, but the Palestinians needed at least 30 years to bring back the case of Palestine back.
One can never forget a lunatic speech delivered by Ben Gurion that traces the sufferings of the Jews to 2500 years ago. Ilian Pappe quotes him by saying: " We will establish a Christian State in Lebanon. We will break Transjordan, bomb Amman and destroy its army, and then Syria falls, an of Egupt will still continue to fight – we will bombard Port Said, Alexandria, and Cairo. This will be in revenge for what they (the Egyptians, the Aramis, and Assyrians) did to our forefathers during Biblical Times). " (I. Pappe, The Ethnic Cleansing of the Palestine, 144).
Having heard such a statement, it is no surprise that Israel is a perverted state, carved out by a minority called Zionism that doesn't even represent the majority of the Jews in the world. As a matter of fact, Zionism was and still the greatest bad news for Jews across the world because it calls for their isolation and importing them to Israel under a crazier banner: "Unifying the Diaspora". Some Christian fanatics support Zionism based on the biblical logic of "Israel was occupied for 2000 years by Arabs." They never read on how Israel of 1948 is different from the Kingdom of Israel 2000 years ago. They never read how Israel ethnically cleansed anyone who was not a Jew: Christian or Muslim Palestinian. They never bother to know how there was an entity called Palestinian Jews who were subjected to harassments by Zionism and threats.
Palestine by 1948 was omitted, and the logic of Israel was: "The Palestinians freely left their lands hence they have no right to return." Israel omits to mention Plan D which aimed way before the riots of 1947, after the partition with the Jews themselves being a minority in the Jewish half of Palestine, to clean the Palestinians out of their historical homelands. Yosif Weitz was not a manager of a luxury pub, rather the Transfer Committee of the Palestinians out of Palestine, ie , a genocidal committee since international law regards transferring populations as "an act of genocide."
Whenever someone mentioned Palestine since 1948, Israel and its lobbies attack the person as anti-Semite and brings back the memories of the Holocaust. Currently, in the Arab World, there is no longer the WWII Holocaust, it is the Gaza War of 2009. This became as the new Holocaust in the heads of every person who believes in Human Rights. For Gaza, it has been suffering from a blockade worse than that inflicted on Cuba, and living conditions couldn't have been more horrible as Israel remains to break international law and expand fake settlements on Gaza, West Bank, and attempt to take over East Jerusalem.
By 1951, things couldn't have been worse. The creator of the Universal Declaration of the Human Rights, Eleanor Roosevelt, visited Israel. When humanitarian activists were cheerful of her visit, and hoped she would check out the refugees in Gaza and the West Bank then, she simply said that she is only visiting some friends in Israel. That, sadly, puts the United States as a 'defender' of human rights in the bottom.
Most of the Palestinian figureheads were originally from the Palestinian Middle Class. And for them, life was horrible. Edward Said, in the opening of the book Joe Sacco's Palestine, argued how by the 1960s, the term Palestine or Palestinian was barred out from usage. Several academics couldn't defend, or revive what happened in Palestine 1948 without risking their own jobs. This goes with Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir's most racist statement on the behalf of the Palestinians: "Palestinians? What Palestinians? There was never a Palestine?". Apparently she never read President Woodrow Wilson's King-Crane Commission which proved that 92% of the people were Muslims and Christians, while only 8% are Jews.
Ironically, peaceful demands were never the solution. With the Arab defeat of 1967, the Palestinians found themselves in a position that only they should fight for their lands. This of course was accompanied with Arab treason. In 1948, when the Arab armies entered to protect the Palestinians, Egypt, Jordan, and Iraq were still under the British Mandate. In 1967, they themselves sponsored the PLO but refused to assist them militarily, except in 1968's Battle of Dignity where Jordan along with the PLO blocked Israel's invasion.
Israel's plans of denying the existence of the Palestinians was part of the plan. There were several Palestinian authors, such as Sayyegh, and Hadawi, writing. It was Edward Said's Orientalism that shocked the foundation of the Zionist claims. Orientalism shed light on the treatment of Palestinians. This went hand in hand with the PLO bulldozing their way through military operations to the "Observant Status" in the UN. This was much to the disgust of Israel. When the Palestinians received such a status, it meant the Palestinians, Christians, Muslims, (and even Jewish), were recognized as an official nation. This nation, is dispersed, due to something, what was it? Oh yes, Israel's attempt to delete the existence of the Palestinians.
Till this day, Palestinians wonder: "How can the Zionists do to us what the Nazis did to them?" Rereading Ben Gurion's crazy statement in the beginning of the article answers this question: they are racists, and they do not care about human rights.
Israel's denial of Palestine/Palestinians falls in the category of blocking the return of the Palestinians. UN resolution 194 insists that every Palestinian has the right to return home, or at least compensated. The descendants of the Palestinians also have the right for such a claim. Some would argue that currently this is insane, bringing back Palestinians who were dispersed in 1948 and 1967 is out of reach. This is a false claim. Israel argued that it is bringing a state that existed 2500 years ago. If someone reads Shlomo Sands, most of these Jews that are "returning" to Palestine, are not originally part of the 2000 year old diasporas. They are people who converted into Judaism as a religious sect in Europe, Africa, or Europe. Nevertheless, the barring out of refugees returning to Palestine was the main goal of the Arab-Israeli peace process with Egypt and followed later by Jordan. Neither the Egyptians nor the Jordanians (whose population is beyond 80% composed of Palestinian refugees) are satisfied with the peace treaties, with the on-going atrocities of civilians in Israel and beyond it.
Israel's invasion of Lebanon in 1982 probably opened the gateways for knowing the Israeli army for the truth it is: a racist army. Israel, amidst mass media, invaded Lebanon. Its atrocities were covered by several journalists, and these same journalists complained that Israel tried to force them to write "its' version" of the war. With Sabra-Chatila massacres taking place, Israel, as a beacon of democracy in the image of the West, fell. This of course was a concrete reference on Israeli behavior. People wondered who was the real democracy: Israel that focuses on Judaism as an ethnicity trait, or Lebanon: the homeland of 18 sects co-existing with each other till the civil war broke out.
Currently, more and more scandals are published on Israel, past or present. The world's shrinkage through the mass communication and media revolutions means that if Israel slaps a Palestinian in its ground, the whole world knows. Israel may have held the upper hand in the media, but the other side of the coin is finding more and more space to highlight the reality of the region, and Israel's racist atrocities.
This was caused by the neo-Israeli historians who found the guts to speak. Benny Morris, a hard core Zionist, was condemned by different Israeli spheres for being a traitor, because he simply brought into light what happened in 1948. ILan Pappe had to flee Israel out of safety because he also accused Israel of ethnically cleansing the Palestinians.
The biggest example was probably the Israeli offensive on Lebanon 3 years ago. Israel was bombarding also the Palestinians as well. The reactions of Israeli offensive to Lebanon was highly condemned by mass demonstrations (part of the reason is the large Lebanese diaspora across the world), while the Palestinians were covered second. This lies in the fact that not everyday Israel bombed Lebanon, while the repetition news of Israel torturing Palestinians is new. The suicide bombings of some Palestinians across the 1990s gave Israel the pretext to behave under the banner of fighting terrorism. 9/11 also gave it the flexibilities to commit atrocities and massacres on the remaining Palestinians. This is changing.
With the offensive on Gaza 2009, several Israeli figureheads are getting cornered. The voting on the Goldstone Report in the UN highlights to what extent the world is fed up from Israel's butcheries. They still as arrogant as possible. They accused the entire world as "immoral" while only few states were "moral". Why? Because the majority of the world was disgusted with Israel's atrocities on the Palestinians. Luckily for Israel, the veto power always saved them.
Now, in 2009, when you say Palestinian, it is no longer: "non-existent". (PS: Times Square in New York has a gigantic road called Golda Mair St.), or terrorist. It is the struggle for existence. Israel's campaign of equating the Palestinians to terrorists is failing. More Israelis are speaking out against their racist government, and more people are informed of what is going on globally. Those who hate the Palestinians or believe that Israel is the suffering state for 2500 years are under bombardment of criticism, and the center for mockery. Palestinian these days means the exact definition of the fight for Human Rights. The fact the world is seeing the fanatic religious Jewish settlers, with their angry beards and automatic machine guns, brings the question of who is really the religious fanatic? The Palestinian Muslims? (Israel always attempts to omit its atrocities and racism towards the Palestinian and Arab Christians to avoid losing support from the Christian fanatics in the West). The fact the International Courts are tightening the knot on Israeli warcriminals is a beginning.
The battle for existence continues, and Israel is failing to do anything about it. If anything, they only have their superior airforce bombardment of innocent civilians and the veto power. At this slow rate, the way I see it, Israel is going to enter dark times. Other than the United States, we seriously do not see any media blackouts on what is happening there. And even in the United States, the alternate media of the truth is gradually breaching Israeli barriers.
MFL
One can never forget a lunatic speech delivered by Ben Gurion that traces the sufferings of the Jews to 2500 years ago. Ilian Pappe quotes him by saying: " We will establish a Christian State in Lebanon. We will break Transjordan, bomb Amman and destroy its army, and then Syria falls, an of Egupt will still continue to fight – we will bombard Port Said, Alexandria, and Cairo. This will be in revenge for what they (the Egyptians, the Aramis, and Assyrians) did to our forefathers during Biblical Times). " (I. Pappe, The Ethnic Cleansing of the Palestine, 144).
Having heard such a statement, it is no surprise that Israel is a perverted state, carved out by a minority called Zionism that doesn't even represent the majority of the Jews in the world. As a matter of fact, Zionism was and still the greatest bad news for Jews across the world because it calls for their isolation and importing them to Israel under a crazier banner: "Unifying the Diaspora". Some Christian fanatics support Zionism based on the biblical logic of "Israel was occupied for 2000 years by Arabs." They never read on how Israel of 1948 is different from the Kingdom of Israel 2000 years ago. They never read how Israel ethnically cleansed anyone who was not a Jew: Christian or Muslim Palestinian. They never bother to know how there was an entity called Palestinian Jews who were subjected to harassments by Zionism and threats.
Palestine by 1948 was omitted, and the logic of Israel was: "The Palestinians freely left their lands hence they have no right to return." Israel omits to mention Plan D which aimed way before the riots of 1947, after the partition with the Jews themselves being a minority in the Jewish half of Palestine, to clean the Palestinians out of their historical homelands. Yosif Weitz was not a manager of a luxury pub, rather the Transfer Committee of the Palestinians out of Palestine, ie , a genocidal committee since international law regards transferring populations as "an act of genocide."
Whenever someone mentioned Palestine since 1948, Israel and its lobbies attack the person as anti-Semite and brings back the memories of the Holocaust. Currently, in the Arab World, there is no longer the WWII Holocaust, it is the Gaza War of 2009. This became as the new Holocaust in the heads of every person who believes in Human Rights. For Gaza, it has been suffering from a blockade worse than that inflicted on Cuba, and living conditions couldn't have been more horrible as Israel remains to break international law and expand fake settlements on Gaza, West Bank, and attempt to take over East Jerusalem.
By 1951, things couldn't have been worse. The creator of the Universal Declaration of the Human Rights, Eleanor Roosevelt, visited Israel. When humanitarian activists were cheerful of her visit, and hoped she would check out the refugees in Gaza and the West Bank then, she simply said that she is only visiting some friends in Israel. That, sadly, puts the United States as a 'defender' of human rights in the bottom.
Most of the Palestinian figureheads were originally from the Palestinian Middle Class. And for them, life was horrible. Edward Said, in the opening of the book Joe Sacco's Palestine, argued how by the 1960s, the term Palestine or Palestinian was barred out from usage. Several academics couldn't defend, or revive what happened in Palestine 1948 without risking their own jobs. This goes with Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir's most racist statement on the behalf of the Palestinians: "Palestinians? What Palestinians? There was never a Palestine?". Apparently she never read President Woodrow Wilson's King-Crane Commission which proved that 92% of the people were Muslims and Christians, while only 8% are Jews.
Ironically, peaceful demands were never the solution. With the Arab defeat of 1967, the Palestinians found themselves in a position that only they should fight for their lands. This of course was accompanied with Arab treason. In 1948, when the Arab armies entered to protect the Palestinians, Egypt, Jordan, and Iraq were still under the British Mandate. In 1967, they themselves sponsored the PLO but refused to assist them militarily, except in 1968's Battle of Dignity where Jordan along with the PLO blocked Israel's invasion.
Israel's plans of denying the existence of the Palestinians was part of the plan. There were several Palestinian authors, such as Sayyegh, and Hadawi, writing. It was Edward Said's Orientalism that shocked the foundation of the Zionist claims. Orientalism shed light on the treatment of Palestinians. This went hand in hand with the PLO bulldozing their way through military operations to the "Observant Status" in the UN. This was much to the disgust of Israel. When the Palestinians received such a status, it meant the Palestinians, Christians, Muslims, (and even Jewish), were recognized as an official nation. This nation, is dispersed, due to something, what was it? Oh yes, Israel's attempt to delete the existence of the Palestinians.
Till this day, Palestinians wonder: "How can the Zionists do to us what the Nazis did to them?" Rereading Ben Gurion's crazy statement in the beginning of the article answers this question: they are racists, and they do not care about human rights.
Israel's denial of Palestine/Palestinians falls in the category of blocking the return of the Palestinians. UN resolution 194 insists that every Palestinian has the right to return home, or at least compensated. The descendants of the Palestinians also have the right for such a claim. Some would argue that currently this is insane, bringing back Palestinians who were dispersed in 1948 and 1967 is out of reach. This is a false claim. Israel argued that it is bringing a state that existed 2500 years ago. If someone reads Shlomo Sands, most of these Jews that are "returning" to Palestine, are not originally part of the 2000 year old diasporas. They are people who converted into Judaism as a religious sect in Europe, Africa, or Europe. Nevertheless, the barring out of refugees returning to Palestine was the main goal of the Arab-Israeli peace process with Egypt and followed later by Jordan. Neither the Egyptians nor the Jordanians (whose population is beyond 80% composed of Palestinian refugees) are satisfied with the peace treaties, with the on-going atrocities of civilians in Israel and beyond it.
Israel's invasion of Lebanon in 1982 probably opened the gateways for knowing the Israeli army for the truth it is: a racist army. Israel, amidst mass media, invaded Lebanon. Its atrocities were covered by several journalists, and these same journalists complained that Israel tried to force them to write "its' version" of the war. With Sabra-Chatila massacres taking place, Israel, as a beacon of democracy in the image of the West, fell. This of course was a concrete reference on Israeli behavior. People wondered who was the real democracy: Israel that focuses on Judaism as an ethnicity trait, or Lebanon: the homeland of 18 sects co-existing with each other till the civil war broke out.
Currently, more and more scandals are published on Israel, past or present. The world's shrinkage through the mass communication and media revolutions means that if Israel slaps a Palestinian in its ground, the whole world knows. Israel may have held the upper hand in the media, but the other side of the coin is finding more and more space to highlight the reality of the region, and Israel's racist atrocities.
This was caused by the neo-Israeli historians who found the guts to speak. Benny Morris, a hard core Zionist, was condemned by different Israeli spheres for being a traitor, because he simply brought into light what happened in 1948. ILan Pappe had to flee Israel out of safety because he also accused Israel of ethnically cleansing the Palestinians.
The biggest example was probably the Israeli offensive on Lebanon 3 years ago. Israel was bombarding also the Palestinians as well. The reactions of Israeli offensive to Lebanon was highly condemned by mass demonstrations (part of the reason is the large Lebanese diaspora across the world), while the Palestinians were covered second. This lies in the fact that not everyday Israel bombed Lebanon, while the repetition news of Israel torturing Palestinians is new. The suicide bombings of some Palestinians across the 1990s gave Israel the pretext to behave under the banner of fighting terrorism. 9/11 also gave it the flexibilities to commit atrocities and massacres on the remaining Palestinians. This is changing.
With the offensive on Gaza 2009, several Israeli figureheads are getting cornered. The voting on the Goldstone Report in the UN highlights to what extent the world is fed up from Israel's butcheries. They still as arrogant as possible. They accused the entire world as "immoral" while only few states were "moral". Why? Because the majority of the world was disgusted with Israel's atrocities on the Palestinians. Luckily for Israel, the veto power always saved them.
Now, in 2009, when you say Palestinian, it is no longer: "non-existent". (PS: Times Square in New York has a gigantic road called Golda Mair St.), or terrorist. It is the struggle for existence. Israel's campaign of equating the Palestinians to terrorists is failing. More Israelis are speaking out against their racist government, and more people are informed of what is going on globally. Those who hate the Palestinians or believe that Israel is the suffering state for 2500 years are under bombardment of criticism, and the center for mockery. Palestinian these days means the exact definition of the fight for Human Rights. The fact the world is seeing the fanatic religious Jewish settlers, with their angry beards and automatic machine guns, brings the question of who is really the religious fanatic? The Palestinian Muslims? (Israel always attempts to omit its atrocities and racism towards the Palestinian and Arab Christians to avoid losing support from the Christian fanatics in the West). The fact the International Courts are tightening the knot on Israeli warcriminals is a beginning.
The battle for existence continues, and Israel is failing to do anything about it. If anything, they only have their superior airforce bombardment of innocent civilians and the veto power. At this slow rate, the way I see it, Israel is going to enter dark times. Other than the United States, we seriously do not see any media blackouts on what is happening there. And even in the United States, the alternate media of the truth is gradually breaching Israeli barriers.
MFL
Saturday, December 12, 2009
Chibli Mallat: Is Israel a democracy? It's conditional
Article taken from Daily Star
(MFL notes: I wanted to take a section out of it, but since articles usually disappear the next day, so I posted the whole thing)
On December 6, the Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI, website www.acri.org.il) released a 73-page report on democracy and human rights in Israel, entitled on “Human Rights – On Condition, Democracy – On Condition.” The chapters of the report develop the characteristic list of an authoritarian state: “Freedom of Expression – as long as you have nice things to say;
Harassment of Human Rights Organizations and Activists: Freedom of Expression and Activity – as long as you don’t criticize;
Palestinian-Arab Citizens of Israel: Rights – as long as you’re loyal,
Bedouin Rights – as long as you live where we tell you;
Criminal Justice Rights – as long as you’re not suspected of a security offense;
Hatred and Racism: Rights – as long as you’re one of us;
Rights of the Elderly – as long as you’re young;
The Right to Education – as long as you fit in;
The Right to Housing – as long as you’re one of us;
The Right to Social Security – as long as you’re gainfully employed; The Right to Health Care – as long as you pay;
The Occupied Territories: Rights – as long as you’re Israeli;” and a conclusion entitled “Undermining the Foundations of Democracy.”
As The Daily Star law page presents excerpts of the report, it is time for a serious discussion among jurists and human rights advocates on one basic premise which remains the received mantra in the West: can Israel be considered a democracy, in the same way we consider the US, France or India democracies?
I have argued in my “Introduction to Middle Eastern Law,” published two years ago, that Israel does not qualify as a democracy by standards a universal jury recognizes. This is not only on account of history, where patterns of ethnic cleansing and of legal discrimination are hardly in dispute. The argument of Israel not qualifying as a democracy rests on the persistence of these patterns as structural traits of Israel to date, six decades after its foundation.
The evidence is plain in the treatment of all the people living under Israeli control, by which I mean those whose lives have been and continue to be determined by Israel’s legal structure and its political treatment of their daily existence. Next to 7 million Jewish Israelis who enjoy by-and-large a Western-style democracy, over a million so-called Israeli Arabs have no place in governmental representation and are subject to a large array of rights breaches; 4 million “occupied Palestinians” in the West Bank, Gaza and Jerusalem suffer from open legal exclusion in a system of Israeli decisions that have governed their lives for over a generation. West Bankers, Gazans and Jerusalemites are respectively the victims of land settlement and expropriation, siege and daily physical harassment of their right to live and move freely; and 4-6 million Palestinians are denied their universal right to return to the place from which they fled or were evicted in successive waves in 1948, 1949 and 1967. To this should be added over 100,000 Syrians in the Golan, not to mention the 22-year occupation of south Lebanon and the victims of repeat massacres, from Deir Yasin to Sabra and Shatila, Qana and Jenin.
This is a serious discussion to be undertaken on a world level on the type of system that Israel is, as serious indeed as the legal investigation carried out in the mid-1960s on the legal nature of the apartheid regime in South Africa. In the early 1960s, Yale Law Journal published a long, two-part article by Elizabeth Landis entitled “South African Apartheid legislation,” part one, “Fundamental structures,” part two “Extension, enforcement and perpetuation.” It was no longer possible for white Afrikaners and their US supporters to argue that apartheid, a neutral term until then in world politics, was an intolerable system of discrimination.
We need a similar study for Israel. While insufficient, the present ACRI report is a step toward a correction of the mantra of democracy for Israel’s legal and political system.
Chibli Mallat is a lawyer and law professor at the Universities of Utah and Saint Joseph in Lebanon. His books include “Introduction to Middle Eastern Law,” Oxford paperback 2009, and “The Middle East into the 21st Century,” at Ithaca press in 1996. He edits the weekly law page of The Daily Star.
(MFL notes: I wanted to take a section out of it, but since articles usually disappear the next day, so I posted the whole thing)
On December 6, the Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI, website www.acri.org.il) released a 73-page report on democracy and human rights in Israel, entitled on “Human Rights – On Condition, Democracy – On Condition.” The chapters of the report develop the characteristic list of an authoritarian state: “Freedom of Expression – as long as you have nice things to say;
Harassment of Human Rights Organizations and Activists: Freedom of Expression and Activity – as long as you don’t criticize;
Palestinian-Arab Citizens of Israel: Rights – as long as you’re loyal,
Bedouin Rights – as long as you live where we tell you;
Criminal Justice Rights – as long as you’re not suspected of a security offense;
Hatred and Racism: Rights – as long as you’re one of us;
Rights of the Elderly – as long as you’re young;
The Right to Education – as long as you fit in;
The Right to Housing – as long as you’re one of us;
The Right to Social Security – as long as you’re gainfully employed; The Right to Health Care – as long as you pay;
The Occupied Territories: Rights – as long as you’re Israeli;” and a conclusion entitled “Undermining the Foundations of Democracy.”
As The Daily Star law page presents excerpts of the report, it is time for a serious discussion among jurists and human rights advocates on one basic premise which remains the received mantra in the West: can Israel be considered a democracy, in the same way we consider the US, France or India democracies?
I have argued in my “Introduction to Middle Eastern Law,” published two years ago, that Israel does not qualify as a democracy by standards a universal jury recognizes. This is not only on account of history, where patterns of ethnic cleansing and of legal discrimination are hardly in dispute. The argument of Israel not qualifying as a democracy rests on the persistence of these patterns as structural traits of Israel to date, six decades after its foundation.
The evidence is plain in the treatment of all the people living under Israeli control, by which I mean those whose lives have been and continue to be determined by Israel’s legal structure and its political treatment of their daily existence. Next to 7 million Jewish Israelis who enjoy by-and-large a Western-style democracy, over a million so-called Israeli Arabs have no place in governmental representation and are subject to a large array of rights breaches; 4 million “occupied Palestinians” in the West Bank, Gaza and Jerusalem suffer from open legal exclusion in a system of Israeli decisions that have governed their lives for over a generation. West Bankers, Gazans and Jerusalemites are respectively the victims of land settlement and expropriation, siege and daily physical harassment of their right to live and move freely; and 4-6 million Palestinians are denied their universal right to return to the place from which they fled or were evicted in successive waves in 1948, 1949 and 1967. To this should be added over 100,000 Syrians in the Golan, not to mention the 22-year occupation of south Lebanon and the victims of repeat massacres, from Deir Yasin to Sabra and Shatila, Qana and Jenin.
This is a serious discussion to be undertaken on a world level on the type of system that Israel is, as serious indeed as the legal investigation carried out in the mid-1960s on the legal nature of the apartheid regime in South Africa. In the early 1960s, Yale Law Journal published a long, two-part article by Elizabeth Landis entitled “South African Apartheid legislation,” part one, “Fundamental structures,” part two “Extension, enforcement and perpetuation.” It was no longer possible for white Afrikaners and their US supporters to argue that apartheid, a neutral term until then in world politics, was an intolerable system of discrimination.
We need a similar study for Israel. While insufficient, the present ACRI report is a step toward a correction of the mantra of democracy for Israel’s legal and political system.
Chibli Mallat is a lawyer and law professor at the Universities of Utah and Saint Joseph in Lebanon. His books include “Introduction to Middle Eastern Law,” Oxford paperback 2009, and “The Middle East into the 21st Century,” at Ithaca press in 1996. He edits the weekly law page of The Daily Star.
Responding to Tony Blair
In Response to Blair's "Removing Saddam Was Right"
Nobody likes Saddam, Mr. Blair.
Nevertheless, the problem is pulling such a crazy operation and by-passing the entire UN forums,
Attempting to re-invent the causes of war after the WMDs were not located, specially the invasion couldn't wait any longer due to Saddam's 'nuclear threat'.
There was no Qa'eda in Iraq till the US-UK invasion took place, thank you "democracy" for bringing terrorism to that region.
Thank you for demolishing a state entity called Iraq. If this war is war of democracy, then how come in the first two years of the Iraqi invasion, more Iraqis died than lunatic Saddam's entire rule era?
Wasn't the United States that funded Saddam in the Iranian-Iraqi war and made him a super dictator over his people? We know democracy, and fight for it, it is the United States that funds most of the dictators in the Arab World (Egypt's Moubarak, Morocco's Sultan dynasty, The Saudi Dynasty, ... etc).
Of all the Iraqi officials, whose legitimacy is severely under check, they couldn't find but this minister? BBC can do better.
Accelerating the operation without a Plan B to Iraq which led to the swift breakdown of the regime and the presence of terrorist groups and ethnic wars?
Does Blair know that every Iraqi that died and still dies blame him and Bush Jr. due to the swift breakdown of the state?
Finally, I love it how several people underscore the Iraqi lives by simply calling the war on Iraq as 'policy changing' and conflict management. People's lives from that corner can be so cheap for such men from this corner of the world.
MFL
Nobody likes Saddam, Mr. Blair.
Nevertheless, the problem is pulling such a crazy operation and by-passing the entire UN forums,
Attempting to re-invent the causes of war after the WMDs were not located, specially the invasion couldn't wait any longer due to Saddam's 'nuclear threat'.
There was no Qa'eda in Iraq till the US-UK invasion took place, thank you "democracy" for bringing terrorism to that region.
Thank you for demolishing a state entity called Iraq. If this war is war of democracy, then how come in the first two years of the Iraqi invasion, more Iraqis died than lunatic Saddam's entire rule era?
Wasn't the United States that funded Saddam in the Iranian-Iraqi war and made him a super dictator over his people? We know democracy, and fight for it, it is the United States that funds most of the dictators in the Arab World (Egypt's Moubarak, Morocco's Sultan dynasty, The Saudi Dynasty, ... etc).
Of all the Iraqi officials, whose legitimacy is severely under check, they couldn't find but this minister? BBC can do better.
Accelerating the operation without a Plan B to Iraq which led to the swift breakdown of the regime and the presence of terrorist groups and ethnic wars?
Does Blair know that every Iraqi that died and still dies blame him and Bush Jr. due to the swift breakdown of the state?
Finally, I love it how several people underscore the Iraqi lives by simply calling the war on Iraq as 'policy changing' and conflict management. People's lives from that corner can be so cheap for such men from this corner of the world.
MFL
Monday, November 23, 2009
Memoirs of a Defeatist - Too Many Slaps in the Face!
Couple of years ago, I started blogging, and I decided to blog for change. I decided I needed change from face to face politics. I was writing extensively, almost on daily basis, but then... I lacked the time, there is no time to write. Eventually, I started running out of motivation and stamina. Even on the blogosphere I was losing it.
To be honest, ever since 1997 I have been active on the ground. I used to participate in a lot of demonstrations: freedom of speech, civil marriage, and against Israeli atrocities (to name few). I have been active since then, and in those days, me and the fellow "comrades" dreamt of a left-wing Lebanon free of all those corrupt political parties. We had a dream to demolish sectarianism, free ourselves from Syrian chains of thought control, and proceed to continue struggle against Israeli ethnic cleansing against the Palestinians and Lebanese. We had dreams to shatter the borders between Lebanon and Syria, get rid of the Baathi brutal regime, and establish people's republics away from tyranny. We already were dedicated leftists then: each one of us had the experience to be beaten by political party hooligans, the armies (Syrian or Lebanese), and had the guts to go to South Lebanon and stick up our middle fingers in the face of Israeli cowardly soldiers who occupied Lebanon (and still occupy Palestine). Some friends were even more bold, they were students, and they went in a demonstration and throw those chicken Israeli soldiers from Arnon for 24 hours (Israel brutally returned and almost committed a massacre against those brave university students). We were stalked by Syrian second bureau into our houses, and we demanded social justice. In a nutshell, what our non-political activists used to call us: crazy and insane.
One of our aspirations was to dismantle the Lebanese Communist Party and get rid of the Stalinist features. Of course, some broke out and triggered a chain reaction briefly. These people were saluted for their courageous move; nevertheless, they ended up as the founders of another reactionary movement (even though that movement barely has 150 people in it): the Democratic Leftist Movement (as in the Neo-con "Leftists").
We never knew religion, we thought that religion is an invention, and one day we will bury that feature of Lebanon in the graveyard without return. We used to meet up with all types of university students, go and talk to farmers, the proletariat, and anyone. We used to convert party members into free lancing leftists. We thought the whole world was ours. In 1998-1999, we thought that the revolution will begin. Civil marriage was close to be implemented, yet we were far to get that part alive. We retreated with more heat and excitement to change Lebanon, the Middle East, and even the whole blasted entire world. Breaking ethnicity and uniting the workers of the world was easy then. We did believe it, no matter how much the Syrian army tried to shut us up or demoralize us. We were seculars and against Zionism: how could they get their loyalists to accuse us of treason? Beat us instead. Yet, we stayed active. Heck, we had the chance to go to the Lebanese border, after the Israeli army withdrew like cowards, and we had the chance to stick up our middle fingers straight from the borders, with Palestinian grounds for the first time, appeared before our eyes. Yes! As one comrade said in excitement: We are one step closer to our zillion billion goals. Sadly, nothing good lasts for ever.
Then, slap after slap took place. Our different groups of lefties started to crumble down, one after the other. Part of the reason was power struggle and lust for power. Between the Democratic Leftists' bullshit of scaring people away from the left and the Lebanese Communist Party's crappy salutations to "Comrade" Stalin, we were losing grounds. The main reason of our failures were plenty. I demonstrated for Palestine for unaccountable times, yet nothing was done. It was the capitalist powers that decided everything over there. We demonstrated for Iraq in peace demonstrations that aimed against US Imperialism and the dictator Saddam, and the US – UK coalition by-passed the UN and shattered Iraq into a three way ethnic groups. Suddenly, to a lot of people: what is the use to go into demonstrations? We always had those rotten dinosaurs like Elias Atallah or a free lancing leftist suddenly jumping in front a demonstration and then pause to the cameras in order to appear they were demonstrating. Who invited those dorks (prior to the foundation of Democratic Left Movement)?
Then there were the anti-Syrian demonstrations, we took pride in those demonstrations. We succeeded in transforming several demonstrations from Christian versus Syrian to Lebanese versus Syrian hegemony. Walid Junblatt then was defending Syria for the sake of the "Arab Cause" against Israel. We emphasized that solidarity to our brothers and sisters of the Syrian proletariat is a must! That we should together get rid of all our leaderships. Of course, Syria responded with brutality, or get their allies to gather more of their supporters whereby rallies of praising: "Mother Syria". Yet, we stayed active despite the fact our jobs were threatened and everything. We wanted Syria out, but we demonstrated against Aoun's "Syrian Accountability Act" that was launched in DC. Yet, we were little people. The only time anti-Syrian hegemony kicked off in Lebanon is when the late Prime Minister Harriri was assassinated. Hence, mobilization was sectarian in basis, even though Bahiya el Harriri and the late Samir Qassir (the only decent figurehead in the DLM) tried their best to keep it secular (Elias Attallah by then was more Junblatti or Harriri than Junblatt or Harriri themselves, trust me, I know him in person).
Then afterwards, sectarianism entered our private lives. Several comrades started to argue that "we shall demonstrate for civil marriage, but we shall get married in a religious marriage" or "we shall not marry a person non-Christian or non-Muslim". Heck, I was told by several comrades: "if only you were of sect X or Y". Now, tell me dear reader, how does that make you feel?! Nevertheless, I thought we can get it through.
People were involved with jobs, they preferred to stay away from activism instead risking their jobs.
Each 10 lefties built a group, they proclaimed themselves: the real and only leftists fit to "rule" or "guide" other leftists.
Of course, that doesn't exclude other factors as well: the sudden birthrate of NGOs. Those took out a lot of activists from the arena, and suddenly they believe that "lobbying" is the only way to reform the Lebanese government. That is a different topic on its own, as I collected about 90 statements from fellow comrades who were active in NGOs. Nevertheless, these NGOs are business traders, get a part of whatever funding this or that NGO receives. The fact that Ziad Baroud made it as Minister on the behalf of the NGOs, gives them some sense to celebrate; however, Ziad Baroud, is not the NGOs, and Baroud is not involved in the power struggle of these NGOs that scavenge for funds and try to recruit people as "volunteers" (or the NGO term: free labor). Yet so far, these freaks of new capitalism had done better results than others (as much as I hate to admit it), even though at a very very slow pace whereby several top NGOs had scandals being leaked out.
Then 14th of March and 8th of March came out. The remainder of my friends were scattered between those two blocks. My "comrades" of each side accused me of treason for the Lebanese cause because I refused to join them. They accused me of treason for betraying the Palestinian cause. As far as I remembered: Being revolutionary Marxist doesn't mean I was a die-hard nationalist like the latter two. Each of the comrades of each block cut their connections with the other, after they had their blood mixed on the floor from beatings during demonstrations. Of course, they both boycotted the "non-nationalist camp" like me on a social level. By die hard nationalism, this is what I mean: half of the Lebanese are racists to the other half and vice versa (at least party affiliated people). Hence, at a one point, there was no difference between the stands of the Lebanese Communist Party and crazy Aoun's Free Patriotic Movement or the Democratic Left and Saad el Harriri (ultimate symbol of capitalism). That bogged me down.
Then the July war broke out, and I was involved extensively with relief activities in the war. There, I forgot all those lefty bureaucracies, treacheries, and other things. I poured my heart out in activity. I was convinced my activities were breaking the media black-out imposed by Israel on the world. I did great even. I saw the war join some friends, but the great divide remained between the comrades. Heck, some comrades enjoyed how Israel bombed Dahhieh with the hope that Hezbollah learnt a "valuable lesson". Others turned relief work into business (Does Lebanon Aid ring a bell to anyone?). As for our group of relief activists and media warriors, the movement became short-lived as the power-struggle came into existence. At that point, I lost hope, I was shattered.
It was around early 2006 that I started to blog, I decided to start reconstructing the history of Lebanon, Palestine, or anywhere as they happened. I thought that was the way. Then I started to meet other bloggers, some of them to this day do not know who I am. Others were wonderful, and blogging became a means to express my frustration. Yet, even blogging, what can it do on day to day basis except fuel the anger, and feel helpless against everything. I no longer crave for a demonstration. When Nahr el Bared bombardment took place, I spent it quarreling with other friends who were bravely active there (although to do a mini-save, I did announce their campaign). The quarrels were based on the fact I wasn’t participating. To be honest, the 2006 war took out my energy, and the disappointments kept slapping me on the face; work wise or activism wise. I couldn't tolerate another crap from anyone. I was totally drained. By then 11 years of activism was too much for me. We used to take one step forward, and three back.
Then I started to look elsewhere, where in the world the left is doing great? The man we hailed as a hero ended up turning as a dickhead, yes I am referring to Hugo Chavez. Of course, I love it every time he threw the Israeli ambassador out and cut ties with Israel; yet his blind support to anyone that opposes the United States got me punched in the stomach. How could he support Iran then while a lot of comrades were rotting in prison, our feminist sisters' lives are under threat. That didn't click in my head (and not to forget the more recently renewal of his mandate). The Trotskyites of Great Britain are fighting each other, and the only articles I enjoyed to read are the www.marxist.com. To be more exact, I adored their theoretical articles.
Hence, every time I believed we can do change, I was slapped. The unity of the Christians, Muslims, and Jews of Palestine/Israel was shattered as more Jews are becoming zealot fanatics and actually believe that God has chosen them and the great divide is growing as Hamas is gaining more popularity (because Fatah are bunch of sell-outs and leave the Palestinian proletariat with no option).
The Lebanese politicians are still there, and corrupt as ever. Heck we have new ones (in addition to the old) after the Syrians withdrew. Nothing can be done so far, and last year's mini-civil war became part of the amnesia within the people: a new "history" that will be distorted to suit the needs of the Politicians.
Zionist monopoly of the media keeps the US citizens away from knowing the truth in the middle east. Heck, alienation there is worse than here. To my laughter though, a lot of US citizens that I chatted with (or met) actually believe that the BBC is "Pro-Islam" because it reports all events (now how can that be?!)
What ought to be done? I am experiencing what Marx exactly warned... alienation from the cause due to the brutality of capitalism and its offspring (actually this part of the sentence is Lenin's): nationalism/sectarianism.
I still believe in the class struggle and the Marxist doctrines, but currently, the upper class are standing victorious over the divided alienated proletariat.
MFL
PS: Did you know that several "comrades" thing China is the real People's forthcoming Union? (Shoot me please!)
To be honest, ever since 1997 I have been active on the ground. I used to participate in a lot of demonstrations: freedom of speech, civil marriage, and against Israeli atrocities (to name few). I have been active since then, and in those days, me and the fellow "comrades" dreamt of a left-wing Lebanon free of all those corrupt political parties. We had a dream to demolish sectarianism, free ourselves from Syrian chains of thought control, and proceed to continue struggle against Israeli ethnic cleansing against the Palestinians and Lebanese. We had dreams to shatter the borders between Lebanon and Syria, get rid of the Baathi brutal regime, and establish people's republics away from tyranny. We already were dedicated leftists then: each one of us had the experience to be beaten by political party hooligans, the armies (Syrian or Lebanese), and had the guts to go to South Lebanon and stick up our middle fingers in the face of Israeli cowardly soldiers who occupied Lebanon (and still occupy Palestine). Some friends were even more bold, they were students, and they went in a demonstration and throw those chicken Israeli soldiers from Arnon for 24 hours (Israel brutally returned and almost committed a massacre against those brave university students). We were stalked by Syrian second bureau into our houses, and we demanded social justice. In a nutshell, what our non-political activists used to call us: crazy and insane.
One of our aspirations was to dismantle the Lebanese Communist Party and get rid of the Stalinist features. Of course, some broke out and triggered a chain reaction briefly. These people were saluted for their courageous move; nevertheless, they ended up as the founders of another reactionary movement (even though that movement barely has 150 people in it): the Democratic Leftist Movement (as in the Neo-con "Leftists").
We never knew religion, we thought that religion is an invention, and one day we will bury that feature of Lebanon in the graveyard without return. We used to meet up with all types of university students, go and talk to farmers, the proletariat, and anyone. We used to convert party members into free lancing leftists. We thought the whole world was ours. In 1998-1999, we thought that the revolution will begin. Civil marriage was close to be implemented, yet we were far to get that part alive. We retreated with more heat and excitement to change Lebanon, the Middle East, and even the whole blasted entire world. Breaking ethnicity and uniting the workers of the world was easy then. We did believe it, no matter how much the Syrian army tried to shut us up or demoralize us. We were seculars and against Zionism: how could they get their loyalists to accuse us of treason? Beat us instead. Yet, we stayed active. Heck, we had the chance to go to the Lebanese border, after the Israeli army withdrew like cowards, and we had the chance to stick up our middle fingers straight from the borders, with Palestinian grounds for the first time, appeared before our eyes. Yes! As one comrade said in excitement: We are one step closer to our zillion billion goals. Sadly, nothing good lasts for ever.
Then, slap after slap took place. Our different groups of lefties started to crumble down, one after the other. Part of the reason was power struggle and lust for power. Between the Democratic Leftists' bullshit of scaring people away from the left and the Lebanese Communist Party's crappy salutations to "Comrade" Stalin, we were losing grounds. The main reason of our failures were plenty. I demonstrated for Palestine for unaccountable times, yet nothing was done. It was the capitalist powers that decided everything over there. We demonstrated for Iraq in peace demonstrations that aimed against US Imperialism and the dictator Saddam, and the US – UK coalition by-passed the UN and shattered Iraq into a three way ethnic groups. Suddenly, to a lot of people: what is the use to go into demonstrations? We always had those rotten dinosaurs like Elias Atallah or a free lancing leftist suddenly jumping in front a demonstration and then pause to the cameras in order to appear they were demonstrating. Who invited those dorks (prior to the foundation of Democratic Left Movement)?
Then there were the anti-Syrian demonstrations, we took pride in those demonstrations. We succeeded in transforming several demonstrations from Christian versus Syrian to Lebanese versus Syrian hegemony. Walid Junblatt then was defending Syria for the sake of the "Arab Cause" against Israel. We emphasized that solidarity to our brothers and sisters of the Syrian proletariat is a must! That we should together get rid of all our leaderships. Of course, Syria responded with brutality, or get their allies to gather more of their supporters whereby rallies of praising: "Mother Syria". Yet, we stayed active despite the fact our jobs were threatened and everything. We wanted Syria out, but we demonstrated against Aoun's "Syrian Accountability Act" that was launched in DC. Yet, we were little people. The only time anti-Syrian hegemony kicked off in Lebanon is when the late Prime Minister Harriri was assassinated. Hence, mobilization was sectarian in basis, even though Bahiya el Harriri and the late Samir Qassir (the only decent figurehead in the DLM) tried their best to keep it secular (Elias Attallah by then was more Junblatti or Harriri than Junblatt or Harriri themselves, trust me, I know him in person).
Then afterwards, sectarianism entered our private lives. Several comrades started to argue that "we shall demonstrate for civil marriage, but we shall get married in a religious marriage" or "we shall not marry a person non-Christian or non-Muslim". Heck, I was told by several comrades: "if only you were of sect X or Y". Now, tell me dear reader, how does that make you feel?! Nevertheless, I thought we can get it through.
People were involved with jobs, they preferred to stay away from activism instead risking their jobs.
Each 10 lefties built a group, they proclaimed themselves: the real and only leftists fit to "rule" or "guide" other leftists.
Of course, that doesn't exclude other factors as well: the sudden birthrate of NGOs. Those took out a lot of activists from the arena, and suddenly they believe that "lobbying" is the only way to reform the Lebanese government. That is a different topic on its own, as I collected about 90 statements from fellow comrades who were active in NGOs. Nevertheless, these NGOs are business traders, get a part of whatever funding this or that NGO receives. The fact that Ziad Baroud made it as Minister on the behalf of the NGOs, gives them some sense to celebrate; however, Ziad Baroud, is not the NGOs, and Baroud is not involved in the power struggle of these NGOs that scavenge for funds and try to recruit people as "volunteers" (or the NGO term: free labor). Yet so far, these freaks of new capitalism had done better results than others (as much as I hate to admit it), even though at a very very slow pace whereby several top NGOs had scandals being leaked out.
Then 14th of March and 8th of March came out. The remainder of my friends were scattered between those two blocks. My "comrades" of each side accused me of treason for the Lebanese cause because I refused to join them. They accused me of treason for betraying the Palestinian cause. As far as I remembered: Being revolutionary Marxist doesn't mean I was a die-hard nationalist like the latter two. Each of the comrades of each block cut their connections with the other, after they had their blood mixed on the floor from beatings during demonstrations. Of course, they both boycotted the "non-nationalist camp" like me on a social level. By die hard nationalism, this is what I mean: half of the Lebanese are racists to the other half and vice versa (at least party affiliated people). Hence, at a one point, there was no difference between the stands of the Lebanese Communist Party and crazy Aoun's Free Patriotic Movement or the Democratic Left and Saad el Harriri (ultimate symbol of capitalism). That bogged me down.
Then the July war broke out, and I was involved extensively with relief activities in the war. There, I forgot all those lefty bureaucracies, treacheries, and other things. I poured my heart out in activity. I was convinced my activities were breaking the media black-out imposed by Israel on the world. I did great even. I saw the war join some friends, but the great divide remained between the comrades. Heck, some comrades enjoyed how Israel bombed Dahhieh with the hope that Hezbollah learnt a "valuable lesson". Others turned relief work into business (Does Lebanon Aid ring a bell to anyone?). As for our group of relief activists and media warriors, the movement became short-lived as the power-struggle came into existence. At that point, I lost hope, I was shattered.
It was around early 2006 that I started to blog, I decided to start reconstructing the history of Lebanon, Palestine, or anywhere as they happened. I thought that was the way. Then I started to meet other bloggers, some of them to this day do not know who I am. Others were wonderful, and blogging became a means to express my frustration. Yet, even blogging, what can it do on day to day basis except fuel the anger, and feel helpless against everything. I no longer crave for a demonstration. When Nahr el Bared bombardment took place, I spent it quarreling with other friends who were bravely active there (although to do a mini-save, I did announce their campaign). The quarrels were based on the fact I wasn’t participating. To be honest, the 2006 war took out my energy, and the disappointments kept slapping me on the face; work wise or activism wise. I couldn't tolerate another crap from anyone. I was totally drained. By then 11 years of activism was too much for me. We used to take one step forward, and three back.
Then I started to look elsewhere, where in the world the left is doing great? The man we hailed as a hero ended up turning as a dickhead, yes I am referring to Hugo Chavez. Of course, I love it every time he threw the Israeli ambassador out and cut ties with Israel; yet his blind support to anyone that opposes the United States got me punched in the stomach. How could he support Iran then while a lot of comrades were rotting in prison, our feminist sisters' lives are under threat. That didn't click in my head (and not to forget the more recently renewal of his mandate). The Trotskyites of Great Britain are fighting each other, and the only articles I enjoyed to read are the www.marxist.com. To be more exact, I adored their theoretical articles.
Hence, every time I believed we can do change, I was slapped. The unity of the Christians, Muslims, and Jews of Palestine/Israel was shattered as more Jews are becoming zealot fanatics and actually believe that God has chosen them and the great divide is growing as Hamas is gaining more popularity (because Fatah are bunch of sell-outs and leave the Palestinian proletariat with no option).
The Lebanese politicians are still there, and corrupt as ever. Heck we have new ones (in addition to the old) after the Syrians withdrew. Nothing can be done so far, and last year's mini-civil war became part of the amnesia within the people: a new "history" that will be distorted to suit the needs of the Politicians.
Zionist monopoly of the media keeps the US citizens away from knowing the truth in the middle east. Heck, alienation there is worse than here. To my laughter though, a lot of US citizens that I chatted with (or met) actually believe that the BBC is "Pro-Islam" because it reports all events (now how can that be?!)
What ought to be done? I am experiencing what Marx exactly warned... alienation from the cause due to the brutality of capitalism and its offspring (actually this part of the sentence is Lenin's): nationalism/sectarianism.
I still believe in the class struggle and the Marxist doctrines, but currently, the upper class are standing victorious over the divided alienated proletariat.
MFL
PS: Did you know that several "comrades" thing China is the real People's forthcoming Union? (Shoot me please!)
Thursday, November 05, 2009
America, stop sucking up to Israel - Gideon Levy
Taken from Haaretz
Barack Obama has been busy - offering the Jewish People blessings for Rosh Hashanah, and recording a flattering video for the President's Conference in Jerusalem and another for Yitzhak Rabin's memorial rally. Only Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah surpasses him in terms of sheer output of recorded remarks.
In all the videos, Obama heaps sticky-sweet praise on Israel, even though he has spent nearly a year fruitlessly lobbying for Israel to be so kind as to do something, anything - even just a temporary freeze on settlement building - to advance the peace process.
The president's Mideast envoy, George Mitchell, has also been busy, shuttling between a funeral (for IDF soldier Asaf Ramon, the son of Israel's first astronaut Ilan Ramon) and a memorial (for Rabin, though it was postponed until next week due to rain), in order to find favor with Israelis. Polls have shown that Obama is increasingly unpopular here, with an approval rating of only 6 to 10 percent
He decided to address Israelis by video, but a persuasive speech won't persuade anyone to end the occupation. He simply should have told the Israeli people the truth. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who arrived here last night, will certainly express similar sentiments: "commitment to Israel's security," "strategic alliance," "the need for peace," and so on .
Before no other country on the planet does the United States kneel and plead like this. In other trouble spots, America takes a different tone. It bombs in Afghanistan, invades Iraq and threatens sanctions against Iran and North Korea. Did anyone in Washington consider begging Saddam Hussein to withdraw from occupied territory in Kuwait?
But Israel the occupier, the stubborn contrarian that continues to mock America and the world by building settlements and abusing the Palestinians, receives different treatment. Another massage to the national ego in one video, more embarrassing praise in another.
Now is the time to say to the United States: Enough flattery. If you don't change the tone, nothing will change. As long as Israel feels the United States is in its pocket, and that America's automatic veto will save it from condemnations and sanctions, that it will receive massive aid unconditionally, and that it can continue waging punitive, lethal campaigns without a word from Washington, killing, destroying and imprisoning without the world's policeman making a sound, it will continue in its ways.
Illegal acts like the occupation and settlement expansion, and offensives that may have involved war crimes, as in Gaza, deserve a different approach. If America and the world had issued condemnations after Operation Summer Rains in 2006 - which left 400 Palestinians dead and severe infrastructure damage in the first major operation in Gaza since the disengagement - then Operation Cast Lead never would have been launched.
It is true that unlike all the world's other troublemakers, Israel is viewed as a Western democracy, but Israel of 2009 is a country whose language is force. Anwar Sadat may have been the last leader to win our hearts with optimistic, hope-igniting speeches. If he were to visit Israel today, he would be jeered off the stage. The Syrian president pleads for peace and Israel callously dismisses him, the United States begs for a settlement free ze and Israel turns up its nose. This is what happens when there are no consequences for Israel's inaction.
When Clinton returns to Washington, she should advocate a sharp policy change toward Israel. Israeli hearts can no longer be won with hope, promises of a better future or sweet talk, for this is no longer Israel's language. For something to change, Israel must understand that perpetuating the status quo will exact a painful price.
Israel of 2009 is a spoiled country, arrogant and condescending, convinced that it deserves everything and that it has the power to make a fool of America and the world. The United States has engendered this situation, which endangers the entire Mideast and Israel itself. That is why there needs to be a turning point in the coming year - Washington needs to finally say no to Israel and the occupation. An unambiguous, presidential no.
Barack Obama has been busy - offering the Jewish People blessings for Rosh Hashanah, and recording a flattering video for the President's Conference in Jerusalem and another for Yitzhak Rabin's memorial rally. Only Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah surpasses him in terms of sheer output of recorded remarks.
In all the videos, Obama heaps sticky-sweet praise on Israel, even though he has spent nearly a year fruitlessly lobbying for Israel to be so kind as to do something, anything - even just a temporary freeze on settlement building - to advance the peace process.
The president's Mideast envoy, George Mitchell, has also been busy, shuttling between a funeral (for IDF soldier Asaf Ramon, the son of Israel's first astronaut Ilan Ramon) and a memorial (for Rabin, though it was postponed until next week due to rain), in order to find favor with Israelis. Polls have shown that Obama is increasingly unpopular here, with an approval rating of only 6 to 10 percent
He decided to address Israelis by video, but a persuasive speech won't persuade anyone to end the occupation. He simply should have told the Israeli people the truth. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who arrived here last night, will certainly express similar sentiments: "commitment to Israel's security," "strategic alliance," "the need for peace," and so on .
Before no other country on the planet does the United States kneel and plead like this. In other trouble spots, America takes a different tone. It bombs in Afghanistan, invades Iraq and threatens sanctions against Iran and North Korea. Did anyone in Washington consider begging Saddam Hussein to withdraw from occupied territory in Kuwait?
But Israel the occupier, the stubborn contrarian that continues to mock America and the world by building settlements and abusing the Palestinians, receives different treatment. Another massage to the national ego in one video, more embarrassing praise in another.
Now is the time to say to the United States: Enough flattery. If you don't change the tone, nothing will change. As long as Israel feels the United States is in its pocket, and that America's automatic veto will save it from condemnations and sanctions, that it will receive massive aid unconditionally, and that it can continue waging punitive, lethal campaigns without a word from Washington, killing, destroying and imprisoning without the world's policeman making a sound, it will continue in its ways.
Illegal acts like the occupation and settlement expansion, and offensives that may have involved war crimes, as in Gaza, deserve a different approach. If America and the world had issued condemnations after Operation Summer Rains in 2006 - which left 400 Palestinians dead and severe infrastructure damage in the first major operation in Gaza since the disengagement - then Operation Cast Lead never would have been launched.
It is true that unlike all the world's other troublemakers, Israel is viewed as a Western democracy, but Israel of 2009 is a country whose language is force. Anwar Sadat may have been the last leader to win our hearts with optimistic, hope-igniting speeches. If he were to visit Israel today, he would be jeered off the stage. The Syrian president pleads for peace and Israel callously dismisses him, the United States begs for a settlement free ze and Israel turns up its nose. This is what happens when there are no consequences for Israel's inaction.
When Clinton returns to Washington, she should advocate a sharp policy change toward Israel. Israeli hearts can no longer be won with hope, promises of a better future or sweet talk, for this is no longer Israel's language. For something to change, Israel must understand that perpetuating the status quo will exact a painful price.
Israel of 2009 is a spoiled country, arrogant and condescending, convinced that it deserves everything and that it has the power to make a fool of America and the world. The United States has engendered this situation, which endangers the entire Mideast and Israel itself. That is why there needs to be a turning point in the coming year - Washington needs to finally say no to Israel and the occupation. An unambiguous, presidential no.
Saturday, October 17, 2009
The Goldstone Effect: What Alternatives we have?
Nothing to deny about, Israel has been accused of war crimes, its soldiers should stand up in an International Tribunal Court, and this bullshit of "self-defense" is not working as it used to in the past.
Isreal's main threat are plenty:
1) If the soldiers, officers, and politicians will be accused of war crimes, and proven guilty by the international court (who will be by all means possible), they cannot carry mass ethnic cleansing in the name of self-defense like this racist state used to do.
2) The accusation and proving of Israel as a war criminal nation based on the Gazza events will lead to the opening of all cases Israel has been involved as a war criminal (almost 24/7 in its lands against the Israeli Palestinians whom Israel tries to eradicate their identity as Israeli Arabs) , and its horrors elsewhere (such as 2006 war on Lebanon and Gazza, Beit Hannoun massacres, the 1996 Qana massacres, the law suits from Southern Lebanese on Israel, the 1982 invasion, Sabra-Chatilla Camps) and the list is really really long).
3) This leads to almost every politician in Israel's history to be held accountable (even if symbolically) that the Isreali "Defense" Forces are war criminals. Natanyaho is too scared of such an effect, because while he is defending Levni and Olmert from not being taken to the Tribunal, because for example Peres will go as well (Qana I massacre)
The Goldstone report was also sponsored by the UN Human Rights, the level of Israel's brutality on Gazza was too big for its allies: USA and UK to hide it or cover it up. Well, they didn't to hide it up! We got Mahmoud Abbass! He ordered, to the shock of the world, to withdraw the report's findings till six months (giving Israel and USA a lot of time to counter the Goldstone report and like many other reports--> Buried).
Abbass represents the new Palestinian elites, who are making money out of the PA. He sold out the Palestinians ages ago, and is paying lip services to everyone that sustain him in power. Hamas, the more radical alternative, also had committed blunters. Hamas, during the Gazza Holocaust, proved incapable of protecting its people, due to the fact that simply Hamas doesn't have the circumstances or funding to operate like Hezbollah when the latter humilated the Israeli infantry. Nevertheless, what do Hamas offer? They offered welfarism (covering 38% of the Palestinians in Gazza) amidst a brutal seige of the Israelis to keep Gazza locked out from the world. All reporters and official figureheads were not allowed to enter Gazza during the ethnic cleansing. However, Annahar reported two weeks ago that Hamas barred women from riding bicycles... again, where do we progress from here?
As a matter of fact, Goldstone himself complained that Israel didn't allow the investigators to enter Gazza through its lands. The answer is simple: Israel wants to get away with its ethnic cleansing---> Self-Defense logo again... lost its charm. Even the Obama administration is trying to cover this up, and the reason is simple, because the USA covered the attrocities of Israel against Muslim and Christian Palestinians. It is too embarassing. Yet, on a side note, I do believe Obama wants to be more strict with Israel, his problem is that his hands are tied over there. The only reason makes me think so because unlike all previous presidents during their mandates at the White House, Obama has very strong ties with a mighty Palestinian academic: Rashid Khalidi.
The summary of the Goldstone report is important, released by the UN, and can be found at their website
To all those pethatic supporters of Israel, do not preach me democracy and self-defense, you are racists and disgusting for supporting a nation that seggregates based on religion. As you see, the tides are beginning to turn against racism, slowly, but the tides are turning.
MFL
PS: Check www.zmag.org for more details on the updates!
Isreal's main threat are plenty:
1) If the soldiers, officers, and politicians will be accused of war crimes, and proven guilty by the international court (who will be by all means possible), they cannot carry mass ethnic cleansing in the name of self-defense like this racist state used to do.
2) The accusation and proving of Israel as a war criminal nation based on the Gazza events will lead to the opening of all cases Israel has been involved as a war criminal (almost 24/7 in its lands against the Israeli Palestinians whom Israel tries to eradicate their identity as Israeli Arabs) , and its horrors elsewhere (such as 2006 war on Lebanon and Gazza, Beit Hannoun massacres, the 1996 Qana massacres, the law suits from Southern Lebanese on Israel, the 1982 invasion, Sabra-Chatilla Camps) and the list is really really long).
3) This leads to almost every politician in Israel's history to be held accountable (even if symbolically) that the Isreali "Defense" Forces are war criminals. Natanyaho is too scared of such an effect, because while he is defending Levni and Olmert from not being taken to the Tribunal, because for example Peres will go as well (Qana I massacre)
The Goldstone report was also sponsored by the UN Human Rights, the level of Israel's brutality on Gazza was too big for its allies: USA and UK to hide it or cover it up. Well, they didn't to hide it up! We got Mahmoud Abbass! He ordered, to the shock of the world, to withdraw the report's findings till six months (giving Israel and USA a lot of time to counter the Goldstone report and like many other reports--> Buried).
Abbass represents the new Palestinian elites, who are making money out of the PA. He sold out the Palestinians ages ago, and is paying lip services to everyone that sustain him in power. Hamas, the more radical alternative, also had committed blunters. Hamas, during the Gazza Holocaust, proved incapable of protecting its people, due to the fact that simply Hamas doesn't have the circumstances or funding to operate like Hezbollah when the latter humilated the Israeli infantry. Nevertheless, what do Hamas offer? They offered welfarism (covering 38% of the Palestinians in Gazza) amidst a brutal seige of the Israelis to keep Gazza locked out from the world. All reporters and official figureheads were not allowed to enter Gazza during the ethnic cleansing. However, Annahar reported two weeks ago that Hamas barred women from riding bicycles... again, where do we progress from here?
As a matter of fact, Goldstone himself complained that Israel didn't allow the investigators to enter Gazza through its lands. The answer is simple: Israel wants to get away with its ethnic cleansing---> Self-Defense logo again... lost its charm. Even the Obama administration is trying to cover this up, and the reason is simple, because the USA covered the attrocities of Israel against Muslim and Christian Palestinians. It is too embarassing. Yet, on a side note, I do believe Obama wants to be more strict with Israel, his problem is that his hands are tied over there. The only reason makes me think so because unlike all previous presidents during their mandates at the White House, Obama has very strong ties with a mighty Palestinian academic: Rashid Khalidi.
The summary of the Goldstone report is important, released by the UN, and can be found at their website
To all those pethatic supporters of Israel, do not preach me democracy and self-defense, you are racists and disgusting for supporting a nation that seggregates based on religion. As you see, the tides are beginning to turn against racism, slowly, but the tides are turning.
MFL
PS: Check www.zmag.org for more details on the updates!
Thursday, October 08, 2009
And the Lebanese Never Learn... (surprised?)
Not having a government is not noticed in Lebanon... some joke about it, and they are correct to joke about it; sadly, I notice that having a government eases down the tension between the bougeoisie of Lebanon.
Commenting briefly on the elections before proceeding to the incidents: Was anyone surprised of the results? Everyone claimed they are won, the 14th of March gathered the highest number of seats, and the Opposition gathered the highest number of votes; last but not least, Junblatt opened a minimarket for himself and became the actual veto vote on the government. Meanwhile, it was impressive that not much riots broke up on election days, nevertheless, while waiting for the government to form, we open the TV over here, we see bulletins telling us a grenade was thrown by a "mysterious" evil hand, and everyone denounces it. Tripoli became the source of clashes again, whereby "mysterious rpj" missiles fly, and then "mysterious" gunners reply back. Now wait, isn't that everyday news, I mean why I got bored from blogging on Lebanon? It is the same news, and everyone expects the results. Finally, a person died, stabbed brutally three times, who was supposed to hold a riot between two young groups. Hence, he became the latest in the line of martyrs for the "Lebanese cause", whatever the cause these days it is.
Are we surprised? Hell no, are we sad? Hell yes, I mean doesn't it bother you to hear a riot then you have to call your direct relatives first to check on them, and then call your friends who live there to double check, and finally call friends who actually might be in the region? Will we ever be used to that? Definietly not!
The reason for all of this is simple. All parties still preserve their militia weaponry. Access to arms is still cheap, and none of the political leaders are doing anything to stop it. This of course excludes the arms of Hezbollah which lost some credibility after last year's events of shoot-outs, at least in my own perspective, and also the Palestinian Refugee camps were at least three major factions have large stock of arms: Fatah, Osbat el Ansar, and PFLP-General Command (Gibreel's faction). In all of this chaos, we also had two coalitions going head to head in a militarily sense last year, one group overwhelmed the other, and the winner in these street to street shootouts had disarmed the loser and gave the light and middle ranged weapons to the Lebanese Army. The Lebanese army in such situations, where political parties clearly go and shoot at each other (ie the downfall of the government into militias) can do nothing but sit and watch. Last time the Lebanese army was ordered to bomb an armed political party, it was Hezbollah back in 1989. The result was Nabih Berri (then fresh of clashes with Hezbollah) told the Shiites to leave the army; guess what, they did! The army lost 60% of its units, and the army was threatened then (but yet again) to crumble down. The army these days are called to detect Israeli hidden cells (and may others be captured for the security of the citizens) but to be a riot intercepter: shoot out takes place, army comes, and case closed. Some are captured, but then we lack the follow-up on what happened. Hence, the army is really crippled to disarm anyone, probably not even We'am Wahhab's militants as well.
The reason these ugly incidents take place, like the Cola "mysterious" grenade (and whose echo rang in my ear the other day), is simple! The top leaders are soothing things down, but we see their second in command escalating (well except for Aoun and Jaajaa both competing to prove who is the real Lebanese Christian while Sami Gemayel and Suleiman Franjieh are just trying put their own political space in the mainstream. Walid Junblatt returned to be the pendulum of agreeing one day with this faction or that one, or even both at the same time. Bottom line is, each political party is driving a hard bargain on the government level, mainly Mr. Aoun wants his beloved adorable nephew, Jubran Bathil, to be a minister of interior, then a minister of something else (el-mohem: a minister), and Harriri. Harriri and everyone else would tell us on TV, "we are all happy about the atmosphere", but then their MPs and figureheads lash out on each other. This double tongue doesn't work out at all. Already people are overcharged, and the party militants won't hesitate to blow off some steam. The reason they would blow steam is for the fact simply they are fully convinced the leaders are representing their own sectarian interests (I would exclude the SSNP and the Democratic Left for two reasons):
1) The SSNP had been gaining a lot of grounds politically in Syria, and after last year's militant performance in Beirut, they are being rewarded; also for the fact they are the only official group in the Opposition that is secular (after all Aoun gave up years ago on secularism and preached Christianity). This allows Hassan Nasrallah to argue that whenever Sunni and Shiite militants collide (Future and AMAL to be exact), it is strictly political and not sectarian (same as Harriri) Of course, on TV, we see the MPs joking around, and the sort, hugging each other, laughing, and go back home to their fancy houses. I might exclude Ali Ammar (the MP that was actually a football player who takes in charge of agressively "purifying the chins" of those who mention Hezbollah badly. This guy is a walking time bomb to explode in the parliament. The fact that the Lebanese Communist Party walked out from the Opposition, means the SSNP are the only secular party within the Opposition, within the Lebanese borders.
2) The Democratic Left: Yes, you read that right. They are, much of my hate to them, back to the Parliament, even though with one MP. Why we may ask that question? Well they are the only group that is secular within the 14th of March, but also they carry the maryrdom of Samir Qassir in their files. For such a reason, again to preserve the monopoly of the 2005 - 2007 martyrs of figureheads, a DLM had to be elected. The other reason is the fact that the DLM figureheads, specially Elias Atallah, was the cofounder of the Resistance Front, which fought Israel skin to the teeth; hence 14th of March can use the fascinating relic of Elias Atallah to preach that they have militants that fought Israel in the past. We both remember how Prime Minister Seniora and Hassan Nasrallah competed about whose block was the resistance.
Main issue is: citizens are dying. The man who got stabbled, he may be a part of the Free Patriotic Movement, but he was a citizen, and not an armed militant. It gets worse, by-standers are getting wounded or killed (remember when AMAL's Berri spoke and couple recieved raining bullets? That case was closed swiftly). If we don't have Israel bombing over our heads, we have the political parties shooting at each other, with the occassion of someone mysterious releasing a missile from South Lebanon on Israel's Northern Frontier, and Israel replies with a massive bombardment on nearby villages as if these civilians shot the rockets. Security wise? Fantastic, what more can we ask?
The double tongue of the politicians of escalations and "love affairs of each other" caused this. The economic situation makes it worse, for people's lives are horrible in the country with minimum wages, and frustration goes on the "enemy". The "enemy" is not Israel, it is not the Qa'eda based Fatah Islam (whom we are still debating if it was Syria sending them through the borders or the US sent them), but each other. These riots just escalate more problems, for riots and hate bring more riots and fear, and eventually one day we will have those sporadic violence spreading across sensitive regions in less than 20 minutes. Of course, everyone will yell to their supporters: "go home" or "these parties are armed". I got news for you, a very nice juicy secret news for you: EVERYONE IS ARMED! What happened with the arms that the SSNP or AMAL carried with them? Still there under the banner of Resistance Arms! What happened with the weapons of 14th of March, apparently new ones can be bought easily, and with the latest military blunder of last year, they can learn from their mistakes (super yay for 14th of March, boohoo for the citizens). Having said all these, what about the Labenese in general?
This is why I watch few channels in Lebanon that go on Middle Grounds: LBC and NTV. The problem with NTV though, like Junblatt, they got a moodswing of their own as well: they swing between 14th of March, middle grounds, and the Opposition. By Middle Grounds, I sure do not mean "All the President's men", these people, like Ziad Baroud, will never be elected in a sectarian based state.
Anyways, the reason why I watch the LBC roundabout (yes, sure they put Jaajaa couple of minutes more than the rest) is the fact they ask everyone what happened and what they think. Well, what do they think?! Anyone noticed how the citizens of both sides of a conflicting regions go down screaming and yelling: "we have no problems with our neighbors", "we are all Lebanese", "Don't involve us with party politics", "Leave us alone". Anyone noticed as we sit on our chair (with a nice juicy glass of white wine in my hand) and notice how our proletariat hate what is going on? Notice that there are always a mini-angry crowd blaming the other party while the majority just expressing regrets? (glass finished in one sip after watching the old lady, heartbroken, saying to the politicians: leave us alone). The reason is that these political riots, including the mysterious Inerga (whatever spelled) missiles, and the hand grenades are just the beginning. They suit the politicians to divide the Proletariat according to their sects, and furthermore, and worse, they impose the political divisions on the Lebanese people. Thus, if affiliates of Sect A, but not party affiliates (perhaps some sympathy) has no issues with Sect B, on the contrary relations are fantastic, and these riots take place. Sect A, if losing casualties in this or that region, or even experiencing fear, doubts Sect B. What if some hot head militant that belongs to sect A, pays retaliates and hurts Sect B, the domino effect rolls. All politicians (including Hezbollah, our "defenders" and the "secular" Lebanese Forces) get what they want: isolated sects that clutch to the secatarian parties. Why? Simple... if Sect A for example supports Harriri, but its people are in good relations with Sect B (say supporters of Hezbollah), how to get neighbors to shoot at each other? Simple: bring the hooligans to do some riots, then viola! Fear of the other!
Who benefits: the politicians; who mourns: the proletariat
Who gets richer: the politicians; who mourns: the proletariat
Who goes to their rich houses, the politicians, who is getting poorer: the Proletariat.
The media of the parties are still charging the situation, depends on whenever Minister Baroud yells at them to cool it down aggressively or not!
Lately, these incidents (after the riots of three years, and of course 17 years of civil wars) seem normal to a lot of us. It is as if a Pavlov effect whereby we got accustomed to it!
As my beloved friend Darko said in two posts earlier, we are losing hope, I lost it ages ago, I mean I am still a Marxist, and not any Marxist, the one who still dreams to unite the world into a single classless society where everyone are equal (reminds us of John Lennon's Imagine; good song) I say, we have no choice, as activists to carry on with our belief and quest we can change Lebanon and the whole world (no, I am not doing an Obama ad. of Yes We Can), more like Connelly's logo of: Our demands most humble, we want the world. Neverthelesss, if we do not have the vision, what do we have on the ground? Sad pictures of Iraqis dying by the 100s every day while enjoying what Bush Jr. said: "Giving Freedom and Democracy?" (Side note: Bush Jr. I am still waiting for those damn Weapons of Mass Destructions, you did promise us they will pop up eventually).
It is now 6:51 in Beirut, I bid thee all good night/morning (yes, I am a night crawler, and had a whole rakwi of caffeine for myself in the afternoon)
PS: Doesn't my post on Iran, Hezbollah, and Wilayat el Faqih click on what happened on the elections over there? I love it when my analysis hits the right bullseye
MFL
Commenting briefly on the elections before proceeding to the incidents: Was anyone surprised of the results? Everyone claimed they are won, the 14th of March gathered the highest number of seats, and the Opposition gathered the highest number of votes; last but not least, Junblatt opened a minimarket for himself and became the actual veto vote on the government. Meanwhile, it was impressive that not much riots broke up on election days, nevertheless, while waiting for the government to form, we open the TV over here, we see bulletins telling us a grenade was thrown by a "mysterious" evil hand, and everyone denounces it. Tripoli became the source of clashes again, whereby "mysterious rpj" missiles fly, and then "mysterious" gunners reply back. Now wait, isn't that everyday news, I mean why I got bored from blogging on Lebanon? It is the same news, and everyone expects the results. Finally, a person died, stabbed brutally three times, who was supposed to hold a riot between two young groups. Hence, he became the latest in the line of martyrs for the "Lebanese cause", whatever the cause these days it is.
Are we surprised? Hell no, are we sad? Hell yes, I mean doesn't it bother you to hear a riot then you have to call your direct relatives first to check on them, and then call your friends who live there to double check, and finally call friends who actually might be in the region? Will we ever be used to that? Definietly not!
The reason for all of this is simple. All parties still preserve their militia weaponry. Access to arms is still cheap, and none of the political leaders are doing anything to stop it. This of course excludes the arms of Hezbollah which lost some credibility after last year's events of shoot-outs, at least in my own perspective, and also the Palestinian Refugee camps were at least three major factions have large stock of arms: Fatah, Osbat el Ansar, and PFLP-General Command (Gibreel's faction). In all of this chaos, we also had two coalitions going head to head in a militarily sense last year, one group overwhelmed the other, and the winner in these street to street shootouts had disarmed the loser and gave the light and middle ranged weapons to the Lebanese Army. The Lebanese army in such situations, where political parties clearly go and shoot at each other (ie the downfall of the government into militias) can do nothing but sit and watch. Last time the Lebanese army was ordered to bomb an armed political party, it was Hezbollah back in 1989. The result was Nabih Berri (then fresh of clashes with Hezbollah) told the Shiites to leave the army; guess what, they did! The army lost 60% of its units, and the army was threatened then (but yet again) to crumble down. The army these days are called to detect Israeli hidden cells (and may others be captured for the security of the citizens) but to be a riot intercepter: shoot out takes place, army comes, and case closed. Some are captured, but then we lack the follow-up on what happened. Hence, the army is really crippled to disarm anyone, probably not even We'am Wahhab's militants as well.
The reason these ugly incidents take place, like the Cola "mysterious" grenade (and whose echo rang in my ear the other day), is simple! The top leaders are soothing things down, but we see their second in command escalating (well except for Aoun and Jaajaa both competing to prove who is the real Lebanese Christian while Sami Gemayel and Suleiman Franjieh are just trying put their own political space in the mainstream. Walid Junblatt returned to be the pendulum of agreeing one day with this faction or that one, or even both at the same time. Bottom line is, each political party is driving a hard bargain on the government level, mainly Mr. Aoun wants his beloved adorable nephew, Jubran Bathil, to be a minister of interior, then a minister of something else (el-mohem: a minister), and Harriri. Harriri and everyone else would tell us on TV, "we are all happy about the atmosphere", but then their MPs and figureheads lash out on each other. This double tongue doesn't work out at all. Already people are overcharged, and the party militants won't hesitate to blow off some steam. The reason they would blow steam is for the fact simply they are fully convinced the leaders are representing their own sectarian interests (I would exclude the SSNP and the Democratic Left for two reasons):
1) The SSNP had been gaining a lot of grounds politically in Syria, and after last year's militant performance in Beirut, they are being rewarded; also for the fact they are the only official group in the Opposition that is secular (after all Aoun gave up years ago on secularism and preached Christianity). This allows Hassan Nasrallah to argue that whenever Sunni and Shiite militants collide (Future and AMAL to be exact), it is strictly political and not sectarian (same as Harriri) Of course, on TV, we see the MPs joking around, and the sort, hugging each other, laughing, and go back home to their fancy houses. I might exclude Ali Ammar (the MP that was actually a football player who takes in charge of agressively "purifying the chins" of those who mention Hezbollah badly. This guy is a walking time bomb to explode in the parliament. The fact that the Lebanese Communist Party walked out from the Opposition, means the SSNP are the only secular party within the Opposition, within the Lebanese borders.
2) The Democratic Left: Yes, you read that right. They are, much of my hate to them, back to the Parliament, even though with one MP. Why we may ask that question? Well they are the only group that is secular within the 14th of March, but also they carry the maryrdom of Samir Qassir in their files. For such a reason, again to preserve the monopoly of the 2005 - 2007 martyrs of figureheads, a DLM had to be elected. The other reason is the fact that the DLM figureheads, specially Elias Atallah, was the cofounder of the Resistance Front, which fought Israel skin to the teeth; hence 14th of March can use the fascinating relic of Elias Atallah to preach that they have militants that fought Israel in the past. We both remember how Prime Minister Seniora and Hassan Nasrallah competed about whose block was the resistance.
Main issue is: citizens are dying. The man who got stabbled, he may be a part of the Free Patriotic Movement, but he was a citizen, and not an armed militant. It gets worse, by-standers are getting wounded or killed (remember when AMAL's Berri spoke and couple recieved raining bullets? That case was closed swiftly). If we don't have Israel bombing over our heads, we have the political parties shooting at each other, with the occassion of someone mysterious releasing a missile from South Lebanon on Israel's Northern Frontier, and Israel replies with a massive bombardment on nearby villages as if these civilians shot the rockets. Security wise? Fantastic, what more can we ask?
The double tongue of the politicians of escalations and "love affairs of each other" caused this. The economic situation makes it worse, for people's lives are horrible in the country with minimum wages, and frustration goes on the "enemy". The "enemy" is not Israel, it is not the Qa'eda based Fatah Islam (whom we are still debating if it was Syria sending them through the borders or the US sent them), but each other. These riots just escalate more problems, for riots and hate bring more riots and fear, and eventually one day we will have those sporadic violence spreading across sensitive regions in less than 20 minutes. Of course, everyone will yell to their supporters: "go home" or "these parties are armed". I got news for you, a very nice juicy secret news for you: EVERYONE IS ARMED! What happened with the arms that the SSNP or AMAL carried with them? Still there under the banner of Resistance Arms! What happened with the weapons of 14th of March, apparently new ones can be bought easily, and with the latest military blunder of last year, they can learn from their mistakes (super yay for 14th of March, boohoo for the citizens). Having said all these, what about the Labenese in general?
This is why I watch few channels in Lebanon that go on Middle Grounds: LBC and NTV. The problem with NTV though, like Junblatt, they got a moodswing of their own as well: they swing between 14th of March, middle grounds, and the Opposition. By Middle Grounds, I sure do not mean "All the President's men", these people, like Ziad Baroud, will never be elected in a sectarian based state.
Anyways, the reason why I watch the LBC roundabout (yes, sure they put Jaajaa couple of minutes more than the rest) is the fact they ask everyone what happened and what they think. Well, what do they think?! Anyone noticed how the citizens of both sides of a conflicting regions go down screaming and yelling: "we have no problems with our neighbors", "we are all Lebanese", "Don't involve us with party politics", "Leave us alone". Anyone noticed as we sit on our chair (with a nice juicy glass of white wine in my hand) and notice how our proletariat hate what is going on? Notice that there are always a mini-angry crowd blaming the other party while the majority just expressing regrets? (glass finished in one sip after watching the old lady, heartbroken, saying to the politicians: leave us alone). The reason is that these political riots, including the mysterious Inerga (whatever spelled) missiles, and the hand grenades are just the beginning. They suit the politicians to divide the Proletariat according to their sects, and furthermore, and worse, they impose the political divisions on the Lebanese people. Thus, if affiliates of Sect A, but not party affiliates (perhaps some sympathy) has no issues with Sect B, on the contrary relations are fantastic, and these riots take place. Sect A, if losing casualties in this or that region, or even experiencing fear, doubts Sect B. What if some hot head militant that belongs to sect A, pays retaliates and hurts Sect B, the domino effect rolls. All politicians (including Hezbollah, our "defenders" and the "secular" Lebanese Forces) get what they want: isolated sects that clutch to the secatarian parties. Why? Simple... if Sect A for example supports Harriri, but its people are in good relations with Sect B (say supporters of Hezbollah), how to get neighbors to shoot at each other? Simple: bring the hooligans to do some riots, then viola! Fear of the other!
Who benefits: the politicians; who mourns: the proletariat
Who gets richer: the politicians; who mourns: the proletariat
Who goes to their rich houses, the politicians, who is getting poorer: the Proletariat.
The media of the parties are still charging the situation, depends on whenever Minister Baroud yells at them to cool it down aggressively or not!
Lately, these incidents (after the riots of three years, and of course 17 years of civil wars) seem normal to a lot of us. It is as if a Pavlov effect whereby we got accustomed to it!
As my beloved friend Darko said in two posts earlier, we are losing hope, I lost it ages ago, I mean I am still a Marxist, and not any Marxist, the one who still dreams to unite the world into a single classless society where everyone are equal (reminds us of John Lennon's Imagine; good song) I say, we have no choice, as activists to carry on with our belief and quest we can change Lebanon and the whole world (no, I am not doing an Obama ad. of Yes We Can), more like Connelly's logo of: Our demands most humble, we want the world. Neverthelesss, if we do not have the vision, what do we have on the ground? Sad pictures of Iraqis dying by the 100s every day while enjoying what Bush Jr. said: "Giving Freedom and Democracy?" (Side note: Bush Jr. I am still waiting for those damn Weapons of Mass Destructions, you did promise us they will pop up eventually).
It is now 6:51 in Beirut, I bid thee all good night/morning (yes, I am a night crawler, and had a whole rakwi of caffeine for myself in the afternoon)
PS: Doesn't my post on Iran, Hezbollah, and Wilayat el Faqih click on what happened on the elections over there? I love it when my analysis hits the right bullseye
MFL
Wednesday, October 07, 2009
Anti-Semite?
To form critiques against the nation state of Israel is not to be antisemite, rather to assume that all Jews are Zionists is antisemitism. Israel's racist attacks on Palestinians and degradation of their way of living is antisemitism, even though both belong to same of origins. Zionism is a political racist movement, Judaism is a sect. There is a big difference when someone attacks Zionism for political reasons, and Judaism for racist reasons.
When I typed antisemite on the dictionary.com, it gave me prejudice or hated towards the Jews, that definition in fact is an error, the term Semites refer to the entire region. Semites include Palestinians, Lebanese, Syrians, and also Hebrews. These are in geneal the Cena'anites. To the extreme non-Jewish Zionists in the US, get your facts straight!
Let us get this straight from the beginning, antisemitism refers to us all over here.
MFL
When I typed antisemite on the dictionary.com, it gave me prejudice or hated towards the Jews, that definition in fact is an error, the term Semites refer to the entire region. Semites include Palestinians, Lebanese, Syrians, and also Hebrews. These are in geneal the Cena'anites. To the extreme non-Jewish Zionists in the US, get your facts straight!
Let us get this straight from the beginning, antisemitism refers to us all over here.
MFL
Monday, October 05, 2009
Oh... You Mean Israel Should Not Be Held Accountable?
Well, we all know how the UN never punished Israel for its war-crimes, while in Eastern Europe, if a soldier shot a rocket on a civilian village, they faced the International Tribunal.
This of course rotates on how the UN also disregards Israel's abuse of human rights whereby it has the total freedom to arrest anyone and torture them, whereby the innocent signs a confession of a crime he/she do not know off. The latest proof is the women released by the Israeli Chicken Forces, 7 of the women were independent and non-party affiliates, and the rest according to the Israeli officials were not involved in "terrorist" acts. Of course, Israel could have started negotiations by 2006, instead of bombing the hell out of the Palestinian civilians while not hurting Hamas. Instead, Bomb them to kingdom come, kill as many as possible Palestinians, get a way with this ethnic cleansing, then start negotiating and pretend to be the victim.
Now, Mr. Mahmoud Abbass, also requests the prolonging of the Gazza report. How it can be so? Human Right activists hailed the report; however, Abbass put himself in a more sticky situation. Israel, trying as allows to ignore the facts, that the Gazza Holocaust was simply "self-defense", that the civilians who died were not to be considered as victims, that the IDF does not commit warcrimes. The US itself (under Obama's leadership) didn't like the conclusions. So Israel is not a war crime comitter? My memory tells me that the country to commit the highest number of attrocities and butcheries on civilians is Israel, and so far none is held accountable.
While Fatah is demanding to prolong the vote on the report for "political reasons", elsewhere, fellow British activists are just doing their jobs right, which is seeking justice for the civilians killed. Henceforth, the accused warcriminal Yaalon called it "de-legetimise" the state rather than doing his duty and answer for the deaths of the 14 citizens. Of course, in his eyes, Israel did its duty by expressing "regret" on their death. Sure, if a soldier kills a citizen, he/she should face justice, if it is an IDF soldier, well, he/she are victims for shooting a civilian.
This is the arrogance of racist Zionists allowed to construct their own state.
MFL
This of course rotates on how the UN also disregards Israel's abuse of human rights whereby it has the total freedom to arrest anyone and torture them, whereby the innocent signs a confession of a crime he/she do not know off. The latest proof is the women released by the Israeli Chicken Forces, 7 of the women were independent and non-party affiliates, and the rest according to the Israeli officials were not involved in "terrorist" acts. Of course, Israel could have started negotiations by 2006, instead of bombing the hell out of the Palestinian civilians while not hurting Hamas. Instead, Bomb them to kingdom come, kill as many as possible Palestinians, get a way with this ethnic cleansing, then start negotiating and pretend to be the victim.
Now, Mr. Mahmoud Abbass, also requests the prolonging of the Gazza report. How it can be so? Human Right activists hailed the report; however, Abbass put himself in a more sticky situation. Israel, trying as allows to ignore the facts, that the Gazza Holocaust was simply "self-defense", that the civilians who died were not to be considered as victims, that the IDF does not commit warcrimes. The US itself (under Obama's leadership) didn't like the conclusions. So Israel is not a war crime comitter? My memory tells me that the country to commit the highest number of attrocities and butcheries on civilians is Israel, and so far none is held accountable.
While Fatah is demanding to prolong the vote on the report for "political reasons", elsewhere, fellow British activists are just doing their jobs right, which is seeking justice for the civilians killed. Henceforth, the accused warcriminal Yaalon called it "de-legetimise" the state rather than doing his duty and answer for the deaths of the 14 citizens. Of course, in his eyes, Israel did its duty by expressing "regret" on their death. Sure, if a soldier kills a citizen, he/she should face justice, if it is an IDF soldier, well, he/she are victims for shooting a civilian.
This is the arrogance of racist Zionists allowed to construct their own state.
MFL
Democracy and its preachers
Socialism Needs Democracy Like the Human Body Needs Oxygen - Leon Trotsky
The latest blabs on democratizing Iran by ousting its insane president Ahmadinejad had been rotating lately. Of course, as I wrote last year, the president is worthless, while it is the Wali el Faqih, currently Ali Khamanei, pulls all the major strings. This leads to the question: What is the use of throwing Mr. Ahmadinejad in the first place?
Nevertheless, my main interest is not writing about Iran at all currently, but rather on those capitalists who preach democracy, and lead a very normal life in the West. This is of course not to doubt the intentions of some of those who preach democracy, some of them have really the intent, but promoting the "US logic" of democracy in the Arab world yields zero feedback.
Democracy as we know it, took centuries to evolve in Western Europe, and rapidly in the US, with the African Americans hitting the streets to demand for their civil and human rights. Nevertheless, even in the West, where citizens get respect from their police force, democracy rotated around, to quote Karl Marx, electing the oppressors every certain time period.
Those preachers of Democracy of course come through several institutions, mainly through US AID, World Bank sponsored projects/proposals, and other institutions. As far as I know, both political parties of the US, whether Republican or Democrats, have branch parties across the globe, composed of ex-pats, seeking to promote the Western culture of democracy. However, if we consider the West as central and Western Europe (along with the US), then even there democracy is not really accessable for a lot of people. The US proletariat are as confused about the realities of the world due to media monopolation, and of course, they are alienated even from their surroundings due to the hectic business rush lifestyle to survive. Homeless people live in the streets of several US states, and if I remember correctly, there was an accusation between the Republicans and Democrats during Bush Jr's first election, that party representatives were going to the streets bribing the homeless with cigarettes to go and vote. Of course, we expect the preachers of democracy over there to come here. Latin Americans have been facing abuses all the time (even from African Americans), while several Arabs walk in fear due to fact any 'wild cowboy bill' can point at them and yell "terrorists".
Now I need to mention one tiny detail of all those "democratic crusades" that come to the Middle East and elsewhere (North Africa, Eastern Europe, others...), the majority of them come here because they are paid to come here. Their work involves think tanks, associations, organizations, and lectures. The bulk of their work ends up on a nice dry paper that nobody would read except few academics, and probably an official or two. Yet, emancipation on the ground provides fruitless communication. The fact that Ziad Baroud made it as a Minister due to his hard efforts and good reputation proves a victory of the local NGOs against such efforts of "democratization". Although Baroud's supporters in my opinion require a different post. Even Baroud, with the support of all the networks behind him, that include reforms & proposals, vanish into thin air at the first political instability that hits the area (whether local or regional). The main reason is: Democracy cannot begin except by empowering the proletarit to unify across the ethnic and sectarian borders.
The corrupt elites of the third world make sure that the status quo among the proletariat remain divided. It can be seculars, berbers, moderate Muslims, and Islamists in Morroco, or it can be sectarian isolation in Lebanon. The proletariat lack the means to identify their own rights, and their own strength if they are united. Now of course, someone will jump and say: our projects reach out grass root people on the ground and in rural areas. That person who actually jumped in front of me was a diet reformist in Kosovo. Well, the same person would jump anywhere in any country that wants to democratize. The Western preachers of democracy would assume that the people are ignorant of their rights, this can be solved by couple of workshops, some nice donations, and a nice group picture in the end of the event. So far, almost all nations excluding very few (even though those few as mentioned earlier have defective democracy) are still where they are: corrupt leadership at the expense of the people. My question to those crusaders of democracy would stem, why not change from their side of the continent? For example, why the activists won't ask the US administration why it still supports dictators like Moubarak and the Sauds regime. The support to these people thwarts democracy backwards, and bring instead Islamist groups as an option (due to the fact someone smart in the past thought that strengthening the Islamists would weaken the socialist tide in Asia and the MENA region.
In Lebanon at least, all those workshops, and all those conferences ended up in less than 24 hours when 14th of March and the Opposition hit the streets and shot at each other (not to exclude the heavy artillary exchanged between Hezbollah and Junblatt's PSP).
Socialism is the true path to democracy. Those in the West who sit in Lalaland and scream: "let us give them democracy" reminds me of the 16th - 19th century of Europe's colonial powers of taking in charge of "civilizing" the American continents, Asia, and Africa. I do believe the term was called "White Man's Burden". I guess now it transformed to "Western burden". Marxism is the real tool which breaks the grip of the elites on the proletariat over here, for the elites want their people to be divided into tiny ethnic and sectarian groups, that assists the flow of profits into their pockets, or their parties (as the case of Hezbollah benefiting from the funds from Iran, and the donations to the resistance). This is not an easy task, and its path is long; however, all other paths have been tried and they hit the wall. The current democratization processes include to preach a "common" person that they should vote, but democratization doesn't tell the person how he/she should form a unified front with other proletariats to safeguard their rights, for a vote is no longer a right. A vote is a game competition between the elties of the society. Instead, we have fancy conferences within the academic sphere whereby 20 professors travel abroad (to Beirut) to speak in panels, everyone dozes off, and whoever organized the conferences can click "check" next to his budget time plan sent to his donors.
They forgot that we inherited those democratic institutions from the colonial eras that were intended to divide and conquer. The elites kept them to safeguard, acquire, or renew their powers. Those crusaders of democracy should also know that the economic burdens of the proletariat, and how more "extra efforts" they should put to secure democracy (namely to sign a paper that they participated in workshop X or Y) are too much a waste of time.
I am sure more and more examples can be written on this topic
Let me be clear, there is no war but class war, end of story
MFL
The latest blabs on democratizing Iran by ousting its insane president Ahmadinejad had been rotating lately. Of course, as I wrote last year, the president is worthless, while it is the Wali el Faqih, currently Ali Khamanei, pulls all the major strings. This leads to the question: What is the use of throwing Mr. Ahmadinejad in the first place?
Nevertheless, my main interest is not writing about Iran at all currently, but rather on those capitalists who preach democracy, and lead a very normal life in the West. This is of course not to doubt the intentions of some of those who preach democracy, some of them have really the intent, but promoting the "US logic" of democracy in the Arab world yields zero feedback.
Democracy as we know it, took centuries to evolve in Western Europe, and rapidly in the US, with the African Americans hitting the streets to demand for their civil and human rights. Nevertheless, even in the West, where citizens get respect from their police force, democracy rotated around, to quote Karl Marx, electing the oppressors every certain time period.
Those preachers of Democracy of course come through several institutions, mainly through US AID, World Bank sponsored projects/proposals, and other institutions. As far as I know, both political parties of the US, whether Republican or Democrats, have branch parties across the globe, composed of ex-pats, seeking to promote the Western culture of democracy. However, if we consider the West as central and Western Europe (along with the US), then even there democracy is not really accessable for a lot of people. The US proletariat are as confused about the realities of the world due to media monopolation, and of course, they are alienated even from their surroundings due to the hectic business rush lifestyle to survive. Homeless people live in the streets of several US states, and if I remember correctly, there was an accusation between the Republicans and Democrats during Bush Jr's first election, that party representatives were going to the streets bribing the homeless with cigarettes to go and vote. Of course, we expect the preachers of democracy over there to come here. Latin Americans have been facing abuses all the time (even from African Americans), while several Arabs walk in fear due to fact any 'wild cowboy bill' can point at them and yell "terrorists".
Now I need to mention one tiny detail of all those "democratic crusades" that come to the Middle East and elsewhere (North Africa, Eastern Europe, others...), the majority of them come here because they are paid to come here. Their work involves think tanks, associations, organizations, and lectures. The bulk of their work ends up on a nice dry paper that nobody would read except few academics, and probably an official or two. Yet, emancipation on the ground provides fruitless communication. The fact that Ziad Baroud made it as a Minister due to his hard efforts and good reputation proves a victory of the local NGOs against such efforts of "democratization". Although Baroud's supporters in my opinion require a different post. Even Baroud, with the support of all the networks behind him, that include reforms & proposals, vanish into thin air at the first political instability that hits the area (whether local or regional). The main reason is: Democracy cannot begin except by empowering the proletarit to unify across the ethnic and sectarian borders.
The corrupt elites of the third world make sure that the status quo among the proletariat remain divided. It can be seculars, berbers, moderate Muslims, and Islamists in Morroco, or it can be sectarian isolation in Lebanon. The proletariat lack the means to identify their own rights, and their own strength if they are united. Now of course, someone will jump and say: our projects reach out grass root people on the ground and in rural areas. That person who actually jumped in front of me was a diet reformist in Kosovo. Well, the same person would jump anywhere in any country that wants to democratize. The Western preachers of democracy would assume that the people are ignorant of their rights, this can be solved by couple of workshops, some nice donations, and a nice group picture in the end of the event. So far, almost all nations excluding very few (even though those few as mentioned earlier have defective democracy) are still where they are: corrupt leadership at the expense of the people. My question to those crusaders of democracy would stem, why not change from their side of the continent? For example, why the activists won't ask the US administration why it still supports dictators like Moubarak and the Sauds regime. The support to these people thwarts democracy backwards, and bring instead Islamist groups as an option (due to the fact someone smart in the past thought that strengthening the Islamists would weaken the socialist tide in Asia and the MENA region.
In Lebanon at least, all those workshops, and all those conferences ended up in less than 24 hours when 14th of March and the Opposition hit the streets and shot at each other (not to exclude the heavy artillary exchanged between Hezbollah and Junblatt's PSP).
Socialism is the true path to democracy. Those in the West who sit in Lalaland and scream: "let us give them democracy" reminds me of the 16th - 19th century of Europe's colonial powers of taking in charge of "civilizing" the American continents, Asia, and Africa. I do believe the term was called "White Man's Burden". I guess now it transformed to "Western burden". Marxism is the real tool which breaks the grip of the elites on the proletariat over here, for the elites want their people to be divided into tiny ethnic and sectarian groups, that assists the flow of profits into their pockets, or their parties (as the case of Hezbollah benefiting from the funds from Iran, and the donations to the resistance). This is not an easy task, and its path is long; however, all other paths have been tried and they hit the wall. The current democratization processes include to preach a "common" person that they should vote, but democratization doesn't tell the person how he/she should form a unified front with other proletariats to safeguard their rights, for a vote is no longer a right. A vote is a game competition between the elties of the society. Instead, we have fancy conferences within the academic sphere whereby 20 professors travel abroad (to Beirut) to speak in panels, everyone dozes off, and whoever organized the conferences can click "check" next to his budget time plan sent to his donors.
They forgot that we inherited those democratic institutions from the colonial eras that were intended to divide and conquer. The elites kept them to safeguard, acquire, or renew their powers. Those crusaders of democracy should also know that the economic burdens of the proletariat, and how more "extra efforts" they should put to secure democracy (namely to sign a paper that they participated in workshop X or Y) are too much a waste of time.
I am sure more and more examples can be written on this topic
Let me be clear, there is no war but class war, end of story
MFL
Thursday, October 01, 2009
Returning Back to the Blogosphere
I have not opened the blog life since the Israeli brutality massacred the Palestinian citizens.
I am coming back to write, specially I missed writing on a lot of important and controversial incidents. As difficult it may seem from where I am currently and the situation I am in, I decided that writing is the most important tool to preserve the ideas. My email address will be activated in the next few days.
Last but not least, enjoy the latest brutality of the Zionist regime and their racist brutality.
Gaza peace protester is prisoner in own home
MFL
I am coming back to write, specially I missed writing on a lot of important and controversial incidents. As difficult it may seem from where I am currently and the situation I am in, I decided that writing is the most important tool to preserve the ideas. My email address will be activated in the next few days.
Last but not least, enjoy the latest brutality of the Zionist regime and their racist brutality.
Gaza peace protester is prisoner in own home
MFL
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
The Zionists: Philosophy of Fear and Hatred (Part I)
A Little Knowledge is a Dangerous Thing ~ Alexander Pope
Olmert's Speech
It came no surprise that Olmert's seize of fire justified Israel's butchery of 1200 Palestinians in the sense of the IDF defending the victims against terrorists. The timing of Olmert's 'unilateral' seize of fire was also perfect. He secured three goals through bloodshed:
• Making use of Bush's presence and unlimited support to Israel's atrocities till Bush's final moments
• Sending a signal to Obama that no one will obstruct Israel's bloody policies
• Making use of the International Media where all world attentions were focused on Obama's elections instead of the evidence of Israel's genocidal policies on the Palestinians after the media was more loose to wonder around Gaza.
This reflected on Obama's speech, where he mentioned global peace and hope, while not mentioning anything on Israel and Palestine, specially on the recent butcheries that took place. Luckily, U2 where there two days earlier to remind Obama on the Israeli/Palestinian question.
Fear of the Other: A Look at the Terrorists
Israel as always successfully integrated the fear of Palestinians. The nation of Israel is fully convinced that they live in the middle of an ocean of war mongrels of barbarians. The sporadic attacks of the Palestinians on the Israelis are depicted as terrorist attacks on a nation that wants to live peace. What the story is untold is the exact history on how Palestinians of 1948 were expelled from their homes, and the butcheries never stopped since that day. Almost on daily basis, Israelis are free to run, shoot randomly couple of Palestinians every day, and then argue that they were shot at. That was the case in 1948, and that is the case today. 9/11, where everyone assumes that the Arabs celebrate that day, was the greatest bad news for the Arabs. 9/11 brought the justification for Bush and Israel to do any activity they want in the name of "War of Terror" and open a full scale war under the banner of "Pre-Emptive Strikes".
Tarek Ali, in his book Bush in Babylon: The Recolonization of Iraq, divulges the primary reasons why Palestinians become militants. For these people are the terrorists that Israel is supposed to defend. This phenomenon is universal for the Israelis, bomb your victims to kingdom come, and drive them to join a militant group, which represents a liberation movement, and dub it terrorism.
" By making Ariel Sharon a co-leader in the 'war against terrorism', the regime in Washington consciously blurred the distinctions between national liberation and terror. The result has been catastrophic. Not a day passes without an email from Israel and Palestine informing me of the latest atrocity. The material on my computer would fill two large volumes if it were presented as evidence before a war crimes tribunal. One of these emails arrived on 9 July 2003 and is less typical because no young children were killed. It was sent to me by Palestinian Monitors:
In the early hours of this morning Israeli Special Forces and soldiers entered the West Bank town of Burkin, killing one man, seriously injuring his wife and arresting another Palestinian man. The Israeli army claims that they were fired upon when entering the village, so they returned fire, however according to Palestinian witnesses this is not true.
The Troops entered the village and went to the house next door to ours. My wife and I were sleeping on our roof when suddenly we heard some shots. We immediately entered our house. The shooting ended as soon as it began – only about four shots were fired. About 10 minutes later our door bell rang and it was Iyad and his wife. They had crawled to our front door, covered in blood and still bleeding. We called for an ambulance, and eventually it came. The medics said the soldiers had stopped them for only about 10 minutes.
We went over and spoke to Iyad's father to see what had happened and he told us the soldiers had entered his house and arrested his 20-year-old son Fadi. Iyad, his other son, and Khaloud, Iyad's wife, and their three children, were sleeping on a bed in the garden as it was too hot in their house. When the soldiers left after arresting Fadi they must have seen them and opened fire. There was no shooting from the Palestinians – just the Israelis. We saw the mattress where the couple had been sleeping and it too was covered with blood.
Iyad later died, according to the doctors at Rafidiya hospital in Nablus, from bullets to his throat and arms. Khaloud was shot in the face, and is currently in hospital in a critical but stable condition; their children, the eldest of whom is five years old, escaped uninjured.
With this going on every single day since 9/11 how can any thinking person be surprised that young kids are desperate to join one of the militant organizations resisting the Israelis. There is a purity and moral integrity in children that illuminates a struggle. A single hair on their head is worth more than all those who sit in judgement on them, let alone their killers. " (Tarek Ali, Bush in Babylon, Verso 2003 – Page 13 – 14)
Joe Sacco, during his visit to Palestine, quoted several Arab Jews arguing that Zionism came from Europe. The British mandate recorded several procedures of extortions of Zionists on local Palestinian Jews whereby the latter were forced to recruit Jewish labor and expel their own Palestinian Arab friends from their farms. The Ottomans' legacy also included tolerance and coexistence, which was more than comfortable for the World Zionist Organization to visit the Sultan and attempt to purchase Palestine. Of course, the final 9 years of the Ottoman empire changed radically when the nationalist Young Turks revolution took place. Bottom line, the policies of the Zionists, and their revisionist counterparts of Vladimir Japotinsky, stressed on expelling the expulsion of the local inhabitants of Palestine, and secure it to the Jewish nation. Hence, from their first moments of arrival to Palestine, their philosophy rotated around imposing the ethnic line. Suddenly, Palestinian Christians and Muslims suddenly found themselves gradually kicked out of their homes in Jerusalem, and elsewhere. Any Jew who didn't follow-up their program, the Zionists had all the means to extort and threaten the non-Zionist Jews.
King-Crane Commission and Lord Grey's Anti-Zionist Approach
As a revolutionary Marxist obliged to reconstruct history as it happened, we shall begin with the Zionist claims that Palestine was empty, The Zionists also had their cover-up in Europe. Supported by their vast network of contacts, and their advanced organization allowed them in World War I, the Zionists were able to receive offers from both, the Germans and the British, in regards to Palestine. Eventually, their socialist infrastructure allowed them to organize themselves better than the Palestinians who just immerged from the Ottoman dominion and jumped into British brutal rule and biased support to the Jews. As riots started to spring in the early 1920s and climaxed in 1929, the Zionists' propaganda was in jeopardy, Palestine was not an empty desert. Nevertheless the King-Crane commission proved the British wrong, sadly their advices were not listened to, and it meant that the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians would begin shortly after the Versailles treaties. The report and statistics of the Commission were as follows (after visiting Palestine in 1919):
Out of 260 petitions in Palestine:
For Complete Zionist Program: 7 Petitions (2.7%)
Modified Zionist Program: 8 Petitions (3%)
Against the Zionist Program: 222 Petitions (85.3%)
The recommendations of the Commission actually warned against the implementation of the Zionist Program, which was facilitated by Lord Balfour, by saying:
'For a national home for the Jewish people is not equivalent to making Palestine into a Jewish State, nor can the erection of such a Jewish State be accompanied without the gravest trespass upon the "civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine.'
The Commission also accused Zionism of breaching the very concept of Woodrow Wilson's 'Right for Self-Determination', and warned against the implementation of the Zionist Program, whereby they argued:
"If that principle is to rule [US President Woodrow Wilson's Self-Determination], and so the wishes of Palestine's population are to be decisive as to what is to be done with Palestine, then it is to be remembered that the non-Jewish population of Palestine – nearly nine-tenths of the whole – are emphatically against the entire Zionist program. The tables show that there was no one thing upon which the population of Palestine were more agreed on this." (in regards to the numbers given above)To subject a people so minded to unlimited Jewish immigration, and to steady financial and social pressure to surrender the land, would be a gross violation of the principle just quoted (Wilson's Self-Determination), and of the people's rights, though it kept within the forms of law.
They summed the demands of the Palestinians as follows:
"We oppose the pretentions of the Zionists to create a Jewish commonwealth in the southern part of Syria, known as Palestine, and oppose Zionist migration to any part of our country for we do not acknowledge their title, but consider them a grave peril to our people from the national, economical, and political points of view..."
The Commission recommended that the Zionist program be reduced drastically, : " In view of these considerations, and with a deep sense of sympathy for the Jewish cause, the Commissioners feel bound to recommend that only a greatly reduced Zionist program be attempted by the Peace Conference, and even that, only very gradually initiated. This would have to mean that Jewish immigration should be definitely limited, and that the project for making Palestine a Jewish commonwealth should be given up."
In Parallel, Sir Edward Grey, who was Foreign Secretary of the British Empire from 10905 – 1916, exploded in the House of the Lords in regards to the Balfour Declaration: "It promised a Zionist home without prejudice to the civil and religious rights of the population of Palestine. A Zionist home, my Lords, undoubtedly means or implies a Zionist Government over the district in which the home is placed, and 93 per cent of the population of Palestine are Arabs, I do not see how you can establish other than an Arab Government, without prejudice to their civil rights."
And prejudice was the correct term but the application was ethnic cleansing. The British mandate played a massive role in giving the Zionist Jews the right mechanisms.
Lt. – Col. W. F. Stirling, British Army Officer and Chief Staff Officer under T.E. Lawrence as well as ex-governer of Jaffa/Yafa) gave important testimonies on the riots that broke up that year in Jaffa (called in Arabic Yafa). In reaction of Jewish colonies expanding by that year, riots broke up between the Arabs and Jews:
"The [Balfour] declaration, however, coupled with the attitude of the Jews, caused the Arabs to fear an eventual Jewish domination; for while in stated that the British Government favoured the creation of a Jewish national home in Palestine, the Jewish interpretation of it, which was openly preached, suggested that we favored the conversion of the whole country into a national home for them. The Arabs, not unnaturally, took alarm. Poor an dinexperienced, they saw little chance of competing against their rivals, who were rich and clever, and who were also, as it seemed, being supported by the powerful British Government."
Riots broke out, while the government ordered that Hebrew, English, and Arabic to be used, the Zionist section refused to use the Arabic words. It is, in their nature, to divide the population as Jewish and non-Jewish. "Atrocities were committed by both sides, and some Arab women lying wounded in the fields were seen to have their breasts scythed off by Jewish colonists."
A final quote I will borrow from Stirling is on the ethnic character of Zionism. Most of the Jews were not Zionists, they regarded their fellow Christian and Muslim friends as colleagues. As I always mentioned, Zionism is the greatest bad news for Judaism. It is not recent that we saw the Orthodox Jews opposed Zionism. Zionism despised equality of the inhabitants of Palestine, and imposed this racial segregation:
"In the early days there were many Jews in Palestine who were not Zionists, but the pressure applied by the Jewish Agency became so great, and its Gestapo methods so severe, that few Jews dared openly express any other faith. Just before I left Jaffa a very important Jewish farmer from Richon-le-Zion sent a message asking if he could come and see me. I accordingly invited him to come to my office the following morning, but he refused to do that and asked for an appointment at my house after dark.
When he arrived he told me he had come to ask for my advice on a personal problem. He explained how, as a small boy, he had been brought to Palestine by his father, one of the biggest landowners of his village. Growing up there, he had made numerous friends among the little Arab boys of his own age. On his father's death he had taken over the property and naturally continued to employ his boyhood friends as herdsmen, ploughmen and teamsters. That morning, however, the Jewish Agency had ordered him to dismiss all his Arab employees and to engage some newly arrived Jewish immigrants at a wage-rate far excess of the pay of his Arab workmen. What should he do? If he dismissed the Arabs in the summary manner suggested, such bad feeling would be created, being a vindictive people, they might well burn his crops. Apart from this consideration, they also happened to be his friends. The Jews who had been proposed to him as labourers knew nothing about farming, and certainly nothing about the local conditions. The Arabs would work to all hours of the night if it were a question of getting a crop in before the rain; the Jews would down tools precisely at six o'clock, no matter what the weather. He now saw no possibility of working his land on economic lines, and he would inevitably go bankrupt." (Walid Khalidi, From Haven to Conquest, P. 219 – 237).
In his notebook, C.R. Ashbee (British Architect, Civic Adviser to the Palestine Administration), wrote:
"There is then the effort of clearing up and rebuilding a country, and the city of Jerusalem – for here the part is always greater than the whole – a country which to all men has a strange unreal sanctity. Palestine for most of us was an emotion rather than a reality."
"There was next the half-generous, wholly ignorant impulse, that this, as we English thought, empty land, this no man's land, this land lost to us when were last there in the days Edward Longshanks, might as we had now conquered it of the Turk be tossed to the Jews. So we thought."
"There was then – and here came the rub – a certain chivalrous reaction, and it came with greater knowledge. This country, it appeared, belonged after all to other people and they, too, had helped us win the war [WWI]. Who were these other people? What right had we to mortgage their inheritance? Might it not be a breach of trust? We have recently begun to find out the truth, to answer some of these troublesome questions."
The greater knowledge, clinging round the word "self-determination," came as an eye-opener. It showed us two things: first, that we were after all, as far as Palestine was concerned, only a part of Christendom; Greek, Italian, French, German, Russian, also had a share in the Holy Land, perhaps a greater share than we, even as St. Bernard, St. Francis, and St. Louis did more for Palestine, and meant more for the world, than Richard Coeur-de-Lion or Edward Longshanks. It showed us next there were also the Arab and the Moslem to be reckoned with, him to whom the Holy Land actually belonged , to whom the Holdy Land was equally holy, and whose record and achievement it – Amr, Abdul Malek, Al-Mamun , Saladin , Kalaoun , Kait Bey – were far greater than ours. We were learning a little history. "
Next Chapter: Roots for Zionist Tactic of the Modern Day
Olmert's Speech
It came no surprise that Olmert's seize of fire justified Israel's butchery of 1200 Palestinians in the sense of the IDF defending the victims against terrorists. The timing of Olmert's 'unilateral' seize of fire was also perfect. He secured three goals through bloodshed:
• Making use of Bush's presence and unlimited support to Israel's atrocities till Bush's final moments
• Sending a signal to Obama that no one will obstruct Israel's bloody policies
• Making use of the International Media where all world attentions were focused on Obama's elections instead of the evidence of Israel's genocidal policies on the Palestinians after the media was more loose to wonder around Gaza.
This reflected on Obama's speech, where he mentioned global peace and hope, while not mentioning anything on Israel and Palestine, specially on the recent butcheries that took place. Luckily, U2 where there two days earlier to remind Obama on the Israeli/Palestinian question.
Fear of the Other: A Look at the Terrorists
Israel as always successfully integrated the fear of Palestinians. The nation of Israel is fully convinced that they live in the middle of an ocean of war mongrels of barbarians. The sporadic attacks of the Palestinians on the Israelis are depicted as terrorist attacks on a nation that wants to live peace. What the story is untold is the exact history on how Palestinians of 1948 were expelled from their homes, and the butcheries never stopped since that day. Almost on daily basis, Israelis are free to run, shoot randomly couple of Palestinians every day, and then argue that they were shot at. That was the case in 1948, and that is the case today. 9/11, where everyone assumes that the Arabs celebrate that day, was the greatest bad news for the Arabs. 9/11 brought the justification for Bush and Israel to do any activity they want in the name of "War of Terror" and open a full scale war under the banner of "Pre-Emptive Strikes".
Tarek Ali, in his book Bush in Babylon: The Recolonization of Iraq, divulges the primary reasons why Palestinians become militants. For these people are the terrorists that Israel is supposed to defend. This phenomenon is universal for the Israelis, bomb your victims to kingdom come, and drive them to join a militant group, which represents a liberation movement, and dub it terrorism.
" By making Ariel Sharon a co-leader in the 'war against terrorism', the regime in Washington consciously blurred the distinctions between national liberation and terror. The result has been catastrophic. Not a day passes without an email from Israel and Palestine informing me of the latest atrocity. The material on my computer would fill two large volumes if it were presented as evidence before a war crimes tribunal. One of these emails arrived on 9 July 2003 and is less typical because no young children were killed. It was sent to me by Palestinian Monitors:
In the early hours of this morning Israeli Special Forces and soldiers entered the West Bank town of Burkin, killing one man, seriously injuring his wife and arresting another Palestinian man. The Israeli army claims that they were fired upon when entering the village, so they returned fire, however according to Palestinian witnesses this is not true.
The Troops entered the village and went to the house next door to ours. My wife and I were sleeping on our roof when suddenly we heard some shots. We immediately entered our house. The shooting ended as soon as it began – only about four shots were fired. About 10 minutes later our door bell rang and it was Iyad and his wife. They had crawled to our front door, covered in blood and still bleeding. We called for an ambulance, and eventually it came. The medics said the soldiers had stopped them for only about 10 minutes.
We went over and spoke to Iyad's father to see what had happened and he told us the soldiers had entered his house and arrested his 20-year-old son Fadi. Iyad, his other son, and Khaloud, Iyad's wife, and their three children, were sleeping on a bed in the garden as it was too hot in their house. When the soldiers left after arresting Fadi they must have seen them and opened fire. There was no shooting from the Palestinians – just the Israelis. We saw the mattress where the couple had been sleeping and it too was covered with blood.
Iyad later died, according to the doctors at Rafidiya hospital in Nablus, from bullets to his throat and arms. Khaloud was shot in the face, and is currently in hospital in a critical but stable condition; their children, the eldest of whom is five years old, escaped uninjured.
With this going on every single day since 9/11 how can any thinking person be surprised that young kids are desperate to join one of the militant organizations resisting the Israelis. There is a purity and moral integrity in children that illuminates a struggle. A single hair on their head is worth more than all those who sit in judgement on them, let alone their killers. " (Tarek Ali, Bush in Babylon, Verso 2003 – Page 13 – 14)
Joe Sacco, during his visit to Palestine, quoted several Arab Jews arguing that Zionism came from Europe. The British mandate recorded several procedures of extortions of Zionists on local Palestinian Jews whereby the latter were forced to recruit Jewish labor and expel their own Palestinian Arab friends from their farms. The Ottomans' legacy also included tolerance and coexistence, which was more than comfortable for the World Zionist Organization to visit the Sultan and attempt to purchase Palestine. Of course, the final 9 years of the Ottoman empire changed radically when the nationalist Young Turks revolution took place. Bottom line, the policies of the Zionists, and their revisionist counterparts of Vladimir Japotinsky, stressed on expelling the expulsion of the local inhabitants of Palestine, and secure it to the Jewish nation. Hence, from their first moments of arrival to Palestine, their philosophy rotated around imposing the ethnic line. Suddenly, Palestinian Christians and Muslims suddenly found themselves gradually kicked out of their homes in Jerusalem, and elsewhere. Any Jew who didn't follow-up their program, the Zionists had all the means to extort and threaten the non-Zionist Jews.
King-Crane Commission and Lord Grey's Anti-Zionist Approach
As a revolutionary Marxist obliged to reconstruct history as it happened, we shall begin with the Zionist claims that Palestine was empty, The Zionists also had their cover-up in Europe. Supported by their vast network of contacts, and their advanced organization allowed them in World War I, the Zionists were able to receive offers from both, the Germans and the British, in regards to Palestine. Eventually, their socialist infrastructure allowed them to organize themselves better than the Palestinians who just immerged from the Ottoman dominion and jumped into British brutal rule and biased support to the Jews. As riots started to spring in the early 1920s and climaxed in 1929, the Zionists' propaganda was in jeopardy, Palestine was not an empty desert. Nevertheless the King-Crane commission proved the British wrong, sadly their advices were not listened to, and it meant that the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians would begin shortly after the Versailles treaties. The report and statistics of the Commission were as follows (after visiting Palestine in 1919):
Out of 260 petitions in Palestine:
For Complete Zionist Program: 7 Petitions (2.7%)
Modified Zionist Program: 8 Petitions (3%)
Against the Zionist Program: 222 Petitions (85.3%)
The recommendations of the Commission actually warned against the implementation of the Zionist Program, which was facilitated by Lord Balfour, by saying:
'For a national home for the Jewish people is not equivalent to making Palestine into a Jewish State, nor can the erection of such a Jewish State be accompanied without the gravest trespass upon the "civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine.'
The Commission also accused Zionism of breaching the very concept of Woodrow Wilson's 'Right for Self-Determination', and warned against the implementation of the Zionist Program, whereby they argued:
"If that principle is to rule [US President Woodrow Wilson's Self-Determination], and so the wishes of Palestine's population are to be decisive as to what is to be done with Palestine, then it is to be remembered that the non-Jewish population of Palestine – nearly nine-tenths of the whole – are emphatically against the entire Zionist program. The tables show that there was no one thing upon which the population of Palestine were more agreed on this." (in regards to the numbers given above)To subject a people so minded to unlimited Jewish immigration, and to steady financial and social pressure to surrender the land, would be a gross violation of the principle just quoted (Wilson's Self-Determination), and of the people's rights, though it kept within the forms of law.
They summed the demands of the Palestinians as follows:
"We oppose the pretentions of the Zionists to create a Jewish commonwealth in the southern part of Syria, known as Palestine, and oppose Zionist migration to any part of our country for we do not acknowledge their title, but consider them a grave peril to our people from the national, economical, and political points of view..."
The Commission recommended that the Zionist program be reduced drastically, : " In view of these considerations, and with a deep sense of sympathy for the Jewish cause, the Commissioners feel bound to recommend that only a greatly reduced Zionist program be attempted by the Peace Conference, and even that, only very gradually initiated. This would have to mean that Jewish immigration should be definitely limited, and that the project for making Palestine a Jewish commonwealth should be given up."
In Parallel, Sir Edward Grey, who was Foreign Secretary of the British Empire from 10905 – 1916, exploded in the House of the Lords in regards to the Balfour Declaration: "It promised a Zionist home without prejudice to the civil and religious rights of the population of Palestine. A Zionist home, my Lords, undoubtedly means or implies a Zionist Government over the district in which the home is placed, and 93 per cent of the population of Palestine are Arabs, I do not see how you can establish other than an Arab Government, without prejudice to their civil rights."
And prejudice was the correct term but the application was ethnic cleansing. The British mandate played a massive role in giving the Zionist Jews the right mechanisms.
Lt. – Col. W. F. Stirling, British Army Officer and Chief Staff Officer under T.E. Lawrence as well as ex-governer of Jaffa/Yafa) gave important testimonies on the riots that broke up that year in Jaffa (called in Arabic Yafa). In reaction of Jewish colonies expanding by that year, riots broke up between the Arabs and Jews:
"The [Balfour] declaration, however, coupled with the attitude of the Jews, caused the Arabs to fear an eventual Jewish domination; for while in stated that the British Government favoured the creation of a Jewish national home in Palestine, the Jewish interpretation of it, which was openly preached, suggested that we favored the conversion of the whole country into a national home for them. The Arabs, not unnaturally, took alarm. Poor an dinexperienced, they saw little chance of competing against their rivals, who were rich and clever, and who were also, as it seemed, being supported by the powerful British Government."
Riots broke out, while the government ordered that Hebrew, English, and Arabic to be used, the Zionist section refused to use the Arabic words. It is, in their nature, to divide the population as Jewish and non-Jewish. "Atrocities were committed by both sides, and some Arab women lying wounded in the fields were seen to have their breasts scythed off by Jewish colonists."
A final quote I will borrow from Stirling is on the ethnic character of Zionism. Most of the Jews were not Zionists, they regarded their fellow Christian and Muslim friends as colleagues. As I always mentioned, Zionism is the greatest bad news for Judaism. It is not recent that we saw the Orthodox Jews opposed Zionism. Zionism despised equality of the inhabitants of Palestine, and imposed this racial segregation:
"In the early days there were many Jews in Palestine who were not Zionists, but the pressure applied by the Jewish Agency became so great, and its Gestapo methods so severe, that few Jews dared openly express any other faith. Just before I left Jaffa a very important Jewish farmer from Richon-le-Zion sent a message asking if he could come and see me. I accordingly invited him to come to my office the following morning, but he refused to do that and asked for an appointment at my house after dark.
When he arrived he told me he had come to ask for my advice on a personal problem. He explained how, as a small boy, he had been brought to Palestine by his father, one of the biggest landowners of his village. Growing up there, he had made numerous friends among the little Arab boys of his own age. On his father's death he had taken over the property and naturally continued to employ his boyhood friends as herdsmen, ploughmen and teamsters. That morning, however, the Jewish Agency had ordered him to dismiss all his Arab employees and to engage some newly arrived Jewish immigrants at a wage-rate far excess of the pay of his Arab workmen. What should he do? If he dismissed the Arabs in the summary manner suggested, such bad feeling would be created, being a vindictive people, they might well burn his crops. Apart from this consideration, they also happened to be his friends. The Jews who had been proposed to him as labourers knew nothing about farming, and certainly nothing about the local conditions. The Arabs would work to all hours of the night if it were a question of getting a crop in before the rain; the Jews would down tools precisely at six o'clock, no matter what the weather. He now saw no possibility of working his land on economic lines, and he would inevitably go bankrupt." (Walid Khalidi, From Haven to Conquest, P. 219 – 237).
In his notebook, C.R. Ashbee (British Architect, Civic Adviser to the Palestine Administration), wrote:
"There is then the effort of clearing up and rebuilding a country, and the city of Jerusalem – for here the part is always greater than the whole – a country which to all men has a strange unreal sanctity. Palestine for most of us was an emotion rather than a reality."
"There was next the half-generous, wholly ignorant impulse, that this, as we English thought, empty land, this no man's land, this land lost to us when were last there in the days Edward Longshanks, might as we had now conquered it of the Turk be tossed to the Jews. So we thought."
"There was then – and here came the rub – a certain chivalrous reaction, and it came with greater knowledge. This country, it appeared, belonged after all to other people and they, too, had helped us win the war [WWI]. Who were these other people? What right had we to mortgage their inheritance? Might it not be a breach of trust? We have recently begun to find out the truth, to answer some of these troublesome questions."
The greater knowledge, clinging round the word "self-determination," came as an eye-opener. It showed us two things: first, that we were after all, as far as Palestine was concerned, only a part of Christendom; Greek, Italian, French, German, Russian, also had a share in the Holy Land, perhaps a greater share than we, even as St. Bernard, St. Francis, and St. Louis did more for Palestine, and meant more for the world, than Richard Coeur-de-Lion or Edward Longshanks. It showed us next there were also the Arab and the Moslem to be reckoned with, him to whom the Holy Land actually belonged , to whom the Holdy Land was equally holy, and whose record and achievement it – Amr, Abdul Malek, Al-Mamun , Saladin , Kalaoun , Kait Bey – were far greater than ours. We were learning a little history. "
Next Chapter: Roots for Zionist Tactic of the Modern Day
Saturday, January 17, 2009
War Crimes and Puppies...
Beirut of the July War 2006 seems heavenly compared to Gaza of January 2009...
Israeli atrocities never ended...
In the words of UN officials go as follows:
"A spokesman for Unrwa in Gaza, Chris Gunness, said: "There has to be an investigation to determine whether a war crime has been committed."
This is not the first time the UN has talked about war crimes in Gaza.
Earlier this month, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay said some Israeli actions reported in Gaza might warrant prosecutions for war crimes. "
On Thursday, Israel bombed three hospitals at the same time. This falls down as self defense.
Just like the seize fire of Lebanon in 2006, where the Arab Ministers assembled 'bravely', before leaving to New York, after a month of bombardment, they are taking the credit of stopping the war. The same is done by Mr. Puppy Ban as well. Israeli leadership is supposed to meet today to vote on a unilateral decision. Like always, they didn't do anything but massacres in the end result. Some argue that they want to maximize damage on the Palestinians of Gaza prior to Obama taking the Presidential seat, such as bombing 50 targets over the night.
As a matter of fact, Israel shelled again a UN school, but this time from an IDF tank. Death tolls in less than a month has totalled according to the UN 1203, and among them 400 children. UNRWA spokes man said:
"The Israeli army knew exactly our GPS co-ordinates and they would have known that hundreds of people had taken shelter there," he said.
"When you have a direct hit into the third floor of a UN school, there has to be an investigation to see if a war crime has been committed."
Picture from here
The UN at the top level been in a state of chaos, while Mr. Ban indirectly appeared helpless in front the Lebanese Parliament, elsewhere:
The president of the United Nations General Assembly has accused Israel of violating international law with its war on Gaza in which almost 1,100 Palestinians have been killed, nearly half of them civilians.
"Gaza is ablaze. It has been turned into a burning hell," Miguel d'Escoto Brockmann told an emergency session of the UN General Assembly in New York on Thursday.
He said Israel's offensive was "a war against a helpless, defenceless and imprisoned people" and accused Israel of carrying out attacks on civilian targets.
"The violations of international law inherent in the Gaza assault have been well documented: collective punishment, disproportionate military force [and] attacks on civilian targets, including homes, mosques, universities, schools," he said.
He also rebuked UN member-states for their lack of action over the crisis, saying: "The [UN Security Council] may have found itself unable or unwilling to take the necessary steps to impose an immediate ceasefire, but outsourcing that effort to one or two governments, or through the quartet, does not relieve the council of its own responsibilities under the UN charter.
"The council cannot disavow its collective responsibility. It cannot continue to fiddle while Gaza burns."
(link)
Nobody dares not to compare Karadzic to Olmert.
On a side note, yesterday's summit in Qatar witnessed Mauritanya and Qatar 'suspend' ties with Israel on the economic and political level. Suspend doesn't mean end actually, but it was enough to put Egypt's leadership in a more shameful position.
Israel also continues to reveal its true form of hypocracy even from the inside. Other than barring out the media from covering Gaza, they also barred out two of the three parties that run to their parliament from the Arab side.
"This racist government want us out of the Knesset during the war on Gaza," Mr Tibi told the BBC's Fouad Abu-ghosh.
"They are accusing us of supporting the terror while they are killing children in Gaza," he added.
President Moubarak (el Sharmout)
Moubarak speaks that he helped Gaza, what a hypocrite. He claims he allowed 1000 tons of aid through Egyptian borders and pressured Israel, and even had the nerve to say that Egypt hospitalized a 100 Palestinian. Funny he allowed Israel to bomb the hell out of Gaza, arrest pro-Gaza supporters, and shattered the Arab leaders from taking serious decisions against the genocide. Funny, Egypt can simply cut ties with Israel. Just when the seize fire is about to take place, Moubarak is taking credit for it "I demand Israel to stop its activities now", which also coincides with Israel voting on the unilateral decision. He also blames the Palestinian militants by 'listening to reason' and be quiet in order to lift the blockade. He kept the Rafah Corridor closed all the time and the Egyptian army shot at Palestinian refugees... what a bullshiter. He is a simply-sold out. Now he wants to organize a big summit to rebuild Gaza, again trying to shove Egypt as the central player in Arab affairs, at the expense of Palestinians facing starvation. One day, either him or his son will have a bad ass revolution. He is hilarious on how he ordered Israel to practice 'self-restraint'. Traitor! Even Turkey at least demanded the barring out of Israel outside the UN.
Isn't it funny he is repeating the same demands of the Doha summit where he refused to participate in?
The following demands will be taken to Sunday's Kuwait summit for pan-Arab approval:
- Strong condemnation of Israel
- Israel withdraws from Gaza
- Legal liability for Gaza "crimes"
- Re-opening of crossings
- "Sea-bridge" to supply Gaza
- Assist Palestinian reconciliation
- Establish Gaza rebuilding fund
Moubarak this is your self-restraint
(Pic taken from al-Jazeera main page)
no comment on Condi and Levni signing an agreement on blocking arms to Gaza which means Israel can have the perfect US coverage for bombing Gaza anytime they want?
Unilateral Seize Fire?
Israel are supposed tonight to be holding a meeting for their miniature government to vote on a unilateral seize fire. This seize fire is meaningless if they do not withdraw of Gaza. I remember perfectly clear what seize fire means to the Israeli in 1982, whereby they vote on a seize fire, but can continue moving wherever they want. If shot at, the IDF will reply with all brutality. This was one of the first slaps of the US diplomats in Lebanon then realizing how dirty the Israelis are when they agreed to a seize fire but proceeded moving towards the Syrian army which shot at them. Seize fire has to be a seize fire in motion and location. That is another plan to show how Israel wanted peace by stopping their inferno arsenal on the Palestinians, then be shot at (if they don't withdraw from Gaza and open the blockades).
Finally
Anyone feels to play darts on Mahmoud Abbas's picture?
Hamad bin Jassem bin Jabre el Thani (Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs in Qatar) exposed why Mahmoud Abbas failed to come in a dialogue manner on phone calls that took place five times from Doha to Abbas:
"Why are you not attending the Doha Summit, you are the president of the people, you are responsible for your people, and your presence is important"
Abbas: "I called Omre Moussa, he said there is no summit"
el Thani: Why didn't you call us?
Abbas: I need an authorization to leave, I cannot leave
El-Thani: We can fix you an authorization to leave
Abbas: I cannot leave, there are a lot of pressure on me, if I leave, I would seal myself to a sacrifice...
Afterwards Qatar sent one of its planes to bring Hamas. This exposes to what extent Moubarak, Abbas, and Isreali leadership are intertwined...
Time to dismantle the Arab League as a whole or move its HQ elsewhere...
MFL
Israeli atrocities never ended...
In the words of UN officials go as follows:
"A spokesman for Unrwa in Gaza, Chris Gunness, said: "There has to be an investigation to determine whether a war crime has been committed."
This is not the first time the UN has talked about war crimes in Gaza.
Earlier this month, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay said some Israeli actions reported in Gaza might warrant prosecutions for war crimes. "
On Thursday, Israel bombed three hospitals at the same time. This falls down as self defense.
Just like the seize fire of Lebanon in 2006, where the Arab Ministers assembled 'bravely', before leaving to New York, after a month of bombardment, they are taking the credit of stopping the war. The same is done by Mr. Puppy Ban as well. Israeli leadership is supposed to meet today to vote on a unilateral decision. Like always, they didn't do anything but massacres in the end result. Some argue that they want to maximize damage on the Palestinians of Gaza prior to Obama taking the Presidential seat, such as bombing 50 targets over the night.
As a matter of fact, Israel shelled again a UN school, but this time from an IDF tank. Death tolls in less than a month has totalled according to the UN 1203, and among them 400 children. UNRWA spokes man said:
"The Israeli army knew exactly our GPS co-ordinates and they would have known that hundreds of people had taken shelter there," he said.
"When you have a direct hit into the third floor of a UN school, there has to be an investigation to see if a war crime has been committed."
Picture from here
The UN at the top level been in a state of chaos, while Mr. Ban indirectly appeared helpless in front the Lebanese Parliament, elsewhere:
The president of the United Nations General Assembly has accused Israel of violating international law with its war on Gaza in which almost 1,100 Palestinians have been killed, nearly half of them civilians.
"Gaza is ablaze. It has been turned into a burning hell," Miguel d'Escoto Brockmann told an emergency session of the UN General Assembly in New York on Thursday.
He said Israel's offensive was "a war against a helpless, defenceless and imprisoned people" and accused Israel of carrying out attacks on civilian targets.
"The violations of international law inherent in the Gaza assault have been well documented: collective punishment, disproportionate military force [and] attacks on civilian targets, including homes, mosques, universities, schools," he said.
He also rebuked UN member-states for their lack of action over the crisis, saying: "The [UN Security Council] may have found itself unable or unwilling to take the necessary steps to impose an immediate ceasefire, but outsourcing that effort to one or two governments, or through the quartet, does not relieve the council of its own responsibilities under the UN charter.
"The council cannot disavow its collective responsibility. It cannot continue to fiddle while Gaza burns."
(link)
Nobody dares not to compare Karadzic to Olmert.
On a side note, yesterday's summit in Qatar witnessed Mauritanya and Qatar 'suspend' ties with Israel on the economic and political level. Suspend doesn't mean end actually, but it was enough to put Egypt's leadership in a more shameful position.
Israel also continues to reveal its true form of hypocracy even from the inside. Other than barring out the media from covering Gaza, they also barred out two of the three parties that run to their parliament from the Arab side.
"This racist government want us out of the Knesset during the war on Gaza," Mr Tibi told the BBC's Fouad Abu-ghosh.
"They are accusing us of supporting the terror while they are killing children in Gaza," he added.
President Moubarak (el Sharmout)
Moubarak speaks that he helped Gaza, what a hypocrite. He claims he allowed 1000 tons of aid through Egyptian borders and pressured Israel, and even had the nerve to say that Egypt hospitalized a 100 Palestinian. Funny he allowed Israel to bomb the hell out of Gaza, arrest pro-Gaza supporters, and shattered the Arab leaders from taking serious decisions against the genocide. Funny, Egypt can simply cut ties with Israel. Just when the seize fire is about to take place, Moubarak is taking credit for it "I demand Israel to stop its activities now", which also coincides with Israel voting on the unilateral decision. He also blames the Palestinian militants by 'listening to reason' and be quiet in order to lift the blockade. He kept the Rafah Corridor closed all the time and the Egyptian army shot at Palestinian refugees... what a bullshiter. He is a simply-sold out. Now he wants to organize a big summit to rebuild Gaza, again trying to shove Egypt as the central player in Arab affairs, at the expense of Palestinians facing starvation. One day, either him or his son will have a bad ass revolution. He is hilarious on how he ordered Israel to practice 'self-restraint'. Traitor! Even Turkey at least demanded the barring out of Israel outside the UN.
Isn't it funny he is repeating the same demands of the Doha summit where he refused to participate in?
The following demands will be taken to Sunday's Kuwait summit for pan-Arab approval:
- Strong condemnation of Israel
- Israel withdraws from Gaza
- Legal liability for Gaza "crimes"
- Re-opening of crossings
- "Sea-bridge" to supply Gaza
- Assist Palestinian reconciliation
- Establish Gaza rebuilding fund
Moubarak this is your self-restraint
(Pic taken from al-Jazeera main page)
no comment on Condi and Levni signing an agreement on blocking arms to Gaza which means Israel can have the perfect US coverage for bombing Gaza anytime they want?
Unilateral Seize Fire?
Israel are supposed tonight to be holding a meeting for their miniature government to vote on a unilateral seize fire. This seize fire is meaningless if they do not withdraw of Gaza. I remember perfectly clear what seize fire means to the Israeli in 1982, whereby they vote on a seize fire, but can continue moving wherever they want. If shot at, the IDF will reply with all brutality. This was one of the first slaps of the US diplomats in Lebanon then realizing how dirty the Israelis are when they agreed to a seize fire but proceeded moving towards the Syrian army which shot at them. Seize fire has to be a seize fire in motion and location. That is another plan to show how Israel wanted peace by stopping their inferno arsenal on the Palestinians, then be shot at (if they don't withdraw from Gaza and open the blockades).
Finally
Anyone feels to play darts on Mahmoud Abbas's picture?
Hamad bin Jassem bin Jabre el Thani (Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs in Qatar) exposed why Mahmoud Abbas failed to come in a dialogue manner on phone calls that took place five times from Doha to Abbas:
"Why are you not attending the Doha Summit, you are the president of the people, you are responsible for your people, and your presence is important"
Abbas: "I called Omre Moussa, he said there is no summit"
el Thani: Why didn't you call us?
Abbas: I need an authorization to leave, I cannot leave
El-Thani: We can fix you an authorization to leave
Abbas: I cannot leave, there are a lot of pressure on me, if I leave, I would seal myself to a sacrifice...
Afterwards Qatar sent one of its planes to bring Hamas. This exposes to what extent Moubarak, Abbas, and Isreali leadership are intertwined...
Time to dismantle the Arab League as a whole or move its HQ elsewhere...
MFL
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
