The Great Arab Spring and Its Implications

A wave has been sweeping over the Arab world, and US Foreign Policy journal wondered that who would be the next Arab dictator to go down.

I would like to dissect the latest events and their broader implications for the long run:

The Revolutions themselves

Several Westerners considered the revolutions as sparked by a man who set himself on fire in Tunisia. This is a reductionist approach where US intelligence misread (probably on purpose given the available wrath of your average Arab “Joe” or “Omar”) with the hope that stability would prevail over the wishes of the average Arab citizen.

I have to admit, I did anticipate that Tunis would eventually go head to head with its dictator, but like many, I thought that the first spark would be in Egypt. Moubarak’s regime has bled dry his society and the Egyptian revolution informally started since 2000 against the regime. By revolution; I define people going down the streets and demanding a simple request under the threat of the gun: “Freedom of Expression.”

General Petreus warned last year that the Arab-Israeli conflict (well I would like to define it these days as Palestinian/Lebanese conflict with Israel) has serious impact on the US interests. The brutality of the Israeli conflict on different fronts and the fact Israel on daily basis is criticized for its on-going settlements, destroying the prospects of peace, and a regional bully. The fact that the US Administration blindly supports Israel; US troops are under constant threat and furthermore US interests in the region are under threat.

General Petreus’s comments came 9 years late (if not at least four decades late). As the Second Intifada exploded; its spill-over hit Egypt. Protestors hit the streets in solidarity with the Palestinian civilians while Hosni Mubarak’s apparatus simply crushed the demonstrators with an Iron Fist. Since then, solidarity with the Palestinians became the symbol of resisting Hosni Mubarak.

For those who have no clue about Palestine’s symbolism on the Arab world (and by Arab I do not mean Muslim only). Palestine proper (which includes currently Israel) has been regarded as the last of European colonialism by the Arabs; especially the Western support it harvested. The fact dictators of the Arab world (excluding Syria even though Syria and the US always flirted with each other) shook hands with the following agreement: “Pro-West alliances at the expense of the average citizen.” The Arab citizen has been oppressed by dictators who seek to renew their mandate indefinitely and the West who seek “stable Middle East” (a synonym for oil and imposing normalization with Israel on the people without Israel itself coming into terms on how it was founded on genocidal base).
In my opinion, pride as humans, economic repressions, Orientalism, and ongoing colonialism played its role. The Arab-Israeli conflict is included within all of them. The Palestinian question, as Arabs (Christians and Muslims) regard that the Palestinians historically have been most wronged among the Arabs. The fact the UN has been (till recently Libya) has been regarded a muscle show forum among the regional and international powers). They remained crippled against on-going atrocities (especially due to the veto power) and the very fact that the US-UK coalition simply by-passed the UN and invaded Iraq for securing the oils.

In a way, the average citizen lost voice; their dictators are praised as democratic or “friend of the West”. The Arab citizen has been depicted as stupid, Islamist conservative, and a hopeless case for evolving towards Western standards (as if your American average Joe as a clue at least about the geography of the world or Israel itself is really Western). There was no greater irony than Obama giving the greatest speech on Human Rights in Cairo in 2009 amidst mass demonstrations against Hosni Mubarak. Whether Obama was aloof (on purpose or not), but he did not mention the dictator of over 80,000,000 people.

Some people argued that faceook created those revolutions., I doubt that at all. In my opinion, online means of communications and reporting (in Egypt people read blogs to know what is going on and not puppy like official newspapers). If anything, the facebook phenomenon became a catalyst for the forthcoming rage of citizens oppressed for decades.

What are the implications due to the rise of the Arab spring?

For starters, there is no longer media blackout. The world became too small to cover the incidents across the Arab world. Just as the revolution resurrected on new levels in Egypt, the Western media (most of it) tried to marginalize the revolution as another factory rebellion and stressed on the peace process. Despite the fact that Tunis was the first to shoot down its dictator in the most heroic manner, Egypt was on the spotlight due to the peace treaty. Israel informed all its embassies across the world that they should pressure governments globally to support Mubarak. The US administration itself fluctuated its speeches depending whether the revolution appeared at its final breath or not. When it looked like Mubarak was about to reassert his iron grip, Clinton insisted that Mubarak should “lead” the democratic wave. When Mubarak finally fell down, Merkel appeared as ignorant as it can gets: “New Egypt should respect the peace treaty with Israel.” Israeli officials were pushing support to Hosni Mubarak without realizing that this accelerated his downfall.

The selfishness of Israel in imposing Hosni Mubarak on the Egyptian people for its own interest will have (hopefully) repercussions in the near future. Israel disregarded the beautiful images of demonstrators’ heroics because that entity expects a special treatment from the world. Even if we believe that Israel represents the interests of the Jews across the world (which we all know it is false), the number of Egyptians outnumbers the Jews globally).

Due to the dense coverage of al-Jazeera English in Tunis and Egypt forced other media outlets to follow pace with the Arab media. As a matter of fact, even US officials were depending on al-Jazeera to issue statements. With al-Jazeera proving its superiority against Western outlets, more and more non-Arabs will be exposed to the real situation in the Arab world, and actually hear Arab opinions on whatever happens anywhere (the next war on the Palestinian or Lebanese, I bet plenty of Westerns will be shocked to see the brutality of the Israeli army and its fascistic elements).

Just as Hosni Mubarak was promoted as a true friend of the West, it changed in a week as the horrible dictator. The same can be applied on Israel. It takes only a week of objective reporting to change the US mainstream towards Israel. Already the Palestinian papers showed that it was the Palestinians who were the true partners of “peace” (whatever that peace Fatah thought of) and they declined it. Pro Human Rights groups, Palestinian solidarity groups, Jewish and Arab organizations, American NGOs, the stupidity of the current Israeli leadership in not hiding its on-going genocidal policies, and other factors exerts more pressure on AIPAC to maintain its iron grip in the main hubs (DC, New York, Chicago, others).

The final question goes: “ok, what about Syria?”. Syria as I mentioned earlier as always flirted with the US Administration. The US regarded al-Assad regime as the lesser evil in the face of the Muslim Brotherhood in Syria. From such a view, al-Assad is a darling angel. When the tyrant Saddam hid, Bush declared that the Syrian Baathi Party shall follow the Iraqi Baathi, Tony Blair in less than an hour went on TV and gave a detailed speech why al-Assad is different than Saddam. Al-Assad regime has been brutal on its people; the difference is al-Assad gambled on a heavy security apparatus, provide the minimum of welfare (when available) to his people, and relied on the Arab-Israeli conflict to marginalize his opponents. I still find it amusing how he dubs the Syrian opposition as American or Israeli agents even though the ones accused are loud and clear Marxists.

The current situation teaches us that anything can happen in the Arab world. Just as CNN, despite AIPAC’s iron grip on the US media, tried the impossible to blackout the incidents of Egypt, started reporting the incidents as they were happening. CNN only reported objectively (despite blaming the victims themselves) was during the Qana massacres of 1996 and 2006 in Lebanon, where the CNN were present on site. Despite the challenges, Israel’s true face will one day be exposed and the US mainstream media will change its opinion (a growing fear for the past five years in Lebanon).

The current countries that have been affected by the Arab spring as follows: Tunis, Egypt, Libya, Yaman, and Bahrain. To a lesser extent, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Iraq, and Syria. You never know where the Arab spring will explode.

Now when looking at the bigger picture, a different set of lessons are prevalent

1) The Arabs are not waiting for Western blessings to proceed and seek their freedom
2) The Revolutions are completely sparked from the inside.
3) Once the revolution picks up, the Arabs are willing to go seek their freedom or just die trying, as the case of Libya taught us. The Libyans from day 1 warned al-Qazzafi to step down or go ahead and kill the people; if the latter had happened, the Libyans were proud that Qazzafi would just rule empty buildings.
4) (This is my favorite part) The Arabs are teaching the whole world about freedom, human rights, and even democracy; something the average citizen has forgot about in the West or 3rd World due to media alienation and class struggle.

The other dimension to focus on is the decline of the West

Almost all the leaders facing protests and revolutions have been the friends of the West. AL-Saleh of Yamen or lunatic Qazzafi (Tony Blair’s best friend) were regarded as tyrants installed by the West. The West’s interests fluctuates and it is apparent on how they react. A dense media blackout was imposed on Bahrain (easiest way to call the Bahrain incidents as Iran led revolution, reminds us of Lebanon in 2006) as Bahrain is in the direct sphere of influence that is owned by Saudi Arabia. Bahrain in specific is a new battleground where the revolution in Al-Jazeera itself has been blacked out. Bahrain is a monarchy , and the only Arab state where the Arab spring has threatened a monarchy. While most gulf states are monarchies, they have to support militarily the Bahraini monarchy in order to maintain their own rule. Last thing the Monarchs of the Arab gulf want a domino effect spreading in their own turf (although factory strikes did start briefly in Saudi Arabia).

The other dimension to focus on is the stupidity of the US foreign Administration in approaching the Arab world historically. Their blatant arrogance of dictating terms on the dictators in returns of arms (Egypt’s entire aid from the US went to the pockets of Husni Mubarak who turned out to have more money than the Hariri family itself) cost it several allies. Whether Tunis’s Ben Ali, Hosni Mubarak, or excommunicating Qazzafi served as a lesson for the rest of the Arab dictators. They can be replaced. Tunis was swift and ended up in the downfall of its dictator. Egypt was a greater battle arena as Mubarak tried to contain the situation by draining the protestors’ energy, and stepped down just as the evening before the protestors started to become more militants and started to form a siege across governmental locations. Libya is the most brutal of all; because the nature of its dictator= insane with enough militias across the African continent. Anther blow for the US came when its primary ally, Saad el Hariri was ousted from the government (even though that is not related to the Arab Spring, but fits the picture of the different slaps the US administration has been facing).

As for Lebanon, the leftist youth tried to ride the wave and now are pushing for the abolition of the sectarian system. On weekly basis there has been the most beautiful demonstrations against the system. Sadly, we cannot go against our own leaders (for now) because Lebanon does not have one Hosni, one Qazzafi, or one Ben Ali. Each of Lebanon’s sects has three or four Hosni style of dictators and the battle in Lebanon is yet to rage on. In one of my greatest wishes and hopes to see the Left in Lebanon unified as the heroics of the proletariat across the Arab world inspired us.

As for the Palestinians, as hopeless as it is, especially for those in Palestine proper, their leaderships turned out to have one thing in common with the Israeli fascist government: they did their best to block demonstrators express solidarity with the Arab freedom lovers. Hamas, Fatah, and Israel are the biggest bad news for their people, with a bigger highlight on the fact that Israel is the biggest bad news for the global Jewish world as the latter bargains on the racism of the West to renew their legitimacy.

Finally , I would like to add the last lesson acquired from the Arab Spring. Several bourgeoisies in the Arab world and the West stressed that the civil society is the best option to reform the Arab world and make it democratic (for my readers’ information US AID was promoting in Tunis Ben Ali as the man for democracy). Some NGOs may achieve a tiny (irrelevant) progress but without impacting the structure of the state. In the end of the day, a class awareness is needed to demolish those dictators in power, with or without the approval of the West. The entire hopes on the civil society should be understood by now that it is false. Some NGOs are good in reporting and documenting violations or propose some changes (as long as it is not a free market or neocon logic).

The day of the proletariat in the Arab world has come. Decades of boiling wrath can no longer be subdued.

I apologize for not writing as often for different reasons that I will explain thoroughly one day.

No war but class war
MFL

Israel and the US

"It isnt Israeli terrortists that are trying to bomb us. Can we befreind those who wish to destroy us" - Haaretz commentator

The recent condemnation of Clinton to the Bibi government doesn't express much except how much the US is expected to serve Israeli interests.

To the Haaretz commentator, it is about Israeli ongoing terrorism. It is not about Palestinian terrorism, rather it is about who destroyed Palestine in the first place, with records of British archives that the Zionists owned by 1948 only 6% of Palestine proper (with 50% of that 6% being owned by the Jewish Agency and its accessories). You cannot build an argument that "Israel had been occupied by the Arabs for 2000 years. As far as we know, the current Palestinians probably are the direct descendants of those 'biblical' Jews while the Jewish diaspora which is supposed to return has no means to prove anything. Probably the Arab Jews can prove to be descendants, but that is it. Jerusalem was never Jewish, it had been rather a mixed city for all. Since Zionists love to go back to the past, the place where Jews enjoyed best treatment in the past was during the Ottoman Empire, and even before. Shlomo Sands argued that during the Islamic conquests of the Arab peninsula, they played their cards right: Imagine that the Caliphate empire suddenly in the 21st century arrived to USA and promised everyone exemption from the IRS taxes if they converted, would they?

So who destroyed who? That is the question to always refer to back to 1948. That year is not that old for us, since the same genocidal messages continue to carry on:

1) Same logos used by the terrorists (later awarded prime ministers) of the Irgun/Stern/others. As far as I am concerned, there is no difference between the Haganah or Stern

2) An entity that is based on genocide, bans the remaining natives from practicing their identity. The co-director of the Award nominated Ajami is the biggest example of crying racism against his people. He reinforced his Palestinian identity while denounced Israel as an entity that doesn't represent him or his rights. Someone will say: "if he hates it, he should leave", I argue that this is a real native, and has the right to pin-point racism. It is like saying to a native of Latin American or North America (with the latter denied identity and dubbed Indian) to leave the Americas if not happy.

3) Someone will highlight the post 1948 massacres of Jews in the Arab world. I agree, those were horrible brutality, and Arab leaders need to recognize those massacres. Nevertheless, given the temporal framework, Zionism brought racism to the Jews in the Arab World due to its behavior with the Palestinians.

4) Even if someone would tell me: there was never Palestinians, if that holds true, is it justified to murder all those "Arabs" and ethnically cleanse them, and demolish their towns?

Clinton's latest statements are nothing new. AIPAC's fury http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1156467.html from heavens. Even that tiny chunk of land which is designated for the Palestinians is being ethnically cleansed. Gaza is under a worst siege in modern times (yes, I would bluntly argue worse than Sarajevo because no one is denouncing the siege). The West Bank is gradually losing to more settlements, while East Jerusalem is gradually being eliminated from natives, due to fascistic biblical claims (or let us call it superstition).

Had Clinton been serious about those negotiations, Biden wouldn't have had pledged the "We die for Israel's security" logic. I am certain the people in the White House are having headaches from Israel. Nevertheless, due to AIPAC, condemnations have been only words. Obama's administration's problem, to AIPAC, is that it is not giving the Israeli administration any greenlight enjoyed under the war-criminal Bush Jr.

Of all the countries in the world, Israel in theory should be the easiest country to pull all strings. Without the US, in terms of financial, military, and political aids (VETO POWER among other things in the UN), the US can simply cut down on these aids and twist Israel's arms. If the almighty US is facing all those political blockades, what did you leave for the Palestinians.

The saying goes: "Takes one to know one". The US, instead of highlighting how Palestinians are victims of past and present genocide, decided to go for the Armenian genocide. I agree, it is important to highlight that fact. Yet, the method of recognizing the Armenian Genocide is not logical at all, after all, the US itself committed genocide. If the US condemns Israel's current actions and links it to the past, I am certain, the Zionists will reply the same to the US, forgetting that the USA is the lifeline of Israel's survival.

The Cold war had been over, and Israel played its role. This doesn't mean that "War on Islam" as Israeli fanatics has been there. The US has almost allies in all the Arab world, except for Syria. Israel's role is diminishing, yet, the US congressmen cannot commit political suicide by denouncing activities. Clinton, whom we all hate, suddenly became a Muslim lover and anti-semite, due to the picture posted with Arafat's wife. Allow me to remember one thing, wasn't Moshe Dayan's wife, Ruth, in touch till this very day with Arafat's wife? Does that make Moshe Dayan a self hating Jew? The Jews are fed up from Zionism, and apparently so is the world (except for the countries that committed genocide during WWII).

If Israel expects the whole world to remember the Holocaust as Jewish (which wasn't just Jewish as far as I remember), the Palestinians have the right to exist and remember the on-going genocide (the attempt to build those new house units in East Jerusalem, although for the record, there are plenty more settlements). The US probably would have turned their eye on that issue had it not receive a slap in the face in the eyes of the world: Tiny Israel insulted the great United States of America. Of course, now the Zionist sympathizers, they argue that Obama is a Muslim in disguise. This also brings the African Americans (the religious ones) to hate Zionism as well. This is not anti-semitism.

With the situation of the "Israeli Arabs" whom we call heroic Palestinians who are surviving genocide under harsh conditions are reaching new poverty lines, the collisions between the Palestinians and the Zionists is evolving to become a new class struggle.

MFL

R.I.P. Howard Zinn

By Mark Feeney and Bryan Marquard, Globe Staff - Boston News

Howard Zinn, the Boston University historian and political activist who was an early opponent of US involvement in Vietnam and whose books, such as "A People's History of the United States," inspired young and old to rethink the way textbooks present the American experience, died today in Santa Monica, Calif, where he was traveling. He was 87.

His daughter, Myla Kabat-Zinn of Lexington, said he suffered a heart attack.

"He's made an amazing contribution to American intellectual and moral culture," Noam Chomsky, the left-wing activist and MIT professor, said tonight. "He's changed the conscience of America in a highly constructive way. I really can't think of anyone I can compare him to in this respect."


Chomsky added that Dr. Zinn's writings "simply changed perspective and understanding for a whole generation. He opened up approaches to history that were novel and highly significant. Both by his actions, and his writings for 50 years, he played a powerful role in helping and in many ways inspiring the Civil rights movement and the anti-war movement."
For Dr. Zinn, activism was a natural extension of the revisionist brand of history he taught. "A People’s History of the United States" (1980), his best-known book, had for its heroes not the Founding Fathers -- many of them slaveholders and deeply attached to the status quo, as Dr. Zinn was quick to point out -- but rather the farmers of Shays' Rebellion and union organizers of the 1930s.

As he wrote in his autobiography, "You Can't Be Neutral on a Moving Train" (1994), "From the start, my teaching was infused with my own history. I would try to be fair to other points of view, but I wanted more than 'objectivity'; I wanted students to leave my classes not just better informed, but more prepared to relinquish the safety of silence, more prepared to speak up, to act against injustice wherever they saw it. This, of course, was a recipe for trouble."

Certainly, it was a recipe for rancor between Dr. Zinn and John Silber, former president of Boston University. Dr. Zinn, a leading critic of Silber, twice helped lead faculty votes to oust the BU president, who in turn once accused Dr. Zinn of arson (a charge he quickly retracted) and cited him as a prime example of teachers "who poison the well of academe."

Dr. Zinn was a cochairman of the strike committee when BU professors walked out in 1979. After the strike was settled, he and four colleagues were charged with violating their contract when they refused to cross a picket line of striking secretaries. The charges against "the BU Five" were soon dropped.

In 1997, Dr. Zinn slipped into popular culture when his writing made a cameo appearance in the film "Good Will Hunting." The title character, played by Matt Damon, lauds "A People’s History" and urges Robin Williams’s character to read it. Damon, who co-wrote the script, was a neighbor of the Zinns growing up.

"Howard had a great mind and was one of the great voices in the American political life," Ben Affleck, also a family friend growing up and Damon's co-star in "Good Will Hunting," said in a statement. "He taught me how valuable -- how necessary -- dissent was to democracy and to America itself. He taught that history was made by the everyman, not the elites. I was lucky enough to know him personally and I will carry with me what I learned from him -- and try to impart it to my own children -- in his memory."

Damon was later involved in a television version of the book, "The People Speak," which ran on the History Channel in 2009, and he narrated a 2004 biographical documentary, "Howard Zinn: You Can't Be Neutral on a Moving Train."

"Howard had a genius for the shape of public morality and for articulating the great alternative vision of peace as more than a dream," said James Carroll a columnist for the Globe's opinion pages whose friendship with Dr. Zinn dates to when Carroll was a Catholic chaplain at BU. "But above all, he had a genius for the practical meaning of love. That is what drew legions of the young to him and what made the wide circle of his friends so constantly amazed and grateful."

Dr. Zinn was born in New York City on Aug. 24, 1922, the son of Jewish immigrants, Edward Zinn, a waiter, and Jennie (Rabinowitz) Zinn, a housewife. He attended New York public schools and was working in the Brooklyn Navy Yard when he met Roslyn Shechter.

"She was working as a secretary," Dr. Zinn said in an interview with the Globe nearly two years ago. "We were both working in the same neighborhood, but we didn't know each other. A mutual friend asked me to deliver something to her. She opened the door, I saw her, and that was it."

He joined the Army Air Corps, and they courted through the mail before marrying in October 1944 while he was on his first furlough. She died in 2008.

During World War II, he served as a bombardier, was awarded the Air Medal, and attained the rank of second lieutenant.

After the war, Dr. Zinn worked at a series of menial jobs until entering New York University on the GI Bill as a 27-year-old freshman. He worked nights in a warehouse loading trucks to support his studies. He received his bachelor’s degree from NYU, followed by master’s and doctoral degrees in history from Columbia University.

Dr. Zinn was an instructor at Upsala College and lecturer at Brooklyn College before joining the faculty of Spelman College in Atlanta, in 1956. He served at the historically black women’s institution as chairman of the history department. Among his students were novelist Alice Walker, who called him "the best teacher I ever had," and Marian Wright Edelman, future head of the Children's Defense Fund.

During this time, Dr. Zinn became active in the civil rights movement. He served on the executive committee of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, the most aggressive civil rights organization of the time, and participated in numerous demonstrations.

Dr. Zinn became an associate professor of political science at BU in 1964 and was named full professor in 1966.

The focus of his activism became the Vietnam War. Dr. Zinn spoke at many rallies and teach-ins and drew national attention when he and the Rev. Daniel Berrigan, another leading antiwar activist, went to Hanoi in 1968 to receive three prisoners released by the North Vietnamese.

Dr. Zinn’s involvement in the antiwar movement led to his publishing two books: "Vietnam: The Logic of Withdrawal" (1967) and "Disobedience and Democracy" (1968). He had previously published "LaGuardia in Congress" (1959), which had won the American Historical Association's Albert J. Beveridge Prize; "SNCC: The New Abolitionists" (1964); "The Southern Mystique" (1964); and "New Deal Thought" (1966).

He also was the author of "The Politics of History" (1970); "Postwar America" (1973); "Justice in Everyday Life" (1974); and "Declarations of Independence" (1990).

In 1988, Dr. Zinn took early retirement to concentrate on speaking and writing. The latter activity included writing for the stage. Dr. Zinn had two plays produced: "Emma," about the anarchist leader Emma Goldman, and "Daughter of Venus."

On his last day at BU, Dr. Zinn ended class 30 minutes early so he could join a picket line and urged the 500 students attending his lecture to come along. A hundred did.

"Howard was an old and very close friend," Chomsky said. "He was a person of real courage and integrity, warmth and humor. He was just a remarkable person."

Carroll called Dr. Zinn "simply one of the greatest Americans of our time. He will not be replaced -- or soon forgotten. How we loved him back."

In addition to his daughter, Dr. Zinn leaves a son, Jeff of Wellfleet; three granddaughters; and two grandsons.

Funeral plans were not available.


MFL Notes: For the Americans who don't know their own history of war crimes, I highly recommend to read A People's History of American Empire in Comics.

Some photos of the Comics is here

The Book can be found here

Case Point: Robert Weissman: Shed a Tear for Our (U.S.) Democracy

Taken from Corpwatch.org



Yesterday, in the case Citizens United v. FEC, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that corporations have a First Amendment right to spend unlimited amounts of money to influence election outcomes.

Money from Exxon, Goldman Sachs, Pfizer and the rest of the Fortune 500 is already corroding the policy making process in Washington, state capitals and city halls. Now, the Supreme Court tells these corporate giants that they have a constitutional right to trample our democracy.

In eviscerating longstanding rules prohibiting corporations from using their own monies to influence elections, the court invites giant corporations to open up their treasuries to buy election outcomes. Corporations are sure to accept the invitation.


The predictable result will be corporate money flooding the election process; huge targeted campaigns by corporations and their front groups attacking principled candidates who challenge parochial corporate interests; and a chilling effect on candidates and election officials, who will be deterred from advocating and implementing policies that advance the public interest but injure deep-pocket corporations.


Because the decision is made on First Amendment constitutional grounds, the impact will be felt not only at the federal level, but in the states and localities, including in state judicial elections.

In one sense, the decision was a long time in coming. Over the past 30 years, the Supreme Court has created and steadily expanded the First Amendment protections that it has afforded for-profit corporations.

But in another sense, the decision is a startling break from Supreme Court tradition. Even as it has mistakenly equated money with speech in the political context, the court has long upheld regulations on corporate spending in the electoral context. The Citizens United decision is also an astonishing overreach by the court. No one thought the issue of corporations' purported right to spend money to influence election outcomes was at stake in this case until the Supreme Court so decreed. The case had been argued in lower courts, and was originally argued before the Supreme Court, on narrow grounds related to application of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law.

The court has invented the idea that corporations have First Amendment rights to influence election outcomes out of whole cloth. There is surely no originalist interpretation to support this outcome, since the court created the rights only in recent decades. Nor can the outcome be justified in light of the underlying purpose and spirit of the First Amendment. Corporations are state-created entities, not real people. They do not have expressive interests like humans; and, unlike humans, they are uniquely motivated by a singular focus on their economic bottom line.

Corporate spending on elections defeats rather than advances the democratic thrust of the First Amendment.

We, the People cannot allow this decision to go unchallenged. We, the People cannot allow corporations to take control of our democracy.

There are some things that can be done to mitigate the damage from today's decision.

First, we must have public financing of elections. Public financing will give independent candidates a base from which they may be able to compete against candidates benefiting from corporate expenditures. We will intensify our efforts to win rapid passage of the Fair Elections Now Act, which would provide congressional candidates with an alternative to corporate-funded campaigns before fundraising for the 2010 election is in full swing. Sponsored by Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Illinois, and Rep. John Larson, D-Connecticut, the bill would encourage unlimited small-dollar donations from individuals and provide candidates with public funding in exchange for refusing corporate contributions or private contributions in amounts of more than $100. The proposal has broad support, including more than 126 co-sponsors in the House.

In the wake of the court's decision, it is also essential that the presidential public financing system be made viable again. Cities and states will also need to enact public financing of elections.

Congress must ensure that corporate CEOs do not use corporate funds for political purposes, against the wishes of shareholders, with legislation requiring an absolute majority of shares to be voted in favor, before any corporate political expenditure is permitted. There are other legislative approaches to limit today's damage, including a range of measures proposed by Representative Alan Grayson, D-Florida.

These mitigating measures will not be enough to offset today's decision, however. The decision itself must be overturned.

We need a constitutional amendment specifying that for-profit corporations are not entitled to First Amendment protections, except for freedom of the press. A constitutional amendment is not a thing to throw around lightly. But today's decision so imperils our democratic well-being, and so severely distorts the rightful purpose of the First Amendment, that a constitutional corrective is demanded.

Winning a constitutional amendment will be a long-term effort. The starting point is for the people to petition their government to demand action. Public Citizen with allies has launched such a petition effort. Got to to sign the petition.

The Supreme Court has lost its way. Democracy is rule of the people -- real, live humans, not artificial entity corporations. Now it's time for the people to reassert their rights.

Robert Weissman is president of Public Citizen .

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

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.

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!

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

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

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

The Doha Conference, A Great Divide, and A Whirlpool of Ironies

The Doha Conference:

'They come in fancy planes while the people are dying...'

As the number of Palestinian casualties jumps to 1133, those rotten Arab countries so far offered nothing to Palestine. Just as Israel got away in dissecting the West Bank, the massacres of Gaza are exceeding all forms of butcheries. More than 20 Palestinians had been located under the ruins of a building, which means some of them died out of suffocation. Of course, this is dubbed self – defense by Israel.

Conferences and more conferences

The split of the Arab League peaked officially today. Saudi Arabia and Egypt clearly displayed their muscles by blocking the Qataris from having a quorum to meet under the patronage of the Arab League, and take decisions in that regard. This however doesn't mean Qatar is a weakling compared to the former two. Qatar managed to gather 13 voters within the Arab league despite Egypt and Saudi Arabia's obstructions, even though that was not enough to hold a quorum. The Saudi Regime and their allies the Egyptian Regime never forgave how Prince Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani took the lead in spearheading a Lebanese Dialogue that brought a temporary peace to Lebanon.
Meanwhile, Abbas still argues that the peace treaty is under threat, and still unaware that there never was anything called Peace. The Israeli war-machinery never stopped to do peace. Elsewhere the Doha conference kicked off in order to discuss different means of halting the war. Again, no results, but interesting headlines popped out.

Hamas's Mishaal was present, which is natural. Where there is no Fatah, there is Hamas. Hamas repeated their insistence on halting the butchery of the innocent civilians. He argued that Israeli Forces should withdraw from Gaza, cut their war, end the blockade, open the routes of Gaza, and hold Israel accountable for their war crimes. He insisted on how the Palestinians are practically unarmed. He insisted on the time factor, where as they speak, more citizens are dying. Hamas had secured its representation of the Palestinian resistance and the sufferings of the people of Gaza. He also stressed on how Israel is trying to invent new realities, something that Rice supported. In her own words, the seize fire will not take place or else a temporary peace will take place and a new war. Nevertheless, she failed to mention who is the real aggressor on the issue. Mishaal also described the harsh conditions the people of Gaza are living through, and equated his resistance to that of Hezbollah where he argued that it was the same resistance that expelled Israel from the Southern Lebanese region and Gaza. He also highlighted that the resistance of the Palestinians is capable to achieve victory, mainly because they can remain alive after Israel bombed everything. Nevertheless, as I mentioned earlier, Israel's main purpose is not to dismantle Hamas, rather the Zionist country needs Hamas to gain more funds, arms, and settle internal scores in the elections. For example Ehud Barak jumped 17% in the Israeli opinion when the offensive started, which made him the primary competitor to Levni for the Prime Minister position. Nevertheless, Mishaal's pleas to save the Palestinians was fully felt, but the method he gave his pleas, with a steadfast position, allowed him to divulge the charisma he has. Unlike Abbas who is begging the international community to send an international force, similar to UNIFIL, but to bring Hamas under control so that he can live in peace Israel; hence disregarding all the demonstrations that took place in the West Bank in solidarity with Gaza, to which he barely expressed anything.

I have to admit, what nerves of steel Meshaal displayed, specially in less than 24 hours the Israelis killed his colleague, Hamas's minister of interior Said Siam, along with his brother and son.

The Syrian President

The Syrian President spoke next, as always, he took the leadership of opposing the Israelis and fighting for the Arab cause. He gave credit to the Lebanese resistance for defeating the Israelis in 2000 and 2006, and how both the Lebanese and Palestinians are exporting the spirit of resistance to elsewhere in the Arab world. Indirectly, he separated the Arab world to those who surrender, and those who are resisting. He also argued how those who achieve peace by resisting an occupier, and those who accept peace in seeking their own interests. He also, to give himself credit for the July war, also stressed on the importance of standing next to a country. Although as far as I remember, Syria made money on Lebanon's expense due to the July war, he refused to open a front on his side, denied any Israeli missiles falling on Syrian grounds, and probably the credit he takes is using his land to smuggle weaponry to Hezbollah and their allies.

Nevertheless, the Syrian president, in my personal opinion scored highly in the face of other Arab leaders. While it is true that the majority of the Arab citizens are frustrated by their helplessness, he used the 1970s language of the 'Arab revolutionary' where he summarized that time is not on the Israeli side, but he got philosophical on how each generation becomes more wrathful to Israeli brutality. Throughout his speech, he also hinted to Egypt and Saudi Arabia on their unwillingness to do anything about the on-going massacres. He also expressed the distrust of the Arab world in the International Court to hold Israel accountable.
Finally, his contribution to the summit is by suspending the indirect negotatiations with Israel, spoke in an apocalyptic manner in regards to Gaza and the Golan Heights witnessing a new victory, and the importance of funding the Palestinians with all means possible, ranging from materialistic aid to moral boast.

Lebanese President

The Lebanese President, Michel Suleiman, was next to speak. Unlike the days of Emil Lahoud, for once the Lebanese President's speech was different than what the Syrians wanted him to deliver. The other side of the story, Michel Suleiman's travel to Qatar was dubbed as Hezbollah and Amal imposing their demands on the Lebanese President to travel. Nevertheless, the speech he read in Doha was quiet different. Again, the Suleiman succeeded in copy pasting demands of what was known as the 'Opposition' and 14th of March demands. The Prince of Qatar, Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa, back in the July war was regarded a 14th of March supporter, now he is regarded as an 8th of March follower.

President Suleiman's speech began with how Lebanon 'victoriously' extracted UN resolution 1701, and insisted on how Israel continued to breach it. He gave credit to the Lebanese citizens, the Lebanese resistance, and the Lebanese army for crushing the Israeli offensive of 2006. Nevertheless, Suleiman's speech rotated around on keeping Lebanon out of war with Israel, and stressed on how Lebanon's role is non-alignment, whereby its role is to tackle those rifts in the Arab World. Of course, he didn't give any hints on Egypt, Saudi Arabia, or any other country, rather projecting on how the Arabs should be united and gave a long-run period for that, which till then probably half of the people of Gaza would be killed.

Nevertheless, being a president of country that defeated Israel on three different eras, he had the aura to escalate, but didn't escalate beyond providing sympathy to the people of Gaza. Prince Hamad bin Khalifa hailed the President as being part of the resistance when he was the head of the Lebanese Army.

It has to be noted, that the Qatari Prince, and the Lebanese & Syrian Presidents, appeared while reading their speeches as if they are in the middle of an Arabic reading test. Other than Meshaal's eloquent Arabic, the others repeated several times Arabic words, and corrected grammar rules as they read.

The Moon Islands , Mauritania, and Iraq

The Moon islands are a couple of small islands that were glued into a republic. While repeating the atrocities of the Israelis, and like the earlier presidents, blamed the Arab leaderships for taking so much time in taking any actions, proposed to form a committee from the attendees, and tour around the major players in the International Community to raise awareness against the Israelis, and properly to unify media efforts in exposing the Israeli brutality, mainly to the Western audience.

Mauritania was probably the most hilarious country of them all. Just recovering from a military coup and preserving a peace treaty with Israel, all eyes went on the speaker. Nobody understood anything what he said, as his Arabic was rather very weak, and he didn't discuss anything about cutting ties with Israel. He did condemn the Israeli brutality, based on what was understood, but that was it. Everyone issued relief sighs of 'Thank Heaven the torture is over' when he finished.
The Iraqi Vice President was next, as much as he condemned the Israeli aggression, he reiterated Iraq's historical role in standing next to Palestine. Nevertheless, he didn't express anything about the US intervention in Iraq, nor whether Iraq as a nation state still exists theoretically with all the cantons present there. But I also realized that their minister of education was targeted in a bomb there, and I wondered for how long this man will stay alive.

Iran's Ahmadinejad

As probably participating as a guest, he expressed his ideas as well. We all know what Iran's role in arming Hezbollah, and giving them the right technology in beating Israel's ass out of Lebanon, then watching how their infantry were sitting ducks to Hezbollah's warriors. Who would thought that those Merkava tanks are destructible? Not complaining on seeing a popped out tank of that caliber. Yet, the Iranian president repeated the same words where Israel's attrocities in Lebanon and Palestine had been repeating themselves for so long, and demanded that the leadership of Israel should be held in a court.

In Parallel...

The Arab League's official meeting of foreign ministers FINALLY agreed for calling the opening of the borders of Gaza. In a nutshell, that is the biggest crap I ever heard for a while. After three weeks of butchery, the Arab League till this day simply issued out such a decision? After what, 1133 (so far), had been killed, and over 5000 wounded? Isn’t it ironical that such decisions come out when Israel is so close to accept a seize fire agreement? That doesn't stop the butchery of the Palestinians...

Collisions also took place in the West Bank between the Palestinian Authority and Hamas. In a large demonstration in solidarity with the people of Gaza, a small group raised the flags of Hamas, where the PA security beat and arrested them. Hence, Abbas reinforces the division between Fatah and Hamas. BBC's article, under the title of Gaza and West Bank: Growing Divide explains it in a nice way.

Bush's final speech:

Bush hailed himself as giving democracy for different countries; some of those he named were Lebanon, Kosovo, and Iraq.

I accuse Bush of being the biggest liar the world has ever seen, and makes Saddam Hussein look like an angel next to him. For starters, Bush didn't do anything to Lebanon, he sold out on his allies (yet again) the 14th of March, leaving them stranded in the middle of nowhere. The expulsion of the Syrian army didn't come from Bush, rather a strong reaction of the Lebanese on the assassination of Harriri and the fact they were fed up from their crap. As a matter of fact, it was his 'Green Card' to the Israelis that allowed all those Lebanese and Palestinian citizens to flourish.

Kosovo was totally irrelevant to Bush's policy, It was Bill Clinton's policy to the Balkans that gave Kosovo its independence, amidst never-ending chaos in the Balkans that secured Kosovo its independence.

Finally, Iraq, Bush gave them no democracy at all. He shattered a country into a three way ethnic divisions, and gave the al-Qaeda the space to crawl into Iraq. His war on terror cost the Iraqis over 650,000 citizens, and that was prior to the execution of the tyrant Saddam. He waged a war on Iraq under the banner of saving the Americans from weapons of mass destruction which were never found, then turned out Jesus inspired him. He also ruined the US economy, which in turn ruined the global economy by spending over 800 billion dollars a year on upgrading weapons, and producing unneeded weapons that no way a group of Qaeda or even the Iraqi regime was able to counter.

Democracy in Bush meant also to support the Moubarak regime, the Saudi regime, and the Jordanian regime. This led the Muslim Brotherhood in specific to grow even stronger in Egypt, while Saudi Arabia's instability is growing even more.
I will tackle his farewell speeches in details. But I would like to add one note: Afghanistan:

His 'War on Drugs' prior to his 'War on Terror' made him a buffoon in protecting his own citizens, when he was warned. Earlier US Administrations funded the Taliban who were actually needed to counter the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Actually in a period of four months prior to 9/11, he disregarded the issue of Bin Laden wanting to strike the US, and gave the Taliban government almost 45 million dollars in fighting drugs and opium. Ironic, isn't it?

Bush is responsible for almost every civilian's death that took place, for promoting dictatorships, and even funding terrorists like al-Qaeda. So the hell with you Bush, and I sure wish there is a hell, to see you rotting in it.

Israeli On-Going Brutality

A new day, and the Palestinian victims are exceeding 900 dead. Last time I checked as a matter of fact, they were more than 930.

Israel improved (being sarcastic) 1% by easing down its brutality (not!). They at least warned on Saturday the Christian Aid Clinic that they have only 15 minutes to evacuate because their building was suspected of hosting 'terrorists'. The UN itself, unless dumb Zionists want to accuse the UN of racism, reported that 40% of these victims are women and children. Valuable medical supplies required to assist the Palestinians were destroyed. Other clinics remain under threat of being bombed... those threats come straight from the Israeli Defense (still wondering about the defense part) Forces. According to the BBC statistics, only 13 Israelis are killed, whereby three of them are citizens. Only three citizens, whereby 3/4 of the killed by the Palestinians were military, now compare that to the 930 killed. Isn't that ethnic cleansing? Or as some naïve Zionists claim: Self-Defense... still wondering what self-defense has to do with the butchery of almost a 1000 citizens...

One of the comrades posted the damage Hamas is inflicting on Israeli targets, this is the damage:



Another comrade at the Further Left Forum, also provided valuable information on boycotting Israeli products.The bar codes on the packages acually expose the country of origin. The first three numbers, circled in green, related to Israel.



Now of course, a dumb-ass Zionist will tell you they are boycotting Israeli products because they are Jews, not at all. Israel has to learn that their self-victimization strategy is running out of fuel.People are fed up of attrocities covered up by the American propaganda media.

Speaking of media, the echoes of the July War 2006 are repeating itself. Israel, like two years ago, have prepared packages for the newspapers and the media to publish. They are limiting access of media, the BBC World Correspondent expressed deep frustration on Israeli monopoly in regards of imposing its own version on the media. In the words of BBC's Paul Reynolds: Israel has been aiming for total air supremacy in more than one way in Gaza - it wants to dominate the airwaves of the news organisations with its own narrative.

A person is wondering why? Because they are worried that the Israeli government is the barbarian and uncivilized rather the Palestinians who are the real victims? Olmert defended his army by stating that Israel is using acceptable war weapons.... he also added that such weapons are used by all Western Democracies. Now, to what extent Olmert expects people to believe that Israel is the beacon of democracy in the Middle East amidst this butchery. Or is a 'civilized country' justified to bombard the hell out of the Palestinians? To those who support such a logic, they are no better than Hitler or Milosevic, who based attoricities based on race and ethnicity.

It is enough that each Palestinian is suffering in his/her home from explosions, food shortages, diseases, but it is not enough to Israel, they are also calling the victims and laughing on them that they will be killed because Hamas. Now correct me, who is driving those aircrafts? Who is doing the killings? Hamas or the IDF? Of course, the IDF. However, the words of my history professor in school still find resonance in my brains: "The Israelis pull all the triggers, kill people, and they are still crying. When they invaded Beirut in 1982, they were crying. When they brutally took Palestine to announce their fake nation, Israel, they were crying that they are victims! Damn it, they are all candidates for the Grammy Awards!" Indeed, the Palestinians of Gaza are treated as if they carry the blood of the Jewish victims of the Holocaust. Oh I forgot, to some, Israel was a nation 2000 years ago and the Palestinians are simply the conquerors... how pethatic! It reminds us of Mussolini restoring the Roman Empire back in World War II.

Well Israel bombed overnight 60 targets tonight. Mr. Ban of the UN decided finally to visit the region for attrocities. After how many days of on-going Palestinian genocide? Oh sorry, the general secretary cannot do anything except equate the butcherer and the victim's violance and call for peace. The same what Mr. Obama, who promised change. It just hurt his heart to see all those victims, "whether Israeli or Palestinian?" Did he really check out the scene over here? Doesn't this remind us of Bosnia's war where the UN called all parties to seize power and called for an Arms Embargo? Leaving an entire ethnic group at the mercy of two fully armed groups? I seriously find no difference between Karadzic and Olmert, or Levni and the notorious Beljana Plavsic, who based everything on genetic differences to justify attrocities.

Finally, Jon Stewart, probably the most followed comedy program, did it again by mocking Bush and the situation of what is going on in there. This doesn't mean Stewart is a pro-Palestinian. Stewart feeds on the contradictions of the leadership in the US, and uses their archives against them:

The Daily Show With Jon StewartM - Th 11p / 10c

Strip Maul

Barack Obama Interview
John McCain Interview

Sarah Palin Video
Funny Election Video

We have seen Jon Stewart during the July War as well, a video that was very popular in Lebanon two years ago... :

The Daily Show With Jon StewartM - Th 11p / 10c

Intro - MSNBC's Mideast Crisis

Barack Obama Interview
John McCain Interview

Sarah Palin Video
Funny Election Video

Also, I highly recommend readers to check Marcy Newman's amazing blog for details on the situation of Gaza. That activist is all energy, and a source for inspiration, read for the details of Gaza at Newman's Body on the Line.

Finally, I cannot forget my mother, sticking up her middle finger to the TV, as she watched the Bush family mourn the death of their 'first' pet. The pictures of dead children do not affect Bush, apparently their pet seems more human. I wish I can upload the photo, but that would expose who I am.

MFL

PS: Darko, I will fix everything within the two days...