Name:     Michael L. S.   [E-Mail]
      Location: 
      Website:  Middle East Resource Center


 

HOME PAGE

---

RECENT POSTS:

Well, well, a moment's silence was held in Liverpool this morning in honor of Kenneth Bigley. Bigley was an Englisher (although he may have been Irish) who went to Iraq to operate as an "engineer"; he was captured by Iraqi resistance and beheaded a day or two ago. Now, yes, his death is regrettable and of course it repulses every right-thinking human being, particularly the manner of his execution. But what an act of SUPREME hypocrisy: sconeheads standing silently in Liverpool in a poignant act of respect for this one man; while their country is responsible for the deaths of TENS OF THOUSANDS of people, in Iraq and elsewhere. No-one, least of all the somber Liverpudlians, stood in silence in their memory. That, in itself, is repugnant.

* * *

The second debate between Dubiya Bush and John Kerry took place last night. Bush was fidgety and cantankerous while Kerry punished him severely. Of course, both of them had received extensive coaching but here they're having to debate on an equal footing, and Bush's policy holes become glaringly apparent. Naturally, the war in Iraq (or, as Bush likes to put it: the war on terror) was at the very forefront. And here's how Kerry encapsulated the Iraq fiasco: "If we'd use[d] smart diplomacy, we could have saved $200 billion and an invasion of Iraq and right now Osama bin Laden might be in jail or dead. That's the war on terror." He neglected to mention saving tens of thousands of Iraqi and over a thousand American lives in addition but OK. That really IS the crux of it, is it not: Bush disannulled the progress in international law made in the last six or seven decades. He destabilized a country which did NOT have links to al-Qu'ida and which--tyrannical though as it was--was NOT a threat to anyone... - AND he lied about the reasons for ripping up all international conventions and laws and invading Iraq. Now al-Qu'ida and every other terrorist outfit under the sun are flourishing in Iraq, there's not much chance of the country getting a stable government any time in the near future, the US is plunging into ever greater debt and turning into a police state, and the world is not one iota safer. Oh and, Osama bin Laden is still alive and very much kicking--his last kick purportedly being the Sinai bombings.

In other words, the perpetrators of 9/11 which were the reason for the instigation of the "war on terror" have still not been apprehended. North Korea and, more ominously, Iran are in the latter stages of development of REAL weapons of mass destruction, as opposed to Saddam's imaginary ones. That debt I mentioned: Bush accrued more US debt in the four years of his administration than were accumulated in two hundred straight years (from George Washington until Reagan)!! On the plus side, Libya's come on board at last; or better put: Saddam has been replaced by the legitimization of another tyrant: Moamar al-Qadafi. Syria is having to re-examine its position and the Middle East has been "shaken up" in a way. But overall, neither the US nor the rest of the world are any safer than right after 9/11.

One thing that tarnished Kerry in my eyes was his pledge not to raise taxes on high-income earners (those above US$ 200,000) but that is to be expected in US politics. There is no social-democratic current present there as understood in Europe.

* * *

OK, OK, I won't hold you in suspense any longer. The sixth and penultimate part of my series on How To Talk To an Israel-Hater follows. Let us recapitulate: the discourse between Cliff and me developed out of my simple request for the source of a photograph I wished to post on here. It soon got bloated because Cliff raised specific points which I couldn't let go by unchallenged. He then abandoned that discussion and restated his views de novo... - my impression was that he simply didn't have the knowledge or leg to stand on to continue discussing the details. It's very easy to shoot off an accusation; but when that postulate is flatly repudiated, you can continue the debate with new arguments to prove your point, admit you were wrong or act as if you never mentioned anything in the first place. Alas, Cliff elected to take the latter course of action. All the same, I took his fresh mail and dissected that, too--that was Part V below. I thought he would perhaps desist from making further arguments since he was given a castrating response to every previous one of his... - but not a chance. He replied. But how? Again: he didn't tackle my rebuttals but let them go and instead regurgitated a few paragraphs of how he saw things to be. His post follows; things written by him are red and where he quoted me is dark green.

[CJ:] Hi Michael,

Well it is nice to have a civilized discussion, and you make some good points. Thanks for looking at the sources I mention.

I am not very impressed with the Gaza disengagement plan, since it merely means that the Gazans will continue to live in the largest prison (dare I say concentration camp?) in the world.

The organisations you name are all Zionist, as you yourself are, presumably. We could have a long discussion over whether Zionism is the same as racism, but I personally can't see the difference. I think we would all be horrified if Germany declared itself officially an "Aryan" state and expelled the majority of ethnic minorities. In fact that is what has already happened. I would like to understand the difference between this and the declaration of Israel as a Jewish state and the expulsion of the majority of ethnic minorities, but the difference escapes me.

I have had contacts with Israelis in my travels recently, mostly young people travelling in groups and looking for cheap drugs and with no interest in the local culture or in making contact with other travellers. Not that young British people are much different (except that their preferred drug is alcohol!).

I also regularly read Ha'aretz, which is much more open than American and most European newspapers. (Although the number of Arab Israeli employees is zero.)

Whether Tantura happened or not is really academic, as you say. The general pattern is important. And the motivation. I'm still not sure about Jenin. If the Israelis had nothing to hide, why did they refuse to allow the UN to inspect the camp? I'm not saying that the Palestininas are angels, or that they never lie, but I think you can agree that the Israeli PR machine works vastly better than the Palestinians'.

I think that there is more criticism of Israel than other countries because it is Israel that claims to be "the only democracy in the Middle East" and to have "the most humane army in the world". It also consistently blames the victims for everything. I agree with you that the North Africans in France are discriminated against, but there is a BIG difference. The Israeli Arabs can hardly be considered immigrants, since their ancestors have lived in the land for centuries (unless you believe the Zionist myth of "a land without people for a people without land"). Comparable situations would be the Australian treatment of the aborigines, or the American treatment of the native Indians, both of which I find appalling.


[MS:] Israeli Arabs are far better off than the vast majority of Arabs anywhere in the Arab world.

[CJ:] I love this sentence. It reminds me of the rationalization used by white racists in the southern American states talking about black people.


[MS:] The JNF owns very little land (about 5%) and yes, prefers Jews. However, 3% of the land is owned by the Arab Wakhf which gives preference to Israeli Arabs. The point is?

[CJ:] The point is that 93% of the land is in the hands of the state or the JNF, and is in practice never leased to Arab Israelis.

It would be nice to think that the quotes in the quiz were from extremists. However they are from such people as Rafel Eitan, IDF Chief of Staff 1978-83, Menachem Begin, Prime Minister of Israel 1977-82 and Chairman Heilbrun of the Committee for the Re-election of General Shlomo Lahat, the mayor of Tel Aviv.


[MS:] Who walked out of negotiations and started the Intifada in stead?

[CJ:] Oh please, not this piece of Zionist propaganda yet again. Please see http://www.doublestandards.org/gorman1.html.


[MS:] Oh, and while I had the option of DIPLOMACY staring me in the face.

[CJ:] Diplomacy? If your land has been occupied for 37 years and more and more of your land is being stolen then diplomacy is the answer? So the Jews in the Warsaw ghetto should have been diplomatic with the Nazis who were attacking them?

Last but not least, I'm not condoning killing civilians, all I'm saying is that the line between civilians and military is not always clear. Take the settlers for example, many of whom are extremists from Brooklyn living out a fantasy of being in the Wild West surrounded by "wild Indians", and are heavily armed.

Kind regards,

Cliff

Well, there you are. Of course, I responded to this, too, and I'll post what I wrote here next time. In the meantime, let's repeat that little exercize from before: see how YOU would reply to Cliff's letter. And hey, keep it civil, yaar.

Have a shavua tov!

>> send me your opinions by e-mail <<