Israelites go home

Baja JudeaAdmittedly this is a picture of Tel Aviv residents protesting their nation’s militant actions against Lebanon and gathering to offer a prayer for peace.
 
On another level, is it also a picture of fair-skinned westerners on a Middle Eastern beach who’ve overstayed their welcome?
 
Maybe it’s time to close Club Med Judea.

Americans descend upon Baja Mexico all the time, we don’t try to annex it. Or Costa Rica, or Belize. There’s nothing wrong with vacationing in the tropics, but is it fair to emigrate there, declare it your own, and ask the world to protect you from the anger of the people who you sent packing?

Let American and European Jews have their promised land, as promised vacation land. Visit and sunbathe all you want, then go home. This idea that white man should colonize Arabia is so 19th century. Colonization doesn’t work, and we have no right.

Nowhere was this more obvious than South Africa, where white colonizers held themselves as superior to the natives, imposing apartheid to force the indigenous populations to keep to their own neighborhoods.

Can there ever be peace in the Holy Land? Of course there can. Return Israel to its rightful owners. Let Jew, Muslim and Christian live together in a secular state. Will there always be sectarian violence? Perhaps, we’re seeing it elsewhere between Muslims. Sectarian problems will have to be worked out between neighbors. It’s clear the answer was not to give the whole ball of wax to one religion. Especially not the white one.

Mel Gibson in vino veritas

Was Mel Gibson speaking his mind when he was pulled over for drunk driving? No doubt he was. In Vino Veritas. It wouldn’t be in Latin if it weren’t true. Discounting some of the vociferous hyperbole owed to his drunken ego, were Gibson’s comments anti-Semitic? How low is the bar for what is anti-Semitic? Gibson didn’t say he hated Jews.

Gibson’s Passion Spiel was held to be anti-Semitic because it portrayed the Jews as responsible for Jesus’ death. Who did kill Christ, if it even matters? Who betrayed him, who complained about him to the Romans, who passed up their chance to have him freed? Is it a matter of biblical interpretation? Whose? Is it anti-Semitic to bring it up because the subject is still too inflammatory after 2000 years? It’s water under the bridge, it’s not water evaporated to nowhere.

I think Gibson’s alcoholic state released sentiments a lot of us are feeling as we watch Israel unleash wave after wave of bombs upon captive Lebanese masses, while our media fiddles.

Polite people are cautioning everywhere, a Jew is not the same as a Zionist. Specifically, ordinary Jews should not be blamed for Israel’s inhumanity.

Well… why are all the Jews on television speaking in support of Israel? Why are newspapers focusing on the dozen Israeli victims and not the hundreds of Palestinians and Lebanese?

A Jew who does not repudiate Israel, is as guilty as a Zionist. He may not be a Zionist, but wouldn’t he equal a Zionist?

2. Media
How about, just for the immediate time-being, and I know this might sound anti-Jewish, while Israel is killing UN observers and refugees, while Israel is breaking humanitarian laws and refusing to consider a cease-fire, how about we stop asking Jewish pundits on television to explain both sides of the conflict? How about we disqualify all Jewish Center For Peace spokesmen if they are going to persistently proclaim Israel’s moral authority?

You wouldn’t ask a Dixicrat to officiate an NBA game.

Do we need Jewish American think-tank/lobbying-groups weighing in on Israel’s right to commit mass war crimes in Lebanon? Everywhere you look, all the experts/supporters are Jewish or US senators. What is up with that?

Kofi Annan makes an emergency outcry about Israel deliberately targetting a UN peacekeeping observation post, and Jewish pundits question his report.

They reply: “Of course Israel would not do that. How absurd. Why would Israel do that?” But the media talking heads do not take them up on this question:

“Why indeed?”
 
How about: because the observation post might have witnessed Israel doing something too dastardly for words. More dastardly than targeting refugees or ambulances or hospitals or civilian residences or what else.
 
The Arab-Israeli conflict has already seen civilian massacres perpetrated by Israel accompanied by the bombing of the U.N. forces meant to protect those civilians. Qana was the site of a civilian cum U.N. massacre before it was yesterday’s massacre.
 
How indeed did Kofi Annan know the attacks on the U.N. observers were deliberate? Because the Israeli forces kept firing, even as further U.N. troops attempted to rescue the victims.
  Ambulance given Israeli treatment

 
ADDENDUM 8.03
Today Mel Gibson’s outburst and subsequent apology is being co-opted by the Jewish Lobby. With the tide of American public opinion rising against the Zionist drives to exterminate their Arab neighbors, Mel Gibson was giving voice to popular sentiment.

When Gibson immediately espressed his remorse for what he’d said, and asked for forgiveness, prominent Jewish spokesmen stepped in to offer that forgiveness. Even President Bush echoed their response.

Thus all of us who may have doubted Israel are forgiven and invited back into the fold. The error was not Israel’s bombing of a four-story building full of children in Qana, the error was our doubting the righteousness of Israel defending its own.

Middle East sibling rivalry no holds barred

OverkillCan I explain the current cataclysm in Lebanon? The media doesn’t want to do it. Unfortunately for them, it’s becoming a simpler story at each denouement.

Here’s an interesting overview: Peace, Propaganda & The Promised Land. And here’s a chronology of the recent escalation.

Here goes: Both Hamas and Hizb’Allah are always negotiating secret prisoner exchanges with Israel. Israel holds thousands of prisoners of both Hamas and Hizb’Allah. On June 25, Hamas captured an Israeli soldier which it hoped to use in an exchange. Similarly, Hizb’Allah captured two Israeli soldiers in Lebanon.

In Palestine, instead of negotiating with Hamas, Israel decided to escalate its attacks on the Occupied Territories. Israel had already been refusing to recognize Hamas as Palestine’s ruling party, it had been withholding all Palestinian Authority funding, and it was bombing the suspected houses and cars of the democratically-elected Hamas leaders. In its escalation, Israel bombed Palestine’s only power plant and sent tanks into the Gaza Strip to force an immediate release of their “kidnapped” soldier.

Out of solidarity for the defenseless population of Palestine, the military branch of the Hizb’Allah hiding in Syria decided to launch indiscriminate rocket attacks upon Israel, across the Israeli border from southern Lebanon. When Israel sent troops to Lebanon to attack those sites, Hizb’Allah captured two Israeli soldiers. With the precedent set: a-kidnapped-soldier- justifies-massive-air-strikes and M0Fo Bolton in the U.N. to stifle international pressure, Israel now had an identical pretext for attacking Lebanon.

So, Israel is clearing the population out of southern Lebanon, just as it has been displacing the original occupants of Palestine. The world wants an immediate cease-fire, but the US won’t let the U.N. take action. The US says it doesn’t want to interrupt because Israel isn’t finished. Finished what? Retaliating or house-cleaning?

Secretary of State Rice calls Israel’s bombardments “birth pangs” of the new Middle East, as if Israel’s actions have been part of the U.S. remake for the region all along. A recently interviewed Israeli soldier, asked what he thought his unit was doing in Lebanon, smiled and said “purification I guess.”

This is like a household where one of the children, already in the headlock of a stronger sibling, is acting up. Under the pretext of disciplinary action, the bullying sibling decides to convert its headlock into a strangulation, simultaneously pushing that child right out of its room, in fact clear out of the house. The mother decries the disproportionate severity of the reaction, but the father, an abusive lout in his own right, refuses to intervene, and instead sides with the offspring so much his likeness.

Hezbolla is HizbAllah

Hizb’Allah means the Party of God. The party of Allah. The allegiance to god is clear in the spelling Hizb’Allah. This is the way Moslems spell it, this is how al-Jazeera spells it. Even Hizballah or Hezballah is more clear.

The western press however likes to call it Hezbolla. Why? Ebola?

Hizb’Allah is a legitimate political party with popular support in Lebanon and wide support from Shia Moslems throughout the region.

What if al-Jazeera started spelling Christian Coalition as the Coalition of Cretins? How would Americans feel? Would we be insulted that Moslems would see us less as warriors for Jesus and more like self-righteous ignoranuses?
It is not.

Allah, by the way, is not the name for the god of Islam. It is not a proper noun like Yahweh or Jehovah. It is the Arabic word god.

Medical malreporting

I heard a report the other day about the new medicare prescription drug benefit choices and the donut hole trap for for many seniors.

Weak as the various plans are, several of them have lapses of coverage. You’re covered for several thousand dollars worth of medecine, but the next several thousand you have to pay out of pocket until coverage resumes again, and you begin again the next year.

They’re calling it the donut hole. On this report we heard from a couple senior citizens and the terrible financial troubles which come of overcoming the donut hole in their coverage.

The reporter said “no one knows how many people fall into the donut hole.”

Really now? That would have to be the least imaginative investigative reporting ever. Did the reporter think this donut hole is like a back street pot hole claiming its unwarry victims without rhyme or reason?

The reporter would be right about the unwarry victims, but that’s not some random neglected pot hole. That pot hole represents a windfall profit of billions of dollars for the insurance companies who before the medicare reforms had to pay it. They know exactly how many billions are now flowing their way. They know how many millions of people are affected, even their names and prescriptions, because they used to pay for those prescriptions.

What is the purpose of all the complicated medicare drug benefit options? To obscure the fact that each one is intended to screw the senior citizen, but they’ll be dead before they figure that out?

The various complicated plans are the result of the calculations of giant actuarial scenarios in which drug companies and insurers achieve maximum revenue. Trying to figure out which plan might work to your advantage is like pitting yourself against IBM’s Deep Blue. Pencil and legal pad against a supercomputer.

I had intended to remind readers on the onset of this article, and between each paragraph, that health care is free in every other developed nation. Prescriptions, house calls, open heart surgery, free.

Those countries don’t bother with health insurance businesses which skim a third of all health care costs. They don’t bother with kickbacks to corrupt politicians who pass legislation to benefit corporations over public citizens.

Other countries health care and medicines are free.

Do you understand why there need to be dozens of different drug plans, any of which can be discontinued immediately if they don’t suit the drug companies? Does it make sense? That each plan is so complicated you need a super computer to calculate your options?

They devise the plans with the aid of super computers with probability factors including your chances of getting away without paying an arm and a leg. Your chances? Known only to them.

You’re screwed. Unless you live in any other developed nation. Any.

Israel promises to retaliate 10 to 1

Civilian victims of Israeli retaliationIn the days when Hitler occupied Europe, the Nazis had a problem with insurgency. At that time it was called the resistance. Resistance fighters, usually ordinary civilians, conducted espionage, acts of sabotage and executions of collaborators or Germans when they could.

Out of frustration, and to deter further acts, the Nazis promised retaliatory measures against the occupied population. Ten citizens from that town, for example, would be shot for every act of sabotage. Sometimes it was fifty. On the Russian front the ratio was even higher. There the insurgents were called partisans.

We witnessed a vivid example in the film Schindler’s List. In concentration camps, the Nazis would punish infractions by lining up prisoners and shooting every tenth man. A friend of mine in Colorado Springs, a camp survivor recently deceased, escaped several of those line-ups before he was traded to Britain for a German officer in a prisoner exchange.

Collective punishment is illegal under the conventions of war. It’s illegal because it is inhumane and unfair. Perhaps you remember back in your schooldays, feeling it was unfair when your coach ordered you to do fifty pushups because of the failings of the weakest team member. But the coach was trying to build your body, not kill you.

The collective punishment strategy didn’t work for the Nazis, not even in the name of protecting the homeland.

Perhaps because of the universal condemnation of collective punishment, our domestic media is not reporting a recent declaration by Israel, regarding its actions against Hizb’Allah in Lebanon. The world is aflame with indignation and the world is calling for an immediate cease-fire.

What is the world hearing that we are not? Two days ago, they heard the Israeli Defense Forces Chief of Staff General Dan Halutz promise to destroy ten buildings for each rocket. Specifically, Israel will destroy ten residential multi-level buildings in southern Beirut, for every Katyusha rocket that lands on Haifa. Google the headline and see the story that isn’t playing here.

Reframing Iraq War My Bad

Bill Clinton, speaking in support of Neocon Democrat Joe Lieberman, attempted to bridge the gap by saying, “It doesn’t matter whether one supported the Iraq war or not, the question is what do we do now?”

We’re hearing that kind of talk all the time. The Iraq War as fiasco. The Iraq War as terribly expensive burden on our economy. Ouch, misstep, spilt milk, important thing now is to pull together.

Are we going to let the media reframe it IRAQ WAR BAD CALL?

How about the Iraq War, CAUSE OF 250,000 IRAQI LIVES, almost all civilian, half of them children? How’s that for re-reframing?

It’s not the Iraq War error accomplit, it’s 250, ooo innocent deaths later -now where do we go from here?

It’s not Iraq War My Bad, it’s Iraq War 250,000 Dead Oh Dear God We Are So SO SO Sorry.

Inured to war crime.

US soldiers TOSS a bakery in Fallujah
In a recent harder-than-usual puff piece report, the Stars and Stripes described a day of hunting insurgents in Fallujah.
 
Nevermind that Fallujah was supposed to have been pacified, razed to the ground more precisely, and barricaded to such an extent that only residents with approved retina scans could get back in. Nevermind. Insurgents are planting IEDs again, they’re sniping at our soldiers again, and we’re conducting patrols to stop them again.

On this patrol, an Iraqi sniper keeps popping up in a particular neighborhood. Our intrepid soldiers have become upset with the shopkeepers on the block because not one of them will rat on who’s doing the sniping. One of the shops is a bakery.

Here’s what our GIs come up with their down-home plan. “Toss” the bakery.

They blast the business’s lock, or drive into the door with their Humvee, then “toss the place,” throwing everything to the floor including bread, flour and utensils. The strategy being that maybe the bakery will reconsider collaborating with our soldiers.

Here’s the deal. Are you interested? Expecting Iraqi civilians to take a side is not only bad form, it’s a war crime. The tactic which the Stars & Stripes article paints as affable American ingenuity, is in reality an action that comprises three distinct war crimes. Violations of a code to which the American public has become inured, perhaps because of our media’s repeated pandering.

1. Coercing civilians to be our military scouts is forced conscription, a war crime.

2. Meting out collective punishment is a war crime.

3. Destroying civilian food is a war crime.

Such actions have long been designated as war crimes by international consensus, based on centuries of abuse suffered by civilians at the hands of soldiers. Since forever war makers have improvised many cruelties to visit upon uncooperative peoples, two testaments later there are codes of conduct to stop each one.

B.
For the stubborn faint-of-mind: Yes, the Iraqis are supposed to adhere to the same laws and conventions. Yes, hiding behind non-combatants is a crime. But do you think their actions justify your commiting crimes?

Probably you remember a rule your mother taught you: Just because somebody else does it, doesn’t mean you have to.

Shit hits fan writ American War Crime

US servicemen are escaping charges of murder in court because they can claim they were following orders. Actually, their official Rules Of Engagement: “Kill all military age males.”
 
Kill all military age males?! That’s an actual ROE? That’s a war crime!
 
pictureWe’re still trying to bring Serbs to justice for that very crime in Srebrenica. That’s a criminal ROE and all soldiers have an obligation to question such a rule. The Nazis claimed they followed orders. Not good enough. Still a crime.

Say you were a teenage Iraqi, or say you were an innocent bystander, or say you were an insurgent with your hands up, or say even you were an insurgent holding a gun, if you decide to give up and raise your hands in surrender, for your opponent to kill you would be an injustice and a war crime. Don’t you agree?

It’s pretty simple, compassionate and humane. It may feel shitty to a bunch of American soldiers who would like a license to shoot every Hadji in sight, but war is not a license to kill, kill, kill. War is hell, it’s not Half-life.

If you’re an American who just shot up a houseful of children, and you raise your hands in surrender, to shoot you would be a crime too. These days American solders now unfortunate to become captured are facing the wrath of the beleagered Iraqis.
 
We reap what we sow. We must prosecute the bastards sowing war crime.

Shit hits fan writ in Hebrew

US bombs to replenish IsraelIsrael is delivering a lot of shit into the fan, and the US is shoveling to resupply them as fast as we can. The world wants an immediate cease-fire but the US objects because we say Hizb’Allah [Hezbollah] will not honor a cease-fire. In reality Israel says it won’t stop until it has meted out at least another week of punishing air strikes. Secretary Rice objected that to stop Israel now would be to accept the status quo.

The US not only supports Israel’s offensive goals, we acknowledge that her incursions into Palestine and Lebanon are part of our plan for the transformation of the Middle East, of which the democratically elected Hamas and Hizb’Allah parties are to play no part.

Imagine if Cuba started shelling Miami under the pretext of trying to assassinate the anti-cuban terrorists which we harbor there.

Israel is committing the war crimes of disproportionate use of force, collective punishment, destroying civilian infrastructure, and of course, genocide. The UN is calling these clear violations of humanitarian law. Our media is playing this down by quoting only Lebanese officials as protesting these crimes as breaches of international law.

That’s like reporting “bank robbery may have been crime.” “Man on street says money not theirs.”

The US is using its veto to keep the UN from condemning Israel. Our country is a party to Israel’s war crimes and expansionist aims.

The cat’s out of this bag. Americans are in the Middle East for Israel.

Shit hits fan writ large

It’s a hot summer this year, isn’t it? Record-breaking temperatures on this continent and others. Record number of wild fires. Is this global warming? Can’t blame it on an isolated El Nino this time.

Polar ice is melting and finally we’re hearing about it. Perma-frost, glaciers, melting all. Global warming is real isn’t it? No shit Sherlock!

It’s time that you figured it out, it’s time for the politicians and corporate think-tank mouthpieces to admit they’ve been lying about it, and it’s especially time for idiots like you to quit listening to the liars. Lock them away. They’ve been jeopardizing everyone’s lives. And fess up, you’ve been an idiot.

Tree rings for skeptics of science

dead treeWhenever there is talk about the age of mankind, or the solar system, or the universe, a friend of mine delights in adding, “IN THEORY.” If the calculations denote an earthly past beyond the scale of a Creationist’s 7,000 year model, my friend considers it theoretical.

Someone might be addressing dinosaurs or geology or the Big Bang, speaking in terms of MILLIONS OF YEARS AGO, and my friend will chime “in theory!”

She’ll turn to me and justify her footnote by asking “how do they know?”

In truth, I don’t know. I don’t understand carbon dating or astronomy or quantum physics. I don’t disbelieve, I just can’t explain. I give her argument the credit of the electron-vs.-electron-microscope paradox. How can we know what an electron looks like if we can only see it with an electron microscope, which we invented with the anticipation of knowing how to look at an electron? Something like that. Yes, scientists tend to get the results they anticipate.

We attended Al Gore’s AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH the other day, about Global Warming, and researchers were charting climate changes by analyzing core samples taken from polar ice. We are able to sample ice which dates back 800,000 years apparently.

“In theory” my companion added.

“Apparently” I concurred, having no idea how ice was dated/carbon-dated.

Later in the program a scientist likened the layers of ice to the rings of a tree trunk. You can see the seasons of passing years in the grain of the wood. You can see when there might have been a forest fire, or years when the weather might have been different.

Individual layers of ice in the core samples represented similar changes in the environment. The composition of the ice trapped whatever mixture of gases comprised each year’s atmosphere. You can see each year’s climate as layers of ice formed over the last.

Then I remembered visiting Muir Woods in California and marveling at a cross-section of a tree trunk upon which scholars had marked various milestones in history. Columbus, the Battle of Hastings, the year 0 A.D., et al. Some living Grand Sequoias are as old as 3,000 years.

I can understand tree rings, and I can understand ice layers. It’s science we can see with our own eyes. Now I know where I can see 800,000 years of it. If my Christian friend wants to presuppose that God created the polar ice caps with 793,000 years of climate history already embedded in the ice, fair enough. But allow scientists the latitude to seek the lessons the Earth might have to teach us from its most distant “past.” Certainly God intended us to perceive it that way.

2.
The crux of this issue is of course the denial of global warming. There’s a strange correlation between those who refute man’s influence on the climate, and religion, excuse me, anti-science. If they’re end-timer Christians who are really just rooting for the end of the world, let them admit it and step out of the way. If they’re average Christians with a sane sense of responsibility to their fellow beings, they are being misled by preachers who teach them to doubt scientific research.

living treeScience begat technology begat industry (begat pollution and population) which begat this mess. Human knowledge may be a Pandora’s Box, but we are inside the box ourselves, not at its lid. We have to use scientific tools to deliver us from global catastrophe. No one is saying worship it, just listen to it.

Bush the yapping idiot

Gotta get Hezbolla to stop this shitIn Al Gore’s film AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH, much is made of Gore’s new found demeanor. Yes he’s a lot smoother and passionate. It helps that the camera captures him more intimately, and that he had directorial control over how he is portrayed. Contrast this to a hostile media determined in 2000 to make Gore look as bad as possible. Corporate media made Gore’s I-discovered-Love-Canal, I-invented-the-Internet, and Love-Story-was-written-about-me remarks look buffoonish instead of the remarkable half-truths they really were.
 
Juxtapose Gore’s role with George W’s microphone gaff at the G-8.

Not just his expletive, not just his eating with his mouth open and talking with his mouth full, but the inanity of his statements. “Syria has got to get Hezbolla to stop this shit” duh. (See a GREAT musical lampoon at the Huffington Post!)
 
What about his earlier observation: “Russia’s big. So’s China.” Wow.

Our media made hay with Bush’s expletive. The world press came to the bigger conclusion. Idiot. The British saw and heard their Tony Blair, normally of impeccable intellect, play lap dog to a yapping idiot.

To compare Bush and Gore reminds me of the 2000 presidential debates when it was clear as day that Bush was Edward E. Neuman to Gore’s everyman. Bush was Lilliputian.

Yet when the cameras went out to “spin alley” to consult the pundits, wee conservative dweebs told us giddily that Bush had won.

Chain emails and Saint George

About this time each year for some reason, a certain friend of mine gets into a panic and passes on chain emails in renewed hope that she will come into money. Last year she sent everyone the It-Really-Works-Bill-Gates-Will-Pay-You-$275K email. A day later she apologized.

Does she recognize what all these chain emails are really about? Chain letters and Ponzi schemes in the cyber world take on an entirely different purpose than they used to have through snail-mail. And they succeed wildly. Chain emails circulate for large computers to map contact patterns and networks.

When you forward a chain email, its authors track whom you sent it to and how quickly. That’s why the email is launched in the first place, to chart enormous networks of who is in touch with whom. At the most superficial level, the process determines which email addresses are valid. To information traders the emails reveal social connections and hierarchies.

We’re not just talking about the pyramid schemes, we’re also talking about all those clever emails you get in the morning that apparently made one of your relatives smile. Where did you think those come from? Did you think some cherub with time on his hands, sitting at his kitchen window in Hawaii, composed a funny story addressing impish Americanisms which through myriad cyber degrees of separation found itself in your aunt’s incoming email? You’d be right. Except about the cherub’s clients who are watching the logs as their whimsical package bounces along.

Especially if the message involves embedded graphics. Server-side graphic files telegraph the whereabouts of an email in real time. Often graphic files are disguised as text. (MSN and Hotmail track all their email using embedded graphics that pretend to be text. Given that linked files require many times more computation power than does text, disguising the files AS TEXT would seem to concede that Microsoft knows we would not appreciate what they are doing.)

Don’t you wonder why at the end of each and every one of those clever emails, the funny sentiment is always followed by urgent instruction to send it on?

Do these authors think that they are just SO funny, you MUST pass their work on to everyone you know? Do you see this at the end of newspaper columns or comic strips? Do book authors end their novels by recommending that you tell all your friends to buy a copy or face three years of bad luck?

If an email asks to be sent on, and you want to, and must, here’s how to do it without contributing to the fortunes of direct marketers and spammers. Copy and paste just the text into a fresh email, then send it on. If there is a graphic, save it to disk and then attach it.

2.
Or put it on the web. Here’s an email forwarded to me from my good friend Paulette. 🙂 It’s an old joke, presented this go-round as Saint George.

Impeachment prospects

click here for more pictures of the COS Impeachment Teach-inThe problem with impeachment is that Republicans control the houses which possess the power to initiate articles of impeachment. There are a number of offenses for which Bush could be run out of office, there are 4 or 17 listed in various initiatives. Trouble is, what offense will be bad enough to alarm senators and congressmen?

When a president once got caught having sex with an intern, that upset a bunch of Republicans. Before that it was the bugging of the Democratic Party Headquarters. This president has admitted to conducting illegal wiretaps, starting a war without approval from Congress or the U.N., authorizing torture, and showing an unconstitutional disregard for the separation of power. Without raising the ire of his fellow politicians. What in heaven’s name does he have to do to upset them?

What if the president was caught sharing the Lincoln Bedroom with male-escort pretend-reporter Jeffrey Gannon-Guckert during the bald fellow’s numerous over-night White House visits, would that be objectionable?

What if the vice-president got drunk and shot a fellow Republican lawyer in the face, out of season, and without a license? Would that raise eyebrows?

Killing gobs of Iraqis, sanctioning the bombing of Lebanon, standing in the way of medical progress, denying global warming, spending most of his time on vacation, killing the US economy, what is it going to take?

World Trade Center vs. Silent Partner

Christopher Plummer as Bin LadenWORLD TRADE CENTER, Oliver Stone’s sentimental take on 9/11 heroism comes out this summer. I have nothing against a story which describes the travails of two New York City cops and their families caught up in the World Trade Center collapse. But Stone’s timing with the release of this movie is unfortunate. With the upcoming elections, the only rallying cry the Republicans have anymore is 9/11. What a time for Stone to wax patriotic. And I think the absence of his usual political curiosity offers a silent aquiescence to the official line. Too bad.
 
For anyone who feels they absolutely need a jolt of 9/11 heroism, might I suggest the documentary 9/11 aired on CBS and made by the Naudet brothers, the French filmmakers who inadvertantly captured the first tower being hit. Talk about harrowing viewing. They went inside the WTC to witness the second strike and were still inside when the opposite tower collapsed. (That’s why the video of the first plane was so late to emerge. Filmmaker and film were nearly destroyed in the rubble.)

I’d like to recommend an altogether different classic: THE SILENT PARTNER, an unforgettable 1978 sleeper hit starring Elliot Gould and Christopher Plummer. Don’t take my word for it, this thriller shares some striking plot points.

Plummer plays bank robber Harry Reikel who is thwarted in his first attempt to rob the bank at which Gould’s Miles Cullen is a bank teller. Deciding to await a better opportunity, Reikel discards the deposit slip upon which he’d written his directives, this is a robbery, etc. While tidying the lobby, Miles discovers the imprint of Reikel’s message on the deposit slip beneath. He reacts with alarm, but goes home to consider the opportunity knocking and hatches a plan.

(What did the US security advisor do with the memo titled “Bin Laden determined to strike inside the US?”)

The next day at work Miles waylays as much money as he can from the bank vault. When the forecasted robbery occurs, he gives Reikel some of the money, later declaring the entire sum as stolen, and then takes the bulk of the loot home, thus becoming the robber’s silent partner. Of course, when Reikel learns on TV the magnitude of his purported take, he figures out what Miles has done. Now Reikel becomes the partner whom Miles must keep silent.

Does it make sense that someone might be using Guantanamo to keep al Qaida ranks silent, lest anyone find out that Bin Laden had only commandered the planes? Crashing the airliners was forewarned by the now infamous security memo, but the terrorists may have had nothing to do with upping the magnitude of the 9/11 disaster by setting demolition charges at the WTC and the Pentagon. Those may have been more easily planted by cold-blooded accomplices to the terrorists, silent partners who wanted a Pearl Harbor to launch their PNAC authoritarian coup.

Zidane is not a son of a Harki

What did you say?Harki is Algerian for collaborator. Zenedine Zindane has publically refutted the accusation before.
 
“Zizou” Zidane could not even speak the word on TV when asked what taunt had provoked his now infamous headbutt in the last ten minutes of the World Cup. He would only say that Materazzi had insulted his mother and sister, three times.

The western press has suggested that the term was “terrorist” whore. Doesn’t make sense, does it? What kind of traction do your mother’s combat boots have anymore? Zidane is the son of Algerian parents who emigrated to France after Algeria gained its independence.

But there’s a word in France that still burns every Frenchman. Collaborator. Use your imagination what it means to insinuate that your mother and sisters were collaborators.

While it still raises a Frenchman’s blood pressure to accuse his family of having collaborated with the Nazi occupation. There is sympathy as well for those accused. Quite a few French families did collaborate or had no choice.

The term that Zidane refuses to repeat, even in defending his action, was in his words, “a grave insult.” His parents speculated that the term might have been Harki. (If you Google: algeria +grave +insult, you get Wikidedia’s definition of Harki.) Harki is the name for Algerians who collaborated with the French against Algeria’s fight for independence. It is a term with which Zidane has a history.

Boy oh boy do I imagine the western press does not like to deal with insults being thrown at colonial sympathizers. At a time when the Iraqi people are trying to fight their American invaders, and Palestinians are trying to throw off their Israeli occupiers, and each repressive government is trying to recruit turncoats for their cause. There on television we’re shown the profund visceral resentment of being accused of betraying your own people.

At the World Cup Final on TV we saw that a person could forego the unblemished legacy of his sports career, even jeopardize the World Cup match for his team, just to repudiate the suggestion that his family slept with the enemy. The enemy being the West.

Ironically, the western press chose to translate Harki as “terrorist.” It wouldn’t seem to be much of an insult at all, unless it accurately referred to the French paratroupers use of state-sponsored terror to thwart the Algerian struggle.

Just as Iraqi resistance fighters are being called insurgents and terrorists. There will be a word to describe those Iraqis who collaborate with the brutal US occupation. Maybe that word will mean “terrorist” after all.

Fawcett hole-in-the-head

Jay Fawcett is a pro war DemocratOf what good is another pro-war politician, be he a Republican or a Democrat? Colorado Springs congressional candidate Jay Fawcett is a revolving-door military contractor who is unapologetic about what the US is doing in Iraq. We’ve already got plenty of those in Washington. What do the Democrats of El Paso County gain by promoting another conservative schmo who is running on a platform of “smarter governance?”

In my opinion, Fawcett is a Republican plant, a straw-man meant to lose, meant to usurp the opportunity the Democrats have to offer a better candidate. If I’m wrong, the Republicans couldn’t have hand-picked a bigger loser than Fawcett.

At this year’s MLK march, Jay Fawcett walked out of the memorial service when the preacher expounded on King’s adamant opposition to war. Fawcett stood up and worked his way out the row before many gaping mouths.

At the single Justice and Peace event which he attended, Fawcett voiced his opposition and signed off with a condescending “good luck.”

The democrats need an alternative or they need to give it a rest.

Who are the unlawful combatants?

Who are the combatants fighting an illegal war? It’s US. The entire of the world, not including the Murdoch NewsCorp empire of Britain, Australia and the US, have declared the Iraq War to have been an illegal act of agression. Even the Secretary General of the U.N. stated as much. We’re quibbling about whether fighters captured in this war and in Afghanistan have to be considered legal combatants and subject to protection under the Geneva Conventions. We are asserting they do not.

It looks like we are the illegal combatants. Our soldiers and their mercenary counterparts may not be entitled to prisoner of war status either, if you adher to our logic.

What can be done?

Knee-jerk patriots accuse critics of US actions of having nothing to suggest by way of alternatives. Indeed pseudo-rivals like the Democrats aren’t speaking any differently than the GOP.

But the answers have been out there and they are quite simple. Noam Chomsky does not take credit for them, but summarized them recently. Here’s what he suggests our country can do to try to redeem itself with the world community:

1) accept the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court and the World Court;

2) sign and carry forward the Kyoto protocols;

3) let the UN take the lead in international crises;

4) rely on diplomatic and economic measures rather than military ones in confronting terror;

5) keep to the traditional interpretation of the UN Charter;

6) give up the Security Council veto and have “a decent respect for the opinion of mankind,” as the Declaration of Independence advises, even if power centres disagree;

7) cut back sharply on military spending and sharply increase social spending.