Genocide remembrance for Jews only

Daniel Pearl’s name is being added to the Miami Beach Holocaust Memorial. Said the murdered journalist’s father, “the same forces that killed my grandparents in Auschwitz, the forces of hatred, are still operating in our world in the 21st century — and Danny is one of the victims.” Say What?!

Pearl is the first non-Holocaust victim to be added to the list. No one’s been added from among the victims of genocides which have ensued after WWII either. Gypsies, for example, who died along with Jews, Gays and Communists in the German extermination camps, suffer relentless persecution still, but none have been added to the list.

Said the chair of the Holocaust Memorial committee,

“Daniel really died for basically one reason, and basically the same reason 6 million others did, and that was for the crime of being a Jew.”

Though Israel’s criminal acts of genocide against the Palestinians and Lebanese may invite some to think otherwise, nowhere is it a crime to be Jewish.

Daniel Pearl was not the first or last Jew to visit Pakistan. Will no one consider the obvious offense Pearl’s captors would have taken? Daniel Pearl was writing about Islamic militancy for the leading jingoist Neocon pro-Israel warmonger yellow-press newspaper of all, the Wall Street Journal.

Holocaust Remembrance Day

Today is a day chosen by the Jewish government of Israel in the ’50s as a day for remembrance of the millions of Jews who died in Europe during World War Two. The date was chosen because it corresponds to the day the Warsaw Ghetto uprising began, one of the most heroic efforts of resistance to tyranny in the history of all mankind.

The horror of the holocaust against the Jewish community occurred over 60 years ago, but humankind should never forget the victims. They were victims of the apathy of US and non fascist Europe, as well as the fascist movement itself. A horrrible attempt was made to totally eliminate Jewish culture and the Jewish people themselves, and the whole world lost out as well. We now all suffer from the lack of having the Jewish culture of that era still with us today.

May the Jewish victims rest in peace and let us move to stop yet more future Holocausts from occurring again, whether it be against the Jewish community or any other community as well.

The proposed Simon Wiesenthal Museum of Intolerance

I don’t know which is worse, Holocaust denial, or Apartheid denial? There have been several Holocausts, and there have been several Apartheids, but the ones in the news so much today, are the Jewish Apartheid to ethnically separate Jewish settlers from Arab Palestinians, whose property and land have been stolen, and the cases of those who choose to pretend to not know that there was a Holocaust created by German Christians, who murdered off millions of Jews during World War Two.

The LA times has an interesting article about the Simon Wiesenthal Center’s proposal to build a museum on top of an ancient Muslim Cemetery. Incredibly these Zionists want to call it the Museum of Tolerance, too. Well really, what can we really expect from those that have become the centerpiece organization for what has been labeled as the ‘Holocaust Industry’?

When forms of cultural ethnic cleansing become labeled as ‘tolerance’ as the Simon Wiesenthal Center is trying to do with its efforts to build this museum, then we are in serious trouble as a society. Tolerance would mandate that another site be used, which one hopes will actually become the case. Certainly the idea of a museum of tolerance itself is not a bad idea. Muslims, Jews, and Christians working together to pull that off, would be much better than a unilateral effort by one Zionist group doing it much alone, except in alliance mainly with, the Jewish Apartheid State called Israel.

Who smelt it, dealt it.

Israelis accuse their Muslim foes of wanting to wipe Israel off the map. They extrapolate that Israel’s “right to exist” is threatened by exterminationTM, even nuclear holocaust (no trademark needed). In reality opponents of Zionism are only suggesting that European Jewry return from whence it came. Wipe away the aparthied borders, they say, which designate Judea as for Jews Only.

Many Israelis hold dual citizenship, attesting perhaps to their own personal reservations about Israel’s tenure in the Middle East. Israelis know they are but visitors on a Zionist pilgrimage to Jerusalem, imposed at the expense of Palestinian lives. Israeli immigrants preserve their dual citizenship escape clause, their right of return to their lands of origin, should the Palestinians ever reconstitute themselves successfully.

Meanwhile the Jewish Anti Defamation League defames all critics who would question Israel’s underlining claim to statehood, the Zionist usurping of Palestine’s statehood to be more precise. (I’m reminded of how the US beef industry has enacted laws in some states which make it illegal to criticize bad meat. Both stink.)

Israel is most certainly wiping Palestine off the map.Town by town, Palestinian beach-goer by Palestinian. Israel is undeniably in contravention of every Palestinian’s right to exist. And Israel has the temerity to point its finger at its victims and accuse them of wanting to “wipe Israel off the map.” The rapist crying “foul!”

The Path to 9 11

In defense of ABC’s docudrama The Path to 9/11. Near the beginning, when the terrorists were taking responsibility for the 1993 WTC bombing, “Ramzi Youssef – Palestinian Terrorist” explained why they had done it: because of America’s military and economic support of Israel.

The subject of Israel and Palestine never came up again, and never came up at all on Ted Koppel’s counter-ABC-straw-man The Price of Security.

We’ve got our boot on Palestine’s windpipe, they’re flailing their arms hoping to dislodge us, and we declare a war on arm flailing. Our media runs through what options America has to be safe from arm-flailing without looking at our boots to let American citizens consider how we might tread the earth with more humanity.

The US and Israel, it’s hard to say who is the master of whom, are actively killing Palestinians in a genocidal program every bit as calculated as the Holocaust or the extermination of the Native Americans. The US supported the recent slaughter of Lebanese peoples, also considered by the international community as genocide.

The US accuses Syria or Iran of backing Hizb’Allah. Those links are sketchy compared to our sending weapons and aid to Israel and other false authorities in the Middle East. When Israel was stepping up its bombing Lebanon in advance of the nearing ceasefire, we had to speed our resupply of Cluster Bombs lest Israel run out of time to use them. The US arms and defends the self-proclaimed kings and sultans who amass great wealth from the sale of their countries’ oil while at the same time subjecting their peoples to abject poverty. Bin Laden opposed our propping up of the Saudis. Youssef decried our support of Israel in Palestine. Arabs have cause to reject US strong arm policies in Egypt, Qatar, Kuwait, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, and of course Iraq. Muslims have very good reasons to reject US policy in Afghanistan, Indoneasia and the Philippines.

The least ABC could do in its mockudrama was to set the scene with the Muslim extremists’ motives, and that was it. Even though the rest of the program was re-edited because of the criticism, there followed closely law enforcement characters endlessly lamenting they needed authority for warrantless searches, domestic eavesdropping and inter-departmental information sharing. Filipino police were depicted heroically for not waiting for warrants, female border agents were lauded for using their intuitive -read racial- profiling, suggestions were made of an FBI coverup, even that Clinton’s people were helping Osama.

The irrationality-mongering was so egregious it would take forever to enumerate. The good news is that the Stephen Bochco style shaky camera, the endlessly tight closeups, the jump cuts unto incongruous details lacking context, and the frenetic action going every direction, serve really like an alarm bell going off next to your ear. It’s not conducive to critical thinking, but it’s also painfully and obviously contrived.

I draw one fundamental conclusion. The 9/11 truth seekers have been right all along. We must diffuse the 9/11 lie because the establishment yahoos, both Republican and Democrats, plan to ride this vile deception as long as they can.

By comparison, Ted Koppel’s sombre contemplative piece was full of verbal obfuscation. Koppel began his report with “by now every adult in America knows what happened on 9/11.” What an innocuous way to brush aside the fact that what happened is known, yes, and disputed! His language got no clearer as the program progressed. Lots of “clearly” this, when of course it very clearly could be unclear.

Koppel asked critical questions of such criminals as the author of the latest definition of torture and the commander of Gitmo who declined to admit that detainees had ever been tortured, but Koppel let Bush cabinet officials off with softballs and setups. Koppel let Tom Ridge appear thoughtful as to hold a mirror to himself asking what America is about, he let effete Senator Hays tell everyone that nuclear bombs can be made from items purchased at Home Depot, and Koppel let an NSA software developer appear pro-civil liberties by rejecting racial-profiling. His solution? Eavesdrop on everybody.

By assuming the role of white knight, Ted Koppel is really an effective mouthpiece for the Time-Warner machine, a major player in upholding corporate dominance. What do you think of his “point well taken” technique? As if his smilingly elusive subjects have just trumped him with something other than a quacking canard!

The good news about Koppel on Discovery is that we got a close look at the Bush operatives. They are in charge, yes, and they benefit from being presented by a charming, deep voiced newsman, but didn’t you recognize Larry, Moe and Curly right down to the haircuts? These guys are dopes! In morals, self-reflection and speech. It makes me giddy to contemplate because it’s not going to take much thinking power to take them down. Call me gullible, call me idealistic. It’ll take effort, determination and sacrifice, but it won’t take nucular-chemical-rocket science.

Strength in numbers

Mohommed bombheadTwo German newspaper have joined a leading French newspaper in reprinting the controversial Danish caricatures of Islam’s prophet Mohammed. They are acting in solidarity with the Danish paper whose actions provoked an international boycott of Danish products. This is how collective action is supposed to work. Speak out, and if you’re threatened, be joined by another voice and then another, until there would be too many voices to silence.

Isn’t it interesting that the U.S. is speaking out against the unified actions of the Europeans? Perhaps it is not surprising that American fundamentalists are coming to the defense of Islamic fundamentalists.

A survey of Newspapers shows that Western voices are dismissive of the notion that the cartoons should be found so offensive. Muslim papers demand apology yet do not condone the violence. Perhaps surprising to many, Palestinian papers are calling for moderation among Muslims.

I worry that this entire tempest is going to be used to show the volatility of Islam. This will be fuel for the argument that Iran must under no circumstance be allowed to have nukes.

2-8 UPDATE
The Americans and British are now accusing Iran and Syria of inciting the violence. Meanwhile a French paper is printing additional provocative cartoons.

Now the Islamic voices are labeling this provocation as Zionist. An Iranian paper is retaliating by soliciting contributions from cartoonist to lampoon the greatest -and perhaps only- Western taboo, the Holocaust. While I deplore this escalation, the cartoons should prove interesting. They certainly have hit on a taboo which the West cannot countenance.

Since the Enlightenment I think to the western mind freedom of expression is revered. We can tolerate our Jesus depicted as a bald transvestite. We can burn our flag, even piss on it. We have no image that is sacrosanct, except the victims of the Holocaust.

It will be interesting to see if Europeans or Americans can get a dose of what it feels like to be injured by a cartoon. Can you even imagine making fun of a Holocaust victim?

When Anne Frank is depicted at the wheel of a bulldozer, crushing Palestinian children, even maybe unwittingly (hopefully), then we’re probably going to see escalation.

Ahmadinejad and Hamas not denying Holocaust

Iranian president
No one is suggesting that the Holocaust didn’t happen, or that six million Jews weren’t killed by the Nazis. The mythology surrounding the Holocaust has to do with its aftermath: how the murder of six million Jews became justification for the creation of a Jewish state on land which belonged altogether to someone else.
 
That is the mythology about the Holocaust which natives of the Middle East would like the rest of us to contemplate.

Western media seems intent on perpetuating a distortion of the Muslim position. So intent are they to avoid questioning the legitimacy of Zionism that anyone who does is painted as a “Holocaust denier.”

No one is denying the Holocaust! And no one is calling for killing any more Jews! “Wiping Israel off the map” is a truncated translation of what the Muslim voices have expressed. It does not mean “off the face of the earth” or “eradicate” or “exterminate.”

Right to exist
Hamas is often described as not believing in Israel’s right to exist. It sounds so unreasonable. Everyone has a right to exist. But Israel is not a person, it’s an entity. Try this on for size. Does Jewish occupied Palestine have a right to exist? Did French occupied Algeria have a “right to exist?”

Algeria had a right to exist, and the French there had every right to exist, as a minority. And as we’ve seen with all former colonies, the majority population has an inclination to rise against its upper class oppressors. The west has of course the inclination to try to prop up those embattled regimes.

Israel was a nation created in 1949, carved out of the land of the Palestinians to make a home for European Jews. Israel is regarded by many as a last example of colonialism. White settlers laying claim to the lands of another people.

Now the Israelis are erecting a wall to separate themselves from the darker skinned Arabs. It’s an apartheid wall, and we’ve seen apartheid before. The Boers of Dutch ancestry no longer rule South Africa because the world wouldn’t stand for it.

Israelis have as much right to exist as anyone, as the Boers for example, but they don’t have a divine right to exist on the backs of their native brothers.

Apartheir wall   Israelis call it a “fence.” To construct it required demolishing entire Palestinian neighborhoods, often separating Palestinian farmers from their fields and orchards.
 
 

Off the map
When the Iranian president says he would like to wipe Israel off the map, he’s not saying he wishes to kill anyone. He didn’t say he wants to see Israel wiped off the face of the earth, he’s saying he’d like to see Israel off the map OF THE MIDDLE EAST!

Ahmadinejad even suggested that Israel relocate itself to Europe. If Europeans feel so bad about the Holocaust which they inflicted upon the Jews, why shouldn’t it fall to Europe to offer up some of its real estate for a Jewish homeland?

Ahmadinejad, like many Muslims, doesn’t see that it was Europe or America’s place to bequeath Ancient Judea to the present day Jews, a land which for the last two thousand years has belonged to non-Jews and went by the name of Palestine.

We all came from Africa. Does that give us a right to resettle it without regard to who’s already living there? Should someone resurrect Babylon, Alexander’s Greater Macedonia, or the Holy Roman Empire?

Hamas, and the PLO before it, speak of driving this foreign intruder from Palestinian land. The Muslims scattered the Israelites into Europe two thousand years ago. Now interlopers have brought them back and Hamas has pledged to drive them out again.

Imagine if America chose to return its Puritans whence they came, to England, where they weren’t terribly popular the first time. Perhaps the English would vow to expel the kill-joys once again to the New World.

As unreasonable as it was to redraw international borders to recreate a Promised Land, so too might it be unreasonable to undo the land grab of 1949. Perhaps the most pragmatic course of action would be to insist the Israelis and the Palestinians cohabit the promised land. They can govern themselves democratically and the chips will fall where they may. This age of enlightened democracy should have little patience for dogmatic racism and religious prejudice, from either side.

The world should be able to look upon these religious squabbles with impartiality. Although it seems Israelis are plenty worried that the secular west may not always grant Jewish fundamentalism more deference than its Islamic rivals. Therein lies the importance in not denying the Holocaust.

Holocaust myth
What peoples, among victims of genocide, have ever been granted their own ancient Promised Land as a redress for the genocide? None. Is this because the Holocaust was such a unique genocide? Indeed, to be labeled a Holocaust denier you merely have to be denying the uniqueness of the Holocaust.

When Iran president Ahmadinejad says that he wants to examine the myth of the Holocaust, he is threatening to challenge the prevailing Zionist interpretation.

Ward Churchill got in trouble with the Zionists because he wanted to compare the genocide of Native Americans to the Holocaust. He makes the case mainly because the policy of extermination conducted against the original inhabitants of the Americas is still denied, and as a result extensions of the policies persist.

I think the argument to prove Churchill’s point leads in an altogether different direction. This is because the Jewish extermination was not an act of imperialism against an weaker people.

The genocide against the Native Americans was like the systematic extermination of indigenous peoples everywhere: Australia’s aborigines, Indonesia’s Ache and Timorese. It is also the age-old mechanics of one people conquering another, like the genocide by the Turkish of the Armenians, and the recent actions of the Sudanese Arabs against their blacks.

The genocide against the Jews was class warfare upward. It belonged in a category like the Soviet and Chinese against their bourgeois and intellectuals, like the Khmer Rouge genocide of the urban Cambodians most of whom were ethnic Chinese, like the Hutu slaughtering of the Tutsies, like the traditional and recurring pogroms against Jews. It’s hard to say that even the Spanish Inquisition wasn’t after the usury profits of the Jews.

Thus antisemitism is less unique than its name implies, and resembles very much Marx’s class warfare where the proletariat is trying to come out from under its oppressors, or perceived oppressors.

The Holocaust is touted as religious genocide, hence the rationale for redress which honors their biggest religious wish: return to their Promised Land.

The Zionist count on the west’s continued support of that religious goal. They need an independent Israel with a homogeneous Jewish religion. They know that if they were to be integrated with the region’s present-day peoples, as a Jewish minority among Palestinians, they stand a good chance of being voted off the island.

So here are America and modern Europe, standing in support of a dogmatic religious group. It does not play well with others, and it insists in fact that it be segregated from everyone else, even as it usurps the land of others, and occupies adjacent lands under the pretext of its national security.

I have no doubt that victims of the Holocaust would themselves be shocked and shamed at the crimes that Israel is committing in their name against the peoples of Palestine.

Why America and Europe should side in religious solidarity with Jewish fundamentalists without sympathy for the Islamic fundamentalists is the consequence of believing a myth.

The 911 Reichtag Fire

In 1933 someone set fire to the Reichstag, the historic German Parliament Building. Hitler seized on the occasion to incite in the German population a fear of terrorists and foreign agents, and trumped up his case for the preemptive invasion of Eastern Europe.
 
To prevent further acts of terrorism, Hitler curtailed civil rights and created the first concentration camp at Dachau. Predating the extermination camps by a half dozen years, Dachau began as an internment camp for political foes and other “enemies of the state.” Many Germans felt that the Reichstag fire was a Nazi deception, set deliberately to further Nazi goals.

2001 brought the American People their 9-11, with similar doubt as to how it came to happen. Americans were also given their Dachau at Guantanamo Bay, a prison camp absent every American notion of civil right. Americans soon became responsible as well for waging a preemptive war on Iraq based on trumped up charges of WMDs, and American atrocities at Mazar-i-Sharif and Fallujah, which beg comparison to the Nazi taking of Czechoslovakia, and Nazi acts at Babi Yar and Lidice.

To compare American to Nazis may seem like a profound trivialization of the horror of the Holocaust. There is no evil greater than that which perpetrated the Holocaust. But the Final Solution didn’t start until 1940. The U.S. Neocons are comparatively early in their game.

History has now confirmed that it was the Nazis themselves who started the Reichstag fire. They set the fire at night, while no one was in the building. Not a single life was lost. Not very Nazi-like. Someday history will reveal the truth about who perpetrated the events of September 11, 2001 at the World Trade Center. Time will eventually have to overcome this administration’s persistent efforts to thwart investigation and accountability.

IF the Neocons in the U. S. administration, either by negligence or malice, did allow or facilitate or instigate or perpetrate this ugly tragedy, if they did this, what can they have yet in store for the American people?

(Reprinted ArmchairCommando.)

The Ward Churchill problem

Why does Ward Churchill make everyone so upset? Let’s see. He’s advocating that what was done -what is still being done- to Native Americans be recognized as genocide., and he’s being called a anti-semite because of it. Why?

Well, because the jewish people suffered under the Holocaust and as recompense were given Palestine. And just like someone who’s been granted maybe too special a favor, they have to make sure that no one else feels like they can begin lining up for similar treatment. For example, what if Native Americans, who may have suffered 100 million deaths under a systemic program of genocide, what if they decided that their religion had prophesied a return to their native lands, and that -out of guilt- the powers that be should grant them their holy lands, irrespective of who may be presently living there.

There’s an ugly untold story to the Holocaust. Six million jews died; not American jews, not for the most part wealthy jews, but the poor jews. And it is becoming known that world leaders knew about the German programs of extermination. There is doubt now that those jews who were not under threat of extermination may have known about what was happening to their poorer cousins. As unthinkable as was the Holocaust, why can we not stretch our mind to grasp the also unthinkable idea that deaths of millions of poor jews may have been expended to further the cause of Zionism, the notion of a jewish entitlement to the holy land.

When there is talk of genocide in the Balkans or Africa or Southeast Asia or the Americas, Jewish scholars are always at the forefront of the argument against calling it genocide. To them it is some lesser-cide, and certainly no Holocaust. Because the Holocaust by their definition is the worst inhumanity to have been visited upon a people ever, past or future.

The resistance to acknowledge genocide is particularly damnable when it comes to the UN trying to intercede and prevent it. After Bosnia, nations of the world passed a resolution that mandated their intercession in cases of genocide. Could anyone have imagined that their determination to take action would be stymied by having to bicker over the definition of genocide? The uninterrupted ethnic cleansing in the Sudan is the most recent tragic example.

And so no other group of people may lay claim to being the victims of genocide, lest it detract from the genocide suffered by world jewry, lest anyone question the jewish claim, after a 2,000 year absence, to Palestinian lands.

This is why Ward Churchill is so unpopular. And should be I suppose, if you are a zionist. May I say that I don’t believe that I should be considered an anti-semite to say that by definition a Zionist is a bigoted, white-supremist jew.

If you believe that the Israelis are the only qualified caretakers of Jerusalem, do you also believe that the white man has been the best custodian for the holy lands of the American continent’s previous peoples?

Prince Harry isn’t free

Scion of fascist overclass.   Prince Harry in uniform.
 
In usual dress

It says a lot about the state of freedom in the modern world when even the heir to the throne of England can’t express himself freely.

There was a time when dressing like a Nazi was not only irreverent but immaturely insensitive to the memory of the Holocaust. At present however, the Nazi reference calls one’s attention to the fascism omnipresent in today’s governing bodies.

Perhaps Prince Harry wasn’t saying: look at me, I’m the camp commander of Treblinka. Perhaps Prince Harry was saying, if I may put words in his mouth, this:

Look at me, I’m a scion of the ruling family, of a government which has taken its country to war against the wishes of its people, which has invaded a defenseless country, which has curtailed human rights for its own population, which has imprisoned some of its subjects in defiance of rights granted since 400 years, which engages in torture, and is for all intents and purposes, as fascist as the Nazis. Short only the extermination camps. But we do not perhaps yet know about these.

But Harry wasn’t permitted to make this statement. He was treated like only a spoiled kid. Prince Charles treated his son’s act like that of a kid who didn’t know he was triffling with the horrors of Auswitch. But Charles is only protecting the wolf in sheep’s clothing of his protectors, the international corporatocracy which pulls his strings. Who’s the spoiled child really?