Neverland vs. Disneyland

Michael Jackson kid collectionOf course Michael Jackson is closing Neverland, his kid-themed estate in Southern California, he doesn’t need it, he’s gone to Disneyland!
 
(Caution: this article may get a little gross.)
 
The California Disneyland where children run around unattended? The Florida Disney world
with its similar kid-sized attractions? No, it’s just an expression. Jocko’s gone to the proverbial ne-plus-ultra destination for those who’ve hit the jackpot. Well you be the judge.

Michael Jackson got off charges of child molestation, statutory rape, contributing to the delinquency of minors, kidnapping, unlawful detainment, all now curiously summarized as “child abuse.” After which he immediately scooted out of the country! Despite the most unbecoming of evidence, Michael Jackson got away without being declared a sex offender. Maybe he knows something we don’t because he decided he didn’t want to stay within reach of U.S. law enforcement, and he obsconded to… Bahrain.

Where’s Bahrain? What’s Bahrain? Michael Jackson says he has friends there who he feels are more simpathetic to his inner whatever he is. His friend is a sheikh in Bahrain with oil to pay for harems.

Bahrain is like the United Arab Emirates, which are small sultanates set up by the British in such a way that the oil wealth would not have to be shared by national populations but rather by simply the occupiers of each particular stretch of desert. The Dutch did the same thing in Brunei, carved out of Indonesia. These are artificial borders meant to exclude the actual indigenous inhabitants who might require the traditional colonial investments in infrastructure and social welfare.

Imagine if instead of launching the California gold rush, Sutter had walled up his Mill, declared it an autonomous Sultanate, and all the gold wealth had gone only to fund vast automobile collections, Manhattan real estate investments, decadent harems and orgies, ad vomitum, leaving the rest of Californians to a tribal existance outside the flow of the gold largess.

What do Middle East sultans do with themselves which Michael Jackson finds so simpatico? It’s probably not to do with subjugating their populations with poverty and repressive religious dogma. Maybe it’s speedboat racing, who knows? More likely it has to do with the secretive harems, collections of captive sex partners lured and trafficked from all parts of the globe, reputedly the “white slave trade” which what do you wanna bet includes children?

To recap, how did the various pedophelia behaviors so graphically documented by Jackson’s prosecutors, from the Jesus Juice to the predatory grooming, come to be summarized as “child abuse?” Mere balcony-baby-dangling by comparison. This mirrors the current media subversion of the word rape, and all the horror it conjures, by using the more ambiguous term “sexual assault.”

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 thank-the-soldier-not-the-poet chain email

Zell Miller resurrected the “THANK THE SOLDIER, NOT THE POET” spiel at the RNC. It had circulated more than a year ago as one of those sappy emails. I dug up the response I used back then.

Hello!
Thank you for your lovely “The Soldier” poem. I have to disagree with your point a little. While it makes sense to be thankful to the soldiers who have served to protect our freedoms, their task is nothing to glorify.

For example, you can thank the 11 year old child laborer in Indonesia for making your running shoes, certainly you should. But do you want to glorify and justify the necessity of her role? Her daily ordeal is as involuntary as what we are requiring of our soldiers.

I don’t believe a soldier has rarely been anything more, throughout history, than the hapless uneducated joe who didn’t know enough to get out of the way.

Whatever has been accomplished through war is to the credit of leaders and politicians. Would you agree perhaps that when leaders and politicians have aspired to moral and humanitarian goals it would have been due to the influence their education? The extent of that education was no doubt courtesy of: the poet, the reporter, the campus organizer, and I could add, the minister.

Supporting our troops does not mean checking your brain at the door.