Here come the stormtroopers with their American made caterpillar. Jewish Human Rights Activist Ezra Nawi now tries to stop this nasty American bug! Ezra then goes to jail as the stormtrooper gang has a jolly good time.
Doesn’t all this remind you of the American fun and games crew over at Abu Ghraib? See it and weep, Kids.
The word “nutritious” defines a food quality that provides sustenance. I’ve no doubt as skepticism grows about the likely poisonous aspects of refined sugar and High Fructose Corn Syrup, the corporate sugar-water purveyors will append “satiates your subliminal impulses” to the meaning of nutritious. Who safeguards our dictionaries from authoritarians who profit from reweaving the fabric of knowledge we consider inviolate?
We expect facts to change, but it is unsettling to be robbed of the words which we count on to measure the change.
Did you think “anti-Semitic” meant prejudice against the Jews? It does, except the Zionists behind sustaining Israel want it to indemnify their unpopular endeavor too. Anti-Semitism now means opposing Israel, although the stigma implied is of course still “Jew Hater.” But the appropriation is unseemly. Crusading Evangelicals could tell you, if you oppose their bloody incursions into the lands of Islam, then you must be anti-Christian. But are you?
It would seem only fair that the victims of anti-Semitism should be entitled to define what oppresses them, but that’s not who’s wrapping themselves in its protection. Zionists (both Jewish and Christian) claim that an overwhelming percentage of World Jewry supports sustaining the US-Israel occupation of Palestine. Is it true? I wager that the far greater proportion of both Jews and non-Jews repudiate military aggression, occupation, ethnic cleansing and religious oppression. But if it were true, claims of suffering historical persecution are not grounds to be given license to persecute others.
Anti-Semitism describes real, tradition-rooted anti-Jewish sentiment. To expand its meaning disrespects the very tangible prejudice which Jews still face. Opposition to sustaining Israel is actually Anti-Zionism, which is neither for nor against Judaism. Anti-Zionism denounces another long-held prejudice: White European Man’s assertion that the Holy Land belongs to him.
Anti-Zionism is the opposition to sustaining an illegally invaded, illegally occupied, racist administration of Palestine in the name of “Zionism.” Anti-Zionism calls for “the destruction of Israel,” meaning the dissolution of the Western colonial theocracy imposed on the indigenous population of the Middle East. To oppose the sustaining of Israel is a call to exterminate Israeli apartheid. Anti-Zionism is no resurrection of the Final Solution. It means leave people be. White settlers should not assume to usurp the lands and water rights of the native Palestinians.
Zionism defender Nathan Sharansky has constructed a definition of anti-Semitism with an expanded breadth, he calls them the three Ds: Demonization, Double Standards and Delegitimization. It’s this 3D definition with which Zionists are branding UCSB professor William Robinson, himself a Jew, as an anti-Semite. Professor Robinson circulated an email among his sociology students, comparing Israel’s actions in Gaza to methods used by the Nazis, now US-Israeli lobby groups are calling for UCSB to censure him.
Sharansky’s three Ds are easily refuted because he offers no more than circular argument. Ipso Facto my eye. I reprint Sharansky’s explanation below, but first an abridgment:
Demonization: “…having [the Jewish state’s] actions blown out of all sensible proportion … can only be considered anti-Semitic.”
Double Standards: “It is anti-Semitism … when Israel is singled out by the United Nations for human rights abuses while tried and true abusers … are ignored.”
Delegitimization: “…the denial of Israel’s right to exist is always anti-Semitic.”
Thus, if Israel considers the criticisms leveled against it to be insensible, then the criticisms are anti-Semitic; also, so long as abusive regimes persist, Israel reserves its prerogative to abuse; and, the legitimacy of Israel’s biblically ordained Manifest Destiny is never to be questioned. These are self-rationalizations which beg ridicule, but doing so would appear anti-Semitic.
Sharansky finishes: “If other peoples have a right to live securely in their homelands, then the Jewish people have a right to live securely in their homeland.” To suggest that the right of the Palestinians to live in their homeland, have been usurped by the Jewish people, most of whom knew other homelands, is apparently anti-Semitic.
Here is Nathan Sharansky’s statement to support the 3-D formula for decrying “ANTI-SEMITISM!”
I propose the following test for differentiating legitimate criticism of Israel from anti-Semitism. The 3D test, as I call it, is not a new one. It merely applies to the new anti-Semitism the same criteria that for centuries identified the different dimensions of classical anti-Semitism.
DEMONIZATION
The first D is the test of demonization.Whether it came in the theological form of a collective accusation of deicide or in the literary depiction of Shakespeare’s Shylock, Jews were demonized for centuries as the embodiment of evil. Therefore, today we must be wary of whether the Jewish state is being demonized by having its actions blown out of all sensible proportion.
For example, the comparisons of Israelis to Nazis and of the Palestinian refugee camps to Auschwitz — comparisons heard practically every day within the “enlightened” quarters of Europe — can only be considered anti-Semitic.
Those who draw such analogies either do not know anything about Nazi Germany or, more plausibly, are deliberately trying to paint modern-day Israel as the embodiment of evil.
DOUBLE STANDARDS
The second D is the test of double standards. For thousands of years a clear sign of anti-Semitism was treating Jews differently than other peoples, from the discriminatory laws many nations enacted against them to the tendency to judge their behavior by a different yardstick.Similarly, today we must ask whether criticism of Israel is being applied selectively. In other words, do similar policies by other governments engender the same criticism, or is there a double standard at work?
It is anti-Semitism, for instance, when Israel is singled out by the United Nations for human rights abuses while tried and true abusers like China, Iran, Cuba, and Syria are ignored.
Likewise, it is anti-Semitism when Israel’s Magen David Adom, alone among the world’s ambulance services, is denied admission to the International Red Cross.
DELIGITIMIZATION
The third D is the test of deligitimization. In the past, anti-Semites tried to deny the legitimacy of the Jewish religion, the Jewish people, or both. Today, they are trying to deny the legitimacy of the Jewish state, presenting it, among other things, as the last vestige of colonialism.While criticism of an Israeli policy may not be anti-Semitic, the denial of Israel’s right to exist is always anti-Semitic. If other peoples have a right to live securely in their homelands, then the Jewish people have a right to live securely in their homeland.
‘NETANYAHU’S DEMAND that the Palestinians recognize Israel as “the State of the Jewish People” is ridiculous, even as a tactic for preventing peace. A state recognizes a state, not its ideology or political regime. Nobody recognizes Saudi Arabia, the homeland of the Hajj, as “the State of the Muslim Umma” (the community of believers).’
Thus speaks Uri Avnery, and he continues:
‘Moreover, the demand puts the Jews all over the world in an impossible position. If the Palestinians have to recognize Israel as “the State of the Jewish People”, then all the governments in the world must do the same. The United States, for example. That means that the Jewish US citizens Rahm Emmanuel and David Axelrod, Obama’s closest advisors, are officially represented by the government of Israel. The same goes for the Jews in Russia, the UK and France.’
Yes, Uri is right. The ‘Jewish State’ demands more for itself than even the Catholic Church does of its minions. The Catholic Church interjects itself into the affairs of multiple countries throughout the world and the nominally secular ‘Jewish State’ follows along copying the Pope with its own demands for special ‘recognition’.
Then, of course, there are the Muslims who want their own laws to be applied equally to everybody, including everybody else! But the ‘Jewish State’ is more immature and more unformed. It lusts to enlarge the boundaries of where the Jewish State law shall be dominant. It lusts for more territory! It resents the establishment previously of multiple and large Christian States and Muslim States and is like a Germany that lusted once for colonial lands of its own control like England, France, and Spain once had had.
‘Even if Mahmoud Abbas were persuaded to accept this demand – and thereby indirectly put in doubt the citizenship of a million and a half Arabs in Israel – I would oppose this strenuously. More than that, I would consider it an unfriendly act.’
Why, Uri? Is it because Religion mandated states ultimately apply their harsh laws against their own supposed members? Is it, Uri, because as a Jewish person you don’t even want to live in that Jewish State?
See full article Netanyahu’s Plan by URI AVNERY.
And why is Barack Obama keeping the US government signed onto recognizing Israel as a privileged Jewish State rather than a multinational country with equal rights for all? Why is Barack Obama hobnobbing so much with Christian Zionists, too, who believe in maintaining a militaristic Christian Empire centered in the US? Why is Barack Obama continuing the US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan?
“Socialism will continue. The Ecuadorian people voted for that. We are going to emphasize this fight for social justice, for regional justice. We are going to continue the fight to eliminate all forms of workplace exploitation within our socialist conviction: the supremacy of human work over capital. Nobody is in any doubt that our preferential option is for the poorest people, we are here because of them. Hasta la victoria siempre!”
— Rafael Correa, April 30, 2000
See Ecuador’s Election Shows Why Left Continues Winning in Hard Times for an explanation of how and why Rafael Correa just won reelection? Here is genuine populist unlike the phoney one that just won election in the US. Here is a genuine Christian in the better sense of what that means, unlike the herds of hateful, nasty ones running loose all over the US.
What happened to American populism, where did it go? Unfortunately for us here in the US it flew South as the Right Wing hijacked the meaning and fire out of it, and then destroyed US brand populism altogether as they glued it to militarism, racism, and the flag. An effort to find it once again then got further hijacked by corporate pseudo liberalism under Brand Obama. It got even further hijacked by Right Wing evangelism!
That’s OK because it will waken once again, as people here in the US take the hit economically, too. Take the hit for allowing the corporations to dismantle their health care, social security, and human rights. Populism is meanwhile asleep right now in the US, but people like Rafael Correa of Ecuador keep the dream of revival of populism alive in the Americas as a whole. WWJD? Rafael Correa has an idea…
The decision by Egypt’s dictatorship to impoverish further the Coptic minority by using the swine flu as an excuse to slaughter off hundreds of thousands of their pigs is characteristic of how US allies and client regimes in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Egypt, Iraq, and other dictatorship run Islamic countries act. Clashes erupt over Egypt pig cull
This government only stays in power through massive US aid and is dependent on their servility to the US Empire. Mubarak’s use of torture, betrayal of Palestinians in Gaza, and his attacks on internal human rights of Egypt’s Coptic minority are all part of the US government program for the region. This is a brutal dictatorship in action once again. No freedom here.
Today’s university campuses have to deal with College Republicans, ACTA and NeoMcCarthyists. The latest uneducable creeps shopped their leftist-professor- horror-story to the Anti-Defamation League, to brand their teacher’s criticism of Israel as “anti-Semitic.” UCSB senior Rebecca Joseph and junior Tova Hausman both took exception to Professor William Robinson’s Sociology Listserv email comparing Israel’s mop up operation in Gaza to the Warsaw Ghetto. Below are the words they cut and pasted together to accuse Robinson.
The literacy level of these two students is probably on par for Twilight fans, but definitely unbecoming for the University of California system. The first letter is reputedly from a college senior. Rebecca Joseph‘s opening argument was plagiarized from the internet, but she continues to scold Professor Robinson for straying from her idea of what makes a university professor. The second complaint from UCSB junior Tova Hausman copies the first letter’s form, but adds the accusation of sexual misconduct for leaving her feeling raped.
Is it unfair to put simple college students under national scrutiny like this? From their own words they show themselves to be rather helpless. But what to do when students, or some unscrupulous backers, are taking aim at a respected tenured professor? It’s serious business. Organizations like ACTA and Hillel are out to enforce a veritable Right Wing PC rectitude. As if it’s politically incorrect to make fun of uneducated on campus!
Keeping educators silenced was easier during the Bush administration, but the dampers are still on Academic Freedom. Ward Churchill may have won his case in court against the University of Colorado, but opinionated faculty are still few and far between. The latest attack against William Robinson attempts to reinforce more of the same.
Probably by now Hillel is wishing they’d coaxed a better educated pair of students to face off against Robinson. The administrators who received the complaint letters should have earmarked the girls for a remedial English refresher in anticipation of their graduation. But let’s look beyond the cheap shots.
The accusations inarticulated here are scurrilous where they are not outright illogical. You be the judge.
First Student Complaint
Here’s the first complaint received by UCSB, from Rebecca Joseph, Vice-president of the Santa Barbara campus Orthodox Jewish Chabad. Interestingly, UCSB has a number of pro-Israel action groups: Hillel, Jewish Awareness Movement on Campus, American Students for Israel, Stand With Us, AIPAC and the Israeli Palestinian Film Festival (which judging by the lineup runs films only by un-self-critical Israelis and sympathetic Palestinians).
Here is Rebecca Joseph’s complaint, uncorrected.
To Whom It May Concern:
On Monday, january 19, at 1:02 pm, I received an email from Professor Robinson for the course Sociology of Globalization (Soc 130SG). The subject of the email was “Parallel images of Nazis and Israelis.” This email compared the aggression of the Nazis to the Jews in Germany, to that which is going on between Palestine and Israel today. Professor Robinson wrote the first three paragraphs including the following: “Gaza is Israel’s Warsaw…” In addition to his few words, he attached an email describing the comparison which goes on to another attachment showing pictures to prove his point.
This email shocked me; before I did anything I gave him the benefit of the doubt and emailed him back asking, “I just wanted to know what this information was for? Is it for some assignment or just information that you put out there for us?” His response was “Rebecca, just for your interest….. I should have clarified.”
At this point I felt nauseous that a professor could use his power to send this email with his views attached, to each student in his class. To me this overstepped the boundaries of a professor and his conduct in a system of higher education. Due to this horrific email I had to drop the course. being a senior and needing any classes I could get, this left me in need of more classes which added more stress.
Two weeks later I saw a friend that was in the course with me and I asked him if it was ever brought up in class or discussed even for a brief minute or two, he responded by telling me that he never even mentioned it in class and that he too would have dropped the course, but he needed it to graduate on time.
Anti Semitism is considered to be hatred toward Jews –individually and as a group– that can be attributed to the Jewish religion and/or ethnicity. An important issue is the distinction between legitimate criticism of policies and practices of the State of Israel, and commentary that assumes an anti-Semitic character. The demonization of Israel, or vilification of Israeli leaders, sometimes through comparisons with Nazi leaders, and through the use of Nazi symbols to caricature them, indicates an anti-Semitic bias rather than a valid criticism of policy.
I found these parallel images intimidating, disgusting, and beyond a teacher role as an educator in the university system. I feel that something must be done so other students don’t have to go through the same intimidating, disgust I went through. I was asked to speak to him and get him to apologize but I feel that it will not make a difference for future students of his.
Whatever the outcome may be, I am hoping for some apology from Robinson, for not only my self and but for my peers in the class as well. In addition I would like to see more happen then just an apology because he has breached the University’s Code of Conduct for Professors and that this issue must be dealt with immediately.
In the Faculty Code of Conduct in Part II, Professional Responsibilities, Ethical Principles, and Unacceptable Faculty conduct, in Section A, Teaching and Students, it states that “The integrity of the faculty-student relationship is the foundation of the University’s educational mission. This relationship vests considerable trust in the faculty member, who, in turn, bears authority and accountability as mentor, educator, and evaluator.”
However Professor Robinson has turned away from his professional responsibilities through his “significant intrusion of material unrelated to the course.” (Part II, Section A, Number 1, b). He has also violated the universities policy by “participating in or deliberately abetting disruption, interference, or intimidation in the classroom,” (Part II, Section A, Number 5). Robinson has done so through this intimidating email which had pushed me to withdraw from this course and take another one.
In the University System professors above all, are to be “effective teachers and scholars,” Robinson has gone against his rights as a professor at the university through his, “unauthorized use of University resources or facilities on a significant scale for personal, commercial, political, or religious purposes,” (Section II, Section C, Number 3). Robinson used his university resources, to email each student in this course to get his view across, in doing so; he became a representation of the faculty members of the University of California Santa Barbara. The code of conduct state that, “faculty members have the same rights and obligations as all citizens. They are as free as other citizens to express their views and to participate in the political process of the community. When they act or speak in their personal and private capacities, they should avoid deliberately creating the impression that they represent the University.” By Robinson using his university email account he attaches his thoughts with that of the university and they become a single entity sharing the same ideas.
Thank you very much for your time and consideration of this matter and I am hoping to here [sic] back in the near future.
Thank you,
Rebecca Joseph
Second student complaint
The second letter, which cribs from the first obviously, was sent by UCSB junior Tova Hausman. At least she credits the US State Dept as the source of her definition of “anti-Semitism.” But Hausman adds the accusation of sexual impropriety, taking a page it seems from David Mamet’s Oleanna.
February 19, 2009
To whom it may concern,
My name is Tova Hausman, and I was enrolled in Professor William Robinson’s Sociology 130 SG course this Winter 2009. The course was called Social Globalization. Our class received an email in the second week of class, from the professor, called “Parallel images of Nazis and Israelis.” It discussed the parallel acts and images between Nazi Germany during World War II and the present day Israelis. He claims that what the Nazis did to the Jews during the war is parallel to what Israel is doing to Palestine right now. Professor Robinson clearly stated his anti Semitic political views in this email that were unjust and unsolicited. The department of states 2004 definition of anti-Semitism: Anti Semitism is considered to be hatred toward Jews –individually and as a group– that can be attributed to the Jewish religion and/or ethnicity. An important issue is the distinction between legitimate criticism of policies and practices of the State of Israel, and commentary that assumes an anti-Semitic character. The demonization of Israel, or vilification of Israeli leaders, sometimes through comparisons with Nazi leaders, and through the use of Nazi symbols to caricature them, indicates an anti-Semitic bias rather than a valid criticism of policy……
In all the years of schooling and higher education I have never experienced an abuse of an educator position. Taking the opportunity to disseminate personal political views through obtaining email addresses of the class roster that are only for academic use, show betrayal and complete abuse of powers by the professor. To hide behind a computer and send this provocative email shows poor judgment and perhaps a warped personality. The classroom and the forum of which higher education is presented needs to be safe and guarded so the rights of individuals are respected. handle
To express one’s political views is not necessarily wrong but here it was not relevant to the subject matter. How could one continue to participate in this professor’s class? The fact that the professor attached his views to the depiction of what my great grandparents and family experienced shows lack of sensitivity and awareness. What he did was criminal because he took my trust and invaded something that is very personal. I felt as if I have been violated by this professor. Yes I am aware of Anti-Semites, but to abuse this position in an environment of higher education where I always thought it to be safe, until now, is intimidating.
This professor should be stopped immediately from continuing to disseminate this information and be punished because his damage is irreversible. He abused his privilege to teach, to lead, and to mentor.
Bellow is a list of the faculty code of conduct in which I believe Professor Robinson violated:
Part I — Professional Rights of Faculty
2. the right to present controversial material relevant to a course of instruction.Part II — Professional Responsibilities, Ethical Principles, and Unacceptable Faculty Conduct
A. Teaching and StudentThe integrity of the faculty-student relationship is the foundation of the University’s educational mission. This relationship vests considerable trust in the faculty member, who, in turn, bears authority and accountability as mentor, educator, and evaluator. The unequal institutional power inherent in this relationship heighten the vulnerability of the student and the potential for coercion. The pedagogical relationship between faculty member and student must be protected from influences or activities that can interfere with learning consistent with the goals and ideals of the University. Whenever a faculty member is responsible for academic supervision of a student, a personal relationship between them of a romantic or sexual nature, even if consensual, is inappropriate. Any such relationship jeopardizes the integrity of the educational process.
1. Failure to meet the responsibilities of instruction, including:
(b) significant intrusion of material unrelated to the course;2. Discrimination, including harassment, against a student on political grounds, or for reasons of race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, national origin, ancestry, marital status, medical condition, status as a covered veteran, or, within the limits imposed by law or University regulation, because of age or citizenship or for other arbitrary or personal reasons.
5. Participating in or deliberately abetting disruption, interference, or intimidation in the classroom.
Types of unacceptable conduct:
B. Scholarship
Violation of canons of intellectual honesty, such as research misconduct and/or intentional misappropriation of the writings, research, and findings of others.C. University
3. Unauthorized use of University resources or facilities on a significant scale for personal, commercial, political, or religious purposes.E. The Community Ethical Principles.
“Faculty members have the same rights and obligations as all citizens. They are as free as other citizens to express their views and to participate in the political processes of the community. When they act or speak in their personal and private capacities, they should avoid deliberately creating the impression that they represent the University.” (U.C. Academic Council Statement, 1971)I expect this matter to be looked into and wish to be contacted soon.
Thank you,
Tova Hausman
Well let’s make a point to contact this McCarthy wannabe. These are crummy students fancying themselves campus sanitizers for Israel. What contemptible innuendo and vacuous indignation! The two students reportedly approached the Simon Wiesenthal Center, where they were advised to work through the Jewish Anti-Defamation League.
Letter sent from the ADL
Pressure then came from Anti-Defamation League National Director Abraham Foxman who visited the campus in a covert meeting to recommend the immediate reprimand of Professor Robinson. (Foxman even had these words for the Gaza analysis offered by Bill Moyers.)
February 9, 2009
William I. Robinson
Professor of Sociology
Global and international Studies
Latin American and Iberian Studies
University of California – Santa Barbara
Santa Barbara, CA 93106Dear Professor Robinson:
We have received complaints that on January 19, 2009, you sent an email to a number of your student entitled “parallel images of Nazis and Israelis.” If this allegation is true, ADL strongly condemns the views expressed in your email and urges you to unequivocally repudiate them.
While your writings are protected by the First Amendment and academic freedom, we rely upon our own rights to say that your comparisons of Nazis and Israelis were offensive, a historical and have crossed the line well beyond legitimate criticism of Israel.
In our view, no accurate comparison can be made between the complex Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the atrocities committed by the Nazis against the Jews. Nor can Israeli actions or policies be fairly characterized as acts of ethnic cleansing or genocide. Unlike the Holocaust (and to more recent examples of genocide and ethnic cleansing in Darfur, Rwanda and Kosovo), there is no Israeli ideology, policy or plan to persecute, exterminate or expel the Palestinian population — nor has there ever been. In direct contrast, the Nazis’ “final solution” to the “Jewish problem” was the deliberate, systematic and mechanized extermination of European Jewry. Hitler’s “final Solution” led to the calculated, premeditated murder of six million Jews and the destruction of thriving Jewish communities across Europe.
We also think it is important to note that the tone and extreme views presented in your email were intimidating to students and likely chilled thoughtful discussion on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Clearly, that is antithetical to the very purpose of the academy. Finally, using your university email address to send out material that appears unrelated to your Globalization of Sociology course likely violates numerous parts of the University of Santa Barbara Faculty Code of Conduct (see, for example, Part I, 2; Part II, A, 1, b; Part II, C, 3; Part II, E, 1).
Again, ADL strongly condemns the views expressed in the January 19, 2009 email and we urge you to unequivocally repudiate them.
Sincerely,
Cynthia Silverman
Santa Barbara Regional Director
Anti-Defamation LeagueCc:
Department Chair, Verta Dean
Chancellor, Henry T. Yang
President, Mark G. Yudof
Email from UCSB Charges Officer:
Instead of dismissing the dubious accusations, the school is convening an investigation. But not without impropriety on the part of the Charges Officer Martin Scharlemann. Prof. Scharlemann insisted that Robinson produce a written refutation BEFORE he would reveal the formal accusations leveled by the two students. Read the formidable exchanges at the website mounted by the UCSB students and faculty rallying to Robinson’s defense.
Charges Officer E-mail Re: Charges
Professor Robinson,
Responding to your memo of 3 April, here is a summary of the allegations:
* You, as professor of an academic course, sent to each student enrolled in that course a highly partisan email accompanied by lurid
photographs.* The email was unexpected and without educational context.
* You offered no explanation of how the material related to the content of the course.
* You offered no avenue to discuss, nor encouraged any response, to the opinions and photographs included in the email.
* You directly told a student who inquired that the email was not connected to the course.
* As a result, two enrolled students were too distraught to continue with the course.
* The constellation of allegations listed above, if substantially true, may violate the Faculty Code of Conduct.
In the (”not exhaustive”) list of examples included with that Faculty Code of Conduct, the most proximate are part II, A. 1. b and A. 4.
On the other matters you raise, while my conversation with the students was confidential, I can tell you that I did not advise them to seek an “apology” from you. And yes, I did offer you an opportunity “if you wish” to provide a written response to the complaint before I met with the Charges Advisory Committee, which is solely vested with the authority to dismiss a complaint as frivolous and unfounded.
-Martin Scharlemann
And from the internets…
And let’s not overlook the attempts to initiate an email campaign to bring public pressure on UCSB to reprimand Professor Robinson. A commenter to this blog linked to a website advocating a form email to convey (our) universal indignation over the anti-Semitism at UCSB. The form letter is suggested by “anonymous” (possibly Alvin Black aka Dr. Mike) and he recommended signing it “Name withheld to protect privacy.” We reprint the opening and closing here:
Dear Chancellor Yang,
As I am sure you know, several months ago, Professor William I. Robinson, a self described “scholar -activist” and professor of Sociology and Global Studies at your university, forwarded an email to his students condemning Israel. The email contained images of Nazi atrocities along with images from Israel’s defensive campaign against Hamas’s terror. This comparison is considered by both the US State Dept and the European Union, in their working paper on anti-Semitism, to cross the line into anti-Semitism. This email was so disturbing to at least two students that they felt compelled to drop his class. Because of the nature of the emails, the Anti-Defamation League, as well as the UCSB Academic Senate’s Charges Committee have become involved.
[…etc…]
And thus the Arab world’s war against Israel becomes a nation-wide campus war against Jews.
Professor Robinson seems to have chosen to join the ranks of these “erstwhile defenders.”
I most sincerely urge you, therefore, to draw a line in the sand. The university should not be a promoter of Jew-hatred, nor an inciter of violence.
Sincerely yours,
Name withheld to protect privacy
Anonymity
Isn’t that what this post is about actually? We’ve aggregated the criticisms flying against Professor Robinson, but most notably this article seeks to expose the UCSB students who led the faceless attack against Professor Robinson.
Until the Los Angeles Times revealed their names today, the identities of both Joseph and Hausman had been concealed. Even the specific complaints they brought against Robinson were kept secret from the accused himself. Now, what kind of people insist on slandering others from the shadows?
At NMT, we make ourselves known, while many of our detractors do not. We could not care less, but if apologists for Israel’s crimes consider themselves in the right, why do they hide behind aliases?
If you support Israel’s “right to defend itself” by breaking international conventions and committing war crimes, stand up and say it. If you think Israel has every right to take the land of the Palestinians and keep it, Goddamn it come out from behind your creepy disguises and say it. If you’re going to impugn others for whatever false transgression, without the courage to reveal yourself, do you expect anyone to accord you credibility?
If you are going to condemn the Palestinians of Gaza for exercising their basic human right to resist an illegal foreign invasion and occupation of their land, you better have the nerve to say it publicly. Cowards.
Wouldn’t you think it bad form for Israeli militants to behave like Nazis, while immunizing themselves with the self-righteous indignation that any criticism of their actions can simply be dismissed as “anti-Semitic?” Photographs and confessions emerging from the IDF’s atrocities in Gaza just beg comparison the German Einsatzgruppen in Poland. Earlier this year UC Santa Barbara professor William Robinson forwarded an email photo essay to a UCSB listserv, the already much-circulated side by side comparison to the WWII atrocities. Two students complained, plagiarizing stock IDF lingo. Now the Anti-Defamation League wants Robinson to recant. With IDF propagandists pouring on the bullshit, let’s revisit the documents.
As has already been noted, Professor Robinson is a harsh critic of US foreign policy, and already a likely target for the goon squad enforcers of Western Capitalism. Not many of America’s actions are defensible, so Robinson has to be attacked by desperate means. Lucky for the lackey-jackals, Robinson chose to criticize Israel’s atrocities against the Palestinians of Gaza. Bingo!
The Israeli propaganda machine has armed aspiring Israel-defenders with a blanket rebuttal: just yell “ANTI-SEMITISM!” And what a load of crap that is. Much turns on the definition of “anti-Semitism.” It packs the punch of meaning someone who hates Jews, but the advocates of Zionism have expanded the definition into 3-D! Zionist apologist Nathan Sharansky has coined the 3D definition of ant-Semitism: demonization of Israel, double standards, and delegitimization. You don’t have to look closely to note that those points outline all the rebuttals of criticisms of Israel and any question of the legitimacy of the Zionist usurpation of Palestine.
The criticisms posed by those concerned for the fate of Gaza are the same expressed by a large portion of the Israeli Jewish population as well. But the US Israeli lobby, militantly Zionist, has the complicity of the US war-mongering corporate media, thus the IDF Megaphone protestations get traction. These are the same cheap shots leveled against Ward Churchill. By flooding the internet to create the sensation that the indignation was shared, the IDF spammers have been successful in slandering these dissenting academics.
Since we’re seeing this technique being slopped unto our comment forums, let’s examine the statement for which Robinson is being attacked. First we’ll present Robinson’s email. The next post will feature the ensuing letters of complaint, two from UCSB students, and third from the ADL.
Original Email
Here is Professor Robinson’s original email, including his attachment of the Judith Stone article. This accompanied the aforementioned photo essay he forwarded.
Subject: [socforum] parallel images of Nazis and Israelis
From: “William I. Robinson” …
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 21:00:05
…If Martin Luther King were alive on this day of January 19, 2009, there is no doubt that he would be condemning the Israeli aggression against Gaza along with U.S. military and political support for Israeli war crimes, or that he would be standing shoulder to shoulder with the Palestinians. I am forwarding some horrific, parallel images of Nazi atrocities against the Jews and Israeli atrocities against the Palestinians. Perhaps the most frightening are not those providing a graphic depiction of the carnage but that which shows Israeli children writing “with love” on a bomb that will tear apart Palestinian children.
Gaza is Israel’s Warsaw – a vast concentration camp that confined and blockaded Palestinians, subjecting them to the slow death of malnutrition, disease and despair, nearly two years before their subjection to the quick death of Israeli bombs. We are witness to a slow-motion process of genocide (Websters: “the systematic killing of, or a program of action intended to destroy, a whole national or ethnic group”), a process whose objective is not so much to physically eliminate each and every Palestinian than to eliminate the Palestinians as a people in any meaningful sense of the notion of people-hood.
The Israeli army is the fifth most potent military machine in the world and one that is backed by a propaganda machine that rivals and may well surpass that of the U.S., a machine that dares to make the ludicrous and obnoxious claim that opposition to the policies and practices of the Israeli state is anti-Semitism. It should be no surprise that a state founded on the negation of a people was one of the principal backers of the apartheid South African state not to mention of the Latin American military dictatorships until those regimes collapsed under mass protest, and today arms, trains, and advises military and paramilitary forces in Colombia, one of the world’s worst human rights violators.
Below is an article written by a U.S. Jew and sent to a Jewish newspaper. The editor of the paper was fired for publishing it.
Quest for Justice
By Judith Stone
I am a Jew. I was a participant in the Rally for the Right of Return to Palestine. It was the right thing to do.
I’ve heard about the European holocaust against the Jews since I was a small child. I’ve visited the memorials in Washington, DC and Jerusalem dedicated to Jewish lives lost and I’ve cried at the recognition to what level of atrocity mankind is capable of sinking.
Where are the Jews of conscience? No righteous malice can be held against the survivors of Hitler’s holocaust. These fragments of humanity were in no position to make choices beyond that of personal survival. We must not forget that being a survivor or a co-religionist of the victims of the European Holocaust does not grant dispensation from abiding by the rules of humanity.
“Never again” as a motto, rings hollow when it means “never again to us alone.” My generation was raised being led to believe that the biblical land was a vast desert inhabited by a handful of impoverished Palestinians living with their camels and eking out a living in the sand. The arrival of the Jews was touted as a tremendous benefit to these desert dwellers. Golda Mier even assured us that there “is no Palestinian problem.”
We know now this picture wasn’t as it was painted. Palestine was a land filled with people who called it home. There were thriving towns and villages, schools and hospitals. There were Jews, Christians and Muslims. In fact, prior to the occupation, Jews represented a mere 7 percent of the population and owned 3 percent of the land.
Taking the blinders off for a moment, I see a second atrocity perpetuated by the very people who should be exquisitely sensitive to the suffering of others. These people knew what it felt like to be ordered out of your home at gun point and forced to march into the night to unknown destinations or face execution on the spot. The people who displaced the Palestinians knew first hand what it means to watch your home in flames, to surrender everything dear to your heart at a moment’s notice. Bulldozers leveled hundreds of villages, along with the remains of the village inhabitants, the old and the young. This was nothing new to the world.
Poland is a vast graveyard of the Jews of Europe. Israel is the final resting place of the massacred Palestinian people. A short distance from the memorial to the Jewish children lost to the holocaust in Europe there is a leveled parking lot. Under this parking lot is what’s left of a once flourishing village and the bodies of men, women and children whose only crime was taking up needed space and not leaving graciously. This particular burial marker reads: “Public Parking”.
I’ve talked with Palestinians. I have yet to meet a Palestinian who hasn’t lost a member of their family to the Israeli Shoah, nor a Palestinian who cannot name a relative or friend languishing under inhumane conditions in an Israeli prison. Time and time again, Israel is cited for human rights violations to no avail. On a recent trip to Israel, I visited the refugee camps inhabited by a people who have waited 52 years in these ‘temporary’ camps to go home. Every Palestinian grandparent can tell you the name of their village, their street, and where the olive trees were planted. Their grandchildren may never have been home, but they can tell you where their great-grandfather lies buried and where the village well stood. The press has fostered the portrait of the Palestinian terrorist. But, the victims who rose up against human indignity in the Warsaw Ghetto are called heroes. Those who lost their lives are called martyrs. The Palestinian who tosses a rock in desperation is a terrorist.
Two years ago I drove through Palestine and watched intricate sprinkler systems watering lush green lawns of Zionist settlers in their new condominium complexes, surrounded by armed guards and barbed wire in the midst of a Palestinian community where there was not adequate water to drink and the surrounding fields were sandy and dry. University professor Moshe Zimmerman reported in the Jerusalem Post (April 30, 1995), “The Jewish children of Hebron are just like Hitler’s youth.”
We Jews are suing for restitution, lost wages, compensation for homes, land, slave labor and back wages in Europe. Am I a traitor of a Jew for supporting the right of return of the Palestinian refugees to their birthplace and compensation for what was taken that cannot be returned?
The Jewish dead cannot be brought back to life and neither can the Palestinian massacred be resurrected. David Ben Gurion said, “Let us not ignore the truth among ourselves…politically, we are the aggressors and they defend themselves…The country is theirs, because they inhabit it, whereas we want to come here and settle down, and in their view we want to take away from them their country…”
Palestine is a land that has been occupied and emptied of its people. It’s cultural and physical landmarks have been obliterated and replaced by tidy Hebrew signs. The history of a people was the first thing eradicated by the occupiers. The history of the indigenous people has been all but eradicated as though they never existed. And all this has been hailed by the world as a miraculous act of G-d. We must recognize that Israel’s existence is not even a question of legality so much as it is an illegal fait accompli realized through the use of force while supported by the Western powers. The UN missions directed at Israel in attempting to correct its violations of have thus far been futile.
In Hertzl’s “The Jewish State,” the father of Zionism said, “…We must investigate and take possession of the new Jewish country by means of every modern expedient.” I guess I agree with Ehud Barak (3 June 1998) when he said, “If I were a Palestinian, I’d also join a terror group.” I’d go a step further perhaps. Rather than throwing little stones in desperation, I’d hurtle a boulder.
Hopefully, somewhere deep inside, every Jew of conscience knows that this was no war; that this was not G-d’s restitution of the holy land to it’s rightful owners. We know that a human atrocity was and continues to be perpetuated against an innocent people who couldn’t come up with the arms and money to defend themselves against the western powers bent upon their demise as a people.
We cannot continue to say, “But what were we to do?” Zionism is not synonymous with Judaism. I wholly support the rally of the right of return of the Palestinian people.
Which was a propaganda line the British, French and Belgian Empires used to justify sending millions of “their” subjects to die in the trenches of World War One… same standard is now being used for Space Technology.
Sure, any nation can participate in the technology… as long as they do it by the Rules Set Forth…
By the Empire…
Much like Irish and Scots and other Subjects of the King were conscripted into the British Army… to fight for the noble cause that even the smallest nation had the same National Rights as the Great Powers.
By a truly equitable application of the standards used by American and British and Israeli “Nationalists”, North Korea or Iran could invade America, kill any who resist, imprison anybody they wished as “Unlawful Combatants”.
But, Ah! (you say) Iran and North Korea don’t have the technology or the Raw Power to do that, and of course, Might Makes Right…
And if they look like they might acquire such powers we should invade them and force them to their knees and force them to beg “our” God-damn forgiveness for thinking themselves our Equals.
Back to the British Standard in WW1, the IRA could have conscripted Englishmen to fight against England.
Or, as the song continues, die “at Subla sud-Al Bar”
To secure more Resources and land and subjects for the Emperor.
Ciudad Juarez is a city of 1,500,000 plus people directly opposite El Paso, Texas, and Presidente Fecal Calderon and his Gringo manager, US President Barack Obama, have occupied the city with 10,000 Mexican troops. In short, this is where and what the so-called ‘War on Drugs’ has ‘retreated’ to.
Sure military pacification works short term but not long term, as the examples of Lebanon, Somalia, Iraq, and Afghanistan, and Gaza so poignantly illustrate. So what happens when the troops are withdrawn, and they eventually must be? What happens then? See An Army Takeover Quells Violence in Mexico/ Drug Killings in Juarez Plummet, but Rights Complaints Surge
My guess is that they move on and occupy with troops yet other major cities in the years ahead. And eventually… voila! we have a situation much like that of Colombia. In other words, ‘the solution’ becomes the bigger problem.
At last we have a copy of the full text of the Iranian President’s speech at the Durban Review Conference on racism and now we can examine just how it has been misrepresented as vile, ugly, and racist by vile ugly racists. The fact is that the main point of the speech actually has next to nothing to do directly with Israel or Jewish people at all, but rather is an attack on the war-like and imperialist United Nation Security Council and the undemocratic nature of this US controlled organization.
He essentially calls for its abolishment in the summary of his remarks and it is this Call that actually is the cause of the Made-In-US boycott and subsequent walkout from the anti-racism conference, and not anything else Ahmadinejad said.
President Ahmadinejad….
‘Secondly, mindful of the inefficiency of the current international political, economic and security systems, it is necessary to focus on divine and humanitarian values by referring to the true definition of human beings based upon justice and respect for the rights of all people in all parts of the world and by acknowledging the past wrong doings in the past dominant management of the world, and to undertake collective measures to reform the existing structures.
In this respect, it is crucially important to rapidly reform the structure of the Security Council, including the elimination of the discriminatory veto right and to change the current world financial and monetary systems.
It is evident that lack of understanding of the urgency for change is equivalent to the much heavier costs of delay.’
There is absolutely nothing anti-Jewish in any of his remarks, and the world has had enough of the United Nation Security Council and its constant war making. Many will also champion Ahmadinejad’s call for its abolishment.
FULL TEXT:
(Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s speech at the Durban Review Conference on racism in Geneva on April 20, 2009.)
Mr. Chairman, honorable secretary general of the United Nations, honorable United Nations high commissioner for human rights, Ladies and gentleman:
We have gathered in the follow-up to the Durban conference against racism and racial discrimination to work out practical mechanisms for our holy and humanitarian campaigns.
Over the last centuries, humanity has gone through great sufferings and pains. In the Medieval Ages, thinkers and scientists were sentenced to death. It was then followed by a period of slavery and slave trade. Innocent people were taken captive in their millions and separated from their families and loved ones to be taken to Europe and America under the worst conditions. A dark period that also experienced occupation, lootings and massacres of innocent people.
Many years passed by before nations rose up and fought for their liberty and freedom and they paid a high price for it. They lost millions of lives to expel the occupiers and establish independent and national governments. However, it did not take long before power grabbers imposed two wars in Europe which also plagued a part of Asia and Africa. Those horrific wars claimed about a hundred million lives and left behind massive devastation. Had lessons been learnt from the occupations, horrors and crimes of those wars, there would have been a ray of hope for the future.
The victorious powers called themselves the conquerors of the world while ignoring or down treading upon rights of other nations by the imposition of oppressive laws and international arrangements.
Ladies and gentlemen, let us take a look at the UN Security Council which is one of the legacies of World War I and World War II. What was the logic behind their granting themselves the veto right? How can such logic comply with humanitarian or spiritual values? Would it not be inconformity with the recognized principles of justice, equality before the law, love and human dignity? Would it not be discrimination, injustice, violations of human rights or humiliation of the majority of nations and countries?
The council is the highest decision-making world body for safeguarding international peace and security. How can we expect the realization of justice and peace when discrimination is legalized and the origin of the law is dominated by coercion and force rather than by justice and the rights?
Coercion and arrogance is the origin of oppression and wars. Although today many proponents of racism condemn racial discrimination in their words and their slogans, a number of powerful countries have been authorized to decide for other nations based on their own interests and at their own discretion and they can easily violate all laws and humanitarian values as they have done so.
Following World War II, they resorted to military aggression to make an entire nation homeless under the pretext of Jewish suffering and they sent migrants from Europe, the United States and other parts of the world in order to establish a totally racist government in occupied Palestine. And, in fact, in compensation for the dire consequences of racism in Europe, they helped bring to power the most cruel and repressive racist regime in Palestine.
The Security Council helped stabilize the occupying regime and supported it in the past 60 years giving them a free hand to commit all sorts of atrocities. It is all the more regrettable that a number of Western governments and the United States have committed themselves to defending those racist perpetrators of genocide while the awakened-conscience and free-minded people of the world condemn aggression, brutalities and the bombardment of civilians in Gaza. The supporters of Israel have always been either supportive or silent against the crimes.
Dear friends, distinguished delegates, ladies and gentlemen. What are the root causes of the US attacks against Iraq or the invasion of Afghanistan?
Was the motive behind the invasion of Iraq anything other than the arrogance of the then US administration and the mounting pressures on the part of the possessors of wealth and power to expand their sphere of influence seeking the interests of giant arms manufacturing companies affecting a noble culture with thousands of years of historical background, eliminating the potential and practical threats of Muslim countries against the Zionist regime or to control and plunder the energy resources of the Iraqi people?
Why, indeed, almost a million people were killed and injured and a few more millions were displaced? Why, indeed, the Iraqi people have suffered enormous losses amounting to hundreds of billions of dollars? And why was billions of dollars imposed on the American people as the result of these military actions? Was not the military action against Iraq planned by the Zionists and their allies in the then US administration in complicity with the arms manufacturing countries and the possessors of wealth? Did the invasion of Afghanistan restore peace, security and economic wellbeing in the country?
The United States and its allies not only have failed to contain the production of drugs in Afghanistan, but the cultivation of narcotics has multiplied in the course of their presence. The basic question is that what was the responsibility and the job of the then US administration and its allies?
Did they represent the countries of the world? Have they been mandated by them? Have they been authorized by the people of the world to interfere in all parts of the globe, of course mostly in our region? Are not these measures a clear example of egocentrism, racism, discrimination or infringement upon the dignity and independence of nations?
Ladies and gentlemen, who is responsible for the current global economic crisis? Where did the crisis start from? From Africa, Asia or from the United States in the first place then spreading across Europe and their allies?
For a long time, they imposed inequitable economic regulations by their political power on the international economy. They imposed a financial and monetary system without a proper international oversight mechanism on nations and governments that played no role in repressive trends or policies. They have not even allowed their people to oversea or monitor their financial policies. They introduced all laws and regulations in defiance of all moral values only to protect the interests of the possessors of wealth and power.
They further presented a definition for market economy and competition that denied many of the economic opportunities that could be available to other countries of the world. They even transferred their problems to others while the waves of crisis lashed back plaguing their economies with thousands of billions of dollars in budget deficit. And today, they are injecting hundreds of billions of dollars of cash from the pockets of their own people and other nations into the failing banks, companies and financial institutions making the situation more and more complicated for their economy and their people. They are simply thinking about maintaining power and wealth. They could not care any less about the people of the world and even their own people.
Mr. President, Ladies and gentlemen, Racism is rooted in the lack of knowledge concerning the root of human existence as the selected creature of God. It is also the product of his deviation from the true path of human life and the obligations of mankind in the world of creation, failing to consciously worship God, not being able to think about the philosophy of life or the path to perfection that are the main ingredients of divine and humanitarian values which have restricted the horizon of human outlook making transient and limited interests, the yardstick for his action. That is why evil’s power took shape and expanded its realm of power while depriving others from enjoying equitable and just opportunities of development.
The result has been the making of an unbridled racism that is posing the most serious threats against international peace and has hindered the way for building peaceful coexistence in the entire world. Undoubtedly, racism is the symbol of ignorance which has deep roots in history and it is, indeed, the sign of frustration in the development of human society.
It is, therefore, crucially important to trace the manifestations of racism in situations or in societies where ignorance or lack of knowledge prevails. This increasing general awareness and understanding towards the philosophy of human existence is the principle struggle against such manifestations, and reveals the truth that human kind centers on the creation of the universe and the key to solving the problem of racism is a return to spiritual and moral values and finally the inclination to worship God Almighty.
The international community must initiate collective moves to raise awareness in afflicted societies where ignorance of racism still prevails so as to bring to a halt the spread of these malicious manifestations.
Dear Friends, today, the human community is facing a kind of racism which has tarnished the image of humanity in the beginning of the third millennium.
World Zionism personifies racism that falsely resorts to religions and abuses religious sentiments to hide its hatred and ugly face. However, it is of great importance to bring into focus the political goals of some of the world powers and those who control huge economic resources and interests in the world. They mobilize all the resources including their economic and political influence and world media to render support in vain to the Zionist regime and to maliciously diminish the indignity and disgrace of this regime.
This is not simply a question of ignorance and one cannot conclude these ugly phenomena through consular campaigns. Efforts must be made to put an end to the abuse by Zionists and their political and international supporters and in respect with the will and aspirations of nations. Governments must be encouraged and supported in their fights aimed at eradicating this barbaric racism and to move towards reform in current international mechanisms.
There is no doubt that you are all aware of the conspiracies of some powers and Zionist circles against the goals and objectives of this conference. Unfortunately, there have been literatures and statements in support of Zionists and their crimes. And it is the responsibility of honorable representatives of nations to disclose these campaigns which run counter to humanitarian values and principles.
It should be recognized that boycotting such a session as an outstanding international capacity is a true indication of supporting the blatant example of racism. In defending human rights, it is primarily important to defend the rights of all nations to participate equally in all important international decision making processes without the influence of certain world powers.
And secondly, it is necessary to restructure the existing international organizations and their respective arrangements. Therefore this conference is a testing ground and the world public opinion today and tomorrow will judge our decisions and our actions.
Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen, the world is going through rapid fundamental changes. Power relations have become weak and fragile. The sound of cracks in the pillars of world systems can now be heard. Major political and economic structures are on the brink of collapse. Political and security crises are on the rise. The worsening crisis in the world economy for which there can be seen no bright prospect, demonstrates the rising tide of far-reaching global changes. I have repeatedly emphasized the need to change the wrong direction through which the world is being managed today and I have also warned of the dire consequences of any delay in this crucial responsibility.
Now in this valuable event, I would like to announce to all leaders, thinkers and to all nations of the world present in this meeting and those who have a hunger for peace and economic well-being that the unjust economic management of the world is now at the end of the road. This deadlock was inevitable since the logic of this imposed management was oppressive.
The logic of collective management of world affairs is based on noble aspirations which centers on human beings and the supremacy of the almighty God. Therefore it defies any policy or plan which goes against the influence of nations. The victory of right over wrong and the establishment of a just world system has been promised by the Almighty God and his messengers and it has been a shared goal of all human beings from different societies and generations in the course of history. Realization of such a future depends on the knowledge of creation and the belief of the faithful.
The making of a global society is in fact the accomplishment of a noble goal held in the establishment of a common global system that will be run with the participation of all nations of the world in all major decision making processes and the definite root to this sublime goal.
Scientific and technical capacities as well as communication technology have created a common and widespread understanding of the world society and has provided the necessary ground for a common system. Now it is upon all intellectuals, thinkers and policy makers in the world to carry out their historical responsibility with a firm belief in this definite root.
I also want to lay emphasis on the fact that Western liberalism and capitalism has reached its end since it has failed to perceive the truth of the world and humans as they are.
It has imposed its own goals and directions on human beings. There is no regard for human and divine values, justice, freedom, love and brotherhood and it has based living on intense competition, securing individual and cooperative material interest.
Now we must learn from the past by initiating collective efforts in dealing with present challenges and in this connection, and as a closing remark, I wish to draw your kind attention to two important issues:
Firstly, it is absolutely possible to improve the existing situation in the world. However it must be noted that this could be only achieved through the cooperation of all countries in order to get the best out of the existing capacities and resources in the world. My participation in this conference is because of my conviction to these important issues as well as to our common responsibility of defending the rights of nations vis-à-vis the sinister phenomena of racism and being with you, the thinkers of the world.
Secondly, mindful of the inefficiency of the current international political, economic and security systems, it is necessary to focus on divine and humanitarian values by referring to the true definition of human beings based upon justice and respect for the rights of all people in all parts of the world and by acknowledging the past wrong doings in the past dominant management of the world, and to undertake collective measures to reform the existing structures.
In this respect, it is crucially important to rapidly reform the structure of the Security Council, including the elimination of the discriminatory veto right and to change the current world financial and monetary systems.
It is evident that lack of understanding of the urgency for change is equivalent to the much heavier costs of delay.
Dear Friends, beware that to move in the direction of justice and human dignity is like a rapid flow in the current of a river. Let us not forget the essence of love and affection. The promised future of human beings is a great asset that may serve our purposes in keeping together to build a new world.
In order to make the world a better place full of love and blessings, a world devoid of poverty and hatred, merging the increasing blessings of God Almighty and the righteous managing of the perfect human being, let us all join hands in friendship in the fulfillment of such a new world.
I thank you Mr. President, Secretary General and all distinguished participants for having the patience to listen to me. Thank you very much.
After the 1914 Ludlow Massacre and the later capitulation of the UMWA union, Mother Jones, by now 85 years old, toured the US to spread the word about what happened. She wrote in her autobiography, about a meeting in Kansas City: “I told the great audience that packed the hall that when their coal glowed red in their fires, it was the blood of the workers, of men who went down into black holes to dig it, of women who suffered and endured, of little children who had but a brief childhood. ‘You are being warmed and made comfortable with human blood’ I said. … ‘The miners lost,’ I told them, because they had only the constitution. The other side had bayonets. In the end, bayonets always win.'”
From The Autobiography of Mother Jones, Chapter 22:
YOU DON’T NEED A VOTE TO RAISE HELL.
Five hundred women got up a dinner and asked me to speak. Most of the women were crazy about women suffrage. They thought that Kingdom-come would follow the enfranchisement of women.
“You must stand for free speech in the streets,” I told them.
“How can we,” piped a woman, “when we haven’t a vote?”
“I have never had a vote,” said I, “and I have raised hell all over this country! You don’t need a vote to raise hell! You need convictions and a voice!”
Some one meowed, “You’re an anti!”
“I am not an anti to anything which will bring freedom to my class,” said I. “But I am going to be honest with you sincere women who are working for votes for women. The women of Colorado have had the vote for two generations and the working men and women are in slavery. The state is in slavery, vassal to the Colorado Iron and Fuel Company and its subsidiary interests. A man who was present at a meeting of mine owners told me that when the trouble started in the mines, one operator proposed that women be disfranchised because here and there some woman had raised her voice in behalf of the miners. Another operator jumped to his feet and shouted, ‘For God’s sake! What are you talking about! If it had not been for the women’s vote the miners would have beaten us long ago!'”
Some of the women gasped with horror. One or two left the room. I told the women I did not believe in women’s rights nor in men’s rights but in human rights. “No matter what your fight,” I said, “don’t be ladylike! God Almighty made women and the Rockefeller gang of thieves made the ladies. I have just fought through sixteen months of bitter warfare in Colorado. I have been up against armed mercenaries but this old woman, without a vote, and with nothing but a hatpin has scared them.
“Organized labor should organize its women along industrial lines. Politics is only the servant of industry. The plutocrats have organized their women. They keep them busy with suffrage and prohibition and charity.”
Ali Abunimah– “We have to expect that the official apparatus of the peace-process industry — the Hillary Clintons, the Quartets, the Tony Blairs, the Javier Solanas, the Ban Ki-Moons, the whole panoply of official and semi-official Washington think tanks — will carry on with business as usual, trying to make believe that, through their ministrations, a Palestinian state will come into being.”
What is so disingenuous about this ‘peace process industry’ is that both the US and Israel simply have already scrapped what is called the ‘Two State Solution’ in favor of an ‘Israel Kicks Ass Solution’. See Solving Palestine While Israel Destroys It
In fact, a ‘US Kicks Ass Solution’ is behind this new ‘Road to Peace’ where Israel shall be allowed by the US to totally militarily dominate the region as Pentagon servant. And the United Nations is totally on board with the US, too!
In reality, the use of only military, military might alone, is no ‘solution’ on a ‘road to Peace’, and is the complete opposite of that. Barack Obama is just the latest camouflage, in place for this official apparatus of the Two State Solution peace-process industry. The basic game plan is still just more US-made war until the other side totally collapses.
However, the more-war-until-the-other-side-totally-collapses might just well be leading to US total economic collapse. Over the long haul we’ll hardly ever get any real Peace, and certainly that is the case with this parallel economic collapse in process. Meanwhile, the blah, blah, blah goes on and on and on. The dominant elites want ‘Peace’ without Justice, as is always the case.
The only real Peace will be when Palestinians are given their rights and that includes being allowed to be equal partners inside what Zionists now call, the ‘Jewish State’. Can racist America ever come to allow racist ‘Jewish State’ Israel to cede to these just demands? Will we ever seek a ‘One State Solution’ in that treats all as equals? We hardly have that in America, let alone the Middle East. And there is no official peace-process industry that is yet working to dismantle the US war making machine.
‘The Vatican has vetoed three of Barack Obama’s potential nominees as US ambassador amid a growing dispute between the White House and the Roman Catholic church over the new administration’s support for abortion rights and the lifting of a ban on stem cell research.’
Full story at
Vatican vetoes Barack Obama’s nominees for US ambassador
Yes, but wouldn’t it be perfectly GRAND if the US government was to just say,
‘Catholic Church, you are not a country anyway, and we don’t send government ambassadors to churches.’ That would shut those silly ass bishops and the Pope God figure up for good, wouldn’t it?
Just who the Hell does the Pope and his Catholic church groupies think that they are anyway? The Anglican Church doesn’t have an American ambassador sitting in London or wherever that church’s HQ is located at for their leader to chat with. The Muslims don’t get an ambassador sent to Mecca or any of the other Holy Cities of their religion. There is no US government ambassador sent to Salt Lake City to hobnob with the Mormon Big Shot there. Simply to send an ambassador to the Vatican violates the separation of Church and State that is the foundation of modern democracy. It simply privileges one religion over others and the Catholics do not deserve this extra privilege at all!
Obama, just tell the Pope that you’ll send them Nobody as the US ambassador to the Vatican. And start taxing all that Catholic Church property, too. OH? And start applying the law to its fullest extent to those in the Catholic Church that have covered up sex crimes within the Catholic Church. Time for the special treatment for this church to come to an end. Time for them to end their interference in politics and stick to talking about God, instead of always trying to push their religion off onto others.
It’s impossible to make this yuppie humanitarian interventionist lunacy up on our own, and since we at Not My Tribe have talked so much about Greg Mortenson and his Three Cups of Tea, why not take a quick look at Jay Leno’s wife’s new “cause celebre.” See: Jay and Mavis Leno turn serious about the plight of Afghan women.
Move over Darfur. Move over Tibet. There’s a new ‘In’ thing for yuppie America to focus its tears on. And the new team has on board CNN’s Christiane Amanpour, former National Organization for Women President Eleanor Smeal, knuckle chinned Jay Leno and wife, and wait!!! …where’s Madelyn Albright? It must just be a matter of time before she and the President’s wife come into the act, too! Whooppee! The Imperial Yuppie Feminist Brigade is now coming to life to save women in Afghanistan! Move over Greg Mortenson!
Humanitarian interventionism tied now to terrorist extermination by Pentagon drone! Isn’t this all so sweet? I know that the Muslim women of occupied Afghanistan must just be so happy about this ‘aid’.
Bombs away! Bombs away with NOW, Ms. Magazine, and the ‘Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission’ propaganda drops on dumb-founded America, too! Hollywood America appeals to Shopping Mall America to CARE!
First we’ll get the indignant denials that the War is against Anybody Arabic or similarly dark-skinned and third world…
or that there’s anything Racist or White Man’s Burden about it…
That we’re really only fighting for their Rights and Freedoms…
Then we get some nudnik admitting that he actually enjoyed killing civilians.
That would be two comments in the Unexpurgated Face of War thread.
They say they “gave” us the right to dissent, but when mention is made of Pig Brutality against demonstrators or anybody else who is beaten, chained, falsely charged… for daring to talk back, and like at the St Paddies Day Massacre two years ago not ONE Uniform Clad person actually stood up for our rights…
Sure as shittin’ some RightWing Nutjob will post a comment that we deserved to get beaten down.
And so it goes.
Maybe some of the ones who whine about how we’re “wrong to criticize the Troops and “OUR” leaders and whatever…” instead of trying to force or coerce or cajole or shame US into being silent or cooperative with the Fascist Agenda, get in contact with your right wing freak buddies when they boast about killing civilians.
All the denials and protestations that “The Troops” never committed any atrocities get shot down not by our voice of reason, but by your Right Wing Heroes.
Kind of like Dr Laura Schlesinger, in order to deflect the ChickenHawk label she actually still deserves, offered her own son up as a sacrifice on the Altar to His Satanic Majesty Bush…
Then he posts youtube videos and pictures on his myspace page, and long rants about all the war crimes he was involved in.
The two Marines who killed a puppy by throwing it over a cliff, things like that.
People who don’t seek out their Big-Mouthed Comrades and order or shame THEM into silence have really no moral prerogative to try to tell us how wrong they think we are for simple stating and restating the facts…
Meanwhile, Right Wing Loose-Lip Loonie-toons, thank you.
Your comments are very much appreciated.
As far as ending World War One.
Since the issue was raised that the United States intervention in 1917 was what ended the war.
Silly on the face of it and sillier still the further you delve into the idea.
Britain and the rest of the Triple Entente (although there were far more than three of them) had the propaganda going about “That Small nations might have the same rights as the Great Powers”.
Just not nations like Ireland, India, China, Kenya, VietNam (only “our” French allies were calling it “Cochin China”… Cochin is French for “pig”) the Congo, the Sudan, South Africa… you know, the Small Nations inhabited by those the European Royalists considered “inferior”.
So while the Band of Cousins, related by blood and by their arrogance, sent “their” subjects to do bayonet charges against poison gas and belt-fed water-cooled machine guns, eventually, the worst of the lot, Cousin Nicholas Romanoff, pissed off his Peasant Slaves errr Lawfully Appointed Subjects to the point that they got sick of it, and gave him and his Demon Spawn family exactly what they deserved..
If it had spread much further, and the American intervention was the only thing the “free” nations had to end it…(Free to Obey Your King as though he were anointed by God) (and the Royalists still believe that they ACTUALLY ARE anointed by God)
If there were no American intervention the general mutiny that was building in ALL the trenches, French, Belgian, English, Turkish, German, Austrian… the same way it had amongst the Russian Conscripts, would have reached it’s natural apex, and they would have gotten rid of THEIR parasite class the same way the Russian people had.
The war would have ended a lot sooner, and even the Spanish Influenza epidemic might have been averted.
And since it wouldn’t have ended on terms imposed by the “victors”… it would actually have been over.
Instead of, you know, our generation still fighting the same war, different battles.
This email was sent to NMT, from a Rafael Diaz, recording an experience at the Lake City VA Medical Center. It’s an unusual chain email that doesn’t appear to ask anything from its recipient. We present it to our readers, unless directed to do something otherwise.
Rafael A. Díaz Nieves
Live Oak, FlSWORN STATEMENT
Friday, March 13, 2009Wrongdoer:
Dr. James Kim, Psychiatrist
North Florida/South Georgia
Veterans Health SystemFacility:
Lake City VA Medical CenterDr James Kim has violated my HIPPA LAW rights and has endangered my life. While under his care in numerous occasions I have reminded him that I was his patient not my wife Edna Irizarry, I expressly said to him that I don’t want him talking anything about my treatment with her and anyone else. My privacy is my paramount, especially regarding my Mental Health care because of the stigma society gives to this matters. On the month of August 2005 I was prescribe Quetiapine Fumarte (generic name) of Seroquel. I tried this medication and informed Dr. Kim that I will not take this medication anymore because of the reaction I got from it. As soon I took it I went short of breath and felt like I was dying I was turning blue because I start breathing and had to force myself to breath. Thank god I just tried with a little peace like 1/8 of the pill and this reaction lasted about 2 hours. I remember this because in my entire life I have never reacted so violent to a medication. This turned out to be an allergic reaction to this medication.
In several occasions I communicated Dr. Kim that for some reasons the sleeping aid medication was not coming in to my home via mail and that I was buying over the counter sleeping aids. When I came to be under his care I was taking Dilanting to prevent the headaches that causes seizures on me and Fioricet without codeine because codeine gave me more headaches and Ambiance as needed to help me go to sleep when the pain is too hard. My compensation is for Service Connected Organic Brain Syndrome as secondary to Service Connected Posttraumatic Headaches.
I have told this to him in various occasions and in one time he answered me that after talking to my wife she explained him that my compensation was for bipolar disorders among other things. Immediately I told him that I was the patient and not she, and that I don’t want to have to prove myself to him. And we never talk about the subject again.
1- Dr. James Kim Violation of the HIPPA Law has been rampant, in my case. He had no right to discuss anything of my treatment with no one specially Mrs. Irizarry
2- Regarding the medication, once I said NO, he should have stopped prescribing it and using the US Postal Service to send that medication to my home. After requesting a copy of my treatment with him I discovered that as soon I informed Dr. Kim that the medication gave such violent reaction He appointed Mrs. Irizarry in charge of my medicate me without my knowledge and he had no right to do so. (Thank God Mrs. Irizarry have not decide to kill me at that time. I have found bottles full of this medication hiding all over the home.)
3- The fact that I was medicated against my will or knowledge cannot be denied. Do to the way Mrs. Irizarry used against me so many starts and withdrawals with this medication that had harmed my body. Now I have Diabetes Type 2 with Peripheral Neuropathy, Tardive Dyskenesia that makes me look like I have Parkinson’s disease. All of them well known side effects of Seroquel. Not even the state have the right to medicate a person without His/hers will without “Do Process”. But for some reason Dr. Kim and Mrs. Irizarry did.
4- After Mrs. Irizarry abandoned the home I have discovered various bottles of Quetiapine Fumarte or Seroquel, hidden in different parts of my house. My condition is that I have Traumatic Brain Syndrome or TBI that causes Migraine headaches, seizures and a Congestive problem that causes me to loose or forget things while in stress and that is the reason of my compensation. This medication kills people with TBI. One of the side effects of this medication is Neuroleptic Malignant Syndrome and that is a fact. (Please find document with definitions and causes attached) especially people with TBI. It has come to light that Mrs. Irizarry has been trying to kill me in various occasions among other things. For this there are witnesses and one of the weapons Mrs. Irizarry has used is this medication. Because she knows the side effects and how dangerous are for me because her mother is a Pharmacist and the first time I took this medication she was one the persons I contacted and advise me and her daughter of the side effects and how dangerous it was specially for people with brain damage. Also at that time Mrs. Irizarry was going to College in order to become a nurse.
After reading my medical record I discover that Dr. Kim was adjusting the milligrams of this medication, without my knowledge. I don’t know with whom he was discussing this treatment. What I do know it was not with me because from the beginning I reject this treatment or medication. I have had episodes of MNS that are documented. This I discovered after requesting a copy of my medical records from Shands of Live Oak. One of the many occasions that I passed out since September 2007 an ambulance was called to my home and Mrs. Irizarry informed the paramedics that I was taking Quetiapine and that we were having problems and I did not know how to deal with them. (Nothing further from the truth for that you can ask Mr. William Nieves Social Worker at the Lake City VA medical Center) at the Hospital the ER DR ask me what medications I was taking and because in years I have not see any coming in via the US Mail in to my home, I said none. If I don’t know I am taking it.. How can I deny treatment?
5- On December 2008 I learn that Dr Kim was supposedly worried that I was delusional because one occasion he ask me about my family in Puerto Rico. And after I told him about them, things like my Uncle was the Comptroller of Puerto Rico that my Sister was a lawyer. He told me that my wife told him that that was the sort of thing I was inventing in my head. After I learn that I requested some family members I including my Uncle Manuel Diaz Saldaña Comptroller of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. (Please find copy of the letters attached as support of this complaint)
6- I have knowledge that recently Suwannee County Deputy Sheriff Robinson (386-362-2222) called Dr. Kim and that Dr Kim told him that I was schizophrenic and I was inventing all this. This was told to me by Robinson on the afternoon of March 12, 2009 at my residence. Now that Dr. Kim knows that he was deceived by Mrs. Irizarry he is trying to cover His crimes with this label. And that make him an accessory of Mrs. Irizarry crimes against me.
7- The first bottle of medication can be considered malpractice at best, but after the second bottle on and especially in conjunction with Mrs. Irizarry to give me the medication without my knowledge is irresponsible and criminal act of him and could had coasted me my life. I have found various bottles that should not have been sent to my address using the US POSTAL SERVICE specially knowing that Mrs. Irizarry will intercept them. These have been found by family and friends after Mrs. Irizarry abandon the home.
8- There is a matter of a letter that Mrs. Irizarry used in court to take custody of my children that appears to be a diagnostic and is sign by Dr. Kim. Mrs. Irizarry said that it was given to her by Dr. Kim but there is no record of such letter been requested by me that am his patient. I was granted custody of the children last year and with that letter that basically say that I am crazy they were taken from me. (Please find document attached)
9- I am alive by the Grace of God. But for the rest of my life I will have to deal with the Diabetes, Neuropathy and the Dyskinesia and that is not right. I don’t deserve this. Dr. James Kim has violated my privacy, HIPPA Law Rights, My trust and above of all put my life in grave danger of getting kill by Mrs. Irizarry using the medication that he provided her.
10- Without knowledge of the circumstances that are happening in my home. The domestic violence that I have endure, since September 2007, at the hands of Mrs. Irizarry. And the violence that my children were exposed at the hands of Mrs. Irizarry. He has stated that the children are in danger with me and talk to DCF about me. There are witness of the battery and abuse the children and me have endured trying to deal with her. First he should have not volunteer medical information without my knowledge and second he had no right to interfere in my personal life. I am the one that was taking care of the children since they were born and especially after Mrs. Irizarry start disappearing for days and weeks and not let anyone know where she were.
11- I am been force by this situation to abandon the house and lose everything I have including the home. Because he, validated the crimes of Mrs. Irizarry against me. I am been treated less than human and I have to endure the humiliation of been stigmatized by Mrs. Irizarry with the help of Dr. Kim. I am been deny entrance to public buildings and now because of the information he volunteer been humiliated by the law enforcement community in more than one occasion. (Please find sworn statement about one of those incidents)
On February 13 2009 at about 1:30 P.M. I, Rafael Angel Diaz Nieves of 9677 105 Dr Live Oak, Fl. 32060 went to the FDLE office located on 815 North Ohio Avenue Live Oak, FL 32064, as instructed by a Suwannee County Deputy Sherriff. The FDLE office has an intercom at the entrance. I proceeded to press the button and announce my name as instructed by the sign posted. The office has a glass door. The receptionist waved at me and walk to the door to grant me entrance to the building when all of the sudden she stopped about 2 feet from the door and then she turned around and rapidly disappear behind a wall behind the reception desk. Then I saw another woman (second person) that also waved at me and walked towards the door and she also turned around and hid in the same area. When I saw what happened got closer to the glass door. Then I saw an Special Agent Robert M. Shotwell whose office is in the front area of the building and with whom I have met before, trying to hide behind a diagonal wall. As he was trying to hide, I saw him making gestures to the other two women to not let me in.. It was very sunny and I stood there for more than ten minutes and pressed the button a few times more because I knew there were people inside the building and close to the reception. No one opened the door to let me in. No one came to explain why they would not open the door to me.
I stood underneath the hot Florida sun for more than 10 minutes and they would not open the door to me. I had to leave without being attended. My entrance was denied. I had no choice but to leave. As I was driving away I saw a white person enter the building trough the same entrance and to the same offices I was denied access. I am the only the only Puerto Rican who’s also a 100% disable US Veteran in Live Oak. These are facts known by the Special Agent I have talked to before and was making denigrating gestures about me. This is the first time in my life I have been denied access to a public building. That day I was humiliated, discriminated and abused by Special Agent Robert M. Shotwell and the employees of the FDLE. I have been mortified since that day; I still feel the humiliation and cannot believe what happened, but it did happened. The whole event made me feel less than human.
The term was coined as part of a coordinated effort to disrupt the lives and careers of Americans whose “crime” was in not being members of the Right Wing Lunatic Fringe during the McCarthy Era.
Now we have representatives of groups who walk hand in hand with Nazism criticizing us for pointing out the fact that they’re Fellow Travelers with the Nazis.
What have they got to complain about? It’s their own damn concept.
As I recall, the groups they represent today as being Fighters for Freedom, during the McCarthy Witch-hunts just like those of today, did NOTHING to stop the madness and the degradation of Human Rights in America.
When they say they did, they’re quite simply Lying.
It’s familiar territory for them, they’re Good Friends of the Untruth.
…the date chosen for beginning the invasion and occupation was in commemoration of the date in 1988 when the Iraqi Army, with full cooperation and collaboration from the United States, gassed a Kurdish town as part of the continuing war between Iraq and Iran.
It should be noted too, that the U.S. Air Force and other military have supplied various countries, Turkey, Iraq, Russia Soviet and post-Soviet… with tactical, logistical and materiel support for their Extermination Campaigns against the Kurds.
When a Bu’ush Regime supporter starts with the sob stories about how the Kurds were abused by Saddam, remember that.
The Bushi’ites have no concern for any ethnic group, any human rights or freedoms.
In fact there are pictures of U.S. state and defense department officials shaking hands and yukking it up with Saddam in the days following the March 19th attack.
And official statements that the gas attack had been done by the Iranian troops.
This is old news, certainly, but the Propaganda Campaign is being ramped up to “justify” the Murder Campaign begun in Iraq 6 years ago this evening.
Ari Fleischer went on record saying that Saddam Hussein had orchestrated 9/11.
He said this not 6 years ago but 6 DAYS ago.
So, what’s a Truth Activist to do?
All we can do, keep plugging along and correct the Lies of the war-pigs, keep exposing them for the murdering lying thieves they truly are.
Now the same people who told us about Iraq having a million pounds of WMDs are telling us about the New, Scary Boogie-Man State, Iran, having Weapons of Mass Destruction and saying that we need to destroy Iran.
This, too, is old news, but again, the Manipulative Ones keep putting out their same old tired lies, so we have to keep reminding them, sometimes gently and sometimes angrily and in a manner quite cross…
Of the fact that they Lie through their teeth.
DENVER- The Ward Churchill vs. CU trial continues today, featuring the much anticipated testimony of SCRUM hatchet chairwoman Mimi Wesson. But not before two dramatic points had already been made. First, that eugenics did play a part in the disenfranchisement of Native Americans, and second, that a witness brought from California by the plaintiff to talk about The American Council of Trustees and Alumni (ACTA) would not be allowed to testify. The defense attorney objected that a Psychology School Dean was insufficiently “expert” on ACTA, and the judge concurred. You’re going to have to look it up, and the Denver jury is not even going to hear about it.
The audience is more sparse for this sixth day, as the trial enters its second of an expected three weeks. Although the subject matter is getting meatier. Last week’s testimonies, cross examination, and one too many overruled objections prompted Churchill’s attorney David Lane to call for a mistrial.
Today’s witnesses, the third one a hostile witness, will address the allegations made against Ward Churchill by CU. While arguments about plagiarism will entail discussing the methods of scholarship, accusations about fabrication of history will mean debunking Ward, or questioning the Master Narrative.
The General Allotment Act of 1887 and “Eugenics”
ALLEGATION A made against Ward Churchill by CU is that he characterized a 1887 legislative act as being “for the first time a formal Eugenics Code.” CU maintains that this is a misrepresentation, mostly because the word is not mentioned anywhere in the act. Lucky for us, eugenics historian Dr. Lombardo is on hand to label that accusation “silly.”
Allegations
A. Misrepresentation General Allotment Act of 1887, calling it a “Eugenics Code”
B. Misre Indian Arts and Crafts Act, requires blood percentage
C. John Smith 1614, started small pox epidemic
D. Small pox epidemic in Ft Clark ND, from St Louis
E. Plagiarism, work from pamphlet DAMN THE DAMS
F. Plagiarism from Rebecca Robbins
G. Plagiarism, Fay Cohen alegation, she never
A-D from Prof Lavell
E came from RMN
F-G came from Prof Lavell.
SCRUM chairperson Mimi Wesson, who did not recuse herself, even after it was revealed in an email:
“I confess to being somewhat mystified by the variety of people this unpleasant (to say the least) individual has been able to enlist to defend him. I know people say it’s the principle, but we aren’t all out there defending Bob Guccioni’s first amendment rights, although God knows he has them.”
and
“The rallying around Churchill reminds me unhappily of the rallying around OJ Simpson and Bill Clinton and now Michael Jackson and other charismatic male celebrity wrongdoers.” (well okay, I don’t really know that jackson is an…
more in a bit!
“We cannot claim that the (U.S.) Democrats are not warmongering like the Republicans. They are just as warmongering and mischievous, and they would like to do that (attack Iran),” Iran’s top military commander, Major-General Hassan Firouzabadi said.
And the US under Barack Obama continues to carry out the Pentagon fund raiser ‘Global War on Terrorism’, too. That means more killer drones murdering Pakistani civilians, more US occupation terrorism in Afghanistan and Iraq, and more backing Israeli terrorism against the Palestinians of Lebanon, Gaza, and the West Bank. It means that war with Syria and Iran might be started on a second’s notice by the US. It mean’s also that Barack Obama will try to hide away clandestine US military use of torture and that the concentration terror camps of the Pentagon will not be fully stopped. It means that the US government will continue to secretly take away the rights of its own citizens.
Obama wants to attack us still, says Iranian general? You bet he does! And I would not be over confident that the US under Barack Obama will not be any less reckless in using the military to bankrupt the economy than Dubya and Dick were. The military-inudstrial complex comes first for the Democratic Party, same as with the Republicans.
See Reuters… Iran says U.S. still “warmongering”
Here’s the letter Bill Ayers published to Defend Ward Churchill.
Defend Ward Churchill
Dear Colleagues,
In Brecht’s play Galileo the great astronomer sets forth into a world dominated by a mighty church and an authoritarian power: “The cities are narrow and so are the brains,” he declares recklessly.
“Superstition and plague. But now the word is: since it is so, it does not remain so. For everything moves my friend.”
Intoxicated with his own radical discoveries, Galileo feels the earth shifting and finds himself propelled surprisingly toward revolution.
”It was always said that the stars were fastened to a crystal vault so they could not fall. . . Now we have taken heart and let them float in the air, without support… they are embarked on a great voyage—like us who are also without support and embarked on a great voyage.”
Here Galileo raises the stakes and risks taking on the establishment in the realm of its own authority, and it strikes back fiercely. Forced to renounce his life’s work under the exquisite pressure of the Inquisition he denounces what he knows to be true, and is welcomed back into the church and the ranks of the faithful, but exiled from humanity—by his own word. A former student confronts him in the street:
“Many on all sides followed you with their ears and their eyes believing that you stood, not only for a particular view of the movement of the stars, but even more for the liberty of teaching— in all fields. Not then for any particular thoughts, but for the right to think at all. Which is in dispute.”
The right to think at all, which is in dispute—-this is what the Ward Churchill affair finally comes to: The right to a mind of one’s own, the right to pursue an argument into uncharted spaces, the right to challenge the church and its orthodoxy in the public square. The right to think at all.
It’s no surprise that this outrage against Professor Churchill occurs at this particular moment— a time of empire resurrected and unapologetic, militarism proudly expanding and triumphant, war without justice and without end, white supremacy retrenched, basic rights and protections shredded, growing disparities between the haves and the have-nots, fear and superstition and the mobilization of scapegoating social formations based on bigotry and violence or the threats of violence, and on and on. There’s more of course, and this isn’t the only story, but this is a recognizable part of where we’re living, and a familiar place to anyone with even a casual understanding of history. Here the competing impulses and ideals that have always animated our country’s story are on full display: rights and liberty and the pursuit of human freedom on one side, domination and war and repression on the other. The trauma of contradictions that is America.
Ward Churchill is under a sustained, orchestrated, and determined attack because of his political beliefs and statements and activities, and nothing more. No one doubts his productivity or his accomplishments. But the attack on Churchill is neither isolated nor innocent— the high school history teacher on the west side of Chicago gets the message, and so does the English literature teacher in Detroit and the math teacher in an Oakland middle school: be careful what you say; stay close to the official story; stick to the authorized text. If someone of Ward Churchill’s stature and standing for so many years at the University of Colorado can suffer this kind of campaign, what chance do I have?
Every committee, every investigation, every report plays out under a shadow of the star chamber; everyone must choose who to be and how to act in response. For this reason I support Ward Churchill unequivocally, unapologetically, whole-heartedly. I urge my colleagues and my students and everyone who values education as a grand enterprise geared toward enlightenment and liberation to speak out forcefully and fearlessly now on behalf of the liberty of teaching and learning, on behalf of the right to think at all.
Sincerely,
William Ayers
Distinguished Professor of Education and Senior University Scholar
University of Illinois at Chicago
billayers.org
World Jewish leaders urge boycott of Durban conference -because the International Conference on Racism is planning to condemn Israeli racism. So the headlines scream: World Jewish Congress president lauds US’ decision to withdraw from anti-racism conference which he says ignores “plight of victims of true racism.” Head of European Jewish Congress calls on EU to boycott event as well. Then a curious headline invites conference attendees instead to join a pilgrimage to Auschwitz.
First of all, we’re accustomed to hearing that only Jews have been the victims of genocide. Did you know they are racism’s only true victims too?!
The March of the Living is a Zionist organization dedicated to shepherding young “birthright” Jews to Nazi concentration camp memorial sites to indoctrinate them afresh with the horrors of the Holocaust. The visitors drape themselves with Israeli flags as they tour the iconographic gates and museums. Photographs are taken and reprinted in sepia tone, as if to depict the “Living” visitors in the same circumstances as less fortunate predecessors.
After which, the young charges travel to Israel, to participate in the anniversary of Israel’s creation.
Here is yesterday’s article on the MARCH OF THE LIVING 2009 invitation. I reprint it in its entirety because it is comically oblivious to irony. Here the “living” want to memorialize the dead, at the expense of the living. It’s a repudiation of hatred, by pretending it is vanquished.
Each classic Zionist fallacy is there: 1) to accuse Jews of racism is racism, 2) mankind has suffered no greater evil than the Holocaust, and 3) Auschwitz ergo Israel.
Auschwitz march to protest Durban II
This year’s March of the Living to be held while anti-racism conference convenes in Geneva. Organizers call on all government’s to follow US’ example, withdraw from gathering and attend march instead
YnetnewsThe International March of the Living has announced that precisely while many countries will be convening in Geneva for the Durban II gatherings, 10,000 youths—Jewish and non-Jewish—will be at the gates of Auschwitz on Tuesday, April 21, to give the next generation a strong platform to “Say No to Hatred Today.”
The event will commemorate several important milestone dates: International Holocaust Remembrance Day, the 70th anniversary of the beginning of World War II and the 60th anniversary of the ratification of the International Human Rights Declaration.
Organizers of the March of the Living saluted the decision of the United States Government to abstain from the planned proceedings in Geneva. “This is a compelling moral position by the US leadership, displaying that hatred and intolerance have no place in international discourse.” said Dr. Shmuel Rosenman, Chairman of the International March of the Living.
“We call upon all governments with conscience to follow suit and demonstrate the ultimate repudiation of genocide through participation in the March of the Living 2009 at Auschwitz.”
Global call for action
As a further means to counter the messages that are expected to emerge from the Geneva event, tens of contemporary victims of genocide, offering a united voice against hatred and persecution, have been invited to lead the march, which this year is under the sponsorship of Guma and Jamie Aguiar.Canadian MP and former Justice Minister Irwin Cotler, internationally recognized human rights advocate, today announced his decision to come to Auschwitz from the conferences he will be attending then in Geneva—together with other well-known human rights activists—to join the youthful participants at March of the Living.
“Auschwitz is the most powerful symbol with which to memorialize evil found in Jewish history – in fact in the history of mankind,” said Cotler who also serves as the honorary co-chair of the International March of the Living Advisory Board. “It is a compelling reminder of the dangers of state-sanctioned incitement to hatred and genocide, and the indifference and inaction left in its wake. This global effort is a call to remembrance and action so that never again will we be indifferent in the face of mass atrocity and injustice.”
In addition to Cotler honorary co-chairs include: Dan Kurtzer, Lord Greville Janner, Jennifer Laszlo-Mizrahi, Tal Brody and Daniel Ayalon .
Since 1988, the March of the Living has brought over 140,000 students to Poland to participate in educational missions aimed at better understanding the horrors of the Holocaust.
The March of the Living, with an expected attendance of over 10,000 young people from around the world, will include a three kilometer march from Auschwitz to the death camp at Birkenau where over 1.5 million Jews perished. Most of the participants will then visit Israel during the week of that nation’s Memorial Day and Independence Day.
At a time when the US government is boycotting participation in the United Nations 2009 anti-racism conference, here are a few interesting figures from The Association of Civil Rights in Israel. ACRI`s Annual Report on the State of Human Rights We learn the following…
According to the Israeli Association for Civil Rights, anti-Arab incidents have risen sharply. “Israeli society is reaching new heights of racism that damages freedom of expression and privacy,” says Sami Michael, the organization’s president. Among the Association’s findings:
Some 55 percent of Jewish Israelis say that the state should encourage Arab emigration;
78 percent of Jewish Israelis oppose including Arab parties in the government;
56 percent agree with the statement that “Arabs cannot attain the Jewish level of cultural development”;
75 percent agree that Arabs are inclined to be violent. Among Arab-Israelis, 54 percent feel the same way about Jews.
75 percent of Israeli Jews say they would not live in the same building as Arabs.
This could almost have been polled from the US and be White opinions about Blacks. Zionism simply is racism, and YES, Jewish people are often racists. See Israeli Civil rights group claim Israeli occupation is “reminiscent of apartheid”
Here in this cartoon above, is how the Jewish State Zionist flock see themselves as victims who are prevented from finding a ‘peaceful solution’ to the Jewish State-Palestinian conflict. So just what is their proposed ‘solution’ then?
There are 3 ‘solutions’ to the finding ‘peace’ for the Israeli-Palestinians conflict. The 2 most openly discussed ‘solutions’ are usually termed the ‘One State Solution’ where Palestinian Arabs and Israeli Jews would live in one state where both would have equal rights together. And the other well-known proposal is called the ‘Two State Solution’, and is supported by those who posit that neither group could get along with the other in a single territory or state, so that two separate states must be created to then live side by side with each other. But there is yet another ‘solution’ for the conflict that the actual Israeli government has been covertly supporting for decades now.
This third ‘solution’ should be called the ‘Final Solution’ in my opinion, because it is seen as just that by the Israeli government itself. That ‘Final Solution’ advocated by the Israeli government, is that all Palestinians must be forced out of the Occupied Territories and other areas that Jewish people covet, and forced to live in the surrounding Arab countries. Obviously ethnic cleansing must occur for the ‘Final Solution’ to ever be fully implemented, just as ethnic cleansing was needed in the first place for the original establishment of the Jewish State over Palestine to have occurred.
See just who inside Israel advocates this ‘Final Solution’ to be implemented against the Palestinians… Israel’s Likud resists “two-state” commitment or the ‘One State Solution’ for that matter. That leaves only the ‘Final Solution’ that will satisfy the Jewish State crowd. It is pretty straight forward what they actually want.