"US diplomacy in the Middle East is bound with hoops of iron to the most chauvinist advocates of a greater Israel. Not an onion skin separates the White House from Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu. When the time comes, for example, it's hard to see the administration resisting annexation of the West Bank. Any pretence at an honest-broker role is abandoned and the alliance with the Saudi royals is the one other pillar of US strategy. Links between Jared Kushner and Saudi's Crown Prince resemble a romance between royal houses." (Trump's overriding success is as radical agent for change, Bob Carr, The Australian, 29/12/18)
"I spoke with Bibi. I told Bibi, you know we give Israel $4.5 billion a year. And they are doing very well at defending themselves. I'm the one that moved the embassy to Jerusalem. I was the one who was willing to do that. So that's the way it is - we are going to take great care of Israel. Israel is going to be good. We give Israel $4.5 billion a year. And we give frankly a lot more than that if you look at the books. They've been doing a good job." (Donald Trump quoted in Trump on Syria withdrawal: We give Israel billions of dollars, they'll be OK, Amir Tibon, Haaretz, 27/12/18)
Monday, December 31, 2018
Saturday, December 29, 2018
The Zionist Occupation of the American Mind
I've quoted Norman Finkelstein's groundbreaking work The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering (2000) several times before in this blog, but his words bear repeating as a preface to that which follows:
"'The Holocaust' is an ideological representation of the Nazi holocaust. Like most ideologies, it bears a connection, if tenuous, with reality. The Holocaust is not an arbitrary but rather an internally coherent construct. Its central dogmas sustain significant political and class interests. Indeed, The Holocaust has proven to be an indispensable ideological weapon. Through its deployment, one of the world's most formidable military powers, with a horrendous human rights record, has cast itself as a 'victim' state, and the most successful ethnic group in the United States has likewise acquired victim status. Considerable dividends accrue from this specious victimhood - in particular, immunity to criticism, however justified." (p 3)
Later in his book, Finkelstein demolishes the dogma that The Holocaust "marks a categorically unique historical event." (pp 41-6)
He then asserts that "the claims of Holocaust uniqueness have come to constitute a form of 'intellectual terrorism' (Chaumont)," adding, "Those practicing the normal comparative procedures of scholarly inquiry must first enter a thousand and one caveats to ward off the accusation of 'trivializing The Holocaust'." (p 47)
I can think of no better example of this kind of intellectual terrorism than the following mea maxima culpa recounted in former Trump press secretary Sean Spicer's book, Briefing: Politics, the Press, and the President (2018). Smell the fear, feel the terror:
"I've had many roles as a communication director or press secretary in my career, and I have helped countless candidates, party officials, and elected officials undergo media training. Media training [is] basically teaching people how to prepare for an interview, especially on camera... And there are some basic rules. If you're preparing for an in-studio interview, you look at the interviewer, not the camera; if your interview is in a remote studio, you look directly at the camera. Don't move your hands too much. Don't repeat a question. Don't validate a premise with which you disagree. And the number one rule I gave every Republican was don't ever, ever... compare anything or anyone to Hitler or the Holocaust. Ever.
"I can't tell you how many times I've repeated these rules to everyone from candidates to state party chairmen. But on April 11, 2017, I violated my number one rule, setting off another controversy from the White House podium.
"Earlier, I had been part of a small, impromptu briefing in the dining room off the Oval Office where Secretary Mattis had explained to the president the degree of the current atrocities committed by Syria's leader, Bashar al-Assad. He noted that not even Adolf Hitler had dared to use chemical weapons on the battlefield (note the word 'battlefield'). I left the meeting wanting to make sure that the horror of Assad's actions was fully communicated. I wanted everyone to understand just how evil Assad is and why the president had acted so swiftly.
"When I went into the briefing room to begin the daily briefing, echoes of Mattis's words were still with me... I opened up the briefing for questions. Eleven of the first fifteen questions focused on Syria. The video showing the pain and suffering of the Syrian people that had gone viral was clearly on the minds of the reporters. I was doing well, talking about the president's reaction and concern. But then came the sixteenth question. 'The alliance between Russia and Syria is a strong one; it goes back decades. President Putin has supplied personnel. He's supplied military equipment to the Assad government. What makes you think that at this point he's going to pull back in his support for President Assad and for the Syrian government right now?'
"I thought to myself, 'I got this.' I had been in a groove expressing the president's concern and Assad's horrific actions. But instead of staying on the messages that had been working just fine, I tried to turn it up a notch: 'I think a couple of things. You look - we didn't use chemical weapons in World War II. You had someone as despicable as Hitler who didn't even sink to using chemical weapons. So, you have to, if you're Russia, ask yourself is this a country that you and a regime you want to align yourself with? You have previously signed on to international agreements rightfully acknowledging that the use of chemical weapons should be out of bounds by every country. To not stand up to not only Assad, but your own word, should be troubling. Russia put their name on the line. So, it's not a question of how long that alliance has lasted, but at what point do they recognize that they are now getting on the wrong side of history in a really bad way really quickly. And again, look at the countries that are standing with them: Iran, Syria, North Korea. This is not a team you want to be on. And I think that Russia has to recognize that while they may have had an alliance with them, that the lines that have been crossed are one that no country should ever want to see another country cross.
"That was it - like the previous eleven questions on the subject, I thought I had sufficiently described the outrage we had toward both Assad and Russia. The questions in the briefing room are asked at the speed of light. I would answer one question while anticipating the next one. In my mind, I thought I had answered the question, but clearly what had come out of my mouth was not the full explanation that I had envisioned saying. I kept going, oblivious to the damage I had done.
"The next question was about the president's tax returns. Then came a question about the Easter Egg Roll. My corny response about it being 'egg-cellent' evoked laughter from the briefing room. That was followed by a question on the White House visitor logs. After that, more questions focused on Syria and North Korea, and a question was asked about taxes and infrastructure. At this point, I thought, I was doing great. Nothing seemed out of the ordinary because of the pace and intensity of the briefings.
"Then I called on ABC News's Cecilia Vega. 'Sean, thanks, I just want to give you an opportunity to clarify something you said that seems to be gaining some traction right now.' What now? Then she started reading from her phone. 'Hitler didn't even sink to the level of using chemical weapons.' What did you mean by that?' What? Frantically, I'm thinking, 'What did I do?' I responded, 'I think you come to sarin gas, there was no - he was not using the gas on his own people the same way Assad is doing, I mean, there was clearly - I understand your point, thank you.' She said, 'I'm just getting - ' but I cut her off and stepped in deeper and deeper. 'Thank you, I appreciate that,' I said. 'There was not - he brought them into the Holocaust center, I understand that. But I'm saying in the way that Assad used them, where he went into towns, dropped them down to innocent - into the middle of towns. It was brought - so the use of it - I appreciate the clarification there. That was not the intent.' What had I done. Holocaust centers? And I didn't realize until later that I had inadvertently omitted Mattis's important phrase 'on the battlefield.' Hitler, of course, had used chemical weapons to murder Jews and other victims during the Holocaust.
"I read the body language of not only the reporters but also my own staffers along the side of the room. I was beginning to realize I had misspoken badly... In the heat of the moment, I still hadn't realized what I had said wrong. I was so fully focused on condemning Assad that I failed to see how badly I had stumbled by omitting that phrase, 'on the battlefield.' By this point, I was feeling flustered, still not fully understanding what had just happened. My remarks were not quite right, I had the alarming sense that I was digging myself into a deeper hole with each word. This may have been the lowest moment I had in the White House. I alone had fumbled; no one else had made me do it. The irony is that this was a question that I had been waiting for, that I had been prepared to answer. And I had been given two chances to clarify the record.
"After the briefing, I went to my staff. I knew it was bad, but I still asked, how deep am I? Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Natalie Strom, and Raj Shah give me a look that said, 'Deeper than the Titanic.' Then I noticed the calendar on my computer. It read, 'First day of Passover.'
"Reince came into my office. 'Remember the first thing you taught me in media training?' he asked. 'Yes,' I said sheepishly. Never compare anyone to Hitler. I made a mistake, a big one, and I needed to say so.
"I went to the Oval Office to see the president. 'Mr President, I need you to know that I just stepped in it really badly, and I screwed up.' 'I saw it. But I know what you meant, Sean. It's going to be okay.' 'Thank you, sir, but I think I've embarrassed you and the administration and insulted the Jewish people. I need to make it right.' 'Look, Sean, you screwed up, but I know what you meant. You clearly didn't mean... ' He trailed off. When he spoke again, his tone was gentle. At a moment when I felt my worst, he tried to reassure me and was gracious, caring, and forgiving. Finally, he said, 'Do what you think is right.' I felt like I had a fever that was going to get worse before it broke. And despite the president's support, I was again wondering if this was my last day at the White House.
"I asked Natalie, who is Jewish, how the story was playing. Natalie is as loyal as they come, but she had to confess it was getting much worse. Many people echoed the president, telling me they knew what I meant,' but millions of other people did not and were deeply offended. In this moment, I knew I had three choices: one, do nothing and hope that it blew over; two, look for a friendly interviewer or reporter and try to put my spin on the story; or three, find the most challenging interviewer I could, own the mistake, and ask for forgiveness. I chose number three.
"I asked my team to check which news shows I could get on ASAP. They came back with several options, including appearing on CNN with Wolf Blitzer... I knew from the outset that it wouldn't be an easy interview. Wolf always asks tough questions. And he is the son of two Holocaust survivors. 'I was absolutely trying to make a point about the heinous acts that Assad had made against his own people last week, using chemical weapons and gas,' I told Wolf. 'Frankly, I mistakenly used an inappropriate and insensitive reference to the Holocaust, for which, frankly, there is no comparison. And for that I apologize.'... Wolf kept boring down on me. Wasn't I aware that in addition to the Jews, others had been victims of Hitler's poison-gas chambers? Of course, I told him. 'Have you spoken to President Trump about your blunder today?' Wolf asked. 'Obviously, it was my blunder,' I said. To think that I had offended people - especially those whose families had been victims of the Holocaust - twisted my stomach in a way I had never felt before and hope to never feel again. I had created this mess. I had embarrassed myself, my team, and the president.
"House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, other Democrats, and even a Republican congressman from Colorado were soon calling for my resignation.
"That evening, I was as down as I ever was. Some people can shrug off bad moments, but I have a hard time forgiving myself when I make a mistake, especially when I hurt others. It grates on me. Fortunately, Rebecca and the kids were waiting for me at home, and that made all the difference." (pp 195-200)
"'The Holocaust' is an ideological representation of the Nazi holocaust. Like most ideologies, it bears a connection, if tenuous, with reality. The Holocaust is not an arbitrary but rather an internally coherent construct. Its central dogmas sustain significant political and class interests. Indeed, The Holocaust has proven to be an indispensable ideological weapon. Through its deployment, one of the world's most formidable military powers, with a horrendous human rights record, has cast itself as a 'victim' state, and the most successful ethnic group in the United States has likewise acquired victim status. Considerable dividends accrue from this specious victimhood - in particular, immunity to criticism, however justified." (p 3)
Later in his book, Finkelstein demolishes the dogma that The Holocaust "marks a categorically unique historical event." (pp 41-6)
He then asserts that "the claims of Holocaust uniqueness have come to constitute a form of 'intellectual terrorism' (Chaumont)," adding, "Those practicing the normal comparative procedures of scholarly inquiry must first enter a thousand and one caveats to ward off the accusation of 'trivializing The Holocaust'." (p 47)
I can think of no better example of this kind of intellectual terrorism than the following mea maxima culpa recounted in former Trump press secretary Sean Spicer's book, Briefing: Politics, the Press, and the President (2018). Smell the fear, feel the terror:
"I've had many roles as a communication director or press secretary in my career, and I have helped countless candidates, party officials, and elected officials undergo media training. Media training [is] basically teaching people how to prepare for an interview, especially on camera... And there are some basic rules. If you're preparing for an in-studio interview, you look at the interviewer, not the camera; if your interview is in a remote studio, you look directly at the camera. Don't move your hands too much. Don't repeat a question. Don't validate a premise with which you disagree. And the number one rule I gave every Republican was don't ever, ever... compare anything or anyone to Hitler or the Holocaust. Ever.
"I can't tell you how many times I've repeated these rules to everyone from candidates to state party chairmen. But on April 11, 2017, I violated my number one rule, setting off another controversy from the White House podium.
"Earlier, I had been part of a small, impromptu briefing in the dining room off the Oval Office where Secretary Mattis had explained to the president the degree of the current atrocities committed by Syria's leader, Bashar al-Assad. He noted that not even Adolf Hitler had dared to use chemical weapons on the battlefield (note the word 'battlefield'). I left the meeting wanting to make sure that the horror of Assad's actions was fully communicated. I wanted everyone to understand just how evil Assad is and why the president had acted so swiftly.
"When I went into the briefing room to begin the daily briefing, echoes of Mattis's words were still with me... I opened up the briefing for questions. Eleven of the first fifteen questions focused on Syria. The video showing the pain and suffering of the Syrian people that had gone viral was clearly on the minds of the reporters. I was doing well, talking about the president's reaction and concern. But then came the sixteenth question. 'The alliance between Russia and Syria is a strong one; it goes back decades. President Putin has supplied personnel. He's supplied military equipment to the Assad government. What makes you think that at this point he's going to pull back in his support for President Assad and for the Syrian government right now?'
"I thought to myself, 'I got this.' I had been in a groove expressing the president's concern and Assad's horrific actions. But instead of staying on the messages that had been working just fine, I tried to turn it up a notch: 'I think a couple of things. You look - we didn't use chemical weapons in World War II. You had someone as despicable as Hitler who didn't even sink to using chemical weapons. So, you have to, if you're Russia, ask yourself is this a country that you and a regime you want to align yourself with? You have previously signed on to international agreements rightfully acknowledging that the use of chemical weapons should be out of bounds by every country. To not stand up to not only Assad, but your own word, should be troubling. Russia put their name on the line. So, it's not a question of how long that alliance has lasted, but at what point do they recognize that they are now getting on the wrong side of history in a really bad way really quickly. And again, look at the countries that are standing with them: Iran, Syria, North Korea. This is not a team you want to be on. And I think that Russia has to recognize that while they may have had an alliance with them, that the lines that have been crossed are one that no country should ever want to see another country cross.
"That was it - like the previous eleven questions on the subject, I thought I had sufficiently described the outrage we had toward both Assad and Russia. The questions in the briefing room are asked at the speed of light. I would answer one question while anticipating the next one. In my mind, I thought I had answered the question, but clearly what had come out of my mouth was not the full explanation that I had envisioned saying. I kept going, oblivious to the damage I had done.
"The next question was about the president's tax returns. Then came a question about the Easter Egg Roll. My corny response about it being 'egg-cellent' evoked laughter from the briefing room. That was followed by a question on the White House visitor logs. After that, more questions focused on Syria and North Korea, and a question was asked about taxes and infrastructure. At this point, I thought, I was doing great. Nothing seemed out of the ordinary because of the pace and intensity of the briefings.
"Then I called on ABC News's Cecilia Vega. 'Sean, thanks, I just want to give you an opportunity to clarify something you said that seems to be gaining some traction right now.' What now? Then she started reading from her phone. 'Hitler didn't even sink to the level of using chemical weapons.' What did you mean by that?' What? Frantically, I'm thinking, 'What did I do?' I responded, 'I think you come to sarin gas, there was no - he was not using the gas on his own people the same way Assad is doing, I mean, there was clearly - I understand your point, thank you.' She said, 'I'm just getting - ' but I cut her off and stepped in deeper and deeper. 'Thank you, I appreciate that,' I said. 'There was not - he brought them into the Holocaust center, I understand that. But I'm saying in the way that Assad used them, where he went into towns, dropped them down to innocent - into the middle of towns. It was brought - so the use of it - I appreciate the clarification there. That was not the intent.' What had I done. Holocaust centers? And I didn't realize until later that I had inadvertently omitted Mattis's important phrase 'on the battlefield.' Hitler, of course, had used chemical weapons to murder Jews and other victims during the Holocaust.
"I read the body language of not only the reporters but also my own staffers along the side of the room. I was beginning to realize I had misspoken badly... In the heat of the moment, I still hadn't realized what I had said wrong. I was so fully focused on condemning Assad that I failed to see how badly I had stumbled by omitting that phrase, 'on the battlefield.' By this point, I was feeling flustered, still not fully understanding what had just happened. My remarks were not quite right, I had the alarming sense that I was digging myself into a deeper hole with each word. This may have been the lowest moment I had in the White House. I alone had fumbled; no one else had made me do it. The irony is that this was a question that I had been waiting for, that I had been prepared to answer. And I had been given two chances to clarify the record.
"After the briefing, I went to my staff. I knew it was bad, but I still asked, how deep am I? Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Natalie Strom, and Raj Shah give me a look that said, 'Deeper than the Titanic.' Then I noticed the calendar on my computer. It read, 'First day of Passover.'
"Reince came into my office. 'Remember the first thing you taught me in media training?' he asked. 'Yes,' I said sheepishly. Never compare anyone to Hitler. I made a mistake, a big one, and I needed to say so.
"I went to the Oval Office to see the president. 'Mr President, I need you to know that I just stepped in it really badly, and I screwed up.' 'I saw it. But I know what you meant, Sean. It's going to be okay.' 'Thank you, sir, but I think I've embarrassed you and the administration and insulted the Jewish people. I need to make it right.' 'Look, Sean, you screwed up, but I know what you meant. You clearly didn't mean... ' He trailed off. When he spoke again, his tone was gentle. At a moment when I felt my worst, he tried to reassure me and was gracious, caring, and forgiving. Finally, he said, 'Do what you think is right.' I felt like I had a fever that was going to get worse before it broke. And despite the president's support, I was again wondering if this was my last day at the White House.
"I asked Natalie, who is Jewish, how the story was playing. Natalie is as loyal as they come, but she had to confess it was getting much worse. Many people echoed the president, telling me they knew what I meant,' but millions of other people did not and were deeply offended. In this moment, I knew I had three choices: one, do nothing and hope that it blew over; two, look for a friendly interviewer or reporter and try to put my spin on the story; or three, find the most challenging interviewer I could, own the mistake, and ask for forgiveness. I chose number three.
"I asked my team to check which news shows I could get on ASAP. They came back with several options, including appearing on CNN with Wolf Blitzer... I knew from the outset that it wouldn't be an easy interview. Wolf always asks tough questions. And he is the son of two Holocaust survivors. 'I was absolutely trying to make a point about the heinous acts that Assad had made against his own people last week, using chemical weapons and gas,' I told Wolf. 'Frankly, I mistakenly used an inappropriate and insensitive reference to the Holocaust, for which, frankly, there is no comparison. And for that I apologize.'... Wolf kept boring down on me. Wasn't I aware that in addition to the Jews, others had been victims of Hitler's poison-gas chambers? Of course, I told him. 'Have you spoken to President Trump about your blunder today?' Wolf asked. 'Obviously, it was my blunder,' I said. To think that I had offended people - especially those whose families had been victims of the Holocaust - twisted my stomach in a way I had never felt before and hope to never feel again. I had created this mess. I had embarrassed myself, my team, and the president.
"House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, other Democrats, and even a Republican congressman from Colorado were soon calling for my resignation.
"That evening, I was as down as I ever was. Some people can shrug off bad moments, but I have a hard time forgiving myself when I make a mistake, especially when I hurt others. It grates on me. Fortunately, Rebecca and the kids were waiting for me at home, and that made all the difference." (pp 195-200)
Thursday, December 27, 2018
The Zionisation of America 2
In addition to US state legislatures doing their bit to protect Israel from free speech, Congress has also been getting in on the act:
You will hopefully remember Greenwald's 2017 piece* on the AIPAC-inspired Israel Boycott Act (S. 720), "introduced by Democratic Sen. Benjamin Cardin of Maryland, that would criminalize participation in any international boycott of Israel. After the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) issued a statement vehemently condemning Cardin's bill as an attack on core free speech rights, one which 'would punish individuals for no reason other than their political beliefs,' numerous senators announced that they were re-considering their support." (School contractor in Texas denied work over pro-Israel loyalty oath)
Greenwald updates us here on Cardin's latest move:
"But now... a modified version of the bill is back and pending in the lame-duck session: 'Cardin is making a behind-the-scenes push to slip an anti-boycott law into a last-minute spending bill being finalized during the lame-duck session.' The ACLU has also condemned this latest bill because 'its intent and the intent of the underlying state laws it purports to uphold are contrary to the spirit and letter of the First Amendment guarantee of freedom of speech and association.'... While that 'new version clarifies that people cannot face jail time for participating in a boycott,' the ACLU insists that it still leaves the door open for criminal financial penalties' for anyone found to be participating in or even advocating for a boycott of Israel." (ibid)
Watch this space...
[*For the gruesome details, see my 23/7/17 post First They Came for the Palestinians. See also my 10/7/18 post Ziofascist Legislation Creep in the US.]
You will hopefully remember Greenwald's 2017 piece* on the AIPAC-inspired Israel Boycott Act (S. 720), "introduced by Democratic Sen. Benjamin Cardin of Maryland, that would criminalize participation in any international boycott of Israel. After the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) issued a statement vehemently condemning Cardin's bill as an attack on core free speech rights, one which 'would punish individuals for no reason other than their political beliefs,' numerous senators announced that they were re-considering their support." (School contractor in Texas denied work over pro-Israel loyalty oath)
Greenwald updates us here on Cardin's latest move:
"But now... a modified version of the bill is back and pending in the lame-duck session: 'Cardin is making a behind-the-scenes push to slip an anti-boycott law into a last-minute spending bill being finalized during the lame-duck session.' The ACLU has also condemned this latest bill because 'its intent and the intent of the underlying state laws it purports to uphold are contrary to the spirit and letter of the First Amendment guarantee of freedom of speech and association.'... While that 'new version clarifies that people cannot face jail time for participating in a boycott,' the ACLU insists that it still leaves the door open for criminal financial penalties' for anyone found to be participating in or even advocating for a boycott of Israel." (ibid)
Watch this space...
[*For the gruesome details, see my 23/7/17 post First They Came for the Palestinians. See also my 10/7/18 post Ziofascist Legislation Creep in the US.]
Wednesday, December 26, 2018
The Zionisation of America 1
From 'the world's greatest democracy', aka the 'Home of the brave' and 'Land of the free', further evidence of the rapid advance of that most insidious phenomenon, the Zionisation of America:
"A children's speech pathologist [Bahia Amawi] who has worked for the last nine years with developmentally disabled, autistic, and speech-impaired elementary school students in Austin, Texas, has been told that she can no longer work with the public school district, after she refused to sign an oath vowing that she 'does not' and 'will not' engage in a boycott of Israel or 'otherwise tak[e] any action that is intended to inflict economic harm' on that foreign nation. A lawsuit on her behalf was filed early Monday morning in a federal court... alleging a violation of her First Amendment right of free speech." (School contractor in Texas denied work over pro-Israel loyalty oath, Glenn Greenwald, theintercept.com, 17/12/18)
"The anti-BDS Israel oath was included in Amawi's contract papers due to an Israel-specific state law enacted on May 2, 2017, by the Texas State Legislature... The bill [authored by an evangelical Republican rep.] unanimously passed the lower House by a vote of 131-0, and then the Senate by a vote of 25-4." (ibid)
"At the time that Texas enacted the law barring contractors from supporting a boycott of Israel, it was the 17th state in the country to do so. As of now, 26 states have enacted such laws - including blue states run by Democrats such as New York, California, and New Jersey - while similar bills are pending in another 13 states." (ibid)
You won't, of course, have heard about this outrage from any branch of the Australian corporate media.
And don't dare think it can't happen here. Remember how the shit hit the fan when Sydney's Marrickville Council bravely adopted a pro-BDS position in 2011?
I'll leave you with Greenwald's assessment to ponder:
"Put simply, it is impossible to be a credible, effective, genuine advocate of free speech and free discourse without objecting to the organized, orchestrated, sustained onslaught of attacks on the free speech and free association rights undertaken specifically to protect the Israeli government from criticism and activism. Self-professed free speech defenders who only invoke that principle when their political allies are targeted are, by definition, charlatans and frauds. Genuine free speech advocates object to censorship even when, arguably especially when, the free speech rights of their political adversaries are assaulted."
"A children's speech pathologist [Bahia Amawi] who has worked for the last nine years with developmentally disabled, autistic, and speech-impaired elementary school students in Austin, Texas, has been told that she can no longer work with the public school district, after she refused to sign an oath vowing that she 'does not' and 'will not' engage in a boycott of Israel or 'otherwise tak[e] any action that is intended to inflict economic harm' on that foreign nation. A lawsuit on her behalf was filed early Monday morning in a federal court... alleging a violation of her First Amendment right of free speech." (School contractor in Texas denied work over pro-Israel loyalty oath, Glenn Greenwald, theintercept.com, 17/12/18)
"The anti-BDS Israel oath was included in Amawi's contract papers due to an Israel-specific state law enacted on May 2, 2017, by the Texas State Legislature... The bill [authored by an evangelical Republican rep.] unanimously passed the lower House by a vote of 131-0, and then the Senate by a vote of 25-4." (ibid)
"At the time that Texas enacted the law barring contractors from supporting a boycott of Israel, it was the 17th state in the country to do so. As of now, 26 states have enacted such laws - including blue states run by Democrats such as New York, California, and New Jersey - while similar bills are pending in another 13 states." (ibid)
You won't, of course, have heard about this outrage from any branch of the Australian corporate media.
And don't dare think it can't happen here. Remember how the shit hit the fan when Sydney's Marrickville Council bravely adopted a pro-BDS position in 2011?
I'll leave you with Greenwald's assessment to ponder:
"Put simply, it is impossible to be a credible, effective, genuine advocate of free speech and free discourse without objecting to the organized, orchestrated, sustained onslaught of attacks on the free speech and free association rights undertaken specifically to protect the Israeli government from criticism and activism. Self-professed free speech defenders who only invoke that principle when their political allies are targeted are, by definition, charlatans and frauds. Genuine free speech advocates object to censorship even when, arguably especially when, the free speech rights of their political adversaries are assaulted."
Tuesday, December 25, 2018
You Read What You Are
"The PM's holiday reading includes former Canadian PM Stephen Harper's Right Here, Right Now... " (Our pollies brought to book over summer, Troy Bramston, The Australian, 11/12/18)
Stephen Harper, eh? No surprises there:
"[O]ne of Harper's most polarizing foreign policy causes has been Israel. As Israel has grown increasingly isolated due to its treatment of the Palestinians in the Occupied Territories - as well as building illegal settlements on this land - the Harper government has become one of the country's most zealous supporters.
"Since Harper became prime minister [2006], Israel has invaded Lebanon - killing up to 1,125 Lebanese (as compared to 159 Israelis) and launched two invasions of the Gaza Strip, the first in 2008-09 that led to 1,434 Palestinian casualties (as compared to 13 Israelis) and then last year, leading to 2,139 Palestinian deaths and 11,000 wounded (as compared to 73 Israeli deaths and 556 wounded). In 2010, when six Turkish ships set sail for Gaza to deliver 10,000 tonnes of humanitarian aid to relieve Israel's blockade, Israeli commandos stormed the boats in international waters and killed 10 activists. Despite international condemnation over what was seen as Israel's overkill in these instances, the Harper government has consistently rushed to Israel's defense and been quick to brand Palestinians and their organizations as 'terrorists.'...
"Harper has a close affinity with the current government of Israel, led by the hard-liner Benjamin Netanyahu, although Netanyahu's party won only 23% of the vote in the most recent election. Moreover, during that campaign, Netanyahu pledged to never negotiate a two-state solution with the Palestinians and made thinly racist comments on the eve of the vote, saying 'Arab voters are heading to the polling stations in droves' as a warning to voters to back his Likud party. In fact, Canada has sided with Israel to thwart Palestinians' efforts to have their own state: in 2012, Canada was the only one of nine countries in the UN that voted against Palestinians achieving statehood. Since 2007, it has cut off aid to the Palestinian Authority, voted against all UN resolutions recognizing the rights of Palestinians and complained bitterly when Palestine was admitted as a full member state to UNESCO.
"Not surprisingly, Harper's foreign policy has alienated Canada's Arab and Muslim communities... In 2009, the federal government cut its $1-million annual funding for the Canadian Arab Federation (CAF) due to the organization's criticism's of Israel... And then there is Harper's decision to send fighter jets to Iraq to do battle with ISIS, costing $360-million this year... " (Is Harper Canada's worst prime minister?, Bruce Livesey, nationalobserver.com, 7/6/15)
That was 2015. Lately, Harper has begun to display signs of the dreaded Jerusalem Syndrome:
"The intersection of populism and trade may be Harper's second-favourite subject on the speaking circuit after Israel. His sharpest post-political advocacy is for the Jewish state, after steadfast rhetorical support during his time in government. Maclean's counts at least 10 Israel-related speaking engagements or events Harper has attended since leaving office [in 2015]... plus a private event at the mansion of pro-Israel casino magnate Sheldon Adelson for the Republican Jewish Coalition while still MP in 2016. Harper has become director of the Friends of Israel Initiative, a group of former political leaders [inc. Howard and Downer!] - and it was through that group that he co-signed a full-page ad in the New York Times praising Trump's pulling out of the Iran nuclear accord, which Israel hotly advocated but Canada's current government didn't.
"'He's a man of principles and he's not going to let political exigencies affect his standing for what he believes is right, even if not popular,' says Rabbi Yechiel Eckstein, head of the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews. When that charity [LOL] held its first gala, at Trump's glitzy Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida, it hoped to book Nikki Haley, Trump's UN ambassador, Eckstein recalls. When she was unavailable, his board opted for Harper. According to a speech transcript provided by the charity, Harper... ripped into anti-Semitism on campuses, Iran's threat to Israel, how he would declare Jerusalem the state's capital if he were prime minister, and why unequivocal support of Israel is 'plainly and simply the right thing to do'." (What on earth is Stephen Harper up to? Jason Markusoff, macleans.ca, 12/7/18)
Stephen Harper, eh? No surprises there:
"[O]ne of Harper's most polarizing foreign policy causes has been Israel. As Israel has grown increasingly isolated due to its treatment of the Palestinians in the Occupied Territories - as well as building illegal settlements on this land - the Harper government has become one of the country's most zealous supporters.
"Since Harper became prime minister [2006], Israel has invaded Lebanon - killing up to 1,125 Lebanese (as compared to 159 Israelis) and launched two invasions of the Gaza Strip, the first in 2008-09 that led to 1,434 Palestinian casualties (as compared to 13 Israelis) and then last year, leading to 2,139 Palestinian deaths and 11,000 wounded (as compared to 73 Israeli deaths and 556 wounded). In 2010, when six Turkish ships set sail for Gaza to deliver 10,000 tonnes of humanitarian aid to relieve Israel's blockade, Israeli commandos stormed the boats in international waters and killed 10 activists. Despite international condemnation over what was seen as Israel's overkill in these instances, the Harper government has consistently rushed to Israel's defense and been quick to brand Palestinians and their organizations as 'terrorists.'...
"Harper has a close affinity with the current government of Israel, led by the hard-liner Benjamin Netanyahu, although Netanyahu's party won only 23% of the vote in the most recent election. Moreover, during that campaign, Netanyahu pledged to never negotiate a two-state solution with the Palestinians and made thinly racist comments on the eve of the vote, saying 'Arab voters are heading to the polling stations in droves' as a warning to voters to back his Likud party. In fact, Canada has sided with Israel to thwart Palestinians' efforts to have their own state: in 2012, Canada was the only one of nine countries in the UN that voted against Palestinians achieving statehood. Since 2007, it has cut off aid to the Palestinian Authority, voted against all UN resolutions recognizing the rights of Palestinians and complained bitterly when Palestine was admitted as a full member state to UNESCO.
"Not surprisingly, Harper's foreign policy has alienated Canada's Arab and Muslim communities... In 2009, the federal government cut its $1-million annual funding for the Canadian Arab Federation (CAF) due to the organization's criticism's of Israel... And then there is Harper's decision to send fighter jets to Iraq to do battle with ISIS, costing $360-million this year... " (Is Harper Canada's worst prime minister?, Bruce Livesey, nationalobserver.com, 7/6/15)
That was 2015. Lately, Harper has begun to display signs of the dreaded Jerusalem Syndrome:
"The intersection of populism and trade may be Harper's second-favourite subject on the speaking circuit after Israel. His sharpest post-political advocacy is for the Jewish state, after steadfast rhetorical support during his time in government. Maclean's counts at least 10 Israel-related speaking engagements or events Harper has attended since leaving office [in 2015]... plus a private event at the mansion of pro-Israel casino magnate Sheldon Adelson for the Republican Jewish Coalition while still MP in 2016. Harper has become director of the Friends of Israel Initiative, a group of former political leaders [inc. Howard and Downer!] - and it was through that group that he co-signed a full-page ad in the New York Times praising Trump's pulling out of the Iran nuclear accord, which Israel hotly advocated but Canada's current government didn't.
"'He's a man of principles and he's not going to let political exigencies affect his standing for what he believes is right, even if not popular,' says Rabbi Yechiel Eckstein, head of the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews. When that charity [LOL] held its first gala, at Trump's glitzy Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida, it hoped to book Nikki Haley, Trump's UN ambassador, Eckstein recalls. When she was unavailable, his board opted for Harper. According to a speech transcript provided by the charity, Harper... ripped into anti-Semitism on campuses, Iran's threat to Israel, how he would declare Jerusalem the state's capital if he were prime minister, and why unequivocal support of Israel is 'plainly and simply the right thing to do'." (What on earth is Stephen Harper up to? Jason Markusoff, macleans.ca, 12/7/18)
Sunday, December 23, 2018
US Coalition 'Cure' Worse than IS Disease
So Trump is at last pulling US forces out of Syria. In my view, the sooner the US gets out of Syria, not to mention the entire Middle East - and stays out - the better.
If you want to know why, read the following chilling news report - keeping in mind, as you read, that it was the US invasion and occupation of Iraq in 2003 that unleashed Islamic State, first on Iraq, then on Syria:
"An Amnesty International report last June said [Raqqa's] civilian casualty figures admitted by the US-led coalition were grossly under-representative. Before that report, the coalition suggested only 23 Syrian civilians had died in its campaign in Raqqa, which destroyed nearly 80% of the city. Britain's Ministry of Defence consistently and incredibly claimed it had no evidence of civilian casualties caused by the 275 British airstrikes in Raqqa or to more than 750 in Mosul, Iraq... 'At least the Americans admit to having caused civilian casualties,' Airwars director Chris Woods said yesterday. 'Britain, like Russia, France, Australia, Belgium and the Dutch, claim their bombs only kill bad people, which is ridiculous'.
"The operation by the Syrian recovery teams [of the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces] suggests Amnesty and Airwars are accurate in their assessment of civilian casualties. Data shared with The Times, which was up to date on December 11, said teams had recovered 3280 corpses since work began in January. This included the bodies of 604 children younger than 16; 538 adult civilian women; 1251 civilian men; and 792 fighters. In 95 cases, it was not possible to identify age or sex. Thousands of civilians were wounded during the operation, in which US forces fired more than 30,000 artillery shells into the city as well as airstrikes by jets from Britain, Australia and France. American units fired more artillery into Raqqa than into any other city since the Vietnam War...
"Hannan Mukhlaf, 27, lost two brothers, two sisters, two sisters-in-law and their five children in a coalition airstrike on her family's home in August last year... 'Islamic State were cruel to all but the coalition used airstrikes against us as if we were animals. If just one person in the West was killed in such a way, everybody would be talking about it. But thousands of us died like this here - bombed like we were animals'. The grim work of recovering bodies goes on." (Raqqa's dead tell a haunting tale of coalition civilian casualties by the thousands, Anthony Lloyd, The Times/The Australian, 21/12/18)
The fact is that the US is directly responsible both for inflicting the IS contagion on Syria, and for inflicting on its hapless Syrian victims an aerial and artillery bombardment infinitely worse than the disease itself.
Typically, there are those who either don't get it or don't care. One such is Australia's prime minister. Fresh from his Jerusalem debacle:
"Scott Morrison has vowed to stay the course in the war against terrorism in the Middle East, warning that 'we cannot be complacent' about the threat of a resurgence of Islamic State, a day after Donald Trump withdrew US troops from Syria and amid reports he is planning to draw down forces in Afghanistan." (PM's vow on terror alliance, Paul Maley/ Cameron Stewart, The Australian, 22/12/18)
Apparently, this stems from the dogma that we must "deny terrorist organisations safe havens in which to plan and export terror attacks across the globe, including the Indo-Pacific." (ibid)
Whenever you hear this kind of simple-minded rhetoric about "denying terrorist organisations safe havens," please remember the fate of the thousands of mangled and maimed civilians in Raqqa and Mosul.
If you want to know why, read the following chilling news report - keeping in mind, as you read, that it was the US invasion and occupation of Iraq in 2003 that unleashed Islamic State, first on Iraq, then on Syria:
"An Amnesty International report last June said [Raqqa's] civilian casualty figures admitted by the US-led coalition were grossly under-representative. Before that report, the coalition suggested only 23 Syrian civilians had died in its campaign in Raqqa, which destroyed nearly 80% of the city. Britain's Ministry of Defence consistently and incredibly claimed it had no evidence of civilian casualties caused by the 275 British airstrikes in Raqqa or to more than 750 in Mosul, Iraq... 'At least the Americans admit to having caused civilian casualties,' Airwars director Chris Woods said yesterday. 'Britain, like Russia, France, Australia, Belgium and the Dutch, claim their bombs only kill bad people, which is ridiculous'.
"The operation by the Syrian recovery teams [of the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces] suggests Amnesty and Airwars are accurate in their assessment of civilian casualties. Data shared with The Times, which was up to date on December 11, said teams had recovered 3280 corpses since work began in January. This included the bodies of 604 children younger than 16; 538 adult civilian women; 1251 civilian men; and 792 fighters. In 95 cases, it was not possible to identify age or sex. Thousands of civilians were wounded during the operation, in which US forces fired more than 30,000 artillery shells into the city as well as airstrikes by jets from Britain, Australia and France. American units fired more artillery into Raqqa than into any other city since the Vietnam War...
"Hannan Mukhlaf, 27, lost two brothers, two sisters, two sisters-in-law and their five children in a coalition airstrike on her family's home in August last year... 'Islamic State were cruel to all but the coalition used airstrikes against us as if we were animals. If just one person in the West was killed in such a way, everybody would be talking about it. But thousands of us died like this here - bombed like we were animals'. The grim work of recovering bodies goes on." (Raqqa's dead tell a haunting tale of coalition civilian casualties by the thousands, Anthony Lloyd, The Times/The Australian, 21/12/18)
The fact is that the US is directly responsible both for inflicting the IS contagion on Syria, and for inflicting on its hapless Syrian victims an aerial and artillery bombardment infinitely worse than the disease itself.
Typically, there are those who either don't get it or don't care. One such is Australia's prime minister. Fresh from his Jerusalem debacle:
"Scott Morrison has vowed to stay the course in the war against terrorism in the Middle East, warning that 'we cannot be complacent' about the threat of a resurgence of Islamic State, a day after Donald Trump withdrew US troops from Syria and amid reports he is planning to draw down forces in Afghanistan." (PM's vow on terror alliance, Paul Maley/ Cameron Stewart, The Australian, 22/12/18)
Apparently, this stems from the dogma that we must "deny terrorist organisations safe havens in which to plan and export terror attacks across the globe, including the Indo-Pacific." (ibid)
Whenever you hear this kind of simple-minded rhetoric about "denying terrorist organisations safe havens," please remember the fate of the thousands of mangled and maimed civilians in Raqqa and Mosul.
Friday, December 21, 2018
Zionists Put Shorten on Notice
If, as I suspect, federal Labor leader Bill Shorten will simply ignore his party's 2018 National Conference call "to recognise Palestine as a state," will he at least have the fortitude to resist Zionist threats such as this?:
"The Zionist Federation of Australia has written to Bill Shorten and opposition foreign affairs spokeswoman Penny Wong to express concerns about the party's position after they confirmed Labor would recognise Jerusalem as Israel's capital only in the final stages of of a two-state solution... In the ZFA letter, obtained by The Australian, president Jeremy Leibler seeks clarification of Labor's position after Australia became one of the few countries to formally recognise West Jerusalem as Israel's capital while pledging to recognise a future Palestinian state with its capital in East Jerusalem. 'A move by a future Labor government to reverse such an important position would be considered a hostile act to Australia's strongest ally in the Middle East,' Mr Leibler writes. 'Should Labor form government, we... urge the ALP not to reverse the decision to recognise West Jerusalem as the capital of Israel'. Senator Wong has tweeted that Labor did not 'support unilateral recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and in government would reverse this decision'." (Labor warned against undoing Israel move, Rosie Lewis, 17/12/18)
Watch this space...
"The Zionist Federation of Australia has written to Bill Shorten and opposition foreign affairs spokeswoman Penny Wong to express concerns about the party's position after they confirmed Labor would recognise Jerusalem as Israel's capital only in the final stages of of a two-state solution... In the ZFA letter, obtained by The Australian, president Jeremy Leibler seeks clarification of Labor's position after Australia became one of the few countries to formally recognise West Jerusalem as Israel's capital while pledging to recognise a future Palestinian state with its capital in East Jerusalem. 'A move by a future Labor government to reverse such an important position would be considered a hostile act to Australia's strongest ally in the Middle East,' Mr Leibler writes. 'Should Labor form government, we... urge the ALP not to reverse the decision to recognise West Jerusalem as the capital of Israel'. Senator Wong has tweeted that Labor did not 'support unilateral recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and in government would reverse this decision'." (Labor warned against undoing Israel move, Rosie Lewis, 17/12/18)
Watch this space...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)