"You are pitiful, isolated individuals. You are bankrupts; your role is played out. Go where you belong from now on, into the dustbin of history." Leon Trotsky
"There are signs that Israel's years are numbered. They became clear to me in 2006 when a bunch of youngsters in South Lebanon humiliated its arrogant army. The people of South Lebanon were most impressed by the cries and screams of retreating Israeli soldiers around Marun Ar-Ras. But for me, the signs of Israel's demise can also be seen in its clumsy and comical propaganda. I never thought I'd live to see Israeli propaganda mimic Ba'athist propaganda. These are signs that one relishes from a historical perspective. There are those who worry about the new Israeli (& US) insistence that Arabs recognize the permanent, Jewish character of the state. Are you kidding? This is another sign of Israel's demise. It shows real panic at the inevitability of its demise and the demographic trend. What will Israel do 50 years from now when the Jews in the 'holy land' are outnumbered by Arabs? No pledge of the Jewishness of the state will preserve it. Don't get me wrong: I don't believe Israel will be around in 50 years time. Then, you will most likely be landing at George Habash International Airport (formerly known as Ben Gurion Airport). I'm already discussing plans for a visit to Palestine after its liberation. I know what I'd do there." (As'ad AbuKhalil, angryarab.blogspot.com, 4/11/10)
"The secret of Zionist success lies in the manner in which it overcame the chief flaw in its design: it did not have a natural mother country to support its colonial project. By winning over the Jews in the Western diaspora, and galvanizing them to use their wealth, intellect, and activism to promote Zionist causes, the Zionists succeeded in substituting the West for the missing natural mother country. Over time, nearly every major Western country (including the Soviet Union) has offered critical help in the creation, survival and success of Israel. Most importantly, the two greatest Western powers, Britain and the United States, successively, have placed their military might squarely behind the Zionist project despite the damage that this inflicted on their vital interests in the Middle East.
"The United States has already paid dearly for its pro-Zionist policies since 1948. Over time, these costs would include the hundreds of billions of dollars in subsidies to Israel and its Arab allies, the alienation of the Arab world, an oil embargo, higher oil prices, the rise of Islamic radicalism, and several close confrontations with the Soviet Union in the Middle East. After September 11, 2001, under strong pressure from Israel - working in league with their neoconservative allies - the United States launched a costly but unnecessary war against Iraq. In turn, this war galvanized the Islamist radicals, giving them a new theater where they could engage the United States. The United States has financed this war - and the war in Afghanistan - by borrowing from China and the oil-rich Arabs. We must also add two other consequences of the Iraq War to the debit in America's Israeli account: the rise of Iran and the growing challenge to US hegemony in Latin America.
"The costs that the United States - and the rest of the Western world - might incur in the future are likely to be much greater. We can only speculate about these costs, or when they will come due. The repressive, pro-American regimes in the Arab world are not sustainable. When these unpopular regimes begin to fall, and are replaced by Islamist governments, it may become difficult for the United States to maintain its presence in the region. Indeed, it is likely that the United States itself or Israel might trigger this outcome with an attack on Iran. In the opinion of some, this is an accident waiting to happen.
"Should Israel wither away, the United States will bear much of the collateral damage of this collapse. The withering of the Jewish state could occur due to international pressures against its apartheid regime, a slow loss of nerve as Jewish settlers lose their 'demographic war' with the Palestinians, or loss of deterrence as Israel continues to engage in failed attempts to destroy the Hizbullah and Hamas. Israel and the United States have been joined at the hip for many years. In America's public discourse, the two have become more and more like each other: they are two exceptional societies, marked by destiny, chosen by God, created by brave pioneers, who have shaped and continue to shape their common destiny through territorial expansion and ethnic cleansing. Should the Jewish state wither away, its much larger twin may begin to wobble.
"Some consequences of the withering away of Israel might be easy to predict. Over the past century, the successes of the Zionist movement have galvanized many American Jews and Zionist Christians; they will now be disillusioned, in despair, confused, and angry. Probably, most Israeli Jews will want to migrate to the United States, which most Americans will be loath to refuse. Yet, this will give rise to frictions between some sections of Gentiles and Jews and may give rise to pockets of anti-Semitism. Tensions will also arise between Jews and Muslims. In all likelihood, the United States will experience growing conflicts among different sections of its population; there will be more racism, hate crimes, and, perhaps, worse. None of this will be good for America's image as a great country.
"Although the domestic fallout of the withering of the Israeli state will be serious, the more serious losses for the United States will flow from the erosion of its control over the oil-rich states in the Persian Gulf. It would be foolhardy to predict the contours of the new map that will eventually emerge in the Middle East and the Islamicate. Whatever new structures emerge, these transformations are likely to be violent. On the one hand, the fragmentation imposed on the Islamicate has created local interests that will seek to maintain the status quo. These local interests now will confront Islamist movements that seek to create more integrated structures across the Islamicate. These conflicts will be deeply destabilizing, as India, China, Europe and Russia may choose sides, each eager to replace the United States. Once the US-Israeli straitjacket over the region has been loosened, it will not be easy to fashion a new one made in Moscow, Beijing, Brussels or New Delhi. The Islamicate world today is not what it was during World War I. It is noticeably less inclined to let foreigners draw their maps for them." (Israeli Exceptionalism: The Destabilizing Logic of Zionism, M Shahid Alam, 2009, pp 218-220)
Monday, November 8, 2010
Lock Up Your Daughters!
Australians are a weird mob.
American troops, who routinely visit murder, rape, pillage and plunder on brown people - with Australian assistance of course - are welcome: "Australia has agreed to a major escalation of military cooperation with the US, including more visits by American ships, aircraft and troops and their forces exercising here regularly." (US forces get nod to share our bases, Brendan Nicholson, The Australian, 6/11/10)
But when brown people try to flee said murder, rape, pillage and plunder by jumping on boats and seeking refuge here, Australians are up in arms: "[Northam, WA] resident John Edwards, who lives 200 metres from the [proposed detention centre] site, also expressed concern about safety, saying the three-metre-high security fence would not prevent [asylum seekers] from jumping. 'If they jump that fence, they're going to steal my car, they're going to attack my wife and make their way to Perth and join with groups of their kind', he said." (Northam fires up over detention centre, watoday.com.au, 5/11/10)
Mr Edwards is worried about nothing, of course. However, when the Yanks arrive, I'd seriously advise him to lock up his wife and daughters.
American troops, who routinely visit murder, rape, pillage and plunder on brown people - with Australian assistance of course - are welcome: "Australia has agreed to a major escalation of military cooperation with the US, including more visits by American ships, aircraft and troops and their forces exercising here regularly." (US forces get nod to share our bases, Brendan Nicholson, The Australian, 6/11/10)
But when brown people try to flee said murder, rape, pillage and plunder by jumping on boats and seeking refuge here, Australians are up in arms: "[Northam, WA] resident John Edwards, who lives 200 metres from the [proposed detention centre] site, also expressed concern about safety, saying the three-metre-high security fence would not prevent [asylum seekers] from jumping. 'If they jump that fence, they're going to steal my car, they're going to attack my wife and make their way to Perth and join with groups of their kind', he said." (Northam fires up over detention centre, watoday.com.au, 5/11/10)
Mr Edwards is worried about nothing, of course. However, when the Yanks arrive, I'd seriously advise him to lock up his wife and daughters.
Sunday, November 7, 2010
Guess Who Came to Dinner?
In spruiking his new book, Confessions of a Faceless Man, on the coup which replaced Prime Minister Kevin Rudd with Julia Gillard, union heavy and Zionist hottie Paul Howes writes:
"The problems within the [Rudd] government... are now widely known. Ministers were not encouraged to debate ideas and Cabinet became a rubber-stamping committee. Those who did try to talk to the prime minister about the problems facing the government were so brutalised by their experiences that many never tried it again. Some cabinet ministers couldn't get a meeting with Rudd at all. Departmental secretaries were left waiting hours and hours for meetings, only to be told to come back the next day, when the charade would be repeated. I experienced this sort of treatment first hand, so I knew the increasing complaints from within the government were justified... The party became increasingly closed, and those within the wider labour movement who spoke out or disagreed on policy issues were marginalised and shut up. That culture needed to end. And that's at least partly why Julia Gillard became the leader of the parliamentary Labor party, and the Prime Minister. I believe that, as Prime Minister, Gillard is keen to ensure that debate is had and ideas are generated... that supporters of the party should be able to make their voices heard without the fear of appearing disloyal. After all, that's democracy... It seems to me that because the election had to be held so soon after the change of leadership, there was no opportunity to properly explain to the Australian people what exactly had gone wrong with the Rudd government. It's time now to confront the elephant in the room." (The elephant in the room, Paul Howes, The Sunday Telegraph, 7/11/10)
So cabinet ministers couldn't get a look in with Rudd, and parliamentary secretaries were kept dangling. The nerve of the man! Why, even His Highness, Paul Howes, got his knuckles rapped! And that, he says, was the elephant in the room.
But that wasn't the elephant in the room. This was the elephant in the room:
Some folk had no trouble getting to see Rudd. In fact, he not only invited them but wined and dined them as well: "When Kevin Rudd sat down to dinner in the Lodge with six leaders of the Jewish community this month several remarked at the trouble he'd taken: the PM had ordered kosher food, flown from Melbourne, for the event. It was a nice touch, but not enough. Rudd convened the dinner as a reconciliation with Australia's Jewry. He was the first prime minister to invite the Jewish leadership to address a crisis in relations since Malcolm Fraser after the outbreak of the first Lebanon War in 1982. But it was going to take a lot more than a kosher dinner to alay the anxiety, anger and frustration around the Lodge dining table... (What am I, chopped liver? How Rudd dived into schmooze mode, Peter Hartcher, Sydney Morning Herald, 22/6/10) You can read the rest of Hartcher's account in my 22/6/10 post The Best Israel Policy Money Can Buy.
As for those [Laborites] who spoke out or disagreed on policy issues being marginalised and shut up, that wouldn't happen under Prime Minister Howes, now would it?
Well, yes it would. Take the courageous (and sadly the only) Labor dissent from the party line on the Middle East conflict by former Labor MP Julia Irwin. Hypocrite Howes condemned that out of hand as "a dangerous contribution to the foreign policy debate." (No hope of a fond farewell, Paul Howes, The Australian, 16/9/09)
"The problems within the [Rudd] government... are now widely known. Ministers were not encouraged to debate ideas and Cabinet became a rubber-stamping committee. Those who did try to talk to the prime minister about the problems facing the government were so brutalised by their experiences that many never tried it again. Some cabinet ministers couldn't get a meeting with Rudd at all. Departmental secretaries were left waiting hours and hours for meetings, only to be told to come back the next day, when the charade would be repeated. I experienced this sort of treatment first hand, so I knew the increasing complaints from within the government were justified... The party became increasingly closed, and those within the wider labour movement who spoke out or disagreed on policy issues were marginalised and shut up. That culture needed to end. And that's at least partly why Julia Gillard became the leader of the parliamentary Labor party, and the Prime Minister. I believe that, as Prime Minister, Gillard is keen to ensure that debate is had and ideas are generated... that supporters of the party should be able to make their voices heard without the fear of appearing disloyal. After all, that's democracy... It seems to me that because the election had to be held so soon after the change of leadership, there was no opportunity to properly explain to the Australian people what exactly had gone wrong with the Rudd government. It's time now to confront the elephant in the room." (The elephant in the room, Paul Howes, The Sunday Telegraph, 7/11/10)
So cabinet ministers couldn't get a look in with Rudd, and parliamentary secretaries were kept dangling. The nerve of the man! Why, even His Highness, Paul Howes, got his knuckles rapped! And that, he says, was the elephant in the room.
But that wasn't the elephant in the room. This was the elephant in the room:
Some folk had no trouble getting to see Rudd. In fact, he not only invited them but wined and dined them as well: "When Kevin Rudd sat down to dinner in the Lodge with six leaders of the Jewish community this month several remarked at the trouble he'd taken: the PM had ordered kosher food, flown from Melbourne, for the event. It was a nice touch, but not enough. Rudd convened the dinner as a reconciliation with Australia's Jewry. He was the first prime minister to invite the Jewish leadership to address a crisis in relations since Malcolm Fraser after the outbreak of the first Lebanon War in 1982. But it was going to take a lot more than a kosher dinner to alay the anxiety, anger and frustration around the Lodge dining table... (What am I, chopped liver? How Rudd dived into schmooze mode, Peter Hartcher, Sydney Morning Herald, 22/6/10) You can read the rest of Hartcher's account in my 22/6/10 post The Best Israel Policy Money Can Buy.
As for those [Laborites] who spoke out or disagreed on policy issues being marginalised and shut up, that wouldn't happen under Prime Minister Howes, now would it?
Well, yes it would. Take the courageous (and sadly the only) Labor dissent from the party line on the Middle East conflict by former Labor MP Julia Irwin. Hypocrite Howes condemned that out of hand as "a dangerous contribution to the foreign policy debate." (No hope of a fond farewell, Paul Howes, The Australian, 16/9/09)
Saturday, November 6, 2010
Uberlibs
Hm... there's something about the Liberal Party. Can't quite put my finger on it though. Is there a pattern here do you think?:
"Processing asylum-seekers in 'idyllic' areas of Australia was like rolling out the 'red carpet' to people smugglers, Tony Abbott said yesterday. The Opposition Leader capitalised on community anger in the Adelaide Hills over the Gillard government's handling of plans for a new detention centre in the picturesque region... 'I don't get the impression from anyone in this room that this is not an open and welcoming community', Mr Abbott said before spending 90 minutes mingling and chatting with residents, including Holocaust denier Frederick Tobin. 'Tony and I go back a long time, but I am also a concerned citizen', Dr Toben said." (New centre rolls out the red carpet: Abbott, Michael Owen, The Australian, 4/11/10)
"NSW Election Funding Authority records show that Mr [Ashley] Pittard [who is seeking preselection for the safe NSW Liberal seat of Castle Hill] has donated more than $360,000 to the Liberal Party since 2007. The donations have been made both in his name and that of a company Stuka Ltd, of which he is the sole director and secretary." (Castle Hill Liberals man the ramparts in preselection stoush over wealthy donor, Sean Nicholls, Sydney Morning Herald, 5/11/10)
"The Liberal Party is scrambling to find a new candidate for a key country seat just days before the start of the [Victorian] election campaign after the original contender quit amid a race row. Mike Laker, who was running for the seat of Seymour, got busted by a Melbourne radio station spreading rumours the Victorian labor government was going to house 50 Somali families at a new housing estate in the electorate and give them free cars." (Liberal candidate quits after race row, Milanda Rout, The Australian, 1/11/10)
"Processing asylum-seekers in 'idyllic' areas of Australia was like rolling out the 'red carpet' to people smugglers, Tony Abbott said yesterday. The Opposition Leader capitalised on community anger in the Adelaide Hills over the Gillard government's handling of plans for a new detention centre in the picturesque region... 'I don't get the impression from anyone in this room that this is not an open and welcoming community', Mr Abbott said before spending 90 minutes mingling and chatting with residents, including Holocaust denier Frederick Tobin. 'Tony and I go back a long time, but I am also a concerned citizen', Dr Toben said." (New centre rolls out the red carpet: Abbott, Michael Owen, The Australian, 4/11/10)
"NSW Election Funding Authority records show that Mr [Ashley] Pittard [who is seeking preselection for the safe NSW Liberal seat of Castle Hill] has donated more than $360,000 to the Liberal Party since 2007. The donations have been made both in his name and that of a company Stuka Ltd, of which he is the sole director and secretary." (Castle Hill Liberals man the ramparts in preselection stoush over wealthy donor, Sean Nicholls, Sydney Morning Herald, 5/11/10)
"The Liberal Party is scrambling to find a new candidate for a key country seat just days before the start of the [Victorian] election campaign after the original contender quit amid a race row. Mike Laker, who was running for the seat of Seymour, got busted by a Melbourne radio station spreading rumours the Victorian labor government was going to house 50 Somali families at a new housing estate in the electorate and give them free cars." (Liberal candidate quits after race row, Milanda Rout, The Australian, 1/11/10)
Dear Miranda... 2
Despite Sunday Telegraph columnist Miranda Devine calling for "feedback" on her column, Roadmap to peace heads down a dead end (31/10/10), which dealt with her recent Israeli rambamming, she hasn't bothered addressing any of the questions that I asked her in my 31/10/10 post Dear Miranda...
Absent a response, I guess I'll just have to assume the questions were either too hard for her, or that she has a closed mind, or that she's taken the vow of silence referred to in my 15/10/10 post Omerta.
Or - worst case scenario - maybe all three.
Absent a response, I guess I'll just have to assume the questions were either too hard for her, or that she has a closed mind, or that she's taken the vow of silence referred to in my 15/10/10 post Omerta.
Or - worst case scenario - maybe all three.
Friday, November 5, 2010
Gillard's Education Revolutions
"My firm belief is that the future of our two countries will be determined by what is happening in the schools of each of our nations today." (Julia Gillard's November 2 speech in Jakarta: Australia will spend $500 million to upgrade Indonesian schools, Tom Allard, Sydney Morning Herald, 3/11/10)
Indeed.
In Indonesia, Prime Minister Gillard is hoping to extinguish sectarian fires: "Australia will spend $500 million building 2000 new schools in Indonesia and upgrading the curriculums of 1500 Islamic madrasas to improve prospects for Indonesia's youth and moderate the influence of the country's religious schools." (ibid)
In Australia, however, she's busy fueling sectarian fires: "Recently the PM, Julia Gillard, 'turbo-charged' the [National School] Chaplaincy Program [first introduced by John Howard] and prompted an unseemly rush to chaplaincy, even in the NSW government school system, which has historically eschewed mixing church and state. One of Gillard's key election campaign promises in August was to boost school chaplain numbers. Her $222 million pledge - more than double Howard's spend - is expected to result in federally funded chaplains at more than one-third of Australia's 10,000 government and non-government schools. Constitutional concerns about the separation of church and state... have been swept aside in the subsidy scramble." (With God by their side, Damien Murphy, Sydney Morning Herald, 30/10/10)
Not bad for a declared atheist, eh?
Oh, and as for Australia's future being determined by what is happening in our schools, I thought you might like a glimpse at where we might be heading with the PM's little $222 million sectarian feeding frenzy: "A couple living on the NSW north coast say they are scared to speak out against the chaplaincy program because their 8-year old son has been attacked at school. They wish to remain anonymous, but say that the local Christian lobby that applied for and secured funding for a chaplain did so without the knowledge of the general parent body. 'Since then, we've had to comfort our son on more than one occasion when he's come home upset after being told by other people that he'll literally 'burn in hell' because he does not share their religious beliefs or attend the same church', the father says." (ibid)
Indeed.
In Indonesia, Prime Minister Gillard is hoping to extinguish sectarian fires: "Australia will spend $500 million building 2000 new schools in Indonesia and upgrading the curriculums of 1500 Islamic madrasas to improve prospects for Indonesia's youth and moderate the influence of the country's religious schools." (ibid)
In Australia, however, she's busy fueling sectarian fires: "Recently the PM, Julia Gillard, 'turbo-charged' the [National School] Chaplaincy Program [first introduced by John Howard] and prompted an unseemly rush to chaplaincy, even in the NSW government school system, which has historically eschewed mixing church and state. One of Gillard's key election campaign promises in August was to boost school chaplain numbers. Her $222 million pledge - more than double Howard's spend - is expected to result in federally funded chaplains at more than one-third of Australia's 10,000 government and non-government schools. Constitutional concerns about the separation of church and state... have been swept aside in the subsidy scramble." (With God by their side, Damien Murphy, Sydney Morning Herald, 30/10/10)
Not bad for a declared atheist, eh?
Oh, and as for Australia's future being determined by what is happening in our schools, I thought you might like a glimpse at where we might be heading with the PM's little $222 million sectarian feeding frenzy: "A couple living on the NSW north coast say they are scared to speak out against the chaplaincy program because their 8-year old son has been attacked at school. They wish to remain anonymous, but say that the local Christian lobby that applied for and secured funding for a chaplain did so without the knowledge of the general parent body. 'Since then, we've had to comfort our son on more than one occasion when he's come home upset after being told by other people that he'll literally 'burn in hell' because he does not share their religious beliefs or attend the same church', the father says." (ibid)
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
The Big Picture
Here's the little picture:
"Imagine if, an hour from now, a robot-plane swooped over your house and blasted it to pieces. The plane has no pilot. It is controlled with a joystick from 11,000km away, sent by the Pakistani military to kill you. It blows up all the houses in your street, and so barbecues your family and your neighbours until there is nothing left to bury but a few charred slops. Why? They refuse to comment. They don't even admit the robot-planes belong to them. But they tell the Pakistani newspapers back home it is because one of you was planning to attack Pakistan. How do they know? Somebody told them. Who? You don't know, and there are no appeals against the robot. Now imagine it doesn't end there: these attacks are happening every week somewhere in your country. They blow up funerals and family dinners and children. The number of robot-planes in the sky is increasing every week. You discover they are named 'Predators' or 'Reapers' - after the Grim Reaper. No matter how much you plead, no matter how much you make it clear you are a peaceful civilian getting on with your life, it won't stop. What do you do? If there was a group arguing that Pakistan was an evil nation that deserved to be violently attacked, would you now start to listen?
"This sounds like a sketch for the next James Cameron movie - but it is in fact an accurate description of life in parts of Pakistan today, with the sides flipped. The Predators and Reapers are being sent by Barack Obama's CIA, with the support of other Western governments, and they killed more than 700 civilians in 2009 alone - 14 times the number killed in the 7/7 attacks in London. The floods were seen as an opportunity to increase the attacks, and last month saw the largest number of robot-plane bombings ever: 22. Over the next decade, spending on drones is set to increase by 700%. The US Government doesn't even officially admit the program exists... But [the Obama] administration says, behind closed doors, that these robot-plane attacks are 'the only show in town' for killing suspected jihadis... True, the program has certainly killed some real jihadis. But the evidence suggests it is creating far more jihadis than it kills - and is making an attack on you and me more likely with each bomb.
"Drone technology was developed by the Israelis, who routinely use it to bomb the Gaza Strip. I've been to Gaza during some of these attacks. The people were terrified - and radicalised. A young woman I know who had been averse to political violence and an advocate of peaceful protest saw a drone blow up a car full of people - and she started supporting jihad and crying for the worst possible revenge against Israel. Drones have bombed much of Gaza, from secular Fatah to Islamist Hamas, to the brink of jihad. Is the same thing happening in Pakistan?" (Rise of the killer drones, Johann Hari, The Weekend Australian Magazine, 30/10/10)
And here's the Big Picture:
"Few Zionists would deny the escalating violence that has attended the insertion of Jewish colons into the Middle East. Mostly, however, the Zionists draw attention to the Arabs as the source of this violence and blame it on their rejection of Israel. Moreover, they maintain that Arab rejection of Israel is rooted in their ancient and religiously inspired hostility toward Jews. The Zionist movement in Palestine has generated endemic violence between Jewish settlers and Palestinians. Since 1948, this violence has repeatedly pitted Israel against the Palestinians and its Arab neighbors. It has dragged Western societies, especially the United States, into ever widening and deepening conflicts with the Islamicate.* It is the thesis of this... book that the history of these ever-expanding circles of conflict and instability was contained in the Zionist idea itself. Instability and violence are integral to Zionism: they have flowed from its inner logic. They are not incidental to it." (Israeli Exceptionalism: The Destabilizing Logic of Zionism, M. Shahid Alam, 2009, pp 25-26)
"This study has employed a dialectical framework for analyzing the destabilizing logic of Zionism. We have examined this logic as it has unfolded through time, driven by the vision of an exclusionary colonialism, drawing into its circuit - aligned with it and against it - nations, peoples, forces, and civilizations whose actions and interactions impinge on the trajectory of Zionism, and, in turn, who are changed by this trajectory. It would be a bit simplistic to examine the field of interactions among the different actors in this historic drama on the essentialist assumption that these actors and their interests are unchanging. Instead, we need to explore the complex ways in which the Zionists have worked - and, often have succeeded - to alter the behavior of the other political actors in this drama: and, how, in turn, the Zionists respond to these changes. Most importantly, we need to explore all the ways in which the Zionists have succeeded in mobilizing the resources of the United States and other Western powers to serve their specific objectives. Consider a list of the political actors who have had more than a passing connection to the Zionist project and, who, at one time or another, have affected or have been affected by this project. First, there are the different Zionist factions, the Jewish diaspora, and, later, the state of Israel. These entities are overlapping, with the degrees of overlap between any two of them changing over time. The second set of actors consists of Western powers - especially, the United States, Britain, and France - the Christian Zionists especially in the United States, and the Soviet Union and its allies in Eastern Europe. Finally, there are actors who are direct and indirect victims of the Zionist project, those who have paid the costs of Zionist success. They form four concentric circles around Israel, including the Palestinians, the Arabs, the Middle East, and the Islamicate. These three sets of actors make up the dramatis personae in the unfolding tragedy of the Zionist project. Clearly, the number of actors involved, their variety, and, not least, the multilayered power commanded by the Zionists and their allies would indicate that Zionism is no sideshow. Directly, it has involved much of the Western world, on one side, and the global Islamicate on the other side, who will soon make up one-fourth of the world's population." (ibid, pp 213-214) [*Following Marshall Hodgson, 'Islamicate'... will refer to a society comprising mostly of Muslims.]
"Imagine if, an hour from now, a robot-plane swooped over your house and blasted it to pieces. The plane has no pilot. It is controlled with a joystick from 11,000km away, sent by the Pakistani military to kill you. It blows up all the houses in your street, and so barbecues your family and your neighbours until there is nothing left to bury but a few charred slops. Why? They refuse to comment. They don't even admit the robot-planes belong to them. But they tell the Pakistani newspapers back home it is because one of you was planning to attack Pakistan. How do they know? Somebody told them. Who? You don't know, and there are no appeals against the robot. Now imagine it doesn't end there: these attacks are happening every week somewhere in your country. They blow up funerals and family dinners and children. The number of robot-planes in the sky is increasing every week. You discover they are named 'Predators' or 'Reapers' - after the Grim Reaper. No matter how much you plead, no matter how much you make it clear you are a peaceful civilian getting on with your life, it won't stop. What do you do? If there was a group arguing that Pakistan was an evil nation that deserved to be violently attacked, would you now start to listen?
"This sounds like a sketch for the next James Cameron movie - but it is in fact an accurate description of life in parts of Pakistan today, with the sides flipped. The Predators and Reapers are being sent by Barack Obama's CIA, with the support of other Western governments, and they killed more than 700 civilians in 2009 alone - 14 times the number killed in the 7/7 attacks in London. The floods were seen as an opportunity to increase the attacks, and last month saw the largest number of robot-plane bombings ever: 22. Over the next decade, spending on drones is set to increase by 700%. The US Government doesn't even officially admit the program exists... But [the Obama] administration says, behind closed doors, that these robot-plane attacks are 'the only show in town' for killing suspected jihadis... True, the program has certainly killed some real jihadis. But the evidence suggests it is creating far more jihadis than it kills - and is making an attack on you and me more likely with each bomb.
"Drone technology was developed by the Israelis, who routinely use it to bomb the Gaza Strip. I've been to Gaza during some of these attacks. The people were terrified - and radicalised. A young woman I know who had been averse to political violence and an advocate of peaceful protest saw a drone blow up a car full of people - and she started supporting jihad and crying for the worst possible revenge against Israel. Drones have bombed much of Gaza, from secular Fatah to Islamist Hamas, to the brink of jihad. Is the same thing happening in Pakistan?" (Rise of the killer drones, Johann Hari, The Weekend Australian Magazine, 30/10/10)
And here's the Big Picture:
"Few Zionists would deny the escalating violence that has attended the insertion of Jewish colons into the Middle East. Mostly, however, the Zionists draw attention to the Arabs as the source of this violence and blame it on their rejection of Israel. Moreover, they maintain that Arab rejection of Israel is rooted in their ancient and religiously inspired hostility toward Jews. The Zionist movement in Palestine has generated endemic violence between Jewish settlers and Palestinians. Since 1948, this violence has repeatedly pitted Israel against the Palestinians and its Arab neighbors. It has dragged Western societies, especially the United States, into ever widening and deepening conflicts with the Islamicate.* It is the thesis of this... book that the history of these ever-expanding circles of conflict and instability was contained in the Zionist idea itself. Instability and violence are integral to Zionism: they have flowed from its inner logic. They are not incidental to it." (Israeli Exceptionalism: The Destabilizing Logic of Zionism, M. Shahid Alam, 2009, pp 25-26)
"This study has employed a dialectical framework for analyzing the destabilizing logic of Zionism. We have examined this logic as it has unfolded through time, driven by the vision of an exclusionary colonialism, drawing into its circuit - aligned with it and against it - nations, peoples, forces, and civilizations whose actions and interactions impinge on the trajectory of Zionism, and, in turn, who are changed by this trajectory. It would be a bit simplistic to examine the field of interactions among the different actors in this historic drama on the essentialist assumption that these actors and their interests are unchanging. Instead, we need to explore the complex ways in which the Zionists have worked - and, often have succeeded - to alter the behavior of the other political actors in this drama: and, how, in turn, the Zionists respond to these changes. Most importantly, we need to explore all the ways in which the Zionists have succeeded in mobilizing the resources of the United States and other Western powers to serve their specific objectives. Consider a list of the political actors who have had more than a passing connection to the Zionist project and, who, at one time or another, have affected or have been affected by this project. First, there are the different Zionist factions, the Jewish diaspora, and, later, the state of Israel. These entities are overlapping, with the degrees of overlap between any two of them changing over time. The second set of actors consists of Western powers - especially, the United States, Britain, and France - the Christian Zionists especially in the United States, and the Soviet Union and its allies in Eastern Europe. Finally, there are actors who are direct and indirect victims of the Zionist project, those who have paid the costs of Zionist success. They form four concentric circles around Israel, including the Palestinians, the Arabs, the Middle East, and the Islamicate. These three sets of actors make up the dramatis personae in the unfolding tragedy of the Zionist project. Clearly, the number of actors involved, their variety, and, not least, the multilayered power commanded by the Zionists and their allies would indicate that Zionism is no sideshow. Directly, it has involved much of the Western world, on one side, and the global Islamicate on the other side, who will soon make up one-fourth of the world's population." (ibid, pp 213-214) [*Following Marshall Hodgson, 'Islamicate'... will refer to a society comprising mostly of Muslims.]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)