CNN: During U2's performance of "Pride (In the Name of Love)," a
tribute to the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., frontman Bono referenced the civil
rights leader's "I Have a Dream" speech, saying that it was also, "an Irish
dream, a European dream, and African dream, an Israeli dream, and a Palestinian
dream."
Mondo's source writes: Bono
mentioned the Palestanian cause while singing Pride in the Name of Love
(MLK) during the Obama Inaugural Celebration at the Lincoln Memorial Celebration
(carried live on HBO). He mentioned Irish, European, African,
Israeli…then a pregnant pause…"and Palestinian." The world is
changing.
I was watching it live, and there was a pregnant pause after he said "an israeli dream" …… then "a palestinian dream" … i guess it was for effect, but it almost seemed as if he pondered it for a second (did he think he'd be booed!)… but i am so glad that he said it!
He DID mention the Israeli dream (not the single-state, not the insecure state under shelling siege).
And, the next IMPORTANT question is how practically will the Palestinian dream be realized?
By solidarity with Hamas? I doubt that the morality driven left can stand that association unless Hamas CHANGES.
The israel dream is followed by a palestinian nightmare
No, Richard, both must change. And the truth of how Hamas tried to broker a different and real peace AND SAID IT WOULD RECOGNIZE ISRAEL as reported by Bob Novak in 2004 has to be recognized without all the obnoxious hyperbole by previously one-sided Zionists.
"I doubt that the morality driven left can stand that association unless Hamas CHANGES. "
I consider myself on the morality-driven center-right, nevertheless I will evaluate Hamas' behavior AFTER Israel cleans up its misbehavior, i.e., charges of antisemitism will carry vastly more weight when there are no other far-more-obvious reasons for antipathy: THE COLONIES.
If Israel withdraws to 1967 borders and changes its national security strategy from attempts to 'bludgeon acceptance of humiliated defeat into Arab consciousness by any and all means possible' to genuine efforts to make reparations to its Palestinian victims, share regional water resources, engage in mutually profitable trade, etc, etc AND Arabs don't come around after twenty years or so, then we'll talk. Until then, it's the colonies, it's the colonies, it's the colonies, and attempts to claim it is something else, while possibly true, cannot be credibly made.
I think that most Americans, myself included, would be delighted to assist a transformation of Israel into a normal nation. However, private and official political, economic, and military subsidies to a rogue warmongering relict 19th century colonial state are an unnecessary national security threat to the United States, and real American patriots will work to sever all ties between our nation and Israel until it decides to pursue a different path.
"No, Richard, both must change. "
We are in agreement.
But, I didn't see Hamas change. It CHOSE to re-escalate. I did see Israel restrain from military action for a week, pending Hamas heeding its warning that continued shelling would require a military response.
Maybe it will change now, maybe not. Maybe Israel will change now, maybe not.
Opposing "colonialism" and literally arbitrarily selecting Israel as an example of that for your only articulated dissent, is a stopper.
The rhetoric is noise. I'm sorry that you don't see that your use of the term "colonialism" is imprecise, inconsistently applied, and barely the sum of issues involved.
Israel is close to being a normal nation. One IMPORTANT element that hinders its transformation is the repeated shelling of civilians formerly by Hezbollah from Lebanon and currently by Hamas from Gaza.
ANY normal state in which its civilians are routinely shelled would be at war with its neighbors, and more vehemently than Israel. And, being at war is not by definition a normal state of affairs.
There is no "Israeli dream". There is a Zionist ideology which has manifested itself in the racist "state" of Israel.
Zionism is a racist, supremacist ideology which values Jewish lives over others. In fact, it places next to no value at all on non-Jewish lives, aside from what they can do to help the Zionist cause. It also uses many of "its own" (i.e fellow Jews) to further Zionist supremacy and enrich and empower the few at the top.
Again and again.
PROPOSE, rather than only complain.
"And, the next IMPORTANT question is how practically will the Palestinian dream be realized?"
If Bono is so concerned with Palestinians' fate, why doesn't he arrange one of his mega concerts in order to help them?
A colonial dream. A racist dream. A philanthropop nightmare.
"And, the next IMPORTANT question is how practically will the Palestinian dream be realized?"
By the one state solution, deprivileging the colonists, like in Algeria and South Africa.
Fred Hiatt reviews the Bush years, but makes no mention of Bush's management of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/16/AR2009011603871.html
Even for Phil this is really lame given that Bono referred to the Israeli dream too.
The real "sea change" is in Israel's relationship with the EU. In the past, Europe would have bashed Israel. Not today. See the lovefest in Jerusalem from European leaders to Israel.
The world is changing, indeed.
Phil's nonsense is sort of like Nasser's declaration of victory in '67, or Haniyeh's today.
And, oh by the way, in 23 days, Israel will elect Likud to lead its next government. And while there at times will be tension and disputes, the EU and the U.S. will congratulate Bibi when that happens. Phil will of course find a few fringe Jews expressing horror and declare victory again!
Palestinian Dream, Zionist Hasbara, America
Bono's a phony jerk. Even his drummer publicly asked why Bono hangs out with war criminals.
The only way Palestinians will ever have justice is through armed resistance.
They have shitty leadership though. It's too bad. I wish I could help them in some real way. Not just pissing and moaning on some blog.
They are – if we're being real here – fucked.
The Zionists have more money/guns/PR support. That's all you need.
Morality/ethics/truth have very little value in comparison.
Phil is an optimist to a fault. Who am I to tell him otherwise though? We all want to hope things will get better.
I think all the Palestinians – at once – should take up arms against every single Israeli soldier. Throw yourself at them and fight til the bitter end.
It's either you fight for your dignity and your rights as human beings, or you end up slaves. That's it. There's no need to tell ourselves the Zionists want peace. If the US doesn't act on morals, then there's no reason to give a shitty little country like Israel the benefit of the doubt.
How come Witty never mentions the blockade? Richard? Where were you all summer banging your shoe on the table, saying: "End the blockade!"?
Fuck what Witty thinks. That asshole always has some bullshit excuse for everything.
Bush was on CNN today, saying, only slightly smirking, that he was
full of self-pity, and he reckoned Obama was not–regarding the fact that the economy spiral down "happened on his watch"–as if
he had no power or authority for eight years to regulate the securities and finance industry–as if his own philosophy and that of his minions for unfettered capitalism combined with corporate power and welfare–had nothing to do with the housing bubble and
current bailout, etc…
He may as well be riding an old pickup out of the white house, with a shotgun in back, open bed, raggedy tires–and rusty bumper sticker proclaiming "shit happens" and what's that, a fish symbol sticker on there too?
This is what the American masses voted for? They deserve what they got–he's probably still going to pardon Scooter Libby too…
Obama won because of just how bad and irresponsible Shrub has been–the congress however, does not know this, the full impact and avenues of it–they think Israel First and the Fed are still sacrosanct.
We will find out if Obama will really do more to get at the roots of
the American problem, something more than ditching the bowling alley and putting in a basketball court.
"The world is changing."
Yes it is, but not in a positive way.
http://angryarab.blogspot.com/2009/01/white-man-cheers.html
Do you think anyone would be in this picture after 1982??? Now, they don't even pretend to care. And the angry masses that protest can scream till their lungs get sore. I'm afraid Palestine can't wait for Europeans to save them.
Oh, and that was in Sharm el Sheikh, BTW. Thanx a million Hosni. Whatever would they do without you?
Bono is a phony prick(and I think they are a great band, U2).
I've heard him say basically they are so prolific musically(producing and touring) is mainly because they like the mega-cash.
So that means no concert for the Palestinians anytime soon.
who gives a fuck what a sold-out asshole like bono 'thinks' about anything? Answer: phil weiss, because he is a journalistic whore with nothing substantial to say, trying to hitch a ride on a political movement he will never remotely understand, or want to understand, since for the journalistic whore, real understanding is a handicap.
@ LD: "Fuck what Witty thinks."
Big chuckle. Perhaps it is unrealistic to think that he will find himself knotted up in his own hypocrisy and slink away. But a guy has to hope, no?
Israel recruits 'army of bloggers' to combat anti-Zionist Web sites
Israel's newest PR weapon: The Internet Megaphone
I, like the majority of Jews in the world, regard the idea of Zionism as a good, the realization of Zionism as a partial good.
To be a really good realization requires internal reforms and peace with its neighbors.
It won't get peace so long as it continues expansion, or does not take other opportunities to make peace real with parties and communities that are sincerely willing to make peace.
Hamas is NOT one of those willing parties, and never has been.
That Hamas remains in control of a proto-state, but does not act like a state (in formally recognizing its neighbors, and assertively adopting terror on civilians), is a great tragedy.
Its marginalization continues so long as it undertakes that mode of "resistance".
Anger is NOT a replacement for thought.
On Israel's blockade. So long as Hamas remains at permanent war with Israel and NOT an acknowledged state, a member in good standing in the UN, Israel's blockade of Gaza seems reasonable.
Gaza has a path to improve its status, which is solely to renounce terror directed at civilians. It seems easy.
I get that they are frustrated that their status did not change significantly with the mostly kept six-month cease-fire.
They failed their test though, and NEED to improve for any reasonable basis of either sovereignty or just coexistence.
"I, like the majority of Jews in the world, regard the idea of Zionism as a good, the realization of Zionism as a partial good"
It really takes intense chauvinism against Arabs to feel this way.
"This is what the American masses voted for? They deserve what they got–he's probably still going to pardon Scooter Libby too…"
In parts of South Florida, joyous shouts of "VIVA SCOOTER LIBRE! VIVA!" can be heard echoing through the checkbooks of big time political donors.
It doesn't take chauvenism or contempt to desire to self-govern rather than be governed by something foreign (nation, idea).
Its humane to understand that different people have different basis of association than your own.
I personally prefer to live in society described as solely self-defined as civil, say US.
But, others, others that I know and respect, choose to live in other basis of governance.
A truly dissident movement would question the society that they live in (US), rather than the basis of another society (Israel).
Although I disagree with him about most everything, I think Richard Witty is a very valuable part of this blog.
http://www.amconmag.com/article/2009/jan/26/00006/
Here you go Witty.
Read that. And know that's why nobody give you and your ridiculous whining any heed.
By that analysis, Mearsheimer diminishes his reputation.
You buy his assertion of what "Israel intends"?
How does he conclude what he concludes? Don't be so gullible.
"Israel didn't favor the cease-fire". Of course not. Hamas used the cease-fire to rearm, in preparation for aggression immediately after they were not bound by their word, only their good judgement.
If the cease-fire was in their best interest for six months, why was it not in their interest for six months and a week?
I'm sorry that Mearsheimer has bought into the subjective and impossible analysis that he has. This article resembles the original London Review of Books article which caused them so much censure for their METHOD and conclusion derived from speculative method, without disclosing it as such.
You are very gullible about this.
"On Israel's blockade. So long as Hamas remains at permanent war with Israel and NOT an acknowledged state, a member in good standing in the UN, Israel's blockade of Gaza seems reasonable."
You have a right to demand that Hamas not kill Israeli civilians, but your own credibility (tattered anyway) goes right down the toilet with that remark. So Israel can have its illegal colonies on the West Bank and practice apartheid and impose a brutal sanctions regime on 1.5 million people on top of all that, because Hamas is bad? You're such a hypocrite, Richard. The sad thing is you probably don't even know it.
You buy his assertion of what "Israel intends"?
We don't buy yours, either, Richard.
You've never even mentioned Ze'ev Jabotinsky in a single comment in all of your time on Mondoweiss, Richard.
Is that because you don't know who he was, or you'd rather ignore what his philosophy "intended"?
You have no moral legitimacy to talk about Hamas, none whatsoever, so you just build greater contempt every time you mindlessly insist on the evergreen Zionist propaganda lie–that there is no partner for peace.
(You could challenge the propaganda history of your movement; you choose not to investigate.)
You may have smoked grass and pretended to be counterculture back in the day, Rich, but your subconscious is as still vile and racist as David Horowitz.
I'll say a prayer that your kids are released from your vicious trauma and grow up to be humane, inclusive, and more enlightened.
Witty you moron. Hamas poses virtually no threat to Israel.
You're like every other paranoid Jew who thinks everyone is out to exterminate them and hates them collectively for no reason.
You think the Arabs fought with the Zionists since 48 out of antisemitism?
You think they just randomly decided to wage war with Israel?
It all comes down to the expulsion and elimination of the Native population of Historic Palestine AND the Occupation.
Get your head out of your ass douchebag.
Your name-calling doesn't change the reality, and it certainly doesn't resemble my understanding or goals in the slightest.
Its irrelevant whether I mention Jabotinsky here.
I advocate for the 67 borders as solution (NOT some expansionist maze). But, I regard present residents of those jurisdictions as residents. I conclude that NONE should be forcefully removed, or subordinated in any way politically.
If you want to get to 67 borders, it is best to consider my approach.
Any approach that results in a war in the West Bank in particular, will most likely result in dispossession of Palestinians and FAR MORE restrictions.
There is BLOWBACK (a favorite word) to suggesting militant approaches.
Don't give the expansionists an excuse, like you are now.
If Israel opts to annex all of the West Bank, and dispossess the residents, it will suffer isolation, but it will remain, time will go by, generations likely, and Palestine will NOT exist as Palestine.
On my study of Israeli history. I know more incrimminating quotes and inferences than you do. I've actually read some of the originals, rather than take the quotes out of context from an activist propaganda site, or from "scholar" Pappe.
I also KNOW that Zionism was necessary following WW2, and remains necessary to those for whom self-association is important.
Those that regard Israel as not under threat are living in an opportunistic fantasy. The reality is of tension, NOT of one-sided oppression.
That Hamas CHOSE to return to shelling of civilians, rather than urging a gradual normalization of borders on the basis of trust-building (which it earned partially through the cease-fire), convinces Israelis that Hamas MEANS Israelis ill.
Whether you accuse me of bearing ill-will is irrelevant. Israel rationally perceives that many within Hamas will do anything to exact revenge, or hatred, wherever it originates.
Those with commitment to Palestinian civilians, learned by decades of social service, were silenced in the Hamas discussion. Those individuals are capable of serving their people.
The hotheads are only capable of serving their anger.
Everything ALREADY is different in historic Palestine. If you read any historians, you'd know that that LONG-TERM process is a tension of modernity with various violently conflicting pre-modern power struggles.
There is NO returning to the way things were.
It is entirely a choice of what new.
If you want to propose a civil non-nationalist democratic new as a viable alternative, wonderful. Make it happen.
It won't by suggesting hatred. That I promise.
Nothing can make a racist own his bigoted history until he himself decides to leave it behind.
He casually dismisses scholars of vastly superior qualification than himself, without even reading them, and praises the most biased and untrustworthy commentators that confirm his assumptions (Alan Dershowitz).
He doesn't realize that the sources he considers credible (NY Times, Washington Post) have long since been viewed as suspect by the informed populace.
He thinks his ethnocentrism is not out-of-step with the rest of the United States in the 21st century.
His racism is packaged inside of so many layers of indoctrinated victimization that he neither sees or understands what he is wrapped up in. He thinks of himself as fair, reasonable, moderate, and well-informed.
Dishonest with himself, and of a limited capacity to understand his own emotional politics, he should be an illustration for young Jews of what NOT to do, to avoid following the previous generation to their loathsome, paranoia-ridden ideological island.
Bullshit MM.
You don't have a clue, except to adopt to your groupthink.
Israelis are uniquely NOT paranoid. If any criticism could apply, it is that they are banal, cool.
OBSERVING that Hamas shells civilians over years, is not paranoia.
I'm sorry that you feel so wowed by Mearsheimer that you would offer obeisance at his feet.
I think his analysis is self-talk.
The river flows a different direction over the divide than his description, even if the rain were a few thousand yards east, it would flow into his reservoir.
It ain't necessarily so.
Any chance you could just dialog, rather than name-call. You might get through. You might not.
OBSERVING that Hamas shells civilians over years, is not paranoia.
Not knowing the reason why–when it is historically obvious–and then suggesting it is yet another manifestation of eternal Jew hatred is paranoid, delusional, and dysfunctional.
When you treat Palestinians like dogs, using violence and starvation, you don't engender any sympathy when you get bit.
Maybe the key is to stop treating them like dogs and admit they're humans, not just any humans, but the humans over whose ruined villages Israel has been constructed.
Self-talk is pontificating about how others must engage in vilifying Hamas, on an anti-Zionist blog no less.
Richard Witty: "I, like the majority of Jews in the world, regard the idea of Zionism as a good, the realization of Zionism as a partial good."
That's the problem, Richard. Zionism is at base an idea that incorporates the worst of both Judaism and the ideas of Western Colonialism. Until Zionism is rejected by Jews, there'll be nothing approaching peace, justice or liberty in America or the Mideast.
"Maybe the key is to stop treating them like dogs and admit they're humans, not just any humans, but the humans over whose ruined villages Israel has been constructed."
I agree.
Lets start treating them like humans, humans with rights, and humans with responsibilities.
Zionism is a national liberation movement. Like ALL assertive movements, its assertion also results in change, displacement, reordering.
I regard it as a good because of the fundamental change in consciousness from victim to free. The fulfillment of its work is to avoid the transition of free to oppressor.
So, we agree on much. We disagree on solution. My sense of the agitational solution is NOT agreement but punishment.
Your judgement of my comments cannot be based on my goal, but ONLY on the sense of irritation that I interpret events differently than an "anti-Zionist" blog. "How dare I?"
How dare I consider that Hamas acts in less than a humane manner? How dare I consider that boycott is just a form of collective punishment, in the name of opposing collective punishment.
The question then is WHAT IS PROPOSED? Is it a better solution, or just a reaction?
Israel is 'a member in good standing in the UN' ? It 'formally recognizes it's neighbours and does not assertively adopt terror on civilians?
Most of the world population ( whatever about governments) would give Israel a fail on these criteria you apply to Hamas.
The fake peacemaking (accelerating land theft while lying gleefully to the US) also make it 'not a partner for peace.'
I'm with Phil, you cannot get away with this long term. It may take decades but the longer the delay the worse the consequences.
Thanks to Stevieb for the Mearsheimer article.
The degree of land theft in Palestine has been relatively small in acres.
Its been large in location though.
Whether you give Israel a fail or not, Israel is a member in good standing in the UN, with enthusiastic support for its defense by the EU and the US and reluctant support by most states in the world.
And that is because of sympathy for the exasperation of dealing with Hamas shelling civilians.
No state knows how to deal with Hamas.
And, ALL of the EU, US and Arab states fear the increasing quite negative influence of Iran.
The geo-politics will shift over time. The acceptance of terror will never.
When Hamas rejects terror, then it will fair much better in gaining support from Europe, US and even in Israel.
Why is acknowledging the Palestinian dream such taboo? Or is the Israeli dream the only dream that ma$$ers? (I mean matters!) Pray for peace and tolerance for all people..including Israeli and Palestinian!
Richard Witty said: "When Hamas rejects terror…"
Let Israel reject terror first as they were the progenitors of it some 60+ years ago. Hamas' "terror" is merely a response.
http://original.antiwar.com/sahimi/2009/05/19/wha... What’s Netanyahu Really Afraid Of? by Muhammad Sahimi, May 20, 2009 The crux of the issue is that, Netanyahu, Israel’s military, and the War Party in the U.S. all believe that an Iran equipped with the technological capability for enriching uranium would have a credible nuclear deterrent and, therefore, would be unattackable. That scenario, as Thomas P.M. Barnett, the author of The Pentagon’s New Map: War and Peace in the Twenty-First Century, has put it, "would level the playing field by finally allowing the Muslim Middle East to sit one player at the negotiating table as Israel’s nuclear equal." Thus, Israel would no longer be able to force its will on its neighbors, a prospect that is not acceptable to the Israeli establishment and the American War Party. Such a scenario would also have another consequence. A situation in which Israel’s government maintains a permanent state of war with its neighbors, but in which Israel and the Muslims are in equilibrium militarily, would halt immigration to Israel, even reverse it. That would be the ultimate existential threat to Israel. The only realistic way to prevent this from happening is for Israel to reach a just peace with the Palestinians and Syria and give up the dream of controlling the Litani River. But, Netanyahu, the Likud, and the Israeli establishment are incapable of making these happen, and the progressive forces that could force such a solution have practically disappeared from Israel’s political scene.