Senator Harry Reid was on "Meet the Press" this morning going on and on about Hamas being the bad guy. David Gregory had the presence of mind to say, Is there any difference between you and George Bush on this question? Reid: None. Grinning like a dashboard jockey, I'm afraid.
Thereby demonstrating once again the lockstep power of Jewish cultural/financial/political influence in Middle East policy.
Reid also said that Israel could no more tolerate Hamas's rockets than the U.S. could rockets being fired from Vancouver on our towns. This is a deeply-misguided analogy. Chiefly because Canada is a nation whose people have the rights of self-determination. If a minority in Canada was aggrieved, it would bomb Ottawa, presumably. If Canadians had a shooting-grievance with the U.S., there would be war–ala the US-Mexico territorial war of 1848–and negotiation and treaty would ensue, with acceptance of borders.
The Palestinians have no state, Israel has never established its borders. The Palestinians are in a state of feudal subjection to Israel. Without human rights or civil rights. Their leaders have no ability to exercise sovereignty over their own affairs.
And so the better analogy is to black people in the urban ghettoes in the 60s and 70s at the time of the riots. I saw this in Baltimore growing up, where I was a black-sympathizer. There was a divide between blacks and whites (still is, of course, but then it was even more rancorous) and blacks felt disenfranchised. (The sprinters' fists during the National Anthem at the Mexico Olympics.) There was some black-on-white crime at that time that surely had a political character. I bet it killed as many whites as the rockets aimed at Southern Israel.
And imagine if at that time, in retaliation for such attacks, the police had entered the ghettoes and destroyed the infrastructure and slaughtered hundreds of blacks. Of course it is unimaginable, even in the U.S. And actually, when something like that did happen, during the 60s in the South, you saw the overwhelming response from northern liberals. And the neocons of course were for draconian measures.
My analogy holds in that sense too: We are about to see in America, huge political/social division over this issue, the treatment by Israel of the Arabs under its power.
Why can't Israel's crimes stand on their own? I see no reason to constantly make inexact comparisons to the U.S. And I'm not sure the polcemen of any region of the U.S. had the ability to destroy the infrastructure of a city.
"Thereby demonstrating once again the lockstep power of Jewish cultural/financial/political influence in Middle East policy."
Or, the reasonableness of the thesis.
Phil's point was that the analogy to blacks before the Civil Rights movement took hold in the mid-60s is more on four legs than all the very shallow analogies the
status quo American politicians are
making on TV, even as I type here.
The point, Dear Todd, is that Israel is not standing on its own; its
fully funded by US taxpayers and, indirectly, by the lives of US troops
and treasure in Iraq. And all our federal reps are doing is telling us
Israel is merely defending itself–like we would do if Canadians, or Mexicans etc lobbed rockets over the border. This is a total
disrespect to the American Public, who need objective information to act as viable citizens in our nation's best interest, and according to the USA's declared highest values.
Interestingly, Obama is on board with the status quo BS by both
his statements during the campaign, his hires, and his total silence in the name of "one Prez at a time" while he has spoken
up during his transition on other matters conflicting with Bush.
McKinney's statements and actions regarding Gaza should be
compared to Obama's.
Obama stated publicly he put his feet and those of his lovely daughters in the shoes of families in Israel towns subjected to
HAMAS rockets. He's said nothing about innocent Palestinian families–no public empathy declared there by Mr. Change, even as the attrition rate keeps going up at more than a 100:1….
Phil,
The 1948 conflict with Mexico WAS a war for territory, a colonial war, executed by the United States.
Most of California, Arizona, Colorado, Utah, New Mexico, Texas, Nevada, is historical Mexico.
And, prior to that it was conquered by the Spanish and partially French.
And, prior to that one native tribe conquered others.
And, prior to that was ice age, blocking the link between the Bering land bridge through which was the only path that humans have ever ventured to the western hemisphere.
The Baltimore black analogy is interesting but NOT parallel. When riots did break out, most of it was black on black which was left to simmer. When riots expanded outside of the ghetto, they were put down forcibly, which was the reluctant right thing to do in response to rage-driven or organized violence.
Your parents were probably afraid for you, which is a good thing.
Carrying the 1960s urban ghetto analogy a little further … the Kerner Commission never adequately explained the root causes of riots in Watts, Detroit, Newark, and numerous other cities. The 1967 riots in Newark, for instance, left 26 dead, 725 injured, close to 1,500 arrested, and property damage exceeding $10 million, with some 21 blocks along a major street partially or completely burnt out. Not quite Gaza-scale destruction, but then the rioters didn't have missiles either.
Curiously, these riots occurred AFTER major civil rights gains in Congress, and BEFORE the murder of Martin Luther King. The backdrop, in other words, seemed to be improving, yet tensions flared instead of ameliorating.
In today's considerably less-favorable employment conditions, I wonder how Obama supporters will react when their hopes are dashed. When it is demonstrated that Obama's skin pigmentation signifies absolutely nothing in terms of solidarity with working people, or with oppressed minorities anywhere.
Will the urban riots, which vanished as mysteriously as they came, flare again?
Will Barack Dubya Oreobama handle them any better than Lyndon B. Johnson, who had to ditch the notion of running for a second elected term? The Viceroy of Vietghanistan needs to ponder these issues, while there's still 'one pretzeldent at a time.'
The comparison is simply an attempt to borrow some pre-existing, though largely narcissistic, jewish-american synthetic mass media radical chic, and pretend it applies to hamas (not really your eldridge cleaver types). I'm taking this site off my bookmarks. It is a total wank, frankly.
I doubt that ANY black activist organization that Phil was sympathetic with, attempted to bomb his local Jewish Community Center during a dance.
Words MEAN something.!!!!!
I'm thinking a better analogy is the Nat Turner rebellion of 1831.
Michael Oren, dual citizen par extraordinaire, just said on CNN "that Israel had learned a great deal" since the defeat by Hesbollah.
YEAH! ISRAEL LEARNED TO SHOOT FISH IN A BARREL! LEARNED TO ATTACK 1.5 MILLION PEOPLE WITHOUT A POT TO PISS IN! LEARNED TO PUT A BLITZKRIEG ON THE WEAKEST OPPONENT IT COULD FIND!
SHAME ON ISRAEL AND SHAME ON JEWS EVERYWHERE!
link to rawstory.com
rel=”nofollow”>
LEAKED: Graphic, uncensored video shows carnage in Gaza
THIS IS FRIKKIN' UNBELIEVABLE. THIS HAPPENED YESTERDAY! This is what Israel is doing and some people on this commenting site can defend this? Any sentient being can defend this? I defy you to watch it. Then read this from Haaretz the day before this carnage:
link to haaretz.com
rel=”nofollow”>IDF admits to overestimating Gaza rocket severity…
Glenn Greenwald has just unraveled the riddle of our resident zionist recidivist, Richard "0 credibility" Witty:
I was trained from an early age to view this group as my group, to identify with them emotionally, culturally, religiously. Maybe that — and not an objective assessment of these events — is why I continuously side with that group and see everything from its perspective and justify whatever it does, why I find the Dick Cheney/Weekly Standard/neoconservative worldview repellent in every situation except when it comes to Israel, when I suddenly find it wise and vigorously embrace it.
Now there you go, Mister Witty, something to discuss with your
IDF infatuated sons who wouldn't dream of joining the US military–yes, words MEAN something; so try on cogit8's for size.
Since I'm sure Richard wants to read it, here's the link to Greenwald's excellent piece–
Blinding Tribalism
Tipsy: "Israel's only objective is to stop the threat of rockets from Gaza."
Translation: We tried making Gaza into a concentration camp wizout the gas-chambers and ovens. It didn't vork. Ve haff now to try ze final solution.
'Richardson withdraws as Commerce secretary'
Saw this headline, and imagined it was the first resignation on principle — a cabinet member who won't be a party to slaughter, as the president-elect remains disgracefully silent.
WRONG-O! Nope, Bill's on the hook for possibly being a crook. Shades of Blago/Chicago.
Bad enough that Obama's already proving a spineless wimp. But if he turns out to be mafia as well, like the Bush clan, we are really screwed.
Lawyers' statements always have to be parsed carefully. Maybe he meant 'change for the worse.' Silly us, shoulda paid attention …
SHAME ON ISRAEL AND SHAME ON JEWS EVERYWHERE!
Posted by: cogit8 | January 04, 2009 at 01:22 PM
Regarding 9/11 murder of 3,000 by Muslim Terrorists:
SHAME ON ISLAMIC FUNDAMENTALISTS AND SHAME ON MUSLIMS EVERYWHERE!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBOd1XB943o&feature=related
Both are bullshit – as is much out of your fingers cogit8
"The comparison is simply an attempt to borrow some pre-existing, though largely narcissistic, jewish-american synthetic mass media radical chic, and pretend it applies to hamas (not really your eldridge cleaver types). I'm taking this site off my bookmarks. It is a total wank, frankly."
I'm with Rowan and Witty here–Phil's analogy is simply foolish.
The war in Gaza is a serious conflict between serious opponents. Reifying it through mouldy leftist liberationist ideology and identity politics does nothing to clarify the situation.
"The comparison is simply an attempt to borrow some pre-existing, though largely narcissistic, jewish-american synthetic mass media radical chic, and pretend it applies to hamas (not really your eldridge cleaver types). I'm taking this site off my bookmarks. It is a total wank, frankly."
I'm with Rowan and Witty here–Phil's analogy is simply foolish.
The war in Gaza is a serious conflict between serious opponents. Reifying it through mouldy leftist liberationist ideology and identity politics does nothing to clarify the situation.
The analogy is problematic because African-Americans whether or militant or not wanted the US to live up to its ideals.
For Israel to live up to Zionist ideals it would have to set up death camps on a scale that the German Nazis never achieved.
Jewish and non-Jewish opponents of the actions of the State of Israel have to become far more explicit in stating that Zionism is ethnic Ashkenazi Nazism, which is far more dangerous and far more clever than German Nazism ever was. See Blaming Jews for Financial Meltdown.
BTW, the Jewish Zionists that need to be purged from the newspaper industry are the sort that would hire Bill Kristol or Jeff Jacoby while refusing to employ Philip Weiss.
We always hear that THE great merit of Israel is that it has the only democratically chosen governemnt in the Middle East. It is interesting that this 'democracy' is now trying to crush the only democratically chosen Arab government in the Middle East. No wonder that it has the tacit and not so tacit support of the Arab dictatorships in this enterprise. Joseph Massad wrote an enlightening article on this:
BTW (1), the proper American analogy for Hamas are probably Nat Turner, Denmark Vesey and other heroic slave opponents of North American slavery.
BTW (2),
Roseanne Barr blasts Israel as 'Nazi state'. Will more Americans of Jewish ancestry have the guts to stand up to Zionist intimidation and state the obvious?
Phil,
You've got it all backwards.
It's the Israelis who are the brothers. Check it out
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDu1U0EPImE&feature=channel
or just click my name
Gaza is analogous to an erupting black ghetto, tired of being the cheap labor force; and Jewish Zionists and Christian Zionists are to blame:
http://freethinker.co.uk/2009/01/03/roseanne-barr-tears-into-âzionist-nazisâ-and-fundamentalist-christians/
Straight from the turkeys caught in the American-sponsored shoot to G-D's ear:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5osk2toY1E&feature=related
Nowhere to run, nowhere to hide–
that shitty little coutry ought to be held accountable for its sins against humanity.
that shitty little country.
MM
when I tried your link to the 'graphic' footage, I got this:
Not Found
The requested URL /mondoweiss/2009/01/ââ¬Ålink to rawstory.com
was not found on this server.
so I googled for better link –
http://sabbah.biz/mt/archives/2009/01/04/what-israel-dont-want-you-to-see/
It is poor quality, but horrifying. We stand behind this carnage, and one day children that survive atrocities like this will come hunting for our children. We will call them 'terrorists', which will be small comfort as you try, like some of the people in that video, to caress those bloody parts of your child which remain.
My guess is we, like them, will be looking for someone to blame.
"The point, Dear Todd, is that Israel is not standing on its own; its
fully funded by US taxpayers and, indirectly, by the lives of US troops
and treasure in Iraq. And all our federal reps are doing is telling us
Israel is merely defending itself–like we would do if Canadians, or Mexicans etc lobbed rockets over the border. This is a total
disrespect to the American Public, who need objective information to act as viable citizens in our nation's best interest, and according to the USA's declared highest values."
Anonn, Phil's anaolgy doesn't work, and if he is calling for Israel to stand alone, then maybe he should also call for Israel to be judged on its own merits.
I don't see a whole lot of difference between claiming that Israel has the same interests as the U.S., and claiming that our histories are parallel. I think that each claim is often made for similar reasons, in order to bind the two nations together.
Also, civil rights rebellions or slave revolts in the U.S. were never about land, removal or expansion. And local police forces never had the ability to destroy cities or whole populations.
"The point, Dear Todd, is that Israel is not standing on its own; its
fully funded by US taxpayers and, indirectly, by the lives of US troops
and treasure in Iraq. And all our federal reps are doing is telling us
Israel is merely defending itself–like we would do if Canadians, or Mexicans etc lobbed rockets over the border."
Ive always thought Israel to be more like the Diem led South Vietnam during the early 60s. To save a bunch of capitalists and its corrupt government the Americans had to come in and kill 3 million people over a decade all in the name of bringing them peace and posterity (which they still dont enjoy). The Diem government was so fragile that it wouldve been wiped out in a second if it didnt enjoy massive subsidies from the Americans.
"We always hear that THE great merit of Israel is that it has the only democratically chosen governemnt in the Middle East. It is interesting that this 'democracy' is now trying to crush the only democratically chosen Arab government in the Middle East. No wonder that it has the tacit and not so tacit support of the Arab dictatorships in this enterprise. Joseph Massad wrote an enlightening article on this:"
Hmmm I can remember reading something along the lines of "democracies rarely go to war against each other" This puts that idea in a a new light.