MJ Rosenberg gets read inside the Beltway, and inside the lobby, too, and in this column on the end of negotiations for the 2-state-solution, he seems to be preparing power types for the one-state solution. An important signal to the forces of rejection in Washington. Note the radical principles that Rosenberg invokes: "basic human rights." The question here is whether American Jews (the only game in town, in my view) will marry Netanyahu’s institutionalized dont-worry-be-happy apartheid. Or will they take up the struggle against it. Rosenberg:
Netanyahu’s announcement yesterday that Israel intends to annex Ariel, a West Bank settlement of 15,000 that is 25 miles deep into the West Bank, could be the death knell for negotiations. The Ariel announcement means that the borders of Israel would extend so far into the West Bank that a contiguous Palestinian state could not be created…
Are [Palestinians] completely without recourse?
Not at all.
They can demand their rights without reference to statehood and without negotiations to achieve them. That means they punt on the question of one state, two states, or three states (don’t forget Gaza). They demand their rights whether they are exercised within Israel or within their own country. After all, basic human rights are guaranteed to all people, whether in their own state or as a minority in another country.
These rights are specifically guaranteed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which was ratified by the United Nations with the support of, among others, the United States and Israel. (It was written by Eleanor Roosevelt, the US delegate).
The rights it guarantees (the right to vote, equality before the law, freedom of movement and resistance, peaceful assembly and association, the right to own property and not to be deprived of it, among others) are precisely the rights denied to the Palestinians of Gaza, West Bank, and East Jerusalem.
Why shouldn’t the Palestinians demand these rights, laying aside the question of a state with internationally recognized borders until the Israelis are ready to seriously discuss returning to the pre-’67 borders?…
What would happen is that the Palestinians would go to the United Nations, to the European Union, and even to the United States to seek those consequences. And these would most likely come in the demand for sanctions. [Here's Rosenberg's news alert:] There is already a burgeoning BDS (Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions) movement that is seeking to bring down the occupation the way a similar movement brought down apartheid.
Yeah, I won’t hold my breath waiting for Americans to care about basic human rights when their own are not in jeopardy (which they are, but they don’t know it).
Getting to the truth of “why” people are willing to blow themselves up to take out Americans. “core motivations”
link to consortiumnews.com
Former CIA analyst Ray McGovern
“Answering Helen Thomas on Why?”
As for media squelching, I continue to be amazed at how otherwise informed folks express total surprise when I refer them to Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s statement about his motivation for attacking the United States, as cited on page 147 of the 9/11 Commission Report:
“By his own account, KSM’s animus toward the United States stemmed not from his experience there as a student, but rather from his violent disagreement with U.S. foreign policy favoring Israel.”
And one can understand how even those following such things closely can get confused. Five years after the 9/11 Commission Report, on Aug. 30, 2009, readers of the neoconservative Washington Post were given a diametrically different view, based on what the Post called “an intelligence summary:”
“KSM’s limited and negative experience in the United States — which included a brief jail stay because of unpaid bills — almost certainly helped propel him on his path to becoming a terrorist … He stated that his contact with Americans, while minimal, confirmed his view that the United States was a debauched and racist country.”
Americans really do need to get a clue.
Obama’s answer to the young lady who asked a question about US support of Israel’s violations of human rights demonstrates the distance America’s national discourse must go before the conflict starts seeing actual change on such issues, at least from a public opinion perspective.
Yes. He totally ignored the thrust of what she asked. He even told her he was doing so by telling her he was going to take the liberty of addressing her question in a general way; then he spit out the standard hasbara spiel every American politician knows by heart. He’s a real hack. Bush Jr would have said the exact same thing.
Is the question whether Jews will accord “basic human rights” to “the other”? Is this encouraging?:
link to haaretz.com
Madonna has a large 3-ply supply.
Hillel on human rights: “If I am only for myself, then who am I?”
And at the same time, that was preceded by “If I am not for myself, who will be for me?” (Im En Annie Lee, Me Lee) – meaning, if I don’t look out for my own interests, then who will?
“And if I am only for myself, then who am I? And if not now, then when?”
It is important to appreciate that these came together, though the first is often quoted without regard to the second. The point being that if occupation and ethnic cleansing becomes self-interest and human rights are discarded, whither Judaism?
Imagine what Hillel would say if he were living today?
But *human* rights are for humans, and everyone knows that Arabs aren’t humans.
Zionism, like the movement it aped way back in the days of origin, had a narrow definition of humanism. One morality for you, another for me. What, you say
if an ethic is not universal, it’s not really an ethic? Kant hear you.
RE: “After all, basic human rights are guaranteed to all people, whether in their own state or as a minority in another country…” – MJ
BUT SEE: Apartheid at the Israeli High Court, By URI WEISS, 01/28/10
(EXCERPT)…By doing so, the HCJ has completed the edifice of Apartheid which it had been building. Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty is not applicable to all those who are regarded as human beings by a humanist attitude. Neither are the boundaries of its jurisdiction geographic, like the green line. Instead, they are substantively ethnic. A Jewish settler will be protected by the basic law – both in the territories and in Israel. Her Palestinian neighbor’s rights, which should follow from the basic law, either inside Israel or in the occupied territories, have yet to be decided…
ENTIRETY – link to counterpunch.org
thanks to whomever posted link to Five Sisters video. It introduced me to the concept of hafrada link to en.wikipedia.org
Israel’s apartheid character is not accidental, it was first envisioned and theorized, then tactics were designed based on the vision, then the policy was implemented.
The MSM, even (or most critically) C-Span, do not know, understand, or use the words of apartheid — hasbara, The Iron Wall, hafrada.
Phil is educating the media.
Thanks, Phil.
If the people lead, the leaders will follow….
Hey what’s wrong with separate but equal when one has the power and economic
ability? Listen up to Boss Hog.
America First you are displaying basic ignorance of under-developed countries’ lavatory practices. 90% of them WASH their assholes after shitting, instead of using tissue paper.
Amongst that 90% are most Muslims. Modern Muslim homes put a waste basket to the right of the bog, to take the dry tissues that will be burned every other day. They don’t appreciate tissues being thrown down the hole.
If Hasidic admorim are talking about tearing up toilet paper in advance of the Sabbath then they are seriously mentally depraved.
Sorry, got that wrong The tissue dump is to the left of the bog, not the right.
Muslims, sensibly, use one hand (the right, for eating, and the left for other purposes).
geography and culture: Saudi Arabia, Iran, the Emirates — they’re deserts. Water is of critical importance for human survival, not to be wasted washing bits of paper down a pipe.
Yeah, an the flush toilet itself costs decent money.
I don’t see the implications for a single state proposal in the article.
Netanyahu’s announcement yesterday that Israel intends to annex Ariel, a West Bank settlement of 15,000 that is 25 miles deep into the West Bank, could be the death knell for negotiations. The Ariel announcement means that the borders of Israel would extend so far into the West Bank that a contiguous Palestinian state could not be created…
Witty, at a certain point in actual real estate, there’s not enough land to erect either a viable solid building or a viable sovereign state.
What do you think you gain by your comment?
Citizen whatever else, KSM’s trial, whether held at the ‘scene of the crime’ in New York, or anywhere else, will be a show trial of an already notorious terrorist.
Most of us will remember the only photo published
link to rds.yahoo.com
which shows clearly that if he wasn’t a terrorist, then he should be. He was subjected to no less than 183 waterboardings, which proved it.
link to emptywheel.firedoglake.com
I would love to see his trial in a non-Military court, a trial where he could say whatever he wants in his own defense and that would be broadcast over all USA air waves–let the TV pundits
say what they want. Americans need to hear him out.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was not written by Eleanor Roosevelt, but by John Peters Humphrey (first draft) and René Cassin (final version).
Psychopathic god The tissue vs washing issue after defecating is not just a question of lack of water. In the Philippines, we have plenty of it. I have measured 18 inches of rain over 24 hours several times. My own (rented) home’s ‘Comfort Room’ has a china toilet bowl, but no flushing system apart from a large plastic bin kept full of water and a tabo or plastic dipper used to flush the toilet pan. Most Filipinos crouch with their feet on the rim of the toilet bowl and wash their backsides afterwards. Public loos are usually of the footprint/hole type, with a water tap within reach. When I travel, I carry my own roll of tissue paper.