The attack on Syria was the neocon’s way of asserting their position of dominance within the US government. It was a signal to the winner of next week’s election that the winner would have to deal with the neocon’s reality of foreign policy and not with any campaign promises, and that reality is there will be no reconciliation with the Syrian government ever and that US troops will not leave Iraq anytime soon. I disagree with fellow blogger Xymphora who seems to think Obama’s supposed imminent victory means a demise of neocon control over government, but I do agree with Xymp’s statement that ‘peace is the death of zionism’, hence why else would America attack a government that has shown a willingness to be at peace with its neighbors and America’s allies, unless that ally (Israel) doesn’t want peace. The excuse that the attack was against infiltrators into Iraq from Syria has also been thoroughly discounted.
A top US commander Thursday voiced optimism US troop levels could be cut substantially in western Iraq particularly after provincial elections in the former insurgent stronghold.
Marine Corps Major General John Kelly, who commands the 25,000 US troops in the west, said the tally of security incidents had fallen so low as to be “almost meaningless now.”
“So I would say that I’m very optimistic that we could start to reduce numbers,” he said.
In fact, one could view this attack as a shot across the bow of certain elements within even the military that talk of troop reductions and stability are not consistent with the program of instability and perpetual war that has fueled both the Israeli government and now our own.
There is the possibility that whoever was killed was an enemy to both Syria and the US and as such was a targeted assassination agreed upon by both parties. As with so much about Mid East occurrences that will never be known; however the message is that the US is in Iraq to stay, regardless of the Maliki government’s decision on the SOFA agreement that for the moment is dead. That reality has been foisted on the winner of Tuesday’s election whether he likes it or not.
At first glance, the headline ‘When Settlers Strike, Palestinians Point and Shoot back’ had a hopeful ring about it, but this is the Israeli-Palestinian conflict we are talking about here and for the moment there’s nothing hopeful about that.
Video cameras like hers have emerged as a new nonviolent weapon for West Bank Palestinians – who face a rising number of attacks at the hands of settlers anxious over their fate in Israeli-Palestinian peace talks. But the Palestinian video footage often ends up on Israeli TV, thus becoming a tool for both deterrence and justice.
“We’re trying to use the cameras to reduce the level of violence as a whole. When settlers see the camera, we hope that they will behave less violently,” says Sarit Michaeli, the spokeswoman for Btselem.
“We also want to use the footage to provide to the Israeli media to raise awareness of the problems and to pressure the law enforcement bodies to do their job.”
Btselem has given out 150 cameras as part of its Shooting Back program that started slowly last year and is beginning to show results. Already, footage shot by Palestinians has been used in at least 20 cases involving settler violence.
In any other society I would think that non-violent resistance could make a dent in the morality of the greater society, but that doesn’t seem to work in this conflagration, because all too often camera men and women are shot and their images so clouded in claim and counter claim minutae the impact of the captured images is lost. Fadel Shana’s death was caught by his own camera and there was no mistaking who murdered him, but of course Shana’s offense was he was carrying a “camera” the IDF confused for some sort of weapon that he should not have been pointing at a tank that could more clearly see him through its “camera” than he it through his, and so deserved to die. Of course the people responsible for his murder were let off without even a reprimand because his execution was “sound“.
Amnesty remains extremely concerned that Israeli military personnel continue to operate unaccountably in Gaza. In April this year, for example, a Reuters cameraman – Fadel Shana – was killed by an Israeli tank shell in Gaza despite clearly displaying ‘TV-Press’ on his flak jacket and nearby vehicle.
Two Palestinian children – Ahmad Farajallah and Ghassan Khaled Abu ‘Ataiwi – were also killed in the attack that killed Shana and several other people were also injured. Shana and the two children were killed by a ‘flechette’ shell containing up to 5,000 5cm-long steel darts (or flechettes) that spread over an area as big as a football pitch when fired. These munitions are notoriously imprecise and should never be used in areas populated with civilians. In this case the Israeli army later wrote to Reuters saying it had investigated the incident saying the decision to attack the journalist was ‘sound’.
So far this year more than 420 Palestinians (including some 80 children) have been killed by Israeli forces, and 30 Israelis killed by Palestinian groups. Most of these deaths (some 385) occurred in Gaza. Amnesty International remains concerned at a widespread failure to bring people to justice for unlawful killings.
So, with this as background, the introduction of more video “vigilantes” as they most probably will be called, or worse, “video terrorists” is being heralded as a non-violent response to settler aggression?
“We’re trying to use the cameras to reduce the level of violence as a whole. When settlers see the camera, we hope that they will behave less violently,” says Sarit Michaeli, the spokeswoman for Btselem.
When has that happened in the history of this conflict?? Is that a duh moment or what? For perspective one only need to ask Salam Amira whose story we highlighted earlier this year.
“Since my video was shown, the soldiers shoot at our house all the time,” she said. The shattered and cracked windows at the front of the building confirm her story. “When we leave the windows open, they fire tear gas inside too.”
Doesn’t seem like her possessing a camera and filming the shooting of a neighbor’s ‘big toe’ did either the neighbor or her any good. You can see what she filmed here.
I’m sure the folks passing out the cameras are aware of all this, so why do they insist on this form of protest? I can only think they might be saying to themselves if enough images of Israeli oppression are shown to enough people it will have a positive influence on the “peace process”, but in fact, Israelis are not like Americans of the 50s and sixties. They are much more steeped in the dehumanization of their opponent, the Palestinian, and far more willing to accept the inhumane treatment he receives at their hand wihtout any conscious about it more so than his American counterpart. It’s that difference which makes both countries so special; no doubt the organizers of this “event” want to influence Israeli as well as American public opinion, but American opinion is controlled by a corporate media which is beholden to American politicians heavily lobbied by special interests which have reduced the atrocities of the aggressor and turned them into the aggression of the victim. It’s gonna’ take more than cameras to change that.
Our friends across the “pond” just can’t quite fully understand the nuances of “Free Speech”.
Guardian Held Hostage by Islamophobic Pressure Group
In what can only be described as a shocking glimpse into Zionist lobbying at the heart of British media, the Guardian last week dismissed an Iranian contributor after a group of pro-war, Islamophobic Neocons accused her of anti-Semitism.
Soraya Terani, an Iranian mother who lives and works in London at a children’s charity, was commissioned to write 2 pieces to Comment Is Free (CIF) chronicling the routine horrors endured by Arab women whose lives have been ravaged by the US and Israeli invasion. But then, due to mounting pressure from Zionist “watchdogs” and blogs her pieces were dropped. Seemingly, Terani also posted comments on an open blog forum which, according to editor Matt Seaton, betrayed all the hallmarks of ‘anti-Semetic racist discourse’.
The media of Europe expects to be able to ‘dump’ on groups of people it chooses, Muslims, Asians, Africans, et.al and to censure others for dumping on groups of their choosing, the Vatican, Jews and Israel. The hypocrisy is rather stark and obvious and I’m sure the editors and reporters know this, but agenda driven journalism makes it easy to forget.
Once a supporter of John Mccain, and who knows he might still be, who has fallen off the radar, while Bill Ayers takes on prominence within the McCain/Palin ticket. Funny how that happens!
President Peres of Israel met for the first time with Governor Palin and her running mate John McCain at the international gathering known as the Clinton Global Initiative, hosted by Bill Clinton. “I wanted to meet you for many years,” Ms. Palin told Mr. Peres, according to an aide to the president. “The only flag at my office is an Israeli flag,” she was quoted as saying, “and I want you to know and I want Israelis to know that I am a friend.”
Since the end of the article below says the game became popular because of bloggers who linked to it, let me be one of the bloggers who links to it, not because I want people to play the game which features killing Muslims but because I want someone to hack the game and change the players around a bit. Let’s see how quickly the game would come down if it featured Christians and Muslims killing Sikhs and Jews, or hmm..let’s say Sikhs and Muslims killing Christians and Hindus, or Hindus and Sikhs killing Jews and Buddhists or Muslims killing Jews, or better yet, Palestinians killing Israelis or Anglicans killing Roman Catholics. Here’s the article.
A computer game in which players control an American soldier sent to “wipe out the Muslim race” has been condemned as offensive and tasteless by a British Muslim group.
The goal of Muslim Massacre, which can be downloaded for free on the internet, is to “ensure that no Muslim man or woman is left alive”, according to the game’s creator.
Players control an “American Hero” armed with a machine gun and rocket launcher who is parachuted into the Middle East.
Users progress through levels, first killing Arabs that appear on screen and later taking on Osama bin Laden, Mohammed and finally Allah.
The game’s creator, a freelance programmer known as Sigvatr, described the game on the SomethingAwful.com website as “fun and funny”.
In a “How you can help” section, he writes to visitors: “Don’t whinge about how offensive and ‘edgy’ this is.”
British Muslim youth organisation The Ramadhan Foundation expressed its “deep condemnation and anger” at the game.
The group said: “This game is glorifying the killing of Muslims in the Middle East and we urge ISP providers to take action to remove this site from their services as it incites violence towards Muslims and is trying to justify the killing of innocent Muslims.
“We have written to the British Government to urge an inquiry into this game and take action to shut down the site. This is not satire but a deliberate attempt to demonise Muslims.”
The foundation’s chief executive, Mohammed Shafiq, added: “Encouraging children and young people in a game to kill Muslims is unacceptable, tasteless and deeply offensive.
“There is an increase in violence in this country and some of it comes from video games. When kids spend six hours a day on violent games they are more likely to go outside and commit violence.
“If it was the other way around, with a game featuring Muslims killing Israelis or Americans, there would be uproar and rightly so.
“I would urge ISPs to take action against sites like this and there can be no justification for this sort of video game. I hope the person who made this game thinks again.”
The game was first released in January this year but has become more popular in recent days after being linked to by several prominent blogs.
After just posting a blog about how one’s mouth can get them in trouble, I read where an old Israeli spy master is advocating the kidnapping of Iranian president Ahmedinejad to be taken to the Hague to stand trial for genocide. Rafi Eitan has been all over the Israeli landscape but he’s most notable for being involved with Jonathan Pollard the American accused of spying for Israel. ABCNews ran the story so someone is listening to this 80 plus old guy who really shouldn’t throw stones at other nations’ leaders; Ariel Sharon is still alive, albeit comatose, who Eitan should put on the first plane! Otherwise, Israel should put a gag on this guy and put him out to pasture, or make glue out of him.
It’s nice to see some people other than Muslims get mad when their religious figures are poked fun at. When Muslims get hot and bothered about ridiculing the Last Messenger, many see it as an attack on free speech and the end of days prophecy, but when the attacks are made against members of other faiths, it’s perfectly alright to fire the offender or have them arrested. Fine, no problem, so let’s fire the guy with the stupid cartoons which depicted Muhammad, and while we’re at it, throw him in jail too!
Islam is a moderate voice on the American stage, despite the screeching of some who use it to scare and intimidate Americans into self-serving goals that have more to do with politics than the preservation of the American fabric. Mohammad Qatanani was a target used by such people who wanted him to be a poster boy for their hate, claiming he was a member of Hamas who hid his affiliation with that organization in order to infiltrate America and spread his Islamic deception far and wide throughout this country. But by their works you shall know them or something like comes from the good book as Qatanani who cooperated with US authorities encouraged everyone else to do the same despite all the hate filled rhetoric directed towards him. In so doing he gained the admiration and respect of FBI agents, Jewish Rabbis, and local, state and federal members of the legislative branches of government, even though there were others in government, notably the Department of Homeland Security who wanted Qatanani deported. Well, the news is he won’t be, or at least not for now, although DHS still has 30 days to appeal a judge’s decision that their case was weak and without merit and Qatanani can stay put in the US.
A prominent Muslim cleric, celebrated for his moderation by supporters but accused of ties to a terrorist group by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, today won his bid to call the United States his permanent home.
In his 69-page decision, Immigration Judge Alberto Riefkohl said Homeland Security officials had presented a case weak on evidence and credibility in their effort to cast Imam Mohammad Qatanani as someone who had had ties to Hamas, a Palestinian terrorist organization, and who had lied about it to obtain a so-called green card here.
Riefkohl, often using blunt language in his written decision, said that records obtained by Homeland Security officials from Israeli authorities were “too unreliable to prove that Mr. Qatanani has engaged in terrorist activities.”
He added: “The court also finds DHS’s other evidence is insufficient.”
Outside court on the 11th floor the Peter F. Rodino Federal Building in Newark, the imam’s supporters praised the decision, and said it would bolster their community’s faith in the U.S. justice system. Many Muslims and Arabs saw the government’s deportation effort as evidence that Muslims and Arabs, regardless of their views, are stereotyped as terrorist, or terrorist sympathizers.
Aref Assaf, head of the American Arab Forum in Paterson, said earlier that the case had been watched closely by Muslims and Arabs across the United States as well as overseas.
“We have been working well with the FBI, the U.S. Attorney’s office, and immigration, mostly because of the imam and his encouragement to us to cooperate and work with the government,” Assaf explained.
This of course is not the image the government wants you to have, a cooperating, civic minded Islam that identifies itself with the environment in which it voluntarily places itself. Instead Islam has to be defiant, menacing, uncooperative, in order to propel the propaganda that it’s a threat to the survival of the nation. In that sense, Qatanani is one that escaped the snare of the government’s trap and most likely will live to tell about it. Congratulations to him, his family, friends and supporters. Ramadan will have just a little more meaning for them and America will be a better place because of that.
I am never surprised at the inhumanity of the Israeli killing machine. What does surprise me is how well it’s covered up and passed over by the entire world community. Almost no one wants to talk about or expose the atrocities taking place at the hands of the utterly lawless Israeli military community. This latest news item is as disgusting as all the rest.
We all remember this video of the bound and blindfolded Palestinian man in Israeli custody who was shot at point blank range by an Israeli soldier. At the time of this occurrence/atrocity my only reaction was he should be thankful he wasn’t shot and killed. (Enter ‘palestinian shot by israeli soldier’ for a youtube.com video search and you’ll get 105 hits, some of them of fatalities) What didn’t even cross my mind was the origins of the video and the person who shot and exposed it. Now, her story has come to light and it’s as dastardly a story as the events videotaped. There’s no doubt this story will not get the attention katusha rockets shot onto Israeli territory receive and more than likely one of the members of this family will wind up dead and their death equally ignored but Salam Amira is a mujahidah in every sense of the word as well as a victim of Israeli terrorism. Would that we could convince George Bush to wage one of his divinely inspired wars on terrorism against them.
Hat tip to this blogger for exposing a rather strange, bizarre and macabre travel tour, euphemistically called the ‘ultimate mission‘ whose features include:
Inside tour of the IAF unit who carries out targeted killings.
Live exhibition of penetration raids in Arab territory.
Observe a trial of Hamas terrorists in an IDF military court.
and when you get tired of all that real world entertainment you can retire to your five star Sheraton Plaza Jerusalem hotel accommodations and return to the world of make believe.
I ran across comments at one of my favorite blog sites, Xymphora, talking about the media’s treatment of Israel. We all know that generally the media has a very kid glove approach to Israel, however there is a very healthy skepticism about Israel in the blogsphere and an exploration of issues corporate media simply refuses to touch. My interests were more than a little aroused when I ran across articles that spoke of the Fairness Doctrine and net neutrality implying that the call for the “Fairness Doctrine” by politicians might infringe upon the more vibrant discussions that take place on the net and in the blogsphere. I was happy to read that bloggers themselves were the first to oppose this idea of net neutrality. I’m left wondering whether the real reason for mentioning this possibility by an FCC commissioner was to frighten some away from a particular politician or party or was this a genuine threat/concern? In any event back to my discussion about Israel, it’s a sure bet any government intrusion onto internet content will more positively affect Israel’s position on the internet than what we already have in main stream media. Here is how some think corporate media deals with the recalcitrant Israelis.
Any news program which deserves special citation for being produced from an Israeli perspective should follow these rules: never mention the word “occupation,” nor the conditions that Palestinians are forced to endure when speaking about the West Bank and Gaza; if you address the issue of casualties suffered by innocent Palestinians as a result of Israeli military offenses, always give the Israelis time to appear “aware and troubled” and to claim they do everything possible to minimize “collateral damage”; never mention anything negative or embarrassing about the Israeli armed forces which cannot be dismissed as an unfortunate mistake. Finally, and this is key, always express that the targeted enemy is “Hitler” and that the military action under consideration will prevent another Holocaust.
I first saw speculation about Israel possibly conducting a false flag operation and blaming Iran in order to get the US to retaliate, and thought nothing of it. However, I ran across an interview a former CIA official who was saying the same thing and decided the story might have legs. Here is the radio interview with Philip Giraldi.
Apparently a retired ex CIA officer is not the only one thinking this.
The top American military officer has warned Israel against orchestrating ‘USS Liberty Part II’ to provoke a US-led war against Iran.
The fact that American officials have to issue these types of warnings to an “ally” is frightening, and speaks volumes of the relationship between the two countries.
“In short and simple terms, we would be plunged into a depression that would make the Great Depression of the 1930s in which I spent my childhood look like boom times.
Industries would fail, banks would collapse, government revenues would dry up, universities would have to close, health care, even as limited as it now is for roughly 75 million Americans, would virtually cease. In short, something like [what] the South suffered at the end of the Civil War would plague the country.
Even at today’s price, as you know, 14 airlines have gone out of business while others are hovering on the brink of bankruptcy and most have curtailed service and laid off personnel. At double or triple today’s price, none could fly unless nationalized. A whole range of other industries would be quickly drawn into the quicksand. Ironically, war would push America into a form of socialist economy.”
So says William R. Polk, former professor of history at the University of Chicago and a member of the Policy Planning Council under President Kennedy, describing what a post war with Iran America would look like, and it doesn’t look good. My question is why would American politicians risk this catastrophic landscape knowing that Iran poses no threat to America, or for that matter America’s ally Israel, and that the same deception techniques used to enlist America in an Iraqi war are being used against Iran.
One of Israel’s most ardent enemies, Syria, says it wants peace with the Jewish state. In fact, according to this particular Syrian diplomat, Israel has the chance to have peace with all of the Arab world, not just Israel’s contiguous neighbors. The latter part most likely is bluster on the part of this diplomat; he can’t possibly equate his one country with all of the Arab world, except that he’s most likely egomaniacal, but this is what he says:
Syria is interested in securing a peace agreement with Israel that would see a normalization of ties and end to the longstanding state of war between the two countries, Damascus’ envoy to the U.S. has said.
“The negotiations are a historic opportunity for Israel to make peace, not just with Syria and Lebanon, but with the whole Arab world,” Ambassador Imad Moustapha said, according to an interview broadcast on Army Radio on Monday.
*snip*
In response to the statements, Peace Now Secretary General Yariv Oppenheimer called on Israel to complete negotiations with Syria while the current Knesset is still in office.
“The government of Israel has an obligation not to miss this chance for peace with Israel, and to present a full peace agreement to the public,” Oppenheimer told Army Radio.
This is pretty significant, because Israel has always said it wanted recognition by its neighbors of its right to exist, which it seems the Syrian is saying is on the table. But because this is such a desirable result it almost certainly means there will be a casus belli for Israel to attack the border with Syria and exacerbate tensions so that peace won’t be possible, because peace is not in the long term interests of Israel, territory and natural resources are. Let’s see how long before such an attack takes place.
Not long after the Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates said a war with Iran would be disastrous on a number of levels, with his Joint Chiefs of Staff Michael Mullen adding he too wasn’t interested in fighting Iran, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak called on the Administration to tighten sanctions against Iran and keep all military options on the table.
The Bush Administration has already passed legislation enacting sanctions against Iran, and Gates in the speech linked to above already said all options should be kept on the table, so what is the significance of Barak’s comments to the Israeli media? The Israelis are insisting on the logistical use of American military bases in Iraq to strike the Iranians. If they are not able to convince the Americans to hit Iran, then the next best thing would be to use American materiel to do the job, and as we’ve already noted some forward American bases are five minutes from Iranian nuclear targets.
However, what is more likely is this talk coming from Israel is meant to sabotage any attempts at rapprochement currently being made by Iran to America. The Iranian president has gone on record with American media saying they, the Iranians, want good relations with the US and will do everything they can to foster such a cordial atmosphere if the US stops being confrontational. He also repeated his denial that Iran is building nuclear weapons. Such talk coming out of Tehran has to be somewhat disconcerting to Israel which has built its entire existence on threats of its demise due to hostile neighbors. Even when there were none able to be a suitable threat, Israel made them up, as they are doing presently with Iran.
There’s no reason for the United States to go to war with Iran or conduct a military strike against Iranian targets. The only reason such talk graces the printed pages of American newspapers and magazines or finds its way on American airwaves or the ethernet is because of Israel. It appears however, some in Israel don’t think it’s such a good idea either. Again and again, former Mossad chief Halevy has downplayed the Iranian threat in articles published in Israeli sources, and again and again his proclamations have been ignored by American media! What gives? Could it possibly be that American Jews, many of whom are former leftists turned neocons, are believers in the notion of “permanent revolution“? Such a notion surely sounds like the global war on terror proclaimed by Bush, which has no end in sight nor success markers and which with the choice replacement of capitalism with democracy would be enough to get the hearts and minds of most Americans enlisted and on board. More insidious however are those American Jews who are Israel firsters, who put the interest (or rather their perceived interests of Israel) above those of the United States. In a misguided attempt to help their country of choice, they believe using the full power and might of the US military is enough to keep Israel safe. The problem is they do so from afar, in the relative safety of the US, whereas some Israelis on the ground in Israel have different ideas of what’s Israel’s interests.
I do like that such leftists turned neocon Israel firsters are easily spotted. The tactics they are using to engage America with Iran are the same faulty, deceitful tactics they used with Iraq. Here and here are other examples of lies straight out of the play book of the Office of Special Plans’, formerly run by Doug Feith where the reality is completely different. No doubt there are some Israelis who want war with Iran as there are some Americans but such a war would not serve either of the countries’ long term interests, inflict very high civilian casualties in Iran, Iraq, possibly Israel and could have a more devastating effect globally than the Iraqi war has had to date.
Two of America’s more quoted Christian evangelists are in the news for the same reason. Pat Robertson and John Hagee are calling for another war in the Middle East against Iran. In Robertson’s case he wants the Israelis to hit at or strike Iran. In one of his more delusional interviews, Robertson asserts:
But with Israel, it’s not a question of whether they can be moderate or extreme. The question is the survival of their nation. And if Iran gets nuclear weapons, they have announced in advance they’re going to use them against Israel. And Israel has no choice but to make some kind of a strike against the Iranian nuclear facilities, and to do so fairly soon.
Nobody wants to do it, but nevertheless, they’re going to have no choice. They do have nuclear submarines they can launch cruise missiles from. I don’t believe the U.S. would allowing a refueling in Iraq, although some people have mentioned something like that.
This is 2002 all over again. Completely ignoring his own country’s NIE of 2007 which states Iran does not presently have the capacity to build nuclear weapons has dismantled any weapons building program and has shown no signs of starting one, even surreptitiously, Robertson makes more than a leap of faith in his declaration, ‘ when Iranians get nuclear weapons they’ll use them against Israel’. In fact, the leading religious figure in Iran has said his country is prohibited from using nuclear weapons, nullifying any statement anyone else may or may not make on behalf of Iran. One interesting note about Robertson’s statement on Israel not being able to refuel in Iraq is Israel and the US are coordinating closely on tactical issues surrounding Iran. In fact, Israeli jets have used American military bases in Iraq for some time and the forward most base puts Israel within a 5 minute strike of an Iranian nuclear facility.
John Hagee’s Christian’s United for Israel held their convention in Washington, which could be seen as no more than a political rally for John McCain, who by the way has tried to distance himself from Hagee, and which has as its theme, ‘Your chance to vote for Israel’. One of the workshops of the convention was Iran: Eye of the storm, which talked about the need to get rid of a “nuclear” Iran. Israel firster Joe Lieberman spoke at the convention, despite cries from Israeli Jews for him to kick Hagee to the curb, to make the case for sanctions against Iran and warning of an attack if they don’t work. Lieberman used the same fear mongering expressions based only on conjecture, alleging
A nuclear Iran is a mortal danger to all of our allies in the Middle East–both to the Arabs and Israel–and it is a threat to us. A nuclear Iran would transform the balance of power in the region in the worst possible way. As Iran continues to expand the reach of its missiles, it will soon not just be the Middle East that is threatened, but Europe as well.
The President of Iran has made his genocidal intentions toward Israel clear. And he regularly leads his Iranian audiences in chanting “Death to America.”
It’s interesting Americans and Israelis both want the US to attack Iran but for different reasons. The US wants to protect its ally, while the Israelis want Americans to do it in order to spare Israelis the nuclear option. Either way, the use of religious Christian figures to call for war increasingly makes Islam seem like the ‘religion of peace’ indeed.
I believe it’s an unspoken truth that the two are inextricably related so much so that the lines are blurred and many people see them as one. I don’t however, for in my opinion zionism is a political movement dedicated to the return of Jews to a certain part of the world at the expense of the people already living there, whereas Judaism is a belief in God, or G_d as I’ve seen some people write it while not quite knowing why they do it that way, that has some semblance of justice and fairness for all His creation. Perhaps that’s my projection of ANY religion that takes off from the point of a benign and benevolent Creator, which I see wholly inconsistent with oppression and genocide, the likes of which are taking place in the occupied territories of Palestine.
I was very happy to hear that the Saudi regime initiated an interfaith meeting where they invited people from the major religions to Spain to talk about what they have in common and how they could foster better relations with one another. There’s certainly a lot to talk about there in this atmosphere of Islamophobia, although I’m sure members of other faiths have plenty to talk about with Muslims. The Saudis are generally very non-confrontational so they avoided inviting any religious representatives of Christianity, Islam or Judaism, from Palestine or Israel and there was the beginning of a conference whose doom was sealed before it ever got started. Jews wanted Israeli Jews present probably because they thought their presence would indicate de facto recognition of Israel by the Saudis who until now have not recognized that state. Moreover they were not to pleased with the mention of “zionism” in anything other than a good light. Most likely, the conference organizers don’t equate zionism with Judaism as some Jews would like. That criticism of “zionism” which I think had no place in an interfaith conference but whose defense by some Jews highlights the confusion between religion and politics, as it pertains to Judaism. Some of the Jewish participants, and most notably one Rabbi David Rosen of the American Jewish Committee said the conference would be little more than a photo opportunity unless it led to a follow-up in Saudi Arabia with Israeli Jews which seems to mean Jews won’t participate in a follow-up conference unless those two conditions are met: Israeli Jews are invited and it take place in Saudi Arabia. However, not all Jewish participants were in such a conundrum about their religion and the state of Israel and were optimistic about the chances for the future. The identification of a religion with a nation state has no place in an interfaith dialogue, especially one with as poor a human rights record as Israel. That some Jewish members made that connection is more than unfortunate.
Miscellany101's Weblog 