My heroes of the day


I want to congratulate two men who took a principled  stand at the risk of their careers and even their lives when you look at who they are and what they represent, to categorically denounce positions taken that were detrimental to the people suffering in Gaza.

Tayyip Erdogan, whose country Turkey is trying to get admitted into the European Union as well as NATO probably jeopardized those chances when he made an impassioned plea at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland against the Israeli aggression and genocide in Gaza.  He criticised the audience of international officials and corporate chiefs for applauding Peres’s emotional defence of Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza, which left more than 1,300 Palestinians dead. Not sparing any measure, Erdogan said what needs to be said to an Israel that seems to think it is above reproach.  You can view his comments, translated into English, here

Imagine all the things in store for Turkey now that he, its prime minister, did what he did?  Threats will be made against the country’s application to the world bodies it wants to enter, as well as against Erdogan himself and the usual cries of anti-semitism will come from every corner of the world, but the substance of his remarks, that Israel engaged in wholesale slaughter of a population, much like that which occured between Turkey and Armenia which will be thrown in Erdogan’s face, will be ignored.  Nevertheless, kudos for Tayyip Erdogan for being principled.

My other hero is Mohammad Baredei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), who said a BBC decision not to air an aid appeal for victims in Gaza violates the rules of basic human decency which are there to help vulnerable people, irrespective of who is right or wrong.  The BBC said it wasn’t airing the appeal because, now hold on to your seats, it would get in the way of their objectivity in covering the events in Gaza.  Several other channels in England aired the appeal, but the BBC and SkyNews, owned by James Murdoch, son of Rupert Murdoch, *ahem* refused to do so.  As a result Baradei has cancelled planned interviews with the BBC, without mentioning how long such a boycott would last.  Kudos to him as well.  He too chose principle over political expediency, taking a position in light of today’s news which is necessary to stem the Israeli juggernaut that refuses to accept any criticism or consequences of and for its actions.   Here is the highly milquetoast ad the BBC refused to air.

Quote of the day


We possess several hundred atomic warheads and rockets and can launch them at targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets for our air force.

Our armed forces, however, are not the thirtieth strongest in the world, but rather the second or third. We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes under.

Martin van Creveld – professor of military history – Hebrew University in Jerusalem

Nothing more indicates the suicidal nature of the Israeli zionist government and their complete disregard for international law and opinion than this obscure quote by a rather mainstream Israeli historian. It also explains both the reason for Israeli actions in the occupied territories and the silence of the world community towards them.  It lays to rest the notion that Israel is a client state of the US and instead confidently asserts the premise that America, along with most other western powers is a client state of Israel and can be threatened to pursue the Israeli program with military force or retaliation at the slightest hesitation on their part.  It’s an indication of the brazeness of that supposition that von Creveld make this statement to a western audience without any reservation or reluctance.

Lies, damn lies and statistics

There is plenty of documentation to make a case for the illegal nature of the Israeli government towards Palestinian Arabs both inside Israel and in the occupied territories. The longer it takes for America and the rest of the world to act and deny this voracious killer its meal of foreign aide and military hardware, the more likely we are to have these kinds of incursions onto foreign soil by the Israeli government.


wp_gazaThe Israeli war machine has killed over 800 Palestinians and  claims are their genocidal blood lust will be escalated, but finally there are cries, albeit faint, that Israel has committed war crimes.  It’s about time!  All one need do is look at the volume of work on the internet, indisputable pictures and videos which show the use of white phosphorous, the shooting of medical aid workers who were out attending to the wounded as well as hospitals and their facilities, the indiscriminate bombing of shelters for the homeless, and most notably the UN sponsored school where scores of people were killed, all civilians, by the murderous IDF to know that Israel has committed war crimes and should be censured by the international community.

The United Nations has accused Israel of evacuating scores of Palestinians into a house in the suburbs of Gaza City, only to shell the property 24 hours later, killing some 30 people.

In a report published today on what it called “one of the gravest incidents” of the 14-day conflict, the UN’s Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) complained that the Israeli Defence Force then prevented medical teams from entering the area to evacuate the wounded, including young children.

All of these actions come amidst the incontrovertible fact that Israel is the aggressor in this latest war on Palestinians.

Thus the latest ceasefire ended when Israel first killed Palestinians, and Palestinians then fired rockets into Israel. However, before attempting to glean lessons from this event, we need to know if this case is atypical, or if it reflects a systematic pattern.We defined “conflict pauses” as periods of one or more days when no one is killed on either side, and we asked which side kills first after conflict pauses of different durations. As shown in Figure 2, this analysis shows that it is overwhelmingly Israel that kills first after a pause in the conflict: 79% of all conflict pauses were interrupted when Israel killed a Palestinian, while only 8% were interrupted by Palestinian attacks (the remaining 13% were interrupted by both sides on the same day). In addition, we found that this pattern — in which Israel is more likely than Palestine to kill first after a conflict pause — becomes more pronounced for longer conflict pauses. Indeed, of the 25 periods of nonviolence lasting longer than a week, Israel unilaterally interrupted 24, or 96%, and it unilaterally interrupted 100% of the 14 periods of nonviolence lasting longer than 9 days.

Thus, a systematic pattern does exist: it is overwhelmingly Israel, not Palestine, that kills first following a lull. Indeed, it is virtually always Israel that kills first after a lull lasting more than a week.

The lessons from these data are clear:

First, Hamas can indeed control the rockets, when it is in their interest. The data shows that ceasefires can work, reducing the violence to nearly zero for months at a time.

Second, if Israel wants to reduce rocket fire from Gaza, it should cherish and preserve the peace when it starts to break out, not be the first to kill.

One can conclude that Israel is not interested in peace with its neighbors and that this information alone should be the impetus on which the world community denies Israel the blind eye it has lent the Israeli government for so long and impose the type of punishment reserved and codified for “evil doers” or breakers of international law.

The U.N. special rapporteur for human rights in the occupied Palestinian territory, former Princeton University law professor Richard Falk, calls what Israel is doing to the 1.5 million Palestinians in Gaza “a crime against humanity.” Falk, who is Jewish, has condemned the collective punishment of the Palestinians in Gaza as “a flagrant and massive violation of international humanitarian law as laid down in Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention.” He has asked for “the International Criminal Court to investigate the situation, and determine whether the Israeli civilian leaders and military commanders responsible for the Gaza siege should be indicted and prosecuted for violations of international criminal law.”

“It is macabre,” Falk said. “I don’t know of anything that exactly fits this situation. People have been referring to the Warsaw ghetto as the nearest analog in modern times.”

“There is no structure of an occupation that endured for decades and involved this kind of oppressive circumstances,” the rapporteur added. “The magnitude, the deliberateness, the violations of international humanitarian law, the impact on the health, lives and survival and the overall conditions warrant the characterization of a crime against humanity. This occupation is the direct intention by the Israeli military and civilian authorities. They are responsible and should be held accountable.”

The above stated view should gain more traction as time goes on.  There is plenty of documentation to make a case for the illegal nature of the Israeli government towards Palestinian Arabs both inside Israel and in the occupied territories.  The longer it takes for America and the rest of the world to act and deny this voracious killer its meal of foreign aide and military hardware, the more likely we are to have these kinds of incursions onto foreign soil by the Israeli government.

Israel’s existence is not in question


In the minds of the Arab world, Israel exists and will exist and they are no threat to Israel.  The problem is Israel is a threat to its neighbors; inspite of that there has been a muted response from Israel’s enemies.  Juan Cole offers a translation of Ayatollah Sistani’s comments on the Israeli aggression and even I am shocked at how mild mannered it is.

In the Name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate

The beloved Palestinian people in the Gaza Strip have, since noon yesterday, been subjected to a vicious attack and to continual strikes that have resulted so far in hundreds of victims being martyred or wounded.

This assault comes after a suffocating blockade to which this oppressed people has been subjected for several months. It had resulted in the creation of harsh humanitarian conditions as a result of lack of food, medicine, fuel and other necessities of daily life for the citizens.

Mere verbal expressions of condemnation and disapproval of what is being done to our Palestinian brethren in Gaza, and of solidarity with them, mean nothing before the immensity of this horrific tragedy to which they are being subjected.

The Arab and Muslim worlds are called upon, more than at any past time, to take practical steps in order to stop this continual aggression and to break this cruel blockade that has been imposed on that proud people.

We ask God, the Exalted, the All-Powerful to take the hands of all and lead them to that wherein lies goodness and righteousness. Verily, he is the All-Hearing, the Gracious.

Meanwhile, while everyone in corporate American media seems to hedge reporting on the massacre taking place in Gaza, Israeli media seems to have a more realistic handle on the catastrophe raging around their corporate media’s head.

Israel embarked yesterday on yet another unnecessary, ill-fated war. On July 16, 2006, four days after the start of the Second Lebanon War, I wrote: “Every neighborhood has one, a loud-mouthed bully who shouldn’t be provoked into anger… Not that the bully’s not right – someone did harm him. But the reaction, what a reaction!”

Two and a half years later, these words repeat themselves, to our horror, with chilling precision. Within the span of a few hours on a Saturday afternoon,the IDF sowed death and destruction on a scale that the Qassam rockets never approached in all their years, and Operation “Cast Lead” is only in its infancy.

poignantly poised Gordon Levy in Haaretz.  With pretty good moral clarity, Tom Segev writes:

It is admittedly impossible to live with daily missile fire, even if virtually no place in the world today enjoys a situation of zero terror. But Hamas is not a terrorist organization holding Gaza residents hostage: It is a religious nationalist movement, and a majority of Gaza residents believe in its path. One can certainly attack it, and with Knesset elections in the offing, this attack might even produce some kind of cease-fire. But there is another historical truth worth recalling in this context: Since the dawn of the Zionist presence in the Land of Israel, no military operation has ever advanced dialogue with the Palestinians.

 

even though his conclusion is somewhat flawed and undermines what preceeded it.  What’s important is these ideas found their way in mainstream publications in Israel, yet aren’t even remotely mirrored here in the States. I could surmise that’s an indication of the moral strength of certain elements of Israeli media which is greater than their American counterparts. Honestly, I can’t account for the differences in reporting, but the American media is not doing any service to its customers by keeping them in the dark about Israeli trangessions, and our politicians are not working in the best interests of our country when they excuse the faults of a regime hell bent on death and destruction usually ending at our expense.

Encourage KKK membership


With news like this the Klan can be eliminated just by asking people to join.  This goes way beyond bizarre.  Groups like this will be dogs barking at the heels of the Obama administration and their protestations will be carried by corporate media far and wide.  I’d like to see all those who clamored for the Patriot and Military Commission Act to call such groups terrorists and illegal enemy combatants, even though I still propose Guantanamo Bay be closed.  Of course that won’t happen but perhaps we’ll get lucky and get them to decimate their ranks by their own stupidity.

Ashley Todd and the McCain campaign-working together to deceive you the voter!


More and more details are emerging about Ashley Todd and her role in the McCain campaign and the campaign’s role in dissemenating the false story about her being attacked. This unfortunate young woman was used by elements in THE REPUBLICAN PARTY who are heartless and deceitful to the brim and didn’t mind destroying her personal integrity or taking down America in their quest for power.  How else do you explain how this young woman was used by McCain Pennsylvania campaign communications director Peter Feldman who was out hyping details of her story before they were even known by any but the victim and the police?

Long before any facts about the Ashley Todd case had been established, McCain’s Pennsylvania campaign communications director told reporters the alleged attacker had told the woman, “You’re with the McCain campaign? I’m going to teach you a lesson.”

This notion that Todd was a campaign volunteer has also been as quickly eliminated. In an effort to distance themselves from her, College Republican National Committee’s Executive Director Ethan Eilon said, “We have terminated her effective today. Obviously, we had know(sic) idea she was making this story up.” There might be some truth to that because as most campaigns do, organizations are formed that are interconnected but at the same time independent enough in order to guarantee plausible deniability, but first news reports claim Todd was working on the Pennsylvania campaign’s as a phone operator volunteer which probably put her in some sort of contact with Feldman, the communication’s director.

In that capacity and as a “volunteer” she was not working for the CRNC, which was actually paying her to work for them at some point in the campaign.  She was on loan as it were to the campaign.  I assert that Feldman sexually intimidated and harassed this young woman into making up this story for obvious political reasons.  Not being able to say how she received her injuries is significant, especially the black eye, and shows she’s still in denial, protecting someone (the person who battered her perhaps) or hiding something about this strange story. Perhaps it was Feldman’s attempt to give meaning to a relationship he fully manipulated in some perverse way for his candidate, McCain.

Unfortunately, the media should pursue this story to see just how far it reaches into the McCain campaign, but it won’t, and to be fair, doing so would not be in the best interest of this young woman’s mental health.  However, it would expose the depths at which the “system” has gone to exacerbate the adversarial aspects of political campaigning to the detriment of the “political process”. At the very least, however, Feldman should join Ashley Todd in jail for workplace harassment and John McCain should insist on no less.  Don’t expect that to happen.

They just can’t get it right!


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.

Republicans have become the party of liars


Bush’s legacy is he has reduced his party to one of whiners and he has no one to blame but himself, as do both houses of Congress who have no one to blame but themselves.  It’s a pathetic group of politicians.  The latest offense that has really upset me is the one dealing with the financial bailout and the reasons why it is necessary.  The Republicans began by erroneously blaming minorities and Clinton for the Nation’s financial situation because of the Community Reinvestment Act, or CRA which allowed more and more members of minority communities to purchase homes and we called them on it, saying they were the party of sleaze and race baiting.  Unfortunately theirs is a mantra which works on some of their constituents, so they sent out their party hacks to repeat it and much like everything else they utter to cover for the party of race baiters, it’s a lie!  The cause of the housing meltdown lies solely at the feet of the Bush Administration!  You can read all about that here.

Now that they’ve deflected the blame for the cause of the problem, Republicans then set about to say why they can’t solve the problem, blaming a speech Nancy Pelosi gave on the House floor the day of the vote on the Administration’s bail out plan.  Typical.  Does this blame business ever get tiresome with these folks? Of course the corporate equally sleazy media picked up on and broadcast the excuse without commenting on how lame and ridiculous the excuse really was.  Only after Congressman Barney Frank made the comment of the year….”Because somebody hurt their feelings, they decided to punish the country? I don’t believe they had the votes. They are covering up the fact that they don’t have the votes.” did the Republicans come around to saying Pelosi’s verbal bombast wasn’t the reason the bill didn’t pass.

Quite simply the bill is a bad piece of legislation for reasons we’ve already mentioned on this blog, but those reasons are not why House Republicans voted against the measure.  As we’ve discussed the legislation gives broader powers to the executive and specifically the Treasury department than ever before, as well as removes oversight from the other two branches of government.  The Republicans have always given away this power when Bush asked for it, but this time, facing the possibility of defeat in the presidential elections as well as their own seats they decided to listen to the people or did they?  Does anyone else find it ironic that opponents of the bill are now saying such legislation should be more carefully thought out before coming to the floor for a vote?  I seem to remember a lot of peole saying the same thing during the war on terror series of voluminous reams of legislation that were always rushed through at the risk of its opponents being called traitors or siding with the enemies against us. That the Republicans would throw out red herrings which were picked up by the corporate media and hide the real fact of their opposition, that they don’t want to cede this kind of power to a Democratic administration on the eve of what they consider a likely defeat in the presidential elections is just one more example of the pandering and lies they engage in their efforts to frighten, threaten and intimidate the voting public.  I wish I could say at this time that the Democrats are a viable alternative.

How many availed themselves of this opportunity?


We hear and read alot about the Islamic menace in our midst and their intent to destroy everything we stand for.  A lot of political careers have been built on this tried, true and tested sloganeering done by people on all sides of the political spectrum.  The reality is vastly different.  Muslims throughout this land have stood up and condemned acts of terrorism against all forms of humanity, honored those who sacrificed their lives and even given their own lives in the fight against the unseen enemies of terrorism.

How many banner headlines did you read or see that spoke of the ceremony held in Florida by the Muslim residents of that state, honoring those who died on September 11, 2001?  Or who signed up for the Open Houses held throughout the state of California and sponsored by various Muslim organizations who flung open their doors to various and sundy people who might have questions to ask of the Muslim residents of that state or gripes to pick with them?  Instead we have become a Nation that is force fed a steady diet of Islamophobia via the same main stream media that was wrong 100% of the time when it came to Iraq, WMD, the war on terror and government responsibility towards its citizens.  As it’s said on some of the meaner city streets than the internet, ‘if you don’t know you’d better ask somebody!’  Has anyone done that with any of their Muslim neighbors?

Men of courage


Some church leaders in the US are coming under fire for hosting an interfaith breakfast with Iranian President Ahmedinajad.  Why?  Opponents of the affair point to Mr. Ahmadinejad’s nuclear stonewalling, threats against Israel, and questioning of the Holocaust.

The last two are contrivances thrust upon the consumer by a compliant corporate media whose interests is in conflict which sells papers, and access to a government which determines that access based on the “friendliness” outlets give to government’s positions.  Juan Cole has done a pretty good job of blasting holes in the “threats” the Iranian president allegedly made against Israel, attributing the record to sloppy investigating by the press and even sloppier translations of what Ahmadinejad said.  Accuracy has never been a forte of the American press. The presidential candidates are falling over themselves in making Ahmedinejad the next Osama bin Ladin.

In the heat of the campaign, Obama surely overreached himself in appearing to advocate barring leaders of member states from addressing the United Nations because their views are obnoxious to Americans. He also fell into the trap of declining to make a distinction between anti-Zionist views and anti-Semitic ones. If a policy of exclusion had been adopted by past administrations, Soviet Premier Mikhail Gorbachev could not have announced from that podium the reduction of Red Army forces in Eastern Europe in 1988. And if anti-American statements should trigger the denial of a visa to come to New York, should Nelson Mandela, who called the United States the “most dangerous country in the world,” be excluded, too?

Obama’s assertion that Iran’s civilian nuclear energy research program constitutes a “grave threat” may or may not be true. The 2005 National Intelligence Estimate put Iran at least a decade away from having a nuclear weapon if it was trying hard to get one and if the international environment was conducive (i.e., if Iran could import all the equipment it needed easily). Neither of those conditions actually appears to exist, so Iran is very far away from having a bomb. The 2007 National Intelligence Estimate on Iran, parts of which were released last December, concluded that Iranian scientists have not done any weapons-related research since early 2003.

As Ahmadinejad pointed out to Larry King, no country has been as intensely inspected by the International Atomic Energy Agency as Iran. No regularly inspected country has ever developed a nuclear bomb. Although the IAEA’s Mohamed ElBaradei has expressed frustration that Iran failed to declare its nuclear research program before 2003, he continues to say that in current inspections, “the Agency has been able to continue to verify the non-diversion of declared nuclear material in Iran” to weapons purposes. This consistent IAEA finding through recent years raises the question of whether Obama is right to be so categorical on this issue.

Despite the “white noise” coming from media and politicians looking to score points with voters, the organizers of the “iftar” are pressing on because of their belief in dialogue.

“There’s been background work spanning years with the previous reformist president, Mohammad Khatami, which goes on regardless of the vicissitudes of political leadership,” says William Vendley, secretary-general of Religions for Peace USA, part of a 30-year-old global body.

*snip*

“There are many points where we disagree with Iranian policy,” says Mark Graham, AFSC spokesman. “We believe dialogue is the way to understanding and moving past tensions rather than threats and standoffish behavior.”

It’s  very unfortunate the leaders of the strongest country militarily in the world can’t muster the courage of their conviction to get beyond the ethnic/religious baiting of Iran and its leadership.  More than half a century has passed since that country was thrown into turmoil because of a US backed coup against an Iranian government and relations with Iran post the Shah era have been marked with animosity and deceit.  But because Iran sits on a large quantity of the world’s oil supply one can only expect relations to be based on a power struggle whereby America seeks to dominate the Iranian government and control their oil supply.  Men of courage, however, seek relations on a level of mutual benefit and understanding.

“What we will never cease doing is being absolutely forthright and direct; one goes into discourse intentionally looking for appropriate opportunities to clarify concerns that are deeply felt,” Dr. Vendley says.

For that I salute them!

Gone to Hell in a handbasket


Every Ramadan, since 2001 which occurred AFTER 9/11, the White House has been the scene for the breaking of the fast for Muslims; the last 8 Ramadans! This time Bush hailed the event as a celebration of Muslim professionals who’ve made outstanding strides in their chosen line of work and one of them honored was an…..are you ready for this……..Iranian American! No, he’s not trying to build centrifuges to make nuclear weapons.  He’s a biomedical engineer, named Maysam Ghovanloo.  You can read about him here.  What strikes me is people who dislike the Muslim presence in this country decry certain institutions they claim cave in to Muslim traditions, like companies or institutions that allow time off for Muslim holidays, but they re-elected a President who’s been doing the same thing throughout his presidency!  What next, Muslims praying in the White House?

Opps, appears that’s already happening.

Computer game encourages killing Muslims


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.

Drudge, the Republican Party and race baiting


I get really frustrated with Matt Drudge and the stuff he posts on his website. Once I fired off a profanity laced letter to his blog during the initial stages of the Gulf War and then realized it was pointless.  Nevertheless I visit his blog every day to see what headlines he’s placed there…..don’t worry folks it’s one of over 20 news/blog pages I visit each day, most of them through RSS subscription although Drudge is not one of those, and I’ve even second sourced some of his headlines to write about here.

But this latest headline he has about Oprah Winfrey really takes the cake.  It’s clear the Republican Party, for whom Drudge is a mouthpiece and that’s ok by me, is the party of divisiveness at the moment. (Democrats have been there done that too, but that’s for another day) Why would Oprah Winfrey be an issue whether Sarah Palin can be on her show when McCain’s campaign has said Sarah won’t be on ANY show for the moment!! The campaign has said on several occasions that Palin won’t be available for interviews with anyone, printed media , electronic media, ANYONE! You can read about that here, and here and here, and….. Of course, bloggers are all over this story, while corporate dumb down main stream media is focusing on Winfrey and the phony Drudge story. With the characters who they are it’s sure to come down to “race” at some point and it does.  Just read some of the comments found here at ABC News’ race baiting headlined blog. Lowest common denominator media at its best; it can’t get any better.  Of course no one will say that Drudge and ABC News are working hand in hand, but the effect is the same.  You can bet too that ABC News even if given the chance to interview Palin would throw her the same softball type questions Republican “regulars” get from FoxNews or worse, questions that deal with celebrity hood and entertainment and nothing at all about politics and issues of the preservation of the rights and responsibilities of this great Republic!    If you want to fall into the trap set by corporate media and the drudgonians be my guest, but I for one call it demagoguery and no one does it better than main stream media’s Matt Drudge.

The price you pay for diligence in Israel is terrorism


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.

The Media approach to Israel


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.

Images of war return to the public


A bipartisan effort initiated by Republican congressman Walter Jones, NC and co-sponsored by three Democrats and three Republicans has culminated in the The Fallen Hero Commemoration Act, or H.R. 6662, which states, “The Secretary of Defense shall grant access to accredited members of the media at military commemoration ceremonies and memorial services conducted by the Armed Forces for members of the Armed Forces who have died on active duty and when the remains of members of the Armed Forces arrive at military installations in the United States.”

We’ve blogged before about how the Administration has tried to control the images coming from their occupation in order to control public opinion and everyone from media to government and the public in general has gone along with the program.  Finally, members of Congress are attempting to correct that situation by using the power they have as legislators to undo this Bush Administration policy.  Let’s hope they can wipe the entire slate clean of the excesses done by this cabal.

Getting it wrong on all accounts


The blogosphere is abuzz about the abandoned book on the Last Messenger’s love life with his younger wife Aisha and how publishers are giving in to Muslim pressure to censure things some may consider derogatory about Islam. What “Islamophobes”like to point out are cases in modern society where they think people have caved in to pressure to forget about the bad things in Islam in order to appease Muslims.  It doesn’t matter that the bad things they try to bring to light are “fallacious representation(s)”  or “anti-Islamic polemic(s) that uses sex and violence to attack the Prophet and his faith”, much like the book in question.

In some cases, however, the publisher got it right. The excuse given for not publishing because of fear of violence is unfortunate but there is a precedent for that concern.  We’ve talked about media manipulation of Muslims’ reactions before at Miscellany; how things are printed or said to get a rise out of Muslims which is then used to show the uncivilized nature of the Muslims, and that’s unfortunate. However, methinks they chose not to print a book that is factually inaccurate, and perhaps their  vetting process pointed that out to them. Perhaps the author can find an irresponsible publisher who will print ANYTHING no matter how wrong it may be, but Random House chose not to!  Here’s why:

In the time before Islam, Abu Bakr married Fatila bint Abdul Uzza,
from whom Abdullah and Asma were born.  Then he married Umm Ruman,
from whom Abdur Rahman and Aisha were born.  These four were born
before Islam.  ‘Abdullah, Asma, ‘Abdur-Rahman, and ‘A’isha were born
before the beginning of the Revelation (i.e, at least 13 years before
the Hijrah).  This is uncontested and well-known to the muslims.

‘A’isha was betrothed to Jubayr ibn Mut’im ibn Adi, before Abu
Bakr accepted Islam in the first year of the Call (12-13 years before
the Hijrah).  This is uncontested.

When Abu Bakr planned to go to Abyssinia during the fifth year of
the Call (8-9 years before the Hijrah), Mut’im broke off the
engagement because Abu Bakr had accepted Islam.  This is uncontested.

‘A’isha remembered the Revelation of a verse known to have been
revealed in the fifth year of the Call or before (i.e., 8-13 years
before the Hijrah).  This is uncontested.

‘A’isha was betrothed to the prophet two years after the death of
Khadijah, or a year before the Hijrah.  This is uncontested.

‘A’isha did not accompany her father and the prophet during the
Hijrah, but arrived in Madinah later, and became sick so that all of
her hair fell out.  This is uncontested.

‘A’isha moved in with the prophet a year or two after the Hijrah,
or two to four years after her betrothal.  This is unclear from the
various reports, which give different time periods, but all are agreed
as to the general time frame.

‘A’isha was widowed in 11h (the 11th year of the Hijrah).  This is
uncontested.

She was a widow for about forty years and died in 50h.  This is
uncontested.

Among the people who report these facts is one Hisham bin Urwa,
the grandson of Asma and ‘A’isha’s grand-nephew, who lived in Madina
for 71 years and then moved to Iraq, who reported that ‘A’isha died in
50h.  This is uncontested.

‘A’isha’s older sister Asma was ten years older than ‘A’isha.
Asma was 27 at the time of the Hijrah, making ‘A’isha 17.  This is
uncontested.  Asma died at the age of 100 in 73h.  23 years earlier,
when ‘A’isha died, Asma was 77.  This is uncontested.  Thus ‘A’isha
was 67 when she died in 50h, seventeen at the time of the Hijrah,
sixteen at the time of her betrothal to the prophet, and nineteen when
she moved in with him.

All of the reports saying that ‘A’isha was six at the time of her
betrothal to the prophet come from Iraq, as do all of the reports that
she was nine when she moved in with the prophet.  There are no reports
of this from Makkah or Madinah.  This is uncontested.  Most of these
reports from Iraq came through Hisham bin Urwa, Asma’s grandson,
mostly from his father.  This is indisputable.

Hisham bin Urwa is said to have reported (1) that ‘A’isha was nine
in the second year of the Hijrah, (2) was widowed in the eleventh year
of the Hijrah, and (3) died in the fiftieth year of the Hijrah ~ when
his grandmother, ten years older than his great aunt ‘A’isha, was 77.

The same person who said ‘A’isha was nine in 2h also said she was
67 in 50h.

So the only reports that ‘A’isha was six, or nine, come from
someone who also reports that she had to be sixteen when betrothed,
and nineteen when she moved in with the prophet.

And every other report showing her to be much older than six is
uncontested and considered reliable, while Hisham’s reports from Iraq
are considered unreliable for obvious reasons.

Of course not many people know about this and those that do choose to ignore or debate it, but what do you do with people who argue against facts?

Islamophobia and politics


One can expect the right wing of American politics to engage in distortion and race baiting.  It goes as far back as I can remember and that includes the administration of Richard Nixon.  So it is today, and the modern day target is the clean cut Arab/muslim guy or gal.  Mazen Asbahi is “it” today and I’m baffled in one sense but not totally surprised in another.  Baffled because monsieur Asbahi is as clean as they come, except for a really rather tangential connection to someone who had an equally tangentially inconsequential relationship with someone who…..well you know the rest.  This all boils down to party politics; Asbahi worked for Obama, and I guess it’s a little too much for the American palate to digest, so many strange sounding names working together.  But Asbahi has bonafides that not too many people who might even call themselves red blooded Americans possess, so I find his selection as a target unfortunate.  No matter how squeaky clean you try to get you can never get clean enough if you have one of those strange names or a swarthy complexion, but it’s just those characteristics that make him such an easy target. What inevitably the racists in American politics are trying to do is dilute the potency of Islamic charities by calling into question their raison d’etre and the full might of the US government to shut them down and take their assets.  For that reason I wish Asbahi had not resigned his position with the Obama campaign; there are bigger stakes here than helping someone who will gladly kick you to the curb in order to get elected. (That he decided to step down probably speaks more for his integrity than that of the Obama campain. )  Islamic charities have an important role to play in helping Muslims in developing countries maintain a subsistence level lifestyle; just as the cash strapped economies of central and south America depend on money from the American job force, so do those societies in the Middle East.  (Just ask Israel) Mazen was a political football kicked around to hurt a candidate who is running scared from the Muslim label and to damage the work of some honest hard working Muslims who wanted to establish a viable organization to help people at home and abroad.  I suspect there’ll be a lot more of this kind of election year posturing as the political season continues.

Islam, anti-semitism and France


We all remember the caricature of the last Messenger which appeared in European newspapers, some times more than once, as an act of solidarity with the Danish publishers where the cartoon originated. The worldwide reaction of Muslims ran the entire gamut of emotions from anger to demands that the offending cartoon be retracted to calls for the resignation of the cartoonist and/or the editor of the newspaper. European publishers insisted on their rights to a free press saying they would not be intimidated by any reaction no matter how violent or incendiary. Other publications printed the offending cartoon as an act of solidarity with the Danish publications. Sometime later, newspapers again published the cartoon, in my opinion, as an act of provocation hoping to get a reaction from Muslims which would be prominently displayed across the front page of newspapers around the world, but the basic premise of freedom of the press to publish a cartoon even if billions of people found it offensive was always the reason given for the cartoon’s publication. Editors, reporters, et.al all cited the right to a free press to publish unfettered any and everything deemed by them relevant to find its way on the printed page, no matter how many people it upset, no matter which religion was attacked.

Advance a short time later to 2008 and we find this headline.

Satirist sparks uproar with Sarkozy son Jewish jibe

and this one.

Cartoonist gets death threats over Sarkozy ‘Jew” quip

From the former headline:

A French newspaper satirist has sparked a feverish tug-of-war over free speech and anti-Semitism with a biting column on the engagement of President Nicolas Sarkozy’s son to a Jewish heiress.

Published on July 2 in the satirical weekly Charlie Hebdo, the piece cost the 79-year-old Sine, a veteran cartoonist and anarchist writer whose real name is Maurice Sinet, his job after he refused to apologise.

Since then it has unleashed a torrent of op-ed articles, blog entries, petitions and counter-petitions as French writers, politicians and armchair commentators line up to vilify or defend him.

A lifelong provocateur whose previous targets have included Muslim fundamentalists and gays, Sine finally went to the police after a website published a call for him to be murdered, his lawyer said on Sunday.

Explaining what the uproar is all about, the second link writes.

L’affaire Siné, as it is known, began a month ago when the cartoonist wrote a column in Charlie Hebdo, a satirical weekly, about the engagement of Mr Sarkozy, 21, to Jessica Sebaoun-Darty, the Jewish heiress of an electronic goods chain.

Sinet repeated an unfounded rumour that the son of the President planned to become Jewish and added: “He’ll go a long way in life, that little lad.”

The remark caused fury amid claims that it alluded to age-old prejudices about Jews and money.

With the press speculating that Mr Sarkozy could sue Charlie Hebdo, Philippe Val, its editor, asked Sinet to apologise.

“I’d rather cut my balls off,” he replied.

He was fired and Mr Val said that his comments “could be interpreted as making a link between the conversion to Judaism and social success and that was neither acceptable nor defendable in court”.

What I find amazing is the swiftness with which some people found the material offensive and retribution for the offense demanded, and the call by people who said the press had the right to publish material offensive to Muslims supporting the firing of someone who made at best a passing remark about Jewishness. With regards to French Jews, or Judaism, the press does not have the right to offend and should be concerned with French-Jewish reaction, it’s just that someone forgot to tell Monsieur Sinet that. It’s interesting how the reaction to Sinet’s cartoon follows closely the reaction Muslims had to offending material in the past, including the call by some in the Jewish community for Monsieur Sinet’s death! Shades of Salman Rushdie perhaps?