NATO, the Cold War and Afghanistan

The current fiasco of scraping together NATO forces for Afghanistan brings to mind the Cold War.

Before the fall of the Soviet Union, NATO was on the front line to stop, as we were told at the time, the ever present possibility of conflict with the Warsaw Pact countries.

NATO was to be the bulwark against Soviet expansion and millions of Soviet troops.

Oh, how things have changed since the early 1990s.

NATO, instead of fighting millions of soldiers under the direction of the Kremlin, now faces a ragtag band of Taliban.

Of course, guerrilla actions can be unpredictable and hard to contain, but the probable thousands of Taliban fighters hardly compare with the millions of East European troops and the Red Army.

The undignified diplomatic shuffling and arm twisting which is going on now just to raise a few thousand troops for the NATO force in Afghanistan does not bode well for the future.

European nations seem more content when the threat is on the doorstep (has allegedly it was with the Warsaw Pact), but the ramifications of a rejuvenated Taliban retaking Afghanistan are too awful to consider, for the want of countries in the West fully engaging with the problems there.

The recent treaty signed by President Musharraf will, in all probability, give the Taliban a launch pad for attacks into Afghanistan from the lawless border region of Pakistan.

Combined with bumper crops of poppies it would seem that Afghanistan might regress.

Western countries have known for at least the past two years of the Taliban's resurgence and yet have not taken up the challenge, there is much talk of winning “the hearts and minds” but comparatively little real change on the ground.

So the four broad problems of Afghanistan, as I see them, are:

1. Western countries pitiful contribution to the rebuilding of Afghanistan
2. insufficient aid and military expertise
3. a method for dealing with the growth of poppies
4. how to make the border region of Pakistan inhospitable for the Taliban and Al Qaeda

The first two points should be comparatively easy to deal with if Western countries feel that the rebuilding of Afghanistan is in their vested interest and not just another annoyance.

The third point could possibly be dealt with by buying up the crop entirely and using it for medical purposes rather than allowing it to be processed into hard drugs. It seems unlikely that an eradication programme would be feasible or achievable in Afghanistan, so the alternative is to spend money to mopping them up and win the hearts and minds, that way.

The fourth point is very tricky, that border region is incredibly inhospitable and as the British found probably unconquerable. It may be that tribal loyalties in the region take precedence over money or perceived self-interest, military operations would seem futile and buying off parts of the border region may be more effective and in the long run cheaper than military incursions. Either way it is unclear as to how to deal with this problem.

So Western countries have several choices: engage with Afghanistan, pour money and resources into the region or allow Afghanistan to become, yet again, a mediaeval barbaric regime under the Taliban.

I think I know what is more preferable but do the politicians in the West?

Shock! Iran Wanted Nukes

Shock, horror, we are surprised (sarcasm) has reported by the BBC:

"A letter from 1988 in which Iran's top commander says Iran could need a nuclear bomb to win the war against Iraq has come to light in Tehran.

The commander is quoted in the letter, written by the father of the Iranian revolution, Ayatollah Khomeini, to top officials in the final days of the war.

It has only now been made public - by former President Hashemi Rafsanjani.

The letter seems at odds with Tehran's statements that Iran is not seeking a bomb because it is against Islam.

Sensitive

The letter from Ayatollah Khomeini lists the requirements of military commanders if they are to continue fighting against Iraq.

It mentions more aircraft, helicopters, men and weapons, and also quotes the top commander saying Iran would within five years need laser-guided and atomic weapons in order to win the war.

Some Iranian news agencies have, however, deleted the reference to atomic weapons in the letter.

It is sensitive because Iran has always said it is not seeking a nuclear weapon and leading clerics say an atomic bomb would be against Islam.

Ayatollah Khomeini's letter also reveals how challenged Iran's economy and military were by the eight years of war against Iraq.

The letter quotes the prime minister of the time saying the economy was operating at a level below zero and volunteers for the front were in short supply.

Ayatollah Khomeini's letter has been made public at a time when Iran is preparing for a possible confrontation with the US over its nuclear programme.

But it also comes against a background of an argument between Mr Rafsanjani and a top military commander over who was instrumental in persuading Ayatollah Khomeini to agree to a ceasefire with Iraq that the Ayatollah himself likened to drinking a poisoned chalice. "

Of Books and Things to Read

Deciding which books to read can be a bit of a hit and miss process. I have more than my fair share of "looked good at the time but questionable quality" type books, so finding a good source of bibliography information is very valuable and saves time.

The topic of the Middle East is unlikely to disappear from our horizons any time shortly, and I think it pays to be well-informed on the region and its goings-on, so why not try the Mideastweb as it provides a searchable bibliography of books relating to the region..

David Aaronovitch - Fighting Terror

Whilst I remember, here are the clips which make up David Aaronovitch's Fighting Terror programme shown recently on Channel 5.

Thanks to Harry's Place.

YouTube and Fighting Terrorism

YouTube is very handy, and the recent Channel 5 programme Don't Get Me Started by David Aaronovitch is a fine example of how technology is allowing people across the world access to British Television.

Watching clips directly on YouTube is okay, but if you want to download the clip, then help is at hand.

1. Get the URL of the clip, e.g. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbznv15JQ5M

2. Goto http://javimoya.com/blog/youtube_en.php

3. Paste into the space below “Download direct from most video sites” and on the right toggle bring "YouTube" and click on download (right handside).

4. Wait a moment and the file download link will appear, do a right click and save the file.

5. Bring up Media Player Classic or your favourite media player and watch locally.

6. If your player complains about missing FLV codecs, visit the FDDshow page, download, install and try again.

7. Alternatively use this FLV player.

8. NB: Make sure that the downloaded file has the FLV extension.

Update: I forgot to add that the VLC media player will probably play FLV files too.

Better Fox?

Version 2.0 of Firefox is coming out of Beta, with the first release candidate being shipped today.

Firefox 2.0 has a wide range of new features, which include, but not limited to:

Built-in phishing protection
Enhanced search capabilities
Previewing and subscribing to Web feeds
Inline spell checking
Improved Add-ons manager
JavaScript 1.7
Extended search plugin format.
Updates to the extension system
New Windows installer

A fair few existing extensions don’t work with the Beta 2.0 of Firefox, but hopefully those problems will be resolved shortly.

BBC Radio 4 Listen Again

The BBC Radio 4 Listen Again is great, it allows listeners to re-play programmes that might have been missed or just to enjoy again, I would recommend tonight's offering: With Great Pleasure

Nasrallah View: from the Jordan to the Mediterranean

According to reports, in his recent speech, which was aimed at shoring up his position, Hassan Nasrallah made many grandiose claims but one in particular will find some resonance amongst the historical illiterates:

“Mr Nasrallah said that the Israeli withdrawal from southern Lebanon showed that if Arab states had the will, they could destroy Israel. "The Arab armies and Arab peoples are able not only to liberate Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem. In all simplicity, with decision and will they can restore Palestine from the [Jordan] River to the [Mediterranean] sea," he said.”

Nasrallah is playing to his audience’s ignorance, “just one last push and the Jews will be thrown in the sea” is his sub-text, conveniently forgetting that generations of Arab rulers, dictators, military has-beens have tried such tactics since 1948, without any success.

Since 1948 Israel has defeated the combined armies of all neighbouring states and it is barely seems conceivable that feuding local Arab dictators, theocrats and monarchs will summon up the unity and gross stupidity to try it again.

Nevertheless, Israel should not drop its guard, where possible it should sign peace treaties with neighbouring states and reduce to an absolute minimum the low level conflict with the Palestinians, which hopefully will lead to a Palestinian state and remove any festering sore that could unite the disparate Arab rulers and their ballooning military budgets:

"Saudi Arabia's defense budget of dlrs 25.4 billion corresponds to dlrs 962 per capita, spending by Oman of $3.02 bn equates to $1,007 per head and the UAE's $2.65 bn expenditure works out at $1,035 each for its 2.56 million inhabitants.

The ratio is even higher for Kuwait, an equivalent of dlrs 1,856 per head for its dlrs 4.27 bn defense budget in 2005. In Qatar, the cost reaches $2,538 per capita to make up its dlrs 3.02 bn expenditure.

In terms of the country's GDP, Iran's defense spending works out at only 3.5 percent, higher than only than the UAE's 2.23 percent among Persian Gulf countries.

Expenditure in Bahrain, which is equivalent to $764 per capita, is 4.1 percent of GDP. In Qatar it is 6.19 percent, in Kuwait 6.24 percent, in Saudi Arabia 8.44 percent and in Oman 9.64 percent, the report said"

Oh great, poverty spreading across the Middle East and it is Guns before Butter, how social 'progressive' in the 21st century!

Light Relief

As way of light relief and instead of any drugs, it is good to visit JibJab, and their funny takes on DC, this land, etc but also human ingenuity

Tonge tired or Lack of Education?

I hadn't intended to blog on the comments of Baroness Tonge, but two issues occurred to me: words and education.

By words, I mean the primary medium which politicians can communicate by. A mechanic has his toolbox of wrenches, an engineer has a toolbox of screwdrivers and assorted equipment, etc, but a politician only has words and how he or she uses them determines their career and livelihood.

As a result politicians tend or at least try to use words in a more pointed and occasionally precise way than the rest of us (excluding barristers, lawyers, journalists and associated jobs, which politicians often do as well).

As words and the choice of them are of utter importance to a politician, particularly when composing a speech for a meeting at party conference. The politician will consider and measure the impact of the words in his or her speech: are they appropriate for the audience? Do they convey the right message? Are they too extreme? What point is being made? Can the speech be misconstrued?

And so it is with Baroness Tonge's comments at the Liberal Democratic Party fringe meeting on Palestine, in Brighton. Baroness Tonge has been a politician for some 25 years, starting as a local councillor and finally acquiring ermine in 2005. She is not a political novice.

Therefore, it is not unreasonable to assume that she knew what she was saying and the impact that it would have.

Turning to education, Baroness Tonge is not, as many people might suppose, ill educated. Far from it, she is a Doctor and has a degree from University College (although biographical details on the Web seem a bit scant at the moment).

In Baroness Tonge, we have essentially an educated career politician and that seeks to conjure up or inadvertently uses borderline antisemitic imagery: Jews controlling finance/banks.

I am at a loss to understand why Baroness chose to say the words that she did, I can only assume that she is undereducated in terms of antisemitic myths or imagery.

Which brings me to the final point, I think that across the political spectrum there are a wide range of people who are barely conscious of the creeping antisemitism which is entering the mainstream discourse, highlighted by the recent Parliamentary report.

I am unsure as to whether this is intentional or not, but I think there is a need for a concerted campaign to cover 3000 years of antisemitic myths and explain them in detail to all types of people, supposedly educated or not.

Politicians and political activists will be reluctant to ever admit that they don't know something and certainly antisemitism is a topic which falls into that area.

Many of them would probably be able to give a summary of the most overt Nazi antisemitic myths, but how would they fare when trying to discern the subtler manifestations and demonisation which regularly takes place in the media?

So, my contribution to the topic is to recommend that Baroness Tonge and many others read Anti-Semitism: The Longest Hatred by Robert S. Wistrich, ISBN: 041365320X, before they have another Mel Gibson "moment".

It Had to Happen?

Who’s to blame for 9/11, the Asian Tsunami, Katrina, Climate Change and now genocide in Sudan?

You got it! Israel and Jews are to blame for these problems, according to President Omar Hassan al-Bashir. The President dispenses with the normal camouflage of saying ‘Zionists’:

“It is very clear there is a plan to redraw the region," especially after the invasion of Iraq, President Omar Hassan al-Bashir told a news conference on the sidelines of a ministerial U.N. General Assembly session.

"The main purpose is the security of Israel. Any state in the region should be weakened, dismembered in order to protect the Israelis, to guarantee the Israeli security," he said.”

How tediously predictable.

You could almost foretell for each up-and-coming modern catastrophe: hurricane, earthquake, thunder or lightning or genocide, who people will blame.

In one shape of words or the other they say “it was the Zionists/Jews/Israelis that are to blame”.

The chronic antisemitism and conspiracy theories that pervade much of modern thinking are a throwback
to the Middle Ages when Jews were blamed for the Black Death:

"In the Middle Ages, Jews were accused of all kinds of slanders and were scapegoats for the problems of the day.

* Blood Libel _ In 1144, a myth began in England that Jews murdered Christian children. This myth was expanded to become an accusation which persisted for centuries that the Jews used the blood of Christian children in the preparation of their Passover unleavened bread (matzohs). This "blood libel" was ironic in that the consumption of any blood is expressly prohibited by Jewish law.

* Black Death_ the bubonic plague, the cause of the Black Death that liquidated a quarter of the population of Europe in the 14th century, was blamed on the Jews in Europe and Asia. The Pope issued a bull declaring that Jews were not responsible for the plague, but not before many Jews were burned alive or hanged by enraged mobs."

How regressive, it is as if cranky marginal beliefs normally confined to neo-Nazis, their camp followers or fellow travellers are spreading through modern thought on a daily basis.

Google Single Sign On

Google accounts which allow a single sign on to Google services will shortly add Writely to the services offered.

Less hassle or are Google trying to take over the world? you decide.

Oslo

Terrible news from Oslo:

"OSLO, Norway (Reuters) -- Shots were fired at a synagogue in central Oslo early on Sunday and police said they were investigating whether the incident was linked to religious hatred.

Armed police sealed off the synagogue after the incident at around 2.30 a.m. (0030 GMT). No one was injured.

"It seems some of the shots hit the synagogue," said Bjoern Christian Joergensen, a police spokesman.

Asked if the shooting was connected to religious intolerance, he said: "We are keeping all options open and investigating this possibility."

The Mosaic Religious Community, which owns the synagogue, had asked for better protection of its property following threats and after the site was vandalized in early August.

"This is the last in a series of incidents this summer whose purpose, it sees, is to scare us," Anne Sender, the leader of the Mosaic Religious Community, told Reuters."

News from Germany

Depressing news from Germany, 6.4% too many:

"Neo-Nazis capture seats in Merkel's home state
By Tony Paterson in Berlin
Published: 18 September 2006

Neo-Nazis dealt an embarrassing political blow to Germany's Chancellor Angela Merkel yesterday after winning parliamentary seats in her eastern home state for the first time since the country's reunification in 1990.

The overtly racist National Democratic Party, won 6.4 per cent of votes in the Baltic coastal state of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, where Mrs Merkel has her parliamentary constituency and keeps a holiday home.

Mrs Merkel's conservative Christian Democrats were narrowly beaten by the ruling Social Democrats in the state, which is renowned for having the highest unemployment in Germany. However, the Social Democrats lost more than 10 per cent of the vote, and it was unclear whether the party would continue its so-called "Red-Red" ruling coalition with reform Communists or attempt a grand coalition with the conservatives. Harald Ringstorff, the state's Social Democrat prime minister, described the NPD's gains as an " absolute catastrophe" yesterday.

He added: "Our most important task now is to take on these brown brothers and defeat them through argument." The NPD campaigned on a strongly anti-foreigner platform. Its share of the vote was enough to enable the party to enter the Mecklenburg-Vorpommern state parliament.

However, its leaders admitted the party's role would be confined to " stirring up opposition" to the established parties.

The party shocked Germany two years ago after obtaining seats in the eastern state of Saxony for the first time in 36 years.

In Berlin, where city state elections were also held yesterday, the ruling Social Democrats headed by the city's openly gay mayor, Klaus Wowereit, captured 31 per cent of the vote to stay in power.

The Social Democrats faced the choice of continuing their ruling "Red Red" coalition with the reform-Communist Left party, or forming a new alliance with the Greens, who won over 13 per cent of the vote.

In Berlin, the outcome was also interpreted as a defeat for Mrs Merkel's conservatives, who won 21.6 per cent of the vote."

Say No to Rome?

I don't normally comment on religion, it is not one of my major concerns, as an atheist.

I think faith is a private matter and for each individual to decide upon, but when religion, religious beliefs or its exponents cause major social damage or death (as we saw with the cartoon fiasco) then I feel that the matter is worthy of comment.

As far as I can discern from extracts of the Pope's speech, he is quoting a 14th century individual, and the words should probably be best viewed in that world wide and historical context.

Spats between religions are nothing new, historically speaking, many religions manufacture conflicts to differentiate themselves and acquire power, but should it concerned believers in secular society (and by that I mean the separation of Church and State, etc)?

Should religions be beyond criticism? Should secularists walk on eggshells when discussing religion?

I think we all should be concerned, religions are not beyond, criticism after the Reformation, and in contemporary society we should expect a vigorous debate on religion, its impact on society and where to draw some boundaries.

I don't think that we should necessarily go out of our way to the offensive to individuals concerning religion, but the Reformation happened and so did the age of Enlightenment.

We are no longer compelled to seek religious guidance for every action in life, we are no longer compelled to defer to the Papacy or watch as the Inquisition burns people.

Puritans no longer control British life as they did in the 17th century, so believers in civil society, religious or otherwise, need to make the point clear that incitement to violence or killing people merely because they wish to discuss some aspect of religious belief must not be tolerated in any way shape or form.

Killing people because they offend your religion or belief system, with words or cartoons, is murder pure and simple.

Ironically, the last word goes to Popery:

"The emperor goes on to explain in detail the reasons why spreading the faith through violence is something unreasonable. Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul. "God is not pleased by blood, and not acting reasonably ("syn logo") is contrary to God's nature. Faith is born of the soul, not the body. Whoever would lead someone to faith needs the ability to speak well and to reason properly, without violence and threats.... To convince a reasonable soul, one does not need a strong arm, or weapons of any kind, or any other means of threatening a person with death...."



Update 1: The Taliban wants in on the act "Afghanistan's Taliban on Saturday demanded Pope Benedict XVI to apologise for remarks linking Islam with violence, adding the comment showed the Christian West was waging war against Muslims."

Surreal or what?

Forage for Darfur

A new online game highlights the issue of genocide in Sudan: Darfur is Dying

No Blind Spot for Hizbollah's War Crimes

Guardian Unlimited reports that Amnesty International has accused Hezbollah of War Crimes, as if it were a novelty, or unexpected?

“Hizbullah militants broke international humanitarian law during the recent conflict with Israel, an Amnesty International report concluded today.

The report said Hizbullah had violated law by firing thousands of rockets into Israel and killing dozens of civilians during the fighting.”

Amazing? Hizbollah hiding behind civilians? Hizbollah storing missiles in people’s houses? Deliberately starting a war? Kidnapping people or killing members of the IDF?

I think Amnesty International is brave for stating the bleeding obvious, but a bit little too late

The report is here

Still that will sure annoy the usual apologists for Hezbollah.

Ideas on Darfur

I commend Peter Tatchell's suggestions on Darfur:

"# Enforce a no-fly zone over Darfur to halt the Sudanese bombing of African villages

# Send into Darfur a 15,000-strong UN peace-keeping force to protect the civilian population and aid workers, keep the warring factions apart, and disarm the militias

# Provide food, clothing, shelter and medical care to the victims of the conflict, and provide the refugees with assistance to leave the camps, return to their homes and rebuild their lives and communities

# Impose sanctions against the Sudanese government leaders and the leaders of the Janjaweed militia, including an arms embargo and arraignment before the International Criminal Court on charges of war crimes, torture and crimes against humanity"

Also, see Global Day for Darfur and events in London

On the Same Page? On the Same Report?

Have you ever read a book or seen a film only later on to read a review of it?

And then to be mystified by the review as if it is talking about another book or film, certainly not the one that you read or saw.

So it is with the Parliamentary report on antisemitism, I have been mystified by people's comments, in particular George Galloway’s and Michael Rosen’s.

Now in some respects I can understand Galloway's point of view, he is allegedly in the pockets of various Middle Eastern dictators and cannot afford to annoy them, too much. Of course in his recent radio programme Galloway made melodramatic pronunciations and then proceeded to slam the report, much as you might expect from such a shallow demagogue and friend of dictators.

But Michael Rosen's views are entirely different, he is known as an activist, poet and man of principle. So Rosen’s article on the Parliamentary report, in the Socialist Worker, makes interesting, if confusing, reading.

Does Mr Rosen discuss attacks on Jews in broad daylight? NO

Does Mr Rosen highlight attacks on synagogues? NO

Does Mr Rosen talk about the increase in antisemitism? Yes, some two thirds of the way in

Does Mr Rosen bring up the desecration of Jewish graves? Eventually, on the second to last paragraph

Well, what does he do?

He spends most of the article concentrating on definitions and how the report is really a sly attempt at attacking anti-Zionists.

Mr Rosen bemoans definitions, his condemnation verges almost on the paranoid when he states:

“The message is clear - anti-Zionists beware. Criticism of Israeli government policies will be permitted, but if you attack the core creed of Zionism, then we’ll call in the law.”

However,if you actually read the report , it makes clear that criticism of Israel, is not automatically antisemitic.

In fact, the report belabours the distinction between antisemitism and anti-Zionism, nor does it suggest that anti-Zionists should be jailed for their views.

Some examples from the report are below:

Page 7, “The committee unanimously recognised that criticism of Israel should not, in itself, be regarded as antisemitic…”

Page 23: “76. One of the most difficult and contentious issues about which we have received evidence is the dividing line between antisemitism and criticism of Israel or Zionism.”

Page 24: “79. However, most of those who gave evidence were at pains to explain that criticism of Israel is not to be regarded in itself as antisemitic. It is perfectly possible to be critical of the policies and actions of the government of Israel without being antisemitic. The Israeli government itself may, at times, have mistakenly perceived criticism of its policies and actions to be motivated by antisemitism, but we received no evidence of the accusation of antisemitism being misused by mainstream British Jewish community organisations and leaders.”

Page 24: “80. Some witnesses felt that it is misleading to characterise as antisemitic any contemporary attacks on Jews deriving from the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.”

Page 24: “82. Rather than explaining the distinctions between legitimate and illegitimate criticism of the actions and policies of the Israeli government, we took the view that anti-Israel discourse can, at times, become polluted by antisemitism and it is more important in each case to identify whether or not this has occurred.”

Page 24: “83. For example, criticism of Zionism is not in itself antisemitic. However, in some quarters an antisemitic discourse has developed that is in effect antisemitic because it views Zionism itself as a global force of unlimited power and malevolence throughout history.”

And so on, I shall deal with other points later on.

Suffice to say only the most deluded, political illiterate or those who haven't read the report thoroughly, would concur with Michael Rosen’s summary of the report.

I confess that I tried to take up some of these issues with Michael Rosen at Harry's Place, but I have yet to receive a satisfactory answer on many outstanding questions.

It does make me wonder if we were reading the same report?

Parliamentary Report into Antisemitism and Galloway

Before commenting on the Parliamentary report into antisemitism, I would like to advise people to listen to the recordings of George Galloway's radio special from last Friday, 8th September 2006.

Then compare Galloway’s hatchet job on the report with the reality of the evidence, and see the difference.

The files are hosted at Night Studies: first hour, second hour.

Playing to the Gallery or Incitement to Murder

We might suppose that members of the Knesset would have a better grasp of history and the concepts of "Judenrein", however, that does not appear to be the case with MK Effi Eitam (NU-NRP), according to the Jerusalem Post:

"MK Effi Eitam (NU-NRP), called Sunday for the expulsion of Palestinians from the West Bank and the removal of Israeli-Arabs from the political scene, Army Radio reported."

Now he may have been playing to his constituency, or he may wish to emulate Hamas's attitude towards Jews, he should know better.


Either way, such racist comments are unacceptable, I concur with Yossi Beilin:

"Meretz chairman MK Yossi Beilin called Eitam's remarks "racist incitement [that] even crosses the red lines of the extreme right. A Jewish democratic state cannot live with such statements." Beilin and other Meretz members called on Attorney General Menachem Mazuz to press criminal charges against Eitam for "racist incitement."

Sep 11

I had intended to blog on the topic of 9/11 conspiracy theories, combined with the stream of irrational ideas behind it and how Popular Mechanics had debunked most of them.

I would have wrote about some humans predisposition towards irrationality in spite of all the evidence (video footage, survivors accounts, etc)

but in the end I didn't have the heart, I think we all need to remember the planes crashing into the buildings and reflect on it, each in our own way.

What Excuses in the Internet Age

We live in an age of instant media, pictures, video and journalistic accounts of events can be passed around the world in seconds.

Email systems buckle under the volume of video news footage, and yet people in Western countries seem oblivious to disasters, genocide and human tragedy in one of the world's major continent: Africa

Over the decades we have heard excuses in the West, such as “we didn't know what was going on”, “we haven't got the resources”, “it's a consequence of colonialism” or worst still “it is all tribal over there, nothing we can do helps”

Today, there are no such excuses, even if they were valid years back (which I would seriously doubt), the Internet allows millions and millions of people to see the consequences of genocide in Africa, by using a few mouse clicks.

By simply accessing YouTube and typing Darfur in the search box (upper right hand corner) horrific events from Africa are available for all to see. Ignorance is no excuse.

The “international community”, be it Western countries or oil rich Arab nations or Asian economic powerhouses, have sufficient resources (military, humanitarian, etc) to employ when necessary at home, and bearing in mind that a few resources goes a long way in Africa then the excuse of “resources” is hardly tenable.

The latter two excuses of “colonialism” and “tribalism” are fatalistic justifications for inactivity (for decades).

If we truly wish to improve human morality, human health, human ethics and the state of the world, then the least we can do is to stop the genocide in Darfur.

A first step would be for people to acknowledge that it is occurring and that it can be stopped, if there is the will.

Here are some videos which detail the appalling situation in Darfur, remember ignorance is no excuse in the Internet age.

Alternatively go to google videos and type in Darfur

Galloway and Syria

After briefly listening to Galloway on TalkSport, I was reminded of his trip to Syria.

Galloway praised the Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad as:

"For me he is the last Arab ruler, and Syria is the last Arab country. It is the fortress of the remaining dignity of the Arabs, and that's why I'm proud to be here."

Again Galloway defends his crawling to the Syrian dictator.

Next time, Galloway and his Respect/SWP/StWC supporters should consult the Syrian Human Rights Committee and their latest report which details terrible human rights abuses in Syria.

EUMC Working Definition Of Antisemitism

Whilst working through the report I thought it best it highlight the EUMC Working Definition of Antisemitism, taken from page 6 (note the bolded text, my emphasis):

EUMC Working Definition of Antisemitism

Working definition: “Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”

In addition, such manifestations could also target the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity. Antisemitism frequently charges Jews with conspiring to harm humanity, and it is often used to blame Jews for “why things go wrong.” It is expressed in speech, writing, visual forms and action, and employs sinister
stereotypes and negative character traits.

Contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere could, taking into account the overall context, include, but are not limited to:

• Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion.

• Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective – such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.

• Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews.

• Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust).

• Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.

• Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.

Examples of the ways in which antisemitism manifests itself with regard to the state of Israel taking into account the overall context could include:

• Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavour.

• Applying double standards by requiring of it a behaviour not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.

• Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis.

• Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.

• Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.

However, criticism of Israel similar to that levelled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic.

Antisemitic acts are criminal when they are so defined by law (for example, denial of the Holocaust or distribution of antisemitic materials in some countries).

Criminal acts are antisemitic when the targets of attacks, whether they are people or property – such as buildings, schools, places of worship and cemeteries – are selected because they are, or are perceived to be, Jewish or linked to Jews.

Antisemitic discrimination is the denial to Jews of opportunities or services available to others and is illegal in many countries.

Memory

I shall be digesting that report but in the mean time why not visit the Iraq Memory Foundation

Will It Be So Predictable?

After collecting information over the past year, the All Party Parliamentary Inquiry into Antisemitism report will be published today.

Whilst I do not wish to prejudge the issue, I suspect that the response from the usual suspects (fanatical anti-Zionists) will be all too predictable.

Fanatical anti-Zionists will probably say (and I'm guessing, but with some precedent):

1. “OK, there were a large number of physical attacks on Jews in Britain, but (and this is a big but) Israel is fundamentally to blame for the increase in anti-Semitism” (letting off every BNP type thug or neo-Nazi)

2. “anti-Semitism wouldn’t be a problem if British Jews distance themselves from Israel” (presumably by carrying placards, daily)

3. “anti-Semitism? What? the real issue is Islamophobia and the occupation of Arab lands by colonialist armies”

4. “anti-Semitism? never heard of it? It is exaggerated, even if it exists”

5. “anti-Semitism wouldn’t be a problem, if Israel didn't exist and never mind history, Israel is to blame (whatever the problem)”

6. etc

Responses to the report will no doubt forget that no other ethnic/social/religious minority in Britain would ever be blamed for provoking the attacks against themselves, and yet Jews are often blamed for bringing attacks upon themselves.

What nasty racist hypocrisy.

An example, can you imagine someone saying “he’s Turkish/Irish/Afro-Caribbean I thought that it was only right and proper to attack him, I am not to blame, it is his fault, he is to blame for being Turkish/Irish/Afro-Caribbean”

But we shall see, I hope I haven't prejudged the issue too much.

Update 1: the report is here
Radio 4's Today has a small piece here on it, with Iain Duncan-Smith and Inayat Bunglawala and here
with Shalom Lappin and Steven Rose (who interrupts and foaming at the mouth)

Update 2: Steven Rose uses excuse number 2 and 5, how predictable

Evolution and Superstition

There is increasing evidence that we may be biologically predisposed to superstitious beliefs, or at least some of us according to a report in The Times:

“HUMANS have evolved over tens of thousands of years to be susceptible to supernatural beliefs, a psychologist has claimed.

Religion and other forms of magical thinking continue to thrive — despite the lack of evidence and advance of science — because people are naturally biased to accept a role for the irrational, said Bruce Hood, Professor of Experimental Psychology at the University of Bristol.

This evolved credulity suggests that it would be impossible to root out belief in ideas such as creationism and paranormal phenomena, even though they have been countered by evidence and are held as a matter of faith alone.

People ultimately believe in these ideas for the same reasons that they attach sentimental value to inanimate objects such as wedding rings or Teddy bears, and recoil from artefacts linked to evil as if they are pervaded by a physical “essence”.

Even the most rational people behave in irrational ways and supernatural beliefs are part of the same continuum, Professor Hood told the British Association Festival of Science in Norwich yesterday.
…”

As an antidote to such beliefs, I present Crank Dot Net which “… is devoted to presenting Web sites by and about cranks, crankism, crankishness, and crankosity. All cranks, all the time.”

Their Crank of the Day is good fun.

Browser Heaven

Firefox 2 Beta 2 has just been released with some nice features, and one that will be appreciated by poor typists like me, is an on-line spelling checker.

Firefox is a great competitive force for persuading M$ and others to continue the enhancement of browser technology, not forgetting Opera 9, Maxthon, IE7, Slim Browser, Avant Browser, Flock and many others.

Nothing like a bit competition

Dead Historian: Pierre Vidal-Naquet

I am indebted to Bob from Brockley for bringing to my notice, the demise of Pierre Vidal-Naquet, a French historian and noted critic of Noam Chomsky.

In particular, these works are well regarded: The Assassins of Memory: Essays on the Denial of the Holocaust By Pierre Vidal-Naquet

I just managed to pick a copy of Vidal-Naquet's 'The Jews' and hope to read it over the next year, other books permitting.

Samina Altaf

The Home Office has rejected Samina Altaf and her children application to stay in Britain, if ever there was a deserving case it is hers:

“Samina and the children fled Pakistan after domestic abuse by her husband. All 3 suffer from severe rickets and, for the first time, are receiving proper medical support in this country. But the Home Office want to deport them.”

Disabled mum faces destitution

This case has been going on for a long time, as pickled politics and HP links show.

Amazon's Demise?

Well, no, Amazon are still safe.

Finally, Google books are getting their act in gear: they will now allow the downloading of non-copyright books to PDF files.

The selection is fairly small but hopefully should expand with time.

Book lovers get to it

This article describes some of the technology behind the book scanning, very neat but incredibility pricey.

With Friends Like This?

I like the Engage web site, and found an interesting article on Sue Blackwell and some videos posted on YouTube.

I wondered to myself "what type of people make these videos and what are their underlying motives?", here's what I found.

I took a look at the various images posted under the user: israelpalestine on YouTube, who posted Sue Blackwell’s original video.

One video caught my eye, a small film by Ryan Dawson, called the Reality in Israel and Palestine

It is a polished piece of propaganda with very stark imagery of bodies or body parts, IDF soldiers continually pointing guns and acting aggressively. Plenty of sad looking children, parts of houses demolished, etc. and an evocative soundtrack.

And towards the end of the video there is the statement ”it is not anti-Semitic to disagree with the current government of Israel" and "fighting Zionism is no more anti-Semitic than fighting the Nazis would be anti-white"

Then plenty of strong evocative images and at the end an American flag overlaid with "anti-Neocons"

Powerful stuff, but I wondered who was Ryan Dawson? And Google came to my aid!

Ryan Dawson seems to run a forum for “anti-neocons” and in his introduction he expressly states that “Anti-Semitism is NOT the goal of this website."

A quick inspection reveals: Holocaust denial, David Icke followers and 9/11 conspiracy theories.

Using the inbuilt search facility brought up a Holocaust denial article by Edgar J. Steele

Also, a weird topic "David Icke: The Lizards and the Jews"

Finally, plenty of stuff on 9/11 and guess who they think did it?? the Dancing Israelis, of course.

Ryan Dawson comments on the article "good find"

The Palestinians seem to have some allies amongst the David Icke "Lizards exist brigade," backed up ably by the "9/11 was an inside job" crowd.

I cannot say that I am surprised, the most persistent and aggressive anti-Semites tend to articulate many of the weirder conspiracy theories as well, that make the protocols of the Elders of Zion look fairly mild by comparison.

I do feel tempted to ask Sue Blackwell and her pro-boycott friends about their views on Lizards, 9/11 and dancing Israelis.

Humm, still not too sure what they'd reply!

New Verbs?

English is a flexible language, incorporating foreign words with ease, and so the recent conflict in the Middle East gave birth to a new word: Hezbollization

Hezbollization

(noun) A process whereby evil murderous thugs are turned into everyday heroes by an overzealous mainstream media. Hezbollize

(verb) Assign great social importance to gangsters, treat them as celebrities (Hez-boll-ized, Hez-boll-iz-ing, Hez-boll-iz-es)

Example 1: "Cross burnings bring warmth and comfort to homes without central heating, as caring KKK activists distribute clean white clothing among impoverished kids."

Example 2: "Crips, Bloods, MS 13 organize daily after school programs, engage minority children in pharmacological economics and ballistics training"

Conflict In Lebanon For Dummies

I couldn't resist this satire

More TV?

One of my rare commentors pointed out that the Holy Land tool bar does not have many Israeli TV channels, very true.

As far as I can see there are very few English language Israeli TV news channels available across the web, and the Holy Land tool bar provides links to all those accessible.

Some major ones, such as Channel 10 news, do not appear to broadcast in English on the web.

If anyone knows of any English language Israeli TV news channels, please email me or leave a comment.

Some people, for their own reasons, may be reluctant to install the Holy Land tool bar for fear that it might take control of their PC, or like the Iranian President’a web site download a virus or malware.

I can say this is not the case, after gruelling testing and scanning with Spybot, AVG, etc, I can declare that the Holy Land tool bar is harmless and a useful addition to news gathering.

So install and enjoy, unless of course, you think that all Israeli software is a Mossad or “Evil Zionist” type trick?

But if that were the case you’d hardly be watching Israeli TV would you?

Either way, your choice!

Confirmation on 1701

As discussed before, JPost reports

"The prospect of having to disarm Hizbullah, along with the fear of unclear rules of disengagement, have been largely responsible for European countries' reluctance to send large contingencies to the force."

Books Meme

I confess I like books but as I have only managed to complete a small section (those adjacent to me) of the cataloguing at Librarything, so I found trying to recall all of those enjoyable reads a bit hard, still here goes:

A book meme (thingie) from HP

1. Name one book that changed your life: the Iliad

2. One book you've read more than once: most of the Flashman novels, again and again.

3. One book you'd want on a desert island: Capital (all volumes) by Herr Marx

4. One book that made you laugh: an Evil Cradling by Brian Keenan

5. One book that made you cry: The Diving Bell and the Butterfly

6. One book you wish you'd written: Borstal Boy by Brendan Behan

7. One book you wish had never been written: anything by David Irving. He’s such a despicable little shit.

8. One book you're currently reading: several as is my habit, dipping in to Brothers Behan, Ben-Gurion & the Holocaust, Forgotten Millions and Nazi Germany & Neutral Europe (see the theme there!). Meaning to finish: Genocide and Rescue, by David Cesarani (Ed), started it ages ago, half way thru, a fairly small book but harrowing tale.

9. One book you've been meaning to read: French Revolution by George Lefebvre

10. Tag 5 people: Judeosphere, SimplyJews, Gertrude Bell Jar, Brett Lock and Bob From Brockley

11. (additional question), make up the titles of two imaginary books: In all modesty by George Galloway and The Pleasures of Celibacy by Tommy Sheridan.

Should Be Read by Many

I am indebted to ZioNation, a progressive Zionism and Israel web log, for pointing me towards an article by Tarek Heggy, an Egyptian intellectual with a fine sense of proportion in this time of conflict:

“The existence in any country of an armed political party that is not subject to the supervision and control of the central state authority is a prescription for chaos. That is why, in stating that his government would never have condoned what Hezbollah did by attacking Israel on July 12, the prime minister of Lebanon, Fouad Siniora, was expressing the views of the vast majority of his war-weary countrymen.

The overwhelming majority of Christians, all of the Druze, and a vast majority of Sunni Muslims oppose the actions of Hezbollah that led to the war with Israel.

Many reasonable people in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, and Kuwait raised their voices not only to condemn the mass killing of innocent civilians in Lebanon and the crippling destruction of its infrastructure but also to criticize the rash adventurism that opened the gates of Hell for no other reason than to relieve the international pressure on certain regional parties.

When I heard some of the Palestinians and Lebanese who appeared on television asking, "Where is the Arab support?" I could only shake my head in wonder. Why should a party that unilaterally embarked on a rash adventure, in defiance of all reason and logic, expect others, whom it did not bother to consult, to help it? It seems that in the eyes of some Palestinians and Lebanese, Arab societies are like firefighters who must comply when summoned to put out the flames. This attitude is a throwback to the tribal mentality that prevailed thousands of years ago when a tribe would fight for one of its members even if he was the one who recklessly provoked the battle in the first place.

Since Hezbollah sparked the crisis on July 12, I have been in daily contact with my many Lebanese friends. Over a hundred told me it was shameful for the world, the United Nations, and the Arab League to accept a situation in Lebanon that the Lebanese themselves did not accept, namely, the existence of a state within the state. Some said it was Lebanon's curse to experience the existence of a state within the state more than once in its recent history. The first time was in the 1970s, when the Palestinians, together with their leaders and armed fighters, lived and ran amok in Lebanon, above the state and the law. This ultimately sparked off a civil war that dragged on for years and brought the country to its knees.

The second time was when the military and intelligence officers of Syria operated as a separate state within the Lebanese state, above its central government and its laws, for nearly a quarter-century. Now it is Hezbollah that has established itself as an autonomous state within the state, above the central government, Parliament and the law.

Arab brotherhood cannot possibly mean that countries like Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Kuwait should allow themselves to be dragged into a conflict that erupted as a reaction, albeit an excessively violent one, to an action that was reckless in the extreme and, moreover, one that was undertaken without their knowledge or approval. What it means, rather, is that we should not condone the uncivilized, unconstitutional, and unlawful situation in Lebanon that allows an entity other than the state to declare war without the knowledge of the Lebanese Parliament, cabinet or army who are then required, together with the civilian population, to suffer the consequences of a reckless adventure launched by a party with no constitutional capacity.

Any objective analyst must commend the Arab country that dared go against the tribal custom of supporting the members of the tribe even when they commit the most heinous of crimes. I am talking of Saudi Arabia which was the first Arab country to condemn the reckless adventurism of Hezbollah that Hezbollah and Hamas are responsible for what befell Gaza and Lebanon. In their quest for personal glory, they acted rashly and without regard to the consequences.

Those who think Hezbollah can achieve its goals need only remember the lessons of history. Certain images come to mind here. For example, the words of the former president of Egypt, Gamal Abdel Nasser, to reporters at a press conference just days before Israel destroyed the armies of Egypt, Syria, and Jordan, "Egypt may be forced to sink the American Sixth Fleet if the U.S. enters the war that will be fought between Egypt and Israel." Nor can we forget Saddam Hussein's warning that American forces would commit suicide at the gates of Baghdad if America attacked Iraq. The most recent images are of Hassan Nasrallah, who a few weeks ago derisively invited the American forces to enter Lebanon where they would be annihilated, and on July 12 vowed to "destroy Haifa … and what is beyond Haifa … and what is beyond what is beyond Haifa."

I am filled with grief at the heavy price Arab societies have paid and continue to pay for patterns of thinking that can only be described as divorced from logic, objectivity, and the realities of the age. They have only to look at our recent history to realize that it is filled with thousands of examples proving that those who spoke in the name of "Arab pride and dignity" reaped only the bitter fruit of defeat and squandered God's bounty and resources he bestowed on us to improve the living conditions of our societies — not to finance reckless adventures. "

TV from the Middle East

Obtaining a wide range of views on events in the Middle East can be hard, but there is a solution:

Use the Holy Land Radio tool bar

From Firefox, do Tools->Extensions->Find More Extensions

Which will bring you to Firefox Add-ons Extensions

In the search box (upper right) type: Holy

And this entry should appear: Holy Land Radio tool bar

After installing the Holy Land Radio tool bar, you will have direct access to Israeli newspaper feeds and four TV channels, across the web. The TV channels offer a nice balance, countering much of the distorted news that is shown in the West. They are remarkably critical and even harsh about Israeli society.

The tool bar offers a web range of webcams, plenty of goodies, etc.

Right On?

Forgive the pun, but writely has opened up its doors again, altho still in beta it looks and feels nice.

Give it a try

Wartime Videos

As it seems that the conflict in Lebanon will continue I recommend checking out this web site: Israel Radio Videos.

The video below caught my eye, as an operational room for Hezbollah and how sophisticated it was, notice in the corner, the batteries and UPS for the PCs.

Replay this video | Share this video | Watch more videos

Carl's Logic

This Baloney Detection Kit is very useful in political, social or scientific research, we owe a debt to Carl Sagan:

The following are suggested as tools for testing arguments and detecting fallacious or fraudulent arguments:

1. Wherever possible there must be independent confirmation of the facts.

2. Encourage substantive debate on the evidence by knowledgeable proponents of all points of view.

3. Arguments from authority carry little weight (in science there are no "authorities").

4. Spin more than one hypothesis - don't simply run with the first idea that caught your fancy.

5. Try not to get overly attached to a hypothesis just because it's yours.

6. Quantify, wherever possible.

7. If there is a chain of argument every link in the chain must work.

8. Occam's razor - if there are two hypotheses that explain the data equally well choose the simpler.

9. Ask whether the hypothesis can, at least in principle, be falsified (shown to be false by some unambiguous test). In other words, it is testable? Can others duplicate the experiment and get the same result?

Additional issues are:

• Conduct control experiments - especially "double blind" experiments where the person taking measurements is not aware of the test and control subjects.

• Check for confounding factors - separate the variables.

• Common fallacies of logic and rhetoric

• Ad hominem - attacking the arguer and not the argument.

• Argument from "authority".

• Argument from adverse consequences (putting pressure on the decision maker by pointing out dire consequences of an "unfavorable" decision).

• Appeal to ignorance (absence of evidence is not evidence of absence).

• Special pleading (typically referring to god's will).

• Begging the question (assuming an answer in the way the question is phrased).

• Observational selection (counting the hits and forgetting the misses).

• Statistics of small numbers (such as drawing conclusions from inadequate sample sizes).

• Misunderstanding the nature of statistics (President Eisenhower expressing astonishment and alarm on discovering that fully half of all Americans have below average intelligence!)

• Inconsistency (e.g. military expenditures based on worst case scenarios but scientific projections on environmental dangers thriftily ignored because they are not "proved").

• Non sequitur - "it does not follow" - the logic falls down.

• Post hoc, ergo propter hoc - "it happened after so it was caused by" - confusion of cause and effect.

• Meaningless question ("what happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object?).

• Excluded middle - considering only the two extremes in a range of possibilities (making the "other side" look worse than it really is).

• Short-term v. long-term - a subset of excluded middle ("why pursue fundamental science when we have so huge a budget deficit?").

• Slippery slope - a subset of excluded middle - unwarranted extrapolation of the effects (give an inch and they will take a mile).

• Confusion of correlation and causation.

• Caricaturing (or stereotyping) a position to make it easier to attack.

• Suppressed evidence or half-truths.

• Weasel words - for example, use of euphemisms for war such as "police action" to get around limitations on Presidential powers. "An important art of politicians is to find new names for institutions which under old names have become odious to the public"

Lebanon and the Ceasefire

The ramifications of the conflict in Lebanon are unclear, although three issues seem to stand out: Hezbollah's “victory”, the political fallout in Israel and the ceasefire.

In the short-term, the conflict may result in a propaganda victory for Hezbollah locally, as they spend vast sums of money in the rebuilding of Beirut, winning loyalty and news coverage across the Middle East. Merely surviving the onslaught of the IDF is taken by many in the Middle East as a “victory”, irrespective of the civilian casualties and the longer term consequences for Lebanon.

In Israel, Prime Minister Olmert's position is very weak and there is considerable criticism of how the General staff and government conducted the war. The result may be a shake-up amongst the military and Olmert’s replacement by Binyamin Netanyahu.

The ceasefire established on the UN resolution 1701 seems to be holding but the key element: the UN force, looks decidedly shaky.

After the initial pronouncements of participation from France and Germany, they have backtracked and significantly scaled down their involvement. Seemingly the problem is over the rules of engagement, which is a polite way of saying, how they would have to deal with Hezbollah.

France and Germany’s unwillingness to provide a sizeable element of the UN force may doom the whole project, a substantial military force would be required to disarm Hezbollah.

The disarmament of Hezbollah is central to resolving this and any future conflict.

I suspect that Germany and France are unwilling to place their soldiers directly in the firing line, as it appears that Hezbollah will not willingly give up their weapons.

So the UN force will be obliged to either:

1. disarm Hezbollah, according to UN resolutions 1701 and 1559
2. or play along with the façade of removing weapons, rockets and missiles from southern Lebanon, when in reality they will be hidden for “round” two.

The latter is more likely and so we can expect another conflict within the next year or so.

Unless Hezbollah disband their militia and remove the constant threat to Israeli civilians there will be another conflict, and I suspect much bloodier, next time around.

New Blog or Beta?

Blogger gets a fair amount of criticism and with some justification, there are times when it grinds to a halt and throws a wobbly.

Nevertheless, it is free and if used when there’s not too much congestion on the Web (when North America is asleep) then it tends to work well enough.

One proviso: do most of your entries off-line and then upload, less chance of a hiccup or losing a post that way.

In response, Blogger has introduced a new beta service at http://beta.blogger.com/

You need a Google account but that’s easy to get.

Be brave and give it a try!

Site(s) of the Week/Month 17

As a break from the Middle East

Site(s) of the Week/Month is a semi regular slot for interesting web sites that have caught my fancy recently.

I present:

The Association for Skeptical Enquiry

Google's blog - keep an eye oh Google's goings on!

Gizmo's Top Picks

Vulture Man or Green Helmet

Never let it be said that I don't, at least, try to have a sense of humour (altho, I think some of my few commenters don't always get the jokes, pity)

So continuing a theme, I present the Green Helmet Guy

Enjoy!

Oh by the way, if some people need me to explain : why I think that Hezbollah’s helpers are lower than vultures for desecrating dead bodies on camera, then me explaining it won't make much difference, because it should be damn obvious from the outset and hardly require an explanation.

Staged Managed War

I have tried not to comment too much on the conflict in Lebanon, because I think what we hear day to day changes, and the final picture will be very different. I think we need to step back from the constant stream of news coverage and think how is that news being manipulated?

One aspect of my distrust is Hezbollah’s stage management of the media and how many news organisations seem to go along with it.

This small video shows Hezbollah’s cynicism and willingness to use the dead for its own vile purposes:

Respect/SWP in Arabic?

Check out shlemazl's post on the recent demonstrations in London and the slogans that were chanted in Arabic.

Old Arafat's technique, say one thing in English "I want peace, etc" and another in Arabic "those damn Jews" etc

I wonder if the ‘internationalists’ in Respect/SWP will make that a regular “official” chant?

Either way, I’ll bet that Galloway sings it in the shower from now on.

PM's speech?

I was very taken by this speech for PM Olmert (written by Ben Caspit), it is a bit OTT but you'll get the point:

"Ladies and gentlemen, leaders of the world. I, the Prime Minister of Israel, am speaking to you from Jerusalem in the face of the terrible pictures from Kfar Kana. Any human heart, wherever it is, must sicken and recoil at the sight of such pictures. There are no words of comfort that can mitigate the enormity of this tragedy. Still, I am looking you straight in the eye and telling you that the State of Israel will continue its military campaign in Lebanon.

The Israel Defense Forces will continue to attack targets from which missiles and Katyusha rockets are fired at hospitals, old age homes and kindergartens in Israel. I have instructed the security forces and the IDF to continue to hunt for the Katyusha stockpiles and launch sites from which these savages are bombarding the State of Israel.

We will not hesitate, we will not apologize and we will not back off. If they continue to launch missiles into Israel from Kfar Kana, we will continue to bomb Kfar Kana. Today, tomorrow and the day after tomorrow. Here, there and everywhere. The children of Kfar Kana could now be sleeping peacefully in their homes, unmolested, had the agents of the devil not taken over their land and turned the lives of our children into hell.

Ladies and gentlemen, it’s time you understood: the Jewish state will no longer be trampled upon. We will no longer allow anyone to exploit population centers in order to bomb our citizens. No one will be able to hide anymore behind women and children in order to kill our women and children. This anarchy is over. You can condemn us, you can boycott us, you can stop visiting us and, if necessary, we will stop visiting you.

A voice for six million citizens

Today I am serving as the voice of six million bombarded Israeli citizens who serve as the voice of six million murdered Jews who were melted down to dust and ashes by savages in Europe. In both cases, those responsible for these evil acts were, and are, barbarians devoid of all humanity, who set themselves one simple goal: to wipe the Jewish race off the face of the earth, as Adolph Hitler said, or to wipe the State of Israel off the map, as Mahmoud Ahmedinjad proclaims.

And you - just as you did not take those words seriously then, you are ignoring them again now. And that, ladies and gentlemen, leaders of the world, will not happen again. Never again will we wait for bombs that never came to hit the gas chambers. Never again will we wait for salvation that never arrives. Now we have our own air force. The Jewish people are now capable of standing up to those who seek their destruction - those people will no longer be able to hide behind women and children. They will no longer be able to evade their responsibility.

Every place from which a Katyusha is fired into the State of Israel will be a legitimate target for us to attack. This must be stated clearly and publicly, once and for all. You are welcome to judge us, to ostracize us, to boycott us and to vilify us. But to kill us? Absolutely not.

Four months ago I was elected by hundreds of thousands of citizens to the office of Prime Minister of the government of Israel, on the basis of my plan for unilaterally withdrawing from 90 percent of the areas of Judea and Samaria, the birth place and cradle of the Jewish people; to end most of the occupation and to enable the Palestinian people to turn over a new leaf and to calm things down until conditions are ripe for attaining a permanent settlement between us.

The Prime Minister who preceded me, Ariel Sharon, made a full withdrawal from the Gaza Strip back to the international border, and gave the Palestinians there a chance to build a new reality for themselves. The Prime Minister who preceded him, Ehud Barak, ended the lengthy Israeli presence in Lebanon and pulled the IDF back to the international border, leaving the land of the cedars to flourish, develop and establish its democracy and its economy.

What did the State of Israel get in exchange for all of this? Did we win even one minute of quiet? Was our hand, outstretched in peace, met with a handshake of encouragement? Ehud Barak's peace initiative at Camp David let loose on us a wave of suicide bombers who smashed and blew to pieces over 1,000 citizens, men, women and children. I don't remember you being so enraged then. Maybe that happened because we did not allow TV close-ups of the dismembered body parts of the Israeli youngsters at the Dolphinarium? Or of the shattered lives of the people butchered while celebrating the Passover seder at the Park Hotel in Netanya? What can you do - that's the way we are. We don't wave body parts at the camera. We grieve quietly.

We do not dance on the roofs at the sight of the bodies of our enemy's children - we express genuine sorrow and regret. That is the monstrous behavior of our enemies. Now they have risen up against us. Tomorrow they will rise up against you. You are already familiar with the murderous taste of this terror. And you will taste more.

In a loud and clear voice

And Ariel Sharon's withdrawal from Gaza. What did it get us? A barrage of Kassem missiles fired at peaceful settlements and the kidnapping of soldiers. Then too, I don't recall you reacting with such alarm. And for six years, the withdrawal from Lebanon has drawn the vituperation and crimes of a dangerous, extremist Iranian agent, who took over an entire country in the name of religious fanaticism and is trying to take Israel hostage on his way to Jerusalem - and from there to Paris and London.

An enormous terrorist infrastructure has been established by Iran on our border, threatening our citizens, growing stronger before our very eyes, awaiting the moment when the land of the Ayatollahs becomes a nuclear power in order to bring us to our knees. And make no mistake - we won't go down alone. You, the leaders of the free and enlightened world, will go down along with us.

So today, here and now, I am putting an end to this parade of hypocrisy. I don't recall such a wave of reaction in the face of the 100 citizens killed every single day in Iraq. Sunnis kill Shiites who kill Sunnis, and all of them kill Americans - and the world remains silent. And I am hard pressed to recall a similar reaction when the Russians destroyed entire villages and burned down large cities in order to repress the revolt in Chechnya. And when NATO bombed Kosovo for almost three months and crushed the civilian population - then you also kept silent. What is it about us, the Jews, the minority, the persecuted, that arouses this cosmic sense of justice in you? What do we have that all the others don't?

In a loud clear voice, looking you straight in the eye, I stand before you openly and I will not apologize. I will not capitulate. I will not whine. This is a battle for our freedom. For our humanity. For the right to lead normal lives within our recognized, legitimate borders. It is also your battle. I pray and I believe that now you will understand that. Because if you don't, you may regret it later, when it's too late. "

Sadly, I think that Olmert would be too 'diplomatic' to use it

Salutes

Judeosphere points to an alarming trend amongst some anti-Israel counter demonstrators: the Hezbollah salute.

Of course, astute readers would know that it is also the Nazi salute.

So, genuine and sincere non-racist "anti-Zionists" have to decide:

do they really want to keep the company of individuals that march around to the Hitler salute?

Sadly, my guess is that it is the shape of things to come, and needs to be opposed tooth and nail.

Statements or What?

I am still digesting the news from the Middle-East, so probably won’t comment for a while, but one of my commenters (JohnG) wondered what I thought of the Lebanese Communist Party’s recent statement.

I think I give it as much credence as I would statements coming out of the North Korean CP or the speeches of Kim Jong Il, which is to say: zilch

Of course, I can see the Lebanese Communist Party’s point of view, either they side with Hezbollah or side with Israel and they are toast, not a hard political decision.

After all, Hezbollah are a sizable group of Islamist thugs, so if you lived in Lebanon would you want to cross them? Probably not.

Nevertheless, it brings up the point of: support for Hezbollah in the West.

I wonder why people in the West seem to have been dragged into the infantile nihilism of supporting Hezbollah?

They might choose to cover it with some “anti-imperialist” gobbledygook, but they are consciously supporting a pack of Islamist fundamentalists, who would gladly kill all Jews, Westerners or other “decadent” examples of Western hegemony, civil rights for women and gays, etc. if they had the means. Talk about rolling the clock back.

Here’s a tip for would-be supporters/sympathisers of Hezbollah.

When faced with a choice between modernity and reaction, pick modernity.

Hint: Hezbollah are not modernity.

Unlikely Allies?

Israel has found some unlikely allies: Robert Fisk and the Arab League.

Remember that Fisk and Arab League are ardent critics of Israel.

Robert Fisk confirms that Hezbollah pre-planned this conflict:

“The original border crossing, the capture of the two soldiers and the killing of three others was planned, according to Hassan Nasrallah, the Hizbollah leader who escaped assassination by the Israelis on Friday evening, more than five months ago.“

As the Washington Post comments:

“In a stunning development, the 22-member Arab League criticized Hezbollah for provoking the current crisis. It is unprecedented for the Arab League to criticize any Arab party while it is actively engaged in hostilities with Israel.”


So Hezbollah are to blame, well that just confirms it!

Butch Bombers?

Butterflies and Wheels points to a recent academic paper by Dr Antony Whitehead, which suggests that suicide bomber’s “problems” may relate to a lack of masculinity and a need to prove themselves.

The paper concurs with an idea, put about in feminists’ circles for years, that part of the issue was power, male power, and the need for some men to demonstrate their masculinity by using extreme violence.

As the Sunday Herald comments:

“According to the academics, males aged between 18 and 24 are at the optimum age at which to carry out atrocities, as they are also at this time struggling to be identified as men”

Whilst these ideas can not fully explain all instances of these terrible events and there might be some odd exception, the notion of male masculinity as a social problem does provide an insight to aspects of terrorism and suicide bombings which otherwise might go unnoticed.

Gendegreek’s previous comments are most relevant.

Why Such An Advert Now?

The PA is encouraging kids to become suicide bombers again.

Years after complaints and its withdrawal, the Palestinian Authority TV is showing another advert to persuade children to become “Martyrs for Allah”, as detailed in the Jerusalem Post:

“One of the most sinister of these clips was broadcast twice last week, according to our research after a three-year absence. The clip features a child actor playing the most famous Palestinian child martyr, Muhammad al-Dura - whose death in a crossfire was broadcast to the entire world - calling to other Palestinian children to literally follow him to Child Martyrs' Heaven.”

What timing? And I had always thought that arguments over the “cult of death” were an exaggeration, now I am not so sure.

A Little Less Empathy on 7/7

The seventh of July will no doubt bring forth assorted opinions from condemnation, perplexed indignation, confusion to varying degrees of sympathy, if not for their methods, at least with the "alienation" of the 7th July 2005 bombers.

My own memory of the day is rather blurred, and afterwards amongst the confusion of thoughts two ideas stood out: the Bus and Aldgate tube bombings.

The bus bombing which ripped apart a number 30 bus, going south on Tavistock Square took place outside the BMA headquarters and near the dole office, just off Tavistock Place.

The Aldgate tube bombing was in an ethnically mixed area, only minutes from the East London Mosque, and frequented by many Muslims and workers going home.

So the Jihadists were perfectly happy to murder doctors, the unemployed, Muslims, students, poor workers and commuters, etc when it suited them.

Whilst I wouldn't dream of trying to think myself into the mind of the psychotic 7/7 London Jihadists, I do wonder at the utterances of the would-be apologists or "root" causers.

I expect that we will be told that “but for Iraq, Afghanistan and British troops, there would be no 7/7 bombings”.

That might well be true, however, I think that Jihadists, like their 1930s comrades, need only pretexts for their actions, not reasons. A supposed grudge, some hostility, a nihilist’s belief system and an opportunity will suffice for them. They will scamper around and incorporate any likely pretext as a motivation for their mass murder.

The question is: are we gullible enough to believe their lies, their stupidity, and their wanton callousness?

Naval gazing from the chattering classes will not defeat that Jihadists, neither will military might. Jihadists are the purveyors of backward looking nihilism so that ultimately they can only be defeated by ideas and an acceptance of modernity.

Today's societies should not be apologetic about modern ideas nor misjudge the destructive capacity for nihilism, which was all too evident in 1930s.

Again we should argue for the ideas of the Reformation and the age of Enlightenment, any attempt at apologising, empathising or underestimating the Jihadists will be our downfall.

Such views were seen in the 1930s, when people underestimated another group of psychotic murderers. We must not make that mistake.

Where Is It All Going?

My cynical view of Hamas’s recent attack on Israeli soldiers, as a way to deflect from their own splits and political crisis, seems to be borne out by events.

Israelis’ incursion is now the focus of vitriolic attacks in the Westen media, which seemingly forget that:

1) It was Hamas and their proxies that actually provoked this situation.
2) It could have been settled very quickly by releasing Gilad Shalit.
3) Hamas and their proxies rejected any of the proposed compromises from Egyptian mediators.
4) Hamas are not really interested in the welfare of the Palestinians, only using them as political pawns in Hamas’s nihilistic game against the dreaded “Zionist entity”.

Witness the recent evidence from a Hamas video, where Hamas followers chant about “Drinking the blood of the Jews” (thanks to John-Paul for highlighting it).

But I am interested in alternatives to the current Israeli strategy?

Let’s see it from other countries perspectives (USA and Syria):

Hypothetically speaking, what would the USA do, if Mexico had launched some 1000 rockets at American civilians in the past year?

What then if Mexico kidnapped an American trooper?

Hum, yeah, I can see the USA (or any other country) emulating Ghandi with non-violence and prayers? Whilst the likes of Hamas provoke conflict, with rockets and kidnapping.

Or look at it another way, suppose the roles were reversed, with say Syria?

Hypothetically speaking, suppose that Gaza was full of Israelis and Syria was in Israel’s position, what would they do? They would have flattened Gaza with every Israeli in there, in a heartbeat.

So instead, most of IDF has been camped in the north of Gaza, whilst mediation took place

However, as you might expect, the Hamas terrorists have rejected any negotiated settlement, which was all part of their original game plan.

Sadly, the weak Olmert government will probably inflict unnecessary damage on the Gaza infrastructure and kill civilians playing straight into Hamas’s hands.

In the West, the causes of this crisis will conveniently be forgotten and Israel further demonised.

All very unnecessary, stupid, callous and with the Hamas leadership I can see it only getting worst for the Palestinians.

Power Stations

Someone asked if I thought “was Israel right to knock out the only power station in Gaza?”

No, I don't think they were, but on the other hand they COULD have gone straight in and killed 100s, so which do people think is better?

Are Israelis seriously meant to sit on their hands when a soldier is kidnapped?

There is an easy solution to this: give up the kidnapped soldier, stop throwing Qassam rockets into Israel and start talking.

Egypt has put forward a number of workable solutions to resolve this crisis but it seems that Hamas, PRC, etc don’t want a peaceful resolution.

The “eye for an eye” stuff will make everyone blind, and what does that achieve? Nothing

Israeli perspective Across the Web

At times such as this, it is difficult to find out what is happening in Israel from an Israeli perspective, so I present some Israeli TV and radio sources, with English language web broadcasts.

One thing that is notable about some of Israeli TV sources, how they present fairly unfavourable reports of their own country. In video clips they offer a range of critical or unfavourable reports from PA sources, European media and their own commentators, which is refreshing if a tad disconcerting, occasionally.

Jerusalem Online

Israel Radio International English News

Israel Broadcasting Authority

[TV Broadcasts –> On Demand ->and select clip on right-hand side]

Israel National TV