09 July 2008

just a thought............or three

I had a thought while reading an article this evening. The article is not what I am writing about just now. It did get this old brain to spinning at a slightly higher rpm than normal though.
The article was about air strikes against Iran, and how the Air Farce and Navy have the "capacity" to do in Iran what they did during "Operation Iraqi Freedom".
So, big deal you say. Well, wait i second here. Back before the Shrub had even launched the attack against Iraq, the original name of the "operation" was going to be "Operation Iraqi Liberation". Why the name change you ask? Because if you use the first letters of each word, it becomes OIL. Now it is OIF.
OK, big deal again you say. Well, that was my thought, then it morphed into another thought, I get a bit "off track" at times.
So, here goes my "take" on OIF. Bear with me while this develops, it is a bit convoluted, like much of my "thinking" these days, or longer even. OIF, take it this way, Oh, If. OK, good so far?
Well, "Oh, If this Iraq deal works, we'll go down in history as heroes!"
Take it another way, the one I like best, "Oh! If the Iraq deal goes bad, we'd better be ready to spread the bullshit by the train car load." Yep, I like the second way the best. In fact, it seems to me that things did work out more like the second "interpretation" rather than the first one. Yes sir, OIF. Damn, sure sounded good once upon a time, or so they thought.
See, it wasn't all about OIL after all.
Sure, right on, and how would you like some nice beach front property in the southern area of Arizona?
Just a "passing" thought this evening. Take care folks, fuel prices are still going up.
semper fi

07 July 2008

a crime and an outrage, at least it should beDo You Have Love in Your Culture?

Once again, I am indebted to another writer for the following article. His is/was not the first I had read of this criminal act against a fellow human being. His article did get me even more set to post here on this crime and to add my comments after his excellent article.

Do You Have Love in Your Culture?
Israel Flexes Its Muscles
“[The Israeli security man] took his gun out, pressing it to my head . . . Another man, who was laughing, said: “Why are you bringing perfumes?” I replied: “They are gifts for people I love.” He said: “Oh, do you have love in your culture?” ”
Palestinian journalist Mohammad Omar, June 26, 2008
That sums it up. It encapsulates the disrespect, the utter contempt for Palestinians – indeed for all Arabs – felt and displayed by vicious and spiteful Israeli buffoons. This tiny but significant cameo explains the entire ethos of the Israeli regime as concerns colonially-suppressed Arab serfs who have been for sixty horrible years without help or hope in their destitution and despair. This incident, which was not made known by the mainstream media (“Your search - Mohammad Omar - did not match any documents” – New York Times), became public only because non-mainstream editors, not subject to pressure or to energetically held personal beliefs, have nothing to fear from media moguls with financial or personal axes to grind.
The journalist Mohammad Omar was trying to return home from attending a function in London to mark his award of a journalistic distinction, the Martha Gellhorn Prize, for his reporting. His journey back to Gaza was assisted by the Dutch Embassy, which deserves great credit for trying – albeit unsuccessfully – to have his return free of harassment and the normal casual barbarity of Israeli officials. (The Dutch and the Scandinavian countries do a great deal, quietly and usually effectively, in support of decency and world-wide human rights. Official Washington laughs at them.) But the Israelis pay no attention to diplomatic custom and civilized traditions when these do not suit them, although they insist on them when it seems that someone might be so indelicate as to make it clear that Israel is behaving illegally and disgustingly, which it does a lot of the time.
Let me declare an interest : I was made aware of the arrogance of Israelis when one of my duties was to brief and debrief army officers going to the UN Mission in the Middle East. My briefings were straightforward and impartial, but I was interested in the fact that the young officers were without exception pro-Israeli. “There are the brave Israelis,” they exclaimed, “surrounded by evil Arabs intent on destroying their country!” (Or words to that effect.) “Gallant little Israel” was the theme, because it was standing alone against the massed might of the Arab nations. (And true enough, because Egypt and Syria had tried and failed to invade Israel to avenge the treatment of the Palestinians to whom the land belonged – and still belongs, in law.)
I debriefed three of these officers when they returned after their year in UN service. By that time they despised and loathed Israel and Israelis. They told me that without one exception, so far as they knew, their scores of colleagues of all nations represented in the UN Mission had equally forthright views. One of them, an old friend, told me in detail of his experiences, and of one in particular that to his mind demonstrated the jackboot approach.
One day he was in a UN jeep in an area forbidden to Israeli troops, and driving through a village street, when an Israeli tank blocked the way. He got out of his jeep to remonstrate, and the Israeli tank commander – “blond, blue-eyed, he was straight out of Rommel’s Afrika Corps or the bloody SS” – traversed the gun and depressed it to sight on the UN vehicle. He didn't say anything, but obviously was ready to fire. The UN officer was sensible, and got back into his jeep and reversed the hell out of there. His report, like all those detailing Israeli arrogance and non-cooperation, was sent to UN HQ in New York and filed and forgotten. The US does not permit any criticism of the country that its current secretary of state has described as “the key to security of the world.”
This was an astonishing statement by Dr Rice, and should be put in context. So here is the report from an Israeli newspaper:
“In an exclusive interview with Israel’s daily Yediot Aharonot . . . Dr Condoleezza Rice said that “the security of Israel is the key to security of the world.” Rice added that she feels “a deep bond to Israel.” Asked if her feelings toward Israel stem from her religious convictions, Dr. Rice said “That is a very deep question. I first visited Israel in 2000. I already then felt that I am returning home despite the fact that this was a place I never visited. I have a deep affinity with Israel. I have always admired the history of the State of Israel and the hardness and determination of the people that founded it . . . I think that we, Israel and the US, share common values. Israel is the only democracy in the region. That is also very important . . .”
Obviously she has love for Israeli culture, and she is not alone, for there are other lovers of Israel, some in high uniformed places.
Much publicity was given to a statement on 2 July by the US Chairman of the Joints Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mullen, when he was asked about a possible Israeli attack on Iran. He said “This is a very unstable part of the world and I don't need it to be more unstable . . . Opening up a third front right now would be extremely stressful on us.” How this could be interpreted, as it was by most US media, as a sign of “discouragement” to Israel is intriguing. (And use of the personal pronoun “I” says a great deal : who is this man who is grown so mighty?) Associated Press also recorded that Mullen “refused to say what Israeli leaders had told him during his meetings with them last week about any intentions to strike Iran.” But we might have some idea about that, if only because of what Mullen said on 4 May concerning US support for Israel. He declared that the US
“has been at Israel's side for all of 60 years, it will be for the next 60 years, 100 years and 1,000 years. With all its success, I am a tremendous admirer and have great respect for Israel.” It is amazing that a military officer of any nation could make such a public declaration of unconditional support for a foreign country. It was a blatantly political statement by a uniformed officer following his leader, George W Bush, who is similarly committed to Israeli supremacy and has said that “Israel is a solid ally of the United States. We will rise to Israel’s defense, if need be. . . . You bet, we'll defend Israel.”
It was reported on 4 June, following a Bush meeting with Israel’s Prime Minister Olmert, that the latter said “We reached agreement on the need to take care of the Iranian threat. I left with a lot less question marks [than] I had entered with regarding the means, the timetable restrictions, and American resoluteness to deal with the problem. George Bush understands the severity of the Iranian threat and the need to vanquish it, and intends to act on that matter before the end of his term in the White House.” It could not be more clear that the Bush administration is determined to help Israel attack Iran, not matter what might otherwise be stated in public.
The Israeli lobby in Washington has a stranglehold on US foreign policy. There is no US politician of any party who dare criticize Israel. Such impudence would lead to a campaign for their political extinction, funded by rich and vindictive zealots who are single-minded in their support of a foreign country to which they owe unconditional loyalty. So the stage is set for a strike on Iran, after which the world will reel from the effects of Israel’s lunacy.
There is not much love in their culture.
Brian Cloughley lives in France. His website is http://www.briancloughley.com/

There is a further update available at www.ips.org/blog/jimlobe/?p=163.
At this link, Mr. Omer gives his own account of this crime. I have read it, and how he can maintain a sense of humor after what he has endured is beyond what I would be able to manage. Then, he is much younger than me. Maybe back when I was in my mid 20's I'd be able to keep up my sense of humor, I did manage it in Vietnam, but that was with the help of my buddies.
What I am getting at, is that in my old age (60) I no longer have much tolerance for these sorts of crimes. This is not to imply that I ever did really tolerate this sort of criminal behavior before, but as I get older, thses sorts of abuse just piss me off all that much more. Like my near zero tolerance for stupid these days. Maybe it is just my age that makes me feel the extra outrage. Maybe with age, we all see things differently. I am certain that is how it is with me. When I was younger, I could tolerate more crap, also, to a certain extent, I maybe just wasn't as aware of the shit going on in the world.
When we are young, at least for most Americans, we have a different set of priorities, just ask old Dick Cheney ( LOL ). Yes, that was a poor attempt at humor, sorry. When I was young, I had my job, the new house, the new marriage to occupy most all of my time. Now, in my old age, I have the time to look into in more detail, this sort of criminal behavior.
Yes, I am trying damn hard to keep my language "polite" on this. After all, I let it all "hang out" a few posts ago. Now it is deadly serious time and I am even more pissed than I was for that post. I would enjoy cussing out the low life morons who abused this fellow human being, not that it would do any good. Oh, I would be accused of being an anti-Semite, big damn deal.
That is another part of this entire story. The abuse, or as I have called it, the bastardization, of our (American English) language.
The Semites include Hebrews AND Arabs. I may have gone over this before, but here it goes again. BOTH Jews (Hebrews) AND Arabs are Semitic peoples. MY source is the old Oxford English Dictionary. Therefore, to be a real anti-Semite, one would despise BOTH Jews (Hebrews) AND Arabs.
The Zionists have hijacked the term to now mean exclusively anti-Jewish sentiment. Again, bastardizing our language. Yes, I know that words and their meanings DO change over time. That is NOT what has happened in this case. This is a true hijacking of terms to suit a particular group for propaganda purposes. My opinion, plain and simple.
Another thing on this note. The constant crying of "anti-Semitism" every time anyone is the least critical of the government of Israel, or its actions, is degrading the effectiveness of that term. Like the boy who cried wolf too many times, it is losing and will continue to lose its sting. I do not care if I am called anti-Semitic. Big damn deal. Hell, I was a Marine and have been called everyting under the sun. As my Dad used to say, he didn't care what you called him, as long as it wasn't late for dinner. Well, I have even been called late for dinner, so again, big damn deal. Sling those temrs for all you areworth, it won't hurt me at all.
Another thing that this sort of criminal abuse does, or can do, is to create more anti-Jewish feelings among those who do not habor such sentiment at this time. Every time a person reads of such crimes, they get more and more upset about it, or they just get bored and turn off completely. If a person has any sense of humanity, I would think it would get them highly agitated and very upset. Of course the "defense" could (?) be that the Jews are the "chosen people" and they can do as they wish. But, they, or at least the older generation, survived the Nazis, how can they now turn and do such to those who never persecuted them? How can the victim become the criminal? Maybe it would be better to ask why rahter than how. Either way, it is not right, there can be no justification for this sort of crime. It is a crime against humanity, and as such, should outrage every decent human being, period.
All of this because of some old book? Because some tribal god or other said that one group of people were the "chosen" ones? No wonder I refuse to believe in any religion at all. How stupid. How childish. Superstition. Bah, humbug.
semper fi