Try today's Seattle P.I.

Strong stuff that you will not find in the Asper Press!

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/272620_haditha04.html

Well I will agree with his assessment of Pakistan, but for the rest, not likely. The Muslim world is very selective in it’s outrages. There was little voice raised when Saddam oppressed, killed and Arabized Kurdish regions or when he did the same to Shiites. I don’t see people saying “Free the Palestinian from the Hassmites”. Arab countries are rife with suppression of minorities, you just don’t hear about it, like the “security fence” on Saudis Eastern border. The Arab governments use the Israel Palestinian conflict for their own purposes, if it was to be resolved then their populations might start agitating for their own issues.

He claims that the media is not “allowed” to talk about the Palestinian issue, yet it gets far more press than the Congo, Dafur and the rest of Africa combined. Glad I didn’t bother going.

Nasty wars of conquest or of idealistic expansion have always had to be done under a 'shroud' of secrecy.

I like that Fisk is pointing out that the actions of the US in Iraq are less about fighting terrorism - as is thier mantra; and more about enforcing a democracy, very much in a form that does not mesh with the local vision.

In comparing the Bush whitehouse to Napoleon or their actions to the Crusades is far too generous, 'W' is not a 'great, bad man' nor are the actions taken by the Bush administration exaulted in the eyes of god. 'W', still to be judged by history, will likely come up as just a 'simple, bad man' and his administration as brutal in the eyes of the world.

The democracy in the US is where the real threat is pointed, and as Ike pointed out it is for the 5th Estate to perform the rescue with information, real information.

Journalists like Fisk need to be heeded more.

This supports everything I've read about Pakistan. It's playing both sides of the fence pretty well.

When considering that much of the media is influenced by Jewish ownership, this doesn't surprise. He seems to be on the money here... in my opinion.

Jack
How exactly aren’t they “allowed” to speak about the Palestinian issue? What is the longest period when it isn’t in the news, a week at best?

Let's hope the media here does not fall for Harper's sly use of the word "target"...as he tries to further entrench the idea into the Canadian consciousness to better facilitate his handmaiden role in the recruitment of Canadian men and women to fight, even to die...for Amerika and its obsession with power and oil.

This phony "war" on terror has really only served to increase terrorism throughout the world even more. We have leaders now who rule out of weakness, out of greed and self-interest... secretive and sly they are...they, themselves, ironically, are our biggest threat.

And Fisk is right on....where is The New York Times salute to all the Iraqis killed in the name of democracy...you know, like they did with the Americans who died in 9/11... where they said what special people they were, how they loved animals, their hobbies, what great moms and dads they were, how they were the life of the party...you know, how these Iraqi men, women, and children loved life itself... that is, until the Amerikans decided to save them from the brutality of Sadaam Hussein... by killing them and bombing their homes and their antiquities to dust.

The question that Fisk says too many journalists fail to ask as it detours from the self-serving narrative of their leaders ...the important question that should be put boldly in the forefront for the public to ponder..."Why" did this happen and.... "Why" did it happen "now"?

Good piece. I've been annoyed by all the hoopla about the security risk posed by fruitcake fundamentalists. But it's about far more than religious divides or Muslim anger at the West. Two of those boys arrested in Toronto are West Indians (one from Jamaica, one from Trinidad), the very same demographic implicated in Toronto's gun/gang violence.

It's the classic combination of rebellious youth fuelled by outrage over the gap between possessors and the dispossessed, oppressors and oppressed.

Ultimately, all the police, military and CSIS dudes we can muster will give us nothing but Band-Aids. My old man, a proud capitalist, always said the best way to deal with them was to get them signed up on a hire purchase program. Not exactly how I'd put it but he had the right idea -- give 'em a better reason to support the values we support.

Colin

U.S. Politicians have been continually admonished and even threatened for having private conversations with Palestinian leaders by the powerful AIPAC lobby group. In fact, you'd be hard pressed to see any pro-Palestinian coverage by any U.S. or Canadian news agency.

I'm talking national news agencies.

I wish I could have been there Sunday night. It might seem a bit naive but what would be the outcome if instead of spending billions on weaponry we spent the money on food, schools, clothing and houses and gave it to the emerging nations. After all that's probably what the citizenry want; food, clothing, shelter, employment and a chance at a future. It just may be that the anger against the west is born out of frustration and envy. As I understand things the Russian revolution that eventually led to communism took hold partly because of the desperation and anger of the common people.

Great feedback on a nice and thought provoking piece of writing .

Important piece of information to remember(provided above by Name).

This is about the dispossessed, here in Canada...and on the other side of the world. About a kind of desperation that makes the dispossessed particularly vulnerable to those who would use the anger and hopelessness of the dispossessed to benefit their own cause.

The real tricky part here is figuring out who benefits the most, who has the most to gain? Is terrorism and the war on terrorism ultimately the same thing?

Great choice, Crawford!

Anne McLellan, former liberal Minister of Public Safety, was on with Evan Solomon's partner a couple of days ago assuring us that the would-be terrorists' arrests had absolutely nothing to do with Canadian troops being in Afghanistan.

Her intimation that the timing was merely coincidental and that the middle eastern disenchantment with Western intentions stemmed from some kind of existential conflict--exactly what American pundits claimed after 911. Nothing to do with American foreign policy, of course.

The parallel was quite chilling and one has to wonder about the propensity of public officials to virtually lie through their teeth in order to support an official mythology.

Fisk's Seattle Post Intelligencer column which suggests the Haditha slaughter may be only the tip of the iceberg is equally chilling.

And then there was that tv memorial special celebrating and honouring the American soldeirs who had died in Iraq. I think it was the ex-Dukes of Hazard guy who sang, "He ain't heavy--he's my brother."

Not a single utterance of the weight of the Iraqi brothers and sisters and moms and dads and grandfathers and grandmothers who died in bombing runs and shock and awe, of course.

I'm going to try to quote Ed Deak who, at another time and place, made this wonderful analysis of "they hate us for our freedoms" etc.

Ed said "I have never heard of a country that was invaded because of its freedoms."

Interesting article. I agree that not enough attention is being paid to the risks from Pakistan.

There is no hope if you cannot even talk to your enemies. The Asia Times, based out of Thailand, have
an interesting article about the effects of not even talking with your adversaries:

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HC31Ak02.html

Truman,
Anne McLellan was just so happy to have the camera pointing at her again, in all likelihood she just spouted the first nonsensical thing that came into her head.

Jack
You should google “pallywood” to see how MSM manipulates images. I have paid a fair bit of attention over the years to the issue and I will respectfully disagree with your assessment. The Palestinians have been very effective at getting their message out until the last half of the 2nd Infadita. After that Arafat burned up any goodwill people had left for their cause. Despite the Arab rhetoric Palestinians do not receive good treatment in other Arab countries.

The Jewish lobby is strong in the US, but that’s because they work hard at it. There are 6 million Muslims in the US, they can exert influence if they could get their act together.

I noticed that I also spelt Hashmiite wrong previously

I always enjoy reading Robert Fisk's articles when they appear on Znet (http://www.zmag.org/ZNETTOPnoanimation.html)

When I read "Jewish lobby" and "Jewish ownership", I hope what is intended is actually "pro-Israeli government" lobby & ownership.

There are many Jews inside and outside of Israel who are working to achieve a bi-national solution that is just to both Israelis and Palestinians.

Israeli groups like Women In Black demonstrate regularly in solidarity with Palestinians, while B'Tselem (http://www.btselem.org/english/index.asp), The Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories, works to change Israeli policy.

Tikkun (to heal, repair and transform the world) magazine (http://www.tikkun.org/) provides a progressive, spiritual and peace-oriented point of view. Its editor, Rabbi Michael Lerner, shows how it is possible to be both pro-Israel and pro-Palestine in his book Healing Israel/Palestine.

In Vancouver, Jewish artist Sima Elizabeth Shefrin’s Middle East Peace Quilt project (http://www.vcn.bc.ca/quilt) has brought together Jewish, Palestinian and Gentile images of peace in the Middle East in a powerful travelling exhibition.

A Jewish-Palestinian women’s dialogue group has been meeting for years to find common ground, and the group Jews for a Just Peace continues to work for inclusive justice. There are exchanges for Palestinian and Israeli youth to attend summer camps in Canada and the US.

This spring, Headlines Theatre (http://www.headlinestheatre.com) organized a forum theatre event in Vancouver about the struggle for peace and justice in Palestine and Israel, with participants from the Palestinian, Jewish and other communities - endorsed by the Canada Palestine Association and the Palestine
Community Centre.

...lots going on, and many ways to work for real change.

Biscotti, it's very heart-warming of you to "make nice" about the prospects for Israeli-Palestinian peace, but I think your comments are only a mirage.

There have always been sensible people on both sides--who have accomplished exactly nothing.

Israel is committed to surviving by force of arms, dominance and oppression.

It has developed, with a population approximately one quarter the size of Mexico City, the fourth most powerful military force on earth, including a nuclear capability that can take out the entie middle east, if it so wishes.

It is also the world's greatest recipient of foreign aid--most of it from the United States, and much of it in the form of cutting edge military equipment.

Why do you imagine it has developed such a force?

Until the United States, and the rest of the world admits that both sides have an equal moral right to the place, nothing substantial will happen.

I don't disagree with much of what you're saying, Truman. I figure the root of the conflict is the US role in using Israel to thwart Arab nationalism.

But if you reread my posting, you might understand my intent to clarify the distinction
between "Jewish lobby/ownership" and Israeli
policy, and to simply mention some of the
activities people on both sides are involved in. And maybe some Tyee readers will find groups they can work with.

I'm not saying they've succeeded in ending the occupation, but at least they're doing something. And who can ever say what lives
they may have saved in carrying out various direct actions, such as West Bank olive
harvests?

Like the forbidden question, "the why of the
attack" that Fisk often names, these activities
and these people are also usually absent from mainstream press coverage.

The other thing that is nearly completely absent from media coverage of the Middle East is any sense of hope. I think this is done to discourage people from trying to change the situation.

Unfortunately, many activists are susceptible to this and lapse into cynicism, which coats
even the most accurate political analysis with
a repellent that prevents successful organizing. It's just plain unattractive to the
unconverted.

Until activists, esp. in the Left, stop thinking that hope is uncool (or is it unmanly?!), it will remain a sarcastic, fragmented and ineffective mirage of a movement.

You can view a 90 minute video of this talk here
http://workingtv.com/main3.html

It seems to me, that most of the commentary so far buys the idea of the 'global village' too easily. American policies cannot get very far without support inside the countries. Like vampires, they can only get inside, if they are invited. So, the questions stands between the angry arabs and their leaders, not between them and arbitrarily chosen american citizens, in America or elsewhere. It is a cowardly act to spread death and destruction among randomly chosen groups of people, to 'make your point'. Take it up with the actual perpetrators as you see them. European countries in general have, at some time, had every bit as oppressive rulers as the Middle East does now, but they manged to liberate themselves without going into other nations and slaughtering people there. Each country had its own revolution, and, yes, whoever said there never was a country invaded because of its freedoms is wrong. After the Napoleonic wars, there was a dirty pact between the upper crusts of various countries in Europe, that if the 'radicals' won too much headway somewhere, the noble brethren could call for help. This period is known as the period of intervention in Europe, the idea engineered by Prince Metternich of Austria. Nevertheless, Democracy was won in Europe, and so can it be in the Middle East, if people are willing to stop copping out 'with their guns and their bombs' stop being bulls in a China shop and apply intelligence to the problem.

Dorothy, are you sure you just want to attribute the problem to the Palestinians et al, just not using their intelligence enough? I think you need to give it some more intelligent thought!

Biscotti, I have this little theory that you'll never find an answer unless you ask the right question--and that most problems can be understood if you can find the ONE question which accompanies an infinite number of correlations.

And the question regarding Israel-Palestine is this, and I repeat: Why has Israel, a nation of 7 million found it necessary to maintain such a massive military capability?

Any thoughts, Biscotti?

To me it looks like the fears of annhiliation on the part of enough post-Shoa Israeli Jews have made them susceptible to playing this proxy role for US imperialism. It makes a very neat, symbiotic fit, and not the first time the colonized (or genocized?!) become the colonizers. Unfortunately, current Israeli policy is not likely to help anyone’s long range survival.

It’s interesting to me that as “people of the book”, Jews and Muslims have historically got along far more than they have been pitted against each other. In the last century, organizations and parties like Ihud and Hashomer Hatzair tried to advance Arab-Jewish accord and joint Arab-Jewish trade unions.

Maria Rosa Menocal’s book The Ornament of the World - How Muslims, Jews and Christians Created a Culture of Tolerance in Medieval Spain provides a fascinating glimpse of a period of co-operation and culture.

And when under the Spanish Inquisition, Iberian Jews had a “choice” of conversion, flight, or death, the Sultan of the Ottoman Empire invited them in 1492 to a safe haven in Istanbul and other parts of what is now Turkey. So in the long view, Jews and Arabs have enjoyed peaceful relationships for much more of their history than they have been adversaries.

Tragically, twentieth century history in Europe, Israel and Palestine diverged from this coexistence, with bloody results. Hannah Arendt, in her Origins of Totalitarianism, traces the links between anti-Semitism, Nazism and Stalinism. Still an excellent book to understand some of the backdrop of what is going on now.

Here we are. For me, the most important question is, What can we do?

Well Biscotti, it is instructive to study such things as the links between anti-semitism, nazism and stalinism, but in trying to understand this conflict one must not forget all the European expulsions of Jews, including the Spanish expulsion--but also the expulsion from England in 1290, France 1181, Hungary 1376 and sporadic, but continued persecution right up to the British abdication from Palestine and the creation of the Jewish state in 1948.

And one must not forget the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from JAFFA that same year.

And the Palestinian refugee camps!

And the plans of the Zionists to wrench Palestine from the Arabs and so to create a safe haven for Jews.

But you have actually come up with a truism:

The Arabs and Jews got along famously in Palestine until the Jews got the idea, (actually the British suggested it) that the Palestinians should suffer in order for them to create a new homeland.

Don't forget to study the before--and--after population statistics for all those little Arab towns (in present-day Israel)--before and after 1948.

And remember Jaffa, 1948, when the Israeli military entered and forced out nearly all the Arabs.

We're fisking history, eh, not sugarcoating it, eh--with books like "The Ornament of the World."

Yes, looking back farther at the expulsions, pogroms, and Crusades definitely sheds more light on the present. On the weekend I met a Jewish man born in Istanbul whose first language was Turkish and second language was Ladino (?), the Spanish of the Inquisition era. Very interesting conversation; also noteworthy that none of this history was in the curriculum I had in elementary or high school.

Did you read James Carroll’s book Constantine’s Sword – The Church and the Jews? An excellent illumination of the history of Christian anti-semitism.
http://www.houghtonmifflinbooks.com/booksellers/press_release/carroll/

No, Biscotte, I haven't read the book but I just read the interview with Carrol so I think I understand what the book is about. He's writing about the history of Christian--Protestant and Catholic--hatred of Jews in Europe since the time of Constantine's conversion. His idea is that the Shoa could never have occurred, unless the Nazis could draw on hundreds of years of Christian hatred to be used as a "sword" against European Jews.

Which begs the question, considering all the expulsions and pogroms and genocide in Europe, and the historical hatred about which Carrol wrote, how did American Christians come to be Israel's greatest defenders in the world, today?

In the seventies I attended several Christian churches--even Jehovah's Witnesses--and one constant theme was that since that the Jews had returned to Israel, as was prophesized in the Bible, God's plan was being put into action and the end days were near.

But why did the Falwell, Robertson and Graham types become so zealous in their defence of Israel?

But why did the Falwell, Robertson and Graham types become so zealous in their defence of Israel?

Maybe it's a mix of political-economic interest (i.e. this part is not really religious) and the apocalyptic tendencies of these people.

I've enjoyed the discussion and will sign off this thread for now to make room for others. Plus I need to get back to work ;-)

Biscotti, thanks for balancing precariously on the brink of potentially hazardous political incorrectness with me anyway--and beginning to examine the ACTUAL causes of the present conflict, which can be summarized as:

Some rather cliquish people took over some other people's land and put them in concentr..oops, refugee camps, and claimed that god gave it to them. (You know, sorta like the Europeans in North America). The other people figure it was theirs, seeing as how they'd been living on it for thousands of years. This has been a common occurrence in the history of the world, of course. The main difference being only that the second group of people were still able to mount a pretty good protest--unlike the American cavalry just running Indian protests into the ground, for instance.

Was that so hard?