I am off to Baghdad on Sunday for an Arab League conference on Palestinian detainees held in Israel. This is part of my determination to devote more of my time to helping the Palestinian cause. It seems to me we are at a crucial point where the Palestinians are in genuine danger of an accelerated genocide, as Israeli intentions to annex Est Jerusalem and the West Bank become ever plainer.
In retrospect, my life has mostly been based on the idea that I may not be able to do much to help in a particular situation, but it is incumbent on me to try. So I am trying.
A “two state” solution has, from the start, been advanced in bad faith by promoters such as Blair and Bush, with the intention always that it would be a Bantustan solution. For those too young to recall, the grand plan of apartheid South Africa was that the black population would be corraled into a number of small regions which would become “independent states”.
I have said before that I am often pleasantly surprised by Sky News security correspondent Sam Kiley, who seems to get away with talking great sense by hiding behind a Ross Kemp style persona. A couple of days ago he reported from the West Bank that Israel was “moving towards an apartheid state”. There is no doubt that is true – even in Israel proper, there are over three hundred ethnically based Israeli laws prescribing different treatment for Jews and others, across almost every activity of the state. I fear Sam Kiley will not be on mainstream TV long – a tendency to tell the truth being career fatal.
Bibi’s desire to kill off the two state solution is a terrible, genocidal threat but strangely also an opportunity. Botha and De Klerk did not succeed, and Bibi may not either. I personally would have deplored a Bantustan based solution, with crammed and split Palestinian lands deprived of resources, water, communications and any hope of economic viability.
The ultimate solution must involve a proper single state in Israel/Palestine which is blind and fair in its laws to race and religion. That solution can ultimately bring security to the people of Israel, not based on their ability to kill or evict their neighbours and steal their land. The essentials of the agreement will have to be most people staying where they are – including most West Bank settlers – and very serious compensation to dispossessed Palestinians, with the settlements enlarged to become mixed communities.
On the Palestinian detainee question, for me it shows up yet again Israel’s extraordinary capacity for shameless sophistry in matters of international law. Israel justifies its naval blockade on the San Remo Convention, which is only applicable in times of armed conflict. Israel states that it is in a de facto permanent armed conflict. However it denies being in an armed conflict when it comes to its treatment of Palestinain detainees, captured outside Israel, who are not treated as prisoners of war. Both positions cannot be held simultaneously, but secure in the collusion of the West’s bought politicians, Israel does so.
Agree with you on the point; ‘they share with the middle and upper classes some of the most appalling bigoted discriminatory views, inculcated perhaps rather than intrinsic. ”
I tend to oversimplify in my heuristic method, but I have found there are distinct personality related groups, which don’t need probing for my point, for instance; Separating those who recognize a rhetorical question when they hear it, or read it, from those who don’t. It’s kind of a baseline for my determination of the intelligence and receptiveness of who I am speaking to. I can adjust from there, or depart the discussion immediately. In terms of culture, country, ethnicity, race or creed, you will find proportionate percentages of intelligence, character, or mischaracter, I have found the same percentages, anecdotally, that is. of cross-cultural similarity, but sociopaths as a measurable yardstick of reality, are exactly the same.
Ignorance is our chief enemy, followed by apathy, but exalted by both is willful ignorance, refusing an education
‘refusing an education’ ….. or having the temerity to think you are the first person who ever lost an argument, doubling-down on your intractable position as though protecting a bunker from advancing forces.
I wasn’t just disagreeing for the sake of it, just saying its far more complicated and we puny humans, at the mercy of evolved protective defensive tribal biology and brain development that account for our still being around here today, cannot switch off those mechanisms that have enabled us and our kin to emerge from the primeval swamp, the weaker perish and this has already happened an infinite number of times and we at any one time represent the worst of the breed and systems of governance and control by elites likewise have evolved to exploit and abuse the worst aspects of human nature for their own ends. I can’t see that changing, but increasing as global population swells and resources dwindle.
I like the openness of the comments here, I dislike this nickname, formerly posted using my own first name or diminutive forms of it, was accused of sock-puppetry after changing nicks to deal with off topic IT/Linux related matters that were outside the main discussion in which I had also participated and was told to stick to the one nickname, though the email address used at all times was consistent and genuine. I now feel unable to change to something more sensible without similar complaints being raised. Analysis of server logs to identify sock-puppetry or other abuse is exactly the sort of thing which privacy advocates would decry as intrusive and sinister and would hope these are only kept in the short term and only for that purpose. I’ve no idea where the happy medium lies, but have no complaint.
Addressing Clark’s MSR hobby horse, I have nothing further to say on this, I looked at it out of courtesy as it frequently recurs, to see if I could comprehend it or muster any enthusiasm or interest in it, I couldn’t and said so. I’m anti-nuclear power in any form, I don’t see how a tiny part of my comment on that “I only looked it over superficially and with an admittedly prejudiced highly sceptical eye.” on another thread was relevant here.
Goodnight all.
Oniel Samuel (should you return to read), your early comments mentioned “Dhimmi status” and you said:
I think that this attitude is driven by fear, when what Israel needs is courage and conviction. As Craig said, people change. I’ll go further, and say that people want to change. The modern way of life, of education, freedom and prosperity is a better way of life, and given the chance, people will choose it.
You look around the Middle East as it is now, and you fear that the way of life in Israel would be destroyed by what is around it. Aggression is one response to perceived threat, and Israel certainly responds with much aggression.
But the Middle East of our time is degraded and injured by “Western” corporate-driven aggression. Iran as it is now is as far as it has recovered after Operation Ajax destroyed the democracy there. How would Iran be now if its democracy had grown and strengthened undisturbed for the last fifty-nine years? Saudi Arabia is an utterly corrupt theocracy propped up by Western politics to ensure a cheap supply of oil and to provide military bases for the US. If the society there had been developing as the people wished, would that country still be exporting so much dangerous violent extremism? Saddam Hussein was the West’s tool; I could go on and on.
Oneil, Israel needs a One State solution – a big, secure, prosperous state of just laws fairly applied. The Gazans breed so fast because they feel so threatened; this is a well documented tendency among all human populations. Prosperity and the empowerment of women consistently reduce family size. Give the youth education and opportunity, and the only bombs they would build would be for the fun of it, not to attack those they see as their oppressors. I admit that the change would not be instant; courage and determination are needed.
Of course Judaism is threatened, all religions are threatened. Creation myths and false history (the propaganda of its day) fall to science and reason, and hierarchical control structures based upon dogma lose their legitimacy, rendered obsolete by the meritocracy of free markets. The ability to chant inflammatory verses from a “holy book” don’t help one to be a better doctor or to write a better computer program. They don’t help one write a more moving novel or make more beautiful music. Freedom, education and financial security bring those rewards.
Israel has demonstrated great influence upon the Western politics, the entertainment industry and the corporate news media, but Israel has used this influence to serve short-term, short-sighted and self-defeating goals. Push the other way. No single country can enjoy security and prosperity in isolation, while its neighbours are manipulated, held back and exploited. Israel clearly has influence among leaders and the media. Somehow, I don’t think that would be resented that if it was used wisely.
I learned to think this way from Craig Murray. Please wish him luck and fortitude in Baghdad.
As our two day wonder departs for the nth time, will he become a three day wonder? The well used tactic of dividing the contributors here into ‘nice’ (those that corresponded with him) and ‘nasty’ (those that didn’t) was the parting shot.
What makes anybody think that ‘natter’ here will change anything about the effect of an ongoing cruel occupation of another’s country and homes?
Here’s something which gives food for thought.
http://mycatbirdseat.com/2012/12/un-tells-israel-to-let-in-nuclear-inspectors/
See the Corbett Report interview with Grant Smith in this piece. Fascinating and super-scary!
Plus The Israel Lobby Archive for background on {http://www.irmep.org/ILA/default.asp}
Miko Peled ex IDF and the son of an Israeli general, speaks here on three You Tubes. His words chime with Craig’s.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=kCqHcNaw8uU
and
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcWRWIksY7M The Right of Return
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V65P68mB2mQ The Real History of Israel
On the BBC’s representation of Israel’s nuclear capability.
http://members5.boardhost.com/medialens/thread/1354832384.html
Mary, you probably won’t thank me for this, but I want to support your comments in your blog of 7.39 am 150%.
Re your 1st para : ALL of “Oniel”‘s writings have displayed clear evidence of hasbara direction. If I were Jon, I’d be less worried about “sock puppets” and more concerned with propagandists like “Oniel”; it must surely be clear to everyone that this guy/guyess is not just an ordinary citizen who somehow came across this thread and decided to debate. His purpose was to disturb.
Re your 2nd para : following on from the above, our mistake was to waste time “debating” with a man who wasn’t there to be debated with; worse, some commenters got mad with him (that must have pleased him – destabilisation!). And, more generally, nattering HERE won’t change anything on the ground. No, what needs to be done HERE is a referencing and sharing of info and sources (our opinions are just self-indulgence in the last analysis, since we’re preaching to the converted) and what needs to be done THERE (ie, in the real world) is a series of small actions: lose no opportunity, should the subject arise, to persuade people of the justice of the Palestinian cause; keep up steady pressure on the BBC, your MP and ministers as appropriate, support the BDS and apply it in your evereyday life, etc……
Craig, in the interests of openness and transparency, is the Arab League paying for you visit?
@Ben
Apology accepted. Assumption and dismissing what you don’t want to hear is not clear thinking.
Heretic
Craig has already posted (previous page)
“I should make plain that I am going as a guest of the Arab League, but not being paid for my time.”
Anon 6 Dec, 2012 – 11:57 pm
“Derren Brown is an interesting man.”
Yes he is. But mostly he is a ruthless magician who sells his trickery within the fog of mind control techniques as victorians used the supernatural. His eager assassin subject knew, at a subconscious level, that he was in a tv programme and was never going to be killing anyone. It’s showbiz. But still interesting.
Cryptonym – you are welcome to change your nick infrequently. Just declare it – several people have done so, as the mood takes them. Chopping and changing handles frequently in the same conversation is obviously discouraged, as it can garner more support for a particular position than would normally occur. Apologies if you got accused of sock-puppetting previously – perhaps that’s just part of the rough-n-tumble here? 🙂
Habbabkuk, my view is that Oniel is here (present tense hopefully) in good faith, and that some folks here should be willing to speak with him. He said he would be especially condemnatory if Israel were using human shields, and that the new settlements were provocative – hardly “hasbara”.
On the matter of Israel’s nuclear armoury, it is noteworthy that no critic of Zionist nuclear weapons ever cites dear Mordechai Vanunu. His evidence was clear over two decades ago and it was not for nothing he suffered TWELVE years of solitary confinement followed by six of ‘ordinary’ imprisonment. Or why he is stopped from being interviewed by the press.
Israel’s ‘neither confirm nor deny’ nonsense should be countered with Mordechai’s eyewitness evidence at Dimona. This reflects that the USUKIs axis sets the boundaries for discussion in the media it dominates. Of course.
The apologists for Israel and the hasbara-merchants try every dirty rhetorical and propaganda trick in the book and here’s Jon, of a view that “..Oniel is here in good faith”. Well, Jon, I’m of the view that you’re either falling over backwards to be “fair” or then you’re being very naive.
He’s obviously charmed you with his views on human shields and new settlements. But he hasn’t actually admotted that the Israelis are using human shields, has he. And what is his view on the “old” settlements – are they OK? Classical tactic of hasbara merchants – always sound reasonable, give way on the 100% indefensible in order to promote the 99% indefensbile.
But – faugh! – why am I bothering?
Cryptonym:
Yes, I agree that the psychological change is going to have to be huge on both sides, for any solution. Clark’s excellent post above shows up religion to be the reason – and not Judaism specifically, but the excessive adherence to dusty books and creationism of any creed, including Islam.
I’ll add my usual disclaimer: despite my own fairly determined personal atheism, I quite like people finding strength in a personal relationship with a spirit entity of whatever form. I think people should have the freedom to do that, and perhaps even to form small groups where they can discuss their faith with others. But there is something greatly worrying about organised religion, which is political in its nature, and seeks maximum social control over others for its own worldly gain. Worshippers seem to subconsciously accept that they must accept some domination in exchange for the personal strength they believe has been dispensed to them, and like addicts they can’t turn back.
For me, such a psychological analysis gives me some means to sympathise with Israelis who believe they are doing the right thing by voting for a militarist party, or who hold racist views about the Palestinians. Both sides contain a lot of very human and fallible individuals, and each of us (on either side) need to strive towards more understanding, even if it is hard to do, even if it makes us angry.
One state might be ideal but I am, possibly in my ignorance, convinced by Chomsky’s argument that two state is currently the only option.
I understand his points are: that the mutual hatred and distrust are too entrenched for one state. That to call for one state is to hope for an ideal over the improvement of the Palestinian’s lot. That to call for one state is playing into the US/Israeli hands because calling for the unworkable ensures nothing changes.
One argument here, that I have seen, to counter this was Craig saying:
This I find unconvincing because any resolution will require concessions from the Israelis regarding resources. It is not in itself an argument for one state. Indeed any concessions are arguably better secured by two state.
Another argument by Venceremos seemed to be that the middle east uprisings will force Israel into accepting one state. This I believe is wild optimism. I do not see the end of the us/corporate/eu/whatever empire in the short term. So this seems to extend Palestinian suffering for dogma.
Excuse me if I have missed explanations but can someone please point out why you are sold on one state.
Habbabkuk, I’ve not been “charmed”, but I’ve had more disruption and sock-puppetting coming from your computer than from Oniel’s. I disagreed with some points he made (for example, expecting there to be established human rights groups in Palestine rather ignores the basic point that Israel has not allowed Palestinian civil society to flourish).
I should be most interested from you, if you are willing, to try a question I posed earlier. Herbie too, if he/she is up for it:
Or, my old one, from my link earlier:
Ultimately you and I are basically on the same side, so we shouldn’t be bickering amongst ourselves. We should be looking for solutions, and they are going to hurt on both sides. Like in Northern Ireland, old enmities are going to have to be buried.
Habbabkuk
I don’t see that it makes any difference what Oniel is, all that matters is truth and truth is the same as who you are. I focus on the issues not the people raising them. The facts are enough to prove that Palestinians are being denied justice, the facts show that Palestine is the innocent party, we have no need of character assassinations or censorship.
Herbie, from earlier:
I agree Netanyahu is a nutter, and certainly some parts of Europe may become more helpful to the Palestinians in the future. Germany’s change of heart from a No to an Abstain was better than nothing, I guess. And Palestine’s upgraded status at the UN may help, but only time will tell.
But the UK changing its mind? Unlikely, I’d say: we have coat-tails to hang onto and an empire to reminisce. The US? Nearly impossible, partly because all their military deals, contracts and trade agreements, civil structures, lobby groups, and associated paraphernalia relating to Israel depend on their current position.
I’m going to go against the flow (again) slightly: Oneil may be reading from the hasbara script, true. On the other hand he may have arrived at his views himself, influenced by the JP or JC much as some of us here are unconsciously influenced by the Guardian/Telegraph – delete as required. The result would be the same, particularly as a hasbara poster would be trying to engage with opposing arguments at least superficially rationally.
We can suspect his motives, but we can’t really know. On the other hand it would be a boring comments column if everyone agreed with each other, and not all the points he made are invalid. No progress whatever can be made – most of us agree on that – if neither side understands where the other is coming from. The base question for me is really not “is Zionism the root of all evil?”, but “how the hell can Jews, with their history, support Zionism as we see it today?” And thanks to Oneil for clarifying that a little. I’m with Thatcrab on this one.
As an aside, entertaining filleting of Hague by Simon Jenkins in the Grauniad today –
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/dec/06/hague-nation-building-lectures-dare
I don’t claim to know if Oneil was sincere or not. I do know he can find this stuff below as easily as I can:
‘Breaking The Silence – Testimonies
Of Israeli Soldiers’
http://rense.com/general86/break.htm
(human shields etc all covered)
O/T Strange timing for the BBC to have this WWII London bomb mapping on their website. Are they readying the population to get used to the idea of some more bombing in the ME? Or do they just love war?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-20637222#
Also O/T from this Zionist supporting lady.
http://www.globalpost.com/dispatches/globalpost-blogs/weird-wide-web/julia-gillard-australia-prime-minister-jokes-end-of-the-world
!!
“Excuse me if I have missed explanations but can someone please point out why you are sold on one state.”
In my view FWIW, the window of opportunity for a viable separate Palestinian state is now closed. Such a state would have to be contiguous, and that ain’t going to happen. Israel has steadily augmented the West Bank settlement and transport network – Palestinians live disconnectedly in the spaces in the net. Additionally, Israel will never relinquish much of the land on the Dead Sea, which it claims it needs for military security. It is also intent on Jerusalem becoming exclusively Jewish – notwithstanding the agreement decades ago that it would remain a centre for four religions, with free access to all.
The choice is now between secular single-state and Jewish state (with as much apartheid as it takes). If you think the Palestinians, “Israeli Arabs”, yes, even Sephardic Jews* and Christians have as much right to live in the country their not-too distant ancestors lived in as a Hassid from Smolensk, then all that’s left is the single secular state.
*who don’t get a fair crack of the whip in Israel, either
Against that you have two peoples with entirely different cultural background, language and religion who distrust, even hate, each other and they are expected to work together to build one secular nation in which neither has an advantage over the other?
Might sound like a good idea to some but it’s just not going to work on the ground.
Kempe – you got any better ideas? Enquiring minds would like to know. Given that one of the parties has worked very hard for 44 years to make the only rational solution impossible? Maybe Israel needs perpetual war. It is unique if it does.
As a matter of quibbling fact – different background? They coexisted for centuries under Ottoman rule (and so did the Christians – an 18th century writer found a Greek Orthodox church on every hilltop); Hebrew and Arabic are a lot closer than, say, Yiddish and Hebrew. The Canaanites/Philistines and Israelites were very likely the same people, back in the day. It comes down to religion in the end, unless you are talking of the spectacular cultural differences between a newly-arrived Russian or Ukrainian Jew, and the Sephardim who have been in the Med Basin since before Pontius was a pilot…
There’s a religious state next door to Israel, isn’t there? You actually want to be Saudi Arabia?
The Fédération Internationale de Motocyclisme, the governing body of national and international motorcycling, has included Palestine as a member:
http://www.motorcyclenews.com/MCN/News/newsresults/General-news/2012/December/dec0712-fim-award-membership-to-palestine/
@Glenn_uk
Think I’ll take my (antisemitic holocaust-denying etc) bike for a hurl this weekend to celebrate! Good one.