Israel and apartheid

Comparisons of Israel's treatment of the Palestinians are increasingly compared to South African apartheid, but this is an unfair comparison on at least two grounds:

1. The South African apartheid government envisioned independence for the African population of the country. True, they proposed independence for 80% of the population on 13% of the land, with none whatsoever for Asians or Coloured South Africans, and they did insist on dividing the Africans ethnically in a way that they didn't divide the whites, but they did acknowledge that Africans were peoples and entitled to self determination, even if that determination was decided for them by others. Netanyahu has finally admitted that he never had any intention of allowing a Palestinian State to exist. This has been obvious for a long time, and may well ultimately spell the doom of the Israeli state, since neither the Israelis nor the Palestinians are going anywhere. If they won't sit down together and decide how to divide up the land and live in peace with each other they will be increasingly caught up in a vicious cycle of mutual violence. Sure, Hamas is as much to blame as Netanyahu, but that doesn't make the inevitable destruction any less tragic. Israelis used to say that they couldn't negotiate because there was no Palestinian Mandela, but Mandela wasn't Mandela before F.W. de Klerk decided he needed someone he could negotiate with. Mandela was arrested for blowing things up, trying to lead a violent revolution to take power the way his role model, Fidel Castro, had. Netanyahu could have been de Klerk if he'd had enough brains, or patriotism, but he was to smugly self centered and sure he was smarter than anyone else. Of course there was no Palestinian ANC either, no one on the Palestinian side who wanted a secular multiethnic country. There were Arab nationalists and Islamic nationalists, just as Israelis were Jewish nationalists, secular and religious, so the land would have to be divided somehow. The closest thing to a legal solution is still the UN partition plan, but neither side really wants that. And I digress. Israel is not apartheid, it is worse, and more obstinate. When the apartheid government and the Afrikaners running it realized they faced an internal threat, not an external one, they got rid of their nuclear weapons and negotiated. Israel faces an internal threat, but thanks to Netanyahu it keeps its useless nukes and refuses to negotiate. It's sad to watch a country commit suicide like that.

2. The apartheid government in South Africa was not trying to kill off the black population. They tried to control them, especially their access to cities, but they really didn't want to eliminate them as such. They just wanted to exploit their labor, without which the high standard of living of the whites was impossible. Now, just as the Holocaust showed that even Germans were as capable of genocide as the Turks had been against the Armenians, Gaza is proving that Jews are as capable of genocide as the Germans were. Everyone is capable of that kind of behavior. Darfur proved that Arabs are as capable of it as Germans or Jews, and Rwanda proved that Africans are as capable of genocide as Arabs or Turks. Does Netanyahu think that he can really order his military to go into Gaza and kill people until they all just disappear? If so he is as delusional as Hitler, who thought Karl May's fiction set in the American west was real. Hitler thought he could just march his armies east and start shooting people and the natives would just disappear. In fact the decimation of the Native American peoples was part of same Columbian exchange that turned Russian thistle into tumbleweed, an icon of the American western landscape. The native peoples lacked disease immunities and peaceful contact could be, and often was, more dangerous to them than hostilities, since it spread diseases even faster than conflict could. Netanyahu is delusionsal if he thinks Palestinians are going to just fade away into the sunset, or even be absorbed by other Arab countries. They are not Egyptian or Lebanese, much less Yemeni, Moroccan, Sudanese, Kuwaiti or anything other than Palestinians. "Arab Unity" is one of those gag oxymora, like "military intelligence" or "business ethics". They cannot all become one people any more than the English speaking peoples can, or the Roman speaking peoples of Italy, France, Spain, Portugal, and Romania. Morocco has spent decades trying to conquer the Sahrawi people of the Sahara. They both speak Arabic dialects, but they are not the same people and haven't been for centuries. Palestinians are not going anywhere. Neither are Israelis. They need to sit down and bargain in good faith to live together, or they will continue dying together.

Nixonian Democrats?

Some Democrats would prefer Trump as a presidential candidate for the other party. They think he would be easier to defeat. Democratic money helped MAGA candidates in 2022 primary elections, and those MAGA candidates went down to defeat in November. Yes, it works, but I have a long memory and so I don't like it. Some people will tell you that Nixon didn't need to do all those Watergate dirty tricks in 1972 because McGovern would have lost anyway. What they don't realize is that all those dirty tricks were to help McGovern win the nomination because he was the weakest candidate. Muskie was the odds on favorite at the beginning of the race. Donald Segretti knocked him out with dirty tricks. And so it went, on and on, with one candidate after another on the Democratic side being eliminated by the CREEP. No I admit it's different now, in that those Democrats supporting MAGA Republicans aren't hiding what they are doing. But it still leaves a bad taste in my mouth. That's not the way to conduct an honorable and ethical political campaign. It's the kind of sleazoid political skullduggery someone as crooked as Richard Nixon would do. I don't like it.

Hey, Republicans!

You don't like the 14th Amendment now? Well I don't like the 12th Amendment. You wanna talk about how this is not a democracy, but a constitutional republic? Or do you only do that when your candidate loses the popular vote and becomes president? I know the Supreme Court hasn't ruled yet on Trump's eligibility for public office. And no, I don't expect an honest vote, especially not from the guys who gave us Bush v. Gore. But he did send a mob to attempt a violent overthrow of the government on January 6, 2021. Just because it was unsuccessful doesn't mean it wasn't an attempted coup d'etat. If you think the Constitution should decide who becomes president, not the voters? Then live up to it, stand by your words, and support disqualifying Donald Trump.

It's time to come back to this blog. Maybe past due.

Go back to my first posts.

This is what I had been waiting for, almost giving up.

As I later and often said, if Obama can catch bin Ladin and fix the economy, he will be re-elected.

Count on it.

IndictBushNow.org:

IndictBushNow.org:

Let's face it, the Republicans in Congress are going to go back to their old playbook, investigating the president to see if he had a blow job on company time.

Obama MUST appoint a special prosecutor, if only to cover his own behind.

The old excuse was that he wanted to look forward, wanted to work with the Republicans, and wanted to avoid appearing vindictive and partisan.

Those arguments don't hold anymore, and when the Republicans go after him, he's going to have to fight back.

After all, they are a LOT more vulnerable to investigations than he is.

UN special rapporteur on torture Manfred Nowak declared that the Obama administration had a legal and moral obligation to fully investigate credible claims of US forces' complicity in torture. Nick Clegg, the deputy Prime Minister in the UK has, in the wake of the recent revelations, also called for an investigation into the reports of mass torture disclosed in the newly released documents.

Yemen bomb plot: key questions raised - Telegraph

Yemen bomb plot: key questions raised - Telegraph

Any successful terrorist attack on either US soil or on US aircraft during this period would have had an enormous symbolic and political impact, spreading fear and panic among voters and raising doubts over Barack Obama's strategy of containing terrorism in Afghanistan. The President's expected appearance in Chicago today would have given any terrorist attack further significance.

HOW WAS THE PLOT FOILED?

Details of the plot began to emerge on Thursday night when MI6 received a tip-off from Saudi intelligence services.

NEW EVIDENCE that Alvin Greene’s “win” in SC was STOLEN! :: News From Underground

NEW EVIDENCE that Alvin Greene’s “win” in SC was STOLEN! :: News From Underground

Mail-in paper ballot election results just received from each South Carolina county under Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) requests confirm that there were enough voting discrepancies in the recent U.S. Senate Democratic primary to have reversed the election outcome. That race had dramatic, inexplicable discrepancies between the verifiable mail-in absentee paper ballot results and the unverifiable electronic voting results recorded on Election Day, June 8.

U.S. public libraries: We lose them at our peril - Los Angeles Times

U.S. public libraries: We lose them at our peril - Los Angeles Times

McChrystal Drama is Sideshow; Can Obama define a realistic Goal? | Informed Comment

McChrystal Drama is Sideshow; Can Obama define a realistic Goal? | Informed Comment

In short, Karzai appears to be attempting to strike a deal with the very Taliban and insurgents that Obama says he is pledged to uproot and destroy.

How can that make sense?

How indeed, unless Karzai is so much Bush's man that he would rather lose the war than see a Democrat win it.

Texas State Board of Education approves new curriculum standards | News for Dallas, Texas | Dallas Morning News | Texas Regional News

Texas State Board of Education approves new curriculum standards | News for Dallas, Texas | Dallas Morning News | Texas Regional News

U.S. and its history as a “Christian land governed by Christian principles.”

The United States Constitution was not handed by God to George Washington on Mt. Sinai. It was written by a groups of "We the people" (including a lot of Deists and Unitarians like Benjamin Franklin) for six specific purposes, which I had to memorize when I went to school.

Isn't it about time students had to memorize the Preamble to the Constitution again, instead of saying the Protestant Lord's Prayer in public school?

U.S. Approves Targeted Killing of American Cleric - NYTimes.com

U.S. Approves Targeted Killing of American Cleric - NYTimes.com

It is extremely rare, if not unprecedented, for an American to be approved for targeted killing, officials said.

Really? Are you sure?

Didn't Robert Ford collect a reward for shooting Jesse James in the back of the head?

Robert Ford, it was a fact,
shot Jesse in the back,
while Jesse hung a picture on the wall.

- The Ballad of Jesse James

Meanwhile here's the Republican criticism of Obama's move (from the same story as above):

A former senior legal official in the administration of George W. Bush said he did not know of any American who was approved for targeted killing under the former president.

WELL, WHY THE &%$#! NOT!!!

Bush was swaggering around shouting "Wanted: Dead or Alive" but not really doing anything.

At least now we have a president who's going to act more than he talks.

Ephphatha Poetry: "Imagine if the Tea Party Was Black" - Tim Wise

Ephphatha Poetry: "Imagine if the Tea Party Was Black" - Tim Wise

Imagine that hundreds of black protesters were to descend upon Washington DC and Northern Virginia, just a few miles from the Capitol and White House, armed with AK-47s, assorted handguns, and ammunition. And imagine that some of these protesters —the black protesters — spoke of the need for political revolution, and possibly even armed conflict in the event that laws they didn’t like were enforced by the government? Would these protester — these black protesters with guns — be seen as brave defenders of the Second Amendment, or would they be viewed by most whites as a danger to the republic? What if they were Arab-Americans? Because, after all, that’s what happened recently when white gun enthusiasts descended upon the nation’s capital, arms in hand, and verbally announced their readiness to make war on the country’s political leaders if the need arose

It goes on, but you get the point. Or you should.

Ron Paul: President Obama Is Not A Socialist | TPMDC

Ron Paul: President Obama Is Not A Socialist | TPMDC

"The question has been raised about whether or not our president is a socialist," Paul said. "I am sure there are some people here who believe it. But in the technical sense, in the economic definition of a what a socialist is, no, he's not a socialist."

"He's a corporatist," Paul continued. "And unfortunately we have corporatists inside the Republican party and that means you take care of corporations and corporations take over and run the country."

Finally, a sane voice in the Republican Party. Too bad they won't listen to him.

If at First You Don’t Succeed, Hope for Activist Judges

If at First You Don’t Succeed, Hope for Activist Judges

The attorneys general offer no serious rebuttal to this reality that Congress has sweeping authority to enact economic regulation, and a requirement that all Americans be insured is economic in nature. Instead, they claim that health reform is unconstitutional merely because it is unusual. In the words of Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, “at no time in our history has the government mandated its citizens buy a good or service.”

Cuccinelli is not telling the truth. President George Washington signed the Second Militia Act of 1792, which required a significant percentage of the U.S. civilian population to purchase—at their own expense—“a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack” along with various other items they would need if the president ever called them up to serve in the militia. Many of the members of Congress who voted to enact this law were also members of the Philadelphia Convention that wrote the Constitution itself.

Granted that Qadhdhafi is a nutcase, but Arab nationalism just can't work.

It's time to abolish the Arab League | Muslims Debate

In 2009, Gaddafi stormed out of the Doha Summit after he denounced King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia as a "British product, and [an] American ally." When Shaikh Hamad Bin Khalifa Al Thani of Qatar tried to rein him in, the Libyan responded: "I am an international leader, the dean of the Arab rulers, the king of kings of Africa and the imam of Muslims, and my international status does not allow me to descend to a lower level." In Sirte, Gaddafi took aim at the Qatari's weight, declared that Shaikh Hamad was "better than [him] at filling a void," before bursting into laughter. A few years ago, he told summiteers in Algeria that Palestinians and Israelis were "stupid" and that Israel should be invited to join the League. He even coined the term Isratine, Israel and Palestine, in the Oz-like fantasy land he envisaged.

"The Arabs have agreed to disagree." has been attributed to ibn Khaldun. I don't know if the attribution is correct, but the saying is certainly true.

It's about time!

Pakistan's Army takes control of al-Qaeda cave network on Afghan border - Times Online

Pakistani forces have taken control of a warren of caves that served until recently as the nerve centre of the Taleban and al-Qaeda and sheltered Ayman al-Zawahiri, the second-in-command to Osama bin Laden.

Let's hope this good news can continue!

For those disappointed by Obama - it's 1965 all over again.

Cyrus Roberts Vance, Lieutenant, United States Navy & Public Official

This, in a nutshell, was the unself-conscious voice of the establishment - the one that Jimmy Carter ran against so vigorously that his campaign manager, Hamilton Jordan, once said: "If, after the inauguration, you find a Cy Vanceas secretary of state and Zbigniew Brzezinski as head of national security, then I would say we failed. And I'd quit.''

Mr. Vance was Mr. Carter's first appointee, followed soon after by Mr. Brzezinski. Mr. Jordan did not quit.

I remember that. I learned a big and important lesson about American politics.

If you didn't figure out then that the "outsider" and "independent" candidates are set up, or you weren't born yet, figure it out now. Obama was never the revolutionary (much less the Marxist or Muslim terrorist) the Republican party tried to portray him as.

You can get some change in the system. You can't overthrow the system. Nor should you. Few people really won when the Western Roman Empire fell. Not even most of the barbarians.

You get a choice of two candidates, and some protest votes, in most US elections. You have to choose the lesser evil. Obama was the lesser evil last time, not the second coming. And not the anti-Christ.

If you want to get angry about something, get angry about having your choice revoked.

McCain proffered an insurance mandate with no public option. That's the bogus plan they got in Massachusetts that they are rebelling against.

Obama offered a public option with no mandate.

So what are we about to get if we don't get active? What we voted against.

Anyone else remember 1964? We voted for a candidate who promised not to bomb North Vietnam over a candidate who promised to bomb.

What did we get? Carpet bombing, and a massive antiwar movement, and massive disgust with the government that lasted decades, from the credibility gap to Watergate to today's anti-government militants.

Don't let them take the public option away!! It's too important, not just for itself, but for democracy.

Legislation, smegislation! We need a Constitutional Amendment!

Left and right united in opposition to controversial SCOTUS decision - Yahoo! News

As noted by the Post's Dan Eggen, the poll's findings show "remarkably strong agreement" across the board, with roughly 80% of Americans saying that they're against the Court's 5-4 decision. Even more remarkable may be that opposition by Republicans, Democrats, and Independents were all near the same 80% opposition range. Specifically, 85% of Democrats, 81% of Independents, and 76% of Republicans opposed it. In short, "everyone hates" the ruling.

The poll's findings could enhance the possibility of getting a broad range of support behind a movement in Congress to pass legislation that would offset the Court's decision.

We need a Constitutional Amendment that says corporations are not "persons" in terms of the Constitution, before one decides it's over 35 and runs for president.

When another corporatist Supreme Court invalidated the income tax, people didn't wring their hands and passed legislation. They passed and ratified the 16th Amendment.

What is wrong with Congress that they don't get this? Everyone else seems to.

Finally, the US is really going after the enemy

Exclusive: Another Taliban Leader Captured in Pakistan - Declassified Blog - Newsweek.com

Another leader of the Afghan Taliban has been captured by authorities in Pakistan working in partnership with U.S. intelligence officials. Taliban sources in the region and a counterterrorism officials in Washington have identified the detained insurgent leader as Mullah Abdul Salam, described as the Taliban movement's "shadow governor" of Afghanistan's Kunduz province.