I haven't written in this blog in a long time, but occasion of the 70th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz has gotten me thinking about the causes of the Shoa (holocaust) and its lessons for us. I have identified 3 that seem to be particularly important.
The first is anti-semitism. The fact that the Jews were the primary targets and, by a large majority, the main victims was not by accident or coincidental. Anti-semitism is the world's oldest, most widespread prejudice, and it continues as a significant force to this very day. It's all well and good to universalize the holocaust, but ignoring the central role of anti-semitism means missing perhaps the most important lesson of all. We as Jews have mostly realized this, and it's one of the main reasons that support for the State of Israel remains strong. We know that anti-semitism is still a major threat, and we know that we must be prepared to defend ourselves and that we cannot, ultimately, rely on anyone else to do this for us.
The second lesson is the matter of taking people seriously when they proclaim their genocidal threats loudly and clearly. The Nazis agenda was NOT hidden, although there were many who preferred to ignore it and to assume that they could not possibly really mean what they said. In the same way, the world prefers to ignore the vile threats and incitement that is constantly coming from Iran and from the Arab world, particularly from those who have taken on the "Palestinian" identity. The open, sustained calls for the destruction of Israel and genocide of the Jewish people from Iran and the Arab world are rarely even reported on, and, when they are, the reporting is nearly always weak and excusing of it.
The third lesson is that "peace" is NOT the answer. You can NOT negotiate with ideological tyrants and thugs and expect to placate or pacify them. This was the approach of Chamberlain when he gave the so-called "Sudentenland" (a part of Czechoslovakia where many ethnic Germans lived) to the Nazis and then returned home to England, proclaiming that he had achieved "peace in our time", and we all know how utterly poorly THAT worked out! You can sign all the petitions you want about any number of things, but you must prepared to exert real force if you expect to make any changes that matter and to prevent genocides and other horrors. This lesson is very difficult for us peace-loving Westerners to accept. We yearn for peace, and we abhor war. We find it very hard to accept that the road to peace almost always involves fighting along the way -- real, military fighting. We wish it were not so. But, unfortunately, it is.
Wednesday, January 28, 2015
Saturday, December 8, 2012
Week ending December 8, 2012
There are 3 topics that I want to cover in this post, each of them with 2 or 3 articles relating to it.
The first topic might well be called "The Liberal Case for Israel". Indeed, that is actually the title of a book written by the author of our first article. Of course, if you want his full argument, you'll have to buy his book (I don't have it, either, sorry), but the article gives you some of the main point. If you consider yourself liberal (as I do, too, despite what you may think!), you should definitely take the time to read this piece.
The second article is a first-person account of how Israel and the IDF (the Israeli military) were actually helping Gaza during the recent war and actively facilitating the transfer of civilian goods to the Strip. This article was written by an American-Israeli soldier who was actually part of that particular operation, and her story is a compelling one, another must-read!
Our second topic has to do with the history, beliefs, and goals of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and their daughter organization, Hamas, in Gaza.
The first article on this topic is an important read because it give some of the history of the Brotherhood. What most people probably don't know is that it was funded at its beginnings by Nazi Germany! And much of its strength early on came from its campaigns to get the Jews out of both Egypt and Palestine. All of this, of course, was LONG before there was any Jewish state. This is a really important antidote for those who are constantly starting history when Israel fires back in self-defense.
The next article on this topic talks about the Brotherhood's recent power grab in Egypt, but the important thing is to look to the future, in this case. The West is desperate to view the new regime in Egypt as somehow moderate and representing democratic ideals. But this is FAR from the reality. It's true that Morsi's edicts have elicited a lot of protest in Egypt, but it is not at all clear that this will seriously deter him, especially since the U.S. is continuing to send him PLENTY of aid! So, make no mistake about it, folks, the Muslim Brotherhood WILL be fighting against nearly everything that we mean by democracy, sooner or later. They know that they have no hope of destroying Israel in the near future, and, for now, the peace treaty is very much to their advantage. But their long-term goal of destroying the Jewish people and their State has not changed and is highly unlikely to change.
Our last article on this topic is fresh from today. Hamas held a big 25th anniversary celebration in Gaza and once again proclaimed their determination to completely eliminate Israel. Just another reminder (they come nearly every day these days!) that Hamas is NOT becoming "moderate" in any way!
Now we turn to our last topic. After all that we have learned about Hamas and its Muslim Brotherhood parent (not to mention its radical Iranian supporters!), you might think that all of this would be viewed with great alarm in the liberal, democratic countries, and that a whole range of efforts would be made to curb and defeat them. But no! Instead, it seems that the greatest threat to peace is building houses, or even just PLANNING to build them!
The first article on this topic is humorous as well as dead accurate: The Deadly Israeli House! Read it, and weep at how completely confused the world's priorities have become.
Our last article talks directly about the "E1" area. This is the area where the government has just announced approval for the construction of many new homes. It's currently completely empty (except for a police station) and has been since time immemorial, and it's located between Jerusalem (the capital of Israel) and Maalei Adumim, a beautiful Israeli city located a little further east. All reasonable proposals for final boundaries between Israeli and an "Palestinian" state that might be established have assumed that this area would be in Israel, even though it was illegally occupied by the Kingdom of Transjordan from 1948 (when they seized it, along with the rest of Judea and Samaria and the Old City of Jerusalem, in a war of aggression) until 1967 (when it was liberated by Israel in a war of self-defense).
Perhaps the one topic that unites ALL of these is that the conflict between the Arabs and Israel is definitely NOT about boundaries. Instead, it's a conflict between forces that have repeatedly sworn to completely eliminate the Jewish State (and kill the Jews, too, it must be noted!) and the attempts of Israel to defend itself. Nothing has fundamentally changed during all these decades except that Israel now has the power to prevent its own elimination.
The first topic might well be called "The Liberal Case for Israel". Indeed, that is actually the title of a book written by the author of our first article. Of course, if you want his full argument, you'll have to buy his book (I don't have it, either, sorry), but the article gives you some of the main point. If you consider yourself liberal (as I do, too, despite what you may think!), you should definitely take the time to read this piece.
The second article is a first-person account of how Israel and the IDF (the Israeli military) were actually helping Gaza during the recent war and actively facilitating the transfer of civilian goods to the Strip. This article was written by an American-Israeli soldier who was actually part of that particular operation, and her story is a compelling one, another must-read!
Our second topic has to do with the history, beliefs, and goals of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and their daughter organization, Hamas, in Gaza.
The first article on this topic is an important read because it give some of the history of the Brotherhood. What most people probably don't know is that it was funded at its beginnings by Nazi Germany! And much of its strength early on came from its campaigns to get the Jews out of both Egypt and Palestine. All of this, of course, was LONG before there was any Jewish state. This is a really important antidote for those who are constantly starting history when Israel fires back in self-defense.
The next article on this topic talks about the Brotherhood's recent power grab in Egypt, but the important thing is to look to the future, in this case. The West is desperate to view the new regime in Egypt as somehow moderate and representing democratic ideals. But this is FAR from the reality. It's true that Morsi's edicts have elicited a lot of protest in Egypt, but it is not at all clear that this will seriously deter him, especially since the U.S. is continuing to send him PLENTY of aid! So, make no mistake about it, folks, the Muslim Brotherhood WILL be fighting against nearly everything that we mean by democracy, sooner or later. They know that they have no hope of destroying Israel in the near future, and, for now, the peace treaty is very much to their advantage. But their long-term goal of destroying the Jewish people and their State has not changed and is highly unlikely to change.
Our last article on this topic is fresh from today. Hamas held a big 25th anniversary celebration in Gaza and once again proclaimed their determination to completely eliminate Israel. Just another reminder (they come nearly every day these days!) that Hamas is NOT becoming "moderate" in any way!
Now we turn to our last topic. After all that we have learned about Hamas and its Muslim Brotherhood parent (not to mention its radical Iranian supporters!), you might think that all of this would be viewed with great alarm in the liberal, democratic countries, and that a whole range of efforts would be made to curb and defeat them. But no! Instead, it seems that the greatest threat to peace is building houses, or even just PLANNING to build them!
The first article on this topic is humorous as well as dead accurate: The Deadly Israeli House! Read it, and weep at how completely confused the world's priorities have become.
Our last article talks directly about the "E1" area. This is the area where the government has just announced approval for the construction of many new homes. It's currently completely empty (except for a police station) and has been since time immemorial, and it's located between Jerusalem (the capital of Israel) and Maalei Adumim, a beautiful Israeli city located a little further east. All reasonable proposals for final boundaries between Israeli and an "Palestinian" state that might be established have assumed that this area would be in Israel, even though it was illegally occupied by the Kingdom of Transjordan from 1948 (when they seized it, along with the rest of Judea and Samaria and the Old City of Jerusalem, in a war of aggression) until 1967 (when it was liberated by Israel in a war of self-defense).
Perhaps the one topic that unites ALL of these is that the conflict between the Arabs and Israel is definitely NOT about boundaries. Instead, it's a conflict between forces that have repeatedly sworn to completely eliminate the Jewish State (and kill the Jews, too, it must be noted!) and the attempts of Israel to defend itself. Nothing has fundamentally changed during all these decades except that Israel now has the power to prevent its own elimination.
Saturday, November 24, 2012
Week ending November 24, 2012
Not so surprisingly, the articles I want to talk about in this post all relate to the recent war between Israel and Hamas. The first two were written while it was still going, and the third was written shortly after the ceasefire took hold.
The first article was quite personal for me. I grew up with an attitude much like the author's son. But there was a very important difference -- the bullies didn't pick on me. This was mostly because such violence was so much NOT tolerated at my school. It was also because I was always big for my age. Therefore, I did not learn what this woman's son learned until much later in life and, thankfully, NOT from personal experience. There is STILL apart of me that wants to believe that love and nonviolence will conquer all. But now I know that this is mostly wishful thinking. I was basically almost a pacifist when I was young. I have now learned from much observation and study of history that there are times when war is necessary and just. The Second World War is one example, and the recent battle with Hamas is another, albeit on a MUCH smaller scale.
The second article is a letter from an Israeli guy to an imaginary counterpart in Gaza. In it, he manages to highlight the difference between the two sides and to help all of us understand what is really happening. It was originally written in Hebrew, but the English translation is very good, except for the title, where "from" should have been "in".
Our last article is an important reminder, just in case anyone STILL needs it, NOT to believe the pictures you see of wounded or frightened children (or adults, for that matter), especially if they purport to be from Gaza. It gives some specific examples, including pictures of children in Syria, a picture of a girl actually killed by a stray HAMAS rocket, a fake of an injured man (who later in the video is seen walking around perfectly normally!), and (worst of all) pictures of Israeli victims of Palestinian attacks, all purporting to be pictures of victims in Gaza! I must add one more thing here: even genuine pictures of wounded or killed people in Gaza actually prove NOTHING (remember our second article above). The important fact is that, while Hamas's GOAL is to kill, injure, and frighten civilians, Israeli takes extraordinary measures to AVOID civilian harm, even to its own detriment.
The first article was quite personal for me. I grew up with an attitude much like the author's son. But there was a very important difference -- the bullies didn't pick on me. This was mostly because such violence was so much NOT tolerated at my school. It was also because I was always big for my age. Therefore, I did not learn what this woman's son learned until much later in life and, thankfully, NOT from personal experience. There is STILL apart of me that wants to believe that love and nonviolence will conquer all. But now I know that this is mostly wishful thinking. I was basically almost a pacifist when I was young. I have now learned from much observation and study of history that there are times when war is necessary and just. The Second World War is one example, and the recent battle with Hamas is another, albeit on a MUCH smaller scale.
The second article is a letter from an Israeli guy to an imaginary counterpart in Gaza. In it, he manages to highlight the difference between the two sides and to help all of us understand what is really happening. It was originally written in Hebrew, but the English translation is very good, except for the title, where "from" should have been "in".
Our last article is an important reminder, just in case anyone STILL needs it, NOT to believe the pictures you see of wounded or frightened children (or adults, for that matter), especially if they purport to be from Gaza. It gives some specific examples, including pictures of children in Syria, a picture of a girl actually killed by a stray HAMAS rocket, a fake of an injured man (who later in the video is seen walking around perfectly normally!), and (worst of all) pictures of Israeli victims of Palestinian attacks, all purporting to be pictures of victims in Gaza! I must add one more thing here: even genuine pictures of wounded or killed people in Gaza actually prove NOTHING (remember our second article above). The important fact is that, while Hamas's GOAL is to kill, injure, and frighten civilians, Israeli takes extraordinary measures to AVOID civilian harm, even to its own detriment.
Saturday, November 3, 2012
November 3, 2012
I'll have to admit that I've been a bit negligent in writing here. So, now I must get back to it!
The first article I'd like to write about actually is a rebuttal to another article. But I'm highlighting it because it explains so clearly the issue of Jewish refugees from Arab and Muslim lands, an issue that needs to be emphasized much more than it has been. This article is well worth a read, especially if you aren't very familiar with this topic.
The second article I want to talk about deals with an issue that continues to bother me. Why has the liberal left been so reluctant to support Israel and often even eager, instead, to back some of our worst enemies? Even though Israel is certainly not PERFECT (and neither is ANY country!), its human rights record absolutely TOWERS above that of ANY other country in the entire region. Even after the overthrow of many dictators in the neighborhood, there is not any other country or even entity (read "Palestinian Authority") that has anything even CLOSE to the vibrant democracy that flourishes here. What I like about this article is that it challenges those Liberals (and there are plenty out there) who DO care about Israel to do MUCH more to promote support of and understanding of the world's only Jewish state among their friends and colleagues on the Left. It's a point well taken.
Our third article is a short one, but it nicely highlights the utter HYPOCRISY of Muslims, of all people, in calling for laws and rules against defaming a religion. Read the article for more details!
The next article brings to our attention once again the connection between holocaust denial and the enemies of Israel. It's particularly disturbing that these teachers who are refusing to teach children about the holocaust are in Jordan, a country that is supposed to have made peace with Israel.
The fifth article I'd like to bring to your attention today has to do with the terribly imbalanced news coverage of Israel. Although we are disproportionately in the world news, the media, as they nearly always have been, are still paying virtually NO attention to stories about attacks on Israel. Then, when Israel responds to these attacks and tries to defend itself, there are suddenly stories everywhere about how brutal Israel is, and what war-mongers we are, etc., etc.
I'm sure you're getting tired of it by now, but I must point out yet another article describing the actual policies of the current U.S. administration toward Israel, Iran, and terrorism. Unfortunately, this is necessary because, with the election looming very close now, Obama has been pulling out all the stops, calling in all his chips, and getting as many people as he can to write about what a great friend of Israel he is and even has been. But look at the record, folks, look at the record!
My last article for today is interesting and worth reading in itself. It's talking about Jews praying (yes, PRAYING! not rioting, not even demonstrating!) on the Temple Mount (and not IN any of the structures there!) But its last paragraph, a quote from a Muslim official in the organization that manages the Temple Mount, and referring to that place, really gets to the root of many things:
"'This is a Muslim site,' the official said. 'If the police don't stop this, the people will. For Muslims, this is a red line.'"
First of all, this was a JEWISH site LONG before there even WERE any Muslims at ALL in the entire WORLD! I won't argue that it's NOT Muslim now, but it is certainly also JEWISH!
Second, notice the veiled threat. If the Jews don't stop praying, the Muslims will riot.
Third, note how easily and comfortably they are willing to draw red lines. This contrasts rather starkly with the West's vacillation, hesitation, and general confusion when dealing with Islamic terrorism.
The first article I'd like to write about actually is a rebuttal to another article. But I'm highlighting it because it explains so clearly the issue of Jewish refugees from Arab and Muslim lands, an issue that needs to be emphasized much more than it has been. This article is well worth a read, especially if you aren't very familiar with this topic.
The second article I want to talk about deals with an issue that continues to bother me. Why has the liberal left been so reluctant to support Israel and often even eager, instead, to back some of our worst enemies? Even though Israel is certainly not PERFECT (and neither is ANY country!), its human rights record absolutely TOWERS above that of ANY other country in the entire region. Even after the overthrow of many dictators in the neighborhood, there is not any other country or even entity (read "Palestinian Authority") that has anything even CLOSE to the vibrant democracy that flourishes here. What I like about this article is that it challenges those Liberals (and there are plenty out there) who DO care about Israel to do MUCH more to promote support of and understanding of the world's only Jewish state among their friends and colleagues on the Left. It's a point well taken.
Our third article is a short one, but it nicely highlights the utter HYPOCRISY of Muslims, of all people, in calling for laws and rules against defaming a religion. Read the article for more details!
The next article brings to our attention once again the connection between holocaust denial and the enemies of Israel. It's particularly disturbing that these teachers who are refusing to teach children about the holocaust are in Jordan, a country that is supposed to have made peace with Israel.
The fifth article I'd like to bring to your attention today has to do with the terribly imbalanced news coverage of Israel. Although we are disproportionately in the world news, the media, as they nearly always have been, are still paying virtually NO attention to stories about attacks on Israel. Then, when Israel responds to these attacks and tries to defend itself, there are suddenly stories everywhere about how brutal Israel is, and what war-mongers we are, etc., etc.
I'm sure you're getting tired of it by now, but I must point out yet another article describing the actual policies of the current U.S. administration toward Israel, Iran, and terrorism. Unfortunately, this is necessary because, with the election looming very close now, Obama has been pulling out all the stops, calling in all his chips, and getting as many people as he can to write about what a great friend of Israel he is and even has been. But look at the record, folks, look at the record!
My last article for today is interesting and worth reading in itself. It's talking about Jews praying (yes, PRAYING! not rioting, not even demonstrating!) on the Temple Mount (and not IN any of the structures there!) But its last paragraph, a quote from a Muslim official in the organization that manages the Temple Mount, and referring to that place, really gets to the root of many things:
"'This is a Muslim site,' the official said. 'If the police don't stop this, the people will. For Muslims, this is a red line.'"
First of all, this was a JEWISH site LONG before there even WERE any Muslims at ALL in the entire WORLD! I won't argue that it's NOT Muslim now, but it is certainly also JEWISH!
Second, notice the veiled threat. If the Jews don't stop praying, the Muslims will riot.
Third, note how easily and comfortably they are willing to draw red lines. This contrasts rather starkly with the West's vacillation, hesitation, and general confusion when dealing with Islamic terrorism.
Monday, October 8, 2012
October 8, 2012
There are three articles on three different issues that I'd like us to look at this time around.
Our first article touches on a topic that is becoming increasingly important in the world: should speech criticizing a religion, specifically Islam, be prohibited? This is significant because, under Islamic law, the punishment for speaking anything against Mohammed is death! This is also the penalty for leaving Islam, whether for another religion or simply to become unreligious. In typical Islamic fashion, Muslim leaders and governments of Islamic countries now push for "international laws" (a tricky concept in itself!) against speaking against a religion (by which they really mean Islam, since they themselves are CONSTANTLY publishing the most vicious defamatory materials against Jews and Judaism, for example). They do this under a "freedom of religion" rubric because it's a very appealing concept in the West. But what it REALLY means is a SERIOUS limit on freedom of speech.
Now, freedom of speech, like any other freedom, is NOT absolute. The classic example of yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater comes to mind. But the essence of freedom of speech is the ability and right to speak out against ANY philosophy, religion, or political position. This is the very BASIS of democratic civilization as we know it. And this is exactly why the Islamists are so virulently opposed to it.
Our second article is important because once again outlines, in a clear fashion, the cost of NOT stopping Iran BEFORE it gets nuclear weapons. The new significant point here, though, is that the West, especially the United States, will eventually have to stop Iran somewhere at some point, and that the cost in lives and money would be FAR greater later on. Think of how much LESS loss of lives there would have been if the U.S., Britain, and France had stopped the Nazis earlier on. The holocaust would probably have been mostly, if not completely, prevented! And millions of OTHER civilian lives would also have been saved.
Our third article describes a phenomenon that is hardly surprising. But, first, a little background. The main inhabitants of the sparsely populated Golan Heights are Druze. Unlike the Druze in the rest of Israel, these people have generally NOT accepted Israeli citizenship (although it has been available to them for decades) and have preferred, instead, to maintain Syrian citizenship. This has actually been rather prudent on their part, since they have to face the danger that Israel might, at some point, give the Golan back to Syria, in which case they would then once again be in Syria, where Israeli citizenship would certainly NOT be an advantage! Also, they have many relatives in Syria, and the Alawite-controlled Syrian regime has favored various minorities (Alawites, Christians, and Druze) against the Muslim majority.
Now, however, as the article says, some of the Golan Druze, especially the younger ones who have spent their entire lives in Israel, are finding it hard to support the Assad regime in Syria and are beginning to realize how much better things are for EVERYBODY here in Israel. So they are beginning to apply for Israeli citizenship. This is a trend that we can only hope will continue and expand!
Our first article touches on a topic that is becoming increasingly important in the world: should speech criticizing a religion, specifically Islam, be prohibited? This is significant because, under Islamic law, the punishment for speaking anything against Mohammed is death! This is also the penalty for leaving Islam, whether for another religion or simply to become unreligious. In typical Islamic fashion, Muslim leaders and governments of Islamic countries now push for "international laws" (a tricky concept in itself!) against speaking against a religion (by which they really mean Islam, since they themselves are CONSTANTLY publishing the most vicious defamatory materials against Jews and Judaism, for example). They do this under a "freedom of religion" rubric because it's a very appealing concept in the West. But what it REALLY means is a SERIOUS limit on freedom of speech.
Now, freedom of speech, like any other freedom, is NOT absolute. The classic example of yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater comes to mind. But the essence of freedom of speech is the ability and right to speak out against ANY philosophy, religion, or political position. This is the very BASIS of democratic civilization as we know it. And this is exactly why the Islamists are so virulently opposed to it.
Our second article is important because once again outlines, in a clear fashion, the cost of NOT stopping Iran BEFORE it gets nuclear weapons. The new significant point here, though, is that the West, especially the United States, will eventually have to stop Iran somewhere at some point, and that the cost in lives and money would be FAR greater later on. Think of how much LESS loss of lives there would have been if the U.S., Britain, and France had stopped the Nazis earlier on. The holocaust would probably have been mostly, if not completely, prevented! And millions of OTHER civilian lives would also have been saved.
Our third article describes a phenomenon that is hardly surprising. But, first, a little background. The main inhabitants of the sparsely populated Golan Heights are Druze. Unlike the Druze in the rest of Israel, these people have generally NOT accepted Israeli citizenship (although it has been available to them for decades) and have preferred, instead, to maintain Syrian citizenship. This has actually been rather prudent on their part, since they have to face the danger that Israel might, at some point, give the Golan back to Syria, in which case they would then once again be in Syria, where Israeli citizenship would certainly NOT be an advantage! Also, they have many relatives in Syria, and the Alawite-controlled Syrian regime has favored various minorities (Alawites, Christians, and Druze) against the Muslim majority.
Now, however, as the article says, some of the Golan Druze, especially the younger ones who have spent their entire lives in Israel, are finding it hard to support the Assad regime in Syria and are beginning to realize how much better things are for EVERYBODY here in Israel. So they are beginning to apply for Israeli citizenship. This is a trend that we can only hope will continue and expand!
Saturday, September 22, 2012
Week ending September 22, 2012
This week, I have 2 articles that I'd like to call your attention to, and I also want to make some comments of my own.
The first article presents the clear evidence of Iran's incitement to genocide, according to the Genocide Convention, of which Iran is a signatory. Most importantly, this article outlines clearly the steps that can and most certainly SHOULD be taken against Iran, all under international law. Yet, NONE of these have been done. It's easy enough to understand why people are reluctant to go to WAR with Iran, but there are NO excuses whatsoever for failing to bring Iran and its genocidal leaders before international tribunals with charges of incitement to genocide. This shows that the world, unfortunately including the U.S., does not really mean "never again". It's nothing but empty words! They're only concerned about genocides AFTER they happen. It's so much easier just to wring one's hands after the fact!
Our second article delineates how clearly the Obama administration has NOT supported Israel, and how much they have followed the Arab line in this conflict. Note that this is about ACTIONS taken or not taken, NOT about what they CLAIM to have done or plan to do for Israel.
This brings me to the point I want to talk about this week. The election season is in full swing in the U.S., and anybody old enough to vote should realize that the politicians, especially the candidates for President of the United States (including the incumbent) will say ANYTHING at all that they think will win them votes, particularly in the swing states. By the same token, they will try to AVOID saying anything that might lose them votes. In other words, it's the season of pandering.
The best thing to do is to close your eyes and ears to EVERYTHING that they say at this time, whether it's things you LIKE to hear or things you DON'T like to hear. It really doesn't matter, folks!
So, how SHOULD you decide whom to vote for? I have two suggestions. First, look at the candidate's actual actions in the past (and even now!). When he had a real opportunity to make a decision regarding an issue that you consider important, what did he do? You'll find that this is often quite at odds with whatever things they're saying right now. Obama is supporting gay marriage now? That's wonderful, but where was he when he could really have made a difference? Still "evolving"! Republicans are speaking loudly against health care for all now? Unfortunate, but what actually happened in Massachusetts when Romney was governor there?
My second suggestion is to follow the money. Political campaigns, especially presidential ones, are incredibly expensive these days (thanks, in part, to the Supreme Court's action to prevent limits on campaign contributions). This means that ANY candidate must spend a LOT of time raising money. How can they convince people and corporations to give up their hard-earned (or not-so-hard-earned) cash? In one word, ACCESS! Of course, they can NOT promise any particular vote or action on any particular issue, since that would make the money a bribe! But they can and do offer ACCESS to the person or company that has donated generously to their campaign.
Now, here's the difficult part. You need to try to find out WHO has donated, and you need to try to determine WHY this person or company might want access. What is their interest? What will make life easier or more profitable for them? If this will also improve YOUR life, then perhaps your interests are actually aligned with them. If not (which is FAR more likely unless you're very rich!), then their interests are probably at ODDS with yours. Of course, one big problem here is that many corporations actually donate to BOTH candidates and BOTH parties because they're basically hedging their bets and because they want to be sure to have influence and access no matter WHO wins.
So remember: ignore words now, look at past actions, and try to follow the money.
That's it for this week!
The first article presents the clear evidence of Iran's incitement to genocide, according to the Genocide Convention, of which Iran is a signatory. Most importantly, this article outlines clearly the steps that can and most certainly SHOULD be taken against Iran, all under international law. Yet, NONE of these have been done. It's easy enough to understand why people are reluctant to go to WAR with Iran, but there are NO excuses whatsoever for failing to bring Iran and its genocidal leaders before international tribunals with charges of incitement to genocide. This shows that the world, unfortunately including the U.S., does not really mean "never again". It's nothing but empty words! They're only concerned about genocides AFTER they happen. It's so much easier just to wring one's hands after the fact!
Our second article delineates how clearly the Obama administration has NOT supported Israel, and how much they have followed the Arab line in this conflict. Note that this is about ACTIONS taken or not taken, NOT about what they CLAIM to have done or plan to do for Israel.
This brings me to the point I want to talk about this week. The election season is in full swing in the U.S., and anybody old enough to vote should realize that the politicians, especially the candidates for President of the United States (including the incumbent) will say ANYTHING at all that they think will win them votes, particularly in the swing states. By the same token, they will try to AVOID saying anything that might lose them votes. In other words, it's the season of pandering.
The best thing to do is to close your eyes and ears to EVERYTHING that they say at this time, whether it's things you LIKE to hear or things you DON'T like to hear. It really doesn't matter, folks!
So, how SHOULD you decide whom to vote for? I have two suggestions. First, look at the candidate's actual actions in the past (and even now!). When he had a real opportunity to make a decision regarding an issue that you consider important, what did he do? You'll find that this is often quite at odds with whatever things they're saying right now. Obama is supporting gay marriage now? That's wonderful, but where was he when he could really have made a difference? Still "evolving"! Republicans are speaking loudly against health care for all now? Unfortunate, but what actually happened in Massachusetts when Romney was governor there?
My second suggestion is to follow the money. Political campaigns, especially presidential ones, are incredibly expensive these days (thanks, in part, to the Supreme Court's action to prevent limits on campaign contributions). This means that ANY candidate must spend a LOT of time raising money. How can they convince people and corporations to give up their hard-earned (or not-so-hard-earned) cash? In one word, ACCESS! Of course, they can NOT promise any particular vote or action on any particular issue, since that would make the money a bribe! But they can and do offer ACCESS to the person or company that has donated generously to their campaign.
Now, here's the difficult part. You need to try to find out WHO has donated, and you need to try to determine WHY this person or company might want access. What is their interest? What will make life easier or more profitable for them? If this will also improve YOUR life, then perhaps your interests are actually aligned with them. If not (which is FAR more likely unless you're very rich!), then their interests are probably at ODDS with yours. Of course, one big problem here is that many corporations actually donate to BOTH candidates and BOTH parties because they're basically hedging their bets and because they want to be sure to have influence and access no matter WHO wins.
So remember: ignore words now, look at past actions, and try to follow the money.
That's it for this week!
Saturday, September 8, 2012
Week ending September 8, 2012
Since I have posted for about 3 weeks, there's quite a bit to talk about today. So let's get right to it!
Our first article is a reminder of Iran's steadfast and unchanging demand, using the most graphic and offensive images, that Israel be destroyed. The last time we heard this kind of thing was in Hitler's rants in the 1930s about destroying the Jews. Now, as then, people mostly tend to take it merely as deplorable rhetoric, rather than realizing that it is a serious threat and will be carried out unless those who issue it are stopped. Neville Chamberlain (who claimed to have achieved "peace in our time") would feel right at home with today's "no war with Iran no matter what" attitude.
Our next article, though a little long, is a very important read, because it's about attitudes in the Arab and Muslim world towards the premeditated murder of Jews, especially children. EVERY possible group you can imagine has its "crazies". Often they are mostly ignored, and frequently they are condemned by a broad centrist consensus. In this case, though, the murderer, who proudly accepts that she did it, is glorified, honored, and highly praised as a role model, and there are NO condemnations whatsoever. This is the horrifying reality that Israel is up against, plain and simple.
Our third article is about the dismissal of a wrongful death suit against Israel brought by the parents of Rachel Corrie, who was tragically killed by an Israeli armored bulldozer some years ago. This courageous judge looked carefully and in detail at all the evidence and concluded that she was basically responsible for her own death. She was in a closed military area where dangers abounded on all sides, and she failed to take even minimal precautions against them. Of course, the organization that sent her also bears responsibility for taking advantage of an idealistic young woman who really didn't understand (or maybe refused to understand) that she was being sent out, not as a "peace" activist, but as cannon fodder in a war.
The next article is about pay for terrorists. This is NOT pay from Hamas (who openly support terrorism and proudly proclaim that their only goal is the complete destruction of Israel). No, this is from the allegedly "moderate" Palestinian Authority. Several things are worth noting here, as well. Despite the fact that the PA is experiencing a serious budget crunch, they actually managed to RAISE the "salaries" of terrorists in Israeli jails (who actually need NO money at all -- they're prisoners!). And where does the PA get most of its money from? From the international community, including the U.S., that's where. Your tax dollars at work!
The next two articles are about political organizations in the U.S. who CLAIM to be "pro-Israel". The first is about J Street and a letter they sent to rabbis in North America. The letter SOUNDS like it is very supportive of Israel on the surface, but a more careful analysis reveals that it is dangerously ANTI-Israel and advocates policies that, if carried out, would almost certainly lead to the DESTRUCTION of Israel. The second is about the recent debacle at the Democratic National Convention regarding whether Jerusalem should or should not be mentioned as the capital of Israel. Now we know that the platforms of major political parties these days in the U.S. are mostly meaningless. The INTERESTING thing here was the amount of vocal opposition by the rank-and-file delegates on the floor to acknowledging the reality that Jerusalem IS the capital of Israel. True, they didn't win, but the scary thing is that there were LOTS of them there! With friends like these ...
Our last article for this time is the second in a series of articles that carefully and thoughtfully argue that the 2-state solution is unrealistic, unattainable, and even bad for all involved. Obviously, a position like this requires some rather careful analysis because the 2-state solution has been the only one seriously considered for so long now. I encourage you to read these articles, especially if you think you'll disagree with his conclusion.
Our first article is a reminder of Iran's steadfast and unchanging demand, using the most graphic and offensive images, that Israel be destroyed. The last time we heard this kind of thing was in Hitler's rants in the 1930s about destroying the Jews. Now, as then, people mostly tend to take it merely as deplorable rhetoric, rather than realizing that it is a serious threat and will be carried out unless those who issue it are stopped. Neville Chamberlain (who claimed to have achieved "peace in our time") would feel right at home with today's "no war with Iran no matter what" attitude.
Our next article, though a little long, is a very important read, because it's about attitudes in the Arab and Muslim world towards the premeditated murder of Jews, especially children. EVERY possible group you can imagine has its "crazies". Often they are mostly ignored, and frequently they are condemned by a broad centrist consensus. In this case, though, the murderer, who proudly accepts that she did it, is glorified, honored, and highly praised as a role model, and there are NO condemnations whatsoever. This is the horrifying reality that Israel is up against, plain and simple.
Our third article is about the dismissal of a wrongful death suit against Israel brought by the parents of Rachel Corrie, who was tragically killed by an Israeli armored bulldozer some years ago. This courageous judge looked carefully and in detail at all the evidence and concluded that she was basically responsible for her own death. She was in a closed military area where dangers abounded on all sides, and she failed to take even minimal precautions against them. Of course, the organization that sent her also bears responsibility for taking advantage of an idealistic young woman who really didn't understand (or maybe refused to understand) that she was being sent out, not as a "peace" activist, but as cannon fodder in a war.
The next article is about pay for terrorists. This is NOT pay from Hamas (who openly support terrorism and proudly proclaim that their only goal is the complete destruction of Israel). No, this is from the allegedly "moderate" Palestinian Authority. Several things are worth noting here, as well. Despite the fact that the PA is experiencing a serious budget crunch, they actually managed to RAISE the "salaries" of terrorists in Israeli jails (who actually need NO money at all -- they're prisoners!). And where does the PA get most of its money from? From the international community, including the U.S., that's where. Your tax dollars at work!
The next two articles are about political organizations in the U.S. who CLAIM to be "pro-Israel". The first is about J Street and a letter they sent to rabbis in North America. The letter SOUNDS like it is very supportive of Israel on the surface, but a more careful analysis reveals that it is dangerously ANTI-Israel and advocates policies that, if carried out, would almost certainly lead to the DESTRUCTION of Israel. The second is about the recent debacle at the Democratic National Convention regarding whether Jerusalem should or should not be mentioned as the capital of Israel. Now we know that the platforms of major political parties these days in the U.S. are mostly meaningless. The INTERESTING thing here was the amount of vocal opposition by the rank-and-file delegates on the floor to acknowledging the reality that Jerusalem IS the capital of Israel. True, they didn't win, but the scary thing is that there were LOTS of them there! With friends like these ...
Our last article for this time is the second in a series of articles that carefully and thoughtfully argue that the 2-state solution is unrealistic, unattainable, and even bad for all involved. Obviously, a position like this requires some rather careful analysis because the 2-state solution has been the only one seriously considered for so long now. I encourage you to read these articles, especially if you think you'll disagree with his conclusion.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)