Lies, Lies, Lies!

I almost took out my rage on the television set last night when I listened to some of the most outrageous lies I’ve ever heard. Here in the US we think of Fox News as the ultimate in dishonesty, but the disgrace last night was on MSNBC. In Keith Olbermann’s absence, his smirking substitute interviewed one of the show’s regular Jewish “experts” about the current struggle between the Hamas and Fatah parties in Palestine.

'ALISON STEWART: And before we let you go, Jonathan, we want to ask you about another conflict the White House has to consider. Islamic fundamentalists led by the Hamas terror organization seized control of the Gaza Strip for [from? This woman rarely seems to understand what she’s reading.] moderates backed by the Bush administration. What does this do to President Bush‘s vision for that region?
JONATHAN ALTER: Well, you know, it‘s just really—it‘s so awful. I mean, here the Israelis unilaterally handed over Gaza. They did what they‘ve been urged to do in the West Bank. Everybody said, Yes, give the Palestinians their territory. So they did that. How were they rewarded? With missiles fired into Israel from Gaza, and now, with a takeover by Hamas, which is committed to the destruction of Israel.'

The truth is that Hamas won the freely held Palestinian elections early this year and assumed leadership of the government fair and square, just as the Democrats did in the US. But Hamas was – to Israeli and American tastes – too popular and too effective in promoting the welfare of the Palestinian people. The US had branded Hamas a “terrorist” organization because it had refused to accept Israeli occupation rather than, like the losing party, Fatah, obediently bowing to foreign bribes. (Incidentally, Fatah is recognized to be extraordinarily corrupt and indifferent to the people’s needs, while Hamas has just the opposite reputation – integrity and great social welfare work on behalf of the people.)

So the US, despite having insisted on the elections which brought Hamas to power, set out to undermine the legitimate government of Palestine and encourage the violent overthrow of Hamas by the losing party. The financial and other methods used were flagrant efforts to destroy a popularly elected legal government. Fatah gunmen (some trained by the US) began to physically attack Hamas people. Israel kidnapped Hamas mayors and other officials. The violent rebellion instigated by “USrael” reached the point of civil war, and the American media cheered not the elected government but the rebels.

But Newsweek acknowledged what was really going on: “As long as Hamas refused to recognize Israel, the United States refused to deal with the Hamas-dominated Palestinian government. The hope was not that ordinary Palestinians would suffer, but that they would realize such a government was not in their best interests. At the same time Washington tried to bolster Abbas and his Fatah movement.” [Isn’t it commendable of the US to starve the people who elected a government so that they will “realize such a government was not in their best interests”] Newsweek: “Hamas, under pressure, built up its own paramilitary forces to counter those controlled by Abbas (and trained by the United States). Then, last week, as tit-for-tat killings in Gaza spiraled out of control, those Hamas fighters in Gaza turned out to be far more fierce than their better-funded opponents. The result: the radicals are now in charge of Gaza.” [Note that “radicals” are not nice. Memo to Newsweek: Why not say, “The elected government is now in charge of Gaza.”]

So, good news – in Gaza (the smaller of the two bits of Palestine not officially incorporated into “Greater Israel”) Hamas defeated the armed Fatah uprising. Hoorah, right? Wrong.


PLEASE CLICK AND ENLARGE. GAZA ON THE LEFT, WEST BANK ON THE RIGHT.


MSNBC told the exact opposite of the truth. Their story implied that Fatah was the legitimate government, which was defeated by some sort of Hamas rebellion while poor deceived Israel stood by wringing its hands.

Alison Stewart said, “Islamic fundamentalists led by the Hamas terror organization seized control of the Gaza Strip [from] moderates” . Her words not only reversed the fact that it was the Hamas government which prevented Fatah from seizing control, but also instructed Americans how to feel about Hamas by calling it a “terror” organization and distorting its nature with the scare words, “Islamic fundamentalists”.

Jonathan Alter joined in the “ain’t it awful” dialogue by saying that poor Israel, which has done so much for the Palestinians (sarcasm!), even being so generous as to give back a small piece of the territory it stole from them, has been “rewarded” with “a takeover” by Hamas. How can you take over a government you were elected to run?

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas (hand picked for that position by US/Israel, who appreciate his handy-dandy cooperative attitude) swore in an emergency Cabinet on Sunday and purportedly outlawed the militia forces of Hamas. Abbas has no legal power to outlaw anything, least of all the elected government.

Newsweek wrote: “The hurried swearing-in ceremony of the new Cabinet left the Palestinians effectively with two governments — the Hamas leadership in Gaza and the new Cabinet in the West Bank led by respected economist Salam Fayyad. [Notice that the usurper is “respected”, which may be translated into Israelspeak as "easily bent".] Abbas issued decrees Sunday annulling a law requiring the new government to be approved by parliament, which is dominated by Hamas, and outlawing the Islamic group's militias. “ Hmmm. I seem to recall that annulling a country’s laws by decree has been labeled “dictatorship” by the US. Well, yes, but that was last month. Now it is probably something that G.W. Bush admires and envies.

Newsweek sums up with an uncharacteristically candid statement admitting that the US has lost all credibility:
‘Citizens of countries where Washington has called for greater democracy—Iran, say, or Syria—now have three less-than-inspiring examples close to home. In Lebanon, Iranian-backed Hizbullah reigns as a power unto itself [having booted out the most recent Israeli invasion]. In Iraq, the sect-based parties that came to power in the 2005 elections have created a bloody nightmare, and stymied any attempts to forge a truly national consensus. And in the Palestinian territories, Washington simply rejected the election results.’

Interlude?

I’ve been mulling over a post for VIEW FROM THE MOON for several days, unsure why I haven’t written anything. For awhile I was asking, “What’s the use?” Maybe I’ll take Cindy Sheehan’s cue. Maybe I’ll just say, “The show is cancelled because of lack of interest.”

I picture those who look at this blog as falling into three groups: 1. A small group who agree with me on Zionism and other things, and who probably know more about them than I do, and who can read the same opinions a thousandfold on other websites. 2. A small group who regularly scan the Internet for anti-Zionist and “anti-Semitic” opinions and leave canned comments lifted from “talking points” distributed by the Anti-Defamation League and the Simon Wiesenthal Center – lifted verbatim, spelling mistakes and all. 3. A very large proportion, a huge proportion, who have no idea what I’m talking about and couldn’t care less. To the latter crowd belong those who think that Iraq attacked the United States in New York, who believe that some nations are “evil” and some “good”, who have absorbed two generations of teachings that Arabs are sinister and cruel while Jews are noble victims, and who have no idea where Palestine and Israel and Iraq and Iran are, much less what Zionism is or how Israel came into being. If I could believe that VIEW FROM THE MOON had influenced even one of this latter group to become informed and to escape the conventional thinking about American foreign policy, I would feel successful and would never consider quitting. . . but I have no reason to be that optimistic.

Viewed from the Moon, the Earth still looks beautiful. . . silent, blue, seductively veiled in swirls of white clouds. But then it always looks that way. From the Moon you can’t see the explosions in Iraq or Palestine. You can’t hear the tortured screams of prisoners of the Americans and Israelis. If you had just arrived on the Moon, in fact, you would have the impression that you were looking across black space at a luminous cosmic paradise.

Paradise lost, perhaps, but not because of a heavenly Old Testament disciplinarian. Paradise lost, rather, because of the nature of humankind and its inability to organize itself so that its most wise, kind, generous and peaceful members are in charge of its nations. When the Earth is viewed from the Earth, where for the most part the greedy and selfish and brutal rule, the peaceful lunar view seems a sad mockery.

And yet lately Americans (those few paying any attention) could get the impression that we are going through a slight lull in the steady rise of violence and insanity. Here are some of the positive events that have created this intermezzo:

1. Neocon Paul Wolfowitz, one of the chief Iraq war criminals, booted out by the World Bank because of brazen misconduct and incompetence as President of the bank.

2. I. Lewis Libby, Wolfowitz’ protégé and co-planner of wars in the Middle East, given a reasonably hefty prison sentence for his crimes, although for some reason still walking around a free man.

3. Representatives of the United States sitting down and talking with Iranian representatives in the first public diplomatic discussions between the two nations in many years. This accompanied by a decrease in American anti-Iranian oratory and in what were almost daily Israeli threats to bomb Iran.

4. Some signs that even Republicans are finally starting to join in pressuring Bush to do something about ending (or at least altering) the American military presence in Iraq.

5. An increase in lip service to curbing global warming.

6. An upset tummy for G.W. Bush which kept him from embarrassing the United States overseas for at least a few hours.

7. That great American national icon (who may replace the Statue of Liberty as the symbol of American ideals and aspirations), Paris Hilton, put into jail for a series of flagrant violations of law, then let out by a strangely compassionate sheriff, and then put back again. Which of that is positive news and which is negative news depends on whether you are Paris Hilton or almost everybody else, but in general it gives the impression that justice is being done, or at least attempted, in a country where there is a blatant double system of incarceration for the rich and famous on the one hand everybody else on the other hand.


Of course I know that there have been negative as well as soothing developments in the past couple of weeks, and that the sewer of horrors gushes unabated in occupied Palestine and Iraq and Afghanistan. I know that those who scheme for war have not stopped their scheming, and that any apparent improvements in U.S. policies will probably prove illusory and shortlived. Nevertheless, being able to write a few positive things has provided a pleasant interlude.

Another Gap in the News? President Jimmy Carter's Book

There is a story of which I became aware two days ago, thanks to my friend Victor, even though its raison d’etre dates back to November of last year: The furor created by the pro-Israel faction over a book by former president Jimmy Carter, "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid" .

Either there is something really lacking in my daily survey of the news, or this is another one of those significant stories which is not-so-mysteriously missing from widespread reporting in the U.S.A.

Because the book was apparently published in November of last year, and scarcely got its beak out of the shell before it was blasted with the equivalent of the Israeli air assault on Lebanon, I think it is curious that very few Americans have been made aware of it by our zealous guardians of an “informed public”. Obviously they do not want us thinking about the criticisms of Israel which are in the book. This is the silent treatment I mentioned in a recent post.

Did I miss this news just because I don’t read enough news? Did I overlook what everybody else has seen? Possibly, but I doubt it. I have no intention of devoting my life to the depressing and uninstructive perusal of “the daily news”, but I do watch some television news programming each night, and I look more than once a day at all the headlines of major news services (e.g. AP, New York Times, Reuters, MSNBC, USAToday) so that I can read in depth about anything that interests me. I also go to Google News, which is the only news source where I’ve found a Carter book story, and which generally offers a wider spectrum of coverage than other news services.

So, thanks to Vic, I have learned belatedly that a “controversy” over President Carter’s book has presumably been going on for months, the latest development being resignations by members of a Carter Center advisory board.

The news story is ”Carter Center Resignations” .

“The resignations, announced Thursday, are the latest in a backlash against Carter's book ‘Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid,’ which has drawn fire from Jewish groups, been attacked by fellow Democrats and led to the resignation last month of Kenneth Stein, a Carter Center fellow and a longtime Carter adviser. . . . Steve Berman, an Atlanta real estate developer among those who resigned, said members have ‘watched with great dismay’ as Carter defended the book, especially as he implied that Americans might be afraid to discuss the conflict in fear of a powerful Jewish lobby. . . . Berman said the religious affiliation of the resigning members, which include some prominent Jewish leaders in the Atlanta area, did not influence their decision. “

I want to repeat one thing for emphasis, in view of a recent discussion on this blog: “. . . especially as he implied that Americans might be afraid to discuss the conflict in fear of a powerful Jewish lobby.”

My curiosity aroused by Berman’s last statement, I found a list of the people who resigned.

“The following have announced their resignation from the Board of Councilors:

1. Alan R. Abrams, Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer of Servidyne, Inc2.
2. Steve Berman, managing partner, OA Development, an Atlanta based real estate developer company.
3. Michael Coles, chairman of Minneapolis-based Caribou Coffee Co.
4. Doug Hertz, president & CEO, United Distributors.
5. Jonathan Golden, Partner and Chairman, Arnall, Golden, Gregory LLP, an Atlanta law firm.
6. Barbara Babbit Kaufman, author; formerly of Chapter 11 Books as its founder.
7. Liane Levetan, former state senator and DeKalb CEO.
8. Jeff Levy, Chairman and CEO of Atlanta-based PrDigital Media and its parent company, Biltmore Communications9. Leon Novak, principal, The Trilogy Group, a full-service provider of commercial real estate services based in Atlanta.
9. Gail Solomon, Georgia Dome executive services manager.
10. Cathey Steinberg, Executive Director of the Juvenile Justice Fund, former state Consumers' Insurance Advocate and former state Senator.
11. Steve Selig, President and Chairman of the Board of Selig Enterprises.
12. William B. Schwartz, Jr. was the U.S. Ambassador to The Bahamas from 1977-1981 during the Carter Administration.
13. William B. Schwartz III, formerly senior wealth management professional at Offitbank, an arm of Wachovia.”

Regardless of what Berman said, there is a lack of ethnic/religious diversity in the list. To me the fact that so many Jewish people would resign en masse illustrates a “one issue” mentality (which I’ll be writing about at another time) focused on what is perceived as good or not good for Jews as a group – one issue which dwarfs all other issues. It also probably illustrates the power of big organized Jewish groups like the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith to pressure individuals who might otherwise not have thought of resigning.

If by now you are wondering what President Carter wrote, join me. I haven’t seen the book yet, and Googling President Carter and his book’s title lands you waist-deep in a flood of pro-Israel, ad hominem, diatribes which are not keen to let us know about the former president’s assertions. As always in such cases, a debate on facts is avoided, and the spears are thrown at the individual who wrote down the facts.

The hard-to-find articles are the ones favorable to President Carter. Here are a few with favorable views:

>Berkeley

Antiwar

>The Nation

Zmag

Here is another article, fairly balanced, but the comments are a free-for-all!

More on “Democracy” in Palestine

The following news excerpts expand yesterday’s discussion. First, by way of introduction, a recent UN report demonstrates the effects of Israeli occupation and recent American and Israeli obstruction of democracy in Palestine: 65% of Palestinians are living in poverty, 29% are unemployed, healthcare is on the verge of collapse and 50% of Palestinians do not have reliable access to food. With increasing malnutrition in some parts of the Jewish-occupied Palestinian territories, and the severe restrictions on movement imposed by Israel, Palestinians have to negotiate their way through 500 checkpoints and deal with Israel’s “separation” wall. All this on their own native land. Of course the U.S. strangling of normal funding because it did not like the outcome of the January elections is playing a large part in this genocidal picture now.

Al Jazeera (Dec. 22) “Four more people have been killed in violence and revenge killings in the Gaza Strip and West Bank since President Mahmoud Abbas called for early presidential and parliamentary elections on Saturday.

“Hamas won a majority in January 2006 parliamentary elections and Fatah has resisted surrendering positions it dominated for decades.

“Some Palestinians say US-led opposition to the Hamas-led government is drawing battle lines for the entire region.

“’The US administration wants to create a new Middle East,’ acting parliament speaker Hassan Khreisheh told Aljazeera.net. ‘This new Middle East demands that countries allied to the US - Egypt, Jordan, and the Gulf countries - are pit against Iran, Syria, Hezbollah and Hamas.’

[But somebody is happy:] “’I am pleased a moderate* axis of countries in the Arab world has been created that wants to take part in blocking Iran's influence on the region,’ Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Elmer said in an October policy speech.

“Regional banks have also stepped into the foray as mounting concern about US anti-terrorism statutes has coerced them to bar transfer of monies to the Palestinian government."



*(“Moderate: One who, while nominally disagreeing with U.S. and Zionist policies, nevertheless does nothing to oppose them.” BUSH DICTIONARY ANNOTATED.)

Tony Blair's "Democracy" (Wink Wink, Nudge Nudge)

My remarks about the U.S. and Britain ostensibly pressing for democracy in selected Middle East countries (not including “moderates” like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, or Jordan) while thwarting the results of elections if they don’t like them, find new focus today in yelpings of Robopup Tony Blair.

(“Moderate: One who, while nominally disagreeing with U.S. and Zionist policies, nevertheless does nothing to oppose them.” BUSH DICTIONARY ANNOTATED.)

“DUBAI (Reuters) - British Prime Minister Tony Blair urged Middle Eastern states on Wednesday to help rein in the "forces of extremism" in Iran and to advance peace between Israelis and Palestinians.”

(“Extremist” as defined in my BUSH DICTIONARY ANNOTATED: “3. Any person who resists or speaks out against U.S. or Zionist invasion and occupation of any country, or who openly opposes U.S. or Zionist interference in the internal affairs of any country.”)

“Blair, who will leave office next year and whose popularity has been eroded by the Iraq war, rejected suggestions American or British action in the Middle East was fuelling terrorism. . . . He called on moderate leaders across the Middle East to join a ‘monumental struggle’ between democracy and extremism. . . .

“Blair plans to hold talks with world leaders in early 2007 on delivering a package of aid for Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. Abbas has called for early elections after failing to form a unity administration with Hamas, which won elections in January but is being boycotted by the West because of its refusal to recognize the state of Israel.”

So, Blair, who backed a democratic election in Palestine, now ignores the results of that election and works to deliver “aid” to the losing party instead of the lawfully elected party. It will be interesting to find out which “world leaders” go along with him in ignoring the democratic process he and Bush instigated. Isn’t it amazing that the thrust of Blair’s statements is that IRAN is improperly interfering in the Middle East? As a friend of mine said, “Democracy” is just the flag under which the pirates are sailing.)

(What if a second election is held and Hamas wins again in spite of the payoffs to the opposing party? Or is that being “taken care of”?)

As usual, there is no logical consistency in the Blair/Bush duet (they sing in unison, a cappella). As usual, what is good for Israel and bad for the oppressed Palestinians defines “good”.

Awhile back I asked if Robopup Blair might be straining at his leash to set himself free, but the answer is “no”. I think he was just excited by a fire hydrant.


And this just in:

“(Reuters) - Israel is considering handing over millions of dollars in withheld Palestinian tax funds to President Mahmoud Abbas in a move that could bolster him ahead of elections over his Hamas rivals, sources said on Wednesday. Western diplomats and Palestinian sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the proposal under consideration calls for releasing the tax money to Abbas in stages on condition it will bypass the Hamas-led government. Transferring the funds would mark a shift in Israeli policy, and could allow the moderate Abbas to make payments to Palestinian civil servants, who have not received their full salaries since Hamas came to power in March. “