Editorial: Israel's legislative nadir

A rotten law

The passing of a law by the Israeli Knesset giving the right of vexatious civil prosecution to petitioners from parts of the Israeli State who have suffered boycotts marks a nadir in the democratic life of Israel.

There might be very little objective reason to boycott the substantive and legally constituted state of Israel; however, there is every reason by conscience, law and legality to boycott the settlements which are viewed by international law to be illegal.

What makes the law egregious, very bad and a departure from common-sense and reason is that petitioner does not even have to prove “economic, cultural or academic damage” was caused, as long as the petitioner can suggest, assume or imply that a boycott can be reasonably expected to cause damage no matter how contrived.

This law as much as it abridges the freedom of expression and choice of the Israelis by inference confers undue legitimacy on these outposts of the law where already too much is squandered in maintaining an uneasy calm on illegally annexed lands of the Palestinians.

Israel wants no peace

Religionists might for their ulterior purposes suggest that modern Israel which is a fraction of the promised Canaan of antiquity to Abraham and his seed is the ancestral land of the Jews; it is without doubt that the imposition of ancient literality over what must for global interests of today be figurative at best is unfortunate.

However, the biggest signal from the leaning of the current Israeli parliament and government of Israel is not of a state seeking peace with its neighbours but one of a belligerent hegemony whose concept of peace is really that of security borne of being superiorly equipped as a threat and menace whilst depriving its closest neighbour of any means of its own defence and military projection if that course of action becomes necessary.

One can so easily conclude that Israel probably enjoys its continual projection of pseudo-victim within a hostile Middle-Eastern neighbourhood; and as long as we are always distracted and confronted with the spectre of an existential threat to Israel the need to force the issue for peace never assumes the needed priority because any useful peace settlement might well make Israel pale into relative regional insignificance.

Justice needs to prevail

It goes without saying that codifying such atrocious laws into their statute books and by so doing conferring legality on an illegality does make the reasonable, fair and just begin to question the legitimacy of Israel – for whilst representative democracy might well be purposeful, it can yet be abused by the tyranny of ideology.

One would hope that the legality of this law gets tested in the highest courts of the land and the bench will with boldness contemn the intent, purpose, process and enactment of this law whilst striking it down with a stinging rebuke to all those who gave support to this travesty.

Boats, Threats & Videotape

A voice out of somewhere

“I am coming to you”, Could this be a father saying to his daughter who is distressed at school as a voice of assurance or is it a voice carried in the un-calm winds of the Persian Gulf in the Strait of Hormuz, threatening the existence of a coalition vessel convoy?

No one can say, just as the United States military command in the Gulf cannot now confirm that the video of seemingly or allegedly Iranian speedboats in aggressive posturing to their fleet is the source of that cool but eerily sinister voice.

We have seen boats, threats and videotape – you can make what you want out of both.

Far away war a day

The United States, very far away from home causing enough trouble in the Middle East was in international waters close to the territorial extent of Iran – this was no doubt a recipe for close encounters with their enemy.

The US then released a video of seemingly reckless speedboat riders playing chicken with a belligerent world power – they were at the point of being blown to smithereens when a voice was recorded with this chilling threat.

Iran then released their own video and the storyline takes a completely different course – a calm and collected officer asking about the coalition vessel, definitely not the voice we heard of the US video threat.

The curse of propaganda

If anything, it shows why we need multiple perspectives of any story, because each side had a propaganda element to portray and we are at risk of being persuading of what might be entirely false.

Had Iran not released a video view of their perspective of the incident the US reported, we would have satisfied ourselves with the usual staple of Iran being a lawless, ill-disciplined, faction-ridden theocracy that needs to be blown up to instigate regime change.

The Iranian version of events, though edited for consumption just as the US version was, gives us another pause for thought that Iran might not as horrible as we get told they are – it also shows that we would try to get away with anything, if other parties are not smart enough to take a record of their engagements with the West.

The UFO threat

I find this whole thing utterly reprehensible, I would hate to think that people are manufacturing videos to reflect a situation that does not represent the truth – between the US notion of provocative and Iran notion of routine, there must be something that is closer to the truth.

As the US backtracks about the coincidence of the voice with the appearance of these speedboats which one could almost say are probably Unidentified Floating Objects (UFO) – mirages of the sea – recorded from the fatigued lenses of a battle-weary cameraman and edited by excitable agents for more blood and gore of war.

As this story unravels, I do not think the entire truth would be revealed – however, for the sake of truth, fairness and justice, it is incumbent of all these aspiring Hollywood film-makers to release the entirety of their recordings of the event.

The news wires and channels should also keep out the analysts – at least, give us viewers the opportunity to decide for ourselves who is closer to the truth of the event.

A new premise for war

Beyond this is the opportunity for the US to contend that they have been provoked into attacking Iran having lost the impetus from the recent report that states that Iran has suspended any nuclear weapons development programme for years.

With an admiral suggesting that Iran risks a Gulf conflict, one fears that some activity very similar to the Iraq Dossier on the presence of Weapons of Mass Destruction on which the war in Iraq was based but found to be groundless is being orchestrated to justify an unjustifiable attack on Iran – someone is fanning the embers of discord and one wonders who.

More so, having failed to execute the war in Iraq with finesse, or handle the issues in Afghanistan with a conclusion in sight; it is contemptible that a new set of planners are probably trying to see if another war in Iran can be a lessons-learnt success to redeem the supremacy and credibility of the United States.

Perish the thought, but let it pass your mind for a second!

Both pieces of footage

Condolezza brings condolences - maybe more

Would Condi be doing Condolences?

One can only begin to wonder what Condolezza Rice would be attempting to achieve when she gets to the Middle-East today.

There is no argument that Israel does have the right to defend itself and it should be done vigorously, however, the manner and strategy at play does leave one wondering what they intend on achieving.

I am still of the view that focus has shifted – if that was ever the focus - from dealing with Hamas and Hezbollah militarily to the point that it is looking like the economic obliteration of those societies and psychological propaganda with the hope that wanton destruction of all types of infrastructure would make people withdraw support from those organisations.

Whose terrorists are they anyway?

Until we move from the view of looking at those organisations through the blinkered view of terrorists, because only Israel, America and Europe labels elements of Hamas and Hizbollah as terrorist – we would fail to realise that these groups also represent the aspirations of people who have been deprived and wronged on the one hand, they are also the least corrupt of the leaderships emanating from their peoples.

There is no doubt that Europe and America are very well at variance on the matter in the Middle-East, it was evident in the eavesdrop between Bush and Blair – where Bush thought Syria held the keys to stopping the shit and Blair saw a bigger issue.

Arms away

To now hear that in the midst of the outrageous abuse of military might Israel is acquiring new precision weapons from America leaves one completely gob smacked – America is helping to add fire to an untenable situation which might now go on for another few weeks.

The Arabs would take good note of that and hopefully would give a Condi a stern view of this atrocious development.

I could be that it is American weaponry that is used to cause suffering, pain and loss in the Middle-East, the availability of which feeds Israeli bravado to the drunken swagger of believing there is a military solution to this conflict.

I think NOT.

Peace born of negotiation

Like it or not, Israel would have to negotiate with these “terrorists”, if they do succeed to eliminating military threat of Hezbollah by bombing television stations amongst other things, they had better be ready for guerrilla warfare.

Taking a foothold in Lebanon might bring in a less desirable grouping of terrorists – Al Qaeda in Lebanon on the border of Israel would be the least acceptable conclusion to this military escapade.

I have my doubts any of the proponents can achieve the objective of peace with this indiscriminate bombing and the possibility of new arms from a seemingly rotten cause.

Medinat Yisrael - 59

Israel is born - 14^th May 1948

Just a few hours before the British Mandate of Palestine expired David Ben-Gurion read the declaration of independence for Medinat Yisrael (The State of Israel).

The Shehecheyanu blessing was recited, the declaration signed and the Hatikvah (The Israeli National Anthem) was sung to conclude ceremonies.

59 years on, when shall all the people of the holy lands be able to say in one voice of thanks and ululation -

Baruch atah adonai eloheinu melech ha'olam shecheyanu v'kiy'manu v'higyanu lazman hazeh.

The Shehecheyanu

Blessed are You,
Our God, Creator of time and space,
Who has supported us, protected us,
And brought us to this moment.

Pause for a moment for peace in Yisrael and peace with her neighbours, chief amongst them being the Palestinians who seek a land of their own and a declaration of their own independence.

We need this before someone goes excavating the foundations of the Temple Mount looking for some long lost ark of the covenant.

Israeli Blog Trail

Farfour free to burn - II - Poor translation?

An anonymous lengthy visit

An anonymous and hence invisible person albeit from Colorado, USA left a comment on my blog pertaining to Farfour free to burn where presumably a child had offered herself as a martyr to annihilate the Jews.

I am no Arabic scholar and I have no knowledge of the language apart from the numbers which I learnt in a thick Yoruba accent from Keu (Madrassa) students in Nigeria.

Apparently, it appears most of the conversation reported might have been lost in translation and thereby we have ended up with a story a lot worse than what was portrayed.

It however then begs the question why the Minister of Information in the Palestinian government asked for the show to be discontinued, extracted a promise to present a different format and roundly condemned the content of the parts that were broadcast.

Other respectable Palestinian broadcasters also expressed displeasure at the content.

In fact, the commentator portends that Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) an organisation based in Washington D.C. which is supposed to bridge the language gap between the West and the Middle-East had committed egregious atrocities in translation which could be deliberate with the view to excite negative review.

Being one who would always bring to the fore any comment that requires airing to bring balance to the topics I introduce, I publish here the full text of the comment left by Anonymous of Colorado – (I know where all comments come from).

If I have erred, I apologise, not meaning to cause offence to anyone, only to highlight issues of concern.

The comments

I would like to point out what can only be called an egregious mistranslation on the part of MEMRI with respect to the words of one of the children who were featured as a caller on the show this story reports on.

I call it that and not simply a mistake, because a MEMRI spokesperson appeared on CNN to confirm his organization standing by its translation "word for word" and "according to the syntax" even though it is easy for an organization that employs Arabic translators to actually see how wrong the translations that were produced at first are.

The transcript claims that "Sanabel", the little girl caller of the show, responds with "I will shoot" to the host's question "Sanabel, what will you do for the sake of the Al-Aqsa Mosque?"

As a matter of fact, and as can be seen in the video, it is the clown in the ridiculous Mickey Mouse like suit that says that and even makes the gesture of carrying a weapon.

The little girl Sanabel does however respond, but MEMRI omits her response. The little girl actually said in Arabic "bedi arsem soora", which means "I will draw a picture."

So this girl says she wants to draw a picture, and MEMRI transforms that to "I will shoot."

The second example is the most outrageous one, where MEMRI translates the little girl Sanabel's response to the question "we got that, what else?" as saying "We will annihilate the Jews." This is outrageously wrong and completely invented.

The girl can be clearly heard saying in Arabic "betokhoona el yahood", which means "the Jews shoot us."

The word "betokh-oo-na" can be broken down part by part and explained easily as follows:

betokh: the verb "shoots"

oo: the 3rd person plural subject pronoun meaning "they". It becomes "they shoot".

na: the 1st person plural object pronoun meaning "we". It becomes "they shoot us"

Having pointed that out, what the producers of this show are doing is morally outrageous. Instead of giving their children viewers the joy of watching child TV characters and enjoying that aspect of childhood, they are depriving them of that just as the Israeli occupation is depriving them from other aspects of normal childhood development. Both are equally wrong here.

Farfour free to burn

The future in unspeakable words

A children's television programme was banned yesterday by the Palestinian government when it appeared that a Mickey Mouse-like character called Farfour (butterfly) was indoctrinating kids with jihadist talk.

One child phoned in with these words, "I will shoot, we will annihilate the Jews ... I will commit martyrdom."

It is very much like having Tinky Winky the tellitubby prancing over the hill with handbag in one hand and Kalashnikov in the other shouting murderous obscenities.

It is a despicable misuse of the television medium and it should draw condemnation from any reasonable member of the human race as Hamas should and must cover their faces with shame.

The solution is a free Palestine

Now, we should not forget what gives rise to such venomous indoctrination of children in Palestine, it is the seething bitterness of the dispossessed, the disenfranchised, the disillusioned and the desperate who see no progress in general terms to self-determination where a land and country called Palestine would be theirs devoid of occupiers and oppression.

The condemnation of this programme should also go in hand with a redoubling of efforts to reach a settlement between Israel and Palestine which is the nucleus and between the Arabs and the Jews which constitutes the people of the Middle-East.

You cannot have a monster and then starve it in the midst of plenty of food to keep it going, just as you cannot completely nip this kind of stuff in the bud without dealing with the causative issues.

Stripping the "Great" out of Britain

Returning home for Easter

And so the naval personnel would return home just in time for Easter and the UK-Iran Crisis of 2007 is over.

Well, many would assume it is, the people are free, and the Iranian diplomat who was abducted in Iraq suddenly materialised at the Iranian embassy yesterday and it appears another consular official would be able to see the 5 Iranians who have been in American custody since January.

They were granted their freedom as a gift to Great Britain by Dr. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the firebrand, hard-line President of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the adjectives the West has bestowed on this man become almost irrelevant in the face of this humanity and kindness.

Agree to disagree

We can as well agree to disagree that our naval personnel were arrested in Iraqi or Iranian waters depending on whose map you are viewing, or basically, it was fair game on either side. As for the patrolling of Iraqi waters with a UN mandate, let us not plumb the depths of the dishonesty that has brought us thus far in the Middle East.

We can however recall that this time 25 years ago, Mrs. Margaret Hilda Thatcher, the Prime Minister then was busy putting the Great back in Britain and with it sowed the seeds that kept the Conservative Party in power for another 13 years.

Then, the territory under dispute since 1830 but deferring to the British was overrun by the military junta of Argentina; the 3 lions roared and thumped the Argentines out of the Falkland Islands with the loss about 1,000 lives however, leaving Great Britain beaming with patriotic fervour - Rule Britannia! Britannia rule the waves was the waking call of anyone who deigned to be British.

Nothing great going on

Today, we cannot say great diplomacy was at play, no great satisfaction that we have proven our point, no great triumph having been overwhelmed at sea by Iranians who have suffered sanctions for decades.

It is arguable that tepid warnings from the UN, the strident support of the EU and the bluster of the US did nothing to help the situation; our diplomats had to relearn the principles of bilateral negotiations rather than the failed US policy of international isolation.

Them and us

The naval personnel would return and be made to recant all their recorded confessions of having trespassed on Iranian nautical territory; the tabloids would lay out full spreads of the gallantry of the lady and the men in the midst of enemy territory.

And whilst making a public show of these detainees could have been against the Geneva Conventions, they were portrayed in places that no one could fault as being inhospitable or uncomfortable.

We, the stricter adherents of the Geneva Conventions would probably not even provide that quality of facility to those in our Western detention centres; at least, recently, we have heard more of their people being tortured and mistreated amongst us and seen lots of our people being well treated amongst them, except in Iraq of course amongst the insurgents.

However, by the time the tabloids have unravelled this saga and milked every ounce of newsworthiness out of this farce, nothing great would have been achieved for Great Britain.

The future can be bleak

In fact, the danger is if any of our people do end up trespassing in Iranian territory again; their treatment may not be as lovely as we have once seen and then a trial on the tenets of Sharia Law might just be the trigger for another poorly fought war in the Middle East.

Surely, this is all has just stripped the Great out of Great Britain; one wonders what great adventure our leaders might seek to repair the damage done, in the near future.

Welcome Home! But heroes would be too strong a word to use in any context.

Daytime television a cure for current news

Cannot stand the news anymore

Even I cannot believe it; I have not sought, desired or watched any news for almost a week. It is strange, I am your news junkie doped up on an overdose of every snippet of news from all the networks, especially with a digital channels that give me access to at least 10 stations including Al Jazeera.

I can only attribute my lack of interest in the news to the gnawing propaganda machinery that has slanted the required objective assessment of issues in the Middle-East and the way global leadership conveniently tags every legitimate aspiration to self-determination as part of the war against terror.

The meaning of the war on terror

In fact, we can redefine the war against terror as any situation where America and the West have no immediate financial gain as their interests are threatened by people who have another perspective to the issue.

This is because this broad definition is what is happening in practice, each issue is assessed in some self-interest monetary terms or the ability to exert hegemony to emasculate other nation states.

Nowadays, suspicion is enough cause for proof of guilt as is the case of Iran’s nuclear experiments.

The peace of apathy

It allows Lebanon to be leveled in the quest to humiliate Hezbollah militarily in a 19^th Century strategy that believes in military solutions to what is essentially a historical situation that needs bold diplomatic moves that take full account of the affected people.

Anyway, the news becomes staple that creates apathy, as if I now care about how many rockets land anywhere or the collateral damage counted in innocent lives extinguished in the facelessness of an American precision weapon or some Syrian-technology missile.

It is obvious, this is no Six-day-war and there would be no winners in this fracas; the reoccupation of Lebanon would entrench the forces that Israel wants to uproot, but, who is to say Israel does not like living dangerously.

Is Judah also Israel?

Somehow, I am coming to the view that the situation in the Middle-East cannot continue as it is, people have striven to plant the land of Israel within the confines of what was the smaller kingdom of Judah – the more this happens the more it appears like an aberration.

Biblical scholars had better start dusting their biblical history and ancient cartography.

I would suggest that there would be most likely, like in the ancient times, be another dispersal of the Jews – etymology of Diaspora - before they are resettled again in places that might not bear any semblance to what we have today.

Those given to eschatology had better read the signs of the times again and look for deeper interpretation of prophecy – Peace, will not come to Israel on the edge of a sword or the tips of sophisticated weapons.

Condi knows nothing about birth pangs

No clue about the pain of birth

When Condoleezza Rice visited the Middle-East earlier in the week, we were introduced to a supposedly new role of her being a midwife to a new Middle-East with the expression “Birth Pangs of a New Middle East”.

Birth pangs have pain, great agony and more, especially, if after so many hours of labour, the woman is exhausted in the breathing, pushing and panting. She holds her mate’s hand and crushes the bones as she probably curses that swears never to do this again.

If as the waters break, the baby is found in breach, that, could become a major complication probably requiring more that the regulatory epidural and definitely a Caesarean Section.

I am sorry to say, Condoleezza Rice just like me, a male, does not half know what a birth pang is, or else, she would to advocating an immediate stop to this labour that has already had the baby’s foot stuck somewhere in the pelvis – on the verge of killing the mother.

Not fooled with the supposed outrage

This is sufficient notice to Israel, reading between the lines and taking the cue which now has the US is expressing outrage that the strategic “no immediate ceasefire” concept is being read as an untrammelled sanction to Israel to continue bombing Lebanon.

We, we are not fooled, the non-imposition of a ceasefire in the light of the overwhelming disproportionate military force that seems to be achieving more in terms of humanitarian mystery and destruction.

In the light of this, we also learn that the tide of Arab opinion is turning towards supporting Hezbollah as neighbouring governments are beginning to sound more strident about Israeli aggression.

Dishonest and insincere

The lectures we received from Mr George W. Bush and Mr Tony Blair, left me askance in disbelief as they launched into the psychology and philosophy of Hezbollah trying to win people to their cause through playing the underdog.

These 2 men have not been entirely honest and sincere and this is an utter shame.

If UN Security Council Resolution 1559 is the standard for ensuring peace by allowing Lebanon to have total sovereignty over its lands, then the disputed Shebaa Farms has to come into the equation as to whose territory it really is between Israel, Syria and Lebanon.

History would place that territory in the hands of Lebanon according to a 1964 border agreement with Syria, requiring Israel vacate that territory in entirety; then the need for any militia in Southern Lebanon would be obviated. Hezbollah can return home or move to Golan Heights where another land dispute still awaits action on the part of Israel in favour of Syria.

Partnership with “terrorists”

There is no point continuing to talk down to Syria and Iran, if they are critical to resolving the current crises then America and Britain would have to engage them in some sort of dialogue.

This stony faced mantra of terror, terrorism and terrorists is wearing thin; they are labels of convenience without addressing the core issues at hand. Hamas and Hezbollah are terrorists in the same vein as those that terrorise Iraq – to lump them in the same basket as Al Qaeda is disingenuous.

I find that exaggeration portrayed by the America, Britain and Australia quite offensive and far from the truth, these organisations have a political and democratic mandate and a militant dimension related to a struggle for justice for their people.

This should be incompatible with being in a democracy, but in a situation when Israel represents an untamed aggressive hegemony, occupying territories which fuel dispute and threaten Israeli security, we cannot have America delivering bombs to Israel and blankets to the occupied territories and naively expect these organisations to disarm to the point of complete defenceless.

It just does not add up.

With Condoleezza Rice returning to the Middle-East again, this midwife is probably not going to deliver a healthy baby, regardless of the hopes and fears, the “new Middle-East” is on to becoming a still-born baby, taking the mother along with it.

A double tragedy nursed by America – is there a real doctor in the house, before this gets seriously out of hand?

References

The battles each day

Birth pangs of a new Middle-East

The land of the matter - The Middle-East Cauldron

Good Intentions

(All images courtesy of Wikipedia)

In November 2002, Jack Straw, the then UK Foreign Secretary lamented what the British Empire had bequeathed places it had vacated as the peoples of those lands sought self-determination.

Chief amongst those was that relating to the establishment of the Nation of Israel.

In 1917, in response to desires of the Zionist movement, the Foreign Secretary of that time Arthur James Balfour wrote to the British representative of the movement Lord Rothschild in the following words.

Foreign Office

November 2nd, 1917

Dear Lord Rothschild,

I have much pleasure in conveying to you, on behalf of His Majesty's Government, the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations which has been submitted to, and approved by, the Cabinet.

"His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."

I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation.

Yours sincerely, Arthur James Balfour

This formed the basis of what is now known as the Balfour Declaration of 1917, where Britain expressed an interest in the creation of a state of Israel in the land of Palestine, but without prejudicing the rights of the pre-existing non-Jewish communities in that region.

As it transpires, Jack Straw indicates that the assurances given to the Palestinians were not met in an honourable way.

Over time there began conflicts between the Arabs and the Jews, part of which was assuaged by restricting the number of Jewish migrations and barring their acquisition of land.

The British Mandate for Palestine

On the fall of the Ottoman Empire in 1922, Palestinian region which was part of the empire came under the administration of the British Empire as a mandate granted by the League of Nations.

Up till 1947, there were conflicts between the Arabs and the Jews at which point Britain was keen to withdraw from the mandate. UN Resolution 818 ended up with this patchwork plan for Israel and Palestine called the United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine with the Jews having 55% of the land and the Palestinian Arabs having 45% even though they the Arabs were in the majority.

The UN voted 33 for, 13 against and 10 abstained including the United Kingdom; however, at this point the Balfour Declaration of 1917 had been unravelled, the fact is, there is no way of not prejudicing the existing communities’ rights in old Palestine – and if the Palestinian Arabs were to suffered a deprecation of rights, it should not have been with their majority in numbers ending up with the minority of the land.

Riots, wars, crises, uprisings ensued, which are fully tabulated in the link provided – Arab-Israeli Conflicts.

Herein lays the general framework of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

References

The British Mandate for Palestine

Mandate for Palestine
Key Maps of the region and conflict

Zionism

The conflict of Biblical promise with current realities.

A look at the map of Israel in the biblical times and shows that Gaza which once happened to be the land of Philistines might be the only place the Israeli would be willing to cede of all current Israeli land if the extreme Zionists have their way.

It also shows that the settlers who were unsettled last year did not have any ancient claim to that land for the settlement of the children of Israel. Other maps show changes to that landscape in the 20th Century.

Israel Today

Forked-tongues fuelling the Middle-Eastern fires

Where is the Genesis of the Middle-East conflict?

I have just had my fill of the fork-tongued diatribe masquerading as diplomacy coming from all quarters regarding the situation in the Middle-East.

When the Hamas militants blew a hole in the wall bordering Gaza and Egypt to allow in Palestinians who had been stranded at the border for weeks the hapless but relieved people thanked Hezbollah for giving them the kind of reprieve that has given them respite.

Let us look at the issues on the ground, indeed militants including Hamas supported personnel have been firing rockets into Israel over the last few months, but all as a result of the occupied situation that the Palestinians find themselves in.

I am not trying to condone or support the struggle which gets conveniently branded as terrorism; there is a serious problem of land conflict in the Middle-East with Israelis and Palestinians in the middle of that muddle.

The fear of 1967 sees no end to this problem

If only we had leaders with conviction who addressed the matter head on and the see the results – Israel completely pulling back to the 1967 lines and Palestine a state within the bounds of what is left – this includes the Jerusalem question – that is the resolution of this conflict.

However, this bizarre occupation where Israel has at will be able to maraud through Palestinian lands with impunity could only exact guerrilla and terrorism type activity where the opponent cannot match the aggressor bullet for bullet and man for man. It would be naïve to expect another situation.

So, the raid on Israel that left 2 soldiers dead and one captured was hardly the Genesis of this situation, the inability for the west to accept the democratic will of the Palestinians allowed Hamas to remain recalcitrant about the right for Israel to exist.

I would contend that if Israel existed within its legitimate pre-1967 borders, Hamas and all other opponents of Israel would have not foot to stand on with their rhetoric.

Recognition should precede calls for influence

Once the West refused to acknowledge democracy because it yielded as it were the “wrong” result, it meant that Hamas would be a weakened and ineffective governing machine unable to command the influence to contain rogue elements.

Then that beach bombing to which we cannot conclusive assign blame still leaves many thinking Israel was responsible – the impunity of Israel had reached a point that certain elements rose to show that Israel in all its might is vulnerable.

Israel’s response to the capture of its soldier-recruit has not only been overly disproportionate, it lacks purpose or the kind of objective that can guarantee the return of the soldier and the earlier someone laments that fact than acquiesce to the hope that reason would prevail on the part kidnappers the better for the poor soldier’s life.

Brothers joined up in arms

But Israel has been unrelenting, so who else would be touched by that intemperate overrun of Palestine but the brothers in arms of Hamas who could divert Israel’s attention – The Hezbollah.

Just as anyone would eventually act if in the presence of great an injustice none of those who can sue for justice actively play the part of arbiter.

So, Hezbollah which happens to be located in Lebanon entered Israel, killed a number of soldiers and captured two as hostage. Where a negotiated settlement might have yielded better results, Israel raced into Lebanon bombing every important structure they could find and killing many innocents.

So, Hezbollah with better weaponry – Katyusha rocket not matching Israel’s manpower however, better than the Qassam rockets has rained disruption but not yet carnage on Israel and the blockade on Lebanese waters has resulted in at least 4 Israeli Navy men being overboard.

A UN debacle and a hissing Bush

So, at the UN as calls for calm and restraint echoed from the chambers the Ambassador to the UN from Israel had the temerity, gall and effrontery to address his Lebanese counterpart in terms that suggested he should in honesty and truth support Israel in the attack on his country which would free Lebanon from the influence of Hezbollah. The is the most warped diplomatic logic I have ever heard from that esteemed chamber and it is amazing that Syria was refused the opportunity to comment on the floor.

So, when Mr Bush from St Petersburg insists that the escalation of violence is primarily due to Hezbollah’s activities; it shows that the warped logic is not only disingenuous; it is dishonest, disgraceful and disheartening. There can be not solution in sight.

Why should Syria care?

Then calls are being made to Syria to rein in Hezbollah – Fat Chance! – Why should Syria get involved no matter what influence they can peddle – Syria’s Golan Heights has been annexed by Israel since 1967 and nothing is being done to resolve that issue conclusive.

However, if Lebanon continues to suffer an onslaught from Israel with the increasing loss of life and the destruction of infrastructure, it would not be long before fraternal ties with Syria have them pitched against Israel.

That would create a domino effect of Iran moving up to support Syria and then the Arab World leading to the Muslim World – simply the makings of World War III.

With Iraq and Afghanistan being simmering cauldrons of violence, the ramifications of Israeli belligerence are far from fully appreciated by all concern and that is scary to say the least.

Israel will never be big in this matter

There are no simple solutions to this matter, but it would take the magnanimity of Israel to do something dovish and materially ground-breaking to bring an impasse this deteriorating situation, unfortunately, Israel does not have the maturity to bring about that quality of statesmanship.

If, those soldiers eventually get returned alive, what a hefty price would have been paid for that and if anything has been lost from all this is the perspective – a quality of far-sighted leadership.

References

The Summary of the Middle-East Conflicts

US and Russia differ on Middle-East

Israel hits Lebanese Ports

Terrorism was a part of the struggle

The Knights of the Oval Office

The Knights of the Oval Office

The quest for the Holy Grail of democracy in the Middle East through pre-emptive wars leading to regime change and eventual self-determination continues apace in Ur of the Chaldees.

Just as we know that the that quest made and destroyed lives of those knights, the ability for history to repeat itself by legend and fable turning into reality is as fearful as thought of the plunder that accompanied the noble acts of the Crusades.

In fact, one can say that those events are acting out of a screenplay that combines the adventures of Robin Hood with the quest of the Knights of the Round Table with the Crusades theme. Call it the Eighth Crusade.

The principals include King Arthur (President George W. Bush), Sir Gawain (Tony Blair), Sir Lancelot, Sir Galahad and Lady Guinevere (Condoleeza Rice, but not as we know the lady of the story).

There is no scope for the romantic slant in this vivid dramatisation. However, you are called to view the issues of the day in the light of the presented screenplay.

No doubt, one would expect some human emotion and expression of a humane disposition in deciding who the best actor is.

This is evidently absent when all acts are taken with such Messianic zeal, humans are playing God in action, purpose, determination and execution.

How else does one explain the fact that Iran - a country that has already captured Al-Qaeda suspects and holds them in custody - is now expected to hand over those suspects to the US?

Is the war on terror just about the US and its fears or about the world and its safety? One is not aware of an extradition treaty between the US and Iran. They have had no diplomatic relations for over 20 years.

It ought not to be so, we cannot have a nation state above all states deciding who belongs to the leagues of nations of this world, who rules the peoples of other lands and threatens or uproots governments of other lands with impunity on the premise of pre-emptive strikes.

It is reckless and irresponsible for a state that is in the flux of imperfect democratic processes to advocate any form of democracy in other states. Democracy cannot be imposed on the tips of uranium depleted bombs.

This is evidenced by the insurgencies the occupying forces in Iraq have encountered since the end of hostilities in May 2003.

The myth of a Robin Hood taking the government of the corrupt and tyrannical elite and giving it to the people would have been fine, it were true.

However, the majority of that ruling council constitutes exiles with scores to settle, hurts needing healing and great self-interest non-representative of the people they portend to lead.

Declaring a liberation day in honour of the American liberation or banning alternative news sources that are at variance to the preferred spin do no constitute the priorities of people who have been oppressed for over 35 years.

The faux pas of disbanding the army of the de-Baathification of Iraq is absurd.

For 35 years, people who wanted to live in Iraq and make a living had to be members of the Baath party, just as many had to be members of the Communist Party to gain any privilege or influence in their lives and the lives of others.

They have gotten it all wrong and are not in the frame of getting it right in the near future. We need to rid ourselves of this God-like resolve and consider our humanity, vulnerability and multi-lateral purpose of co-existence.

No matter how bad the Sheriff of Nottingham was, it did not justify the acts of Robin Hood who just happened to be a nice bandit.

The quest of the Crusades has not resolved that self-same problem of the Jews, Arabs and Christian peoples sharing the cradle of the birth of their religions, it did not then and it would not now.

Dialogue, communication, respect for all parties is needed, not belligerent disregard expressed through military might but no transfer of civilised values.

Just because one nation cannot handle the humiliation of being attacked by such low tech methods in view of their sophisticated weapons defence systems, does not mean the whole world now has to adopt policies that Stalin would have considered so radical and authoritarian.

2004 offers ample opportunity to turf these knights out of the Oval Office before the free democratic world has no moral high ground for the suppression of dissent, the propensity of unilateral action and protection of human rights.

All nations need to rise to defeat the new fascism masquerading as the war on terrorism; the world is no safer since this whole debacle started.

Americans need to receive the same treatment they give to others who visit America. Then would the electorate be stimulated to do the right thing and make their votes count.

I rest for now, but the case is in debate.

Addendum

The Crusades

Internet Medieval Sourcebook

The Crusades and the Contributions of Islam

A History of the Crusades: Electronic Facsimile

Movie: The Crusades (1935)

The Knights of the Round table

King Arthur & The Knights of the Round Table

Britannia King Arthur Knights of the Round Table

Movie: Knights of the Round Table (1953)

Robin Hood

The Robin Hood Project

Movie: Adventures of Robin Hood, The (1938)