Israeli Aggression

By Glenn Greenwald

(source: Salon Media Group.com)

On so many levels, this is one of the most stunningly revealing things I’ve read in quite some time.  As I documented last week, the media’s reluctance to describe IRS attacker Joe Stack as a "terrorist" reveals that this term has little to do with the act itself and everything to do with the demographic attributes of the actor:  namely, in the American political lexicon, "Terrorists" are Muslims who dislike the U.S., while Americans — especially ones who are white and non-Muslim — cannot, by definition, qualify.  Anyone who has doubts about that or who thought my argument was hyperbole should click on that link, which will direct you to an internal discussion among Newsweek editors and writers over their reluctance to use the term "Terrorist" to describe Stack and who they believe qualifies instead.

Aside from the suffocating denseness of their discussion — most of them ramble on about who is and is not a "Terrorist" for three straight days without even attempting to define what that term means — just look at how blatantly tribalistic and propagnadistic they are about its usage.  Many of them all but say outright that it can apply only to Muslims but never non-Muslim Americans.  The whole thing has to be read to be believed — and what’s most amazing is that they published it because they obviously though it was some sort of probing, intelligent discussion which would enlighten the public — but let’s just examine a few of the contributions.

Read More »Inside the mind of newsweek on terrorism

By John J. Mearsheimer

(source: Chicago Tribune.com)

President Barack Obama has finally coaxed Israel and the Palestinians back to the negotiating table. He and most Americans hope that the talks will lead to the creation of a Palestinian state in Gaza and the West Bank. Regrettably, that is not going to happen. Instead, those territories are almost certain to be incorporated into a "Greater Israel," which will then be an apartheid state bearing a marked resemblance to white-ruled South Africa.

There are four possible futures regarding Israel and the occupied territories. The outcome that gets the most attention is the two-state solution, where a Palestinian state would control 95 percent or more of the West Bank and all of Gaza, and territorial swaps would compensate the Palestinians for those small pieces of the West Bank that Israel would keep. East Jerusalem would be its capital.

The alternatives to a two-state solution all involve creating a Greater Israel — an Israel that effectively controls Gaza and the West Bank. In the first scenario, it would become a democratic binational state in which Palestinians and Jews enjoy equal political rights. This solution would mean abandoning the original Zionist vision of a Jewish state, since Palestinians would eventually outnumber Jews.

Read More »Israels fated bleak future

By Iqbal Jassat

September 2010 will usher in the ANC’s National General Council and all expectations are that the Zuma presidency will regard it as a defining moment of make or break.

Amidst a wave of countrywide protests and huge outcries for better wages and more jobs, it seems impossible to imagine that only weeks ago the country was caught up in passionate euphoria over the soccer world cup.

National pride was in a state of ecstasy then. Unbelievable levels of efficiency and tight security measures characterized South Africa’s international showcase. Whether FIFA or its enigmatic Sepp Blatter was effectively at the helm of this country did not matter. What mattered was that every conceivable state function seemed to work in harmony.

News reports dominating headlines today seem to have backtracked so swiftly to the pre-WC2010 era, that many would find it unworthy of the soccer festival themed country.

Yet the harsh reality is that there cannot be any permanent escape to few fleeting moments of bliss when we as a country do indeed face tough challenges. While these may be described as socio-economic by some commentators, a fundamental challenge is that of governance.

Read More »Tough times ahead as Zuma reaches defining moment

By Naom Chomsky

(source: VOCfm Online)

While intensively engaged in illegal settlement expansion, the government of Israel is also seeking to deal with two problems: a global campaign of what it perceives as “delegitimation” – that is, objections to its crimes and withdrawal of participation in them – and a parallel campaign of legitimation of Palestine.

The “delegitimation,” which is progressing rapidly, was carried forward in December by a Human Rights Watch call on the U.S. “to suspend financing to Israel in an amount equivalent to the costs of Israel’s spending in support of settlements,” and to monitor contributions to Israel from tax-exempt U.S. organizations that violate international law, “including prohibitions against discrimination” – which would cast a wide net. Amnesty International had already called for an arms embargo on Israel. The legitimation process also took a long step forward in December, when Argentina, Bolivia and Brazil recognized the State of Palestine (Gaza and the West Bank), bringing the number of supporting nations to more than 100.

International lawyer John Whitbeck estimates that 80-90 percent of the world’s population live in states that recognize Palestine, while 10-20 percent recognize the Republic of Kosovo. The U.S. recognizes Kosovo but not Palestine. Accordingly, as Whitbeck writes in Counterpunch, media “act as though Kosovo’s independence were an accomplished fact while Palestine’s independence is only an aspiration which can never be realized without Israeli-American consent,” reflecting the normal workings of power in the international arena.

Read More »Breaking the deadlock