Extraordinary interview with Robert Fisk at the Democracy Now! web site.
"Many Beirut people were very moved Saturday when the Lebanese Beirut newspapers carried a very, very tragic picture of a young girl, a little girl -- must have been 4 or 5 years old -- near a place called Ter Hafra, lying dead in a field in her blue pajamas, looking, as I said in my newspaper, very similar to that terrifying picture from Poland in 1939 of a little Polish girl lying dead with her weeping sister beside her."
I can't bring myself to post that particular image on this site.
But for some strange reason, this one from the BBC hurts more.
No more fucking moral high ground left for anyone, for now on, for ever.
According to the US State Department, it's a fucking picnic, with piggyback rides.
Yeah--the real story here is the dramatic evacuation of Westerners! Once again our media has its finger on the pulse.
Let's see--we Americans pay for the bombs and shells, tell Israel "Go for it!" to kill hundreds of civilians in retaliation for the capture of a couple of their soldiers, realize "Oh shit, we've got our citizens mixed in with those civilians" so then we make lemonade out of these lemons with some made for TV stories about normal people escaping from a war zone.
Is America a great country or what? (Don't answer that.)
The evacuation is a major story here as well. There are 50,000 Canadians in Lebanon. I haven't read much American commentary on that subject, but here, there's a large internal political dimension to this evacuation.
Since 911, and with resulting pressure from the U.S., we have conservatives that have demanded a re-evaluation of our immigration policies, a general subject that conveniently leaves unsaid that our immigration policies in regards to western European nations are just fine, but we really must watch those folks with the dusky complexions. There was even an asinine proposal (by way of those 'think tanks' that should be drained of their stale rancid contents) that new Canadian citizens, in addition to swearing allegiance to the Crown (I know, cute anachronisms, we love them so.), should swear some sort of oath not to blow up stuff; basically a legal formality that could allow someone's Canadian citizenship to be stripped if accused of a fuzzily defined terrorist action.
You have to add to this mix a strange suspicion of dual citizenship, and a level of discomfort, in some quarters, with a constantly evolving self-definition as a multi-cultural country. What we've ended up hearing from a portion of the population are some appalling arguments about which Canadians are 'worthy' of a government funded rescue from a war zone.
I should clarify something in response to Tom's observation about the American Media stories on the evacuations. On the surface, the Canadian media is handling it in a similar way but with the subtext of "these are your neighbours and they are happy to be back home". We have a particular slant that I'm not sure Americans would share: due to a popular will to retain and support social programs, part of the news script requires a public show of gratitude from anyone who benefits.
(I don't mean that with any sarcasm, a particular slant in the news serves us with an image of ourselves and our community that we wish to project. We want to appear generous as a country, and we want to see the generosity acknowledged. This can be harmful when our self-image deserves strong critical examination and we wish to ignore it, but for the most part, it's only human)
None of this even starts to take into account the political strategies of a minority Conservative government. That's another story.
I've been avoiding the US media. The picture above is from the US State Dept. web site. Pure propaganda from an organization that is standing aside to give war a chance.
The statistics are chilling, 1:10. Have we not seen that before? Kill one of us, we kill ten of yours. As far as I know, the Romans and the Nazis did not include children
I just remembered the word for killing ten for one, it is decimation
I appreciate your outrage, butttttttttttt, you may want to double check that statement you made about Nazis.
I got the definition of decimate wrong too. It refers to the killing of every tenth person, a punishment the Romans meted out. With the Nazis, I may be thinking of old films where a Nazi soldier is killed by the resistance, and ten of the villagers are shot in response
I have just reread my first posting, very unclear. I was not referring to the holocaust where a whole people was targeted without reference to age
Ben Stein recently said it was okay for Israel to bomb civilians in Lebanon because the US and UK fire-bombed Dresden (and many other cities) which was okay because the Nazis bombed London (and many other cities). Since the Nazis came up on this thread, I just thought I'd throw that in. "Because Hitler did it first" is a really fucked justification, as I'm sure we all agree.
Speaking of the Romans, the war nerd said in one of his columns that we will not be able to pacify Iraq because the US public does not have the blood thirsty nature of the Roman Empire. Besides decimation, which the Romans sometimes meted out to their own legions for mutiny, the Romans practiced eradication. The US practices a watered down version of this (e.g. Fallujah) which has the twin characteristics of being manifestly evil and militarily ineffective against an insurgency. Evil and ineffective ... that's our Bush!
Lastly. I finally found my partially read copy of Overthrow, and just finished the section covering the US orchestrated coup against the democratic government of Iran. Can we dig up John Foster Dulles and hang the evil fucker?
I think the phrase galenagalaxia is searching for is Collective Punishment. In terms of this region of the world, there is much documentation to level this accusation against IDF forces in Gaza and the West Bank.
I should also clarify that I am not extending any moral high ground to Hezbollah either, if that was unclear from my first comment on this thread.
From the interview with Robert Fisk:
"I mean, this is a mass punishment of a whole people for the actions of a very ruthless, powerful guerrilla army, Hezbollah, which does not represent the Lebanese people.
Anyway, it is important to remember that the Hezbollah crossed that border against all international law. No one gave them a referendum or a vote to cross the border and kill Israelis and capture two Israelis and start off this war. But, you see, they relied upon -- they totally relied upon the cruelty of Israel's response. And Israel, as usual, obliged them. So no one will now criticize the Hezbollah in Lebanon."
Hadn't heard of the book Overthrow, thanks, I'll check it out.
Also a speech by the author of Overthrow at World Affairs Council, seach under Kinzer. He examines about 20 overthrows performed by or with tacit approval of the US, starting with Hawaii. He identifies common characteristics. All of these overthrows have made conditions worse for the victims, with the exception of Puerto Rico and Hawaii (which became part of the US). I think the Hawaii outcome was mixed, with different outcomes for the native Hawaiians and the Asian immigrants workers. Also, many of these overthrows have made conditions worse for the US, e.g. Iran, Cuba, due to the backlash once the puppet regime fails.
Safe to say this stuff wasn't covered in any of my history classes. Most Americans don't know this stuff, but the people on the receiving end do remember.
War links from Rabble.ca
Questions for Canadians by Rahat Kurd
"We are supposed to clutch our passports, weeping and praying over them every night, keeping our mouths shut, and feeling cravenly grateful to be allowed to continue our fear-stunted lives. Already the letters pages of The Globe and Mail and the message boards on its web site are full of hosers snarling resentfully about the waste of tax dollars on rescuing “irresponsible whiners” who should “know better” than to holiday in a “war zone.”
Lebanon, Israel and obscenity by Rick Salutin
"But it is hard to imagine anyone who, like Israel, feels deeply menaced and morally justified, not using the power they have. In that case, great responsibility falls on those who endow them with that power, particularly the U.S. It is criminal to create a huge imbalance of power in a fragile situation. It is criminally negligent to then stand back and refuse to seriously try to moderate its use."
There are some in the US whining about paying for AS citizens to evacuate. I propose ...
New Rule: When Americans are being attacked by weapons provided by their own government (especially ones paid for by their own tax dollars), then said government should use its own resources to extract said Americans.
By the way, Rick Salutin put it well. Bush is clearly using Israel as a proxy. He either does not understand the implications on the civilian victims or does not care. And he's already shown himself to be a dunce at geopolitical strategery. Old saying: when you've dug yourself into a hole -- first stop digging.
|
Extraordinary interview with Robert Fisk at the Democracy Now! web site.
- L.M. 7-22-2006 11:03 am
"Many Beirut people were very moved Saturday when the Lebanese Beirut newspapers carried a very, very tragic picture of a young girl, a little girl -- must have been 4 or 5 years old -- near a place called Ter Hafra, lying dead in a field in her blue pajamas, looking, as I said in my newspaper, very similar to that terrifying picture from Poland in 1939 of a little Polish girl lying dead with her weeping sister beside her."
I can't bring myself to post that particular image on this site.
But for some strange reason, this one from the BBC hurts more.
No more fucking moral high ground left for anyone, for now on, for ever.
- L.M. 7-22-2006 11:17 am
According to the US State Department, it's a fucking picnic, with piggyback rides.
- mark 7-22-2006 12:25 pm
Yeah--the real story here is the dramatic evacuation of Westerners! Once again our media has its finger on the pulse.
Let's see--we Americans pay for the bombs and shells, tell Israel "Go for it!" to kill hundreds of civilians in retaliation for the capture of a couple of their soldiers, realize "Oh shit, we've got our citizens mixed in with those civilians" so then we make lemonade out of these lemons with some made for TV stories about normal people escaping from a war zone.
Is America a great country or what? (Don't answer that.)
- tom moody 7-22-2006 7:09 pm
The evacuation is a major story here as well. There are 50,000 Canadians in Lebanon. I haven't read much American commentary on that subject, but here, there's a large internal political dimension to this evacuation.
Since 911, and with resulting pressure from the U.S., we have conservatives that have demanded a re-evaluation of our immigration policies, a general subject that conveniently leaves unsaid that our immigration policies in regards to western European nations are just fine, but we really must watch those folks with the dusky complexions. There was even an asinine proposal (by way of those 'think tanks' that should be drained of their stale rancid contents) that new Canadian citizens, in addition to swearing allegiance to the Crown (I know, cute anachronisms, we love them so.), should swear some sort of oath not to blow up stuff; basically a legal formality that could allow someone's Canadian citizenship to be stripped if accused of a fuzzily defined terrorist action.
You have to add to this mix a strange suspicion of dual citizenship, and a level of discomfort, in some quarters, with a constantly evolving self-definition as a multi-cultural country. What we've ended up hearing from a portion of the population are some appalling arguments about which Canadians are 'worthy' of a government funded rescue from a war zone.
- L.M. 7-22-2006 10:36 pm
I should clarify something in response to Tom's observation about the American Media stories on the evacuations. On the surface, the Canadian media is handling it in a similar way but with the subtext of "these are your neighbours and they are happy to be back home". We have a particular slant that I'm not sure Americans would share: due to a popular will to retain and support social programs, part of the news script requires a public show of gratitude from anyone who benefits.
(I don't mean that with any sarcasm, a particular slant in the news serves us with an image of ourselves and our community that we wish to project. We want to appear generous as a country, and we want to see the generosity acknowledged. This can be harmful when our self-image deserves strong critical examination and we wish to ignore it, but for the most part, it's only human)
None of this even starts to take into account the political strategies of a minority Conservative government. That's another story.
- L.M. 7-22-2006 11:49 pm
I've been avoiding the US media. The picture above is from the US State Dept. web site. Pure propaganda from an organization that is standing aside to give war a chance.
- mark 7-23-2006 2:00 am
The statistics are chilling, 1:10. Have we not seen that before? Kill one of us, we kill ten of yours. As far as I know, the Romans and the Nazis did not include children
- galenagalaxian 7-23-2006 7:00 am
I just remembered the word for killing ten for one, it is decimation
- galenagalaxian 7-23-2006 9:04 pm
I appreciate your outrage, butttttttttttt, you may want to double check that statement you made about Nazis.
- L.M. 7-23-2006 9:19 pm
I got the definition of decimate wrong too. It refers to the killing of every tenth person, a punishment the Romans meted out. With the Nazis, I may be thinking of old films where a Nazi soldier is killed by the resistance, and ten of the villagers are shot in response
- galenagalaxian 7-23-2006 11:59 pm
I have just reread my first posting, very unclear. I was not referring to the holocaust where a whole people was targeted without reference to age
- galenagalaxian 7-24-2006 12:07 am
Ben Stein recently said it was okay for Israel to bomb civilians in Lebanon because the US and UK fire-bombed Dresden (and many other cities) which was okay because the Nazis bombed London (and many other cities). Since the Nazis came up on this thread, I just thought I'd throw that in. "Because Hitler did it first" is a really fucked justification, as I'm sure we all agree.
Speaking of the Romans, the war nerd said in one of his columns that we will not be able to pacify Iraq because the US public does not have the blood thirsty nature of the Roman Empire. Besides decimation, which the Romans sometimes meted out to their own legions for mutiny, the Romans practiced eradication. The US practices a watered down version of this (e.g. Fallujah) which has the twin characteristics of being manifestly evil and militarily ineffective against an insurgency. Evil and ineffective ... that's our Bush!
Lastly. I finally found my partially read copy of Overthrow, and just finished the section covering the US orchestrated coup against the democratic government of Iran. Can we dig up John Foster Dulles and hang the evil fucker?
- mark 7-24-2006 1:16 am
I think the phrase galenagalaxia is searching for is Collective Punishment. In terms of this region of the world, there is much documentation to level this accusation against IDF forces in Gaza and the West Bank.
I should also clarify that I am not extending any moral high ground to Hezbollah either, if that was unclear from my first comment on this thread.
From the interview with Robert Fisk:
"I mean, this is a mass punishment of a whole people for the actions of a very ruthless, powerful guerrilla army, Hezbollah, which does not represent the Lebanese people.
Anyway, it is important to remember that the Hezbollah crossed that border against all international law. No one gave them a referendum or a vote to cross the border and kill Israelis and capture two Israelis and start off this war. But, you see, they relied upon -- they totally relied upon the cruelty of Israel's response. And Israel, as usual, obliged them. So no one will now criticize the Hezbollah in Lebanon."
- L.M. 7-24-2006 1:22 am
Hadn't heard of the book Overthrow, thanks, I'll check it out.
- L.M. 7-24-2006 1:43 am
Also a speech by the author of Overthrow at World Affairs Council, seach under Kinzer. He examines about 20 overthrows performed by or with tacit approval of the US, starting with Hawaii. He identifies common characteristics. All of these overthrows have made conditions worse for the victims, with the exception of Puerto Rico and Hawaii (which became part of the US). I think the Hawaii outcome was mixed, with different outcomes for the native Hawaiians and the Asian immigrants workers. Also, many of these overthrows have made conditions worse for the US, e.g. Iran, Cuba, due to the backlash once the puppet regime fails.
Safe to say this stuff wasn't covered in any of my history classes. Most Americans don't know this stuff, but the people on the receiving end do remember.
- mark 7-24-2006 9:08 am
War links from Rabble.ca
Questions for Canadians by Rahat Kurd
"We are supposed to clutch our passports, weeping and praying over them every night, keeping our mouths shut, and feeling cravenly grateful to be allowed to continue our fear-stunted lives. Already the letters pages of The Globe and Mail and the message boards on its web site are full of hosers snarling resentfully about the waste of tax dollars on rescuing “irresponsible whiners” who should “know better” than to holiday in a “war zone.”
Lebanon, Israel and obscenity by Rick Salutin
"But it is hard to imagine anyone who, like Israel, feels deeply menaced and morally justified, not using the power they have. In that case, great responsibility falls on those who endow them with that power, particularly the U.S. It is criminal to create a huge imbalance of power in a fragile situation. It is criminally negligent to then stand back and refuse to seriously try to moderate its use."
- L.M. 7-25-2006 2:14 am
There are some in the US whining about paying for AS citizens to evacuate. I propose ...
New Rule: When Americans are being attacked by weapons provided by their own government (especially ones paid for by their own tax dollars), then said government should use its own resources to extract said Americans.
By the way, Rick Salutin put it well. Bush is clearly using Israel as a proxy. He either does not understand the implications on the civilian victims or does not care. And he's already shown himself to be a dunce at geopolitical strategery. Old saying: when you've dug yourself into a hole -- first stop digging.
- mark 7-25-2006 2:24 am