Zoeken in deze blog 🔎🔎

zaterdag 2 januari 2010

Jezus Christus! 5

Wounded Knee, de laatste grootschalige christelijke slachtpartij van Indianen in de VS.


Sonja heeft een nieuwe reactie op uw bericht "Max Pam 7" achtergelaten:

The Winning of the West, Volume Three:
The Founding of the Trans-Alleghany Commonwealths, 1784-1790:
Theodore (Teddy) Roosevelt

Righteousness of the War.

The most ultimately righteous of all wars is a war with savages, though it is apt to be also the most terrible and inhuman. The rude, fierce settler who drives the savage from the land lays all civilized mankind under a debt to him. American and Indian, Boer and Zulu, Cossack and Tartar, New Zealander and Maori,—in each case the victor, horrible though many of his deeds are, has laid deep the foundations for the future greatness of a mighty people. The consequences of struggles for territory between civilized nations seem small by comparison. Looked at from the standpoint of the ages, it is of little moment whether Lorraine is part of Germany or of France, whether the northern Adriatic cities pay homage to Austrian Kaiser or Italian King; but it is of incalculable importance that America, Australia, and Siberia should pass out of the hands of their red, black, and yellow aboriginal owners, and become the heritage of the dominant world races.

http://www.bluecorncomics.com/roosvelt.htm


Jezus Christus! 4



Wat betekent het dat de mens naar het evenbeeld en de gelijkenis van God is gemaakt (Genesis 1:26-27)?



Jezus Christus! 3



Jezus als blanke Europeaan.



blasphemy.ie January 1, 2010

Atheist Ireland Publishes 25 Blasphemous Quotes
Filed under: Atheist Ireland, Campaign, Freedom of Speech, Is this Blasphemy?,
Quotes — Michael Nugent @ 12:33 am


From today, 1 January 2010, the new Irish blasphemy law becomes operational, and we begin our campaign to have it repealed. Blasphemy is now a crime punishable by a €25,000 fine. The new law defines blasphemy as publishing or uttering matter that is grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters held sacred by any religion, thereby intentionally causing outrage among a substantial number of adherents of that religion, with some defences permitted.
This new law is both silly and dangerous. It is silly because medieval religious laws have no place in a modern secular republic, where the criminal law should protect people and not ideas. And it is dangerous because it incentives religious outrage, and because Islamic States led by Pakistan are already using the wording of this Irish law to promote new blasphemy laws at UN level. We believe in the golden rule: that we have a right to be treated justly, and that we have a responsibility to treat other people justly. Blasphemy laws are unjust: they silence people in order to protect ideas. In a civilised society, people have a right to to express and to hear ideas about religion even if other people find those ideas to be outrageous. Publication of 25 blasphemous quotes In this context we now publish a list of 25 blasphemous quotes, which have previously been published by or uttered by or attributed to Jesus Christ, Muhammad, Mark Twain, Tom Lehrer, Randy Newman, James Kirkup, Monty Python, Rev Ian Paisley, Conor Cruise O’Brien, Frank Zappa, Salman Rushdie, Bjork, Amanda Donohoe, George Carlin, Paul Woodfull, Jerry Springer the Opera, Tim Minchin, Richard Dawkins, Pope Benedict XVI, Christopher Hitchens, PZ Myers, Ian O’Doherty, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor and Dermot Ahern. Despite these quotes being abusive and insulting in relation to matters held sacred by various religions, we unreservedly support the right of these people to have published or uttered them, and we unreservedly support the right of any Irish citizen to make comparable statements about matters held sacred by any religion without fear of being criminalised, and without having to prove to a court that a reasonable person would find any particular value in the statement. Campaign begins to repeal the Irish blasphemy law We ask Fianna Fail and the Green Party to repeal their anachronistic blasphemy law, as part of the revision of the Defamation Act that is included within the Act. We ask them to hold a referendum to remove the reference to blasphemy from the Irish Constitution. We also ask all TDs and Senators to support a referendum to remove references to God from the Irish Constitution, including the clauses that prevent atheists from being appointed as President of Ireland or as a Judge without swearing a religious oath asking God to direct them in their work. If you run a website, blog or other media publication, please feel free to republish this statement and the list of quotes yourself, in order to show your support for the campaign to repeal the Irish blasphemy law and to promote a rational, ethical, secular Ireland. List of 25 Blasphemous Quotes Published by Atheist Ireland


1. Jesus Christ, when asked if he was the son of God, in Matthew 26:64: “Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.” According to the Christian Bible, the Jewish chief priests and elders and council deemed this statement by Jesus to be blasphemous, and they sentenced Jesus to death for saying it.

2. Jesus Christ, talking to Jews about their God, in John 8:44: “Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him.” This is one of several chapters in the Christian Bible that can give a scriptural foundation to Christian anti-Semitism. The first part of John 8, the story of “whoever is without sin cast the first stone”, was not in the original version, but was added centuries later. The original John 8 is a debate between Jesus and some Jews. In brief, Jesus calls the Jews who disbelieve him sons of the Devil, the Jews try to stone him, and Jesus runs away and hides.

3. Muhammad, quoted in Hadith of Bukhari, Vol 1 Book 8 Hadith 427: “May Allah curse the Jews and Christians for they built the places of worship at the graves of their prophets.” This quote is attributed to Muhammad on his death-bed as a warning to Muslims not to copy this practice of the Jews and Christians. It is one of several passages in the Koran and in Hadith that can give a scriptural foundation to Islamic anti-Semitism, including the assertion in Sura 5:60 that Allah cursed Jews and turned some of them into apes and swine.

4. Mark Twain, describing the Christian Bible in Letters from the Earth, 1909: “Also it has another name - The Word of God. For the Christian thinks every word of it was dictated by God. It is full of interest. It has noble poetry in it; and some clever fables; and some blood-drenched history; and some good morals; and a wealth of obscenity; and upwards of a thousand lies… But you notice that when the Lord God of Heaven and Earth, adored Father of Man, goes to war, there is no limit. He is totally without mercy - he, who is called the Fountain of Mercy. He slays, slays, slays! All the men, all the beasts, all the boys, all the babies; also all the women and all the girls, except those that have not been deflowered. He makes no distinction between innocent and guilty… What the insane Father required was blood and misery; he was indifferent as to who furnished it.” Twain’s book was published posthumously in 1939. His daughter, Clara Clemens, at first objected to it being published, but later changed her mind in 1960 when she believed that public opinion had grown more tolerant of the expression of such ideas. That was half a century before Fianna Fail and the Green Party imposed a new blasphemy law on the people of Ireland.

5. Tom Lehrer, The Vatican Rag, 1963: “Get in line in that processional, step into that small confessional. There, the guy who’s got religion’ll tell you if your sin’s original. If it is, try playing it safer, drink the wine and chew the wafer. Two, four, six, eight, time to transubstantiate!”

6. Randy Newman, God’s Song, 1972: “And the Lord said: I burn down your cities - how blind you must be. I take from you your children, and you say how blessed are we. You all must be crazy to put your faith in me. That’s why I love mankind.”

7. James Kirkup, The Love That Dares to Speak its Name, 1976: “While they prepared the tomb I kept guard over him. His mother and the Magdalen had gone to fetch clean linen to shroud his nakedness. I was alone with him… I laid my lips around the tip of that great cock, the instrument of our salvation, our eternal joy. The shaft, still throbbed, anointed with death’s final ejaculation.” This extract is from a poem that led to the last successful blasphemy prosecution in Britain, when Denis Lemon was given a suspended prison sentence after he published it in the now-defunct magazine Gay News. In 2002, a public reading of the poem, on the steps of St. Martin-in-the-Fields church in Trafalgar Square, failed to lead to any prosecution. In 2008, the British Parliament abolished the common law offences of blasphemy and blasphemous libel.

8. Matthias, son of Deuteronomy of Gath, in Monty Python’s Life of Brian, 1979: “Look, I had a lovely supper, and all I said to my wife was that piece of halibut was good enough for Jehovah.”

9. Rev Ian Paisley MEP to the Pope in the European Parliament, 1988: “I denounce you as the Antichrist.” Paisley’s website describes the Antichrist as being “a liar, the true son of the father of lies, the original liar from the beginning… he will imitate Christ, a diabolical imitation, Satan transformed into an angel of light, which will deceive the world.”

10. Conor Cruise O’Brien, 1989: “In the last century the Arab thinker Jamal al-Afghani wrote: ‘Every Muslim is sick and his only remedy is in the Koran.’ Unfortunately the sickness gets worse the more the remedy is taken.”

11. Frank Zappa, 1989: “If you want to get together in any exclusive situation and have people love you, fine - but to hang all this desperate sociology on the idea of The Cloud-Guy who has The Big Book, who knows if you’ve been bad or good - and cares about any of it - to hang it all on that, folks, is the chimpanzee part of the brain working.”

12. Salman Rushdie, 1990: “The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas - uncertainty, progress, change - into crimes.” In 1989, Ayatollah Khomeini of Iran issued a fatwa ordering Muslims to kill Rushdie because of blasphemous passages in Rushdie’s novel The Satanic Verses.

13. Bjork, 1995: “I do not believe in religion, but if I had to choose one it would be Buddhism. It seems more livable, closer to men… I’ve been reading about reincarnation, and the Buddhists say we come back as animals and they refer to them as lesser beings. Well, animals aren’t lesser beings, they’re just like us. So I say fuck the Buddhists.”

14. Amanda Donohoe on her role in the Ken Russell movie Lair of the White Worm, 1995: “Spitting on Christ was a great deal of fun. I can’t embrace a male god who has persecuted female sexuality throughout the ages, and that persecution still goes on today all over the world.”

15. George Carlin, 1999: “Religion easily has the greatest bullshit story ever told. Think about it. Religion has actually convinced people that there’s an invisible man living in the sky who watches everything you do, every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a special list of ten things he does not want you to do. And if you do any of these ten things, he has a special place, full of fire and smoke and burning and torture and anguish, where he will send you to live and suffer and burn and choke and scream and cry forever and ever ’til the end of time! But He loves you. He loves you, and He needs money! He always needs money! He’s all-powerful, all-perfect, all-knowing, and all-wise, somehow just can’t handle money! Religion takes in billions of dollars, they pay no taxes, and they always need a little more. Now, talk about a good bullshit story. Holy Shit!”

16. Paul Woodfull as Ding Dong Denny O’Reilly, The Ballad of Jaysus Christ, 2000: “He said me ma’s a virgin and sure no one disagreed, Cause they knew a lad who walks on water’s handy with his feet… Jaysus oh Jaysus, as cool as bleedin’ ice, With all the scrubbers in Israel he could not be enticed, Jaysus oh Jaysus, it’s funny you never rode, Cause it’s you I do be shoutin’ for each time I shoot me load.”

17. Jesus Christ, in Jerry Springer The Opera, 2003: “Actually, I’m a bit gay.” In 2005, the Christian Institute tried to bring a prosecution against the BBC for screening Jerry Springer the Opera, but the UK courts refused to issue a summons.

18. Tim Minchin, Ten-foot Cock and a Few Hundred Virgins, 2005: “So you’re gonna live in paradise, With a ten-foot cock and a few hundred virgins, So you’re gonna sacrifice your life, For a shot at the greener grass, And when the Lord comes down with his shiny rod of judgment, He’s gonna kick my heathen ass.”

19. Richard Dawkins in The God Delusion, 2006: “The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.” In 2007 Turkish publisher Erol Karaaslan was charged with the crime of insulting believers for publishing a Turkish translation of The God Delusion. He was acquitted in 2008, but another charge was brought in 2009. Karaaslan told the court that “it is a right to criticise religions and beliefs as part of the freedom of thought and expression.”

20. Pope Benedict XVI quoting a 14th century Byzantine emperor, 2006: “Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.” This statement has already led to both outrage and condemnation of the outrage. The Organisation of the Islamic Conference, the world’s largest Muslim body, said it was a “character assassination of the prophet Muhammad”. The Malaysian Prime Minister said that “the Pope must not take lightly the spread of outrage that has been created.” Pakistan’s foreign Ministry spokesperson said that “anyone who describes Islam as a religion as intolerant encourages violence”. The European Commission said that “reactions which are disproportionate and which are tantamount to rejecting freedom of speech are unacceptable.”

21. Christopher Hitchens in God is not Great, 2007: “There is some question as to whether Islam is a separate religion at all… Islam when examined is not much more than a rather obvious and ill-arranged set of plagiarisms, helping itself from earlier books and traditions as occasion appeared to require… It makes immense claims for itself, invokes prostrate submission or ‘surrender’ as a maxim to its adherents, and demands deference and respect from nonbelievers into the bargain. There is nothing-absolutely nothing-in its teachings that can even begin to justify such arrogance and presumption.”

22. PZ Myers, on the Roman Catholic communion host, 2008: “You would not believe how many people are writing to me, insisting that these horrible little crackers (they look like flattened bits of styrofoam) are literally pieces of their god, and that this omnipotent being who created the universe can actually be seriously harmed by some third-rate liberal intellectual at a third-rate university… However, inspired by an old woodcut of Jews stabbing the host, I thought of a simple, quick thing to do: I pierced it with a rusty nail (I hope Jesus’s tetanus shots are up to date). And then I simply threw it in the trash, followed by the classic, decorative items of trash cans everywhere, old coffeegrounds and a banana peel.”

23. Ian O’Doherty, 2009: “(If defamation of religion was illegal) it would be a crime for me to say that the notion of transubstantiation is so ridiculous that even a small child should be able to see the insanity and utter physical impossibility of a piece of bread and some wine somehow taking on corporeal form. It would be a crime for me to say that Islam is a backward desert superstition that has no place in modern, enlightened Europe and it would be a crime to point out that Jewish settlers in Israel who believe they have a God given right to take the land are, frankly, mad. All the above assertions will, no doubt, offend someone or other.”

24. Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, 2009: “Whether a person is atheist or any other, there is in fact in my view something not totally human if they leave out the transcendent… we call it God… I think that if you leave that out you are not fully human.” Because atheism is not a religion, the Irish blasphemy law does not protect atheists from abusive and insulting statements about their fundamental beliefs. While atheists are not seeking such protection, we include the statement here to point out that it is discriminatory that this law does not hold all citizens equal.

25. Dermot Ahern, Irish Minister for Justice, introducing his blasphemy law at an Oireachtas Justice Committee meeting, 2009, and referring to comments made about him personally: “They are blasphemous.” Deputy Pat Rabbitte replied: “Given the Minister’s self-image, it could very well be that we are blaspheming,” and Minister Ahern replied: “Deputy Rabbitte says that I am close to the baby Jesus, I am so pure.” So here we have an Irish Justice Minister joking about himself being blasphemed, at a parliamentary Justice Committee discussing his own blasphemy law, that could make his own jokes illegal.

Finally, as a bonus, Micheal Martin, Irish Minister for Foreign Affairs, opposing attempts by Islamic States to make defamation of religion a crime at UN level, 2009: “We believe that the concept of defamation of religion is not consistent with the promotion and protection of human rights. It can be used to justify arbitrary limitations on, or the denial of, freedom of expression. Indeed, Ireland considers that freedom of expression is a key and inherent element in the manifestation of freedom of thought and conscience and as such is complementary to freedom of religion or belief.” Just months after Minister Martin made this comment, his colleague Dermot Ahern introduced Ireland’s new blasphemy law.

Please share this post on other sites

http://richarddawkins.net/articles/4849

De Israelische Terreur 1094


Gaza Mars. Via Jose:

http://www.deredactie.be/cm/vrtnieuws/mediatheek/programmas/journaal/2.8449/2.8450/1.687454

Max Pam 8



Kees Broer. 'In de VS hebben ze ook een Clairy Polak.'

Ik kreeg van AdR een reactie naar aanleiding van mijn stukken over de Bolkesteinen in Nederland. Ik had geschreven:
Max Pam schrijft in zijn column van vorige week donderdag in de Volkskrant: 'Het lijkt mij zelfs onweerlegbaar dat het christendom een voedingsbodem heeft gelegd voor een virulent antisemitisme dat uiteindelijk heeft geleid tot de Holocaust.' En zo is het, alleen een dwaas ontkent dit. Maar ik zou hier het volgende aan willen toevoegen, niet alleen heeft het christendom 'een voedingsbodem gelegd voor een virulent antisemitisme', maar tevens heeft het 'christendom een voedingsbodem gelegd voor een viruelent filosemitisme.' In de woorden van de joods-Israelische filmmaker Eyal Sivan:

‘het moderne antisemitisme in Europa is het filosemitisme. De jood is heilig verklaard. We zien een liefde voor joden, louter en alleen omdat ze joden zijn. Voor de filosemiet blijft een jood de ander, de buitenstaander, net als voor de antisemiet. Als we het over Israel hebben dan hebben we het in feite over Europa, over het Europese onvermogen om met de ander te leven, over de continuïteit van het Europese antisemitisme dat zich nu tegen de Arabier richt, daarbij aangemoedigd door de zionistische propaganda. Opvallend is dat nu de joden in Europa worden geaccepteerd, zij grotendeels uit Europa zijn verdwenen. Het is als het ware alsof de wandelende jood eindelijk naar huis is gegaan, een gedachte die je zowel bij christenen als zionisten aantreft. Het Europees racisme heeft geleid tot de geboorte van Israel en het filosemitisme komt tevens voort uit het Europees besef gefaald te hebben in de geschiedenis. Maar waar het in feite allemaal om draait is niet de liefde voor de jood, maar de liefde voor het slachtoffer. Die geeft de filosemiet, dus niet het slachtoffer, maar de filosemiet zelf het gevoel een goed mens te zijn.'

Die ontwikkeling van antisemitisme naar filosemitisme is onvermijdelijk geweest, want de 20 eeuwen lang zorgvuldig gekweekte en gekoesterde haat tegen de ander, de vreemdeling, de afwijkende kon na 1945 natuurlijk niet van de ene op de andere dag verdwijnen. Die wordt nu geprojecteerd op de Arabier, de islamiet, zoals we onder andere ook aan de Bolkesteinen kunnen zien.

En: De Amerikaanse hoogleraar in de kerkgeschiedenis, dr. Franklin H. Littell, stelt het zo:

"For the professing Christian, of all the questions that arise out of the study of the Third Reich and the Holocaust the most terrible are these: What were the churches doing? How could such a monstrous crime be committed in the heart of Christendom by baptized Roman Catholics, Protestants, and Eastern Orthodox who were never rebuked, let alone excommunicated? Where were the Christians?"

Franklin H. Littell, "Foreword" in Bonifas, Prisoner 20-801: A French National in the Nazi Labor Camps, p. vii.

Ja, waar waren de christenen? En waar zijn ze nu, nu het antisemitisme in het al even verdachte filosemitisme is veranderd? Max Pam schrijft:

Met zijn stuk "Hoe Europa zijn zelfvetrouwen verloor" heeft Frits Bolkenstein zich opnieuw geschaard onder wat de filosoof Daniel Dennett heeft omschreven als de believers in belief. Dat zijn mensen die zelf niet geloven, die de inhoud van het geloof vaak als onhoudbaar of zelfs als onzinnig afwijzen, maar die het toch heilzaam vinden dat anderen wel geloven.

Ik wil daar het volgende aan toevoegen. De reden waarom de Bolkesteinen een dergelijk pardoxaal gedrag vertonen is simpel: ze gebruiken de religie als stok om een andere religie te slaan. De christelijke cultuur gebruiken ze alleen maar als knuppel om een andere cultuur te kunnen meppen. Want geloven doen ze niet. En hetzelfde is het gesteld met de filosemieten die het filosemitisme gebruiken als uitlaatklep voor hun antisemitisme dat nu tegen de Arabische bevolking is gericht, zo u wilt, de islamitische cultuur. De haat en de angst tegen de ander, de vreemde, de buitenstaander geven ze op die manier vorm. Waar dit uiteindelijk op uitloopt weten we. Maar hun haat en angst is zo intens dat ze geen van beide meer kunnen bedwingen. Het zijn hysterische mensen, die telkens weer in tijden van crisis naar boven komen drijven.

The best lack all conviction, while the worst

Are full of passionate intensity...

The darkness drops again; but now I know

That twenty centuries of stony sleep

Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,

And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,

Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?


Welnu, Adr wees me op het volgende voorbeeld van hoe antisemieten/filosemieten 'altijd door de mand [vallen]':
"In de VS hebben ze ook een Clairy Polak."
Die heet namelijk Amy Goodman!
Voelt u hem?
En meteen daarboveop: sommige Joden hebben nog hun
lesje niet geleerd in Auschwitz.
Nederland anno 2010.

En inderdaad, AdR heeft gelijk, op de website van de extreem rechtse Kees Broer, alias Keesjemaduraatje, is dit te lezen:

'In de VS hebben ze ook een Clairy Polak. Die mocht de net vrijgelaten klimaatactivist Jeff Luer interviewen. Jeff stak 9 jaar geleden op de parkeerplaats van een Chrysler-dealer 3 SUV's in de fik. Natuurlijk met de beste bedoelingen. Namelijk om aandacht te vragen voor de "klimaatverandering". Sure. Kijk eens met welke welwillendheid deze brandstichter wordt behamdeld door DemocracyNow. Het weldenkende deel van de natie heeft er best een heleboel begrip voor dat een klimaatactivist een paar auto's in de hens steekt. Vooral als het auto' s zijn waar ze zelf niet in kunnen of willen rijden...

Aldus deze Kees Broer. Dit nu is een duidelijke illustratie van hoe het antisemitisme na 1945 is veranderd in filosemitisme. Want wat bedoelt Maduraatje met deze zin: 'In de VS hebben ze ook een Clairy Polak.' Welnu, hij bedoelt niet dat we met dezelfde soort journalisten te maken hebben. Geen sprake van, want Clairy Polak werkt niet voor een alternatieve omroep, zoals Amy Goodman doet die bij het progressieve Democracy Now werkt, een organisatie die dissidente stemmen laat horen en uiterst kritisch staat tegenover de neoliberale macht, iets dat NOVA niet doet. Nee, 'in de VS hebben ze ook een Clairy Polak', want beide dames zijn joods. Zoals eerder gesteld: kenmerkend voor de antisemitiet/filosemiet is dat hij allereerst een jood ziet en niet een mens, allereerst een Arabier ziet en niet een mens. Hetzelfde geldt voor racisten die op kleur discrimineren, die zien allereerst een neger en niet een mens. De ander, de buitenstaander, de vreemdeling wordt tot een cliche gemaakt, een stereotype, die op die manier ontmenselijkt kan worden. De ander krijgt een bepaalde onveranderlijke rol toebedeeld waarvan natuurlijk niet mag worden afgeweken, aangezien het cliche een cliche moet blijven van de antisemiet/filosemiet. Daarom heeft Eyal Sivan zo gelijk wanneer hij zegt: 'waar het in feite allemaal om draait is niet de liefde voor de jood, maar de liefde voor het slachtoffer. Die geeft de filosemiet, dus niet het slachtoffer, maar de filosemiet zelf het gevoel een goed mens te zijn.'


Et voila, lees deze reactie op de site van Kees Broer:

Helaas was daar een mevrouw Hedy Epstein, die van het Holocaust-overlevingschap haar beroep gemaakt heeft ("Holocaust survivor and speaker") [...] Als een overlevende van de holocaust zo-nodig naar Gaza toe moet [...] dan heb je geen verstand van het verleden, dan heb je het wel meegemaakt maar dan heb je het niet begrepen. Feitelijk is dan alles wat je geleerd zou moeten hebben voor niets geweest [...] Hoeren zijn het, publieks- en publiciteitsgeile hoeren [...] Wat die Hedy Epstein bezielt is mij overigens een volkomen raadsel. De Gaza-strook is bezet door de Palestijnen, en die zelfde Palestijnen en de Arabische donorlanden hebben van Gaza een heel erg groot eeuwigdurend concentratiekamp gemaakt. Waarom zou Hedy Epstein daar heen willen? Was een keer in een concentratiekamp zitten niet voldoende? Wil ze zich even verlekkeren aan het feit dat er nu eens anderen in een concentratiekamp zitten soms?

Tot zover de site van Keesjemaduraatje. Het gaat hier over Hedy Epstein, een '85-year-old German Jew who fled the Nazis in 1939, and is now promoting her hunger strike in Egypt' om op die manier aandacht te vragen voor het lot van de Palestijnse burgerbevolking die opgesloten zit in de Gazastrook. En dat mag niet van de filosemiet. De jood moet van hem de rol van slachtoffer spelen en weigert die dit dan is ze een 'publiciteitsgeile hoer'. Net als zijn broer de antisemiet is de filosemiet alleen met zichzelf bezig. De jood, de Arabier, de ander is slechts een rol in zijn melodramatische voorstelling van de wereld.


Daarom is het ook zo gevaarlijk wanneer een opiniemaker als Bolkestein de instincten van de heffe des volks mobiliseert door te beweren dat zelfkritiek, zelfrelativering en schuldbesef christelijke waarden zijn die hebben geleid tot vrijheid, tolerantie en welvaart. Het crapuul heeft altijd een zondebok nodig, of die nu joods dan wel Arabisch is, maakt voor hen niets uit. Ze hebben immers niets anders om de eigen angstaanjagende leegte te maskeren.



vrijdag 1 januari 2010

The Empire 507

Strange Days Indeed

by: William Rivers Pitt, t r u t h o u t | Op-Ed

photo
(Image: Troy Page / t r u t h o u t; Adapted: gravem / Flickr)

Most peculiar, mama. Hoo.
- John Lennon

I know, I know, the decade doesn't really end until next year, but whatever to that. The calendar police can come and arrest me, because I'm calling this damnable decade over and done with first thing Friday morning. To hell with it, and anything that looks like it. The odometer is rolling, and I say good riddance to bad rubbish.

I mean, what else can you say about a decade that began when the world didn't end? Everyone woke up on Y2K-plus-one expecting to find fifty million computers transformed into inert paperweights because of a glitch in the calendar software, and when that didn't happen, there was a bewildered sigh of relief. Prophesies of doom have always been a part of the show on the eve of triple-zero years - Did they call it Y1K back in 999? - and the advent of 2000 was no different. The trains ran (mostly) on time as usual, planes didn't tumble out of the sky and things rolled along exactly as they had the day before the end of the world failed to come to pass.

The last night before this finally-fading decade began also ushered in the last year of the Clinton administration, a night that was almost certainly that administration's finest hour, though very few were aware of it at the time. On New Year's Eve 1999, terrorist plots were underway to attack Los Angeles International Airport, the Amman Radisson Hotel in Jordan, several religious sites in Israel and the USS The Sullivan Brothers at dock in Yemen. Thanks to the leadership of the United States and broad international military, intelligence and police cooperation, every single one of the intended millennium terrorist attacks was thwarted. The Clinton administration began the new decade by proving beyond doubt that the will and intent of terrorists can be stopped, that explosions and death are not a fait accompli whenever a plot is undertaken and that the US and its allies can, with proper preparation and execution, derail and defeat even the best laid plans of dangerous men.

The lesson, tragically, did not take hold during the subsequent administration.

There have been a hundred billion words written and spoken about the calamity that befell this nation on September 11, 2001. Who did it, how it happened, who was responsible and what it all means: these questions and a thousand others have been poured over endlessly since the attacks took place, a cottage industry of investigation and speculation ranging from the ridiculous to the sublime. From Unocal pipelines through Afghanistan to theories on controlled demolition and even to missiles instead of airplanes, from Congressional investigations to "Nobody could have anticipated," the debate over how and why 9/11 took place has raged since that first plane appeared on the New York horizon.

One event above all others, however, remains paramount in the cause-and-effect nexus of 9/11: the presidential election debacle of 2000. Nine months before the attack, the Supreme Court leaned on a preposterous Equal Protection argument and handed the White House to a man who became, in the fullness of time, the worst president in the history of the office. The disastrous Bush administration, staffed from stem to stern by deranged neoconservatives like Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld, failed to follow up on any aspect of the anti-terrorism efforts of the Clinton administration - incoming NSA Director Condoleezza Rice famously ignored the voluminous al-Qaeda files left for her by outgoing NSA Director Sandy Berger, reading them only after the attacks had taken place - and likewise ignored a blizzard of warnings about an impending attack, including the now-infamous Presidential Daily Briefing of August 6, 2001. As far as failures go, for the decade's first presidential administration, these were just for openers.

It is not at all difficult to argue that if the broken election of 2000 had not taken place; if the right-leaning majority on the Supreme Court did not take rank partisanship to the highest and lowest levels by giving that election to their party's man instead of letting the votes be counted in the proper fashion; if Al Gore had been allowed to assume the office he rightly won, his administration would have continued to pursue the rigorous Clinton-era anti-terror policies that had successfully defeated those would-be millennium murderers. In other words, but for the sad and sorry electoral debacle at the outset of this decade, two tall towers would still stand in New York City, the Pentagon would be whole and there would be no hero's graveyard in that field in Shanksville, Pennsylvania.

Three events - half a dozen terror attacks thwarted in the final year of Clinton's stewardship, followed by the ersatz ascendance of a brigand and his band of fools who came to power by way of a broad-daylight fraud that would make even Tammany Hall blush, followed by a day of horror that should have never been allowed to happen at all - came to define these last ten years. All that came to pass is aftermath, a deadly chain of events loosed by those three truths. For all his myriad flaws, President Clinton was the most significant anti-terror leader in American history, but the hard work of his administration was ignored by a bunch of Bible-beating absolutists who thought they knew better. Their failures - "failures" being used loosely, because a few special people got rich at our expense, and it's awfully hard to call that an accident - are our inheritance.

You know the rest all too well. Nearly 5,000 of the best soldiers America has to offer are dead. Almost 50,000 more are wounded, most of them permanently. Bush's wars have cut down a full third of America's combat strength, leaving us with fingers crossed that no other would-be foes decide to see if this punch-drunk champion can be taken down. Less important than the lives lost is the very present truth that hundreds of billions of dollars got spent to no good end, except to make a few people you'll never meet rich. The economic calamity still enveloping this nation should be called "The Iraq Depression," as it is a simple, bloody and absolute fact that we would all be better off in every measurable way had Bush not ignored Clinton's good work, had Bush not assumed an office he did not win and had this nation not been taken into the nightmare that defined these last ten years.

Those three realities are what birthed the disgraced and disgraceful American era we were forced to endure these last ten years, and will suffer still for many more years to come, thanks to the myriad nightmare consequences of the failed decade that opened the close of what was known as the American Century. Things are different now, at least on the surface, but the cancer remains. The last ten years were not up to us - we voted, and our votes were cast aside in the most cynical fashion imaginable, with ghastly consequences - but the next ten years are an open book.

Let's see if we can do better this time.

http://www.truthout.org/0101101

De Israelische Terreur 1093

Het door de VS en Israel gesteunde regime van Egypte slaat toe. Voor wat hoort wat. En Europa kijkt toe:


Egyptian Security Forces Attack Gaza Protesters

by: Max Ajl, t r u t h o u t | Report

photo
Security outside Gaza Freedom March protest in Cairo. (Photo: Middle East Children's Alliance)

Cairo, Egypt - Egyptian security forces were attacking protesters in Tahrir Square, at the core of downtown Cairo, after they sat down in the middle of a busy Cairo street, protesting the imprisonment of the people of Gaza. Others were literally barricaded inside their hotel, the entrance surrounded by steel riot barriers. Egyptian security forces refuse to allow them to leave. Green personnel carriers line the streets. It is pandemonium.

The protesters are part of the Gaza Freedom March, a group of 1,400 delegates from 42 countries, including France, the United States, the Philippines, Italy, Germany, Sweden, Brazil, Australia and Japan. They converged on Cairo intending to march with Gazan civil society in a massive show of nonviolent resistance against the blockade, which 16 international NGO's and charities condemned in a report released December 22 as "preventing reconstruction and recovery" in the Gaza Strip and which the United Nations Development Program has criticized as contributing to Gaza's "de-development."

But Egypt refused them entry into Gaza, just days before most of the marchers were to arrive in Cairo. Since then, the marchers have convoked a series of vigils, demonstrations and marches, accompanied by song, chants and bright banners. The Egyptian state has responded with repression, putting groups of riot police around marchers, harassing hunger strikers, canceling permits, detaining marchers and threatening them with water cannons, arrest and deportation.

Two days ago, Egypt attempted to placate the marchers by offering the organizers permission for a token 100 marchers to enter Gaza. Initially, a segment of the steering committee accepted the offer.

But after many of the core delegations refused to submit to tokenism, including the French EuroPalestine group, which has spent nearly a week sleeping in tents in front of their embassy, and the South African contingent, with leadership strengthened in the crucible of the anti-apartheid struggle, a fuller, more representative segment of the steering committee rejected the offer in deliberations that lasted until dawn, and attempted to prevent the buses from leaving.

Two young Palestinian-American sisters, Dana and Lara Elbrno, their father from Gaza, were among those who refused to go. They said they could not accept the offer and were unwilling to accept the terms the Egyptian government had imposed: the buses allowed into Gaza under the auspices of Code Pink and not the Gaza Freedom March, their purpose framed explicitly as a humanitarian convoy and not a political symbol - ultimately, they said, the conversion of a political statement against the siege into charity.

Others, selected among the 100, refused the offer too. Palestinian author Ali Abunimah and Filipino politician and writer Walden Bello of the Akbayan Party disembarked when they heard that the Gaza Freedom March's core partners in Palestinian civil society, including Haidar Eid, a literature professor at Al-Aqsa University and Omar Barghouthi, the founder of the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions campaign, also spurned the offer, claiming it was divisive, and so, "we deeply feel, terrible for the solidarity movement."

The GFM steering committee in Gaza reportedly abstained from receiving those who boarded the buses in Cairo. The real Gaza Freedom March remains "stalled in Cairo," says march communications coordinator Ziyaad Lunat.

Or surrounded. A huge group of internationals attempted to march in the direction of Gaza from Tahrir Square. The marchers, hundreds of them, came to the streets from cafes, hookah bars, the KFCs and Hardees that sit on the sidewalks surrounding the square, swarming in from points all around, stopping traffic on the circular ring road around the center of the square. Then they collided with Egyptian riot police.

They sat down, blocking several lanes of traffic for 45 minutes. Retaliation was violent. The plainclothes police picked the protesters up, one by one, pulling them by the hair, roughly throwing them around, until they had them cloistered on a corner, and then closed the museum and the metro. They broke cameras and video cards, and left one delegate with several fractured ribs.

Several were hit, some left bloodied and bruised. One, Suleika Jaouad, a student at Princeton University, was punched in the face. As she says, "I was witness to bloody, indiscriminate violence." She was on the periphery of the protest and says she was "assaulted just for being there and attempting to film the police brutality - evidence that they clearly did not want to be documented."

Things got much quieter when the protesters were no longer blocking traffic. They quickly set up an encampment. Conscripted riot police, in visored black helmets, stood around them, blocking sight of anything except for the multi-colored banner hanging from the tree around which they were clustered. Gael Murphy, one of the organizers of the march, says that the protesters "renamed Tahrir Square Free Gaza Square" and sang songs, played the accordion and waved banners reading "those who stand up for human rights will never be wrong."

There were many chants of "Free Gaza." Marchers were jumping up and down, practically screaming. One attendee, Max Geller of Brookline, Massachusetts, said, "It's at a fever pitch, it looks like a rock concert." The excitement level was alpine. Bill Ayers added, "We shine a light on a dark spot in Gaza," in the process offering "solidarity with the people of Gaza, letting them know that they're not alone."

While the protesters were alternately sitting down and being slammed around in Tahrir Square, others were trapped inside their hotels. Egyptian security forces had preemptively barricaded many of them, in a desperate bid to prevent them from joining today's protests. One march participant, Desiree Fairoz, after speaking to the police from outside, attempting to convince them to remove the barriers, "was lifted by the Egyptian police forces and literally tossed over the fence." Nonetheless, over 300 internationals made it to the protest, in a show of solidarity with Gaza's inhabitants and Palestinian society that has riveted the world's attention on Gaza, and made front-page news in the Egyptian press. Despite not getting to Gaza, it was unprecedented. As one South African marcher commented, "The Gaza Freedom March got 1,400 people to Cairo to march in solidarity with the Palestinian people. That's amazing."

http://www.truthout.org/1231098



De Groene NAVO-Propagandist Maarten Muns

  Op zoek naar een modus vivendi met Rusland Containment of detente? Welke ideologie er ook regeert, Rusland blijft een expansieve macht. ‘H...