The biggest arms supplier on the planet is the United States. The United States has military bases in many parts of the world along with a history of backing authoritarian or dictatorial governments. In 1987 a meeting former CIA men in Switzerland estimated that 6,000,000 have been killed by US trained or sponsored death squads. Union leaders, co-op organisers and others who were seen as threats to those in power. China suppresses dissent, has killed over 3,000 Falun Gong practitioners and allows little political freedom. Indonesia has exported Javanese to the other parts of Indonesia ignoring the wishes of others in the area, suppressed independence movements in Sumatra and Irian Jaya and has imprisoned people for merely stating they were atheists. One could go on. Some of Israel's actions have been horrible, but the horrible actions of the US, Indonesia and China don't even merit a slap on the wrist. Israel is a minor player when it comes to oppression. Why not recognise the others?

That Australia is a fervent supporter of the murderous regimes of the U.S. and Israel is something that should bring much shame.

The U.S. has killed between 20 and 30 million people since WW2 in its attempt to achieve global domination. Who would know how many people Israel has killed since 1947 as it brutalizes the Palestinians and steals more and more of their land.

Why is Australia a supporter of rogue regimes? Aren't we supposed to support the principle of the 'fair-go'.

It seems that that is an illusion!

I thought that the Article was drivel.

Then I read the comments.......

There are many parts of Henry Lebovic's article which are factually incorrect - let me just focus on one of them: "...the killing of Turkish peace activists on the Gaza Freedom Flotilla raid took place on 31 May 2010, but that tragedy prompted no condemnation from the Australian government."

That's because the Gaza blockade is legal according to the UN itself, and designed to prevent arms smuggling into Gaza - and Henry Lebovic should know it. Also the so-called "peace activists" set upon the Israeli soldiers with clubs and other weapons - there is footage to prove it. If activists were killed by soldiers in self-defence then that's the chance they took, opening attack on soldiers who were simply doing their job - boarding the vessel to escort it out of Israeli waters. If these activists did indeed come in 'peace', what were they doing armed and on the attack?

Henry Lebovic writes “the killing of Turkish peace activists on the Gaza Freedom Flotilla raid took place on 31 May 2010, but that tragedy prompted no condemnation from the Australian government.”

They were not condemned because the UN ruled that Israel acted within its rights and was legal. "Activists” attacked the Israeli IDF sailors and if the same had happened to Australian sailors they would have done the same.

Israel does make advanced weapons and yes Australia buys them.

Australia manufactures Land mines. I am sure that we are responsible for some of the greatest tragedies in Africa, Asia and Europe. Oh by the way Australia is a signature for ethical weapons sale. Hmm. Maybe we need a slap on the wrist?

Henry also writes “even after the outrage over Operation Cast Lead in late 2008

Lets see about this, Operation Cast Lead was mounted by Israel to halt the unending barrage of missiles being fired by Hamas in Gaza at Israeli civilians.

The rest of Mr Lebovic’s article praises Israeli innovation by using technology that was designed for the military and used of mining in harsh environments. Although he would not see that. (turning swords into plowshares?)

His article is biased. He condemns Israel on all points. If he would apply the same criteria to Australia he would have to say that we have a terrible human rights history. I think we Australians need to be slapped on the wrist.

We have systematically performed genocide on the indigenous Australians. We killed millions and subjected the survivors to poverty. We stole their children and did not treat them as human until the late 60’s. Now we have children in custody. We treat refugees so badly we are in violation of human rights accords that we signed.

Maybe Israel should not trade with us! We have a terrible human rights record. Maybe not as bad as Saudi Arabia, Libya, Syria, Iran and Gaza but we do alright.

So let’s be honest. The author is anti-Israel and has an agenda that is not based on human rights but on bias and Antisemitism.

David G I see you continue with your usual hate posts of the US and Israel ‘murderous regimes’. You are obviously not familiar with too many other regimes to make this bizarre claim.

The last time I checked Australia is not a supporter of rogue regimes. Australia supports Israel and the US, simply because in most cases the interests of those two nations converge with our own and we share similar values. It does not support rogue regimes such as Hamas because, well, it’s a rogue regime intent on killing and destruction. Just visit their home page and you’ll get the idea.

AVW, you continue with your blindness as to what is going on in the world. Do you want everyone in the world to be as ignorant as you are?

Is revealing to the world that the imperial U.S. has killed between 20-30 million people since WW2 hate-speak or merely alerting people to the facts (Google it if you don't believe me).

Is revealing the sixty-year old plight of the Palestinians hate-speak or just revealing the despicable, psychopathic nature of the Israelis who, foolishly, are trying to re-establish an anachronistic, 2-3 thousand year old primitive culture.

An excellent and truthful article Henry.Israel is a rogue state holding the West to ransom with their threat of 200+ nukes, yet North Korea is demonised along with Iran that has no nukes?

Is this not the definition of cognitive dissonance?

Am I hearing a call for the ethical supply of weapons?

Perhaps feather pillows?

David G:

There is really no need to google anything, I am sure you are correct – there are other people out there with extreme views such as yours who are willing to go to any length to portray the US and Israel as the most evil countries on earth. All it takes is some creativity in pinning all the world conflicts on either the US or Israel, while ignoring the role of the real culprits. I am curious though how you reached that particular figure of 20-30 million.

As for the 60-year old plight of the Palestinian Arabs, you need to remember that it is mostly of their own making, having refused settlements time and time again, from the 1930s to the present day. The Israelis are trying to establish safe and secure borders for their country, not an anachronistic culture as you claim. I think you have them confused with the policy of Hamas.

Revealing the truth is not hate speak, but promoting a lie in order to denigrate certain countries is.

The siege of Gaza is not 'legal' in any way - note the Israeli NGO Gisha's legal analysis of this closure:
"Gisha's position is that the closure is illegal because it punishes civilians in the Gaza Strip for
acts they did not commit and for political circumstances beyond their control. The closure
inflicts harm to the civilian population and civilian institutions by blocking the passage of
goods necessary for health, well-being, and economic life. The closure infringes on the right
to freedom of movement and thereby violates other rights for which freedom of movement
is a precondition, such as the right to health, to education, to family life, and to access
economic opportunities. "(http://www.gisha.org/userfiles/File/publications/GazaClosureDefinedEng.pdf)
These lawyers take cases to the Israeli courts daily and are documenting the abuses of international law. We will wait to see Israeli war criminals in the Hague. Sabra and other apologists for Israel's warcrimes in Gaza are blind to the fact that the whole civilian population is on the verge of starvation and WHO figures show a huge increase in malnutrition.
Vicious collective punishment of Gazans will never bring peace.

David G,

"Is revealing to the world that the imperial U.S. has killed between 20-30 million people since WW2 hate-speak" No, it is fantasy, similar to revealing to the world that your uncle is an alien. I did google the casualties in the various conflicts and could not anywhere near.

FG,

As Hamas, considers itself at war with Israel, and continues hostile actions, a blockade is the least aggressive action that Israel could take to protect its people.

US war-murdered 20-30 million since WW2 - Washington's Blog
www.washingtonsblog.com › General
2 Apr 2012 – Overweight People Aren't Lazy: They're Under Too MUCH Stress and Are ... US war-murdered 20-30 million since WW2: arrest today's War Criminals ... Avenge This: US kills 500, spends $1 billion every day since 2001 in ...

US war-murdered 20-30 million since WW2: arrest today's War ...
www.examiner.com/.../us-war-murdered-20-30-million-since-ww2-a...
2 Apr 2012 – US war-murdered 20-30 million since WW2: arrest today's War Criminals ... This is usual for people who present facts that refute the 1%'s war ...

Shadow Minister, these are two sources copied directly from Google. Are you sure you know what Google is?

DG,

I do know what Google is, and how to sort out reliable sources from whack jobs.

Here is a site Google produce that could help you:

http://www.stopabductions.com/

Shadow Minister, I don't know of any site that could help you.

You challenged me and I proved you wrong. A bit of humble pie from you would be appreciated but I can guarantee it won't be forthcoming!

DG,

Showing that you can find a few whack jobs that share your fantasy, does not prove me wrong.

Casualty figures from reliable sources, plus some evidence that these were the result of actions by the US would suffice.

I am interested to see how you remove all responsibility from China in the Korean war.

Shadow Minister, you've used 'whack' a number of times in your comments.

Obviously, that is your main problem!

Dear davidf,

The question you have posed is both pertinent and legitimate.

If I may I would like to explore it a little further although much of the following will be a personal perspective so make of it what you will.

So why does Israel attract what appears to be special condemnation and retalitory action when there are other, far more powerful nations with records of oppression at least as bad if not significantly worse?

While I see the question as legitimate I don't think it is a valid argument that one must be seen to condemn the worst transgressor and make ones way through the list until reaching a country like Israel. While there were indeed quite racist regimes in Africa during South Africa's apartheid regime, and there were massacres significantly larger for instance than the Soweto death toll, the South African government was certainly deserving of our rebuke and our rejection of sporting, diplomatic and economic ties. The fact that we didn't extend the same to all other deserving regimes surely doesn't mean our actions should not have been deployed.

That being said I'm not sure, given the world's current geo-political state, the argument “Israel is a minor player when it comes to oppression.” can be sustained. Where else in the world is there a people who currently have such a high proportion of their number existing as refugees, whose population has its movements so tightly restricted, who are under collective punishment for democratically electing a government that offended the occupying power, who recently suffered a crippling blockage designed to keep them just above starvation level, whose leaders are systematically assassinated, whose skies are constantly filled with drones, whose territory is constantly suffers armed incursions and who periodically suffer brutal attacks from overwhelming superior weaponry.

The Chinese oppression of the Tibetan people would certainly be up there as is the situation in the North West Territories of Pakistan. But perhaps it is my lack of imagination or general knowledge but I'm hard pressed to find many situations that equate with what is happening to the Palestinian people.

David G:

Thanks for posting the reference to your claim. I’m afraid, however, that this reference goes a long way to discredit your argument, rather than prove it.

I assume you have not read the Countercurrent article that you provided as evidence. I have. It is a mostly collection of conspiracy theories and hearsay taken as facts.

Let’s examine a few of the fanciful reasons for deaths attributed to the US::

- ‘luring the Soviet Union into invading Afghanistan’. Curiously the Soviets are not to blame for killing millions of Afghans in that invasion – blame the US instead.

- assisting South Korea to repel the invasion from the north (with full support from the UN). The great thing about this argument is that you can have it both ways, if the US did not provide help you could then blame them for causing deaths in South Korea by withholding assistance to repel the invaders

- assisting Hissen Habre to come to power and form a dictatorship that caused the death of some 40,000. Ignore the fact that Chad was a failed state prior to that, with civil wars raging throughout the country

I can go on and on refuting the points of this article, but my time and space on OLO is limited. The bulk of the claims simply hold the US accountable for the actions of every government it ever provided assistance to.

Your argument, if it is mainly based on this article, is on very shaky ground.

csteele:

It appears from what you are saying that one is not required to condemn the worst transgressors as long as Israel is condemned. This is like saying that it is ok if we do not condemn the murderer, as long as we throw the book at the jaywalker. It doesn’t make much sense to me, and I suspect most sensible people will not agree with you on this.

Furthermore, you are disputing the fact that "Israel is a minor player when it comes to oppression", citing the number of refugees as proof. It is important to remember here that the Palestinian refugee problem was actively nurtured and promoted by the Arab states as a strategy to de-legitimise Israel by refusing to integrate Palestinian refugees, their brothers, into their societies. In comparison, the Jewish refugees from Arab countries were absorbed by Israel decades ago. In 1948 the number of Arab refugees was estimated at around 700,000 - similar to the number of Jewish refugees. While there are no more Jewish refugees today, the number of Arab refugees has ballooned to several millions.

The ruling Hamas group has not just ‘offended the occupying power’. They were shelling Israel with daily rockets AFTER the ‘occupying power’ has withdrawn from their territory. Incidentally, referring to Hamas as democratically elected is misleading in the extreme – when was the last election there? Have you not heard of the violent ousting of their rival – Fatah – following their ascension to power? The idea of a democracy is as foreign to them as it was to the Nazi party in the 1930s.

Finally, comparing the situation in Israel to the China-Tibet state of affairs is not valid, as China extends its sovereignty over Tibet whereas Israel has withdrawn from Gaza and much of the West Bank. The Israeli government supports the two-state solution, whereas China has no plan to leave Tibet.

Dear Avw,

No I am not “saying that one is not required to condemn the worst transgressors as long as Israel is condemned.”. I have always firmly believed that the caste system in India was and to a degree still is a far more transgressive form of internal racism than even what existed in South Africa. Yet I would never have argued that we needed to fix the situation there before addressing the injustices in South Africa.

There were many fine, passionate Australians who made sure the evils of Apartheid were front and centre whenever we received diplomatic or sporting visits from that country.

If we were to have apologists for the caste system writing weekly pieces on this site I'm sure they would be copping more than a little flack from most of us. We instead have Singer and Ariel.

Your argument about refugees can just as easily be made from the other side of the issue. There were many European Jewish refugees who were made to feel unsafe in their countries so vast numbers were foisted on the Palestinian people including the native Jewish population. Australia absorbed some but not without strong resistance from many Australians including senior politicians.

Israel spent just as much time shelling Gaza after the withdrawal as Hamas did engaging in rocket fire. They also imposed a brutal blockade, withheld millions of dollar owed to Hamas, and lobbied other countries to withdraw vital aid.

Finally comparing Palestine and Tibet is perfectly valid as the Israeli government, despite your assertions, has shown it has little intention of leaving the West Bank. It has allowed 600,000 of its citizens to steal land and illegally settle within the West Bank. It effectively retains full control over half of the West Bank and nominal control over the rest. Do you really think we are that stupid to believe, after the Israeli government having just announced yet another 3,000 fresh illegal houses to be built on occupied territory in direct violation of the Geneva Convention, that it believes in a two state solution?

No dice my friend.

Dear csteele,

There are a number of oppressive acts by a number of oppressive countries. Almost all countries are oppressive at one time or another either to their own people or other people or both.

It is easier to see the 'mote in the neighbour's eye rather than the beam in our own.' It is also most sensible to condemn actions that our condemnation can do something about.

As far as the latter point it makes little sense to attack the caste system in India, bad as it is, since one would be pretty much alone outside India in condemning it. In India there are movements to change the caste system. The Harijan or untouchables in India are organising and have support in some other segments of the Indian population. India is lessening its problem within itself as the civil rights movement lessened the racial problem in the US to the extent that the US elected a dark-skinned president. The US and India both have problems within the country, but both have movements which are doing something about it.

in Australia both major parties have spent a great deal of effort in making a small number of boat people a menace. The policies of Australia in that regard have violated the refugee convention. Australians have managed to shut their eyes to the illegal acts by Australia in assisting PNG to maintain the blockade against Bougainville and to suppress the people within Bougainville. Most Australians, I believe, are unaware of the condemnations of Australia in that conflict. Most Australians do not belong to Australians for Native Title and Reconciliation (ANTaR) which seeks to recognise the disabilities suffered by Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders and see they get a fair shake. It was reprehensible of Australia to seek to minimise the results of the Mabo decision.

Israel has merited condemnation for its treatment of Palestinians. The settlements are also illegal and should be entirely evacuated. A country has a right to maintain an army of occupation on conquered land. It has no right to make permanent civilian settlements on that land.

continued

continued

Israel committed a war crime in dropping cluster bombs in Lebanon in the final days of the Lebanese incursion. They continued to kill after the Israeli forces withdrew and served no military purpose. Since many countries either use those devices as part of their arsenal or tolerate their allies using those devices as Australia does the US Israel will not be condemned for the cluster bombs as that would be in the nature of the pot calling the kettle black. I am for the complete elimination of cluster bombs, depleted uranium, land mines and condemnation of countries that use them.

There is a factor involving Israel that does not exist with many other nations. That is the fact that many other nations around Israel would like to terminate Israel’s existence. Australia, China, India, Indonesia and many other nations are oppressive in part but do not have a real concern with mere existence. Fear does not justify oppression, but it can be a factor in explaining it.

To some extent Israel is a reflection of its neighbours. In Egypt Sadat who wanted peace was murdered by a member of the Arab Brotherhood who did not. In Israel Rabin who wanted peace was murdered by an ultra-orthodox Jew who did not. Israel might be wiped out by its neighbours. It does not have the capability to wipe out its neighbours although it has military superiority over those neighbours at the moment.

The fact of the Holocaust is no excuse for present oppression, but it is a factor in explaining it. Many Israelis are frightened and feel they are threatened beyond a real threat. This same situation has existed in other countries. Apartheid South Africa felt justified in maintaining its oppression partially because of memories of the concentration camps that England put the Boer families in. In the US the Republican Party since Nixon has exploited the feelings of the defeated southern rebels in the Civil War.

The Israelis will probably re-elect the present government, and the beat will go on. Is there any reasonable solution?

Davidf,

Considering that cluster bombs are not illegal internationally, how can their use be a crime

Dear csteele:

It is not even a matter of what situation needs to be fixed first. The concern is that criticism is solely directed at Israel, there is hardly any attempt to fix any other issues at all. It is nothing more than an exercise in Israel-bashing. The frequent apologists for the policies of terrorist organisations such as Hamas are interested not in justice, but in the continuous demonisation of Israel. We are getting weekly anti-Israel pieces, but seldom, if at all, any criticism of the caste system in India, to use your example. Most of those critics do not have any real interest in human right issues, unless it involves Israel (or the US).

Israel was shelling Gaza in response to terrorist attacks, not in an attempt to dislodge or exterminate the population there (in contrast to the stated policy of Hamas). The sequence of events is important to note here: The Israeli withdrawal led to Hamas shelling which in turn led to Israeli response. It is the violence from Gaza that triggered Israeli response, not the other way around. In addition, while the Israeli response is aimed at terrorists and their infrastructure, Hamas actions are aimed almost exclusively at Israeli civilians.

I’m sorry, but any comparison to the Tibet situation is still not valid. Israel has signed an agreement with the Palestinians on a two-state solution. It has offered to the Palestinians some 95% of the West Bank territory. How is this offer consistent with your claim that Israel “has little intention of leaving the West Bank”?

Israel has withdrawn from Gaza and parts of the West Bank, uprooting settlements in the process. In return all it got back from the Palestinians was a sharp increase in violence. Israeli settlement activity was frozen for nearly a year at the request of the Palestinians, only to find that the Palestinians were still not interested in having any meaningful discussion. How are any of these actions similar to Tibet?

As you say, no dice my friend.

Dear Shadow Minister,

According to the Nuremberg Principles 'wanton destruction' is a crime. To use weapons which create wanton destruction which has no discernible military purpose is a crime under the Nuremberg Principles whether the specific weapons have been outlawed or not.

http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/full/390

Principle VI

The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law:

...

(b) War crimes:

Violations of the laws or customs of war include, but are not limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation to slave-labour or for any other purpose of civilian population of or in occupied territory, murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war, of persons on the seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns, or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity.

Cluster bombs are an extremely effective weapon against entrenched infantry or personnel. Your claim that they have no discernible military use has no basis in fact, as is your claim that their use constitutes a war crime.

Dear Shadow Minister,

I did not claim cluster bombs have no military use. You either didn't read or didn't understand my post. The manner in which they were used in Lebanon was wanton destruction. They were dropped in the last few days of an incursion by a military which was preparing to withdraw. They were left to be picked up by children or other non-combatants.

That was a war crime. Had the same weapons been used against a military force it would not have been a war crime. There was no discernible military purpose in the way they were used. That makes it a war crime.

Dear davidf,

Thank you for your reply.

I agree with you that fear is such a motivator whether it be promoted by unchecked racism or manufactured by government propaganda, or explicit actions such as drone strikes or rocket attacks, or simply a product of history.

I understand the comment “There is a factor involving Israel that does not exist with many other nations.” as I do with “The fact of the Holocaust is no excuse for present oppression, but it is a factor in explaining it.”. But I'm not sure it explains the Israeli government's actions.

It should be noted that the Palestinian people must surely have a far greater question mark over their future as their occupiers (with what appears to be rather unshakable support from the world's only superpower) are seemingly determined to never accept an independent Palestinian state.

This is my question; if Israel is so fearful about its existence then why is it so determined to upset the rest of the world with its actions, much of which had been supportive of it in the past? Why indeed would it risk the ire of the US, without whose support, particularly militarily but also in the UN, Israel would find the going far tougher?

It is hard to escape the conclusion that the current crop of seemingly hyper-Zionists which control the government in Israel care more about the ideology than the safety and future of their country.

Cont..

Cont..

When you write “Israel might be wiped out by its neighbours.” there is the obvious impression that it would be obliterated as a State and the 'Jewish people pushed into the sea'. I totally agree that many of these neighbours want to see an end to the current incarnation of the Zionist dream if only through granting the right of return to the millions of Palestinian refugees. South Africa did not disappear as a nation when the cancer of apartheid was finally excised from it nor would the State of Israel. Nor would it have to stop being the homeland of the Jewish people, it just would not exist as a Jewish nation with all the oppression, injustice and killing that has come to signify.

Ultimately isn't this is an exercise in utilising oppression, slaughter, brutality and military might to solve a demographic problem? It is however increasingly unacceptable to the rest of the world and unsustainable for the future of Israelis and Palestinians. I share you pessimism.

Dear Avw,

The comparison of Palestine to the Tibetan situation, despite your objections, in entirely appropriate. China has swallowed over 50% of what Tibetans regard as their country. The rest is now called the Tibet Autonomous Region which is governed by a Tibetan Chairman but the real control is exercised by China. It has has young idealistic monks self immolating themselves to protest the continuing occupation, an act that the Chinese government refers to as “Terrorism”. I could go on.

You claim “We are getting weekly anti-Israel pieces”. That is so misrepresentative of the facts as to be laughable. Mr Singer has by far the greater preponderance of articles on this site, all staunchly pro-Israel to the point of outright slander and racism. If the article count reflected world opinion then less than 5% of them would be supportive of the current Israeli regime.

Dear csteele,

I agree with you about the oppressive nature of the current Israeli government and its disregard of both world opinion and common decency. The factors I cited such as the memory of the Holocaust, the fear of being wiped out etc. are the psychological levers that government exploits to stay in power.

http://www.nif.org/component/content/article/15-general/1473-20-december-2012 is the site of one of the many groups in Israel that oppose the present government. One great problem is the support given to that government by American Christian Zionists who have poured much money into Israel to support the present government. In general they also support the Republican Party. American Jews by a great majority voted for Obama in the last election.

We are getting many anti-Israel pieces. Most people, me included, read what reinforces our opinions or what we find pleasant. I find Mr. Singer a one trick pony and do not read most of his items as I find them both predictable and boring. I imagine Mr. Singer’s readership is mostly limited to those who swallow his line and those who want to put their hooks into him. Article count is one thing. Actual readership is another.

I favour nations which do not discriminate among their citizens on the basis of ethnicity and religion and have separation of state and religion. Therefore I oppose Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Buddhist and Hindu states.

In Australia I oppose chaplains in the public schools, subsidies to non-public schools and all other actions which break down the separation of state and religion.

Dear davidf,

Thank you for the link to the NIF, an organisation certainly worthy of support. They do not have Paypal initiated but I will send them an email to see what can be arranged.

From their site; “Israel's 1.37 million Arab citizens vote, pay taxes and speak Hebrew, yet suffer pervasive discrimination, unequal allocation of resources and violation of their legal rights. Housing, education, and income all substantially lag that of the Jewish majority.  Only 3 percent of the land in Israel proper is owned by Arabs; permits are rarely granted to Arab families to expand their housing; and most Jewish towns and neighborhoods remain off-limits.”

Quite extraordinary, but are they anti-Israel?

You wrote;

“We are getting many anti-Israel pieces.”

I took the liberty of going back over the last thirty days of articles by noting those that had been commented on in that period, obviously not definitive by any means. The count as you see is 7 pro vs 5 that could be loosely called anti.

While you may dismiss Mr Singer's pieces I'm afraid it would take some creative accounting for the rest of us to do so. I'm certainly not denying your taste in commentators, I regard your rebuttal of Mr Singer some time ago now as the most effective and powerful ever given,

Palestine: democracies in diplomatic disarray Pro

Wrist-slapping unlikely to halt Israeli military sales to Australia Anti

Reason and passion on Israel Anti

Palestine - hands up those who hate Jews Pro

Australia's diplomatic pragmatism Anti

Palestine vote finally turns the tide Anti

Israel's Iron Dome: a global game changer? Pro

Palestine: Sharon's Gaza gambit Pro

Targeted killings: Operation ‘Pillar of Defence’ Pro

Australia's blinkered view of violence in Gaza Anti

Palestine: Gaza conflict sure to resume Pro

Israel on the horns of a dilemma Pro

What is disturbing to me is that there are not more articles challenging the actions of the Israeli government but perhaps the drive to be 'balanced' afflicts OLO on this issue as much as it does on AGW whether warranted or not.

Dear csteele,

I don't think online opinion tries to be balanced on any subject. Since they don't pay authors they are happy to get any item that sounds literate. Singer grinds out material and gets printed. I write an occasional piece, and most of my effusions get accepted.

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/author.asp?id=4977 will direct you to all my articles that olo has published. Israel is not a major interest of mine so only two articles of mine concern Israel. Apparently Singer only writes articles on Israel.

Propagandists such as Singer concentrate their energies on their hobby horse. Most of us are not so focused, and I regard that as a more reasonable attitude.

Yeats wrote a poem called "The Second Coming". In it were these lines.

The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.

I don't think the best lack all conviction. They merely are not one trick ponies like Mr. Singer. However, I think he is full of passionate intensity and probably doesn't have time for poetry.

Since I have referred to horses twice in the above you can take that with equinimity.

Dear davidf,

It's behooven for me to reply.

At my family's Christmas eve celebration I spent some time in conversation with a former East German border guard and an Israeli cancer doctor doing research in Australia. The former has written a book on a German paratrooper regiment but had very little idealism left, particularly for communism, while the latter has served in the IDF and was full of nationalism and exceptionalism not only for Israel but also for the US where he had been studying.

When the question of the Palestinians arose he could have been reading from Mr Singer's play-book. It was like having a check list in front of me and he ticked all the boxes, even announcing that without a proper understanding of the history of the region it was always going to be almost impossible for me to get my head around the true state of affairs.

As the conversation developed the value of engaging with Mr Singer's pieces came to the fore and allowed me to answer most of the propaganda politely but firmly, stating the facts as I saw them.

In the end he conceded and admitted quietly with a rather rueful smile that yes for the Israelis, setting all the rest aside, it was mostly about grabbing as much land as possible.

Even those who give the air of being full of 'passionate intensity' are often just as the rest of us, lacking conviction.

Thank you for the Yeats poem. Before writing this reply I had been watching a half hour doco titled 'Crime & Punishment in the Gaza Strip'.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWJFC98jPrQ

Part of it detailed the drug taking of Palestinian youths, particularly of the prescription drug Tramdol.

“Because of the disgust, sadness and despair we started to use it.” When asked if they were scared of another war and they reply “We don't care any more. We've become desensitised. I hope there is another war where all of us die. Dying is better than living like this.”

“The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;”

Dear csteele,

You wrote: " I regard your rebuttal of Mr Singer some time ago now as the most effective and powerful ever given,"

As far as Singer is concerned did it make any difference?

I am 87 and afraid of getting Alzheimers'. I think it more worthwhile for me to read and write poetry, study mycology, travel and learn more about mathematics. It exercises my mind.

Yeats' poem is full of great lines. There is a beauty in simplicity. I don't know how much time Shelley spent on the last line of Ozymandias, but it has such air of desolation in the one and two syllable words. "The lone and level sands stretch far away." Even President Grant got in an occasional good phrase. “pure morals unfettered by religious sentiments” That was in his speech to the veterans of the Army of the Tennessee on September 30, 1875 told about on page 509 of "Grant" by Jean Edward Smith.

I despair of reaching the Israeli government or its apologists. From Candide:

Pangloss used now and then to say to Candide, “There is a concatenation of all events in the best of possible worlds; for, in short, had you not been kicked out of a fine castle for the love of Miss Cunegund; had you not been put into the Inquisition; had you not travelled over America on foot; had you not run the baron through the body; and had you not lost all your sheep, which you brought from the good country of El Dorado, you would not have been here to eat preserved citrons and pistachio nuts.” “Excellently observed,” answered Candide; “but let us take care of our garden.”

From me: "Dogma is a bitch."

Dear davidf,

You ask; “As far as Singer is concerned did it make any difference?”

With the greatest respect that is not the question to be asking. What you delivered showed us the man for what he really was. You tore his armour asunder and made it easier for the rest of us who take exception to his propaganda. Although my replies to his articles are spit-balls in comparison it certainly inspired me to take it up to him more forcefully.

I feel where possible a man like Mr Singer does need to be answered on every occasion as it is easy for others to assume silence means acceptance.

Another thread has inspired some Ogden.

This is for Mr Singer;

““The door of a bigoted mind opens outwards so that the only result of the pressure of facts upon it is to close it more snugly.”

And this is for you;

“A jolly young fellow from Yuma
Told an elephant joke to a puma;
now his skeleton lies
beneath hot western skies-
the puma had no sense of huma”

Seasons greetings.