Friday, November 27, 2009
Thursday, November 26, 2009
Obama to validate Honduran military Coup, recognize fake elections
The Organization of American States, and virtually all Latin American countries have condemned the show election being held by the illegitimate Michletti government installed by a military coup that ousted and deported the elected president Manuel Zelaya.
President Obama, being a practical guy, has decided to recognize whoever is "elected" president of Honduras. Coup, Schmoo! says Obama. Let's let bygones be bygones! Besides the new faux-president (Zelaya supporters are not participating in the elections) will be more to the liking of the U.S.A.'s governing corporate elite (I'm referring to the real governing body in this country, the the stumble-bum pack of bribe-taking schleps who populate the Senate, House and the White House).
This slap in the face to the OAS and Latin countries also has the added benefit of being a money saver. If Obama had really wanted to pressure the Honduran coup-makers to relinquish power and restore the real president to finish out his term, all sorts of bad things could happen. A Zelaya supporter would be elected and the new government would continue Zelaya's policies of looking out for the interests of the impoverished Honduran people instead of the profit margins of mulit-national businesses and banks. How tiresome would that be!?
Then, on top of that, the U.S. would have to stage another coup or even invade Honduras to make sure the place is safe from terrorism and community organizers.
Obama's way is much more economical. Besides, from the White House's point of view what's wrong with the army arresting and deporting the president of some country? It worked out OK in Haiti.
President Aristede was siezed by U.S. troops in Haiti in 2004, put on a plane and dumped in the Central African Republic (he's now in South Africa). Then Secretary of State Coin Powell thought it was no big deal and contemptously dismissed criticism of this seemingly undemocratic and imperial action on the part of the U.S.
"Hey, who gives a fuck!" I'm sure Powell said to himself, "no pissant like Aristide is going to interfere with our plans!" U.S. plans required that chaos, crime and starvation better served Washington's interests than an irritating jerk who went around talking about the poor all the time. I'm sure Powell approves of Obama's endorsement of the fraudulent elections in Honduras. It makes for good continuity of U.S. policy from supposedly agressive president W, to the "diplomacy" of our very cool Obama.
President Obama, being a practical guy, has decided to recognize whoever is "elected" president of Honduras. Coup, Schmoo! says Obama. Let's let bygones be bygones! Besides the new faux-president (Zelaya supporters are not participating in the elections) will be more to the liking of the U.S.A.'s governing corporate elite (I'm referring to the real governing body in this country, the the stumble-bum pack of bribe-taking schleps who populate the Senate, House and the White House).
This slap in the face to the OAS and Latin countries also has the added benefit of being a money saver. If Obama had really wanted to pressure the Honduran coup-makers to relinquish power and restore the real president to finish out his term, all sorts of bad things could happen. A Zelaya supporter would be elected and the new government would continue Zelaya's policies of looking out for the interests of the impoverished Honduran people instead of the profit margins of mulit-national businesses and banks. How tiresome would that be!?
Then, on top of that, the U.S. would have to stage another coup or even invade Honduras to make sure the place is safe from terrorism and community organizers.
Obama's way is much more economical. Besides, from the White House's point of view what's wrong with the army arresting and deporting the president of some country? It worked out OK in Haiti.
President Aristede was siezed by U.S. troops in Haiti in 2004, put on a plane and dumped in the Central African Republic (he's now in South Africa). Then Secretary of State Coin Powell thought it was no big deal and contemptously dismissed criticism of this seemingly undemocratic and imperial action on the part of the U.S.
"Hey, who gives a fuck!" I'm sure Powell said to himself, "no pissant like Aristide is going to interfere with our plans!" U.S. plans required that chaos, crime and starvation better served Washington's interests than an irritating jerk who went around talking about the poor all the time. I'm sure Powell approves of Obama's endorsement of the fraudulent elections in Honduras. It makes for good continuity of U.S. policy from supposedly agressive president W, to the "diplomacy" of our very cool Obama.
Saturday, November 21, 2009
FUTURE HEADLINES
From pages of the New Yolk Crimes:
March, 8, 2010
Obama chides Israel for its Latest Move
"A spokesman from the Obama administration said today that the Israeli government's announcement of their plan to brand the forehead of every newborn Palestinian child with the word "treif" "is not helpful," the president would prefer that "they reconsider the move."
Hillary defends Netenyahu
March 9, 2010,
Secretary of state Hillary Clinton described the Israeli government's new requirement for the branding of Palestinian babies as "an unprecedented goodwill gesture." The Secretary, speaking at a fund-raising dinner for the newly-established Israeli settlement "Beth Shalom Fuck the A-rabs,"in downtown Damascus, hosted by Rep. Jerry Nadler and Rudy Gulliani, went on to say, "Israel firmly rejected calls for the taking of an arm and a leg from the newborns."
March 10, 2010,
Obama Apologizes to Netenyahu for Criticizing Israel over Newborn Move
March 11, Lead Editorial:
Israel Once Again Shows that it is The Most Moral Nation in the World
March, 8, 2010
Obama chides Israel for its Latest Move
"A spokesman from the Obama administration said today that the Israeli government's announcement of their plan to brand the forehead of every newborn Palestinian child with the word "treif" "is not helpful," the president would prefer that "they reconsider the move."
Hillary defends Netenyahu
March 9, 2010,
Secretary of state Hillary Clinton described the Israeli government's new requirement for the branding of Palestinian babies as "an unprecedented goodwill gesture." The Secretary, speaking at a fund-raising dinner for the newly-established Israeli settlement "Beth Shalom Fuck the A-rabs,"in downtown Damascus, hosted by Rep. Jerry Nadler and Rudy Gulliani, went on to say, "Israel firmly rejected calls for the taking of an arm and a leg from the newborns."
March 10, 2010,
Obama Apologizes to Netenyahu for Criticizing Israel over Newborn Move
March 11, Lead Editorial:
Israel Once Again Shows that it is The Most Moral Nation in the World
Sunday, November 15, 2009
IDF Chief Rabbi: Show No Mercy
Last update - 11:30 15/11/2009
IDF Chief Rabbi: Troops who show mercy to enemy will be 'damned'
By Anshel Pfeffer, Haaretz Correspondent
The Israel Defense Forces' chief rabbi told students in a pre-army yeshiva program last week that soldiers who "show mercy" toward the enemy in wartime will be "damned."
Brig. Gen. Avichai Rontzki also told the yeshiva students that religious individuals made better combat troops.
Speaking Thursday at the Hesder yeshiva in the West Bank settlement of Karnei Shomron , Rontzki referred to Maimonides' discourse on the laws of war. That text quotes a passage from the Book of Jeremiah stating: "Cursed be he that doeth the work of the Lord with a slack hand, and cursed be he that keepeth back his sword from blood."
In Rontzki's words, "In times of war, whoever doesn't fight with all his heart and soul is damned - if he keeps his sword from bloodshed, if he shows mercy toward his enemy when no mercy should be shown."
Rontzki's remarks came during a ceremony to celebrate a new Torah scroll at the yeshiva. The service was held in commemoration of Yosef Fink, one of two yeshiva students kidnapped by Hezbollah in 1986.
Their bodies were returned 10 years later in a prisoner exchange.
Rontzki also referred specifically to the Israel Defense Forces' conduct during Operation Cast Lead in Gaza. "Apropos all that we've heard in the media of late, thank God that the people of Israel has united recently around the simple understanding of how it must fight. One of the major innovations of that offensive was the conduct of war - not as some kind of mission or detention."
"We all remember the beginning of the war, with a major attack of 80 planes bombing various places, and then artillery, mortar and tank fire and so forth, as in war," he said. "Everyone fought with all their heart and soul, and that includes bravery of course, but also fighting with all the resources one has - to fight as if to truly determine the mission."
Rontzki also referred to the qualities of the ideal combat soldier.
"In Israel's wars, warriors are God-fearing people, righteous people, people who don't have sins on their hands," he said. "One needs to fight with an understanding of what one is fighting for."
Related articles:
IDF rabbinate publication during Gaza war: We will show no mercy on the cruel
IDF chief rabbi says women shouldn't serve
IDF chief rabbi: Army magazine shouldn't cover gays
IDF Chief Rabbi: Troops who show mercy to enemy will be 'damned'
By Anshel Pfeffer, Haaretz Correspondent
The Israel Defense Forces' chief rabbi told students in a pre-army yeshiva program last week that soldiers who "show mercy" toward the enemy in wartime will be "damned."
Brig. Gen. Avichai Rontzki also told the yeshiva students that religious individuals made better combat troops.
Speaking Thursday at the Hesder yeshiva in the West Bank settlement of Karnei Shomron , Rontzki referred to Maimonides' discourse on the laws of war. That text quotes a passage from the Book of Jeremiah stating: "Cursed be he that doeth the work of the Lord with a slack hand, and cursed be he that keepeth back his sword from blood."
In Rontzki's words, "In times of war, whoever doesn't fight with all his heart and soul is damned - if he keeps his sword from bloodshed, if he shows mercy toward his enemy when no mercy should be shown."
Rontzki's remarks came during a ceremony to celebrate a new Torah scroll at the yeshiva. The service was held in commemoration of Yosef Fink, one of two yeshiva students kidnapped by Hezbollah in 1986.
Their bodies were returned 10 years later in a prisoner exchange.
Rontzki also referred specifically to the Israel Defense Forces' conduct during Operation Cast Lead in Gaza. "Apropos all that we've heard in the media of late, thank God that the people of Israel has united recently around the simple understanding of how it must fight. One of the major innovations of that offensive was the conduct of war - not as some kind of mission or detention."
"We all remember the beginning of the war, with a major attack of 80 planes bombing various places, and then artillery, mortar and tank fire and so forth, as in war," he said. "Everyone fought with all their heart and soul, and that includes bravery of course, but also fighting with all the resources one has - to fight as if to truly determine the mission."
Rontzki also referred to the qualities of the ideal combat soldier.
"In Israel's wars, warriors are God-fearing people, righteous people, people who don't have sins on their hands," he said. "One needs to fight with an understanding of what one is fighting for."
Related articles:
IDF rabbinate publication during Gaza war: We will show no mercy on the cruel
IDF chief rabbi says women shouldn't serve
IDF chief rabbi: Army magazine shouldn't cover gays
Friday, October 23, 2009
My Unpublished Letter to the Editor of the New York Times
To The Editor,
In his op-ed of Oct 20, "Rights Watchdog, Lost in the Mideast," Robert L. Bernstein faults Human Rights Watch and other similar organizations for citing Israel for committing human rights abuses in it's attack on Gaza in December 2008 and January, 2009.
Israel, Bernstein argues, is the only democracy in the Mideast, acted solely in self-defense and has the most moral army in the world. There are some problems with this argument.
First, being or not being a democracy has never restrained a country from committing indiscriminate slaughter against other peoples. The record of the United State's mass bombing and spraying of Agent Orange in the Vietnam war is only one case in point.
Second, all the facts of the Gaza attack are against Bernstein. The verified evidence from many reliable sources point to a policy of shoot first and don't ask questions later. Palestinian families were used as human shields, hospitals and schools were bombed and white phosphorous was used against the general population. Not only has this been verified on film, but how can Bernstein explain the children from Gaza with phosphorous burns showing up for treatment in U.S. and European hospitals?
Finally, the fanatical rightist and religious nationalism whipped up by the Netanyahu/Lieberman government has led to harassment and threats of arrests to members of human rights groups in Israel.
Richard Congress
In his op-ed of Oct 20, "Rights Watchdog, Lost in the Mideast," Robert L. Bernstein faults Human Rights Watch and other similar organizations for citing Israel for committing human rights abuses in it's attack on Gaza in December 2008 and January, 2009.
Israel, Bernstein argues, is the only democracy in the Mideast, acted solely in self-defense and has the most moral army in the world. There are some problems with this argument.
First, being or not being a democracy has never restrained a country from committing indiscriminate slaughter against other peoples. The record of the United State's mass bombing and spraying of Agent Orange in the Vietnam war is only one case in point.
Second, all the facts of the Gaza attack are against Bernstein. The verified evidence from many reliable sources point to a policy of shoot first and don't ask questions later. Palestinian families were used as human shields, hospitals and schools were bombed and white phosphorous was used against the general population. Not only has this been verified on film, but how can Bernstein explain the children from Gaza with phosphorous burns showing up for treatment in U.S. and European hospitals?
Finally, the fanatical rightist and religious nationalism whipped up by the Netanyahu/Lieberman government has led to harassment and threats of arrests to members of human rights groups in Israel.
Richard Congress
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
From Haaretz, Israel's Press Freedom Ranking Falls
Last update - 22:49 20/10/2009
Israel ranks low for freedom of press, after Gaza war media ban
By Gili Eizkovitch Haaretz Correspondent and Haaretz Service
Tags: Israel Media, Gaza Offensive
Israel placed No. 93 out of 175 countries on a 2009 international index of press freedom, released by Reporters Without Borders (RSF) on Tuesday.
The 2009 ranking meant Israeli lost its place as the top country for press freedom in the region, falling behind Kuwait at No. 60, Lebanon at No. 61 and the United Arab Emirates at No. 86.
Israel's dramatic drop - 47 spots since last year - came as a result of its press regulations dictated to international media during the Gaza offensive earlier this year.
Advertisement
"Israel has begun to use the same methods internally as it does outside its own territory," said Reporters Without Borders, adding that journalists had been arrested and imprisoned and that military censorship also posed a threat.
But as a result of actions during Israel's war against Hamas militants in the Gaza Strip in December and January, Reporters Without Borders ranked the country at No. 150 for its "extraterritorial actions."
"The toll of the war was very heavy. Around 20 journalists in the Gaza Strip were injured by the Israeli military forces and three were killed while covering the offensive," it said.
Meanwhile, RSF noted that press freedom has improved in the United States in the last year as the country jumped 20 places to No. 20.
The media watchdog said the assumption of the presidency by Barack Obama in January brought a new approach in Washington after eight years under President George W. Bush, while some European countries fell in the group's Press Freedom Index.
It expressed concerns about U.S. attitudes toward the media in Iraq and Afghanistan, where it said journalists had been injured or arrested by the U.S. military.
"President Obama may have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, but his country is still fighting two wars," the group said. "Despite a slight improvement, the attitude of the United States towards the media in Iraq and Afghanistan is worrying."
The United States came in just behind Britain on the press freedom index of 175 countries, while China was at No. 168. Afghanistan No. 149 and Iraq at No. 145.
Reporters Without Borders noted that in the United States the House of Representatives this year backed legislation to allow journalists to protect their sources - it has not yet been voted on in the Senate - and the Obama administration had promised better access to public information.
The group said civil liberties were violated in the name of national security during the Bush era.
European countries hold the top 13 spots, led by Denmark, Finland, Ireland, Norway and Sweden. France fell eight spots to No. 43, Slovakia dropped 37 places to No. 44 and Italy fell five spots to No. 49.
"Europe should be setting an example as regards civil liberties. How can you condemn human rights violations abroad if you do not behave irreproachably at home?" said Reporters Without Borders Secretary-General Jean-Francois Julliard.
Press freedom in France has been worsening for several years, the group said, with the authorities placing growing pressure on journalists to reveal sources and proposing legislation that could reduce their freedom.
In Italy, Reporters Without Borders said press freedom was being stifled by threats from the mafia and various lawsuits being brought or considered by Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi against news organizations.
At the bottom of the list were Turkmenistan, North Korea and Eritrea "where media are so suppressed they are nonexistent," said Reporters Without Borders.
Iran dropped to No. 172 from No. 166, with Reporters Without Borders saying the disputed re-election of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had fostered a paranoia about journalists and bloggers.
"Automatic prior censorship, state surveillance of journalists, mistreatment, journalists forced to flee the country, illegal arrests and imprisonment - such is the state of press freedom this year in Iran," the group said.
The ranking was compiled from hundreds of questionnaires completed by journalists and media experts around the world and reflecting press freedom violations that took place between Sept. 1, 2008 and Aug. 31, 2009. The exact number of questionnaires completed was not immediately available.
Israel ranks low for freedom of press, after Gaza war media ban
By Gili Eizkovitch Haaretz Correspondent and Haaretz Service
Tags: Israel Media, Gaza Offensive
Israel placed No. 93 out of 175 countries on a 2009 international index of press freedom, released by Reporters Without Borders (RSF) on Tuesday.
The 2009 ranking meant Israeli lost its place as the top country for press freedom in the region, falling behind Kuwait at No. 60, Lebanon at No. 61 and the United Arab Emirates at No. 86.
Israel's dramatic drop - 47 spots since last year - came as a result of its press regulations dictated to international media during the Gaza offensive earlier this year.
Advertisement
"Israel has begun to use the same methods internally as it does outside its own territory," said Reporters Without Borders, adding that journalists had been arrested and imprisoned and that military censorship also posed a threat.
But as a result of actions during Israel's war against Hamas militants in the Gaza Strip in December and January, Reporters Without Borders ranked the country at No. 150 for its "extraterritorial actions."
"The toll of the war was very heavy. Around 20 journalists in the Gaza Strip were injured by the Israeli military forces and three were killed while covering the offensive," it said.
Meanwhile, RSF noted that press freedom has improved in the United States in the last year as the country jumped 20 places to No. 20.
The media watchdog said the assumption of the presidency by Barack Obama in January brought a new approach in Washington after eight years under President George W. Bush, while some European countries fell in the group's Press Freedom Index.
It expressed concerns about U.S. attitudes toward the media in Iraq and Afghanistan, where it said journalists had been injured or arrested by the U.S. military.
"President Obama may have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, but his country is still fighting two wars," the group said. "Despite a slight improvement, the attitude of the United States towards the media in Iraq and Afghanistan is worrying."
The United States came in just behind Britain on the press freedom index of 175 countries, while China was at No. 168. Afghanistan No. 149 and Iraq at No. 145.
Reporters Without Borders noted that in the United States the House of Representatives this year backed legislation to allow journalists to protect their sources - it has not yet been voted on in the Senate - and the Obama administration had promised better access to public information.
The group said civil liberties were violated in the name of national security during the Bush era.
European countries hold the top 13 spots, led by Denmark, Finland, Ireland, Norway and Sweden. France fell eight spots to No. 43, Slovakia dropped 37 places to No. 44 and Italy fell five spots to No. 49.
"Europe should be setting an example as regards civil liberties. How can you condemn human rights violations abroad if you do not behave irreproachably at home?" said Reporters Without Borders Secretary-General Jean-Francois Julliard.
Press freedom in France has been worsening for several years, the group said, with the authorities placing growing pressure on journalists to reveal sources and proposing legislation that could reduce their freedom.
In Italy, Reporters Without Borders said press freedom was being stifled by threats from the mafia and various lawsuits being brought or considered by Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi against news organizations.
At the bottom of the list were Turkmenistan, North Korea and Eritrea "where media are so suppressed they are nonexistent," said Reporters Without Borders.
Iran dropped to No. 172 from No. 166, with Reporters Without Borders saying the disputed re-election of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had fostered a paranoia about journalists and bloggers.
"Automatic prior censorship, state surveillance of journalists, mistreatment, journalists forced to flee the country, illegal arrests and imprisonment - such is the state of press freedom this year in Iran," the group said.
The ranking was compiled from hundreds of questionnaires completed by journalists and media experts around the world and reflecting press freedom violations that took place between Sept. 1, 2008 and Aug. 31, 2009. The exact number of questionnaires completed was not immediately available.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)