We Can Liberate Ourselves Thank You!

Have you ever taken a picture with friends when you’re out on the town and when you get the pictures developed there’s some idiot in the background intentionally trying to sabotage the memory? Kind of like the annoying guy who always gives his input when nobody asked him. Well I'm easily describing America in the heated aftermath of the assassination of Rafik Al-Hariri. It bewilders the mind why America won’t just shut up. As if snuggling up to people who can’t stand the sight of you is going to make things better. And using the pain of the Lebanese people and Hariri’s family, as a ploy to drive your personal agenda against Syria is sickening, while admittedly expected. Some Europeans are in the same boat, many with close ties with Hariri, a billionaire in a country that has a GDP that can’t afford millionaires.

And America just doesn’t get it. Rather than being a concerned democracy or a “friend in need,” they are acting like the big brother that just watched his little brother get punched in the face by the school bully. Contrary to popular belief, meddling into Lebanese affairs isn’t best for all those involved. . The will of the Lebanese people will come through, and supporting their will can produce positive results.

While stuck on the track of inflicting liberation on the Iraqi people, George Bush thinks he can come in and set up a new road map for the Middle East, quiet similar to the last road map I’m sure. But Bush forgets one useful point, the only people Arabs hate more than each other, is Americans. This “good will” on the part of the Bush administration is not only fake but can easily backfire. Like the pro-Western population of Iran, don’t ruin a good thing. The Lebanese people are already furious, many are demanding change, and they don’t need another U.N. resolution to tell them how they feel. People can only solve a problem if they make an effort to solve that problem, and getting a moral taste test from a guy without a tongue isn’t reassuring. So from one more person who has relatives in Lebanon, America, please, mind your own damn business.

And Justice For All

We are living in a perverse world where justice has been sidelined for excuses of lobbying groups, politicians and governments who seek not civility but personal and social corruption. We’re living in a time where Ward Churchill’s train of thought is publicly crucified without investigating or understanding the purpose. We’re living in an instance where the Palestinians are demonized but their anger and message is never heard. We’re living in a state where the Bush team “liberates,” instigates, and does so with a blank check. And as each perceived truth gets debunked time and again, the steady current of propaganda stays strong and vigilant. Existing inside this prism of perfection without actually taking responsibility for individual actions has been the status quo for the population of the US; similar stances have taken place in the European states but usually to a far lesser degree.

Ideas of justice and protection of human lives is a virtue that one should hold no matter the situation, but is scarcely found in Western states. We buy into systems that kill, that allow, that turn the other way, and when the boomerang snaps back around we have the audacity to question why. I personally disagree with the tone of Ward Churchill’s comments, but I understand the roots. In America we have this odd tendency to label understanding as sympathizing or agreeing. Ward Churchill was trying to get a rise out of his readers and make them think. Furthermore his comments were directed at those who “fed the corporate machine,” which would not include cleaning crews, children, passerbys and others.

I think that his description of the victims of 9/11 was clearly off. While they truly are “fueling the corporate machine” that reign’s terror on the rest of the world, it is significantly different than the little Eichmans that were reigning terror back some time ago. The direct attempt and success’ of destruction in the 1930’s and 1940’s was quite apparent to those who directly supported it or silently gave their approval. I think that sometimes when professors or thinkers in general try to get a rise out of their students or readers, they can go overboard in making the point. The uneducated mind, oblivious in general, deems the words the highest of heresies. The fact remains that while Churchill’s comments were brazen and overdone, the context did relay a message that has been missed by the U.S. media and its citizens. Personal responsibility must be taken, our actions in feeding this corporate machine can come back to bite, and our government in using our votes has committed mass crime and atrocities that need to be looked into. Whether a militant group or state funded terror, in reality the results are the same, destruction and chaos, so I don’t differentiate between the two, except insofar that the nation state should be held to a higher standard based on the fundamentals of justice that they themselves promote.

As for the Palestinians, who under U.N. resolutions set in 1982 have a right to defend themselves, should pursue the vision of autonomy that they have set out to accomplish. In this situation personal responsibility comes into play. Israelis themselves have to realize that they are living on a land that was ethnically cleansed so they could have a Jewish state. And this land was not brushed clean millennium ago but rather in the middle of the last century. The majority of the refugee population still lives today and is deserving of reparations, apologies, and a healing process that must take place before words of peace can truly be implemented.

As for the idiocy of the Bush administration and their everlasting will to liberate, with the most obvious ulterior motives showing, is a disgrace not only to democracy but a disgrace to intellectuals around the world. The malfeasance of this crew of over zealous, arrogant ideologues is that they represent a nation that used to be the model of democracy, but is now an embarrassment to the international community and it’s own. Ideas of pillage and plunder in lands unknown, for reasons subconsciously expressed, have uprooted morality in the common sense of the word and have recreated democracy and liberation to fit its own devious means.

The world will never be safe with imperialistic tyrants imposing its liberty on its neighbors and far off lands. The concept of Ward Churchill, the Palestinian enigma, and the sacrosanct tone of America interconnect to form a greater problem, unremorseful ignorance. The visions expressed by critics show how intolerable the human race can be in understanding truth, accepting critical analysis, and realizing justice in it’s entirety, no matter what the case and no matter who the victim. Until we accept that models of justice apply to all those involved, reasonability and understanding will never be achieved because the rules never call for such circumstances to exist. If we don’t evaluate ourselves when we are the sole proprietor of rules, then justice in any form will never truly exist.

Peace or Transition Into The Third Intifada?

The media coverage of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict has been a strange display of one sidedness. Going against the pragmatic notion that the truth always sees light has been proven false in this case. Whether coverage in the Wall Street Journal or the “liberal” press such as the New York Times, the constant claim has been that the Palestinians, ridden with corruption and violence, have relentlessly botched up any chances for peace. The Palestinian desire to drive every last Jew to the sea based on their religious convictions and wild anti-Semitism is a fallacy that has been regurgitated by Zionists and Zionist sympathizes for years. And with the attempt to indoctrinate the anti-Zionism, anti-Semitism theory, modern Zionist have remained unapologetic about the atrocities that have taken place against the Palestinians.

If you look as close as Benny Morris, the new historian, in which he states that Ben Gurion didn’t go far enough in displacing the whole indigenous population of 1948, you can understand the problems facing the Palestinians. He even goes further to say that this could be the demise of the Israeli people. Thankfully he assures his readers that displacement in the future and further atrocities leading to the mass death of Palestinians is a viable and possibly quite “necessary” option.

The coupling of the new historians and the US media has been a force to be reckoned with. And using this as an example, it’s easy to grasp the renewed jubilance over prospective peace in the region.

Abu Mazen, the new security chief of Israel, has been juggling Sharon’s demands with militant requests for nearly a month. But the question remains. Can Abu Mazen lead the Palestinians with ideals of justice and with intentions of repairing the past while seeking justified reparations? Many say that the details can be worked out when the process calls for it. But submitting power and sensibilities for chances of peace has burned the Palestinians before.

Regardless of the corruption and incompetence of Arafat, Camp David was still a sham, and was still a deal that represents the Israeli mentality. This has been and will continue to be a problem, the state of mind of Israel. If the Israelis keep tight to the notion of superiority with refusal of past truths, mending the wounds that will lead to eventual peace will be impossible. If I murder your son and never admit his death, how could we ever reconcile? Before the rise of suicide bombers, before the struggle of intifadas, the Palestinian people were still oppressed, were still facing occupation, and were still living in ghettos that they had been pushed into as refugees. To create a future and shakes hands in the present, one can never forget the past. Just as admittance and moves to mend old wounds were taken in South Africa after the fall of apartheid the same must occur here. And questions of peace will rely on the will of the people and the government that leads them. And the Sharon administration, newly linked with Peres’ Labor party, will have a tough road ahead and will need to look inward if hopes for lasting peace wish to be achieved.

The Iraqi Elections - Image and Reality

I’m sitting here wondering if children in Iraq should be passing out candy in the streets. As the elections passed today with relative quiet, an underlying optimism has taken many people in the United States. While both Americans and Iraqis have shown a bit of exuberance, I believe it’s for different reasons. In the States I think the general optimism is naivety driven, the hope that Iraq could turn around in a day, that elections are sure to be the turning point, that by next week we’ll in full steam towards democracy, is expected but silly at best.

Americans in general love to believe. Whether it’s Santa Claus, Rocky or creationism, most of the people in this country have an ideological, picture perfect image of their country and how things should turn out in the world. So consequently they hold on to the idea that our intervention must be driven by purity, rather than ill agendas.

In referring to the Iraqi elections the same emotions were released during the “transfer of power,” which ended up being an anticlimactic farce. But that’s the problem with these dates and ideas, blueprints that most of the educated and Arab world are constantly criticizing; they’re essentially bubbles that are sure to pop. And unfortunately whether the attackers hit toady or not wasn’t so significant but rather it’s whether the resistance overall can be quelled. And realistically speaking the facts on the ground haven’t shown that the resistant can be taken down by a simple election or a “transfer of power.”

While positive strides have been made over the last two years, it has been deeply overshadowed by the cloud of horror, the unending atrocities, and the inefficiency by the occupying force that shouldn’t be occupying. This tailspin, which is inevitable in one form or another, has not even begun, and the relations between the Shia, Sunni, and Kurdish communities have not even been reasonably addressed. The worst fight is still ahead, and most can’t stop worrying about the battles that are taking place right now.

The difference between the American naivety and the Iraqi frame of mind is quite simple. Americans choose to hope because they are led to believe and are natural believers, Iraqis choose to hope, because it’s the only thing they have left.

The people of Iraq have felt the pains of occupation and the harsh insurgency for nearly two years, and any glimmer of hope is worth holding onto if it will ease the burdens their families and friends have been put through, while keeping sacred their Iraqi identity. But these uncertainties will continue, and they can lead to worse conclusions if we don’t start reasonably assessing the situation in Iraq. We will always be the occupying force, the UN will hold respectability over us for sometime to come, if not for the images of Abu Ghraib alone. As for the possibilities of civil war, the overall difficulties of security, and the tarnished face of the American occupation, time will only tell what the 275 members can come up with. But sadly I think whatever they decide, they will fall short of the expectations of the hopers and dreamers.