Showing posts with label Palestinian issues. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Palestinian issues. Show all posts
Friday, July 6, 2018
Tuesday, July 22, 2014
The Palestinian Holocaust
Dear friends,
When will the masses of Jewish people finally stand up and admit that an organize minority of Jews - including rabbis, businessmen, and politicians, has bamboozled the former into believing, under the guise of being their brethren, that they somehow have a right to murder and maim others solely based upon the illusion that they have been "chosen" specifically to do so by a mysterious world-ruling personality?
Liberation!
G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.democracynow.org/2014/7/21/breaking_in_latest_attack_on_gaza Read full post
When will the masses of Jewish people finally stand up and admit that an organize minority of Jews - including rabbis, businessmen, and politicians, has bamboozled the former into believing, under the guise of being their brethren, that they somehow have a right to murder and maim others solely based upon the illusion that they have been "chosen" specifically to do so by a mysterious world-ruling personality?
Liberation!
G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.democracynow.org/2014/7/21/breaking_in_latest_attack_on_gaza Read full post
Wednesday, July 9, 2014
Dr. Finkelstein confronts "Holocaust" tears and Gaza
Dear friends,
Dr. Finkelstein's comments, on the links below, in a short video, to a silly, poorly-raised girl are more important to me than Wikileaks material, because they destroy the fraudulent position of too many Jews who blame Nazis for atrocities against Jews on the one hand, but ignore the atrocities that Isrealu Jews have committed against Palestinians.
G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNQSV3BBtZ4 Read full post
Wednesday, December 11, 2013
2001 David Frost Interview of Ashwari and Netanyahu (originally posted on 12/27/08)
"...at least to me, African Americans have far more in common with the Palestinians than the Israelis.
Dear friends,
When will the world stand up against the imperialisistic and murderous actions of the Israeli government? During his presidential campaigns, President Barack Obama (both 2008 & 2012), consistently, promised to support the continued exploitation and oppression of Palestinian people, as his predecessors have done ever since World War 2. In fact, considering the role of the United States in escalating Israeli hegemony in the Middle East and elsewhere during the Clinton Adminidstration, Obama's choice of Hillary Clinton as the Secretary of State, at least to me, was nothing less than shameful. Moreover, African Americans have far more in common with the Palestinians than the Israelis. Nevertheless, on the link below, during a short but substantive video interview, Palestinian legislator Hanan Ashrawi, provides critical answers to questions about Israel's actions.
NOTE: Unfortunately, in the past hour or so since I posted Ashrawi's interview, CNN has taken down the interview just mentioned. Instead, the media outlets are portraying Israel to be victims of "terrorism". Therefore, I have replaced the earlier posting with a print interview called"BBC BREAKFAST WITH FROST INTERVIEW: BENJAMIN NETANYAHU (then former, since re-elected) ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER, and HANAN ASHWARI PALESTINIAN LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 16TH, 2001."
G. Djata Bumpus
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/breakfast_with_frost/1547267.stm
Read full post
Dear friends,
When will the world stand up against the imperialisistic and murderous actions of the Israeli government? During his presidential campaigns, President Barack Obama (both 2008 & 2012), consistently, promised to support the continued exploitation and oppression of Palestinian people, as his predecessors have done ever since World War 2. In fact, considering the role of the United States in escalating Israeli hegemony in the Middle East and elsewhere during the Clinton Adminidstration, Obama's choice of Hillary Clinton as the Secretary of State, at least to me, was nothing less than shameful. Moreover, African Americans have far more in common with the Palestinians than the Israelis. Nevertheless, on the link below, during a short but substantive video interview, Palestinian legislator Hanan Ashrawi, provides critical answers to questions about Israel's actions.
NOTE: Unfortunately, in the past hour or so since I posted Ashrawi's interview, CNN has taken down the interview just mentioned. Instead, the media outlets are portraying Israel to be victims of "terrorism". Therefore, I have replaced the earlier posting with a print interview called"BBC BREAKFAST WITH FROST INTERVIEW: BENJAMIN NETANYAHU (then former, since re-elected) ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER, and HANAN ASHWARI PALESTINIAN LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 16TH, 2001."
G. Djata Bumpus
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/breakfast_with_frost/1547267.stm
Monday, May 6, 2013
Short video with Dr. Finkelstein comfronting Crocodile Tears
Dear friends,
"...too many Jews who blame Nazis for atrocities against Jews on the one hand, but ignore the atrocities that Israeli Jews have committed against Palestinians and other Arabs.",
Dr. Finkelstein's comments, on the links below, in a short video, to a silly, boo-hooing girl are more important to me than Wikileaks material, because they destroy the fraudulent position of too many Jews who blame Nazis for atrocities against Jews on the one hand, but ignore the atrocities that Israeli Jews have committed against Palestinians nd other Arabs.
G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNQSV3BBtZ4 Read full post
"...too many Jews who blame Nazis for atrocities against Jews on the one hand, but ignore the atrocities that Israeli Jews have committed against Palestinians and other Arabs.",
Dr. Finkelstein's comments, on the links below, in a short video, to a silly, boo-hooing girl are more important to me than Wikileaks material, because they destroy the fraudulent position of too many Jews who blame Nazis for atrocities against Jews on the one hand, but ignore the atrocities that Israeli Jews have committed against Palestinians nd other Arabs.
G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNQSV3BBtZ4 Read full post
Saturday, December 8, 2012
An Interview/Discussion about Zionism" with Neil Zagorin and Palestine/Israel (originally posted 1/28/09)
The Israeli narrative about the creation of the Palestinian refugee population was that these refugees fled either on their own initiative or upon the urging of their leaders. The Palestinian narrative has been that they were driven out..."
**************************************
Djata: We especially hear the term “Zionism”, coming from Arab Muslims and their supporters, whenever there are bloody conflicts such as the one happening in Gaza right now. How do you define Zionism, Neil?
Neil: Jews lived in many parts of the world since the end of the Roman Empire, and remembrance of the biblical land of Israel has been important in Judaism, in the study of bible and in prayers. Zionism was a 19th century philosophy, originating in Europe, that took this impulse and turned it into a secular, nationalist movement to establish a homeland for the Jewish people.
The great majority of Zionists were not religiously inspired, but rather viewed Jews as an ethnic/national group on the basis of their shared experience as a distinctive minority in many places. Being a minority meant being vulnerable, and in 19th century Europe, Jewish communities were not only vulnerable but often mistreated. Having a homeland like everybody else would solve this – that was the belief of Zionism.
There were different viewpoints within Zionism. For example, some thought that having viable Jewish communities in the biblical land of Israel as places of refuge and as centers of Jewish cultural renewal would be a suitable goal. This was known as Spiritual Zionism. The majority view, in the end, was known as Political Zionism, whose central figure is a late 19th century Austrian journalist named Theodor Herzl. Political Zionism sought to develop a modern Jewish nation-state in the ancestral homeland of Jewish people, the Land of Israel – also known as Palestine.
Djata: Does Zionism, whether spiritual or political, represent an attempt by some Jews to “perfect” the understanding and practical expression of their religion, for themselves?
Neil: Zionism was largely a secular movement. Certainly it sought to reformulate Jewish cultural norms and practices, which were rooted in or influenced by Judaism, into norms and practices that could underpin and cement a modern Jewish nation-state.
Djata: Do you believe that Zionism is a form of “self-estrangement”, inasmuch as it is embraced as Jewish people’s nationality as “Jews” over and above their nationalities as, say, North Americans or Europeans ?
Neil: I don’t think that Jews as a group fit into any neat category. At times it’s made sense to view Jews as a community sharing a religion: Judaism. This is how most Jews in the US view themselves today, for example, and this is how Jews are viewed within the US.
At other times it’s made sense to view Jews as an ethnic or national group. Often this has made sense because of the reactions of others. During the period of the Spanish Inquisition, for example, “Jewishness” was a matter of “blood.” A Jew who converted to Christianity could still be regarded as a Jew. In 19th century Europe, the attitude of Christians towards Jews in many places was similar to this. So, for 19th century Zionists, living in an environment where the separation was already there, embracing Jewish “nationalism” wasn’t a matter of self-estrangement, it was an attempt to make a virtue out of a problem.
Is being Jewish a matter of religion or ethnic/national identity? This has been a puzzling dilemma for Jews in the West for the past couple of centuries. Zionism was one of many attempts at resolving this, and Jews have tried resolving it in both ways.
Djata: Particularly in the mainstream media of our country, we hear about Israel’s “right to defend itself”. Yet, since these bloody conflicts, here-to-mentioned, seem to go on constantly and – at least to me – will not end without statehood for Palestinians, is there an issue of legitimacy that the government of Israel is always trying to prove to itself, its citizens, and others?
Neil: The short answer: yes. The State of Israel was born in conflict and lives in conflict. Israel, or at least its ruling elites and supporters, constantly seeks affirmation of legitimacy. There’s a question of what type of legitimacy Israel seeks: as a potent force not to be messed with, or as a society with which its neighbors can live in peace and respect.
Djata: Neil, do you agree with the Palestinian assertion that they were intentionally expelled by Yishuv and later Israeli forces in terms of a plan drawn up even before the war?
Neil: “Yishuv” is the Hebrew term for the community of Jewish settlements in pre-1948 Palestine. The Israeli narrative about the creation of the Palestinian refugee population was that these refugees fled either on their own initiative or upon the urging of their leaders. The Palestinian narrative has been that they were driven out. Jewish militias drove Palestinians from their homes. That this happened is beyond doubt. It is reflected not only in the stories of Palestinian refugees, but by the work of the Israeli “new historians” of the past generation who have found documentation of this in Israeli governmental sources.
I do not know the degree to which the intentional displacement was pre-planned and organized in a top-down fashion. I have heard conflicting claims about this, but it seems fair to assume that there was some level of forethought and planning.
There were also Palestinians who fled a war zone of their own initiative, and Palestinian leaders who ordered their people to move away from the fighting. It is important to acknowledge this to avoid fruitless quibbling about which side did what. I do not know which of the two factors was the most important, and am happy to leave that to be determined by historians in the fullness of time. The important fact to me is that, on the Zionist side, there was definitely intentional displacement of Arabs in order to establish the new Jewish nation-state.
Djata: What do you think of Dr. Ilan Pappe’s claim that, “If you don't understand colonialism, ethnic cleansing and the war for freedom, you can't understand Palestine”?
Neil: Ilan Pappe is one of the Israeli “new historians”. He takes his conclusions about Israel’s willful suppression of Palestinian national aspirations farther than others, and is for that reason very controversial. I want to acknowledge that before responding to this quote. I'm just somebody who cares about justice and human dignity for all. I can’t judge his basis for selecting these three criteria as the bottom-line basis for “understanding Palestine”. I do think that examining these areas is very revealing.
Colonialism: Zionism was not a monolithic movement. However, it emerged in its modern form in late 19th-century Europe, and reflects some of the same beliefs that motivated and justified colonialism by European powers. The State of Israel controls the land from the Mediterranean to the Jordan River today, and as such is the primary force limiting Palestinian nationhood. I think it is also important to recognize that the Ottoman Empire before World War 1, and the British Empire after it, controlled this land and played a role in how the conflict between Zionist settlers and Arabs developed and unfolded.
Ethnic cleansing: Intentional displacement of Palestinians to create a Jewish nation-state played a part in the birth of the State of Israel. This must be taken into account when discussing relations between Palestinians and Israel.
The war for freedom: This primarily means the Palestinian struggle for national freedom. Previously, it took a politically nationalistic expression. Now, with the ascendancy of Hamas, it is taking an Islamist-nationalist form. I don’t know whether Ilan Pappe intends the following, but the conflict between Israel and Palestinians has taken place in a larger context of Third-World nation-state formation and the struggle for freedom from Western control or dominance. Lastly, Zionism was a bold but desperate attempt to seek freedom for Jews on a national/ethnic basis. It was not an attempt to exploit a colonial possession for the benefit of a colonial power far away, and for most Israeli Jews the survival of their state is a matter of both political and physical life and death. I think that acknowledging this sheds light on an important reason that this conflict is so enduring and bitter, and why it is so difficult to see the way forward to a resolution. But this brings us full circle: when thinking of the struggle for freedom in the context of Palestine/Israel, it is the Palestinians who do not have national freedom. There can not be any reasonable resolution until they do.
Djata: I understand what you are saying. I don't like to use the term "Third world", because, like the term "minority", it suggests that certain people are "naturally" inferior to others. Therefore, I prefer non-European. However, since Jews are not a monolithic group, that means that various Jews have different interests. That having been said, if Zionists simply wanted a place where they can live in peace and be left alone, then why did they expand their originally-allotted territory, along with conducting business with a number of world powers, especially the United States, that allows the Israeli government a presence - and influence - in other lands?
Neil: Guess I date myself by using the term “Third World,” don’t I?
You ask about Zionists wanting a place where Jews could live in peace. Again, Zionism has encompassed a variety of outlooks. Many of them were not so utopian as to imagine that nationhood would bring “peace”. Nationhood would bring “normalcy”, that is, Jews as a people doing all the things that any people do to make their way independently in the world. Build, work (in all levels of the economy, not just those to which the host country allows access), play, make decisions. Peace is sometimes part of the picture, but so is conflict.
Modern Zionism developed in late nineteenth-century Europe, a time and place when many of the stereotypes of Jews being treated as victimized outsiders were in fact true (and I don’t subscribe to the view of Jewish history that says this is the essence of Jewish life in Europe). One of the roots of the Israeli army is in local Jewish self-defense groups that arose in towns and cities in Central and Eastern Europe in response to waves of pogroms. Many rank-and-file Zionists who came to Palestine were accustomed to an atmosphere of violence and expected a hard life. They called themselves “halutzim,” or “pioneers,” and they meant it.
So, let’s turn your question into a statement. The State of Israel seeks to project its power beyond its borders. There are a number of reasons for this.
When Zionism was in its visionary phase, it often imagined a Jewish state on the land from the Mediterranean to the Jordan River (and even beyond). This is not how the borders were drawn by the UN in 1947, and not how the borders were fixed at the end of the 1948-49 war. I want to believe that most Israeli Jews, if given the choice between endless war and a realistic chance for a saner life, would not hold to a vision of a larger Israel. However, there are sectors of the Israeli political system that do hold strongly to it, for nationalistic, religious, military, or other reasons. This is a major explanation for the continuing growth of Jewish settlement in the West Bank, even during this past 15 years of negotiations for a two-state solution.
The State of Israel also acts as a regional force. Some of Israel’s reasons for doing this relate to its perceived national interests. Other times, Israel gets swept up in larger political currents. Many local and international powers vie for influence and control in this area. There have been regional rivalries beyond that of Palestinians and Israel. On a larger scale, the Cold War rivalry seems to have been replaced by a rivalry between Iran and the US-led bloc. War, bloodshed, and other suffering result from these things. Israel is not blameless, but there's a lot of guilt to share in this.
Please stay tuned...
Read full post
**************************************
Djata: We especially hear the term “Zionism”, coming from Arab Muslims and their supporters, whenever there are bloody conflicts such as the one happening in Gaza right now. How do you define Zionism, Neil?
Neil: Jews lived in many parts of the world since the end of the Roman Empire, and remembrance of the biblical land of Israel has been important in Judaism, in the study of bible and in prayers. Zionism was a 19th century philosophy, originating in Europe, that took this impulse and turned it into a secular, nationalist movement to establish a homeland for the Jewish people.
The great majority of Zionists were not religiously inspired, but rather viewed Jews as an ethnic/national group on the basis of their shared experience as a distinctive minority in many places. Being a minority meant being vulnerable, and in 19th century Europe, Jewish communities were not only vulnerable but often mistreated. Having a homeland like everybody else would solve this – that was the belief of Zionism.
There were different viewpoints within Zionism. For example, some thought that having viable Jewish communities in the biblical land of Israel as places of refuge and as centers of Jewish cultural renewal would be a suitable goal. This was known as Spiritual Zionism. The majority view, in the end, was known as Political Zionism, whose central figure is a late 19th century Austrian journalist named Theodor Herzl. Political Zionism sought to develop a modern Jewish nation-state in the ancestral homeland of Jewish people, the Land of Israel – also known as Palestine.
Djata: Does Zionism, whether spiritual or political, represent an attempt by some Jews to “perfect” the understanding and practical expression of their religion, for themselves?
Neil: Zionism was largely a secular movement. Certainly it sought to reformulate Jewish cultural norms and practices, which were rooted in or influenced by Judaism, into norms and practices that could underpin and cement a modern Jewish nation-state.
Djata: Do you believe that Zionism is a form of “self-estrangement”, inasmuch as it is embraced as Jewish people’s nationality as “Jews” over and above their nationalities as, say, North Americans or Europeans ?
Neil: I don’t think that Jews as a group fit into any neat category. At times it’s made sense to view Jews as a community sharing a religion: Judaism. This is how most Jews in the US view themselves today, for example, and this is how Jews are viewed within the US.
At other times it’s made sense to view Jews as an ethnic or national group. Often this has made sense because of the reactions of others. During the period of the Spanish Inquisition, for example, “Jewishness” was a matter of “blood.” A Jew who converted to Christianity could still be regarded as a Jew. In 19th century Europe, the attitude of Christians towards Jews in many places was similar to this. So, for 19th century Zionists, living in an environment where the separation was already there, embracing Jewish “nationalism” wasn’t a matter of self-estrangement, it was an attempt to make a virtue out of a problem.
Is being Jewish a matter of religion or ethnic/national identity? This has been a puzzling dilemma for Jews in the West for the past couple of centuries. Zionism was one of many attempts at resolving this, and Jews have tried resolving it in both ways.
Djata: Particularly in the mainstream media of our country, we hear about Israel’s “right to defend itself”. Yet, since these bloody conflicts, here-to-mentioned, seem to go on constantly and – at least to me – will not end without statehood for Palestinians, is there an issue of legitimacy that the government of Israel is always trying to prove to itself, its citizens, and others?
Neil: The short answer: yes. The State of Israel was born in conflict and lives in conflict. Israel, or at least its ruling elites and supporters, constantly seeks affirmation of legitimacy. There’s a question of what type of legitimacy Israel seeks: as a potent force not to be messed with, or as a society with which its neighbors can live in peace and respect.
Djata: Neil, do you agree with the Palestinian assertion that they were intentionally expelled by Yishuv and later Israeli forces in terms of a plan drawn up even before the war?
Neil: “Yishuv” is the Hebrew term for the community of Jewish settlements in pre-1948 Palestine. The Israeli narrative about the creation of the Palestinian refugee population was that these refugees fled either on their own initiative or upon the urging of their leaders. The Palestinian narrative has been that they were driven out. Jewish militias drove Palestinians from their homes. That this happened is beyond doubt. It is reflected not only in the stories of Palestinian refugees, but by the work of the Israeli “new historians” of the past generation who have found documentation of this in Israeli governmental sources.
I do not know the degree to which the intentional displacement was pre-planned and organized in a top-down fashion. I have heard conflicting claims about this, but it seems fair to assume that there was some level of forethought and planning.
There were also Palestinians who fled a war zone of their own initiative, and Palestinian leaders who ordered their people to move away from the fighting. It is important to acknowledge this to avoid fruitless quibbling about which side did what. I do not know which of the two factors was the most important, and am happy to leave that to be determined by historians in the fullness of time. The important fact to me is that, on the Zionist side, there was definitely intentional displacement of Arabs in order to establish the new Jewish nation-state.
Djata: What do you think of Dr. Ilan Pappe’s claim that, “If you don't understand colonialism, ethnic cleansing and the war for freedom, you can't understand Palestine”?
Neil: Ilan Pappe is one of the Israeli “new historians”. He takes his conclusions about Israel’s willful suppression of Palestinian national aspirations farther than others, and is for that reason very controversial. I want to acknowledge that before responding to this quote. I'm just somebody who cares about justice and human dignity for all. I can’t judge his basis for selecting these three criteria as the bottom-line basis for “understanding Palestine”. I do think that examining these areas is very revealing.
Colonialism: Zionism was not a monolithic movement. However, it emerged in its modern form in late 19th-century Europe, and reflects some of the same beliefs that motivated and justified colonialism by European powers. The State of Israel controls the land from the Mediterranean to the Jordan River today, and as such is the primary force limiting Palestinian nationhood. I think it is also important to recognize that the Ottoman Empire before World War 1, and the British Empire after it, controlled this land and played a role in how the conflict between Zionist settlers and Arabs developed and unfolded.
Ethnic cleansing: Intentional displacement of Palestinians to create a Jewish nation-state played a part in the birth of the State of Israel. This must be taken into account when discussing relations between Palestinians and Israel.
The war for freedom: This primarily means the Palestinian struggle for national freedom. Previously, it took a politically nationalistic expression. Now, with the ascendancy of Hamas, it is taking an Islamist-nationalist form. I don’t know whether Ilan Pappe intends the following, but the conflict between Israel and Palestinians has taken place in a larger context of Third-World nation-state formation and the struggle for freedom from Western control or dominance. Lastly, Zionism was a bold but desperate attempt to seek freedom for Jews on a national/ethnic basis. It was not an attempt to exploit a colonial possession for the benefit of a colonial power far away, and for most Israeli Jews the survival of their state is a matter of both political and physical life and death. I think that acknowledging this sheds light on an important reason that this conflict is so enduring and bitter, and why it is so difficult to see the way forward to a resolution. But this brings us full circle: when thinking of the struggle for freedom in the context of Palestine/Israel, it is the Palestinians who do not have national freedom. There can not be any reasonable resolution until they do.
Djata: I understand what you are saying. I don't like to use the term "Third world", because, like the term "minority", it suggests that certain people are "naturally" inferior to others. Therefore, I prefer non-European. However, since Jews are not a monolithic group, that means that various Jews have different interests. That having been said, if Zionists simply wanted a place where they can live in peace and be left alone, then why did they expand their originally-allotted territory, along with conducting business with a number of world powers, especially the United States, that allows the Israeli government a presence - and influence - in other lands?
Neil: Guess I date myself by using the term “Third World,” don’t I?
You ask about Zionists wanting a place where Jews could live in peace. Again, Zionism has encompassed a variety of outlooks. Many of them were not so utopian as to imagine that nationhood would bring “peace”. Nationhood would bring “normalcy”, that is, Jews as a people doing all the things that any people do to make their way independently in the world. Build, work (in all levels of the economy, not just those to which the host country allows access), play, make decisions. Peace is sometimes part of the picture, but so is conflict.
Modern Zionism developed in late nineteenth-century Europe, a time and place when many of the stereotypes of Jews being treated as victimized outsiders were in fact true (and I don’t subscribe to the view of Jewish history that says this is the essence of Jewish life in Europe). One of the roots of the Israeli army is in local Jewish self-defense groups that arose in towns and cities in Central and Eastern Europe in response to waves of pogroms. Many rank-and-file Zionists who came to Palestine were accustomed to an atmosphere of violence and expected a hard life. They called themselves “halutzim,” or “pioneers,” and they meant it.
So, let’s turn your question into a statement. The State of Israel seeks to project its power beyond its borders. There are a number of reasons for this.
When Zionism was in its visionary phase, it often imagined a Jewish state on the land from the Mediterranean to the Jordan River (and even beyond). This is not how the borders were drawn by the UN in 1947, and not how the borders were fixed at the end of the 1948-49 war. I want to believe that most Israeli Jews, if given the choice between endless war and a realistic chance for a saner life, would not hold to a vision of a larger Israel. However, there are sectors of the Israeli political system that do hold strongly to it, for nationalistic, religious, military, or other reasons. This is a major explanation for the continuing growth of Jewish settlement in the West Bank, even during this past 15 years of negotiations for a two-state solution.
The State of Israel also acts as a regional force. Some of Israel’s reasons for doing this relate to its perceived national interests. Other times, Israel gets swept up in larger political currents. Many local and international powers vie for influence and control in this area. There have been regional rivalries beyond that of Palestinians and Israel. On a larger scale, the Cold War rivalry seems to have been replaced by a rivalry between Iran and the US-led bloc. War, bloodshed, and other suffering result from these things. Israel is not blameless, but there's a lot of guilt to share in this.
Please stay tuned...
Monday, November 19, 2012
HAMAS - Liberators or Terrorists? (originally posted 5/4/09)
"Hamas (حماس Ḥamās, an acronym of حركة المقاومة الاسلامية Ḥarakat al-Muqāwamat al-Islāmiyyah, meaning "Islamic Resistance Movement") is an Islamic Palestinian socio-political organization which includes a paramilitary force..."
Dear friends,
Particularly mainstream media in the US lump both HAMAS and Al Qaeda together in the same category as “terrorists”. The idea is: terrorism is a great act of “evil”.
However, if we use history as a guide, terrorist actions are often not just carried out by mean-spirited people for the sake of “evil”, as it were. Rather, they are used mostly, in fact, as part of a larger plan that lesser military powers carry out against their more potent and larger foes for the former’s intent to gain autonomy. A case in point that occurred right here in the United States happened during the 19th Century, when Confederate forces openly robbed and burned stores of armaments from both warehouses and ships belonging to the Union, until President Lincoln was finally forced to declare war. And descendants of many of the Confederates and their ilk, by the way, continue to proliferate in this country, at all levels of power.
Nevertheless, the role of HAMAS is not simply terrorism. After all, their main duties appear to be administrative ones where they are responsible for providing social services to the citizens of Gaza, from food and health care to education. This aspect of their work is rarely, if ever, mentioned by the mainstream media of the West.
At any rate, in the informative discussion/interview, below, with noted Jewish scholar Neil Zagorin, he and I shared ideas about the role of HAMAS in the Israel/Occupied Palestine mess.
Cheers!
G. Djata Bumpus
*******************************
Djata: Hey Neil, talking about HAMAS in the US in anything other than a negative light seems to bring uneasiness among a certain part of the population.
Neil: HAMAS is treated like such a bogeyman that it's hard to say anything positive about it without making it seem naive and easily dismissible.
Djata: Neil, personally, I see HAMAS as a grass roots, freedom-fighting group. How do you see them?
Neil: Virtually every organized Palestinian group in the past century has striven for Palestinian freedom in one way or another, as far as I can tell. If you’re asking whether I see HAMAS as primarily motivated or inspired by the struggle for freedom, I’d say that’s a main factor.
Djata: In the context of their religious/political direction, do you consider HAMAS part of the body of Islamic fundamentalists who seem to be controlling an increasingly larger portion of the Middle East?
Neil: They are an Islamist group that seeks a Muslim renewal of some sort. Of course, the perceived need for that should be seen in the context of the dispossession and lack of freedom Palestinians have endured in the past century. It’s been fashionable, at least in the US, to view Islamism negatively, but I don’t think we should resort to stereotypes. If Al Qaeda is towards the far end of an Islamist spectrum, the ruling party of Turkey, with whom the West seems able to live respectfully, is at a different part of that spectrum. I would be cautious about concluding that HAMAS is like Al Qaeda.
Djata: But if HAMAS is simply another “terrorist” group, then why do they have so much support from everyday Palestinians?
Neil: Hamas would not be where it is without tremendous grass-roots support among Palestinians. As I understand it, HAMAS has earned a reputation for being more honest and competent in discharging administrative duties than the Palestinian Authority. They have earned respect for being confrontational with Israel in a context where 15 years of negotiations have not produced a 2-state solution, but have produced significant Israeli settlement in the West Bank that threatens to make a 2-state solution impossible.
HAMAS will use brute force to achieve political goals within Palestinian society, but brute force is a common tool in that region. The reasons for that are many and complex, and HAMAS is not the roughest group in that part of the world. In the end, for a combination of reasons, HAMAS commands grass-roots support, even among Palestinians who are not Islamist, or even Muslim.
Djata: Do you agree with the US government not wanting to include HAMAS in the dialogue?
Neil: The governments of both the US and Israel have dealt with and do deal with HAMAS. They both tolerated, if not enabled, HAMAS to get started a generation ago, seeing it as something that could counterweight the Palestinian secular radicalism of the PLO and similar groups. Now that HAMAS is a genuine national force, they still deal with them. There’s been quiet cooperation, at times, between Israeli government officials and Palestinian officials who are Hamas members on administrative matters pertaining to daily life. Israel negotiated one truce arrangement with HAMAS last summer, that is, in 2008, that was relatively successful in keeping armed conflict damped down for the duration of its limited scope, even if it was unsuccessful in other ways, particularly in having border crossings into Gaza opened as HAMAS wanted.
Israel and the US deal also with HAMAS by publicly rejecting a direct relationship, and treating it confrontationally. That is also a way for one political actor to deal with another political actor.
Djata: Yes, I understand your point; however, the Obama administration seems to be following the same path as the Bushies did, by not acknowledging HAMAS as a crucial group in the process regarding dialogue that will lead to solving some of the problems that both Israel and Palestine face.
Neil: If you’re asking me whether I think it would be better for the US government to deal openly and directly with the HAMAS-led government in Gaza, I think that it would. The objection at this point is usually that HAMAS is a terrorist organization, or is a bunch of Muslim fanatics, or is rejecting of Israel’s right to exist.
Djata: One of the points that are made against HAMAS is their use of Palestinian civilians as “targets:, during their confrontations with Israel. Is that your position?
Neil: Yes, HAMAS has been willing to harm civilians, and to create fear among civilians, as tools to achieve political aims, which is a definition I would use for terrorism. Yes, HAMAS is an Islamist political entity that has striven for Muslim rule over all of historic Palestine, though some segments of Hamas say they would be willing to settle for a 2-state solution. Substitute “Israel” for “HAMAS” and “Zionist” for “Islamist” and “Muslim” in the preceding sentences, and see how they read.
Yes, HAMAS says it can’t recognize Israel. This is for theological reasons, as I understand it: all lands that were historically under Muslim control should remain under Muslim control. Some people in HAMAS speak of long-term truce that could be extended indefinitely as a method of co-existence with Israel. They may be sincere, or not. In honesty, this is an alien type of political view to me, a Westerner. Look at the Israeli body politic; at this point, though, there’s reason to doubt that it has the intention and will to negotiate a settlement with Palestinians in which Palestinians actually achieve some real independence.
The point of this is that if the US wants to only deal with groups that are politically high-minded and dedicated to non-violence, it may as well pack up and go home. If the US wants to be involved to foster a resolution that will bring some kind of justice and normal life to the region, it should deal with major players. Hamas has a real presence in Palestinian society, it represents a genuine spectrum of Palestinian opinion, it may well be a reality-based player that would adapt to being included in the mainstream by behaving as a mainstream player. Will it become “moderate” in its view of Israel? Doubtful, but let’s be honest, there’s little real moderation in that part of the world. In any case, it would take a long time after some kind of resolution of the conflict is put in place and works out well for most Palestinians to feel okay about the situation.
Djata: President Obama appears to be maintaining a hands-off position with HAMAS. If his administration maintains that stance, how will this help HAMAS become engaged in the dialogue?
Neil: The US has taken a stance of rejectionism vis-a-vis HAMAS for years, while the situation has gone from bad to worse. Congressmen and Senators have visited Gaza recently. It's hard for me to resist the conclusion that this is a form of dealing with HAMAS directly, if not openly. If so, maybe it portends something beneficial. Read full post
Saturday, November 17, 2012
Noam Chomsky on the USA and Israel - partners in crime
"It's something that you'll never see on PBS or even Democracy Bow."
Dear friends,
I was personally introduced to the great scholar Noam Chomsky back in the early Eighties, at Temple University. We shared a mutual friend who insisted upon us meeting. Nevertheless, I found Noam to be a very straightforward guy. Yet, he has an extremely mellow personality.
Nevertheless, the disgraceful move by the Democrats last week, during their convention, to name the occupied territory of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel has inspired me to revisit the link below. It is a 36 minutes-long video of Dr. Chomsky at a college lecture/panel that happened not long ago. He really gives a great synopsis of the relationship between the USA and Israel. It's something that you'll never see on either PBS or even Democracy Now.
Cheers!
G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30X2tYUGK_8 Read full post
Wednesday, October 24, 2012
Ahmadinejad is NOT "all lies", as Romney and Obama woukl have us think
Dera friends,
The constant reference to Iran, by American politicians and Zionists alike, about the Islamic Republic's intentions to start a nuclear arms and/or war race ignores the role of the US and Israel in the old game of "the pot calling the kettle black". Please check out the link below.
One Love!
G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/169514.html Read full post
Monday, September 26, 2011
Bumpus interviews/discusses the present "mess" in Gaza - with a Jewish educator, activist, and scholar (originally posted 1/3/09)
I am coming to believe that there is a type of zero-sum game of discussion about Palestine and Israel that needs rethinking. Do you know what I mean by this? A half-century or more of Israelis bad/Palestinians good, or Arabs bad/Israelis good rhetoric leaves people nothing to do but react predictably to the latest crisis...Dear friends,
The current blood-letting that is going on in the Gaza Strip, particularly, should, at least to me, raise questions in all of us, regarding our genuine belief in human freedom, dignity, and justice.
I am honored to begin a series of discussions about the constant mess that represents the life experiences of our brothers and sisters, of all groups, in the Middle East. Neil Zagorin, a brilliant thinker, who has appeared on this blog in the past, brings a wealth of scholarship and goodwill to the dialogue that appears below.
One Love, One Heart, One Spirit!
G. Djata Bumpus
*******************************************
Djata: Neil, in our attempt to bring more clarity to the current view of what is going on in the Middle East generally, how do you think we should approach it? In other words, is it the “terms” of the discussion or the “facts” of same that we need to consider?
Neil: I want to put it out there that our written exchange stems from a meal we shared recently, when there happened to be disturbing news about Israel’s military operation in Gaza. We’re both citizens of the U.S. You’re an African American with family roots in Barbados. I’m an Ashkenazic Jew with family roots in the Czarist Empire. It was the kind of situation in which probing discussion of the Palestinian-Israeli impasse often goes nowhere, yet we shared outrage, dismay, and sadness in many of the same ways. More importantly, we explored areas where we might differ without personal venom, and most importantly, did so while resisting the temptation to resort to dehumanizing narratives about either side, Palestinian or Israeli. I think this is too rare: do you agree?
So, I am coming to believe that there is a type of zero-sum game of discussion about Palestine and Israel that needs rethinking. Do you know what I mean by this? A half-century or more of Israelis bad/Palestinians good, or Arabs bad/Israelis good rhetoric leaves people nothing to do but react predictably to the latest crisis: anti-Israel as usual, anti-Arab/Palestinian as usual, or anti-both as usual. It’s a horrendously complicated situation. Israel is much stronger than the Palestinians, but they’re both small and diverse groups of angry, scared, confused people in a world where small nations – and they’re both small nations – can sway in the wind created by bigger powers.
Djata: Okay. But is calling Israel a small nation in the same context as one does Palestine a false abstraction? Israel does have nuclear weapons, after all. More significantly I must ask, at what point does the government of Israel pull a Nagasaki and Hiroshima, as the US did in becoming a world power?
Neil: Israel is a military giant compared to Palestine, but not compared to the entire Arab world. Don’t forget that Israel has also relied heavily on U.S. support for decades to maintain its tenuous position in the world. So I’ll maintain that Israel is a small country.
I observe that it’s common for critics of Israel to view Israel as some huge monolith that always sets the agenda. For all of Israel’s resolution in pursuing its aims, I challenge you to acknowledge the many ways that efforts by Jews to build a Jewish state have been influenced and conditioned heavily by outside factors. That is,the Ottoman Empireʼs colonial policy allowed Palestinian land to be legally acquired for Jewish settlement in the late nineteenth, early twentieth centuries.
The British and French Empires controlled the Middle East after World War 1, and redrew the map, physically and politically, in ways that endure today. The British Empire made differing promises about Palestine to Jews and Arabs, and, in dissolution after World War 2, dropped the conflict into the lap of the fledgling United Nations. The Nazi campaign to kill Jews, and the world’s reaction to it, had a huge impact on the movement to create a Jewish state. The West and Soviet Bloc both conducted Cold War conflict by proxy in the Middle East.
It’s still an area in which governments and non-governmental actors from abroad support one side or another for financial or political gain. There are governments or movements that support one side or another as minor players in some larger conflict. There are governmental and non-governmental organizations in other places that profit from munitions expended in Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I’m willing to bet that there are smaller and larger military organizations in many places that have some involvement in what’s going on in Gaza to draw lessons for their own use about waging asymmetric warfare. There are governments or movements beside Hamas that anticipate political gain if Hamas continues to lob rockets randomly at Israel to precipitate continued military conflict in which Gazans will suffer the most. Do you think I’m badly wrong in these observations?
As for nukes, they say that Israel has them. If so, I pray they never use them, but I’m a lot more worried about the possibility of nuclear exchange between Pakistan and India.
Djata: I think that what you’re doing here is keeping with the facts, but not with the terms. And that’s fine. Yet, based upon our initial premise, how do we keep the dialogue in "terms" as opposed to "facts", in light of the obvious domination by the Israelis over Palestinians? Additionally, since the violence (rocket launches) of Hamas is mostly symbolic, as are the rocks thrown at both real and imagined planes in the sky, by small Palestinian boys, when does the reality of "moral superiority" defeat the Israelis, regardless of the benefits of this conflict to bigger powers?
Neil: Djata, when thinking of the difference between “terms” and “facts,” I’m thinking of the zero-sum game of judgment that we’re seeing even now. There’s a nightmare occurring in Gaza. Lots of people are quick to point to one side or the other as the villain, forgoing a deeper discussion that this tangled tragedy deserves. By contrast, I think thereʼs responsibility in many places, both in Israel/Palestine and outside. .
In physical confrontation between Palestinians and Israelis, hatred and murderous intent exist on both sides, though I have to reject the stereotyping of either group. In my understanding, Israelis have shed much more Palestinian blood than Palestinians have shed Israeli blood. Am I wrong in thinking this? In trying to find a way forward, this will make reconciliation, if this will ever happen, a complicated as well as painful process. Somewhere along the way, Israel should expect to be judged for the number of casualties it has caused.
I do not agree that Hamas' targeting of Israeli civilians can be entirely categorized as "symbolic". Why launch rockets at Ashkelon when the thousands of Israeli soldiers massed at the borders of Gaza are available as a foe against whom one can symbolically resist with dignity and honor? Yes, part of what's going on is an oppressed people demonstrating its uncompromising resistance to subjugation in the modest ways possible to it. Another part of it is that the spilling of Jewish (not just Israeli) blood as an end in itself beyond national self-determination is one of the goals for many of the militants in Hamas, and analagous groups. Some of these people are real religious zealots, and do not operate within the moral or political framework of the national liberation movements that struggled in many parts of the world for justice and liberation when we were younger.
Justice needs to be achieved in the Middle East. I ain't King Solomon, and I don't know to achieve it, though the two-state solution, with the world insisting, watching, and supporting so that it works in some real way, seems like the way to go. More funerals of Palestinian children will not bring justice. I do not want to believe that most Palestinians, and Arabs and Muslims in a wider sense, as angry as they might be with Israel, would really view more funerals of Jewish children as a triumph. Some of the militants who launch rockets at Israeli cities, when they already have the world's full attention, would. They should be judged accordingly.
None of this is to claim that there is equivalence between the suffering of Gazans and whatever atmosphere of fear Hamas is able to achieve in Israel. I don't think that Israel is morally superior; many of its views, goals, and methods are morally troubling, in my opinion.
Do you think that all of Hamas' views, goals, and methods are really morally superior to those of Israel? Something I'd like us to look at together over the coming months is how Palestinians look at Hamas; I'm getting the sense that it's increasingly not with tremendous pride and pleasure.
Djata: I think that we can discuss solutions in a future discourse. Your points are certainly well-taken. To be sure, we hear a lot about the involvement of the United States with Israel. Some have even called Israel our 51st state. Yet, are there any other countries or bodies who share culpability in the mess that has been proliferating for much of the 20th Century -and beyond, in Palestine/Israel?
Neil: You’re right, we hear a lot about the involvement of the U.S. with Israel, here in the U.S. It follows predictable patterns: either you hear about an admirable bond of solidarity between two good nations, or you hear about a partnership in which the U.S. supports, or is manipulated to support, Israel’s unjust domination of Palestinians.
For our purposes, I’d like to respond to the latter view. In my opinion, Israel should be held accountable for its actions, and this includes an accounting for the current nightmare in Gaza. With that said, I am hesitant to assume that Israel has been and continues to be in confident control of its own destiny.
To those who feel that Israel should bear responsibility for what’s happening in Gaza, I say “you’re right.” I’d say the same thing to those who feel that Hamas should bear responsibility. I want to add to this that responsibility should be borne by those, neither Israeli nor Palestinian, who pursue their own interests in the Middle East without regard to the interests of millions of frightened, despairing people who live between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River.
Djata: Yes, but let us not forget that during the apartheid era in South Africa, the US circumvented restrictions imposed by the UN embargo against South Africa, by funneling both financial and technical assets to apartheid South Africa through Israel – a country that ignored the aforementioned UN sanctions. At any rate, in speaking out for justice for Palestinians, when is it right to acknowledge the failures of their leaders? Likewise, in acknowledging Israel's vulnerabilities, as Western media outlets so commonly do, at some point, is it either proper or improper to recognize Israel’s use of military and political force, as well, such as bombing the homes of Hamas leaders? Israeli leaders are never targeted it seems, after all.
Neil: Defenders of Palestine or Israel acknowledge the moral and political failings of the side they support incidentally, if at all. That’s my observation. More honesty is necessary to bring greater understanding and less dehumanization of both Israelis and Palestinians. That’s my conclusion.
Concerning South Africa and Palestine, Nelson Mandela has made the point of acknowledging the steadfast support of Palestinians during the anti-apartheid struggle. I admire and honor Palestinians for this.
Concerning South Africa and Israel, it’s an anti-Israel orthodoxy to underscore Israel’s role in working with the apartheid regime. Yes, Israel did this, and should answer for it, but we both know that there were many governments world-wide during the apartheid years that paid lip-service to justice while quietly doing business with Pretoria. The Israel-South Africa connection has been of undoubted value to those seeking to present the Palestinian cause to the world, but does continuing to stress it as has been commonly done come into conflict with the spirit of South Africa’s truth and reconciliation process, which seeks honesty and openness about what actually transpired during the apartheid era?
Djata: While apartheid is gone in “code”, unfortunately, a new social uprising has begun there against injustice and impropriety. Nevertheless, it has been a pleasure Neil, as always. Until next time, my final thought is: Militarily-speaking, why do you think that the Bush administration finds it reasonable for the Israeli government to attack the Palestinians in Gaza, when our own government sought no such reprisal, of any kind, against Saudi Arabia, when 19 of their citizens killed thousands of Americans in one day - on 9/11?
Neil: Oil is precious and blood is cheap. I think it’s the responsibility of citizens here in the U.S. to prevent our government from acting as if this is true.
Look, man, this has been great. We’ve been wrangling with some thorny, complicated issues, trying to be moral in our judgments and analysis, without oversimplifying, and without resorting to any of the racist discourses about Arabs and Jews that often poison discussions about the Middle East. To me, that’s heartening.
Djata: Cool, Bro’. Peace.
Read full post
Another brief interview/discussion with Neil Zagorin about recent developments in Palestine/Israel
"Neil: The Israeli body politic is complicated. Leaving aside what the approximately 25% of Israeli citizens who aren’t Jewish think about Palestinian independence, there is a spread of opinion among Israeli Jews about Palestinian independence."
Djata: Neil, recently, I saw a news clip that featured the mayor of Hebron boasting about how he and his constituents are looking forward to expanding Jewish settlements, especially due to the return of Benjamin Netanyahu as the Prime Minister of Israel. Is this an anti-peace position that that mayor is taking?
Neil: A two-state solution in which Palestine becomes independent in the West Bank and Gaza, and Israel withdraws to its 1949-1967 borders has been discussed and negotiated for the past 15 years or so. It’s not the same thing as peace, but it’s a political resolution that might make peace possible someday – or that’s the hope. The two-state solution assumes that Jewish communities built in the West Bank since the Six-Day War of 1967 will be dismantled to make an independent Palestine possible. Expanding Jewish settlement in the West Bank complicates the process of removing Jewish communities from the West Bank. This in turn complicates the prospect of some type of two-state solution.
Djata: Does it seem that, at least, some political Zionists do not recognize the right of Palestinians to exist as a free and autonomous people within the present geographical domain of Palestine/Israel?
Neil: The Israeli body politic is complicated. Leaving aside what the approximately 25% of Israeli citizens who aren’t Jewish think about Palestinian independence, there is a spread of opinion among Israeli Jews about Palestinian independence. There’s a small group of Israeli Jews who believe that Palestinian independence is the right thing to support no matter the risks involved. There’s a much larger group, possibly a majority, who would support Palestinian independence if they felt it brought them security and peace. At this point many of these Israeli Jews are despairing that Palestinian independence would bring Israel security and peace. There are some other Israeli Jews who favor or would support Palestinian independence, but view this as a settlement to be unilaterally imposed by Israel. Avigdor Lieberman, the new Foreign Minister, exemplifies this. His platform calls for Israel to annex the large Jewish settlement blocs in the West Bank, while insisting that a number of Arab-majority areas of Israel adjacent to the West Bank leave Israel to become part of some type of Palestinian state.
Then there are groups of Israeli Jews who have a vision of Israel as a Jewish nation-state stretching from the Mediterranean to the Jordan River. Such visions may be based on political nationalism (many early Zionists held this view,) a fundamentalist reading of the bible (God gave all the Land of Israel to the Jews,) or some combination of the two. So, yes, there are Israeli Jews who oppose any kind of Palestinian political independence between the Mediterranean and the Jordan. Political parties informed by these beliefs predominate in the new Israeli government. Their current electoral strength stems partly from the fact that many Israeli Jews who formerly were willing to negotiate for Palestinians independence and Israeli security now despair of that option, and support political parties that take a hard-line stance on maintaining Israeli control of the West Bank.
Read full post
Tuesday, September 20, 2011
Is Israel a "Democracy"? (originally posted 8/19/11)
"...democracy only has any integrity, much less validity, if we view the term democracy in relation to the characteristics of any specific institution."
Dear friends,
The notion that the right to vote is "democracy" is foolish, if not deceitful. After all, there are many dictatorships around the world today, and have been in the past, where citizens of a particular regime have the right to vote. As well, especially on the federal level, even in this country, we have seen how vote counts can be manipulated. As a matter of fact, the whole notion of the term "democracy" being an institution, as is the case for, say, capitalism or the Super Bowl, is false.
After all, an institution represents certain activities that are governed by special rules. Moreover,, some institutions require a building - like banks or museums, while others don't. I mean, how many times have you heard a Black preacher say, "This building is not the church." In fact, the Black church started on enslavers' ship and later in cotton and tobacco fields, not when Richard Allen of Philadelphia and some other great men and women started the Free African Society in Philly back in the last quarter of the 18th Century.
Moreover, democracy only has any integrity, much less validity, if we view the term democracy in relation to the characteristics of any specific institution. So, an institution can have either democratic or non-democratic characteristics.
Nevertheless, the hilarious claim of Israel being a democracy is outrageous. The constant murder and bullying by this regime, along with their total disregard for humanity, especially as it relates to not only Palestinians, but anyone who questions their horrific actions, includes attacking anyone who questions Israeli actions with the moral terrorism of being "anti-Semitic". And there are even people out here stupid enough to suggest that there are two sides to this story. That's like saying that there were two sides to the story, when Black captive workers, so-called slaves, like Nat Turner, Harriet Tubman, and so many others revolted.
On the link below is a 12 minutes-long video by an exceptional journalist, Jonathan Cook, who has done quite a bit of investigating into the whole enterprise that is euphemistically called Israel. Cheers!
G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiKX-CGpDos Read full post
Dear friends,
The notion that the right to vote is "democracy" is foolish, if not deceitful. After all, there are many dictatorships around the world today, and have been in the past, where citizens of a particular regime have the right to vote. As well, especially on the federal level, even in this country, we have seen how vote counts can be manipulated. As a matter of fact, the whole notion of the term "democracy" being an institution, as is the case for, say, capitalism or the Super Bowl, is false.
After all, an institution represents certain activities that are governed by special rules. Moreover,, some institutions require a building - like banks or museums, while others don't. I mean, how many times have you heard a Black preacher say, "This building is not the church." In fact, the Black church started on enslavers' ship and later in cotton and tobacco fields, not when Richard Allen of Philadelphia and some other great men and women started the Free African Society in Philly back in the last quarter of the 18th Century.
Moreover, democracy only has any integrity, much less validity, if we view the term democracy in relation to the characteristics of any specific institution. So, an institution can have either democratic or non-democratic characteristics.
Nevertheless, the hilarious claim of Israel being a democracy is outrageous. The constant murder and bullying by this regime, along with their total disregard for humanity, especially as it relates to not only Palestinians, but anyone who questions their horrific actions, includes attacking anyone who questions Israeli actions with the moral terrorism of being "anti-Semitic". And there are even people out here stupid enough to suggest that there are two sides to this story. That's like saying that there were two sides to the story, when Black captive workers, so-called slaves, like Nat Turner, Harriet Tubman, and so many others revolted.
On the link below is a 12 minutes-long video by an exceptional journalist, Jonathan Cook, who has done quite a bit of investigating into the whole enterprise that is euphemistically called Israel. Cheers!
G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiKX-CGpDos Read full post
Friday, August 19, 2011
What is the Difference between the Israelis and the Nazis? (originally posted 5/14/11)
"...what makes the murder and terrorizing of millions of Palestinians everyday less evil than the practice of the Nazis?"
Dear friends,
For all of the crocodile tears of political Zionists about "The Holocaust", what makes the murder and terrorizing of millions of Palestinians everyday less evil than the practice of the Nazis?
On the link below is a 3 minutes-long video that shows the brave soldiers of Israel repelling a young Palestinian woman. The first 54 seconds are not in English, but the photos show what's happening.
G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQyIKyd2gqA&NR=1&feature=fvwp
Read full post
Dear friends,
For all of the crocodile tears of political Zionists about "The Holocaust", what makes the murder and terrorizing of millions of Palestinians everyday less evil than the practice of the Nazis?
On the link below is a 3 minutes-long video that shows the brave soldiers of Israel repelling a young Palestinian woman. The first 54 seconds are not in English, but the photos show what's happening.
G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQyIKyd2gqA&NR=1&feature=fvwp
Read full post
Saturday, May 14, 2011
Israel's blockade of Gaza is cracking
what you'll never hear from a North American journalist - i.e., the truth about the situation in the Middle East, especially Palestine..
Dear friends,
The inhuman atrocities created against millions of human beings for no other cause than power and greed are about to take a different course, in spite of the miscreant US Congress and others. On the link below, is a powerful and scholarly piece, written by a noted female Palestinian activist, that tells us what you'll never hear from a North American journalist - i.e., the truth about the situation in the Middle East, especially Palestine..
G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2011/05/201159153020317825.html
Read full post
Dear friends,
The inhuman atrocities created against millions of human beings for no other cause than power and greed are about to take a different course, in spite of the miscreant US Congress and others. On the link below, is a powerful and scholarly piece, written by a noted female Palestinian activist, that tells us what you'll never hear from a North American journalist - i.e., the truth about the situation in the Middle East, especially Palestine..
G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2011/05/201159153020317825.html
Read full post
Monday, November 15, 2010
Israel disrespects the Obama administration again
“Israel sees no connection at all between the peace process and building plans in Jerusalem.” statement from Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s office
Dear friends,
With President Obama just finishing up his trip around Asia, it’s important to take notice of the state of Israel’s most recent assault on the Palestinian people,, suspiciously timed to coincide with Obama’s spree, as it (Israel) has announced that it will further ignore calls for peace in the region, by building even more settlements.
This all comes just six months after Obama’s then White House chief-of-staff, Rahm Emanuel, traveled to Israel, a land that his father helped to form, in order to witness the massacre of 9 international peacekeepers who were trying to bring food and medicine to Palestinian families. Perhaps, Emanuel’s presence was meant to insure that there would be “minimal collateral damage”. Who knows?
In any case, at least to me, better than either “peace" itself or "talks" to bring it into being, nations like Israel, the US, Iran, and Syria should begin setting up programs for Palestinians, so that these worthy people can develop their own means of sustenance through the latter learning to implement procedures such as forest gardening, so Palestinians can create eco-systems to replace the desolate areas that they are left in due to Jewish settlers; additionally, they need to learn about renewable energy too, for instance.
This will, invariably, lead to the people of Palestine developing their own industries. After all, as the great economics theorist Professor Lloyd Hogan taught us in his landmark book called “The Principles of Black Political Economy”, food, the elixir of life, as it were, is also “wealth in the abstract”. Moreover, whoever controls the food supply of any group of people controls the destiny of that body as well.
On the link below, is a recent New York Times article about Israel’s latest bullying measure against the Palestinian people and all other decent folks in the world.
Cheers!
G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/14/world/middleeast/14mideast.html?_r=1&ref=middleeast
Read full post
Dear friends,
With President Obama just finishing up his trip around Asia, it’s important to take notice of the state of Israel’s most recent assault on the Palestinian people,, suspiciously timed to coincide with Obama’s spree, as it (Israel) has announced that it will further ignore calls for peace in the region, by building even more settlements.
This all comes just six months after Obama’s then White House chief-of-staff, Rahm Emanuel, traveled to Israel, a land that his father helped to form, in order to witness the massacre of 9 international peacekeepers who were trying to bring food and medicine to Palestinian families. Perhaps, Emanuel’s presence was meant to insure that there would be “minimal collateral damage”. Who knows?
In any case, at least to me, better than either “peace" itself or "talks" to bring it into being, nations like Israel, the US, Iran, and Syria should begin setting up programs for Palestinians, so that these worthy people can develop their own means of sustenance through the latter learning to implement procedures such as forest gardening, so Palestinians can create eco-systems to replace the desolate areas that they are left in due to Jewish settlers; additionally, they need to learn about renewable energy too, for instance.
This will, invariably, lead to the people of Palestine developing their own industries. After all, as the great economics theorist Professor Lloyd Hogan taught us in his landmark book called “The Principles of Black Political Economy”, food, the elixir of life, as it were, is also “wealth in the abstract”. Moreover, whoever controls the food supply of any group of people controls the destiny of that body as well.
On the link below, is a recent New York Times article about Israel’s latest bullying measure against the Palestinian people and all other decent folks in the world.
Cheers!
G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/14/world/middleeast/14mideast.html?_r=1&ref=middleeast
Read full post
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Where was Rahm Emanuel as Israel attacked and murdered innocent people
"...why has the Netanyahu administration waited to commit its two most recent unconscionable acts in the full presence of a high level US official?
Dear friends,
The online newspaper article read, “Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu has expressed regret after at least nine people died when troops stormed ships trying to break the Gaza blockade. But he said soldiers had been defending themselves after they were ‘clubbed, beaten and stabbed’ ." Huh?
Get this. Israeli troops were sliding down ropes from a helicopter onto a ship full of civilians who were carrying humanitarian aid supplies to the Gaza Strip, then these same rope-descending marauders began shooting firearms, and BiBi (Netanyahu) wonders why people resisted their massacre with only sticks and clubs. Go figure.
Meanwhile, Gerald Seib of the WSJ just wrote, “Two weeks ago, the president met with 37 Jewish Democrats in Congress and told them that he had spent more time one-on-one with Mr. Netanyahu than any other world leader, and that ties were solid. Geib follows by mentioning that “Israel apologized for embarrassing Vice President Joe Biden by announcing more East Jerusalem construction just as Mr. Biden was visiting.”
Excuse me, Mr. Geib. Where's Rahm Emanuel, Obama’ Chief of Staff who is the son of one of Israel's pioneers/invaders of Palestine? Wasn’t he in Israel, as the slaughter occurred? It was announced only a few days ago that he was. I wondered why he was there, when I first heard about it. Now this. By the way, is Mr. Emanuel looking for an apology too, as Biden was? If not, then why not? As a matter of fact, why hasn’t anyone from either the mainstream or “progressive” media been raising that point?
Additionally, where is the useless Black Caucus of the US Congress on this one? Are they in cahoots with the 37 Congress people with whom Obama bedded with recently, as mentioned above?
Moreover, why has the Netanyahu administration waited to commit its two most recent unconscionable acts in the full presence of a high level US official? Is there something wrong with this picture?
G. Djata Bumpus
Read full post
Dear friends,
The online newspaper article read, “Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu has expressed regret after at least nine people died when troops stormed ships trying to break the Gaza blockade. But he said soldiers had been defending themselves after they were ‘clubbed, beaten and stabbed’ ." Huh?
Get this. Israeli troops were sliding down ropes from a helicopter onto a ship full of civilians who were carrying humanitarian aid supplies to the Gaza Strip, then these same rope-descending marauders began shooting firearms, and BiBi (Netanyahu) wonders why people resisted their massacre with only sticks and clubs. Go figure.
Meanwhile, Gerald Seib of the WSJ just wrote, “Two weeks ago, the president met with 37 Jewish Democrats in Congress and told them that he had spent more time one-on-one with Mr. Netanyahu than any other world leader, and that ties were solid. Geib follows by mentioning that “Israel apologized for embarrassing Vice President Joe Biden by announcing more East Jerusalem construction just as Mr. Biden was visiting.”
Excuse me, Mr. Geib. Where's Rahm Emanuel, Obama’ Chief of Staff who is the son of one of Israel's pioneers/invaders of Palestine? Wasn’t he in Israel, as the slaughter occurred? It was announced only a few days ago that he was. I wondered why he was there, when I first heard about it. Now this. By the way, is Mr. Emanuel looking for an apology too, as Biden was? If not, then why not? As a matter of fact, why hasn’t anyone from either the mainstream or “progressive” media been raising that point?
Additionally, where is the useless Black Caucus of the US Congress on this one? Are they in cahoots with the 37 Congress people with whom Obama bedded with recently, as mentioned above?
Moreover, why has the Netanyahu administration waited to commit its two most recent unconscionable acts in the full presence of a high level US official? Is there something wrong with this picture?
G. Djata Bumpus
Read full post
Monday, March 15, 2010
Israel's latest insult to the world,and a story about 800 "settlers"
"The claim that Israel is the 'closest ally' of the US in the Middle East reminds me of the African proverb that goes: It's better to have an intelligent enemy than a dumb friend."
Dear friends,
With the recent announcement (March 10, 2010) by Israel to build an additional 1600 units for "settlers" in mostly Arab east Jerusalem, it should be obvious, even to those with the most infinitesimally small brains, that Israel, with its nuclear warheads, is nothing but a colonial power that is sponsored by the US government through the despicable likes of Senators Charles Schumer and Joe Lieberman and their ilk. Moreover, the claim that Israel is the "closest ally" of the US in the Middle East reminds me of the African proverb that goes: It's better to have an intelligent enemy than a dumb friend.
At any rate, as bloody and inhuman as the situation in Gaza is, there is a much wider story, regarding the plight of Palestinian people. On the link below is a piece that was written in 2008 that points to a problem that all Palestinians share, whether in Gaza or elsewhere.
G. Djata Bumpus
http://judaismandisrael.blogspot.com/2008/01/abomination-800-jewish-settlers-of.html
Read full post
Dear friends,
With the recent announcement (March 10, 2010) by Israel to build an additional 1600 units for "settlers" in mostly Arab east Jerusalem, it should be obvious, even to those with the most infinitesimally small brains, that Israel, with its nuclear warheads, is nothing but a colonial power that is sponsored by the US government through the despicable likes of Senators Charles Schumer and Joe Lieberman and their ilk. Moreover, the claim that Israel is the "closest ally" of the US in the Middle East reminds me of the African proverb that goes: It's better to have an intelligent enemy than a dumb friend.
At any rate, as bloody and inhuman as the situation in Gaza is, there is a much wider story, regarding the plight of Palestinian people. On the link below is a piece that was written in 2008 that points to a problem that all Palestinians share, whether in Gaza or elsewhere.
G. Djata Bumpus
http://judaismandisrael.blogspot.com/2008/01/abomination-800-jewish-settlers-of.html
Read full post
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
The Lemon Tree - an important book
: Generally, the State of Israel denies its responsibility in the exodus of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians from their homes..."
Dear friends,
On the link below is a book review that in and of itself is incredibly revealing, in terms of the situation in Palestine/Israel - both historically and currently. Additionally, it serves as a preface to further discussion on this blog which will happen in just a few days, about that region.
G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.levantinecenter.org/levantine-review/reviews/lemon-tree-recounts-personal-stories-palestinians-and-israelis
Read full post
Dear friends,
On the link below is a book review that in and of itself is incredibly revealing, in terms of the situation in Palestine/Israel - both historically and currently. Additionally, it serves as a preface to further discussion on this blog which will happen in just a few days, about that region.
G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.levantinecenter.org/levantine-review/reviews/lemon-tree-recounts-personal-stories-palestinians-and-israelis
Read full post
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
