These days, our top opinion moulders--from bought politicians to media critters-- can be depended on to applaud rebels in other nations where it is to the advantage of our elites to have a "regime change". Thus, it should come as no surprise that such sympathies in our ruling circles are often backed up by the full weight of our propaganda assets, diplomacy, and also muscle--from military ops to intelligence dirty tricks. The recent cases of Iraq and Libya readily come to mind, but our rulers were already doing the same hypocritical sleight of hand during the assisted implosion of the Eastern Bloc in the late 80s when Lech Walesa in Poland (and later others like Vaclav Havel in Czechoslovakia) were hailed as a global heroes and exemplars of patriotism for supposedly standing up to the vicious communist tyrannies stifling the people's right to a full consumerist society. Now, of course, as Syria and Iran remain the only independent standing pawns in the Middle East chess, the respected voices are again being heard urging support for the rebels (and outright revolution) in the name of everything that is decent and dear to humankind, beginning with democracy and freedom, the perennial pretext for our international meddling, plus--how could we forget?--national security, the card that trumps all cards. You can't get more sacred and irrefutable than that.

But history as usual is full of surprises, especially when read with an impartial and honest mind. As Winston Churchill, a man who knew a thing or two about hypocrisy and dirty tricks once said, "a man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist." Maybe he was thinking of the Irgun's attack on the King David Hotel, but that's another story.

It's hardly a terribly astute observation that, yes, subjectivism plays a huge role in human affairs, or, as some often claim, the devil is in the details. A man's "insufferable" is another man's "quite tolerable" or even "peachy" conditions. It's therefore logical to expect that the richest and most powerful members of society (who also happen to own the media, the army, the police, and most high public offices) will look upon pronouncements of "insufferable conditions" uttered by the poorest and most disenfranchised sectors of the nation as wild exaggerations. Fred Vanderbilt Field, a direct descendant of Commodore Vanderbilt of Robber baron fame, and a very decent man, recalls in his memoir From Right to Left that few in his parents' circles even acknowledged the existence of the Great Depression, continuing their merry living as usual, as the economic catastrophe barely touched their lives.

In any case, in practice, on the issue of perceived abuses, the "subjective" becomes the objective when a vast majority agree on the reality of their situation. Suffering can't be measured with the exactitude we gauge the boiling point of water, but when great numbers of people repeatedly come to the same conclusion, that a major change is in order, and a sufficient number think this realization is clear enough to propel their actions, no matter how risky, then a measure of the "objective" has been reached.

On the question of a people's right to revolt against oppression, we don't need to listen to Marx, Lenin or Che, admittedly authorities on the subject, to get our bearings, but simply lend an ear to that despicable commie rat, Thomas Jefferson and his notorious cabal. After all, it is they who penned this masterful example of sedition:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. -- That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, -- That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security..." (1)

____________________

(1) No wonder the American Declaration of Independence influenced so many in Europe itself, where its core ideas had germinated, and later served as a blueprint for the French Revolution and other revolutions in the centuries that followed. They say Ho Chi Minh was inspired (and moved) by the document, and I believe it. For truer words have rarely been said in a more beautiful or compelling manner.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Patrice Greanville is founding editor of The Greanville Post, and former publisher of Cyrano's Journal, America's first radical media review.

Collapse

Some are asking how the Occupy movement will accomplish anything now. I say, it already has. It has already changed our world.

I marched through New York in September of last year on the first day of Occupy Wall Street. I laid down my sleeping bag in the open air in Zuccotti Park on the first intense nights of the occupation. Then, I brought my sleeping bag back to Washington DC, where I live. With some hopeful companions, I began occupying McPherson Square on K Street, home to some of the most corrupt lobbyists in the world. We held meetings in the cool October air, not yet the biting chill of winter. And we went to work building a library, a clinic, a kitchen, a media center -- a small village. A second camp quickly emerged in another part of town, within sight of Congress.

I occupied because the rich are too rich, because Wall Street and the corporations control too much, and because all of our governments won't even begin to seriously address some of the biggest challenges of our time, like climate change. I occupied because, like so many in the 99 percent, I am fed up with the status quo. I occupied because people are suffering all over the country and all over the world, while the power to build a better future is in our hands.

Now, most of Occupy DC has been emptied. Many occupiers were made homeless. Miraculously, the cops spared my humble little tent, with a newly broken pole, but sleeping in the park would now likely get me arrested. (I hadn't slept at the park recently anyway. Another occupier was staying in my tent.)

Was it all worth it? Yes, and I'll do it again.

This week, the Senate Budget Committee will hold a hearing about inequality and social mobility, hearing from experts like Sarah Anderson at the Institute for Policy Studies, who has published studies on the CEO-worker pay gap for 18 years. Would the Senate be doing this before Occupy? Probably not.

Mitt Romney is struggling to shed the stigma of being a "one percent candidate," because his Richie Rich image continues to harm his campaign. Even Newt "Huge Tiffany's Tab" Gingrich is making jabs at Romney's wealth. Would this have happened before Occupy? Probably not.

One of President Barack Obama's favorite stump speeches these days is on making the wealthiest Americans and biggest corporations pay their fair share, which would reduce inequality in this country. Would this have become a favorite presidential refrain before Occupy? Probably not.

A thousand plans are afoot to "re-occupy" this spring. But even if the camps were to end now, the Occupy movement has made millions of Americans think harder about our economic, environmental, and political realities, and that has the potential to change everything. It has created spaces for us to bring a bold new world to life. It has sparked conversations and ideas that no police barricade can hold back. And it has opened dreams that we are all still dreaming -- whether we campers are allowed to sleep or not.

Lacy MacAuley wears two hats, which isn't always easy. She is the media relations manager at the Institute for Policy Studies and a participant in the Occupy movement. www.ips-dc.org

Collapse

Criminal injustice is pervasive, especially against people of color. Racial and ethnic minorities comprise over 60% of America's prison population. "For black males in their twenties, 1 in every 8 is in prison or jail on any given day."

America's racist war on drugs disproportionately targets people of color and ethnic minorities. They comprise 75% of those in prison on drug related charges.

On March 17, 2011, Mauer testified before the US Sentencing Commission regarding proposed federal drug offense sentencing guideline amendments to the 2010 Fair Sentencing Act.

He said in 2009, drug offenses accounted for over half (51%) of the federal prison population. Those imprisoned represent a 20-fold increase since 1980. Their numbers exceed those incarcerated in 1980 for all offenses. They're the most significant source of America's 700% federal prison growth.

In recent years, state incarcerations stabilized. Federal ones keep rising. Drug related offenses are most responsible. Racial and ethnic minorities are grievously harmed. Reform is urgently needed.

Mandatory minimum sentences exacerbate the problem. So do other racist policies, including judicial unfairness, three strikes and you're out, get tough on crime policies, and a guilty unless proved innocent mentality.

New York's 1973 Rockefeller drug laws are most pernicious. Anyone convicted of selling two ounces or more of heroin, morphine, "raw or prepared opium," cocaine, or cannabis, or possessing four ounces of the same substances receive mandatory 15-year minimum sentences up a maximum of 25 years to life.

In 1979, marijuana possession penalties were reduced from crimes to misdemeanors. However, aggressive pursuit of offenders continues, especially in New York City. More on that below.

Nationwide crack cocaine (vs. powder) and marijuana possession penalties are also pernicious. Until revised under the 2010 Fair Sentencing Act, first time offenders convicted of possessing as little as five grams of crack (one ounce = 28 grams) automatically got five years in prison.

The new law reduces, but doesn't eliminate, the disparity between crack and powder cocaine. Henceforth, possessing 28 or more grams of crack subjects offenders to penalties up to five years. Mandatory simple possession sentencing ended. In addition, courts may reduce prior sentencing disparities.

Nonetheless, pot busts define America's drug war. In 2006, Mauer said primary focus since 1990 shifted to marijuana offenses. As a result, they comprised 82% of the increase in drug arrests. Virtually all of them were for possessing small amounts. Enforcement costs are enormous - $4 billion or more annually for marijuana alone.

Under the 1970 federal Controlled Substances Act, cannabis is a Schedule I drug, meaning it's defined as having high potential for abuse. So far, redefinition attempts failed. In 2001, the Supreme Court ruled against medical marijuana use in United States v. Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative.

In Gonzales v. Raich (2005), the High Court ruled that Congress, under the Constitution's Commerce Clause, may criminalize the production and use of home-grown cannabis, even where states approve it for medicinal purposes. More on that below.

A Brief History of Legal Cannabis in America

In 1619, Jamestown colonial law required settlers to grow hemp. George Washington grew it as one of his main crops. Its use for rope and fabric was common throughout 18th and 19th century America.

Around 1860, cannabis regulations and restrictions were first instituted. After 1906, states began labeling it poisonous. In the 1920, prohibitions began. By the mid-1930s, all states enacted regulations, including 35 under the Uniform State Narcotic Drug Act. Violators were penalized but not imprisoned.

In the 1970s, communities began abolishing state laws and local regulations banning cannabis possession. Federal laws remain in place. In the 1990s, local sale for medical purposes began even though doing so conflicts with federal law.

Nonetheless, 16 states and the District of Columbia legalized medical marijuana, including Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington.

Expect others to follow. Possession amounts and other legal provisions vary by state, but the message is clear. Medicinal marijuana works. As a result, criminalizing it harms those dependent for relief.

In addition, it's a growing revenue source for budget-strapped states. It also produces jobs when they're most needed. It's a win-win, regardless of outdated, counterproductive and repressive federal policies.

Efficacious substances should be encouraged, not prohibited. In 1850s America, pharmacies carried medicinal cannabis. Around the same time, states began regulating pharmaceutical sales, including penalties for mislabeling and adulterated substances.

It became a slippery slope toward criminalizing cannabis. Today's momentum suggests eventual legalization, starting with medicinal use.

Racially Biased New York City Marijuana Policies

In 2008, the New York ACLU published a report titled, "Marijuana Arrest Crusade: Racial Bias and Police Policy in New York City - 1997 - 2007."

From 1977 - 1986, 33,000 possession arrests were made. Numbers declined to 30,000 from 1987 - 1996. However, from 1997 - 2006, they exploded to 353,000. Today, outside the report's timeline, they number around 50,000 annually for simple possession of small amounts. More on that below.

US Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas once said:

"As nightfall does not come all at once, neither does oppression. In both instances, there is a twilight when everything remains seemingly unchanged. And it is in such twilight that we all must be aware of change in the air, however slight, lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness."

In New York City, Blacks and Hispanics are Exhibit A. They've been victimized by racist drug enforcement, notably for cannabis possession. From 1997 - 2006, Blacks comprised 52% of arrests, Hispanics another 31%. Whites accounted for 15%.

Those arrested and jailed affected 185,000 Blacks, 110,000 Hispanics, but only 53,000 Whites for minor possession offenses. Most were aged 26 or younger. About 91% were males.

Under Mayor Rudy Giuliani (January 1994 - December 2001), marijuana possession arrests exploded 10-fold. Under Mayor Michael Bloomberg (January 2002 - present), they're higher than ever. At the same time, New York police provide little information. As a result, few New Yorkers know their city conducts "a historically unprecedented marijuana arrest crusade."

Cops involved up to top commanders benefit. Marijuana busts are safe. Involved officers and supervisors accrue overtime pay, and produce numbers showing productivity.

In contrast, those arrested are harmed even if not prosecuted. Procedures include handcuffing, fingerprinting, photographing, and potentially obtaining DNA samples. Often people with no criminal records are affected. Henceforth they'll have one and plenty of baggage.

Whether or not convicted, employment and educational opportunities, mortgages or other loans, public housing benefits, licenses, travel visas, and good credit standing are at risk.

Moreover, arrests and overnight custody alone are humiliating, degrading, alienating and unjust for possessing small amounts of controlled substances, especially marijuana that long ago should have been legalized.

Last September, New York Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly responded to public pressure. As a result, he ordered commanders not to arrest people possessing small marijuana amounts unless they're in public view.

In 1979, New York state decriminalized amounts of 25 grams or less. Henceforth, displaying it publicly became low-level misdemeanors, subject to ticketing, not arrests or jailing.

New York City's stop-and-frisk policy drew widespread criticism. Mostly Black and Hispanic males are targeted. Police routinely confront them, demand their pockets be emptied, and if marijuana is displayed, they're arrested for having it in public view. As a result, around 50,000 annually are criminalized unjustly.

At the time, critics called Kelly's action important. Chief Legal Aid Society attorney Steven Banks said it would make a tremendous difference to wrongfully targeted young minorities.

Drug Policy Alliance executive director Ethan Nadelmann called the order a significant change in how police deal with minor marijuana possession cases. Hopefully, "gross racial disparity" would be curbed.

Kelly's order in part read:

"Questions have been raised about the processing of certain marijuana arrests." Henceforth, "(a) crime will not be charged to an individual who is requested or compelled to engage in the behavior that results in the public display of marijuana." Displaying it must be "actively undertaken of the subject's own volition."

Queens College sociologist Harry G. Levine said public defenders and legal aid lawyers estimate up to three-fourths of those arrested displayed it on police orders. Those affected don't know they're illegal, but police are very intimidating.

Last year, Brooklyn Democratic assemblyman Hakeem Jeffries and Republican Senator Mark Grisanti sponsored legislation to downgrade small possession public displays from misdemeanors to a lessor violations. Bloomberg opposed them, claiming it would encourage greater use.

Despite Kelly's order, marijuana arrests declined slightly but continue. So does NYPD's racist crusade. Bloomberg supports it. So does Kelly tacitly. In 2010, one in every seven city arrests were for displaying marijuana in public view. Illegal police searches and false charges were mostly responsible.

Last year, New York's illegal stop-and-frisk policy affected over 600,000 people, overwhelmingly young Black and Hispanic males. Despite Kelly's order, illegal arrests continue. Institute for Juvenile Reform and Alternatives member Chino Hardin said "build(ing) a movement to stop" New York's crusade is essential.

On December 8, the ACLU called "NYPD Pot Arrests Habit....Tough to Break," saying:

Police Commissioner Kelly's order lowered arrests slightly, but maintained New York's distinction as "the marijuana arrest capital of the world. This just won't do."

City Hall policy is at fault. People of color are aggressively targeted for petty offenses like "graffiti, disorderly conduct, and - you guessed it - minor marijuana possession."

Ingrained habits are hard to break. Kelly's order lacked teeth, especially without City Hall's endorsement.

As a result, New York Black and Hispanic youths face unrelenting persecution unless public pressure forces legislative relief. It's long overdue nationwide with teeth.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at [email protected]

Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.

progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/.

Collapse

The Komen Foundation hasn't been leveling with the public. Even its apology was disingenuous.

The organization is behaving more like Bank of America, one of its most prominent sponsors. Like a Wall Street bank, its using its monopoly power to crush competitors, dictate its terms to the public, and to speak both disingenuously and hypocritically to the American people. The Susan G. Komen organization has become "too big to fail."

"Our original desire was to fulfill our fiduciary duty to our donors by not funding grant applications made by organizations under investigation," said a statement issued today. But the evidence shows that no such policy was ever enforced for anyone but Planned Parenthood.

"We will amend the criteria to make clear that disqualifying investigations must be criminal and conclusive in nature and not political," the statement continued. Yet criminal investigations were ignored, and only the politically-based investigation resulted in action. The only logical explanation is that this policy never existed, or was invented solely for the purpose of defunding Planned Parenthood.

Monopoly to Monopoly

And while the alleged policy was aimed at grant recipients, not donors, the charity's increasingly implausible claim reeks of hypocrisy when the sources of its money are considered. Several large Komen donors are also the targets of past or current investigations. Bank of America, which is prominently displayed on the Komen website as a member of its "Million Dollar Council Elite," has paid tens of millions to settle fraud charges in recent years as the result of "federal investigations."

The Susan G. Komen Foundation targeted Planned Parenthood for moral scorn to justify a decision that we now know to be political, while accepting money from organizations that are under investigation and giving to others in the same condition.

That's what happens when a single charity pursues and achieves excessive control over one area of need. Like B of A and other large banks, it's a monopoly that's leveraging its size and influence improperly. Case in point: The foundation chose to cut funding for stem cell research. Given its size and dominance, that's a serious threat to this critical avenue of research.

The Komen website includes a sales pitch to corporate donors which notes that "Americans believe it's more important than ever for companies to be socially responsible... In fact, 83 percent of Americans wish more of the products, services and retailers they use would support causes... "

It's now clear that the foundation has a double-standard about who it gives money to and receives money from, and no compunction about using its well-known (and well-guarded) name to provide marketing clout and the appearance of good behavior to some bad corporate actors. And when it came to Bank of America and Komen, it was a case of one monopoly helping another.

Double Standard

In the aftermath of its move to defund Planned Parenthood, Susan G. Komen officials said it had adopted a new policy of refusing to fund any institution that was under federal investigation. CEO Nancy Brinker (who travels first-class at foundation expense, according to financial documents filed with the government) put it even more broadly when she said that the group had the "right to cancel if a group is under investigation" -- which presumably means any investigation.

Despite the new presence of a Sarah Palin-endorsed anti-choice politician as its public policy director, and despite new revelations that it quietly stopped funding stem cell research, the Komen Foundation continues to insist this isn't a politically motivated move. They claim they would cut funds for any organization that's under investigation.

The easiest way to defuse the controversy would have been to list other groups that were losing funding under the same policy. They didn't, which strongly suggests no others have been affected. And look who receives Kamen funds and hasn't lost funds.

Based on its latest legal filings, which is nevertheless only a partial listing of grantees, a casual review reveals five organizations which are under federal investigation yet still receive Komen funds. There may be many more; this is what a quick read-through revealed.)

Before we begin, let's be clear: We're not suggesting that these institutions don't do terrific work in the search for a cancer cure, or that their funding should be compromised in any way by the existence of these investigations. The purpose of this exercise is strictly to demonstrate that the Komen Foundation's stated reason for slashing Planned Parenthood funding is demonstrably false.

That said, here are the institutions whose current or recent investigations seem to undermine the "under investigation" rationale for defunding Planned Parenthood.

Harvard University is currently under federal investigation for allegedly discriminating against Asian-Americans and is also being investigated for violations of the Animal Welfare Act after a monkey died in its research labs.

Yale University is currently under federal investigation for failing to adequately address sexual misconduct and harassment.

Columbia University is currently under federal investigation for religious discrimination.

The University of Texas was the subject of an IRS investigation regarding its executive salaries and compensation.

Massachusetts General Hospital paid a million dollars last year after an investigation by the Department of Health and Human Services regarding HIPAA (patient privacy) violations.

The Komen foundation also continues to give funding to the University of Madison, where a cancer researcher was forced to resign after internal investigations disclosed unacceptable conflicts of interest. And while we were conducting this research, Adam Serwer at Mother Jones noted that Penn State is also receiving Komen funding while it is under investigation.

The Million-Dollar Council Elite...

When it comes to federal investigations, a review of its business partners is even uglier. Consider the corporate members of its "Million Dollar Council Elite":

Ford Motor Corporation has been the subject of multiple federal investigations in the last two years alone. Probes involved defective floor mats on Ford Fusions, a jack defect on the Ford Freestar that was said to have caused at least one death, and an investigation of multiple potential defects on the Ford F-150 truck.

American Airlines is currently locked in a dispute with the Pension Fund Guaranty Agency, which filed $91 million in liens against the company the day before yesterday. The federal agency accusing Americans of "pocketing pension relief money instead of putting it into workers' retirements," as the Associated Press reported. No doubt there was a "federal investigation" before these liens were filed.

And while breast cancer is a great cause, one might well also ask why a corporation that says it's too broke to honor its pension obligations belongs to the "Million Dollar Council Elite" program.

... Million Dollar Settlements, That Is

But nobody outdoes Bank of America, which is featured on both the Komen Foundation's "Million Dollar Council Elite" page, and on its plain old, non-elite "Million Dollar Council."

Bank of America is currently under federal investigation regarding charges it has illegally foreclosed on borrowers. It stands accused of committing widespread mortgage fraud, including what was allegedly the largest "robo-signing" operation of them all. ("Robo-signing" is the falsification of court documents, and the filing of false court documents is perjury.)

Bank of America has settled fraud charges with SEC six times in the past 15 years. Each settlement was the result of a "federal investigation." With each settlement it promised to stop committing the same form of fraud. And yet it has done so anyway, at least five additional times.

Bank of America hasn't just been the target of many federal investigations. It "significantly hindered" one of those investigations. As Shahien Nasipour noted in a summary of the mountain of evidence against the bank, a federal auditor stated that "HUD's internal watchdog issued two subpoenas requesting documents and information, and what was returned was incomplete, had conflicting information, and in some cases, the bank provided excerpts of documents rather than the complete record." An auditor also said that the bank refused to permit a walk-through of its mortgage documents unit.

The HUD's internal audit -- a federal investigation -- concluded that the bank knowingly provided the U.S. government with false information. A federal investigation of the bank's foreclosure activity is ongoing, and was recently joined by New York State Attorney General Eric Schneiderman.

Any organization that cuts ties to Planned Parenthood over investigations while advertising its ties to Bank of America is guilty of gross hypocrisy.

Resist -- But Give if You Can

It would be tragic if women's cancer services lost funding as a result of this scandal. But the Susan G. Komen Foundation story appears to be one of power abuse, corporate cronyism, and politicized decision-making. The Komen group has been extremely aggressive in its attempts to force other such groups off the field so that it can dominate breast cancer giving.

That's too much power for one organization to have -- especially if it has shown itself to be unwilling to act transparently and change direction when it abuses that power. Stem cell research is a highly promising avenue for a cure. If the organization that's moved so aggressively to dominate funding refuses to fund it, an approach has been partially obstructed that might eventually save millions of lives in the future.

I'm not rich, but I plan to give more money to both Planned Parenthood and another cancer research organization as a result of this incident. I hope others will do the same. This could all turn out for the best, especially if the fall of one organization raises breast cancer awareness and increases support for treatment and research.

Collapse

It also expresses the main theme as I had interpreted it while reading the work. There are many common ideas, and all are inter-related in one manner or another, but one of the more common phrases, used by many of the writers, is one containing the root word tribe or tribal. The tribe in this case are those brought up and living in mainstream Jewish thought, arguments, and traditions, where Israel and the Jews are constant victims and recognize no others, maintaining at the same time their exceptionalism with their place in history. That is putting it simplistically, but in each short personal memoir different strands of the idea stand out.

Tribalism is mentioned throughout the work:

"I realised then that Judaism was more about tribalism than a universal religion....my antipathy to injustice is now much stronger than any tribal loyalty inherited from my ethnic background....Jewish moral tradition...which was enhanced by the European enlightenment, was substituted with a tribal code based on loyalty and revenge."

"This [incident] sheds light on the mechanisms for enforcement of tribal loyalty....where ethnic and tribal sentiments are involved, even exemplary intellectuals may lapse....The feeling of seeing an alien tribal ritual has stayed with me - an anthropological perspective on the customs of a culture to which I don't belong."

"I no longer need an identity other than my own, and I experience myself as a member of the human race rather than of a particular tribal group."

"Said [author of "Orientalism"] dragged me through my tribal narcissism....I developed a world view and ethics that were universal rather than tribal or relativistic."

"I immediately had to re-think my childhood...the tribal paranoia and martyrdom."

These comments return to the editor's theme of changing of thought patterns, of breaking out of familiar dogmatic ways of acting and thinking into a more fully self-actualized person. The results of this are twofold - a rejection or loss of the previous tribal group, and an acceptance and opening up to new ideas, opportunities, and friendships. However, for those that are labelled deviant, "Deviant behaviour may reflect a pathology of the society rather than of the individual." Further for those that make a change, "To be well differentiated it is necessary to develop a sense of self that is separate from the collective identity of our primary work group."

One writer noted that he had lived within a "limited identity" and until he "acknowledged the profound influence of this primal error, may participation in the generational reenactment of hatred and retribution, of chronic hostility, and mistrust, was destined to continue." He then had to consider "the possibility that they didn't become our enemies because of who we were; they became our enemies because of what we did." [italics in original]

Jewish progressive humanism

Accompanying the tribal idea was the recognition that the tradition of progressive humanist Judaism was being lost by the actions of the Zionists and Jewish residents of Israel and the U.S. and other countries (for this work notably Australia, U.K, and Canada). Some writers arrived at this awareness slowly, some realized it as a sudden event brought about by some significant contradictory evidence of behaviour (what we did) - all through exposure to the plight of the Palestinians who for several "had no opinion about the Palestinians because I had never heard of them." Or from their experiences with the IDF where the Palestinians "were invisible." Much of that of course is part of the Israeli/Jewish culture, where schools "talked about Israel, but never mentioned Palestine or Palestinians."

For one author, "the rich progressive humanist Jewish traditions which were so strong among Jews before the Nazi Holocaust...Has been replaced by fear, aggression, and harsh ethnocentricity - a shocking and ironic posthumous victory for Hitler."

One referred to tikkun olam, repairing the world, and felt closer to their Jewish progressive traditions because of their activism. This was extended more by another author, who argued that simply doing a good deed was insufficient, that to be a radical activist involved "going to the root of the situation and repairing it so the world can be a better, more whole place." For all the activists, their background in Jewish progressive humanism supported and reinforced their change towards their activities, and only highlighted the hypocrisy of a tribal code that spoke of universal values while denying them to others, "the deeper moral issue was identical [to apartheid]. It was the issue of inalienable human rights."

Lies and myths

One of the more important revelatory moments came when the activists became aware that they had been lied to and misled. The new truth becomes, "that authorities lie, conventional doctrines are often false, official power is used to suppress the truth and punish 'deviants'." The historian Ilan Pappe noted that the Israeli military archives "exposed the Israeli historiography to which I belonged, as having been developed by a fraudulent group of experts...I had a sense of betrayal." Others, learning their history within their community learned "a version of history that I have now come to understand as a wild and vivid myth."

In much milder terms, Anna Baltzer, says "I was the one who had been misled," as she listed numerous incidents that challenged her orthodox ideas. She witnessed medical deaths due to lack of access to proper medical treatment, harassment of children and farmers by settlers, lack of clean water, trees and houses ripped apart by Caterpillar tractors, the destruction of Gaza, the lack of educational opportunities, and on, also witnessing ultimately one of the Palestinians' characteristics, "steadfast."

For Rich Forer, he came to acknowledge his "history of delusion and denial," recognizing that when it came to Israel, he "had brushed aside challenging questions in favour of an irrational but emotionally satisfying appraisal."

More basically stated, Rich Siegel says "I had been lied to all my life."

The future?

Many of the activists express thoughts indicating that Israel could not survive in its present form and had to change, that its colonial settler mythology and practices could not support the country into the future.

"Israel can only bring about its own destruction if it clings to its current path of colonial domination of the Palestinians."

"Israel, like all colonial regimes who managed in the end to redeem themselves from their oppressive pasts, must traverse a long and painful trail from de-colonisation through reconciliation, to a new form of political life that is just and inclusive of all the country's inhabitants, before it can expect security and normalization."

Ilan Pappe again, says "that unless Israel is de-Zionised there is no chance for peace." He adds, "There is little chance for change from within Israeli society." The issue "of boycott and sanctions, seemed urgent to me as I still believe that the operation in 1948 which I coined "the ethnic cleansing of Palestine" continues today, and it has to be stopped to avert another catastrophe."

Referring back to the Jewish humanist tradition Starhawk writes "I was raised to love justice, not tyranny - no matter who the tyrants profess to be. Without justice for the Palestinians, there can be no security or peace for Israelis."

Much more...

"Beyond Tribal Loyalties" is much more than the ideas reviewed above. It is a powerful expression of humanity in search of itself, of recognizing the atrocities that are perpetrated against the Palestinians and against the fundamental humanitarian values of Judaism. The stories are deeply personal, emotional, simply written and represent a very valuable record of how the world could possibly be changed. This is a wonderful work of human emotional effort and physical presence to overcome layers of prejudice, lies, and mythology. It should receive wide spread attention as its message is one ultimately of hope, of awakening to a new broader global humanity, of a secure world existing in peace.

Jim Miles is a Canadian educator and a regular contributor/columnist of
opinion pieces and book reviews for The Palestinian Chronicle. Miles' work is
also presented globally through other alternative websites and news
publications.

Collapse

Those of us who can see through such distorted thinking know that White is a principled writer who has never displayed a shred of racism in his work. Zoabi is very well-known civil rights leader with a long-standing reputation of courage and poise.

How could anti-racist endeavors themselves become the subject of accusation by Halili and others like him?

It goes without saying there should be no room for any racist discourse - Islamophobia, anti-Semitism, or any other - in the Palestine solidarity movement, which aims at achieving long-denied justice and rights for the Palestinian people. A racist discourse is predicated on racial supremacy, which is exactly what Palestinians are resisting in Israel and the occupied territories.

But the "Jewish and democratic state" of Israel is riddled with so many contradictions, the kind that no straightforward narrative can possibly capture.

Many scholars and rights groups have discussed the way in which irreconcilable values defined the very character of Israel from the onset. According to Adalah (meaning "justice" in Arabic), the legal center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel, "Israel's Declaration of Independence (1948) states two principles important for understanding the legal status of Palestinian citizens of Israel. First, the Declaration refers specifically to Israel as a 'Jewish state' committed to the 'ingathering of the exiles.' (Second)...it contains only one reference to the maintenance of complete equality of political and social rights for all its citizens, irrespective of race, religion, or sex."

Adalah further asserts that there is a 'tension' between the two principles. Perhaps this is the case, intellectually, but in practice the Israeli political establishment has resolved the seeming quandary whereby the Jewishness of the state prevails above every other humanitarian, democratic or legal consideration. Racially discriminating legislation is being churned out in the Israeli Knesset at an alarming speed, and new laws are constantly being proposed. These include "one that would end the status of Arabic as one of Israel's official languages and another that would punish Israeli citizens, including Arab Israelis, for refusing to pledge their allegiance to 'Israel as a Jewish and democratic state,'" according to columnist Linda Heard (Arab News, Jan 24).

As for Palestinians living in the occupied territories, their legally enshrined political inferiority has been felt in much harsher and often bloodier ways than their brethren living in Israel. For nearly four and a half decades, the Palestinians living in these territories have been losing their land, livelihood, freedom of movement and even their very lives in the name of the racial superiority of their occupiers. Jewish settlements are illegally constructed on Palestinian land to host Jewish settlers, who use Jewish-only roads to travel between their heavily fortified colonies and the "Jewish state." While numerous intellectuals, activists and ordinary members of Jewish communities around the world have strongly protested Israel's treatment of the Palestinians, as well as Israel's misuse of the Jewish religion to attain political goals, Israel relies greatly on the support of Jewish communities, organizations and individuals for vital funds, political support and lobbying.

While many Jews identify with Israel as a 'Jewish state', "younger American Jews are more likely than their parents to be acquainted with the Palestinians and their story," reported TIME magazine on September 29.

The TIME story references one such youth, Benjamin Resnick, 27, who decries the fact that Jewish state and American liberal democracy represent two views that are 'irreconcilable'. On the other hand, he "continues to consider himself a Zionist," who "quotes the Torah in support of his view that American Jews should press Israel to end settlement expansion and help facilitate a Palestinian state." Even Resnick's political dissent is riddled with inconsistencies, where national identity (as an American) clashes with ideology (Zionism) and religion (the Torah) is referenced as a means to resolve the discord.

The Torah is put to good use repeatedly among mainstream and ardent Israeli rabbis, whose edicts to kill Arabs are commonplace in Israeli media (although rarely discussed in US media). The so-called King's Torah - which is endorsed by some prominent Israeli rabbis - has made it permissible to kill Palestinians of all ages, including those who don't pose a threat. "You can kill those who are not supporting or encouraging murder in order to save the lives of Jews," it states in the fifth chapter, entitled "Murder of non-Jews in a time of war." The BBC elaborates: "At one point it suggests that babies can justifiably be killed if it is clear they will grow up to pose a threat" (July 19).

This becomes particularly problematic when the lines between politics, ideology and religion become so conveniently blurred. Israeli and Jewish leaders borrow from the corresponding text as they find suitable to achieve policies to further occupation, war and illegal settlement. Alan Dershowitz, a professor at Harvard Law School, came to represent the latter model. His style lacks diplomacy and logic; however, it is effective in some circles because it centers around the idea of smearing anyone who dares to criticize Israel. The greater tragedy is that Dershowitz is provided with platforms in mainstream and rightwing Israeli media, thus giving his smear campaign the means to turn any genuine discussion of Israel into a controversial hate speech.

While critical non-Jews are often smeared as 'anti-Semites', jurist Richard Goldstone, who lead the UN investigation into the Israeli war on Gaza., was not a mere anti-Semite for concluding that Israel and Hamas had both potentially committed war crimes and crimes against humanity. Dershowitz told Israeli Army Radio that Goldstone is a 'traitor to the Jewish people'. 'The Goldstone report is a defamation written by an evil, evil man,' Dershowitz said (Haaretz, October 31).

While the case for Palestinian rights and statehood can be clear-cut - not many true-to-self intellectuals could justify ethnic cleansing, defend Apartheid and rationalize murder - delving into the political identity of Israel and its ideological and religious supporters becomes immediately 'controversial'. The controversy is embedded in the purposeful intellectual and political elasticity by which Israel defines, or refuses to define itself. It claims to be Jewish as well as democratic. It claims to embody religious ideals but also to be secular. It claims to be liberal, while it is militarily oppressive. It claims to uphold 'equality' for all, while it is racially exclusive.

And if you dare to challenge these irreconcilable contradictions, you are termed an anti-Semite or a traitor - or both.

Ramzy Baroud (www.ramzybaroud.net) is an internationally-syndicated columnist and the editor of PalestineChronicle.com. His latest book is My Father Was a Freedom Fighter: Gaza's Untold Story (Pluto Press, London), available on Amazon.com.

Collapse

But the raging soul of the world will not be assaulted without consequence. Mind and body are intertwined and inseparable from nature, and, when nature responds to our assaults, her replies are known to humankind as the stuff of mythic tragedy and natural catastrophe.

"When the poet lives his hell, it is no longer possible for the common man to escape it."-- Excerpt from, The Time of the Assassins, a study of Rimbaud, by Henry Miller

But take heart. As the saying goes, it is always darkest right before it goes completely black.

Rejoice in this: Seeds of futurity require the darkness within soil to dream.

"To go into the dark with a light is to know the light. /To know the dark, go dark. Go without sight,/ and find that the dark, too, blooms and sings,/ and is traveled by dark feet and dark wings."-- Wendell Berry, To Know The Dark

What "tangible" and "constructive" things can a poetic sensibility contribute to everyday existence? Here's one: The atomized denizens of neoliberal culture are in dire need of a novel yet durable sensibility, one bearing the creativity and stamina required, for example, to withstand the police state rebuffs inflicted by the ruthless authoritarian keepers of the present order...as is the case, when OWS dissidents initiate attempts to retake, inhabit, and re-imagine public space.

Yet, while it is all well and good to be politically enlightened, approaching the tumult of human events guided by reason and restraint, if the self is not saturated in poetry, one will inhabit a dismal tower looking over a desiccated wasteland.

The crackpot realist's notion that poetry has no value other than what can be quantified in practical terms emerges from the same mindset that deems nature to be merely worth what it can be rendered down to as a commodity. The trees of a rain forest can be pulped to paper cups. A human being is only the content of his resume. The underlying meaning of this sentiment: The value of one's existence is derived by the act of being an asset of the 1%.

Resultantly, the tattered remnants of the neoliberal imagination (embodied in lofty but content-devoid Obama speechifying and the clown car demolition derby of Republican politics) spends its days in a broken tower of the mind, insulated from this reality: The exponentially increasing consequences (e.g., economic collapse, perpetual war, ecocide) created by the excesses of the present paradigm will shake those insular towers to theirs foundations, and, will inevitably caused the structures to totter and collapse.

The bells, I say, the bells break down their tower;
And swing I know not where. Their tongues engrave
Membrane through marrow, my long-scattered score
Of broken intervals...And I, their sexton slave!-- Hart Crane , excerpt from The Broken Tower

We have been "sexton slave" to this destructive order long enough; its lodestar is a death star.

In polar opposition, a poetic view of existence insists that one embrace the sorrow that comes at the end of things. The times have bestowed on us a shuffle to the graveside of our culture, and, we, like members of a New Orleans-style, second line, funeral procession, must allow our hearts to be saturated by sorrowful songs. Yet when the service is complete, the march away from the boneyard should shake the air with the ebullient noise borne of insistent brass.

"Often we're not so much afraid of our own limitations, as we are of the infinite within us."--Nelson Mandela (from an interview from his prison cell, conducted by the late Irish poet and priest, John O'Donnahey)

In this way, we are nourished by the ineffable, whereby unseen components of consciousness provide us the strength to carry the weight of darkness. Therefore, to those who demand this of poets: that all ideas, notions, flights of imagination, revelries, swoons of intuition, Rabelaisian rancor, metaphysical overreach, unnerving apprehensions, and inspired misapprehensions be tamed, rendered practical, and only considered fit to be broached in reputable company when these things bring "concrete" answers to polite dialog--I ask you this, if the defining aspects of our existence were constructed of concrete, would not the world be made of the material of a prison?

Moreover, is this not the building material and psychic criteria comprising the neoliberal paradigm? Is it any wonder that the concept of freedom is under siege?

Carl Jung averred, when a disconnect occurs between the inner life of the individual and the outward exigencies of daily life that "the Gods [...] become diseases." One way, this assertion can be taken is: There are multiple forces, tangible and intangible, in play in our lives and the trajectory of events e.g., the personal, in the form of the ghosts of trauma that haunt individual memory, but there exist, as well, extant and within, the collective spirit of an age. Tragically, in our own time, within the precincts of power, our national house of spirits has become a madhouse.

Yet beneath the gibbering cacophony of the insane asylums of past eras, beneath the haze of pharmacologically induced stupors of the institutions of the present, there exists much pain. This is the toll taken by a manic flight from honest suffering. At present, this is what we're given in our age of cultural and political disconnect and its attendant sense of nebulous dread.

Paradoxically, while the forces of nature are impersonal, the dilemma feels very personal. Therefore, on this journey to the end of empire, when impersonal elements are in play, one can become alienated from the dehumanizing trajectory of the times. Likewise, as exemplified by the U.S. political system, what process is more impersonal than the process of decay? Apropos, the air is permeated with a reek of putrefaction.

Yet the earth is kind, for one can use putrescent material in the process of renewal. The loam of earth is enriched by the rancid...just don't swallow it down whole...doing so, will cause you to become ill.

Importantly, because a cultural breakdown is occurring, and culture carries the criteria of psyche, the acts of social engagement through dissent, cultural re-imagining and rebuilding can have a propitious effect upon individual consciousness, an endeavor James Hillman termed "soul-making". Remember to disguise yourself as yourself when approached by ghosts of calcified habit and gods of tumultuous change. This is essential: Because what takes hold and brings about the collapse of an empire...is a loss of collective soul e.g., the type of loss of meaning and purpose evinced when only a meaningless, zombie-like drive remains, because, even though, the culture is dead, it refuses to accept the shroud of the earth's enveloping soil...to have its decomposing remains broken down and returned to the cycle of all things.

As circumstances stand, at present, for the 1%, their refusal to accept the inevitable has yielded grave ramifications for the people, fauna, and flora of the planet. Although, due to their seemingly vacuum-sealed insularity, ensured by vast wealth, the economic and political elite have yet to be touched by the consequences of their actions, much less forced down to earth.

Of course, this behavior defies logic, is in breach of the law, and is an affront to any workable code of ethics--as well as, stands in defiance to the laws of nature, including the force of gravity. But you can count on this, "the unseen hand of the market" (actually the buckling backs of the (99%) can't hold up the 1% swaying tower of hubris for much longer, and when it comes down, stand clear, for there are no bystanders when an empire crumbles.

"That's just the way it is."

As exhibited by the often bland, "normal" outward appearance of a serial killer, when the apologists and operatives of an exploitive, destructive system appear to be reasonable, they can go about their business without creating general alarm. By the same token, while many present day Republicans are zealots--barnburners raving into the flames of the conflagrations created by the militarist/national security/police/prison industrial state--Barack Obama and the Democratic Party serve as normalizers of the pathologies of late empire.

In this manner, atrocious acts can be committed by the state, with increasing frequency, because, over the passage of time, such outrages will have been allowed to pass into the realm of the mundane, and are thus bestowed with a patina of acceptability.

In nineteenth century Britain, the sugar that sweetened the tea of oh-so civilized, afternoon teatime was harvested by brutalized, Caribbean slaves, who rarely lived past the age of thirty, as, for example, in our time, in our blood-wrought moments of normalcy, we trudge about in sweatshop sewn clothing, brandishing i-Phones manufactured by factory enslaved teenage girls who are forced to work 14 hour plus shifts.

"That's just the way it is" might be one of the most soul-defying phrases in the human lexicon.

Contrast this with the OSW slogan, "The beginning is near." Hold both sentiments in your mind and discover which one allows your own heart to beat in sync with the heart of the world, and which will grant the imagination and stamina required to remake the world anew.

Phil Rockstroh is a poet, lyricist and philosopher bard living in New York City. He may be contacted at: [email protected] Visit Phil's website: http://philrockstroh.com/ or at FaceBook.

Collapse

Yet Newt Gingrich's booty calls are forgivable. Stones shall not be cast. His transgressions humanize him and the balms of forgiveness of Christian believers rising from this sin-buffeted earth cause the Baby Jesus to coo into the dawn of a coming golden age.

When Bush/Cheney sat at the helm of empire and plundered foreign lands and breached the rule of law, Democratic partisans insisted that constitutional order be reestablished by having Bush et al marched in shackles from the halls of power. To do anything short of this was to risk the foundation of the republic being crushed to rubble and silt beneath the boot of tyranny.

Yet, we critics of duopoly are accused of being impractical sorts who don't dwell in this world, the world of the possible. Although, it seems that political partisans give themselves permission to dwell, simultaneously, in two worlds: This one, as well as a Bizarro World--the parallel universe limned in comic books--where all things are done in reverse, where true is false and false is true, as well as, apparently, a realm where Newt Gingrich is a shining standard bearer of moral rectitude and a defender of faith and family and President Obama is a protector of constitutional law and a friend of the downtrodden.

According to a recent poll by the Pew Research Center, 77% of the citizens of the U.S. expressed the belief that the massive power imbalance in place in the nation is a direct result of the vast wealth inequity between the 1% and the 99%. In addition, according to a poll by Time Magazine, 86% of Americans held the conviction that Wall Street and its lobbyists exert undue influence over the U.S. political class.

Still, both major U.S. political parties remain unmoved by the opinions of their constituents and unresponsive to their needs. By having the right to vote under present day, political duopoly, one is granted the right to co-sign the ongoing fraud that the nation is a democratic republic. To vote for either a Democratic or Republican candidate (i.e., the well vetted stooges of the 1%) is to cast a vote in favor of the only political party allowed in the rigged process--The Big Money, Perpetual War Party.

Believing that replacing one of these candidates with the other...is in any way propitious is analogous to believing that the hanging of new wallpaper within a house with a rotted-out foundation constitutes renovating the structure.

Memo to those who cling to the hope you can change the order of a calcified system from within e.g., the U.S. political, corporate and governmental order:

What has caused you to believe you can change the insatiable appetite of a mindless beast from within the belly of said leviathan? Seemingly, your predicament presents you with these alternatives: 1) paste up some soothing wallpaper. 2) Learn to play the xylophone on its ribcage (i.e., turn your powerlessness into the stuff of art). 3) Light a fire and have the creature vomit you to freedom. Otherwise, you're going to be digested; you will lose your mind and body to the dehumanizing system and become part of its monstrous form.

As they embody the Spiritus Mundi of empire's end, Obama builds towering monuments of verbiage into empty air while Mitt Romney bores the soul of liberty into a soporific state, causing her to sleepwalk into a bottomless abyss of bland.

Obama and Romney manage to hide the malevolent, hungry ghost of empire behind a veneer of soul-defying, daylight normalcy. But Newt Gingrich's bloated carcass displays imperium's murderous id. What has become of the diminishing resources of the world? Newt grows ever fatter and more grotesque as he greedily devours these things. What terrible fate befell the U.S. constitution? Newt dry humped it to dust.

Regarding the mindset, libido, and modus operandi of the 1%: We are confronted with types who would clearcut the last tree standing in the last forest on earth to render down to toothpicks used to pick scraps of flesh from the teeth of the members of their class who just dined on the last Bird of Paradise.

To resist, we, as individuals and en masse, are advised to mitigate our sense of powerlessness by occupying our own libido, thereby allowing oneself to be drawn into the élan vital of the world...to ride the zeitgeist, embodying the eros of resistance and renewal, and, in so doing, refusing to defer to the corrupt-beyond-redemption machinations of the U.S. political and big media classes.

Ask yourself and those around you Rainer Maria Rilke's deceptively simple question: How shall I spend my days?

To appropriate Cornell West's phrase, launch yourself into the midst of "the funk of life" by means of the gritty sublime of cultural eros...This act is a marriage of earthly complaint and winged aspiration--both a lamentation and goof take--a conversation/a collaboration/a spirited debate between what has been lost to indifference, exploitation, and cupidity--and the insistent eros of the breathing moment--a commitment to occupy life's restive pantheon of purpose and decay.

Show your face to the world. Occupy libido by acts large and small, public and private.

Conversely, in what way is it attractive, healthy, or even interesting to willingly submit to the dictates of a culture that has conjured from the zeitgeist the likes of Gingrich--a high chair tyrant of the lowest order--a grotesque man-brat banging on the sides of his elevated seat, insisting that all the things of the world he sees are, "MINE!"

Why did the zeitgeist regurgitate Gingrich into our midst? Newt embodies the misappropriated libido and attendant, oceanic sense of entitlement of the corporate consumer state i.e., modes of being conjured by the dark magicians of advertising and finance to enslave the 99%, as, all the while, the system's rapacious verities and doomed vectors serve as the lodestar and raison d'être of the 1%.

Eric Hoffer advised, "You can never get enough of what you don't really need."

William Butler Yeats, on the subject of being overwhelmed by abundance:

The salmon-falls, the mackerel-crowded seas,

Fish, flesh, or fowl, commend all summer long

Whatever is begotten, born, and dies.

Caught in that sensual music all neglect

Monuments of unageing intellect.--excerpt: Sailing to Byzantium

One's character is forged amid this agon of excess and restraint e.g., of discerning the difference between the habitual excesses of consumer addiction and the callings of one's character; life lessons that are arrested by the shallow compulsions and time-sucking demands of the current neoliberal order.

As things stand, there exists no panacea to prevent this dilemma. Yet the messy, learning process known as creative resistance will suffice i.e., a type of endeavor similar to an artist's approach to his craft, involving his working with the materials at hand...At present, those materials being: you--your longings, your inspiration, your aspirations, your defeats, your mindful refusal to accept the diminished and demeaning status quo, and, of course, the found material of: the status quo itself.

As revealed by the deeds of OWS, promoting a dialog between individual and cultural forces leaves one receptive to the transformation that unfolds when enjoined in the conversation of the times. Don't allow the soul of discourse to be dominated by the half-mad, hungry ghosts possessing empire's end.

"Awareness, no matter how confused it may be, develops from every act of rebellion: the sudden, dazzling perception that there is something in man with which he can identify himself, if only for a moment ... What was at first the man's obstinate resistance now becomes the whole man, who is identified with and summed up in this resistance. The part of himself that he wanted to be respected he proceeds to place above everything else and proclaims it preferable to everything, even to life itself ... [Resistance] lures the individual from his solitude. It founds its first value on the whole human race. I rebel-therefore we exist."--Albert Camus

Phil Rockstroh is a poet, lyricist and philosopher bard living in New York City. He may be contacted at: [email protected] Visit Phil's website: http://philrockstroh.com/ or at FaceBook.

Collapse

Using a handheld transceiver, the journalist aired live communication between a Libyan commander and his troops in a Tripoli neighborhood targeted by a massive air assault. Millions of people listened, as surely did NATO military intelligence, to sensitive information disclosed by an overpowered, largely defeated army. The Doha-based news anchor sought further elaboration, and the reporter readily provided all the details he knew.

Did Abdel-Azim Mohammed, a journalist reputed for his gutsy reports from Iraq's Fallujah, violate the rules of journalism by transmitting information that could aid one party against another, and worse, cost human lives?

While there are few doubts about the impressive legacy of Aljazeera - and the valuable individual contributions of many of its reporters - urgent questions need to be asked regarding its current coverage of the so-called Arab Spring that began in December 2010.

Some of us have warned against the temptation of a one-narrative-fits-all style of reporting. A non-violent popular uprising is fundamentally different from an armed rebellion, and a home-grown peaceful Tahrir Square revolution is different from NATO-Arab military and political campaigns aimed at settling old scores and fomenting sectarian conflict (as in Libya and now Syria).

Aljazeera coverage of the Egyptian revolution was, for the most part, impeccable. It was the type of coverage that reflected the revolutionary fervor felt throughout the country. Even when the former regime of Hosni Mubarak pulled the plug on Aljazeera coverage, it somehow found a way to transmit the country's mood with impressive clarity.

Yet, despite the fact that some Arab uprisings are inherently more complex than others (because some societies embody a more involved sectarian makeup, for example), Aljazeera news anchors continue to jump from one country to the other, as if addressing different points of the exact same topic. In the channel's coverage of Libya, NATO's unwarranted bombing campaign received little reporting. The targeting of black Africans (covered by some Western and African media) earned little airtime at Aljazeera Arabic. Ever-available guests were often immediately dispatched to dismiss any reports of maltreatment of captured soldiers accused of being 'loyal to Muammar al-Qaddafi'. Aljazeera had indeed striven to present a perfect scenario of a perfect revolution. Now that the sentimentalization of the revolution is fading out, a harsh new reality is setting in, one that encompasses numerous arms groups, infighting and Western countries ready to share the spoils.

Aljazeera's priority has now shifted from Libya to Syria, a country that has been on Washington's radar for many years and long irked Israel for its support of Lebanese and Palestinian resistance factions.

From a political and humanitarian viewpoint, there is no denial that Syria is in need of fundamental political reforms. More, the blatant violence employed against the uprising was simply indefensible. However, unlike what Aljazeera Arabic and other media may claim on an hourly basis, there is more to Syria than a brutal 'Alawite regime' and a rebelling nation that never ceases to demand 'international intervention'. There is also the reality of ill-intentioned parties seeking their own objectives, such as further isolating Iran, strengthening allies in Lebanon, weakening Damascus-based Palestinian factions, and aiding US allies in rearranging the entire power-paradigm in the region.

One would argue that whatever ambitions some small Arab country may have, these should not be pursued at the expense of the Syrian people, who are seeking real democracy in a sovereign country free from meddling, armed militias and unexplained car bombs. The fact is, insecurity and political uncertainty will be the future of Syria if a political settlement is not achieved between the government - which must end its violent crackdowns on pro-democracy protests - and a truly patriotic opposition that doesn't call for foreign intervention or 'no-fly-zones'. The Iraq no-fly-zone in 1991 and the Libya no-fly-zone in 2011 were mere prologues to military actions that devastated both countries. There is little justification in repeating this scenario; the Syrian people did not rise merely to see their country being destroyed.

In January 5, a massive blast killed 26 people in Damascus, exactly two weeks after twin bombings killed 44. Between the two bombings, hundreds of Syrians were reportedly killed and wounded in the armed conflict involving the Free Syrian Army. Considering the large and porous border areas between Syria and Iraq, Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan, and the contentious border area with the occupied Golan Heights (illegally annexed by Israel), one cannot dismiss the possibility that Syria has been infiltrated on many fronts. But this also goes unreported.

While one lacks sympathy for any regime that brutally murders innocent people, journalists are also accountable to both balance and humanitarian standards. They cannot completely dismiss one party and embrace another. Aljazeera Arabic channel has done just that. It has failed to maintain its independence, and is growingly covering the upheaval in the Arab world from the narrow political prism of its host country.

In Aljazeera's early days in the mid and late 1990s, the channel took on taboo subjects and proudly challenged the status quo. This continued with Aljazeera's coverage of Afghanistan and the Iraq war, when mainstream western media were disowning their own proclaimed standards of objectivity and treating Iraqis like dispensable beings underserving of even a body count.

In recent months, however, Aljazeera has begun to change course. It has deviated from its journalistic responsibilities in Libya, and is now completely losing the plot with Syria.

The channel is in urgent need to revisit its own code of ethics, and to fulfill its promise of treating its audience "with due respect and address every issue or story with due attention to present a clear, factual and accurate picture." Yes, perhaps the Syrian regime should be changed, and perhaps an armed rebellion in Syria will eventually overtake the non-violent uprising. But the outcome is not for me, Aljazeera, The New York Times or any other journalist or publication to decide. The revolution belongs to the Syrian people alone, and only they can determine where it leads.

Ramzy Baroud (www.ramzybaroud.net) is an internationally-syndicated columnist and the editor of PalestineChronicle.com. His latest book is My Father Was a Freedom Fighter: Gaza's Untold Story (Pluto Press, London), available on Amazon.com.

Collapse

The following are some quotes from an email conversation. In sharing them I hope it sparks thought, but also provides an opportunity for a wider conversation.

When you send people to hell don't expect them to act like angels.

War is a low down dirty thing; that's why we are against it.

These sorts of things have been going on by both sides in every war.

I knew some WWII vets that told me things most people wouldn't believe.

Of course they shouldn't have taken a leak on the Afghans, but somehow
I understand.

For some reason I am more outraged at the sanctimony response. It's like nobody has blood on their hands. Flag waving chicken hawks.

Thanks for letting me vent, hope you understand the context.

PEACE

Once you say it's ok to kill people then everything else is off the table. I find this uproar somewhat laughable.

Further, when they use a phrase such as "the target (a person) has been neutralized" and then find it shocking when Marines piss on a dead Afghans it is just such bull shit.

There is a strange sense of American exceptionalism and racism. What concerns
me also is some people are saying "Well they were just Afghans" So racism will used to justify not only the killing but also the urinating. It's like the the brutality of war is never really examined or dealt with. It's odd when you think about it we never kill white people. Unless they are poor, uneducated then we put a needle in their arm and the state calls it o.k.

I'm outraged that there's so much said about the pissin and NOTHING about all the fuckin killing that never seems to end. I totally agree with ya [name withheld].

All my vet friends agree as well. When you are in military they teach you and use words to dehumanize the enemy. Gook, slope, chink, they use cold words like well you know. But when soldiers adapt to their environment people don't like it. Even though they "Support the Troops" whatever that means.

It's all such bull shit and really gets my PTSD a working.

I read a Marine Corp Sgt. analysis today on some channel, I admit I am a news junkie, highly addicted. Any who, the MC Sgt started to get to the meat of "it" and then went bull shit USMC. Too bad. Somebody needs to express a feeling, an understanding, of the complexities of war, how it really fucks your mind up, how you see yourself changing into something you really aren't but nevertheless changing ...going along to get along... but actually feeling what HST talked about: Fear and Loathing.

So the events depicted in the video are much more than a side incident of a few bad actors. It is systemic. Just as what happened at Abu Ghraib was not a few bad actors but systemic. Until we address the reality of what we are creating we will continue to allow it to be created. Generation after generation of troops will have to keep the stuff of nightmares bottled up inside, or it will come out in another attack and another prison sentence.

Collapse