To:

Zcom_simple
Home » Z Blogs » Noam Chomsky's Blog » US-Israel Strategic Relations

Hello,

Blogs are a familiar feature on the internet - where users post content in an accumulating manner, with comments, and search options, etc. They facilitate expression and exploration, and via attached comments, also debate and synthesis.


Reading and
Navigating Blogs

Our blogs are quite powerful. Each writer can post, as is typically the case. Sustainers who have the option can also post, however. All Blogs appear in the blog system, and sometimes also in content boxes the top page of ZNet - and always via the left menu of the top page - and can be found via searches, etc.

Commenting on blogs follows the blogs, attached at the bottom, and blog comments, like all others, are also visible in many places that show comments including in the forum system. In addition, the entire blog system gathers content for everyone - but one can look at the accumulating content in many ways.

  • For example one can look at one writer's efforts - so one is seeing what is effectively a blog system for that one writer, or Sustainer.
  • One can also look at the content by topic, seeing blogs that are tagged as being about a certain topic - or place, as well. Thus, when doing that, it is a blog system about a topic, or a place, with many contributors.
  • One can look at only writer blogs, or only sustainer blogs, as well.
  • One can look at blogs for particular Groups, too.

All this is easily done using the left menu. Searches allow even more variables and refinements.


Creating Blog Posts

If you are a Sustainer with permission, and are logged in, you will see a link in the left menu for you to post a blog - and you can use that to post one, and then tag it various ways (such as with a topic or place, or a group tag), and once you do, it is in the system with you as the author.

You can also use the console button to the left to post a blog - anytime and from anywhere in the site, as long as you are logged in.

Meanwhile, enjoy the blogs - and, by the way, if you are a Free Member or a Sustainer with a ZSpace page, of course you can put one or more content boxes on it, pulling blog links of any sort you may want to filter for, for example, by you or by your friends or by others - and by topic, about places, for groups, etc.

Blogs

9

Noam Chomsky's Blog

Web Address: http://www.zcommunications.org/zspace/noamchomsky
Bio: (More)

All Chomsky Blogs

Recent Chomsky Content

Znetarticle_icon ZNet Articles
Zmagarticle_icon ZMag Articles
Zcommentary_icon ZCommentaries
Zaudio_icon ZAudios
Zvideo_icon ZVideos
Zblogpost_icon Blog Posts
Zbook_icon Books
Zvideo_icon ZStores

US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Noam Chomsky at Feb 16, 2005

PDF Version

Printer Friendly Version
Change Text Size a- | A+
...There are real US-Israel conflicts, but they are not being reported in the US (they are in Israel). An important one right now is the conflict over Israel's efforts to sell advanced military technology to China (Harpy drones), to which the US is strongly objecting, as it has in the past, when Clinton compelled Israel in 2000 to cancel its transfer of Phalcon technology to China, after Israeli authorities had sworn that they would never back down because of its enormous significance to Israel's highly militarized high-tech economy. This goes way back. On the end of the Arafat era offering new hopes, that's true in only one respect: US-Israel are hoping that a new leadership may be more willing to accept unchanged US-Israeli demands. I can only refer you to my posting on the commentary on Arafat's death. We need not waste time [on] our Dear Leader's [Bush's] "efforts to spread democracy," etc. It's normal, not only here, for the more obsequious commentators to worship at the shrine of the political leadership, who are always proclaiming noble visions. That's why no serious analyst ever pays the slightest attention to declarations of virtuous intent by political leaders, which carry precisely zero information because they are completely predictable, including Hitler, Stalin, Japanese fascists, and virtually anyone else you can think of. ...The question [regarding a change in strategic relations with Israel] always is: Where's the evidence? One bit of evidence is indeed put forth, with enormous enthusiasm in fact: the Sharon-Abbas cease-fire. The gushing is understandable. The cease-fire is an enormous victory for the US-Israeli rejectionism which, since Kissinger, has blocked political settlement. The cease-fire is to be welcomed: better no killing than killing. But take a careful look at the terms. The framework is entirely that of US-Israeli rejectionism: Palestinian resistance, even against the occupying army, must cease. Nothing could delight US-Israeli hawks more than complete peace, which would enable them to pursue, unhindered, the policies of US-Israeli takeover of the valuable land and resources of the West Bank, and huge infrastructure projects to break up the remaining Palestinian territories into unviable cantons. That has been the core issue of the conflict for years, and there is not a single word about it in the cease-fire agreement. Last year, US-backed Israeli settlement programs increased the illegal settler population by 6%, to 450,000 -- counting "East Jerusalem," illegally annexed in violation of Security Council orders, but with a wink from the US, since expanded enormously, and now recognized by the US as part of Israel -- tacitly by the press, which even goes so far as to say that the illegal wall -- also not mentioned -- separates the West Bank from Israel. Bush virtually put the stamp of official approval on it. It would be hard to imagine a clearer and more complete victory for US-Israeli rejectionism. The Abbas government accepted it, much as the Arafat-led "Tunis" PLO accepted Clinton's doctrine that all UN resolutions are "obsolete and anachronistic" -- opening the way, as predicted, to the continuation of the US-backed Israeli settlement programs that continued without a break through the Oslo years, reaching their highest level (pre-Sharon-Bush) in 2000, the last year for Clinton and Barak. One might argue that it's the best they can do as long as the US keeps to its unilateral rejectionism, and the population here let's it happen. But that's a separate question. There's no indication that I can see that anything has changed. There's a somewhat more general issue that is settled by the cease-fire agreement. The strongest UN condemnation of terrorism, passed at Reaganite initiative in 1987, had unanimous support (Honduras alone abstaining), apart from the US and Israel, which voted against it. As they explained, the offending passage was one that endorsed the right of resistance in accord with the UN Charter against racist and colonialist regimes (meaning their close ally Apartheid South Africa) and foreign military occupation (meaning Israel). Unreported, as usual, when the facts shed an improper light on the character of US elites. Now the US and Israel have won that battle. Military occupation is declared legitimate, and no resistance to it is tolerable. Another great victory for the rule of force, and demonstration of the importance of a subservient intellectual community. I'd like to be optimistic, and will leap at any straw in the wind. But so far I see nothing real.

Comment On This Blog Post  See All Comments (89)

Z

chumpsky

By Anonymous, Anonymous at Jun 10, 2007 02:57 AM
poor bleeding heart liberal  its just terrible when nation states form an alliance.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Sef101960, Yellow at Jun 01, 2005 21:33 PM
Support for Israel is based purely on geo-strategic considerations. The sale of advanced weapons technology to China by Israel is one instance of patron/client divergence that I think will be resolved with all due speed. The US has always relied on Israel to crush and discourage Arab nationalism. This is their sole purpose. Nationalist unrest in the region , including the Iraqi Coup, led to the drafting of National Security Council Memorandum 5801 which stipulated that a powerful, well armed Jewish state in the eastern Mediterranian is clearly in US national security interests. The sudden emergence of Kissinger in 1971 signalled a committment to eliminate all but US influence from the ME peace process. The Israeli rejection of a startling offer that year by the new Egyptian president A. Sadat of full peace and diplomatic relations in exchange for a full Israeli withdrawl from all territories occupied in the 1967 War signalled the US/Israeli rejection of ceasing neo-colonial expansionism so as to allow a viable Palestinain state. The current state of affairs is perfectly consistent with the history of the region.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Jsassin, Logic at May 03, 2005 06:37 AM
If a child was self destructive a parent would use tough love, thus preventing injury by grabbing a child before they run into the street. Israel needs tough love. They should have all military aid stopped and their PAC should be investigated. Maybe then their survival would be assured. History will judge them harsely if they do not grow up and become a real nation. The Palestians would fare much better if the adopted a nonviolent yet strong economic message to their oppressive landlords. Control is only maintained if one has the might, that is why behavioralism is not as effective as self-efficacy. Self-efficacy in the conflict would mean letting go of control and finding a common ground. Noam has always presented a better way, he truly is an American.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Mar 19, 2005 21:56 PM
I've known people who've committed suicide. I'm in no mood for your childish crap, or Chomsky talking about how "GREAT" America is, and, oh, he didn't say that really, getting all in a huff. I gave Chomsky the benefit of the doubt. No more. He can talk to himself from now on - or to idiots like you: young teenagers with nothing between their ears. Chomsky blog - and he can't even be bothered to reply to anyone on his blog. So why does he have one? Because of his ego. Overinflated, like yours, Graeme. "I wish the world would go away" I'm going, Chomsky. I've done so much in the past to help people, and this is what I get in return - abuse! Death is something I would welcome.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Mar 19, 2005 21:52 PM
"...you haven't even attempted to answer any of the substantive claims I made about your arguments." (Graeme) -- This is a joke. You haven't bothered to read any of Chomsky's articles or debates on his Web site. You spend all your time puffing up your ego, and neglecting your mind. But that's because you're not very bright. Why are you so obsessed with defending the American people? They are slaughtering innocent people in Iraq and elsewhere. They've run out of excuses. I'm not interested anymore in the poor, hard-done-by Americans. Their country stinks, and Chomsky should be ashamed of himself for calling America "great". Shows how much he cares. But he's as brainwashed as the rest of them. His hands also drip with blood. Chomsky is just playing an intellectual game of chess. Great fun for him, not for the rest of us. Like Noam Chomsky said at the end of Manufacturing Consent (he was interviewed in 2002, ten years after the documentary was made): "I wish the world would go away" (or words very similar). That's me, and that's you Graeme. So I'm off.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Mar 19, 2005 13:15 PM
In case you missed the obvious: after asking Chomsky to furnish my prospective employer - or whomever - with a character reference, Chomsky might say (he would be perfectly entitled to): well, I'd love to, but you might have a criminal record, you might have been sacked from your previous job for pilfering, etc. "WHAT?!" I exclaim, indignantly. "How dare you question my integrity. I'm an angel. Now you put that down on that there character reference and hand it to me - THIS INSTANT!" "Sorry, no can do." "What? But you must. My name's Noam Chomsky and Graeme says you must."

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Mar 19, 2005 12:00 PM
I don't have time right now to read your reply, but I want to make a quick comment, as you seem to take exception to me questioning Chomsky's integrity - even indirectly. If I asked Chomsky to write a character reference for me, would he do so? No, of course he wouldn't. He would say: sorry, I would have to have known you personally for a number of years to do that. Even if I was a well known celebrity, he would still refuse. From that, is it logical to conclude that Chomsky thinks I'm an unscrupulous, untrustworthy person, and THAT is why he refuses to give me a character reference? No, of course not. Understand so far? Good! Because this applies in reverse. It is not possible for me to give Chomsky a character reference, implied or otherwise. I haven't met Chomsky; I don't know him; therefore, don't expect me to worship the ground he walks on. The mentality you want to engender in others is the same kind that has created the cult of celebrity. Noam Chomsky is publicly very critical of such hero-worshipping. Therefore, he should be very pleased that I treat him in exactly the same way that I treat anyone else.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Mar 17, 2005 16:22 PM
But Chomsky chose not to, because he truly does believe America is the best country in the world - at least FOR HIM. More likely, what he said was a Freudian slip, rather than a dumbing down. "By the way, Michael Jackson?! What are you talking about?" (Graeme) Do I have to spell everything out to you? I'm talking about your fanaticism towards Chomsky, taking every perceived criticism of that man as a personal attack on yourself. I came to this site as a supporter of Chomsky, thinking he might be a decent human being. You are turning me right against him. With friends like you, Chomsky doesn't need enemies.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Mar 17, 2005 16:21 PM
"indeed it was almost exactly the response you recommended he give." (Grme) Almost is a mile away. I said the question is absurd, and it has NO answer. It's like someone saying, "My girlfriend is the prettiest woman in the world." To some, she might be; to others, she isn't. I'm British, and some British people claim Britain is the greatest country in the world. Which is it? Britain or America? It can't be both! See the absurdity of what Chomsky and others are saying. The question can only be answered from a selfish perspective. "Perhaps Chomsky was 'dumbing down' his responses so that Bennett could possibly understand him." (Graeme) No he wasn't. Chomsky isn't talking to Bennett; he's talking to the listeners and viewers - to the "great American public". Chomsky had the chance to say something obvious, such as, "I was born here, this is MY country, not the President's, not the Pentagon's, and, as such, I have every right to try to set my country straight, to prevent it from butchering yet more people abroad."

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Mar 17, 2005 16:19 PM
"In the article you cited above Chomsky's response was nothing like you claimed" (Graeme) -- Just what is your agenda, Graeme? I quoted verbatim. For anyone reading this, and who doesn't believe me, go to http://www.chomsky.info/debates.htm - and click on "On 9-11". If Noam Chomsky can't be bothered to have a Web site set up that cites his articles and interviews correctly, that is HIS fault - not mine! But the quote is not a contraction, because Bennett says in response: BENNETT: I think you should say greatest -- I think you should say greatest a little more often. Noam Chomsky is NOT a religion. I am not obligated to spend years of my life discovering every nuance of his work, and every detail of his life. "In the article you cited above Chomsky's..." You're not making yourself clear. If you're referring to the Guardian article I mentioned in a previous post, then, yes, Chomsky has elaborated more deeply on what the "greatest" country in the world stands for. Chomsky is human, Graeme. He's not a god. He makes mistakes, he slips up, he gets things wrong - he can be selfish and unpleasant, just like the rest of us.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Mar 16, 2005 20:24 PM
"This is getting tiresome. From the article you quoted:" (Graeme) -- No, your attack on me is getting tiresome. Is this the Michael Jackson fanatics fan club I've stumbled upon? Bennett: ...why do you choose to live in this terrorist nation, Mr. Chomsky? CHOMSKY: I don't. I choose to live in what I think is the greatest country in the world, which is committing horrendous terrorist acts and should stop. There! Satisfied! You will find this quote on Chomsky's official site (http://chomsky.info). The article is here: http://www.chomsky.info/debates/20020530.htm -- "How you can then conclude that Chomsky was merely play[ing] to the patriotic feelings Americans have about their 'great' nation" (Graeme) I did NOT say Noam Chomsky was DELIBERATELY playing to the patriotic feelings of the American people. This is a complete misreading of what I wrote. I will read the rest of your posts later and make appropriate responses. I'm very tired now. I'm sure you'll forgive me. "Get him, lads!" "Oh, hell!" :(

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Mar 13, 2005 06:10 AM
I didn't let this rich man get away with being a hypocrite (I had contacted him to help someone else, but his response was almost flippant). So I told him exactly what I thought of him - in polite terms, of course. His personal secretary, in particular, got very angry. :) Cross the rich, and, boy, can they get nasty - they defend their turf like wild animals. (In reality, I wasn't smiling afterwards; I was pretty depressed).

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Mar 13, 2005 05:43 AM
This rich man later threatened to leave the country if his taxes were increased. He also took a couple of people to court (this appeared in the newspaper), in order to claim a couple of tens of thousands of dollars in royalty fees. This pair needed the money, and rightfully it was theirs; but this rich man, devoured by greed and his own self-importance, was determined to grab the paltry sum for himself. He's still phenomenally rich. He spends his money prudently is the euphemism. However, according to Ninja - another poster - he's altruistic because he's given money to good causes. As I said to Ninja, just because many American people gave money to a Tsunami appeal, it is not evidence that the U.S. is a lovely, caring nation that's been led astray by propaganda. Of course, neither is it evidence to the contrary.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Mar 13, 2005 02:03 AM
"But when Chomsky talks about the tendency in the US to believe that 'you're meant to be out there making money, not giving a damn about world affairs and the quality of people's lives at home,' he's talking as much about the American socio-economic system as American culture." (Graeme) -- The question is: as Noam Chomsky charges speaking fees, is he doing what he's doing out of decency, or because he's onto a nice little earner. Noam Chomsky Speeches Ltd. "Hang on a minute. You're telling us we shouldn't be going out there making money 24/7, and that's precisely what you're doing." It's a question we should ask. I was misled once by a rich man - who is far, far richer than NC. So now I always question people's motives. This rich man said all the right words; however, I later discovered - by contacting him directly - that he was not the man he made himself out to be. Once bitten, twice shy as they say.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Mar 13, 2005 01:26 AM
"Many Americans *do* only listen to what they want to hear. BUT SO DO OTHER PEOPLE." (Graeme) You don't say. You seem to be forgetting who has the empire. That makes the American people more culpable than anyone. Tomorrow, we might have to criticize another nation; but today, it's the U.S. "Furthermore there might be perfectly good reasons why this is the case (including both state and cultural indoctrination)." (Graeme) -- Come on Graeme. And the abuse gay people get? Also the result of indoctrination. Racism? Indoctrination? Slavery? Treatment of women? Abuse of children? Hunting animals for sport, which involves inflicting pain, etc., etc. So, in a nut shell, Graeme, you're saying the American people are angels from heaven, possessed only by pure thoughts; it's just propaganda, indoctrination and the socio-economic system that's led them astray. Pull the other one.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Mar 13, 2005 01:11 AM
"Heres a thought: Why not post your own thoughts and opinions? This back and forth game of "Chomsky says" is pretty silly." (IlliterateRiffraff) -- You mean I should be a bit more like the "illiterate riffraff"? I should massage my ego daily, not read a single book, ignore the opinions and thoughts of others, and just generally spit on everyone who isn't like myself. If you read what I said Riffraff, I'm using Chomsky's words to express a view of the American people. Chomsky places a lot of emphasis on propaganda being responsible for how the American people behave. I'm saying, the American people have to take some of the blame themselves.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Mar 13, 2005 00:19 AM
"Sorry, I should have been more clear. I just meant that it might be nice to have some opinions posted that arent just Chomsky references." (Illiterate Riffraff) -- We cite Chomsky because, unlike many of us, he has a voice - although, in comparison to Bush, his voice is barely audible. Still, Chomsky has the ability to get a subset of people thinking about certain things, which someone like me does not. I already said in a previous post we shouldn't turn this "cause" into a religion and deem every follower a saint. And that includes Noam Chomsky. He's human - like the rest of us.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Mar 13, 2005 00:07 AM
"ok, even if America HAS done all this terrible stuff that Chomsky mentions, we're still the greatest country on Earth. Other countries do bad things as well; no one's perfect. But America comes damn well close - EVEN Chomsky admits it!!" "This is nonsense. Chomsky doesn't 'admit' this." (Graeme). -- I didn't say he did. I said this is the impression many patriotic Americans will form - or the excuse they will use - if, even in a roundabout way, Chomsky admits America is a great nation. It's a get out clause for the U.S. people. America's great! However bad other countries are, ours is still the best overall. Ok, we commit atrocities - so what? Other countries do as well.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Mar 12, 2005 23:59 PM
"I don't get your point here at all. What are you saying?" (Graeme) I'm saying Chomsky shouldn't answer the question - at least, not in the way he does - because he then merely plays to the patriotic feelings Americans have about their "great" nation, blinding them still further to the truth, and reinforcing the great lie. He should say something like, "great for whom?" If I'm a CEO, my company's great because I'm being paid a fat salary, but to my workers, who get paid very little, the company is not great at all. Eating a sirloin steak is great for me, but not for the cow that was slaughtered. The question is nonsense. I'm not answering it, because it has no answer.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Not_you_ese, Illiterateriffraff at Mar 07, 2005 04:42 AM
Sorry, I should have been more clear. I just meant that it might be nice to have some opinions posted that arent just Chomsky references. While I do realize this is a Chomsky blog, I dont think the purpose is go back and forth quoting Chomsky inorder to prove ones point. Without going to far out on a limb, Id say that infact thats probably the last thing Chomsky intends the reader to do. Various quotes do come to mind, but I think you all know them.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Not_you_ese, Illiterateriffraff at Mar 05, 2005 22:15 PM
Heres a thought: Why not post your own thoughts and opinions? This back and forth game of "Chomsky says" is pretty silly.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Mar 05, 2005 15:07 PM
Having said all this, I do agree with you that America needs well-funded independent media (as does every country) to give people undistorted information - even if they do nothing with it! Good article here: "It's the Media Stupid!" http://www.consortiumnews.com/2005/010505.html - Maybe George Orwell's 1984 got closer to the truth: 80% of the population can be given their "freedom" because they pose no danger to the system; all they want is to be entertained; all they care about is their own happinesss. It's the 20% you have to watch. Maybe that seems patronizing, but maybe it's true. Humans aren't easy things to understand. :-/

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Mar 05, 2005 14:15 PM
(continued from last time...) "...if a people have been indocrinated and propagandized since birth, what does it matter if they 'should' know things they don't?" (Graeme) - As Noam Chomsky points out, the U.S. isn't a totalitarian state quite yet, which means the truth regularly trickles out to the American public. Whether anyone is actually listening is quite another matter. But let's assume, as you do, that legions are. Well, then, over time, these small facts start to accumulate in a person's mind until, one day, their combined weight can no longer be supported by what the government is saying. Something snaps! Or, to put it another way, a tipping point is reached. The person no longer trusts the government or much of what the corporate media is saying, and starts to search around for a more honest view of the world. From that point on the person is lost as far as the politicians and elite are concerned. The American public should have reached a tipping point long ago. So you have to ask yourself why they haven't. That's what I've been trying to do.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Mar 05, 2005 01:34 AM
"The effect of this last question..." - ...could be worse! Noam Chomsky may be seen as totally discrediting himself. "What is this guy talking about? America's the greatest country on Earth. He's just admitted that! So why does he persist in attacking a free nation? We don't torture our own people; we don't start wars with other democratic countries. He's picked on the wrong people! He's totally wacko." America is like The Borg in Star Trek. Everyone is assimilated into one being; hence, to question the president is to question the American people; and to question the integrity of the U.S. government is to - guess what? - question the integrity of the American people. And to question the integrity of the American people will result in - you've guessed it! - DEATH! (or the end of your career).

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Mar 05, 2005 00:26 AM
And human nature. A quote from George Monbiot (his site: http://www.monbiot.com): "Tell people something they know already, and they will thank you for it. Tell them something new, and they will hate you for it." Americans are so puffed up with pride that for them to admit their country is guilty of terrible crimes against humanity is too humiliating for many of them to accept. And so their heads go back into the sand. (Something else I want to say. Will post later!) Here's an article in which Chomsky is asked about living in the "greatest" country in the world (scroll down to 9th paragraph): http://books.guardian.co.uk/departments/politicsphilosophyandsociety/story/0,6000,1096132,00.html

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Mar 05, 2005 00:17 AM
"...if a people have been indocrinated and propagandized since birth, what does it matter if they 'should' know things they don't?" (Graeme) - Graeme, even Noam Chomsky doesn't pretend propaganda is entirely responsible for the widespread ignorance that exists in America. He talks about the American culture: you're meant to be out there making money, not giving a damn about world affairs and the quality of people's lives at home. Just look at how many interviews Chomsky has done in which he's asked at the end: but you live in the U.S. because it's the greatest country in the world - isn't that right, Mr Chomsky? Transcripts are edited, and Noam Chomsky invariably ends up giving a terse reply, something like: "Yes, that's right". The effect of this last question on the listener's/reader's mind is: ok, even if America HAS done all this terrible stuff that Chomsky mentions, we're still the greatest country on Earth. Other countries do bad things as well; no one's perfect. But America comes damn well close - EVEN Chomsky admits it!! The American culture, Grameme. Many Americans only listen to what they want to hear.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Kreuzberg_anto, Moderne at Mar 04, 2005 02:48 AM
As far as pragmatic solutions and ways forward from here goes, I would concede that the distinction is rather moot... hence the "good, very real reasons" for the state of affairs in the US that you cite and I agree with. But I cannot personally accept that the American public should not be held *at the very least* partly responsible for the effects of their ignorance, when information is available to those who look for it (and don't have to look all that hard, really), and *especially* considering the brutal end result of that ignorance on so much of the world... I would think that the argument that Americans hold little or no responsibility for the acts of their state through ignorance, propaganda, and lies to be much easier for a Westerners to make to each other and believe, but I wouldn't want to try and sell an Iraqi child on the idea.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Kreuzberg_anto, Moderne at Mar 04, 2005 02:38 AM
I agree with you in the abstract, Graeme, but my reason for my raising the point in the first place was the fact that though the situations are clearly wildly different for a whole host of reasons, we are still arguing the degree of moral responsibility of an ignorant populace for the behavour of their government. And my point was that through Nuremberg it was widely accepted in the west (though I personally disagree with the reasoning, btw) that in that particular case, the civilian population had an obligation to know... the logical extension of that line of reasoning being that they were therefore at least partly resonsible for the behaviour of their government. If that line of moral reasoning works for German civilians in the 1930s, living in a totalitarian society without internet and without the benefit of a lingua franca understood by much of the world, then surely it suffices for the American public of today.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Kreuzberg_anto, Moderne at Mar 04, 2005 01:11 AM
One of the ideas established at Nuremberg was that "not knowing" was not an excuse (and here I'm referring to moral guilt as assigned to the population as a whole, not specific "order-following" justifications from those who were an integral part of the machine), suggesting that in that case the people had an obligation to resist, and therefore to be aware. Admittedly, it's a pretty abstract and nonconcrete angle, but I would be inclined to argue that Americans (and the rest of us - I live in Canada myself), by virtue of our power, money, access to information as compared to the rest of the world, have an *obligation* to know these things and to act accordingly. If ignorance of the law is no excuse in most Western societies when it comes to internal civic matters, why should an (arguably) willful ignorance be an excuse when it comes to international crimes?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Kreuzberg_anto, Moderne at Mar 04, 2005 01:04 AM
From someone who has long been a reader of the Znet blogs but never posted, I would offer an angle to consider on this debate between PlayerPiano and Graeme... what about considering the issue as not *whether* the American people know what is going on, and are therefore responsible (or not), but whether they have an *obligation* to know, and are thus failing through the ignorance of the majority?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Not_you_ese, Illiterateriffraff at Mar 03, 2005 12:26 PM
PlayerPiano- I'm not trying to be a snob, but I think your priorities are mixed up. Here's why. On one hand, you accuse Michael Moore and Noam Chomsky of profiting off of the suffering of others. On the other hand, you promote someone like John Perkins. Now, let me get this straight. We have a film maker, a liguistics professor, and the author of a book entitled, "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man." Of those three, you're concerned about the movie-guy and the word-guy? Not the "I totally screwed your entire people for money, then wrote a book about it" guy? Not to be a jerk, but you might want to work on your own moral priorities before you go around questioning the morals of others. Just a though.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Mar 03, 2005 03:14 AM
In "Secrecy and Privilege" by Robert Parry (his Web site is http://www.consortiumnews.com), Parry points out that the U.S. news media avoided telling the American people who really won the 2000 election for fear their readers would consider it divisive. America had been attacked; now was not the time to question Bush's legitimacy to hold office. That's my point: Americans themselves, of their own volition, have participated in constructing a system that hides the truth from them. Time they behaved like the grown adults that they are, and took some responsibility for what their government and media have done; and still are doing. Time for others to stop running to their defense with the tired excuse that it's simply propaganda that's making the American people act the way they do. The author of "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man", John Perkins, said, in an interview on Democracy Now, that a lot of Americans just don't want to know what's going on. I think he's right. And that means the American people have only themselves to blame.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Mar 03, 2005 03:12 AM
"Why do you insist on associating me with the American government? If you read around on the other blogs...I think you'll find I'm one of the most relentless critics of the US government you're likely to come across." (Graeme) - I would read other blogs if I had time, or it didn't get me down so much. I often wonder if it's all a waste of time, acquiring knowledge about what is going on in the world - given that I'm a nobody. Michael Moore has become hyper rich out of exploiting the suffering of others, and even Noam Chomsky, I read, charges $12-15,000 an hour to speak (I searched the Internet for further info about Noam Chomsky's speaking fees, but found nothing). I regularly wonder if I'm not just being played - by everyone! By the elite, by the rich and famous, and by intellectuals, such as Noam Chomsky. The last thing I need is you telling me the American people are right even when they're wrong - that is, they are making the right choices given the information they have, which is pure propaganda. The fact is, after 9/11 the American people didn't care about reality anymore; they rallied around their president and ignored what the rest of the world was saying.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Not_you_ese, Illiterateriffraff at Feb 28, 2005 13:34 PM
Forgive me if this has already been mentioned, but I think the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty in 1967 is a good example of why this is a strange relationship. At the time it was dismissed as a case of mistaken identity, but from what Ive read that seems highly unlikely. As far as I know there has yet to be a congressional investigation into this. The only thing I've heard that makes even the slightest bit of sense is that the USS Liberty was eves dropping on Egypt and therefore would have been able to pick up on Israeli communications as well. This only raises more questions. Regardless, what is known about the events of that day seem to place Israel in violation of various Geneva Conventions: It was international waters, it was un-provoked, they used of un-marked planes and then they purposely shot at and sunk life boats after attacking the Liberty with torpedoes. I doubt we'll ever get the full story, which makes sense. 34 people died and 172 were wounded at the hands of our closest allie. Accident or not, you don't want that type of information out there. People might start to ask the wrong questions.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Feb 28, 2005 04:57 AM
Not a bad article here on Diego Garcia: http://www.wsws.org/articles/2000/jul2000/isla-j18.shtml

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Feb 28, 2005 04:48 AM
Tim Hurndall, 22, and James Miller, 34, British citizens, shot in cold blood by Israeli soldiers. Justice from Israel is nowhere to be seen. Bush and Blair couldn't care less. The islanders of Diego Garcia: permanently banned from ever returning to their island thanks to an edict by Blair. Timeline for Diego Garcia here (scroll down to 1963 and read from there - for anyone who hasn't heard of Diego Garcia): http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=diego_garcia A constructive solution would be to shake the American people hard, to try to wake them up from the seeming coma they're in.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Feb 28, 2005 04:43 AM
"One more thing: 'Just how long do we excuse Americans for their supposed ignorance?' "It isn't a matter of 'excusing' anybody, but of looking for constructive solutions to our current global crisis." (Graeme) - Finding constructive solutions to international crises is America's forte, isn't it? Fine words mean nothing when America has a gun at your head, or a mini-nuke ready to be detonated. U.S.A: "You do what we say or we'll pull the trigger." SOME POOR SOD: "Please don't shoot. I'm so glad we could solve this crisis constructively. God Bless the American people." -- As usual Graeme, you defend the Americans for their willful ignorance, blaming the rest of the world for seeing reality for what it is. Damn Palestinians! There'd be peace in the Middle East if only they'd talk to Israel constructively. Same too, the Iraqis. These Arabs don't appreciate what the U.S. has done for them, that's the problem.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Feb 28, 2005 01:16 AM
*** Sorry, posted twice by mistake *** The "world" fell silent for several minutes to commemorate those who died on September 11, 2001. The Americans have not fallen silent over ANY atrocity their country has committed. Just how long do we excuse Americans for their supposed ignorance? Till the day we see mushroom clouds out every window of our homes? I'm not picking on America. If I could speak French, I'd be on a French board, pointing out what their government has done to others. The British have nothing to be proud of either.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Feb 28, 2005 01:14 AM
"I agree, and you list some of the other problems above, problems which are by no means unique to or even especially common amongst Americans." (Graeme) - So, two wrongs make a right? Because my neighbor is a thief or a murderer - and gets away with it - that makes it ok for me to do the same? America is trying to push its ruthless capitalist system onto all of us - that means America has relevance in my life. It also makes criticism of the American people valid. Yes, there ARE other countries that treat animals just as badly - or worse - than America. That wasn't the point I was making. I just meant Americans know they are harming animals, yet it doesn't bother them. Equally, people will knowingly harm other humans (directly or indirectly), and it won't bother them. Hence, trying to talk to some Americans about the deaths of foreigners is about as productive as talking to the wall. You don't have to read "Fast Food Nation" to know animals are treated badly in the U.S. Americans aren't THAT stupid - or are they? Did Americans have to read a book to know where their toes are?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Feb 28, 2005 01:13 AM
"I agree, and you list some of the other problems above, problems which are by no means unique to or even especially common amongst Americans." (Graeme) - So, two wrongs make a right? Because my neighbor is a thief or a murderer - and gets away with it - that makes it ok for me to do the same? America is trying to push its ruthless capitalist system onto all of us - that means America has relevance in my life. It also makes criticism of the American people valid. Yes, there ARE other countries that treat animals just as badly - or worse - than America. That wasn't the point I was making. I just meant Americans know they are harming animals, yet it doesn't bother them. Equally, people will knowingly harm other humans (directly or indirectly), and it won't bother them. Hence, trying to talk to some Americans about the deaths of foreigners is about as productive as talking to the wall. You don't have to read "Fast Food Nation" to know animals are treated badly in the U.S. Americans aren't THAT stupid - or are they? Did Americans have to read a book to know where their toes were?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Feb 28, 2005 00:32 AM
Hollywood is apparently making a movie called "The Battle for Fallujah" starring Harrison Ford. Mr Ford is rich enough - and has time enough - to find out the facts, does he not? Yet, he's happy to star in a movie that not only distorts the reality, but also glorifies sickening atrocities committed by the U.S. military. http://film.guardian.co.uk/news/story/0,12589,1375731,00.html (The four "civilian contractors" mentioned in the article were possibly mercenaries, so I've read). As Noam Chomsky would say: imagine the reaction in America if the Arab world produced a movie glorifying 9/11. What would we be saying about them?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Feb 28, 2005 00:31 AM
I don't have first-hand knowledge of how Bush's proposal to privatize social security is going down in the U.S. But according to Byron Williams, in "Working For Change", the propaganda system is breaking down on this particular issue, as more and more Americans are realizing this ain't for them: http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0226-23.htm If the propaganda system is so powerful it can get Americans to willingly support the slaughter and impoverishment of millions of foreigners around the globe, how come it's failing on the issue of social security? Could I be right, and selfishness, greed, callousness, disinterest, and a I-can't-be-bothered-to-care-because-it's-not-me attitude have a far bigger impact on what Americans support than mere propaganda alone. Privatizing social security harms American citizens; butchering civilians and animals in Fallujah does not. I'm not being "anti-American". I've said similar things about people in my own country as well.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Feb 26, 2005 22:14 PM
Just thought I'd post a link to a Web site with an interview with Julian Darley, a British environmental researcher, currently living in Vancouver, Cananda: http://www.globalpublicmedia.com/interviews/344 Scroll down and click on "Download" or "Stream" to hear the interview. The interview is in two parts, and discusses "global relocalization of the economy, society, and culture" - weaning ourselves (that's all of us, in every country) off dependence on oil. It's not a heavy interview - well worth listening to!! Check out Julien Darley's Web site at: http://www.postcarbon.org/ (I wonder if nanotechnology will lead to viable new energy sources).

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Adabanasik, Ap2k at Feb 25, 2005 23:58 PM
There is a reason why most Americans don't know where Indonesia is, etc, etc. The education system in America fails at teaching you the basics of geography and history. You dwell on memorizing state capitals and learn about every battle of the Civil War - those things are important, but not when they replace more important aspects of histrory and geography, like placing certain countries on a map. I went to school in Poland and we learned about almost every country in the world, their capitals, their industry, agriculture, blah, blah, blah. So when you ask a European where Indonesia is they'll most likely be able to tell you where it is and possibly a bit about it, while Americans may have a hard time figuring out what continent it's on. This makes all US invasions quite easy, as the American population is isolated from the countries that the Pentagon attacks. It is easier for Americans then to "close their eyes" and just think of it as a backward country without a face (or to actually just not think about it at all). Knowing about places and ralizing that each country has people with mothers and fathers, daughters and sons who bleed makes war harder to ignore.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Feb 25, 2005 21:27 PM
But even if China is a bigger polluter than the U.S., in per capita terms, you have to remember part of that pollution is America's - that which it exported when it decided to decimate its manufacturing industry by exploiting cheap foreign labor. But, without the figures, there's no way I can make a proper country by country comparison.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Feb 25, 2005 21:08 PM
Got sidetracked and forgot to list the countries with the highest emissions of carbon dioxide, in case anyone's interested. America is the number one polluter, seemingly even in per capita figures: U.S. (5.75 billion metric tons), China (3.32), Russia (1.52), Japan (1.18), India (1.03), Germany (0.84), Canada (0.59), U.K. (0.55), South Korea (0.45), Italy (0.45). These are 2002 figures, which were obtained from an article in The Wall Street Journal, who in turn obtained the figures from the U.S. Energy Information Administration. It's possible China is a bigger polluter in per capita terms since you'd have to exclude from the calculation the huge number of Chinese who live in the countryside - those who aren't benefiting from - or stoking - China's "roaring" economy. Unfortunately, I don't have the figures to do the proper calculations.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Feb 25, 2005 20:22 PM
"Group behavior, conformity to group, and self-interest might explain the rest of it." - I forgot to mention good old-fashioned selfishness, and a large dose of callousness.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Feb 25, 2005 16:01 PM
Was propaganda responsible for Americans believing blacks were inferior to whites? Americans know, for example, that animals are treated like crap, so that they can have their hamburgers and buckets of chicken wings. Yet Americans don't try to eat less meat in order for the animals to be kept in better conditions - nor do they become vegetarian (except for a small minority). Even Noam Chomsky says he's made no attempt to eat less meat out of concern for animals. Propaganda explains part of the problem. It does not explain everything. Group behavior, conformity to group, and self-interest might explain the rest of it. Fear of thinking for yourself; fear of standing out; fear of defending people who are being persecuted; fear of suffering; fear of isolation. People are still frightened of defending gay people, for example. They fear they might be labeled gay themselves. "What? Are you gay or something? What are you defending this fag for?" Unless pushed, humans, generally, don't seem predisposed to defend those outside their own group. Americans are so full of pride, it's become almost impossible, it seems, for them to acknowledge their country might actually be grotesque.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Feb 25, 2005 15:56 PM
"You...underestimate the enormous effect propaganda has in the US. Many Americans really just don't believe what a lot of the rest of the world says about them or tries to tell them" (Graeme) - I'm not underestimating the power of propaganda. You're not telling me Americans are naive little children who don't know any better? The majority are grown adults. They know SUVs waste oil, and they know about global warming. Doesn't take a genius to put two and two together. That's just one instance of turning a blind eye to reality. The Americans have created a culture of we are number one, our country is the best, we don't need to travel abroad to all those backward foreign countries because America is the greatest - God Bless America! Blah, blah, blah. That's what's causing the Americans not to listen - their own blind conceit! I tried to point out the obvious, but you ignored it. Is propaganda to blame for the abusive terms, "You're so gay!", "That's so gay!" - that's a perfect example of people being unpleasant to others for the sake of being unpleasant. Nothing to do with being American; everything to do with being human.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Feb 24, 2005 23:35 PM
"I just think focusing on the American *people* themselves as somehow inherently worse than the rest of us however is both inaccurate and counter-productive." (Graeme) - I never said the American people are *inherently* any worse than the rest of us. And I don't think focusing on the American people, from time to time, is such a bad thing. I've tried speaking to some Americans about what their country is doing around the world, and they just don't want to know. I've also spoken to Americans with the opposite disposition. Anyway, I haven't just focused on the American people - I've laid a lot of blame on corporations, and I talked about human nature - meaning ALL humans, not just Americans. It's equally counter-productive blaming everything on the U.S. Administration. That's like Catholicism: you can sin as much as you want - so long as you repent your transgressions, all will be forgiven. The American people can pollute as much as they want, ignore the reality for as long as they want - so long as they blame the U.S. government, all will be forgiven.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Feb 24, 2005 22:02 PM
'If people hadn't been brainwashed into believing there's such a thing as "anti-Americanism" - that would be taken as given.' "I agree that 'anti-Americanism' is nonsense, but you nonetheless seem to be bordering on blaming Americans themselves for a lot of the problems the US poses to the world" (graeme) - You should hear what I say about my own country then. ;) The U.S. is the number one polluter. Singling out America on the issue of pollution is - therefore - hardly "blaming Americans for a lot". I call it fair criticism, particular since this sole superpower has told the rest of the world to sod off, we'll pollute as much as we want - what are you going to do about it, hey? Instead of spearheading change, America has slumped to the ground and is playing dead. Even China has woken up to climate change, and is starting to take action. In the end, China might do as little as America. But, given that the U.S. is a supposed democracy, which holds itself up as a shining model for the rest of the world, the number one polluter isn't unduly being criticized. (to be continued)

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Eriksson, Olle at Feb 22, 2005 16:13 PM
This isn't a comment but rather a question regarding the term "rejectionist" mentioned in the Noam Chomsky blog. As I read it, the US-Israeli Rejectionsits are rejecting the palestinian claim to forming a coherent state. Or is the term refering to a rejection of the UN resolutions? Further, who are these "rejectionists" and do they themselves accept the term describing them and their ambitions? I am not trying to deny the existance of "rejectionists", actualy I can think of quite a few individuals in both Israel and the US that might be labeled thus. Still, this is the first time I heard the term so, as I said earlier, this is merely a question regarding termenology.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Allen, Robert at Feb 22, 2005 07:04 AM
"But to be fair, Americans don't have a monopoly on ugliness. The newly rich Chinese got to take the cake in terms of grotesque consumptions and wealth flaunting." bwong All the nice things that I've said about you and you turn around and insult me. As a proud American, I take exception to your claim that some of your countrymen are uglier than ugly Americans. I will take a back seat to no one in my admiration for Chinese civilization; but your people will NEVER surpass us when it comes to "grotesque consumption and wealth flaunting." Never.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Gammon101, Bwong at Feb 22, 2005 03:04 AM
But to be fair, Americans don't have a monopoly on ugliness. The newly rich Chinese got to take the cake in terms of grotesque consumptions and wealth flaunting.The Chinese government actually makes it a policy that by year XXX every single Chinese must own a car. Now they are predicting how China will surpass the U.S and become the biggest economy in a short while. God help us all when that happens. P.S I am Chinese so I am in no way racist

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Gammon101, Bwong at Feb 22, 2005 03:03 AM
."Americans are inculcated with myths of their own superiority from before they can read." No kidding! Once I saw a documentary about the decrepit conditions in U.S inner city schools. They interviewed this guy who was the principal in one of the schools. The guy was complaining about how there was no heating in the winter, how the roof was leaking and how teachers were beaten up by the students and the endless gang warfare. Basically it was worse than the third world from what the guy said. Then in the end he said, "but the U.S still has the best education system in the world, this is the greatest country ever existed in human history". I went "eh??!!" and almost fell off my chair. I am not making this up.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Allen, Robert at Feb 21, 2005 19:35 PM
And where is bin Laden? There is considerable evidence linking him and his associates to a mass murder. And he continues to threaten all US citizens with further violence. Yet WTGN's hero does NOTHING but talk tough. Why wasn't he himself, the CIC, in Tora Bora when they had b L surrounded? Why didn't he himself lead the assault on the caves where he was hiding? Or at least allow American soldiers to go in, instead of the mercenaries who obviously lacked the will to get the job done right. That would have shown real guts, backing up the tough talk with action. At bottom he and his supporters like WTGN, who are not in the military themselves, are COWARDS.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Allen, Robert at Feb 21, 2005 19:07 PM
"Talking about ugly Americans, wtgn is a real show case." He's the poster boy alright. And right now, he also seems to be the norm. Sad and scary, but true. His kind thinks 9/11 gives them the right to screw the rest of the world. Those of us who oppose their nationalistic agenda are fighting a losing battle. Not one single prominent politician figure seems interested in being the spokesperson for PEACE. Kerry lost precisely because he tried to ape the "miserable failure" who won. Things are not going to change either until such time as a draft occurs, ala Vietnam. Where's Eugene McCarthy when you need him?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Feb 21, 2005 16:39 PM
"but Europeans...also consume a lot of energy, pollute, eat food that came from far away,etc." (Graeme) - I was using America as a case study for other countries as well. If people hadn't been brainwashed into believing there's such a thing as "anti-Americanism" - that would be taken as given. America, yes, and all other countries that this applies to.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Feb 21, 2005 16:33 PM
Are Americans receptive to hearing the truth? Or do they just want to hear more lies and more propaganda? Will they ever stop huddling round their president like frightened little kids shivering in fear at the "big, bad world" that's out there? "The challenge therefore is to get the truth out to people." Humans being humans, I don't think the truth will change much. Did Americans segregate blacks from the rest of the population because they mistakenly thought black people were more closely related to apes than to humans? How about slavery? Another mistake? What about gay kids in the U.S.? The well-known term of abuse that Americans are spreading around the English-speaking world: "You're SO gay!" Do Americans really believe, due to the propaganda they've been fed, that gay people are any different to the rest of us? Americans seem to get a thrill from persecuting people. People have to fight for their rights - not just feed others undistorted information. So the truth - might not be worth spit, if history is any guide.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Feb 21, 2005 16:29 PM
"but Europeans...also consume a lot of energy, pollute, eat food that came from far away,etc." (Graeme) Yes, they do, but Americans consume the most by borrowing the most, and it is only the Americans who scream about how free and great their country is, and that the rest of us should emulate them. Fine, if I'm going to have my ears assaulted by this cacophony, Americans are going to have to answer for what they are doing more than any other nation - particularly as they are superpower with global influence. Your country is great? Then explain THIS! God Bless America? Would God bless THIS! "...the vast majority of Americans are not especially different from other[s]." No, they are not. They are human. They aren't even native to America -the original colonizers were European. "They tend to have more propagandistic news sources and relatively poor education" I also had a very poor education - didn't stop me from realizing that people knowingly and deliberately hurt others. It was, therefore, not hard to surmise that my government harmed others - the extent of which, however, I did not know at the time. But I was receptive to anyone who seemed to be speaking the truth.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Feb 21, 2005 14:46 PM
'And this brings us back to corporate control - the necessity to take back our lives and make decisions for ourselves' I can't see how this follows from the rest of what you say (bwong) - Corporate control creates artificial wants through advertising, through controlling our lives, by structuring society, by making us work long hours, so that the only pleasure in life becomes buying the biggest and best of everything. Look at cellular phones, for instance. Do we need billions wasted on technology that will make something the size of a cigarette packet play computer games and movies, take snapshots and calls - as well as connect to the Internet at broadband speeds? Is this a priority for human existence and happiness? The question is moot as corporations will decide for us. And, as there's an abundance of cheap labor in China to exploit, these manufactured wants can be satisfied inexpensively. Given the seriousness of global warming, gas-guzzling vehicles like SUVs and Humvees should be banned. But who's going to ban them? Corporate America? George I-want-to-spill-some-more-blood Bush?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Gammon101, Bwong at Feb 21, 2005 03:10 AM
"And this brings us back to corporate control - the necessity to take back our lives and make decisions for ourselves" I can't see how this follows from the rest of what you say, which basically shows that (many, while not all) Americans are simply ugly human beings. Americans seem to take a perverse pride in driving SUVs which are getting bigger and bigger and more resemble military vehicles(the "Humvee"). It is as if to tell the rest of the world, I am American and I have a god given right to do whatevere I damn well please and you can go to hell. It is the same attitude Americans exhibit regarding the international criminal court, the kyoto protocol and pretty well any international treaty. Talking about ugly Americans, wtgn is a real show case.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Feb 20, 2005 22:33 PM
"Are Americans peace-loving enough to make some sacrifices?" Perhaps the word I should have used is "modifications". Doing things differently doesn't, in and of itself, mean being any less happy. In fact, a sensible restructuring of the economy - which would include a shorter working day - is likely to make people happier. Realistically, the day America brings its expectations in line with reality will be the day hell freezes over.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Feb 20, 2005 22:01 PM
"The American people (once they are protected from jingoistic propaganda) are, like most people, usually pretty fair-minded and peace-loving, once they get all the facts." (Graeme) - Define peace-loving? Americans know gas-guzzling SUVs aren't good for peace, nor an economy that requires an every increasing amount of oil. But that hasn't stopped Americans from buying four-wheeled monstrosities - nor has it made them reconsider their way of life. Are there the resources on Earth for everyone to live a middle-class American lifestyle, of having every artificial (manufactured) want satisfied? Are Americans peace-loving enough to make some sacrifices? An interesting fact (extracted from http://www.texasep.org/html/nrg/nrg_5nr2.html): "The food on an average dinner plate in the United States has traveled 1,300 miles. Buying locally produced food supports the local economy, saves energy, and reduces pollution." And this brings us back to corporate control - the necessity to take back our lives and make decisions for ourselves.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Charleswa333, Charlie333 at Feb 20, 2005 00:34 AM
I agree with Chomsky when he says that US-Israeli policy hasn't really changed, but I do think people's attitudes in the US have. In my view, the only way there will be progress in the Middle East is if the American people organize and create popular pressure on our leaders. If there is no critical discourse on Israel/Palestine then no changes will be made. I'm fairly optimistic that this issue is going to become a major concern for the majority of the American public and I hope that actual change will follow.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Feb 19, 2005 20:35 PM
"Sharansky urged Bush, in his second term of office, to stick to his guns and ignore his critics." I should have said: pun intended. "You stick to your guns, Mr Bush," Sharansky said, staring at Bush twirling a plastic toy gun around his finger, the deaths of U.S. soldiers and Iraqi civilians not for a moment impinging on his thoughts. "The world needs people like you; people who are prepared to fight for freedom and democracy. Politicians only care about polls, but you: you care about ideas! That makes you a dissident, Mr President." Bush cooed contentedly, and turned up the volume on the speakerphone. Blair was still there, expressing his deep admiration for the President. Bush turned the speakerphone off. "Enough of that," he said to himself. "Has the British Prime Minister any self-respect?" - Incidentally, Sharansky did call Bush a dissident.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Feb 19, 2005 16:13 PM
'As you live in Europe, you'll know about the ten new member states of the EU, and that America considers this enlargement a positive development...' - What does that have to do with anything? (Botpolar) - Competition between governments is part and parcel of "globalization". "Globalization" being economic integration on terms that benefit corporations and investors rather than civil society. The more countries that have to compete - rather than cooperate! - with one another, the better for corporate America. The ten new members of the EU are putting pressure on France and Germany, countries with higher corporate tax rates, more stringent labor laws, and a stronger safety net. Some people contend that France and Germany need their policies tweaked a bit, but that misses the point. Because it's not about what maximizes human happiness anymore (if ever it was!) - it's about what maximizes corporate happiness - not at all the same thing. The EU has the potential to resist America. Potential, though, is one thing - actually resisting is another. (Read the comments from the posters above, Graeme, ap2k, etc. - much more interesting than what I have to say)

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Adabanasik, Ap2k at Feb 19, 2005 03:15 AM
In addition, when it comes to the war in Iraq, Polish government was also acting in self-interest, trying to assure that they $1bn that Iraq owed Poland would be repaid and hoping that supporting the US in this war would obligate the US to repay Poland with some favors (economic aid, loosening of immigration restrictions, etc.). Keep in mind: the Polish population was not pro-war, it was a decision taken by the Polish President, who is serving a second term and has no concerns over trying to be re-elected. He did stand a chance to make some important connections with US officials through this and we all know how important that is to Presidents-soon-to-be-done-with-their-terms. Now…the Iraqi debt was annulled and we haven't seen anything in return for our help in the war. In fact countries that opposed the war and refused to help (i.e. Turkey) receive a lot more economic aid that Poland ever has or will… So I wouldn't say that it was the US that influences Poland, as much as Poland has chosen to (for some ridiculous reasons) support the US…give us time though and we'll be considered anti-American like the rest of Europe…

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Adabanasik, Ap2k at Feb 19, 2005 03:14 AM
As a Polish citizen terribly embarassed by our blind support for US policies, here are some thought as to WHY Poland has supported the US in recent history (and trust me - I have thought about this a lot if only to explain it to myself) The US helped Poland during the Cold War – mostly financially and with some intelligence and the ignorant and uninformed part of the Polish population still feels grateful for that, so they blindly support the US (in a similar way that the ignorant part of the US population does). I'm not sure where in Poland these polls are taken, since everyone I know opposes the US policies strongly, but that's a separate discussion. They also have some historically negative feelings toward France and Germany, so they are also supporting the US to spite them and in hopes that this new Poland-US alliance will help Poland compete with the European superpowers.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Feb 18, 2005 21:04 PM
"You site chomsky on his views of the term 'anti-american' and how it's a propaganda term, and then in right below you use 'pro-american' exactly in the identical way." (botpolar) - No, I don't. I'm talking about Pro-American policies - policies that are favored by the U.S. administration. My exact words were: "These new members have governments that are far more pro-American in their economic and social policies than the other member countries." I'm not saying these governments have an undying love of the American people, preferring U.S. citizens over other nationalities. No one reads that into what I wrote. I'm saying these governments have adopted policies that America favors. Are you pro-abortion or anti-abortion? Are you pro or anti the U.S. administration's policies? Are you pro-nazi? Are you pro the U.S. administration - do you support what it is doing? "Anti-American"/"Anti-Americanism" - the terms I condemn - have a specific meaning, referring to an individual's attitude towards the American people - something altogether different. "You hate the American people, don't you? You're anti-American!"

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Feb 18, 2005 20:02 PM
(continued...) Bush eagerly devoured Sharansky's book, "The Case for Democracy", apparently so impressed by it, he sent a copy to his good friend and buddy Tony Blair to read. Sharansky's view on the Palestinian situation seems to be: if the people want peace, they do exactly what Israel tells them to do - otherwise no deal; Israel is the aggrieved party. And, of course, if the Palestinians criticize Israel over anything, Sharansky will now label them anti-Semitic. Sharansky urged Bush, in his second term of office, to stick to his guns and ignore his critics.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Feb 18, 2005 20:01 PM
Comment by Natan Sharansky in the Jerusalem Post (http://www.ncsj.org/AuxPages/022304JPost_Shar.shtml): "But the new anti-Semitism is far more subtle. Whereas classical anti-Semitism was seen as being aimed at the Jewish religion or the Jewish people, the new anti-Semitism is ostensibly directed against the Jewish state. Since this anti-Semitism can hide behind the veneer of legitimate criticism of Israel, it is much more difficult to expose." - So, now, anyone who criticizes Israel is an anti-Semite, and, by extension, anyone who criticizes America is "anti-American", a hater of the American people. Sharansky does go on to say "we" need to distinguish between legitimate criticism of Israel and anti-Semitism; however, the Israeli leadership will decide what is legitimate criticism and what isn't - rather like Bush, who will decide what countries have undemocratic regimes - and thus need "liberating" - and what ones don't. Uzbekistan obviously is highly democratic, as Bush is helping the president of Uzbekistan, Islam Karimov, strengthen his grip on power. Uzbekistan has a horrendous human rights record, including the kind of torture Saddam Hussein was "famous" for.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Ulmanen, Botpolar at Feb 18, 2005 15:42 PM
'Botpolar - do you know nothing about the apartheid Wall, and Israel's continuing expropriation of Palestinian land? Just one of a myriad of examples I could cite as to Sharon's commitment to peace.' Yes, but that doesn't mean the peace process is a dead end. I know the history - the '67 war, and resolution 252, etc. and in my opinion, the source of the conflict is the occupation itself which began long ago. I just think it's time for a little ground of optimism. Although Arafat was well respected among his people - his own plight(and his relationship with sharon) seemed to have stalled any developments. I hope this is the beginning of the end of the intifada and in general the bombings from both sides.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Ulmanen, Botpolar at Feb 18, 2005 15:35 PM
'As you live in Europe, you'll know about the ten new member states of the EU, and that America considers this enlargement a positive development (America has been wrong about so many things recently that I can only hope it's wrong about this).' What does that have to do with anything? The EU stands out for social democracies and the US has no influence over this - the countries who have joined want to imrpove their internal governance structures and create healthy environments essentially for businesses to operate in. It's basically IMF/World Bank conditionality with a much greater incentive to transform. This includes American, European and and Eastern European companies. To do this is not pro-american. You site chomsky on his views of the term 'anti-american' and how it's a propaganda term, and then in right below you use 'pro-american' exactly in the identical way. In many cases these are policies which the countries actually want(apart from support for the Iraq war).

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Feb 18, 2005 14:07 PM
"Chomsky's comments in Hegemony or Survival..." (joeblogs56) I haven't read that book yet. But I will, because it seems to cover some interesting topics. Of course, all this "anti-Americanism" garbage is great for domestic consumption: "Mommy, why do the Europeans disagree with what we are doing?" "Remember your history teacher telling you about the Holocaust, and how six million Jews were slaughtered?" "Yes, mommy. That was so sad." "Do you remember what the people who carried out that atrocity were called?" "Anti-Semitics, mommy" "That's right! Well, Europeans are anti-American, and they want to do to us what Hitler did to the Jews." "Oh no, mommy, it can't be so." "It is darling. Anti-Semitism and anti-Americanism are closely related. The Europeans disagree with us only because they hate us - they want our nation destroyed." "Those Europeans are evil, mommy. What can we do to stop anti-Americanism spreading?" "Vote for George Bush, darling. And do exactly as he tells you. Don't ever question his word; our nation is surrounded; a moment's indecision could cost us dearly."

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Feb 17, 2005 20:31 PM
"I live in Europe. This isn't true. Several European countries are fully committed to social-democratic ideals, and people here accept that healthy and transparent business is actually good for the people." (Botpolar) --- As you live in Europe, you'll know about the ten new member states of the EU, and that America considers this enlargement a positive development (America has been wrong about so many things recently that I can only hope it's wrong about this). These new members have governments that are far more pro-American in their economic and social policies than the other member countries. I hope I AM being too pessimistic and the European model isn't sabotaged.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Ulmanen, Botpolar at Feb 17, 2005 16:43 PM
'Regime change in Europe next? America wishes! However, Europe IS gradually being forced to accept an American-style economy thanks to the EU and "globalization". I live in Europe. This isn't true. Several European countries are fully committed to social-democratic ideals, and people here accept that healthy and transparent business is actually good for the people. I think saying that the 'peace-process' is doomed is pessimistic. To me it seems like there is some hope especially now, and that it shouldn't be thrown away. Resistance to the occupation will lead to more deadlock, it's time to think of other viable alternatives. don't forget that abbas was voted into power, and he's making concessions, and the rhetoric from sharon has calmed down as well.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Feb 17, 2005 13:15 PM
Those who criticized the crimes of the Kremlin or the Brazilian generals were not "anti-Russian" or "anti-Brazilian," surely. And by the same token, those who oppose crimes of the most powerful state in the world are not anti-American; in fact, the crimes are often strenuously opposed by a considerable majority of the population. The term should be abandoned, as in the case of its ugly models.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Feb 17, 2005 13:13 PM
Here's what Noam Chomsky has to say about the meaningless term "anti-Americanism": Take the concept "anti-Americanism." It is a rather curious one. Such concepts are typically used only in totalitarian states or military dictatorships. Thus "anti-Sovietism" was a grave crime in the halls of the Kremlin in the old days, and I suppose the Brazilian generals and their supporters charged their internal enemies with being "anti-Brazilian." In countries that have some respect for their freedom, the concept would be dismissed with ridicule. Imagine the reaction in the streets of Milan or Rome to a book called "anti-Italianism." And then observe the actual reaction in the US and Britain to a book by a respected author called "anti-Americanism" -- a scholar who specializes in the Soviet Union, incidentally, and therefore understands very well the model he is following. No one should be surprised to discover that the book is a deceitful rant against those who fail to worship the Holy State with sufficient ardor, and that it is for that reason that it is highly praised in sober reviews in the New York Times and elsewhere.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Feb 17, 2005 13:08 PM
Noam Chomsky has spoken about the meaningless of the term "anti-Americanism", yet it still has currency in Israeli political circles and among the American public. How is hating the U.S. administration's policies enmity towards the American people? It is, according to Sharansky. "Anti-Americanism" is on par with anti-Semitism, particularly in the threat it poses to a conflict-free world. "Anti-Americanism", if allowed to go unchecked, will diminish the freedom and prosperity of U.S. citizens. Regime change in Europe next? America wishes! However, Europe IS gradually being forced to accept an American-style economy thanks to the EU and "globalization". With a few top officials making policies that can be applied across national borders, Europe is vulnerable to being hijacked by a bunch of criminals every bit as unpleasant as Bush, Rumsfeld, and gang. Great for European big business and corporate America; bad for the European and American people.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Playerpiano555, Playerpiano at Feb 17, 2005 13:06 PM
Some curious remarks by a top Israeli official, Natan Sharansky (extracts taken from an article by Tom Barry http://rightweb.irc-online.org/analysis/2005/0502sharansky.php): "According to Sharansky, the Jews have long held that they were chosen to play a special role in history, to be what their prophets called a light unto nations -- not unlike the United States, a nation that has long regarded itself as entrusted with a mission..." Israel clearly articulating its desire to control the Middle East in the same heavy-handed way the U.S. has controlled Central and Latin America. The article goes on to say: "The United States and Israel have much in common, according to Sharansky. One...is the spreading scourge of anti-Semitism. Anti-Americanism in the Islamic world and anti-Americanism in Europe are in fact linked, argues Sharansky, because both bear an uncanny resemblance to anti-Semitism." So now Europeans are being lumped in with the Arabs as people who have an irrational and virulent hatred of Americans, and, this, Sharansky points out, is a potential threat to American national interests. (continued...)

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Adabanasik, Ap2k at Feb 17, 2005 03:36 AM
A so-called "cease-fire" usually means two things: 1. Palestinians cease violence, while Israelis continue violence & oppression, at least to some degree (extrajudicial assasinations, checkpoints, curfeews, destruction of Palestinian homes and livelyhoods, theft of water resources, etc.). Of course, Israeli violence is NOT reported in the US at all, hence it's like it does not happen - and we get a "cease-fire". 2. Palestinians stop resisting and Israel is finally able to concentrate all its means (monetary and human) on building settlements in the West Bank - the ultimate and irreversible way of occupying other peoples' land. American media will distract us with talk of peace and other utopian ideas, while the number of settlements and settlers grows as fast as subsaharan African population. DO NOT BE FOOLED!!! This will not bring peace.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Gammon101, Bwong at Feb 17, 2005 03:20 AM
Excuse me, realpc? You're once again slipping into some irrelevant psychobables. The issue is that the Palestinians are under illegal Israeli occupation funded and armed by U.S tax payers. I fail to see how whether "Muslem leaders" are "saintly" or scumbags is relevant.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Feb 17, 2005 01:44 AM
You changed the subject; this was not about Iraq. Most Muslems in the middle east live under highly oppressive dictatorships. I don't see anyone here complaining about that. And radical Muslem organizations are motivated by extreme intolerance. I am not excusing the US and Israel from their crimes and mistakes. But at least make a feeble attempt to keep things in perspective. Motives everywhere are mixed. Most Muslems are moderate and want peace and prosperity, and normalcy. The same for most Americans and Israelis. Yes the leaders on all sides are often seeking power and are not concerned about the suffering of the powerless. But don't portray Muslem leaders as saintly victims. That is ludicrous.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Ericsilverman_2000, Ericchicago at Feb 17, 2005 00:42 AM
Realpc, What do you believe the US and Israel are motivated by? You feel that the US and Israel are as tolerant as the Palestinians or anyone else? Think about this......look at what the Palestinian people have to tolerate? THEY ARE A COMPLETELY OPPRESSED PEOPLE. Their travel is controlled, their access to jobs, education, security is controlled by an occupying force. I would argue that the US is one of the least tolerant countries in the history of the world. They attacked Iraq saying that they were concerned with what Iraq might do in the future. Preventive war in and of itself connotes a lack of tolerance. We hardly tolerate ourselves. Socially it serves politicians to keep us divided; rich to poor, ethnicity, religion, social class, even geographically. Where do you see toleration???

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Feb 16, 2005 23:47 PM
No, I do not believe that the US and Israel have not been motivated by a desire for peace. I do not believe that racism, intolerance and greed are any more characteristic of the US/Israel than of the Palestinians, or anyone else. I would never claim the US/Israel are entirely innocent, but this is an extremely slanted version of the historical situation. Radical Muslems are notoriously intolerant and anti-semitic. Trying to deny or minimize that fact is crazy.

Reply this comment

Person

By Ericsilverman_2000, Ericchicago at Feb 16, 2005 23:18 PM
I know I'm an idealist. True progress is more likely to be realized as educated non-politicians and more women get involved in voicing themselves. The unfortunate reality might be that many of them are in prison or fear losing their livelihoods. Speak out people!!!!

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Ericsilverman_2000, Ericchicago at Feb 16, 2005 23:12 PM
This situation seems like the same song and dance between a rich oppressor and the oppressed. Earlier today I went to the CIA Factbook to get some info on the Gaza Strip. I was saddened to see that the median age of the people living there is 15.5 years old, and I believe that includes the 5,000 jews. I truly hope the violence ends and that a bilateral agreement can get some legs under it. There is a sense of hope that I haven't felt for quite a while. My dream is that the Palestinian intelligensia around the world will express itself and represent the needs of the Palestinian people, and that moderate Jews around the world will see how amazing the Palestinians are, and how partnering with them can only be a good thing.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: US-Israel Strategic Relations

By Vekey, Tvekey at Feb 16, 2005 21:19 PM
I agree with you that there is prescious little reason for optimism. The Sharon government is succeeding to sabotage (by the unfettered expansion of the settlements) even the possibility of accomplishing long lasting Peace based on the "two-state solution". That was the prefered solution for the majority of the Israeli Society as well as the Diaspora. Also, whith this solution whould of been the most chance of the Israely Society to retain its Jewish character. (a darling of the Israely Right) The remaining "one-state solution" Ie. full citizenship rights to all Palestinians is much harder to accomplish since it would need to break down both phisical and mental barriers in the Israely population. Unfortunately, no photo opportunity bettween smiling politicians can change that.

Reply this comment

Comment On This Blog Post  See All Comments (89)

Loading_border