© PalestineFreeVoice Copyright reserved 2003 - 2011
Intellectual Rights Retained
Saturday, June 26, 2010
Friday, June 25, 2010
Canada Needs More D'Arcy McGee Faddens, and Less Fenians
Dosanjh is a very McGee figure, is he not? Strikingly similar. But many, from all origins, are not, are they? Things don't change, only the names. The problems recur, and the controversies. So who are you with, the Fenians, the Fascists, the Communists, the CIA, the DGSE, the Bavarian CSU, etc.? Or are you with McGee, Canada and Canadians?*
McGee vs. the Fenians yesterday, Fadden vs. others today.
Canada Needs More D'Arcy McGees & Less Fenians.
* Upon rereading, realise some references may need elucidation. See my last reply to comments here.
PS. Tangential, but curious: why would Stephen Taylor delete this post? Cached though. Seems to me he (Cons?) not sure how to play this - yes or no? In control with knowledge or ignorant - incompetent - dupes of CSIS? Approve/disapprove? Strange. I really don't know. I just wonder why it was published, then deleted, and what that means.
McGee vs. the Fenians yesterday, Fadden vs. others today.
Canada Needs More D'Arcy McGees & Less Fenians.
* Upon rereading, realise some references may need elucidation. See my last reply to comments here.
PS. Tangential, but curious: why would Stephen Taylor delete this post? Cached though. Seems to me he (Cons?) not sure how to play this - yes or no? In control with knowledge or ignorant - incompetent - dupes of CSIS? Approve/disapprove? Strange. I really don't know. I just wonder why it was published, then deleted, and what that means.
Zionist Air Strikes Across Gaza - Two Dead one Injured
GAZA - Zionist warplanes targeted and bombed Gaza at dawn on Friday. Two airstrikes caused severe structural damage to buildings in the Jabalaya refuge camp in the northern parts of Gaza, and in Beit Hanoun in the south. Also two Rafah life-line smuggling tunnels where bombed by F16 war planes also targeting and bombing an industrial zone.
Emergency personal pulled out two bodies from a Rafah tunnel following the early Friday mornings Zionist air strikes.Three young men who were inside the tunnel, were crushed by falling walls of rocks and sand.One of the dead found in the collapsing tunnel,was 23 year-old Amer Abu Hadid, while the second victim remains unidentified. A third young man survived the attack, and is according to hospital officials injured. All three victims has been taken to the An-Najjar Hospital in Rafah.
© PalestineFreeVoice Copyright reserved 2003 - 2011
Intellectual Rights Retained
Devouring al-Quds in Broad Daylight
.
Thursday, 24 June 2010 11:15
by Khalid Amayreh in East Jerusalem
The recent decision by the Israeli government to banish four Palestinian lawmakers from Jerusalem to areas in the West Bank run by the Palestinian Authority (PA) is another repugnant expression of the Israeli policy of ethnic cleansing in the city, holy to Muslims, Christians and Jews.
This undeclared but clear policy aims to minimize as much as possible the city's non-Jewish population so that Israel can realize its routinely-invoked mantra of Jerusalem being "Israel's eternal and undivided capital."
The four Arab lawmakers, Muhammad Abu Tir, Ahmed Atwan, Mohammed Totah and Khalid Abu Arafeh, didn't violate any laws, committed no crimes and certainly did nothing to warrant extirpation from their natural homeland, the city of their birth.
Israel claims the four are affiliated with a political organization deemed "terrorist" by the Jewish state. Israel deems anyone and everyone, including peace activists carrying milk powder and food to blockaded Gazans as "terrorist." Indeed, Israel effectively classifies Palestinians into two categories: Terrorists, who ought to be annihilated, and collaborators or informers. There is nothing in between.
This is why the politically-motivated charge (affiliation with a terrorist organization) is really a mere pretext since Hamas is a legitimate political party with hundreds of thousands of supporters.
Hence, what Israel really wants goes far beyond vilifying and weakening Hamas? Israel simply wants to attain the following goal: Getting as many Palestinians as possible to leave East Jerusalem, by hook or by crook, and seizing as much as possible of Arab land and property, mainly under the rubric of hounding and fighting Hamas.
In fact, one can claim rather candidly that the unmitigated demonization of Hamas by Israel has very little to do with the Islamic movement's involvement in active resistance against the plainly cruel Israeli occupation of the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem.
Hamas is an honest organization. Its doesn't accept anything less than a total Israeli withdrawal from occupied territories pursuant to international law, The movement refuses to be cajoled or bullied by Israel to give up inalienable Palestinian rights usurped by Israel. It wouldn't be bribed by carrots or coerced by sticks, which help keep the Palestinian hope for true independence and freedom alive. This, not the issue of terror, is the real reason behind Israel's mad fixation on Hamas, a group molded in reaction to Israeli oppression and savagery against the Palestinian people.
It is for these reasons that the decision to deport these democratically-elected MPs ought to be viewed in the context of larger efforts to ethnically cleanse Jerusalemite Arabs from their city, which is home to al-Masjidul Aqsa, the world's third most important Islamic shrine.
Indeed, the decision to banish the four Jerusalemite leaders is only one expression of the ongoing Israeli drive to make Jerusalem free of Muslims and Christians as much as possible.
In recent days, the Israeli authorities decided to demolish more than 88 Arab homes at the Silwan neighborhood. The declared purpose of this act of war against Arab demography is to build a Talmudic park in the area. However, there are ample signs that the real ultimate goal is to enforce Jewish settler's presence in the area as well as coerce more Arabs to leave.
According to the Israeli human rights organization B'tselem, Israel confiscated the residency rights of more than 6 thousand Palestinian residents in the past three years alone.
Other draconian measures meant to drive Palestinians away include excessive taxation, property seizure, as well as promulgating laws that would lead to shattering Palestinian daily life and force as many Palestinians as possible to leave.
Israel, for example, is never content with demolishing Palestinian homes and confiscating residency rights at the slightest pretext. It is now outlawing protests against these manifestly illegal, indeed criminal, measures. According to reliable sources in Jerusalem, the Israeli occupation authorities have begun to enforce new penalties against Palestinian Jerusalemites, including revocation of residency rights, re-evaluation of taxes owed and reduction in welfare benefits.
According to Ziad al Hammouri, Director of the Jerusalem Center for Legal Rights, he latest racist decision may well be a "test case" that would determine subsequent acts of ethnic cleansing by Israel.
"They are trying to extirpate us from our homes. We are facing the real danger of being uprooted simply because Israel want Jerusalem to be exclusively Jewish and we are not Jews. So it seems that the Israeli message is like this: Either you leave or convert to Judaism."
Like Palestinians everywhere, the Palestinians of Jerusalem are ostensibly successfully protesting the latest measures of ethnic cleansing in Jerusalem. However, Israel can not be trusted to deal justly with Arab grievances. In fact, experience shows that in the absence of massive international pressure, Israel would pay no attention to the most elementary human and civil rights of its victims.
This is why, meaningful international efforts are vital to stop the latest Israeli campaign targeting the very existence of the native Arab community in East Jerusalem.
The American government has half-heartedly protested Israeli plans to demolish numerous homes at Silwan. However, the Israeli authorities don't seem to take the Americans truly seriously.
The Obama administration, which had demanded that Israel freeze Jewish settlement expansion in East Jerusalem and the rest of the West Bank, mainly in order to provide an appropriate atmosphere for the resumption of the clearly moribund peace process, has effectively succumbed to Israeli arrogance and insolence.
Hence, it would be naïve and self-defeating for Palestinians, Arabs and Muslims to pin any genuine hopes on the Obama administration to force Israel to reconsider its criminal designs in Jerusalem.
To be sure the American impotence vis-à-vis Israel is not intrinsic in nature. The US, which is Israel's guardian and ally, simply sees no urgent need to get tough with Israel especially as long as its vital interests throughout the Muslim world are not scathed the least as Arab regimes are vying to please and appease Washington.
This is happening while the frustration and indignation of Arab and Muslim masses are rising to new levels, especially in the aftermath of the criminal Israeli assault on the Gaza Freedom Flotilla on 31 May, which killed at least nine Turkish activists and injured dozens others.
In the final analysis, the Arab and Muslim masses, although unable to reverse their tyrannical regimes subservience to Washington, can at least demonstrate to the Americans that hundreds of millions of Muslims throughout the world will never forgive the US government its scandalous embrace of Israeli criminality toward the Palestinian people.
As to the Palestinians themselves, it is time they turn their backs on the so-called two-state solution strategy.
Israel has simply killed the two-state solutions by rendering unrealistic or virtually impossible the creation of a viable Palestinian state in the West Bank due to the ubiquitous proliferation of Jewish colonies in occupied Arab land.
Perhaps a sustained popular struggle similar to that which eventually terminated the defunct White minority apartheid regime in South Africa, ought to be tried by the Palestinians.
True, Israel may look somewhat invincible and powerful. However, there are many signs that Israel is also disintegrating from within and losing at many fronts. In the end, Israel is moving on a losing track. I am sure many Jewish intellectuals know this.
(End)
© PalestineFreeVoice Copyright reserved 2003 - 2011
Intellectual Rights Retained
Thursday, June 24, 2010
"Oil industry supports carbon tax"...but...Alberta Govt Opposed
That sound you're hearing is bitter laughter from Dionistas...(h/t If Necessary Blogging But Not Necessarily Blogging). From Shaun Polczer and the Calgary Herald:
Oil industry supports carbon tax
The head of Canada's largest integrated oil company on Tuesday came out in favour of a carbon tax as part of a national energy strategy to reduce emissions and promote "responsible" energy development, but provincial government representatives quickly shot down the idea.
Speaking at an environment conference in Calgary, Suncor CEO Rick George said he would support a carbon tax if the fiscal burden was evenly shared between industry and consumers and applied evenly across the country.
"I'm not necessarily opposed to a carbon tax, but what we have to do is tax all carbon equally," he told reporters. "A molecule of carbon is the same whether it's produced out of an oilsands plant or the tailpipe of your car."
During his speech, George complained of a patchwork of regulations across the country and said he supports harmonizing policies between provinces and even major trading partners such as the United States.
But Doug Horner, Alberta's deputy premier and minister of Advanced Education, Industry and Technology, flatly dismissed the idea of a tax on consumers and bristled at the suggestion of a national energy policy beyond simple co-operation between provinces and the federal government on energy issues.
"We're not in favour of a carbon tax because we don't believe it's going to accomplish what we want to get to," he said. "We're a province that prides itself on having the lowest tax regime in the country and we're going to continue to do that."
Alberta is the only jurisdiction in North America that has put a price of $15 per tonne of emissions over and above predetermined intensity targets.
The money is in turn put into a fund devoted to researching carbon reduction technology. In addition, the province has devoted $2 billion to developing and commercializing carbon capture and storage technology.
Alberta's emissions reduction efforts compare with an outright carbon tax in British Columbia, the adoption of low-carbon fuel standards in California and a cap and trade system of emissions trading proposed by the U.S. government.
Other industry representatives said the idea of a carbon levy, or fee, only makes practical sense if it's evenly applied between producing and consuming jurisdictions that import energy products such as oil and natural gas.
David Collyer, head of the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, said the idea of taxes is hard to communicate for politicians and suggested Alberta's $15 per tonne charge is essentially a tax by another name.
"The mechanism doesn't matter so much as its broad application. What we've always said is that industry will do its part -- and it should -- but for Canada to meet its emissions reduction targets, we have to deal with the consumption part of the equation. And part of that is applying carbon pricing in whatever form to consumption as well as production of energy."
Faddenism = McCarthyism? (with updates)
I am opposed to McCarthyism, but I don't think that is what is happening here. He's not saying everyone, everywhere is infiltrated, that there's a spy under every bed. But it's a serious problem, and not taken seriously enough. And since he, like most, is always so vague for precisely the reasons noted, this time he gave some idea of the gravity. Between "we have general concerns about activities" and "x, y, and z is a spy" (which is awfully hard to prove according to rules of evidence, even though one may be convinced it is so), there is a huge gap. The first never seems to wake anyone up. The second can only be stated if one has a watertight case and is willing to make arrests or end ongoing monitoring, which may be more useful.
So he tried to wake everyone up, by giving a better idea. You may think he was wrong to do so (I don't), or that he should have been more circumspect (I agree - except how, if one wants to convey importance? The gap between generalities and specifics is huge, otherwise).
Does anyone else remember Zaccardelli and the RCMP annual reports using almost exactly the same language to describe Canada's number one security problem (still is, much more than terrorism), organised crime and how it has infested our institutions and was(is?) threatening our État de droit? I don't remember anyone complaining about the language then. Why is OK to say that organised crime has compromised public administrations at the highest levels, but not OK to say foreign governments have?
As for timing, I would say the G-20 and G-8 are the perfect time.
As for giving comfort to rednecks, I would say fear of encouraging bigots should also not stop us from confronting difficult and dangerous cultural realities.
If we think that way, we end up the same as the well-meaning apologists for Communists when the Soviets really were up to no good. Not everywhere, not everyone, far from it, and McCarthyism is wrong. But it's also wrong to deny reality. Communists were up to no good, and many well-meaning people helped them by defending any accused Communist, however strong the evidence. Many were innocent, and often the security services were stupid and bad. But not always. Far from it.
I think Orwell did the completely right thing at the end, pointing out which of his acquaintances was a danger, and to what degree. To think otherwise is to to delude oneself about the nature of such threats.
But one should not tag everyone of such sympathies. Orwell didn't - he named some, and in his writing gave an idea of stakes, and kinds of people. And Fadden, awkwardly, has done likewise. And I don't see how one speaks potently about such things in public, going beyond the vaguest generalities, without giving an idea of the kinds of posts held. But of course, if you do that, then people want names. Which may be true, but can't be confirmed in a court of law. So then stick to same old generalities? But that doesn't seem to be getting through to parties and public, and ALL the parties may even be (un?)wittingly ignoring it because taking it seriously will be a real problem for them. And if that is so, and things may even be getting worse, dangerously so, then what to do? What to say?
Maybe Fadden got it wrong, but someone tell me how one raises the alarm effectively without alarming people? As I say, his language was almost word for word what the RCMP reports said about organised crime for years.
PS. Just as an illustration of the psychology of our parties: Harper dit oui aux demandes de censure chinoise
25/06/10 13h30 PPS. Further on all-party denial (at best)- Colin Freeze, National security correspondent for Globe and Mail:
PPPS. Not a fan of Crowley, he's bitter and unhinged about Quebec and Canada, but worth reading his four posts on the matter: The Fadden Files
So he tried to wake everyone up, by giving a better idea. You may think he was wrong to do so (I don't), or that he should have been more circumspect (I agree - except how, if one wants to convey importance? The gap between generalities and specifics is huge, otherwise).
Does anyone else remember Zaccardelli and the RCMP annual reports using almost exactly the same language to describe Canada's number one security problem (still is, much more than terrorism), organised crime and how it has infested our institutions and was(is?) threatening our État de droit? I don't remember anyone complaining about the language then. Why is OK to say that organised crime has compromised public administrations at the highest levels, but not OK to say foreign governments have?
As for timing, I would say the G-20 and G-8 are the perfect time.
As for giving comfort to rednecks, I would say fear of encouraging bigots should also not stop us from confronting difficult and dangerous cultural realities.
If we think that way, we end up the same as the well-meaning apologists for Communists when the Soviets really were up to no good. Not everywhere, not everyone, far from it, and McCarthyism is wrong. But it's also wrong to deny reality. Communists were up to no good, and many well-meaning people helped them by defending any accused Communist, however strong the evidence. Many were innocent, and often the security services were stupid and bad. But not always. Far from it.
I think Orwell did the completely right thing at the end, pointing out which of his acquaintances was a danger, and to what degree. To think otherwise is to to delude oneself about the nature of such threats.
But one should not tag everyone of such sympathies. Orwell didn't - he named some, and in his writing gave an idea of stakes, and kinds of people. And Fadden, awkwardly, has done likewise. And I don't see how one speaks potently about such things in public, going beyond the vaguest generalities, without giving an idea of the kinds of posts held. But of course, if you do that, then people want names. Which may be true, but can't be confirmed in a court of law. So then stick to same old generalities? But that doesn't seem to be getting through to parties and public, and ALL the parties may even be (un?)wittingly ignoring it because taking it seriously will be a real problem for them. And if that is so, and things may even be getting worse, dangerously so, then what to do? What to say?
Maybe Fadden got it wrong, but someone tell me how one raises the alarm effectively without alarming people? As I say, his language was almost word for word what the RCMP reports said about organised crime for years.
PS. Just as an illustration of the psychology of our parties: Harper dit oui aux demandes de censure chinoise
25/06/10 13h30 PPS. Further on all-party denial (at best)- Colin Freeze, National security correspondent for Globe and Mail:
# Iggy's a funny guy. In past 24 hrs he's been cozying up to China http://bit.ly/9HCTnQ and called out CSIS http://bit.ly/d7NRA2 ... about 1 hour ago via web # ... which is all fine and good, if you're prepared to be entirely dismissive of #CSIS's PRC concerns, however awkwardly #Fadden voiced em. about 1 hour ago via web
PPPS. Not a fan of Crowley, he's bitter and unhinged about Quebec and Canada, but worth reading his four posts on the matter: The Fadden Files
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)