Tony Blair pelted with eggs at Dublin book signing…

YES! this on top of kate o’sullivan who on saturday september 4th attempted to make a citizen’s arrest on tony blair at a book signing in dublin. it really bugs me that it’s the people who stand up for justice and accountability (as they should – being free citizens of democracies) who r the ones to get brutalized by the police, whilst war criminals r protected. isn’t the system (including all these political bozos) supposed to work for us and not the other way around?

Ill Fares the Land – The New York Review of Books

“Something is profoundly wrong with the way we live today. For thirty years we have made a virtue out of the pursuit of material self-interest: indeed, this very pursuit now constitutes whatever remains of our sense of collective purpose. We know what things cost but have no idea what they are worth. We no longer ask of a judicial ruling or a legislative act: Is it good? Is it fair? Is it just? Is it right? Will it help bring about a better society or a better world? Those used to be the political questions, even if they invited no easy answers. We must learn once again to pose them.” (Tony Judt) Full article.

an answer to akbar ahmed’s articles about the “mosque on ground zero” controversy

i read akbar ahmed’s article a while back and found some of the things he said offensive. i kept it all inside. now he’s written another article in the washington post and i feel like i must vent.

How the Florida pastor and the New York imam can live their faiths
By Akbar Ahmed, Special to CNN, September 9, 2010

“In both venues, I was struck by how the two men appeared to be disconnected from the storms they have created, unaware of the sociological laws of cause and effect.”

in both his articles mr ahmed seems to be a big proponent of cause and effect. [from his second article: “But as a man who has been an administrator in the Muslim world I am also aware of the sociological laws of cause and effect.”]

what i find interesting then is that he refuses to (or is incapable of) talking about cause and effect when it comes to the mother of all events – 9/11 itself. 9/11 was not carried out in the name of islam. it was a political act, with political ramifications. altho what followed was framed as a clash of civilizations, it was hardly “religious” to attack the financial heart of american empire. just a few days after 9/11, susan sontag wrote a short and courageous piece in the new yorker in which she said:

The disconnect between last Tuesday’s monstrous dose of reality and the self-righteous drivel and outright deceptions being peddled by public figures and TV commentators is startling, depressing. The voices licensed to follow the event seem to have joined together in a campaign to infantilize the public. Where is the acknowledgement that this was not a “cowardly” attack on “civilization” or “liberty” or “humanity” or “the free world” but an attack on the world’s self-proclaimed super-power, undertaken as a consequence of specific American alliances and actions? […] Those in public office have let us know that they consider their task to be a manipulative one: confidence-building and grief management. Politics, the politics of a democracy–which entails disagreement, which promotes candor–has been replaced by psychotherapy. Let’s by all means grieve together. But let’s not be stupid together. A few shreds of historical awareness might help us to understand what has just happened, and what may continue to happen. (The New Yorker, September 24, 2001)

so let’s stop talking about religion – let’s call that bluff. let’s start talking about politics.

“He [Rauf] has just arrived back from a partly taxpayer-funded outreach tour of the affluent Arab capitals.”

i found this to be a bit personal. rauf was sent on a cultural exchange mission by the u.s. state dept and that means what? that rauf can’t take a stand? mr ahmed has advised general petraeus, ambassador holbrooke, and michael chertoff on islam and foreign policy. i’m sure he was compensated with taxpayers’ money. is he being more patriotic than rauf by toeing the majority’s line?

“Two men of God [pastor jones and rauf], both believing that they are motivated by their faith, are adding fuel to the fire flaring around the religion of Islam in the United States today. They have approached their task from the opposite ends of the spectrum. Jones’ Quran burning means to expose what he calls the “evil” religion of Islam. Rauf wishes to create an Islamic center that would attract interfaith activities and promote understanding. The pastor’s purpose is to provoke; the imam’s to build bridges.”

ok. this i find most offensive. drawing any kind of comparison between jones and rauf is ridiculous. of course mr ahmed explains how they’re coming from two opposite ends of the spectrum (one is burning a holy book and the other one is trying to build bridges) but in effect he is v much drawing a parallel:

“Yet both have transgressed on civility in American society, a concept very important to the Founding Fathers.”

his analogy goes something like this:

even tho a murderer tries to take someone’s life, whereas a surgeon tries to save lives (and yes they r both coming from two opposite ends of the spectrum), yet somehow they r in the same boat. maybe they have both transgressed on god’s will (to either grant life or take it). say what? exactly.

“And Rauf has refused to bend to the sensitivities of those who believe that ground zero in New York is hallowed ground.”

oh, yeah. this part is even more offensive. this whole idea about ground zero being hallowed ground is irrelevant. why? because: 1) the islamic center is not being built on top of ground zero – no bodies r being disinterred. 2) there r strip clubs 2 blocks from ground zero and if they’re not disrespectful to those who were killed, then why should an islamic version of the ymca be?

hallowed means sanctified, consecrated. so what we’re saying is that anything islamic within a 2 block radius of that hallowed ground is like a slap in the face? because islam is such an infamy in that location? well, who’s to say islam or muslims won’t be an equal infamy elsewhere: don’t buy a house here – it’s too close to the church; don’t park ur car here – it’s too close to a cemetery where u.s troops r buried; don’t visit the pentagon – it brings back too many memories.

let’s remember that 1.57 billion muslims didn’t do 9/11. some disaffected militants did. they didn’t do it in the name of islam either. it was about american foreign policy – which sucks to this day and is frankly much more harmful to humankind and the earth than 9/11 could ever be. so the connection b/w 9/11 and an islamic center is illogical and racist to start with.

also, i’m sorry but it’s time to look at things in perspective – yes, 9/11 was horrible (my husband was working in nyc that day so i ought to know) but it was not the crime of the century. look at what we’ve done in iraq: one million people killed. can we wrap our minds around that? 5 million displaced. a country destroyed to such an extent that it will take 100s of yrs to build it back to what it was before the american invasion. what about fallujah, where people have been genetically mutated for generations on account of depleted uranium? women have been asked not to have babies. there r pictures and medical reports from intl agencies on the web. and all of this was unprovoked! based on lies and false slides presented to the u.n. how about grieving for the muslims of iraq? does it qualify as hallowed ground? or afghanistan, where we funded a decade long war with the soviets before we decided to occupy ourselves? every time 50 muslims get killed by mistake at a wedding party on the other side of the planet, does it even register? can we feel what it must be like for a mother to pick up the charred remains of her children and bury them? this happens daily in afghanistan, not just on one day.

there is plenty of grief to go around in the world. we r paying for much grief, much death, much torture being perpetrated on muslims right now. how many more lives, how much more blood, how much more hate will it take to quench our thirst for revenge? as americans we so need to finally get over ourselves.

“I urge them [Jones and Rauf] to travel together to minister to the suffering people of Pakistan.”

alright, i agree with this. this is mr ahmed’s way of putting things in perspective. wish he had also talked about our war zones and the lives we’re destroying there – something we have the ability to stop right away.

On Faith Panelists Blog: National security does not “hinge” on mosque
By Akbar Ahmed, September 10, 2010

“When 75% of Americans are already against the mosque, this tragedy to me is counterproductive.”

mr ahmed keeps bringing up this 70-75%. first of all this controversy was created and fueled and funded by pamela geller and other marginal racists and haters. it is a non-issue as there is already a mosque closer to ground zero. so to cede to the national lowest common denominator is immensely sad – not just for rauf but for all americans who expect better from their country.

secondly, in matters of law and civil rights we do not take cues from the majority. majorities r known to lynch and segregate and harrass and vandalize. that’s why we have laws. in democracies, the rights of minorities r not determined by polling – they’re supposed to be protected by the state.

“For the imam to say that the national security of the US “hinges” on the building of the mosque makes little sense to me. He must plan for the immediate future regarding the mosque in the context of the United States and not link it to some theoretical or remote ideas of foreign policy and international relations. The problem is squarely situated in the United States and needs to be resolved here. Whether he shifted or changes his structure or comes up with any other solution, little will change in terms of the implications for American national security. However, to many Americans, the imam’s insistence on linking the construction of the mosque with “national security” appeared almost like a veiled threat.”

aie, aie, aie. the imam is just repeating what general petraeus and every other u.s. govt official has already said. and wasn’t general petraeus advised by mr ahmed?

Barack Obama embraces neoconservatism – John Podhoretz

Even more stunning, perhaps, is the fact that Obama was willing to use this nation’s involvement in Iraq — which he had opposed so completely and whose extension in the form of the surge in 2007 he argued against flatly — as an example of what America can do when it puts its mind to it. “This milestone should serve as a reminder to all Americans that the future is ours to shape if we move forward with confidence and commitment,” he said. Full article.

States of independence – the scramble for Africa

Seventeen African nations gained their independence in 1960, but the dreams of the independence era were short-lived. Africa states of independence tells the story of some of those countries – stories of mass exploitation, of the ecstasy of independence and of how – with liberation – a new, covert scramble for resources was born.

“Europe was in the throes of the Industrial Revolution. The advent of the machine was transforming the cities there into the workshop of the world – a workshop in need of raw materials. It was the dawn of industrial-scale production, modern capitalist economies and mass international trade. And in this new industrial era the value of Africa rocketed – not only for its materials and as a strategic trade route, but also as a market for the goods Europe now produced in bulk.

But the scramble for Africa was not just about economics. Colonialism had become the fast-track to political supremacy in Europe. Rival European powers convened in the German capital and in February 1885 signed the Act of Berlin – an agreement to abolish slavery and allow free trade. The act also drew new borders on the map of Africa, awarding territory to each European power – thus legalising the scramble for Africa.

But with the Second World War – which saw the peak of Europe’s dependency on African troops – a powerful genie was released from a bottle – African nationalism. The tipping point came on February 3, 1960, when Harold Macmillan, the British prime minister, gave his ‘wind of change’ speech. Within 10 months, Britain had surrendered two key African territories and France 14. The rate of decolonisation when it arrived was breathtaking.

Seventeen African nations gained their independence in 1960, but the dreams of the independence era were short-lived. Africa … states of independence tells the story of some of those countries – stories of mass exploitation, of the ecstasy of independence and of how – with liberation – a new, covert scramble for resources was born.” More here.

Freed journalist denies his kidnappers were Taliban

the taliban and al qaeda r brand names, omnipresent boogeymen who can be blamed for everything “evil” so that we can continue our “good” war.

The Japanese freelance journalist released Saturday after going missing in late March denied that his kidnappers were Taliban insurgents as claimed by Afghan security authorities. On his way back to Tokyo, where he says he was scheduled to arrive Monday night, Kosuke Tsuneoka, 41, said on his Twitter account his abductors were “a group of corrupt armed factions” in northeastern Afghanistan. Full article.

Israelis Risk Jail To Smuggle Palestinians: Political Theatrics

Nearly 600 Israelis have signed up for a campaign of civil disobedience, vowing to risk jail to smuggle Palestinian women and children into Israel for a brief taste of life outside the occupied West Bank. The Israelis say they have been inspired by the example of Ilana Hammerman, a writer who is threatened with prosecution after publishing an article in which she admitted breaking the law to bring three Palestinian teenagers into Israel for a day out. Ms Hammerman said she wanted to give the young women, who had never left the West Bank, “some fun” and a chance to see the Mediterranean for the first time. Her story has shocked many Israelis and led to a police investigation after right-wing groups called for her to be tried for security offences. It is illegal to transport Palestinians through checkpoints into Israel without a permit, which few can obtain. If tried and found guilty, Ms Hammerman could be fined and face up to two years in jail. Full article.

Well I’ve got a hammer! Washington Post, LA Times and NYT publish important Palestinian voices

The talks are surely a farce, but this is an amazing moment that we must celebrate: independent Palestinian voices are at last being heard in major American newspapers as a counter to the endless pro-Israel arguments. And they are speaking plainly to Americans about an American idea: equal rights. The other day the New York Times ran Ali Abunimah on the centrality of Hamas to any discussion of the Palestinian future. Today the LATimes features an Op-Ed piece by Ahmad Tibi, a Palestinian member of the Knesset, more prominently than Yossi Klein Halevi’s counterweight hasbara. And Tibi tells Americans of the right of return to stolen farms and houses. Full article.

ACLU: Sign the Petition: Stand for Religious Freedom

I stand with the ACLU and people all across America in defense of religious liberty. I also affirm my support for leaders like Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York City who boldly oppose religious discrimination rooted in cultural stereotyping and resist those who seek to trade away our most precious values for political advantage. Our laws protect the right to build a mosque, church, synagogue or any other house of worship. And preventing Muslims or any other group from practicing their faith is unconstitutional and un-American. Sign petition.

New Statesman – The silent treatment

Beyond the arts world, an increasing number of trade unions, student unions and churches are signing up to the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement. Even an Israel-based group, Boycott from Within, backs the campaign, stating that its government’s “political agenda will change only when the price of continuing the status quo becomes too high . . . because the current levels of apathy in our society render this move necessary”. Full article.

When will those brave critics of Islam decry this mob hate? by Pankaj Mishra

When will those brave critics of Islam decry this mob hate?
As anti-Muslim hysteria in the US reaches a peak, its intellectual accomplices should start to reconsider their actions

In the New York Times last week, writing about the eruption of hatred for Muslims in the US, Frank Rich asked what seems an increasingly pertinent question: “How do you win Muslim hearts and minds in Kandahar when you are calling Muslims every filthy name in the book in New York?” Americans who are shocked by what the columnist Maureen Dowd calls a “weird mass nervous breakdown” accuse the usual suspects – rightwingers whose “fear and disinformation” is “amplified by the poisonous echo chamber that is the modern media environment”. But anti-Muslim toxins were injected into the mainstream well before August 2010, and not by rightwingers alone.

Bestselling authors like Ayaan Hirsi Ali may be the “new heroes”, as the writer Peter Beinart puts it, of the Republican party’s crusade against Muslims. But “professional” former Muslims have long provided respectable cover for the bigotry and, more often, plain ignorance of mainstream western commentators on Islam. This Monday Germany’s Hirsi Ali, the Turkish writer Necla Kelek, stood shoulder to shoulder with the German central banker and Social Democratic party (SPD) member Thilo Sarrazin as he asserted that Muslims are out-breeding white, presumably “Aryan”, Germans and that “all Jews share the same gene”.

Most of these ex-Muslim “dissidents” lucratively raging against Islam in the west wouldn’t be able to flourish without the imprimatur of influential institutions and individuals in the US and Europe. Hirsi Ali, who wishes to be the Voltaire of Islam, commands rapturous endorsements from not only rightwing crazies like Pamela Geller and Glenn Beck but also Tina Brown.

Certainly, the story of Hirsi Ali’s life attests powerfully to the degradations suffered by many women in patriarchal cultures. There is no question that she should feel free to say that Muslims are programmed to kill infidels and mutilate female bodies, however much these opinions may offend some people. There is little reason, however, for most of her opinions to claim serious intellectual attention.

Declaring that the civilised west has no choice but to stamp out barbaric Islam in the clash of civilisations, Hirsi Ali seems useful only to her bellicose neoconservative employers in the US and their ideological kin in the caves of Afghanistan and Pakistan. And her recent exhortations to Muslims to convert to Christianity make her sound more like Billy Graham than Voltaire.

Yet the mildest criticism of Hirsi Ali’s naivety triggers a tsunami of vitriol from her army of prominent supporters. In recent months Clive James as well as Melanie Phillips have rebuked Ian Buruma and Timothy Garton Ash for not joining the chorus of praise for Hirsi Ali, a defender of the western Enlightenment, and for being “soft” on apparently closeted jihadists like the Muslim academic Tariq Ramadan.

Those who tirelessly cheerlead Hirsi Ali’s war on totalitarian Islam today did not have much, if anything at all, to say about the original despoiling, by western-backed Muslim fanatics, of Pakistan and Afghanistan during the anti-Soviet jihad in the 80s. The long-gathering backlash that finally arrived in the west on 9/11 sent them scampering to bone up about “Islam” – about as gainful a mode of knowing your enemy as Afghans sitting down to read Kant’s essay What is Enlightenment? after a US drone has destroyed their village.

Many of these Islam watchers championed the misbegotten wars that have already killed hundreds of thousands of Muslims and ruined innumerable more lives. But they still present themselves as virtuous and lonely warriors, indefatigably rooting out the internal enemies of western civilisation, who tend to be either Muslims sinisterly reluctant to embrace the true American patriot’s worldview, or politically correct liberal-lefties too scared to hear, let alone speak, the real truth about Islam.

Thus the writer Paul Berman, a self-described “laptop general” who first stalked Ramadan and hounded Buruma and Garton Ash in the New Republic – once the principal periodical of liberal America – and then expanded his 28,000-word indictment into a much-reviewed book, could recently lament in the Wall Street Journal, the Murdoch-owned US newspaper, that we are living in the “age of the zipped lip”.

Oddly, this persecution complex afflicts people with the easiest access to mass media and the greatest influence on public opinion. Defending Martin Amis, who had fantasised in the Times about subjecting Muslims to multiple humiliations, Ian McEwan protested that leftwingers were closing down “debate” on Islam.

As it turns out, millions of angry Americans have opened up an equally unedifying “debate” on Islam. “You look them [Muslims] in the eye and flex your muscles,” Hirsi Ali exhorted the west recently, “there comes a moment when you crush your enemy.” Well, that much-awaited moment is here. Populist sentiment, which Democrats as well as Republicans clamour to represent, fully endorses the scapegoating of a religious minority for America’s recent military and economic failures.

It remains to be seen how the previously besieged critics of Islam respond to the mob of Koran-immolators. Certainly their critiques of Islam, always redolent of tabloid wisdom, can no longer be passed off as acts of moral courage. And it may be too optimistic to expect them to go to Muslim countries, or befriend a few Muslims, and then discover, as EM Forster did, that: “Islam is more than a religion … it is an attitude towards life which has produced durable and exquisite civilisations.”

Even a conservative figure like Henry James, while recoiling from Jewish immigrants in Manhattan, manifested a curiosity about America’s new population that transcended the bigotries of his time. In comparison, the liberal assumptions of superiority today have seemed experience-proof. The mass anti-Muslim hysteria has now thrown them into crisis – finally, long after it has become clear that Hirsi Ali-style denunciations, vigorously amplified by mainstream intellectuals and politicians, have potentially terrible consequences for the millions of Muslims in the west.

Writing about another “foul, ignoble” episode in America’s recent history – Joe McCarthy’s witch-hunts against America’s internal enemies – James Baldwin marvelled at the “ignorance and arrogance” of intellectuals who went on discussing the threat to the “free” world while “every hour brought more distress and confusion – and dishonour – to the country they claimed to love”.

The stigmatisation of racial and religious bigotry counts as one of the very few instances of moral progress in the previous half-century. It’s not, alas, an irreversible advance, and the witch-hunters of today can still occasionally have a field day. But it is their intellectual accomplices who will invite the severest contempt of posterity.

The Guardian, September 1, 2010

Iraq Soldier Describes War in Poetry: NPR

Brian Turner is a soldier-poet who served for seven years in the U.S. Army. His book, Here, Bullet, reflects his war-time experiences in graceful and unflinching poetry. Turner tells Steve Inskeep about the military tradition in his family and why he joined the Army when he was almost 30. He reads selected poems from his collection and reflects on what inspired them. One poem, Eulogy, was written to memorialize a soldier in his platoon who took his own life. Full interview.

Eulogy

It happens on a
Monday,
at 11:20
A.M.,

as tower guards eat
sandwiches

and seagulls drift by
on the Tigris River.

Prisoners tilt their
heads to the west

though burlap sacks
and duct tape blind
them.

The sound
reverberates down
concertina coils

the way piano wire
thrums when given
slack.

And it happens like
this, on a blue day of
sun,

when Private Miller
pulls the trigger

to take brass and fire
into his mouth:

the sound lifts the
birds up off the water,

a mongoose pauses
under the orange
trees,

and nothing can stop
it now, no matter
what

blur of motion
surrounds him, no
matter what voices

crackle over the radio
in static confusion,

because if only for
this moment the
earth is stilled,

and Private Miller has
found what low hush
there is

down in the
eucalyptus shade,
there by the river.

PFC B. Miller

(1980-March 22, 2004)

Nir Rosen on Iraq’s Inheritance of Loss

[Obama] said that the US has paid a high price, a huge price. Not as huge as the Iraqis have paid. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis killed. Tens of thousands of Iraqis who were rendered in American detention, their lives ruined for years, children who didn’t know where their fathers were. A couple of million displaced internally and abroad. Iraq is a shattered country. He said we persevered because we share a vision with the Iraqi people. Most of the Iraqi people, their vision has been, for the last seven years, that the Americans would withdraw. Full article.