Modern Barbarism

Sunday, 02 October 2011 10:40

By Lawrence Davidson

  

Has anyone noticed that the political air is wafting rancid lately? That is the smell of modern barbarism. Modern barbarism is a malodorous umbrella concept. Underneath the umbrella are lots of fetid phobias, isms and behaviors: Islamophobia, homophobia, xenophobia, semi-fascism, scapegoating, stereotyping, bullying, libeling and a growing, aggressive intolerance of everything and everyone who is not to the liking of the modern barbarian. Here are some recent instances of this phenomenon.

Mistaking the Particular for the General

Michael Quigley, a Democratic Congressman from Chicago, made the New York Times on 24 September 2011. He made it by promoting the virtues of tolerance and diversity and lamenting the suffering that occurs when tolerance fails. Out and about in his Chicago district, he stopped in at a meeting of the American Islamic Conference. He made a short speech to the 100 or so conferees during which he said “discrimination comes in many forms, many shapes and many guises. You have my pledge to work with you to fight them, and I think it is appropriate for me to apologize on behalf of this country for the discrimination you face.” Mr. Quigley was correct about the growing levels of Islamophobia that confront Muslim Americans. Islamophobia is a delusional mind-set which mistakes the general for the particular, which condemns an entire group (which happens to have a billion plus members) for the particular actions of a very few. There is no logic to such an overreaching generalization. It is irrational.

Within days of Mr. Quigley’s brief presentation he was “attacked harshly…in the conservative blogosphere…on radio and TV.” There was “at least one death threat on a Fox news site that by week’s end was still not taken down despite requests.” Along with “hundreds of nasty calls, e-mails and faxes” received by Quigley’s office, he was soon lambasted by Bill O’Reilly, again on Fox, who denied that there was anything to apologize for. “What discrimination?” O’Reilly asked. “Statistics don’t support claims of bias against Muslim Americans.” Mr. O’Reilly was simply wrong about this. As Ahmed Rehab, executive director of the Chicago office of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) commented, O’Reilly would “have to be living under a rock” to believe there was no evidence. Both federal statistics on work-place complaints of discrimination and a recent report issued by the CAIR in conjunction with the Center for Peace and Gender at the University of California at Berkeley have documented the rise of Islamophobia since the 9/11 attacks.

Despite O’Reilly being factually wrong on the issue of rising prejudice against Muslim Americans, Mr Quigley’s apology continued to draw scorn. Soon some right-wing spokesmen were trying to use the apology to call attention to what they believed to be the violent nature of Muslim culture. Ralph Peters, who might be thought of as a professional anti-Muslim, called Quigley, who is just 51 years old, a “silly old fool” and said you might as well “apologize for preventing them [Muslims] from beating their daughters to death for flirting.” First of all such violence is not a trait of Islam. Secondly, the United States could be made to look like hell on earth for women simply by over-concentrating on nationwide instances of spousal abuse. Such is the danger of mistaking the particular for the general.

Cheers and Jeers

At about the same time Islamophobia was also playing havoc with Republican politics in Florida. Nezar Hamze, a long time Republican as well as CAIR’s South Florida Director, was systematically discriminated against (to the point of the purposeful changing of local party selection rules) when he stood for election to the Broward County Republican executive committee. Usually those who want to serve on this committee are automatically accepted. It was “the first time…anyone could recall…[someone being turned down] in a county where Republicans complain about being outnumbered by Democrats.” When Hamze’s membership in the Executive Committee was denied, the 300 or so people present at the meeting “cheered loudly.” Those cheers were strikingly similar to the foot stomping and applauds that have been heard from the audiences attending the Republican presidential primary debates.

At the Republican debates it is not only Islamophobia that is on display, but rabid reactions to gay rights, scorn for the vulnerability of the uninsured, and calls for the blood of those on death row. To this you can add the following stances that have come to the fore under the influence of a wave of modern barbarism centered in the ranks of the Republican party: Tea Party assertions that environmentalism is “unbiblical” and cutting taxes for the rich is following in the way of Jesus; health care reform is “the equivalent of drug dealing” (Rick Santorum); there is a serious threat of America turning into a “secular atheist country…dominated by radical Islamists” (Newt Gingrich); “those who believe in evolution are part of a cult following” (Michelle Bachman); and the friendly embracing of fundamentalists who believe that the Statue of Liberty is a “demonic idol” (Rick Perry)
Who are these people who give tea a bad name and show up at presidential debates only to behave as if they are enjoying a bear baiting exhibition? Actually, they are Richard Hofstadter’s politically paranoid, Eric Hoffer’s true believers, and Ortega y Gasset’s revolting masses. They are people who are always with us even in the midst of modernity. And they obviously feel that here in America, it is now their time. Maybe they are correct. They have captured one of the two main parties in the U.S., taken at least temporary control of the House of Representatives, and fashioned a slate of Republican presidential hopefuls in their own image. As has been noted, in the midst of the cheering and jeering of these modern barbarians “not one Republican candidate…spoke up to admonish the crowd and call for civility.”

Conclusion

For the rest of America to ignore what is going on here is the equivalent of turning one’s back on a mugging in progress. And what is being mugged is the entire country. Actually, this threat has been building for some time. What do you think Ronald Reagan was doing, in terms of both domestic and foreign policies, if not laying the ground for George Bush Jr. And the Democrats too have done their share to prepare the ground. Bill Clinton helped deregulate the economy to the delight of the devotees of greed and corruption, while simultaneously destroying the lives of millions of Iraqi innocents through draconian sanctions. President Obama has allied with racists in the Middle East and let go free torturers and war criminals in our own midst. Indeed, how many of us, politicians and voters, have turned a blind eye to the repeated bipartisan orgies of blood that sacrificed millions in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan, among other places.

Who are these people? Well, intellectually speaking they are our lumpen-proletariat. The one-dimensional thinkers and political savages that, until recently, had dowelled on the fringes of the conservative movement. However, in another way they are a reflection of all of us and our frustrations with the built in inadequacies of the democratic system. Winston Churchill was right when he said that democracy was the worst political system, except for all the others. The recurrent corruption, constant double standards, favoritism, and influence peddling can get us all down. But what sets the modern barbarians apart is their simple minded intention to essentially dismantle government with nothing but a vague and vengeful minimalism in mind as a replacement. They are, if you will, intimations of our collective political id. So, Dr. Jekyll, meet Mr. Hyde. Who will it be? If you think you really share the character of Dr. Jekyll, then you better assert yourself. Get active, get political, speak out, take a progressive stand. Otherwise, modern barbarism will have its way.
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Netanyahu Owns the US Congress

Soon will Know if He Also Owns Gaza and the UN

25Jun11

by James M. Wall

We need look no further than the politics of the state of Israel to see what extremist religion can do with power. The Tea Party in the US, which will determine the winner of the presidential Republican nominating process, is ready to show the world that God wants a final say in US political decision-making.

The Tea Party has emerged as a carbon copy of ultra right wing Zionist forces in Israel. The Tea Party and right-wing political Zionism share a single-minded religious worldview that religious ideology can, and should, exercise absolute control over its citizens.

On June 3-4, at Ralph Reed’s annual Faith and Faithful gathering in Washington, speakers praised God and Israel in equal measure. Only a few weeks had passed since the leader of a foreign nation came to Washington at the request of Congress.

That leader, Benjamin Netanyahu, showed Americans how to combine religious ideology with political power. The peoples’ representatives cheered mightily to demonstrate their loyalty to a foreign nation operating under a religious ideology that served the interests of political power.

Ralph Reed invited Republican presidential aspirants to speak to his organization of Christian faithful. Sure, they were also there to talk politics. But their politics are inseparable from their ideological devotion to the modern state of Israel.
Philip Giradi discovered how closely Reed’s speakers adhered to the script of political power and religion.

Support for Israel was on the menu du jour in nearly every speech and for every panel. It dominated the conference. One panel had as its subject “Israel: surrounded yet undaunted in the face of evil.”

RICHARD LAND

 Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s oddly named Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, spoke for fifteen minutes about Israel, saying “If we want God to bless America, then we have to bless the Jews. 

Teabagger Queen

Michele Bachmann

 God gave that land to his chosen people forever. That issue is settled by God almighty…Michele Bachmann produced a standing ovation when she cited a “shocking display of betrayal of our greatest friend and ally Israel.” She added “I stand with Israel…President Obama…does not speak for us on the issue of Israel.”

The Reed gathering was just one of several recent Washington displays of love for Israel. Soon we will know what impact that love will have on two major international events.

The first is the arrival of a flotilla of peace-oriented ships off the coast of Gaza. The second is the September meeting of the United Nations General Assembly where Palestinians will seek admission, as a state, to the UN General Assembly.

The last effort of a flotilla to breach the blockade of Gaza led to the deaths of nine passengers, May 10, 2010. One of the passengers killed by the Israeli military was Furkan Dogan, who held dual Turkish-US citizenship. There was no official American objection to any of the killings, including that of Dogan, who was born in Troy, New York.

One year and one month after the Israeli raid that killed nine passengers in May, 2010, a much larger flotilla sails this week to Gaza.

Ali Abunimah, writing about the flotilla in the Electronic Intifada, was dismayed by Hillary Clinton’s response:

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton seemed to lay the ground – indeed almost provide a green light – for an Israeli military attack on the upcoming Gaza Freedom Flotilla, which will include the US Boat to Gaza.
Among the passengers aboard the American boat will be 87-year old Kindertransport survivor Hedy Epstein, and author and poet Alice Walker. In all it is expected that about 10 ships, carrying 1000 people from over 20 countries will take part.
Here’s what Clinton said in remarks at the State Department on 23 June:
“Well, we do not believe that the flotilla is a necessary or useful effort to try to assist the people of Gaza. Just this week, the Israeli Government approved a significant commitment to housing in Gaza. There will be construction materials entering Gaza and we think that it’s not helpful for there to be flotillas that try to provoke actions by entering into Israeli waters and creating a situation in which the Israelis have the right to defend themselves.”
Clinton must know that Gaza is not part of what any country recognizes as ‘sovereign’ Israeli territory, and therefore neither are Gaza’s territorial waters. Any boats entering Gaza’s waters would not in fact be entering ‘Israeli waters’ as Clinton claimed.”

Clinton’s attitude toward the flotilla does not portend a favorable US response when Palestinian UN membership comes before the General Assembly in September
If the GA does vote to refer the membership issue to the Security Council, the US will most likely veto the proposal. The US has no veto in the General Assembly, which is why Israel is working feverishly to persuade European Union nations to vote against the proposal in the GA, and to put pressure on smaller nations to vote against it.
Meanwhile, while the flotilla heads to Gaza waters and diplomats face the September vote, Prime Minister Netanyahu holds three trump cards, any one of which would derail any future peace agreement. 

First Card: Israel will not negotiate in any forum with a Palestinian government that includes Hamas. Since there can be no Palestinian government that does not include Hamas, negotiations are impossible.

Second Card: Netanyahu insists there can be no “right of return” for Palestinian refugees who wish to move to, or be compensated for, former Palestinian land in what is today the state of Israel. No Palestinian leader could survive as a leader if he or she gives up that right before any final negotiations begin.
The right of the return of refugees is codified in international law. It is also one of those sacred rights symbolized by the keys retained in Palestinian homes wherever Palestinian refugees currently live.

Third Card: Israel will not negotiate with the PA until it recognizes Israel as a “Jewish State”. This is the card Uri Avnery has correctly dismissed as “nonsense”. This demand for a “Jewish state” was not a part of any Palestinian-Israeli negotiation until it was introduced into the conversation in 2007.
Yonatan Touval was a senior policy analyst with the Geneva Initiative, an Israeli nonprofit organization, when he wrote in a New York Times op ed column, May 12, 2009:

While the demand for Palestinian recognition of Israel’s right to exist was unique (after all, it is non-states that customarily seek such recognition from already existing states), the more recent demand that the Palestinians recognize Israel as the Jewish state is dangerous. It must be resisted by those who care about Israel’s long-term strategic interests.
Israel’s leaders had never sought such recognition from any party, friend or foe. The 1979 peace treaty with Egypt, which Begin signed, only expresses mutual recognition of the “sovereignty,” “integrity” and “political independence” of both parties. The peace treaty with Jordan that Yitzhak Rabin concluded in 1994 uses the same language. No mention of Israel’s Jewishness appears in either treaty.
In fact, it was only on the eve of the Annapolis conference in November 2007 that then-Prime Minister Ehud Olmert first trotted out the Jewish card, conditioning his participation on Palestinian recognition of Israel as a Jewish state. Fortunately, the international community did not respond and Olmert abandoned his demand.

Not only is this recent addition to Israel’s demands without precedent in the international community, it also ignores the fact that 1.4 million Palestinian Arabs live as citizens within the boundaries of Israel.
In their book, Israel’s Palestinians: The Conflict Within, Ilan Peleg and Dov Waxman write (page 19):

All too often, people are completely unaware of the large number of non-Jewish citizens of Israel–around 1.8 million people–who make up a quarter of the country’s total population of 7.5 million. One in four Israelis, in other words, are not Jewish.
The vast majority of this significant non-Jewish population are Arabs, who at the end of 2009 numbered 1,526,000, more than 20 percent of Israel’s population.

Pelig is the Charles A. Dana Professor of Government and Law at Lafayette College and servesas a scholar at the Middle East Institute in Washington, DC., His co-author, Dov Waxman, is associate professor of Political Science at Baruch College and the Graduate Center, City University of New York.
Their book is a rich resource for information on “Israel’s Palestinians”, the designation, by the way, preferred by Palestinian citizens of Israel instead of the official Israeli government terms, “Arab Israelis” or “Israeli Arabs”.
Peleg and Waxman write specifically on the impact that defining Israel as a Jewish state, would have on Israel’s Palestinians. They resist it. According to the authors, “The redefinition of the state has become the central demand of the Palestinian minority [within Israel].”

As the state’s Jewish identity has become a major point of contention domestically, it has also been inserted into the Israeli-Palestinian peace process by Prime Minister Netanyahu’s insistence that the Palestinian Authority officially recognize Israel as a Jewish state in a final peace agreement.
Such recognition, however,is unlikely to be granted against the objections of the Palestinian minority in Israel–underlining the connection that we emphasize in this book between Israel’s external and internal Palestinian problems.

President Obama grew up as a member of a minority community. Existentially, morally, and intellectually, he knows that the rights of a minority must be respected in a democracy, if that democracy ever expects to become “a state for all its citizens”.

James Wall is currently a Contributing Editor of The Christian Century magazine, based in Chicago, Illinois. From 1972 through 1999, he was editor and publisher of the Christian Century magazine. He has made more than 20 trips to that region as a journalist, during which he covered such events as Anwar Sadat’s 1977 trip to Jerusalem, and the 2006 Palestinian legislative election. He has interviewed, and written about, journalists, religious leaders, political leaders and private citizens in the region. Jim served for two years on active duty in the US Air Force, and three additional years in the USAF (inactive) reserve. Jim launched his new personal blog Wallwritings, on April 24, 2008. He can be reached at: jameswall8@gmail.com

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

When Hanan met Peter

;Franklin Lamb
 Al-manar
-- Beirut

Hanan is the Islamophobic Lebanese woman, Hanan Qahwaji who as a child lived in the South Lebanon village of Maryoun overlooking the Lebanon-Palestine border during three years of the on again off again Lebanese Civil War before she became an Israeli collaborator and fled to Israel.
Hanan, repackaged as “Rachael”, soon quickly landed a job with Israeli TV and specialized in telling stories about how Muslims terrorized her and her Christian neighbors.

Later, repackaged as “Nour Semaan”, a name she still sometimes uses, Hanan tells American audiences that she became a Middle East “anchor” in Israel.
Forgetting to mention that her job was with Pat Roberson’s, Christian Broadcasting Network, working to spread his politically conservative, Pentecostal faith in the Middle East which includes Robertson’s vision of rapture and how righteous Jews will all convert when Jesus comes again. The others will burn in Hell according to the Pentecosts. Hanan is sometimes known as, Nour Semaan, Rachael Cohen, “Dark Angel” and more recently, Bridgitte Gabriel, founder of the anti-Islam Zionist hate group “Act! For America.”

Peter, would be US Congressman Peter T. King, the Republican Islamaphobe from Long Island, NY, who as Hanan’s new partner in saving America from Islam, she sometimes flirtatiously refers to simply as “Petey” or “Petey Chops.”
It’s unknown to this observer whether the couple experienced a vrai coup de foudre when Mr. King was Hanan Qahwaji’s first guest earlier this year on a new cable television show that she co-hosts with Guy Rodgers, a Republican consultant who helped expand the Christian Coalition which used to be a potent political organization on the Christian right and who is ACT’s Executive Director. However, “Petey” and “Bridge” as he calls her sometimes, certainly appear to see potential in one another for saving America from the Muslim hoards which according to the duo are now in all American neighborhoods and who have infiltrated the FBI, the CIA, the State Department and the White House!
The new team is said by one King staffer to share a vision of “defeating Radical Islam in America and defeating it before its too late.” And they intend to show their fellow Americans just how to do it.
This past week in Washington, King held the second of what it planned as a series of “Congressional Hearings” designed to warn Americans about various threats from Muslims in their midst.
Gabriel frequently tells interviewer that “[F]or my first ten years I led a charmed and privileged life. All that came to an end when a jihadist religious war, declared by the Muslims against the Christians, […] tore my country and my life apart. It was a war that the world did not understand.”

Israeli Kids sending rockets as gifts "with love" to the Lebanese kids during July war 2006 on Lebanon.

What is obvious to the many Lebanese who view Hanan with contempt for misrepresenting and besmirching their country (not to mention her open letter to Israel during the July 2006 war, which she read frequently on TV shows urging Israel to keep bombing Lebanon despite their already killing more than 1,300 civilians is that it was a war that Gabriel did not understand.
The on-again off-again intermittent civil war was not characterized by anything remotely resembling a Muslim “Jihad”. Some Muslims actually fought with Israel and with Christian Militia. Moreover, the Palestinian organizations were secular nationalists and not remotely Jihadists plus many were also Christians, while other fighters were communists, Nasserites, and non-religious westerners. Although many combatants were Muslim, perhaps 35% were not. And their fight was with Israel; it was not a religious crusade against Christians.
Gabriel’s fundraising speeches among largely uniformed right wing Republican audiences in which she claims she was the target of a religious crusade against Christians is patent nonsense.
“Watching the World Trade Center buildings fall in 2001,” Hanan tells audiences, “I was struck by the same fear that I experienced during the war in Lebanon. As I watched, words instinctively came from my mouth as I spoke to the TV screen: ‘Now they are here.”
Gabriel is well aware, as Michael Young of Beirut’s Daily Star has pointed out that there was nothing remotely comparable between what happened in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania, and what she experienced in Marjayoun.
Bridgitte is said to believe that she can help King from deflecting rising criticism of his “hearings” given her own experience with hecklers as she tours the American heartland sounding the alarm.
She is said to resemble a Sarah Palin “mama grizzly” when she senses danger to those she cares about and no sooner than King’s hearing began last week than ACT! pounced with Tweets from the Congressional Hearing Room.

Sarah Palin; politician and commentator.

An ACT! staffer twittered live labeling it: “Round 2: House Homeland Security Committee Hearing on The Threat of Muslim-American Radicalization in U.S. Prisons:

“As I watched the discussion during the hearing, I Tweeted about so that our ACT! for America members could see right away what Members of the U.S. Congress are saying and doing about it. While there certainly were not as many “rabble rousers” as there had been for Chairman King’s first hearing on Muslim radicalization, there was some political drama, nonetheless.

“For example, Rep. Laura Richardson (D-CA) falsely alleged that the focus of Chairman King’s hearing 'can be deemed as racist and as discriminatory.' The Chairman immediately fired back by saying that 'the purpose of this Committee is to combat Islamic terrorism because that is the terrorist threat to this country. Bravo!”
“In response to Rep. Dan Lungren (R-CA) commenting that 'the political correctness in this room is astounding,' Rep. Shiela Jackson-Lee (D-TX) held up a copy of the Constitution replying that the document is where she finds her 'version of political correctness.' She went on further to state that there is a parallel between Christian militants and jihadists when it comes to bringing down the Constitution. More nonsense.”
“Rep. Hansen Clarke (D-MI) ranted terribly on for several-minutes about the real problem being the overcrowding of prisons due to unfair sentencing guidelines and claimed that prisoners were turning to Islam to 'protect themselves.'”
Other witnesses who reportedly left Peter and Bridgette unhappy were:
Deputy Chief Michael Downing, Commanding Officer of the LA Police Department’s Counter-Terrorism and Special Operations Bureau, and Professor Bert Useem of Purdue University.

According to ACT! Tweets:
"Chief Downing repeatedly tried to distinguish ‘Islam’ from what he referred to as ‘Prislam,’ and said that all jihadis had ‘hijacked’ the Islamic faith. As I listened to him, I wondered if he has taken the time to read sharia law, the Qur’an and the hadiths? If he did, I think he would understand that what the ‘radicalized’ Muslims are adhering to is an ideology that is clearly enunciated within Islam’s holy books and has been practiced for 14 centuries. His statements reminded me that a great deal of educating at local, state and federal levels still needs to
be done."

"Professor Useem made several amazingly naïve and plain stupid assertions, one of which was that 'correctional leadership (at both the agency and prison-level) has consciously and successfully infused the mission of observing signs of inmate radicalization into organizational practices. Rather than being sitting ducks, waiting for their facilities to be penetrated by radicalizing groups, correctional leaders have fashioned, staffed, and energized the effort to defeat radicalization."
A few examples of questions from new Members that may have pleased Bridge and Petey were:

	• Rep. Chip Cravaack (R-MN) asked if Shariah law would supersede the U.S. Constitution for radicalized Muslims. A chorus of “Yes” was heard from most of the witnesses.
	• Rep. Scott Rigell (R-VA) remarked that he was disappointed to see some members of the committee question why a hearing of this nature needed to take place. That the threat of Islamic radicalization in our prisons is clear.
	• Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-SC) commented how remarkable it is that a discussion about the threat of radical Islam appeared to be “off limits.” He also expressed concerns about literature found in U.S. prisons, such as writings by Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, who asks: Which do you choose, the flag of Islam or the flag of America?

ACT! Final Tweet from King’s Hearing last week:
“Action by our grassroots is the fuel that makes the ACT! For American engine run. As we wait for Chairman King’s third hearing on Islamic radicalization it’s really nice to see that the engine is roaring loud and strong.”
In perhaps a personal message of encouragement to the Chairman were the words: “Please keep it up for Round Three!”
One subject being considered for Round Three is: “How to spot an Islamic terrorist in your neighborhood.” An interesting subject since that’s one suggested title for Hanan’s (Bridgitte’s) next book featuring an introduction by none other than “Petey” King.

Franklin Lamb is doing research in Lebanon and can be contacted c/o fplamb@gmail.com

He is the author of The Price We Pay: A Quarter-Century of Israel’s Use of American Weapons Against Civilians in Lebanon.

He contribute to Uprooted Palestinians Blog

Please Signhttp://www.petitiononline.com/ssfpcrc/petition.html

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Of Trojan Horses, Libertarian Traps and Blueprints for a Judeo-centric NWO

By exilem

Celente is a somewhat likable character.

Aside a bit stuck in the 1980s, he seems to be a follower of the Libertarian & Tea Party drift, which is a trap set up by the same Corporate and Mega-Billionaires rulers.

Their goal is a total aggravation of the current state of concentration of power and capital. To that effect they have engaged the deconstruction of the concept of state/government, through the total revocation of every sense of public service, social program (including education), common interests, environmental regulation, regulatory safeguards and so on.

Instead of a union of "citizens" constituting a society equipped with rights and correlative fiscal obligations in exchange of common and social services managed by the state apparatus (a system by now totally dysfunctional because of corruption), we will have disjointed “individuals" degraded to fight for even the most elementary aspect of their own survival. The former citizenry, now mere “indivuduals” will be deprived of regulatory protection, deprived of any form of rights or entitlement, deprived of the civilizatory social fabric. In essence this represents a regression toward a medieval (feudal) enslavement of the large majority of the (western) populations. The masses of “individuals” placed under the oppressive boot of a very tiny few of own-it-all families. That means a few families above the law, with pharaonic wealth, whose sheer existence and mode of life requires millions and millions of other humans to live short and very miserable lives. Families best described as a tiny group of deranged psychopaths. These criminals have already caused the abysmal current situation, yet their identity and whereabouts are still known to a certain extend -as of now. They obviously have concocted this plan as a way to achieve their sociopathic aim of totalitarian power seizure.

Disturbingly: The current situation of genocidal wars and total social deconstruction is not an opinion, but a matter-of-fact. The seizure of power (governments and parliaments) and capital (financial institutions) as well as the communication organs of the 2 former (medias), by the malevolent Judeo-centric networks is also not any more a matter of discussion, but a matter-of-fact, irrespective of all the ubiquitous attempts to deny it and obfuscate this reality.

This alarming reality was created through surreptitious means such as massive corruption and physical threats. Equally surreptitious means, this time mainly deception, are now at work to open the gates to this scheme of absolute power through deconstruction of state and social fabric. Aside from some fake stance as "stop the wars", the Trojan Horse is mainly the "no-taxes" stance and the “government is out of control” stance.

Where Celente fits in this picture, is when he yells around "stop paying taxes", whilst he is fully aware that this will never work because -as some assert in astute comments above, every person who stops paying taxes will be the victim of crushing consequences since the "state" has been deliberately downgraded to be a mad dog.

Instead of shouting "grow up" and basically inviting his listeners to jump to their self-destruction by stopping to pay their taxes, he should have shouted to "grow a spine" and harangue his listeners to engage in their CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS to topple the government (including Congress) on the grounds that this government and Congress are committing high crimes and treason. As a little reminder, it is also the CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY to "a few good men" in the US military, to contribute to the same aim for the same reason.

Again: the "stop paying taxes" movement is a deceptive trick to trap delusional people (most of them with good intentions) into becoming targets themselves, instead of themselves targeting the corrupted government, corporations, and the sinister articulation between them, namely the malevolent Judeo-Centric networks.

More disturbingly, all these facts on the ground, fit 100 percent and without any variation, into something that has been discredited as a “fabrication” or a “counterfeit”. I am talking of the psychopathic and hateful doctrine as presented in the “Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion”.

Yet these Jewish “Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion”, are like a blueprint with 100 percent accuracy for our abysmal and factual current situation.

In conclusion: we do know the identity of the mostly Jewish perpetrators and their non-Jewish collaborators; we have by now the irrefutable hard facts authenticating methods and aims as published in the “Protocols” blueprint; and last but not least, we have worldwide an abysmal situation that invariably points toward a catastrophe for mankind, of unprecedented level. Actually, the catastrophe has begun: wars, environmental disasters etc. Fukushima, the rivers of blood from heinous wars in the Middle-East and Africa, the Gulf of Mexico/Corexit debacle, depleted uranium, collapsed economies, incompetence to tackle the problems, the population dumbed down, social unrest, the manufactured come-back of racism and hunger, etc etc etc

As long as we don't brake certain taboos, and name and blame the real criminals, we won't be stopping them from the unconscionable destruction they are engaging in.

Not paying taxes, or writing to your Congressmen and typing a few futile posts online, won't change anything.

Those who acquired illegitimately privileges, will NEVER ever abandon their privileges, unless forced. to.

The only suggestion Celente could have credibly shouted at his audience would have been:

“ Grow a spine and REVOLT, name the criminals, point them out, have no fear, do not believe their lies, brake the taboo, go for them, kick them out of their bloody thrones, do your Constitutional Duty and REVOLT ”
.

What Western Protesters Can Learn from the People of the Middle East--third and final

Via Leftwing-Christian.net

By Richard Edmondson

Quiz:

1.     What foreign lobby over the past three decades has consciously and deliberately allied itself with some of the most right wing elements in American society?

2.     What foreign lobby has backed political candidates such as House Majority Leader Eric Cantor—rated 0% by the AFL-CIO for his anti-union voting record?

3.     What foreign lobby pushed for the U.S. to invade Iraq and is now endeavoring to move us into a war with Iran?

If you answered the Israeli lobby to all of the above, congratulations. Go to the head of the class.

Most people view the Lobby as being principally involved in corrupting our country’s foreign policy and give little heed or thought to the assumption that it might also have an adulterating influence on our domestic affairs. Certainly it is true the Lobby is concerned primarily with Israel and with perpetuating U.S. support for the Zionist state. Yet all Americans need to consider how this impacts domestic politics. The American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC, has long been viewed as one of the most, if not the most, powerful lobby in America. It can make or break the careers of U.S. politicians. AIPAC chooses which candidates to support, or alternately oppose, based solely on their positions on Israel. The candidate might love war, exalt corporations as the ultimate good, and hold deplorable views on the rights of working people to organize to improve their lives, but this would not matter. His or her position on Israel is what AIPAC looks at. Were AIPAC no more powerful than, say, the Greek lobby, this would perhaps be of little concern. But AIPAC runs Washington. Consider the House resolution on the Goldstone report, which passed in late 2009 following release of the finding that Israel been complicit in war crimes in Gaza. The resolution, which called upon the president and secretary of state to “oppose unequivocally any endorsement or further consideration” of Goldstone, passed by a vote of 344 to 36, and at the time it was considered unusual that even a mere 36 had summoned the temerity to cross the Lobby.

If you doubt the extent of the Israel lobby’s power, reflect upon the words of Congressman Jim Moran, his comments made in a 2007 interview with Tikkun Magazine: “If you cross AIPAC, AIPAC is unforgiving and will destroy you politically…Every member (of Congress) knows it’s the best-organized national lobbying force…Most people that are involved in foreign policy especially look at a broad range of issues and consider a person’s entire voting record. AIPAC considers the voting record only as it applies to Israel.”

Moreover, voting records on Israel can actually be telling indicators of how politicians might vote on other issues, even in the domestic arena. Those inclined to feel sympathy or compassion for Palestinians are the very same public leaders most likely to place a high value on social justice. One would expect such officials to probably also cast votes in favor of taxing the rich or reining in the power of corporations. When AIPAC systematically weeds out such people from the political process, eliminating them from serving in Congress, the effect we see over time becomes quite dramatic. We end up with a more degraded and debased government, eventually becoming in the process a nation of dishonor.

In considering all this, it’s also pertinent to ask if there really is a clear line of delineation between “foreign policy” and “domestic affairs,” and if so, where that line actually is. This becomes relevant when we consider the complex interrelationship between U.S. and Israeli corporations, especially in the military-industrial-financial sector, a matter discussed by longtime Palestine solidarity activists Kathleen and Bill Christison, who say the Lobby functions essentially to sustain these corporate entanglements:

Israel and its lobby work hand in glove with the US arms industry to advance their combined, usually compatible interests. The relatively few powerful, wealthy families that dominate the Israel arms industry are just as interested in pressing for aggressively militaristic US and Israeli foreign policies as are the CEOS of US arms corporations. As globalization has progressed, so have the ties of joint ownership and close financial and technological cooperation among the arms corporations of the two nations grown ever closer. The relationship is symbiotic, and the lobby cooperates intimately to keep it alive; lobbyists can go to many in Congress and tell them credibly that if aid to Israel is cut off, thousands of arms-industry jobs in their districts will be lost. The lobby does not simply passively support the desires of the military-industrial complex. It actively twists arms in Congress and the administration to perpetuate acceptance of certain “national interests” that many Americans believe is wrong.

Given this interweaving and joint ownership of U.S. and Israeli corporations, it should perhaps come as no surprise that backers of Israel are now actively involved in promoting the Tea Party. Not only does the Tea Party express no opposition to the ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, but the economic interests that are at stake in these allegiances would also seem to fit nicely with the TP’s pro-corporate/anti-union stance. All of which brings us, in a roundabout way, to Wisconsin.

The 800-pound gorilla

On February 14, protests, including a building occupation, began to break out in Wisconsin as union members and supporters rose up in opposition to Governor Scott Walker’s proposal to effectively eliminate collective bargaining rights for some public employee unions. The protesters seemed set to follow the trail blazed by the people of Egypt, who, after occupying Cairo’s Tahrir Square starting on January 25, managed to topple the seemingly entrenched Hosni Mubarak by February 11. In Wisconsin, however, things did not quite work out that way. The two-week occupation of the state capitol building subsided on March 3 with the issue of a court order, rekindled briefly on March 9, and then subsided once more, and while efforts are currently being mounted for an election recall, the anti-union Walker and his Republican cronies remain in power for now.

In parts one and two of this series of articles, I discussed how protesters in the Muslim world have two important things going for them that Western activists by and large do not have: 1 ) faith in God, and, 2 ) a solid, firm analysis of global Zionism and the destructive impact it has had on their lives. In this last installment I would like to discuss the second of these two assets, or its lack thereof, and how that deficiency is playing out in Wisconsin and its implications for social change in America.

Despite the lapsing of the building occupation, protests have continued outside the Wisconsin capitol on a weekly and sometimes more often basis. These protests have drawn huge crowds, in the neighborhood of 100,000 or more, and the gatherings have been quite spirited, with protesters angrily demanding their rights and denouncing what is rightly seen as an anti-worker and pro-corporate agenda by the governor. But there seems an inability to connect dots. Protesters have engaged in repeated, open-ended chants of “Fox lies”, though few if any seem to mention that the network is owned by Rupert Murdoch or that Murdoch is a staunch Zionist and supporter of Israel. There have been speeches tying the nation’s wars to budgetary shortfalls here at home, though almost invariably omitted is any mention of the hype and promotion of those very same wars by the Lobby and its media supporters. The unconnected dots go on. Discussions galore were held, both before the protests got started and after they were under way, on the backing of Walker’s campaign by the billionaire Koch brothers, as well as Koch support for the Tea Party—though seldom if ever mentioned is the fact that the Tea Party is also backed by prominent supporters of Israel. In short, the Israeli lobby seems to be the 800 pound gorilla that no one in Wisconsin wants to talk about.

As CEO of News Corporation, the Australian-born Murdoch runs one of the largest media conglomerates in the world, with holdings in a number of countries including Australia, the U.S. and the U.K. These holdings include newspapers, magazines, book publishing companies, music, radio, and film studios—and they include also Fox News in the United States. It is a media empire that has been described as a cultural Chernobyl. In the video below Murdoch employee Sean Hannity (equally as pro-Israel as his boss) gives a warm reception—and a national media platform—to the union-busting governor.

The Tea Party has shown up in Wisconsin to stage anti-union counter protests. As the next video shows, Murdoch’s network, while obstreperously disparaging teachers and other pro-union protesters, has been an avid supporter of the Tea Party.

Given then the negative union messaging coming from Fox News, one would think those addressing the Wisconsin protest rallies might at least remark upon, maybe even draw an analogy to, the network’s equally hostile coverage of Israel’s critics. Could there possibly be a connection, and is it not logical that the matter might at least be discussed or mentioned at some point? But this never seems to happen. John Nichols is a labor activist who also writes for The Nation magazine. He is a native Wisconsinite and has played a leading role in the protests. Here he makes a rousing speech, calling for “solidarity…solidarity…solidarity…solidarity…”—though apparently not against Zionism. Nichols makes no mention of Israel.

Jesse Jackson takes the podium in this video. Undoubtedly a great civil rights leader and strong champion of the working class, Jackson talks about bankers being “awash in capital while home foreclosures are on the rise.” But again, like Nichols, he makes no mention of the AIPAC hammerlock on Congress.

In October of last year, the Anti-Defamation League held a special evening for Murdoch, presenting the Fox News owner with its “International Leadership Award” at a dinner at New York’s Waldorf Astoria. “I have come to know the man, not his image,” said the ADL’s Abe Foxman, paying tribute to the honored guest. “I learned that he cared deeply about the safety and security of Israel. I learned that he was as distressed as I was about efforts to delegitimize the Jewish state, to hold it to a double standard, and to seek its demise by some.”

In his acceptance speech, Murdoch expressed adulation for the Jewish people, commenting, “I can’t say I have been chosen by God. But tonight I can say this: I am honored to be chosen by His people for this award.” He also asserted that “we live in a world where there is an ongoing war against the Jews,” while discussing what he described as a “soft war” being waged against Israel by its critics. “In this war, the aim is to make Israel a pariah,” he said.

Israel has of course very much made itself into a pariah, through war crimes and sixty years of apartheid, though as is the case with other Zionists, this thought seems never to have entered Murdoch’s head. On the contrary, the Obama administration, by failing to back Israel in an even more vigorous manner than it already does, is in danger of emboldening “extremists” in the Middle East, Murdoch averred:

“Tonight I’d like to speak about two things that worry me most. First is the disturbing new home that anti-Semitism has found in polite society—especially in Europe. Second is how violence and extremism are encouraged when the world sees Israel’s greatest ally distancing herself from the Jewish state.”

The awardee additionally asserted that the “Jewish homeland” (occupied Palestine) must be defended against “armies of terrorists.” By far, however, his main concern seems to be “the soft war that seeks to isolate Israel by delegitimizing it.” Moreover, the “battleground” in this new war “is everywhere,” Murdoch feels—including, he says, in the media. (For the full text of Murdoch’s remarks before the ADL, click here.)

Soft wars, at least when waged by major television networks, can of course easily escalate into hard wars, and as the video below demonstrates, Fox at times seems to be prosecuting its own “fair and balanced” blitzkrieg in that war.

But it isn’t only Fox News or Murdoch feeding the American public pro-Israel propaganda. In a highly informative article entitled “All in the Family,” Palestine solidarity activist Alison Weir, executive director of If Americans Knew, documents how a number of prominent U.S. media figures have either past or ongoing ties to the Zionist state. In some cases these ties go directly to the Israeli military—either by the reporters having served themselves or by way of family members who have served. Among those mentioned by Weir are Ethan Bronner of the New York Times, CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, NPR’s Linda Gradstein, and Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic. But again none of this seems to be on the table for discussion in Wisconsin.

In the video below you’ll see Congressman Dennis Kucinich giving a rousing speech at a rally in Madison. Kucinich was one of the “brave 36” who summoned the nerve necessary to vote against the House resolution on the Goldstone report, and he of all people is well aware of the power the Lobby wields in Washington. At one point in the speech the Ohio congressman calls for an end to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and, and he initiates a chant of “No more wars…no more wars…” Yet he fails to mention that the Israeli lobby was one of the major powers instrumental in taking us to war in the first place. To be sure, Kucinich castigates—and deservedly so—Wall Street banks and arms manufacturers for a variety of evils, including their roles in drumming up bloodshed in the world, but in failing to mention the Israeli lobby he is letting one of the major culprits off the hook.

We find no mention of the lobby here either…

…or here in the lyrics of Tom Morello’s song…

Israel comes for tea

In early February, coincidentally just days before the Wisconsin protests broke out, a new book made it into publication. Hailed as “the first great Tea Party book,” Underdogma touts the idea of “American exceptionalism,” a concept much in vogue with the political Right these days since, if a nation is “exceptional,’ then the wars that that nation chooses to wage cannot be viewed as other than noble and righteous. The book is written by Michael Prell, who is a former political consultant to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as well as a member of the Tea Party Patriots. The TPP is one of the larger and more organized groups that fall under the Tea Party umbrella, and below we see a video of Prell speaking at the organization’s most recent convention. The affair took place February 25-27 in Phoenix, at the $600 million Phoenix Convention Center, just as, coincidentally, in Wisconsin the occupation of the state capitol building was still under way.

In his book, Prell writes that “American exceptionalism requires exceptional Americans”—and in the author’s view the “exceptional Americans” needed at this stage of history are the tea partyers, who he says have begun “rising up to preserve the American spirit, which is the foundation of the United States, the foundation of its greatness, and the foundation of its well-earned power.” In his book, Prell also focuses to a considerable degree on the conflict in the Middle East, and here it might be said that his admiration for the Tea Party is perhaps matched only by his supreme detestation of the Palestinians, for Prell assails Palestinians in terms so strong it could almost be viewed as defamation of an entire people. I have written an extensive review of Underdogma here.

In the video below, Prell is interviewed by the right wing group Accuracy in Media.

Israel has other ties to the Tea Party as well. Freedom Works, a right wing organization headed by former House majority leader Dick Armey, recruits and provides training to Tea Party activists nationally. Armey is a staunch supporter of Israel and once in an interview on “Hardball” called for what essentially would amount to the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians. But again, as stated above, there is in Wisconsin an inability or unwillingness to connect dots. PRWatch.org is a left wing, pro-union site that has been providing daily coverage of the battle for workers’ rights on the streets of Madison. On February 19, members of the Tea Party staged a counter protest at the state capitol building. PRWatch.org’s coverage of the day’s events, which can be found here, includes comments from people on both sides of this emotionally charged issue. But nowhere on the page is there any mention of Israel or the Israeli connection to the Tea Party…

Nor is there any mention of Israel in this speech by Jim Hightower

…nor by filmmaker Michael Moore here, although there are several points at which Moore, in this rather lengthy and riveting speech, does appear to get close. Let me rephrase that. There are several times he seems barely one step away from tagging the Israeli lobby with the ills that have befallen Americans—he even mentions the revolutions in Egypt and Tunisia—but in the end, sadly, he skirts the issue

What Moore might have mentioned, but didn’t, is that Israel has more billionaires per capita than any other nation in the world. This is a fact discussed in two recent essays, here and here, by James Petras, author of Zionism, Militarism and the Decline of US Power and a professor emeritus at Binghamton University in Binghamton, New York. Petras says the U.S. has more billionaires (413) than any other country in the world, but that Israel has the highest number per capita (16) and twice as many as Saudi Arabia (8). Something Israel also has, rather startlingly—a favor which, we should add, has been granted to it by our own leaders—is the power to “leverage” U.S. economic power in its own interests. Writes Petras:

In 2004 a little noticed administrative add-on in the US Treasury Department took place that has had world historic significance: AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) pressured Treasury to create the position of “Undersecretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence”. Equally important, under strong pressure from AIPAC, a zealous Zionist of immense energy, Stuart Levey, was appointed to head the new agency.

Levey used all the administrative mechanisms in the Treasury, from threats of penalties, fines and ostracism, to friendly and hostile persuasion, to line up US federal and state public and private pension funds to sacrifice lucrative investments in targeted countries, most of whom, lo and behold, were adversaries of Israeli occupation of Palestine.

Even as Levey was imposing state constraints over the operations of private investors in the US, he organized his entire staff to police the financial world abroad. Levey and his Zionist allies in the so-called Israel lobby” called on their Congressional cronies to approve sanction policies which not only affected US banks, manufacturers and construction companies but which penalized any European, Asian and Middle Eastern bank which had economic dealings with Iran and other countries on his list (Cuba, North Korea among others).

Petras says that traditionally one of the key distinctions between a capitalist and non-capitalist state has been the relationship between the state and private enterprise. In capitalist countries, the government will act on behalf of business, regulating markets in its interest, but fundamentally state and private enterprise are, and traditionally always have been, separate from one another. In non-capitalist (socialist or feudal) systems, no such separation exists. But, says Petras, these separations are now breaking down in America. Private or publicly traded corporations are now becoming “adjuncts of the US state.” In the process—and this may come as a surprise to a number of leftists—they are undergoing a certain amount of “dispossession,” as Petras puts it, as they are compelled to sacrifice profitable ventures in the interest of the U.S./Israeli imperialist alliance. “How and why the world’s biggest propagandist of ‘free enterprise’ and de-regulated capitalism has successfully converted major international financial and industrial enterprises into tools of foreign policy at enormous costs to their bottom line is yet an untold story,” Petras comments. “Given the enormity of the historical change in the relation between state and market, the shift in power has enormous consequences for peace, prosperity and freedom.”

I strongly encourage people to read both articles by Petras in their entirety. By the way, Petras also informs us that Levey departed from his job at Treasury in March of 2011—only to be replaced by his fellow Zionist and former law firm partner David Cohen.

The Soros factor

The “enormous consequences for peace, prosperity, and freedom” Petras mentions are obviously already being felt in Wisconsin. So why aren’t more people there talking about it? One reason could be George Soros, the Jewish billionaire who has become something of a Daddy Warbucks to a number of left wing progressive groups, including some of those involved in the Wisconsin protests. As a philanthropist, Soros has helped a number of worthy causes, from poverty eradication in Africa to providing aid to civilians in war torn Yugoslavia, while here in the U.S., he has funded such organizations as the Center for American Progress and Moveon.org …as well as the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, which helped produce the TV spot below:

Yet Soros has also served on the board of directors of the Council on Foreign Relations, and is at bottom a Zionist, albeit a liberal one. While he has been critical of Israeli policies (see here and here), he has also funded the “pro-Israel, pro-peace” lobby J Street. That being said, it should also be noted that there is a sharp split among Zionists in the United States (reflected in articles such as this one ) between liberals like Soros and the more conservative Zionists who gravitate toward AIPAC. A lot of American Jewish animosity toward Soros stems from comments he made in 2003 in which he asserted that “a resurgence of anti-Semitism in Europe” is directly attributable to the policies of the U.S. and Israeli governments. Not an altogether illogical conclusion on Soros’ part. Nevertheless, we can easily imagine it might be difficult for left wing groups receiving Soros funding to mount effective criticisms of Israel or of the Zionist lobby’s control over the U.S. government. To the extent this holds true for progressive groups operating in Wisconsin, the organized protests there could almost be thought of as a “controlled opposition.” Moreover, it would appear that Americans on both the Right and the Left have in certain respects become pawns on a chessboard to be manipulated—and pitted against one another—by competing billionaire Zionists, a factor making the prospects for genuine social change in America not good.

Conclusion

Another factor doubtless confounding matters in Wisconsin is that many of those who have supported the unions and played active roles in the protests are progressive Jews. This places both Jews and Gentiles in a difficult position. When presented with a choice, most people, by nature, will choose the less complicated way forward, and in this case the less complicated approach is to maintain a silence on Israel. Yet even as this silence is perpetuated, the “enormous consequences” continue to worsen. Moreover, in Wisconsin there are those who, at least on some level, seem acutely aware that something quite serious and unprecedented is afoot. “We are in the fight of our lives,” said University of Wisconsin professor Joel Rogers. “Outside violence, we cannot afford to bar any holds.”

Rogers, whose comments were made in a letter to a Madison magazine (the letter has since been widely quoted—see here and here ), says what’s being implemented in Wisconsin is a “lethal political project that goes well beyond wrecking unions and schools, inflicting pain upon the poor, and otherwise debasing a single state or group of states.” (It should be mentioned here that bills similar to Walker’s are also being considered in California, Ohio, Iowa, and probably elsewhere, while the Wisconsin governor himself has acknowledged leading a movement that may “ultimately inspire others across this country state by state and in our federal government” to adopt similar measures.) Rogers doesn’t “reject without consideration” any nonviolent strategy that might be proposed, including a “general strike,” though he acknowledges that the latter “carries clear risks.” But what he emphasizes—“first and last,” as he puts it—is the urgent need to “build a mass democratic movement.”

Professor Rogers is correct, a “lethal political project” is indeed under way, but I have for many years now been listening to leftists say “We need to build a movement,” with little ever coming of it. What always seems to get left out of these movement-building stratagems is any mention of religious faith, and I would suggest that that might be one of the problems. Religion provides an element of cohesiveness to a movement that ideology alone may sometimes have trouble retaining. Religious faith can also induce strength and fortitude for those who may find themselves vulnerable at times to such thoughts as “the Zionists are too powerful to be defeated,” and to be honest that is probably all of us. Faith in God is an important component in the lives of those seeking change in the Middle East, perhaps most notably in Egypt, where the Muslim Brotherhood played a key role in bringing to an end the 30-year rule of the dictator Hosni Mubarak. But it is not, at least at present, a constituent factor amongst the American progressive Left.

As Martin Luther King once said, “We must build dikes of courage to hold back the flood of fear.” Indeed. And this is where religious faith plays such a central role. But while faith is important, it should also be mentioned that it is only one of a number of ingredients needed. Another very important ingredient is to know your adversary. What are the possibilities of defeating an enemy when you are unable to publicly identify that enemy or even mention its name? The people of Wisconsin and other states where similar measures are under way need to start making the necessary connections. It has been said that Walker is a puppet—and that is surely true. But what needs to be recognized is that even those who have funded Walker’s campaign are, in a very real sense, puppets as well. They are simply further up the food chain. To fight the “lethal political project” that is being executed upon us, working people and their unions have to take the fight all the way to the top of that chain. The foe must be confronted to his face. A good place to start would be the AIPAC Policy Conference scheduled for May 22-24 in Washington. Expected to draw some 6,000 attendees, the conference will be a magnate to both Democrat and Republican candidates, many of them extremely hostile to working people, who will show up promising their everlasting fealty to Israel. American workers, Gentiles and Jews alike, should use the opportunity to go on the offensive. It is time the battleground shifted from Wisconsin to Washington.

Richard Edmondson is the author of The Memoirs of Saint John. Visit his website at MemoirsofSaintJohn.com.

• What Western Protesters Can Learn from the People of the Middle East -Part 1
• What Western Protesters can Learn from the People of the Middle East--part 2

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian