The Media War
Please see Melanie Phillips's blog here for her analysis of the media's mishandling of the war. She only leaves out two things, firstly, that the media guys in Lebanon are junkies. More important is the war of symbolism.
Why does everyone want to believe every bad thing they hear about Jews? The reason is cultural.
A hole right in the center of the Red Cross. A missile targets an ambulance, fisked thoroughly at zombietime. Why did the fraud work? Symbolism.
Here is an earlier attempt to use Christian symbolism to turn Christian populations against Israelis.
It is important to note that the rise of secular culture in the West, formerly known as Christendom, has not erased the basis of Western culture, which is founded on its myths: it is still Christian and attempts to eradicate it and its values through nationalism and other systems have failed spectacularly. Christian imagery channelled through the unconscious is stronger, not weaker than that apprehended consciously within its own, recognizable, context.
Secular institutions are projections of the faith institutions upon which the culture is grounded but with all reference to their origins expunged. The institutions subsume the content of their origin and become holy in themselves. This, I think, explains the perverse near-holiness of abortion and buggery to the Left. After all, gay rights & feminism have weakened the legal and popular basis of their own ideas by failing to reproduce at a rate necessary to keep their ideas afloat. Blue states in the US are bleeding voters and, therefore, representation in the House of Representatives. Their success has been phyrric. When I asked a friend in the arts whether this points to a flaw in democracy or that the ideas themselves were unsustainable, she did what leftists do best: she avoided reality and embraced the dream which, it must be pointed out, leads to elitist undemocratic rule by an effete pseudo-intellectual class.
But back to the point: the Israeli with a weapon in his hand is a Jew with a spike and hammer at the foot of the Cross. Muslim warriors know very well how to pluck these strings. They know us better than we know them. That's trouble.
Thursday, August 31, 2006
Tuesday, August 29, 2006
Cultural Vandalism
Is the new Hallmark production of Gulliver’s Travels an act of cultural vandalism? Not literally. After all, not a single copy of the book is burned. But if this is the only Gulliver people are exposed to—and to many it will be—those people will not get anything like what Jonathan Swift intended. Were Jonathan Swift alive, Hallmark could be sued for moral rights violations and they'd lose. That's a good way to think before starting a project using someone else's ideas.
Swift’s masterpiece is an extraordinary vision of humanity. Through his hero, Gulliver, he travels to places that make him feel big, small, shat on and… human. The little people in Lilleput are small in every way. Petty and stupid, they fight, the big-enders and little- enders, interminable wars of annihilation over which end of their soft-boiled eggs are opened at the breakfast table. Sounds a bit like us.
I forget most of the rest: it’s been years since I read it. The TV show reminded me of a few things and, on the bright side, it made me want to read it again.
This gift to mankind has been shat on, like Gulligan under the boughs beneath the vulgar yahoos, and Danson, Steenbergen and especially two great actors, Peter O’Toole and Edward Fox, ought to be thoroughly ashamed. Some "Creative Person" got the bright idea to put the focus on "the star:" Gulliver, played by Ted Danson, whose acting is just plain bad. He portrays Gulliver as insane. All his travels were made up. Weeeeel. Yeeeaaah! Of course Swift made up Gulliver! Naturally, the lands he visited were imaginary: that's called fiction. His purpose was to talk about humankind and our, often awful, relations with each other. The travels of his imaginary character to imaginary lands is his method. But these people treat imagination as a disease and anyone who has a moment that Hallmark couldn’t turn into one of its anodyne cards is suspect.
I can sure see why Hallmark would produce this shit—and I mean shit. It’s so bad that O’Toole, always profound, seems as little as his Lilliputian character. He’s in character, of course, while commenting on the character simultaneously, as many, if not all great actors do. Informing the character sheds light on it. Our light completes the character. It becomes three dimensional through this act of psychic triangulation. Most actors do this very subtly, like Hopkins in "The Remains of the Day." Others, like Nicholson, in most things in the last twenty years, play the two parts pretty broadly apart. Nicholson actually plays on the relationship of his two points and with us too: with him it’s all cat’s cradle and he, chuckling away, holds all the strings. Great fun, as is O’Toole. But something here is lacking. He is shouting into a megaphone (as great as ever) and all one senses is a hollow shell standing under him.
That’s because it is. Look up "anodyne" and there ought to be the word "Hallmark" as a synonym. Harmless, bland, inoffensive: Hallmark is the doll who can’t pee because she has no genitals: it is the norm, the average, the person of no distinction. Hallmark’s hallmark is to have no hallmark. I never suspected that such people despise those who have imagination quite so much. Suddenly, Pound’s "Disney against the metaphysicals" stands out in bold type. Or Einstein’s "Men of genius always will be violently opposed by mediocre minds."
Indeed, anyone, to this mediocre type, who has an answer to any question other than "a)" or "b)" is suspect. Who more distinctive then that a man who journeys to the darker places of the human soul and shines his little flashlight to illuminate what can be found there?
Hence the act of vandalism. The Taliban destroyed the Buddhas in Afghanistan, the Palestinians the oldest synagogue in the wortd at Jericho, the barbarians the great statuary of the Classical age and these things are obviously vandalism. Hallmark endeavours to protect us from foreign foes by undermining our own culture; the one that feeds and sustains them. And us.
Please buy a copy of Gulliver’s Travels wherever you live, and read it. Or order it online. I like to use ABE Books. I own no stock in the company and they aren’t paying me for the plug. How could they? As far as I know, no one reads this stuff.
Is the new Hallmark production of Gulliver’s Travels an act of cultural vandalism? Not literally. After all, not a single copy of the book is burned. But if this is the only Gulliver people are exposed to—and to many it will be—those people will not get anything like what Jonathan Swift intended. Were Jonathan Swift alive, Hallmark could be sued for moral rights violations and they'd lose. That's a good way to think before starting a project using someone else's ideas.
Swift’s masterpiece is an extraordinary vision of humanity. Through his hero, Gulliver, he travels to places that make him feel big, small, shat on and… human. The little people in Lilleput are small in every way. Petty and stupid, they fight, the big-enders and little- enders, interminable wars of annihilation over which end of their soft-boiled eggs are opened at the breakfast table. Sounds a bit like us.
I forget most of the rest: it’s been years since I read it. The TV show reminded me of a few things and, on the bright side, it made me want to read it again.
This gift to mankind has been shat on, like Gulligan under the boughs beneath the vulgar yahoos, and Danson, Steenbergen and especially two great actors, Peter O’Toole and Edward Fox, ought to be thoroughly ashamed. Some "Creative Person" got the bright idea to put the focus on "the star:" Gulliver, played by Ted Danson, whose acting is just plain bad. He portrays Gulliver as insane. All his travels were made up. Weeeeel. Yeeeaaah! Of course Swift made up Gulliver! Naturally, the lands he visited were imaginary: that's called fiction. His purpose was to talk about humankind and our, often awful, relations with each other. The travels of his imaginary character to imaginary lands is his method. But these people treat imagination as a disease and anyone who has a moment that Hallmark couldn’t turn into one of its anodyne cards is suspect.
I can sure see why Hallmark would produce this shit—and I mean shit. It’s so bad that O’Toole, always profound, seems as little as his Lilliputian character. He’s in character, of course, while commenting on the character simultaneously, as many, if not all great actors do. Informing the character sheds light on it. Our light completes the character. It becomes three dimensional through this act of psychic triangulation. Most actors do this very subtly, like Hopkins in "The Remains of the Day." Others, like Nicholson, in most things in the last twenty years, play the two parts pretty broadly apart. Nicholson actually plays on the relationship of his two points and with us too: with him it’s all cat’s cradle and he, chuckling away, holds all the strings. Great fun, as is O’Toole. But something here is lacking. He is shouting into a megaphone (as great as ever) and all one senses is a hollow shell standing under him.
That’s because it is. Look up "anodyne" and there ought to be the word "Hallmark" as a synonym. Harmless, bland, inoffensive: Hallmark is the doll who can’t pee because she has no genitals: it is the norm, the average, the person of no distinction. Hallmark’s hallmark is to have no hallmark. I never suspected that such people despise those who have imagination quite so much. Suddenly, Pound’s "Disney against the metaphysicals" stands out in bold type. Or Einstein’s "Men of genius always will be violently opposed by mediocre minds."
Indeed, anyone, to this mediocre type, who has an answer to any question other than "a)" or "b)" is suspect. Who more distinctive then that a man who journeys to the darker places of the human soul and shines his little flashlight to illuminate what can be found there?
Hence the act of vandalism. The Taliban destroyed the Buddhas in Afghanistan, the Palestinians the oldest synagogue in the wortd at Jericho, the barbarians the great statuary of the Classical age and these things are obviously vandalism. Hallmark endeavours to protect us from foreign foes by undermining our own culture; the one that feeds and sustains them. And us.
Please buy a copy of Gulliver’s Travels wherever you live, and read it. Or order it online. I like to use ABE Books. I own no stock in the company and they aren’t paying me for the plug. How could they? As far as I know, no one reads this stuff.
Monday, August 28, 2006
Thursday, August 24, 2006
Wednesday, August 23, 2006
Ostentatious Caring In Toronto
The cab driver wanted to know if I had been part of the AIDS conference as he drove me from my home to the airport. It was over and a lot of people were leaving town that day.
No, I told him, I hadn't partaken in the glitzy concernfest though it had been active just down the street at the glorious Tent City the night before.
I hadn’t known what to say to my neighbour when she asked me if I’d been to see it, her eyes wide and steamy, as if she had perhaps just caught sight of either of Moses on the Mountain or Jesus rising from the Crypt.
"Um, no," I said, awkwardly.
What I wanted to say was that never had so many performed so many feats of ostentatious caring in so short a time. If any one has the injury reports of dislocated shoulders from patting themsleves on the back, let me know.
And how perverse it all is too! The progress of AIDS represents the greatest public health failure in human history. Unlike the plague, we knew how the disease was spread and we had the opportunity to stop it. We chose to quarantine the helathy instead of the ill and now, millions of dead later, we still want to quarantine the well and let the ill get on with infecting or not infecting—it’s the honour system—as many as taste and opportunity permits.
Let me be brutally frank on two points. Firstly, if we had ignored the human rights ninnies and quarantined the sick in the 80s we might have stopped this illness in its tracks. Secondly, from a purely epidemiological point of view, there is no percentage in prolonging the lives of people who may spread the disease.
Quarantine is primary, treatment is secondary. But the "activists" have turned reality on its head. Drugs are being withheld, people are being killed. By whom? The government, of course. That same government that failed to protect its population from AIDS when it mattered.
AIDS, according to another neighbour, was started by "the government." It is surprising how many conspiracy theories there are these days that otherwise intelligent beings seem to be prey too—a kind of intellectual AIDS it might be called—existential doubts about the very worth of our societies, our form of government, our lives. We exagerate every flaw of reasonably-but-not-absolutely- good cultures and romanticize very dangerous and destructive cultures based on a strage notion that all cultures are created equal.
My neighbour has a grain of truth here but it's just a grain: Governments, by not quarantining the ill, certainly participated in the spread of the disease. Ditto for the World Health Organisation and the UN.
My cab driver had a memory I thought conveyed pretty well my general sense of what the mob (as David Peterson might describe the unwashed body of non-Liberal Party cognoscenti) really thinks in spite of the opinions of the cowed crowd that poses as the illuminated. He told me he remembered a City TV interview wth a man who had AIDS but didn’t want to make love with a piece of rubber and didn’t see why he ought to give up his God-given right to his pleasures.
My cousin (who I was being taken to the airport to travel to) said, when I told him and his wife the story, "He should be arrested." Nice guy, my cousin, and always partly right (sometimes wholy): they should all have been "arrested," which was the misleading way human rights advocates misrepresented quarantine.
For how many years now have so many avoided sex because of AIDS? How badly has it coloured our world? If the only way to be free of the illness is abstinence or prophylactics and the infected die, it doesn’t take a genius to see that, between life and death here, something’s got to give.
I had a great weekend with my cousins and aunts and, upon return, as I ran with my suitcases to catch the bus, the driver, seeing I was a mere 5 feet away, gunned the engine and peeled away. The AIDS conference being over, the caring is put back in the cupboard and the everyday cups are brought out. Tannic acid, anyone? [spit] Welcome to Toronto.
The cab driver wanted to know if I had been part of the AIDS conference as he drove me from my home to the airport. It was over and a lot of people were leaving town that day.
No, I told him, I hadn't partaken in the glitzy concernfest though it had been active just down the street at the glorious Tent City the night before.
I hadn’t known what to say to my neighbour when she asked me if I’d been to see it, her eyes wide and steamy, as if she had perhaps just caught sight of either of Moses on the Mountain or Jesus rising from the Crypt.
"Um, no," I said, awkwardly.
What I wanted to say was that never had so many performed so many feats of ostentatious caring in so short a time. If any one has the injury reports of dislocated shoulders from patting themsleves on the back, let me know.
And how perverse it all is too! The progress of AIDS represents the greatest public health failure in human history. Unlike the plague, we knew how the disease was spread and we had the opportunity to stop it. We chose to quarantine the helathy instead of the ill and now, millions of dead later, we still want to quarantine the well and let the ill get on with infecting or not infecting—it’s the honour system—as many as taste and opportunity permits.
Let me be brutally frank on two points. Firstly, if we had ignored the human rights ninnies and quarantined the sick in the 80s we might have stopped this illness in its tracks. Secondly, from a purely epidemiological point of view, there is no percentage in prolonging the lives of people who may spread the disease.
Quarantine is primary, treatment is secondary. But the "activists" have turned reality on its head. Drugs are being withheld, people are being killed. By whom? The government, of course. That same government that failed to protect its population from AIDS when it mattered.
AIDS, according to another neighbour, was started by "the government." It is surprising how many conspiracy theories there are these days that otherwise intelligent beings seem to be prey too—a kind of intellectual AIDS it might be called—existential doubts about the very worth of our societies, our form of government, our lives. We exagerate every flaw of reasonably-but-not-absolutely- good cultures and romanticize very dangerous and destructive cultures based on a strage notion that all cultures are created equal.
My neighbour has a grain of truth here but it's just a grain: Governments, by not quarantining the ill, certainly participated in the spread of the disease. Ditto for the World Health Organisation and the UN.
My cab driver had a memory I thought conveyed pretty well my general sense of what the mob (as David Peterson might describe the unwashed body of non-Liberal Party cognoscenti) really thinks in spite of the opinions of the cowed crowd that poses as the illuminated. He told me he remembered a City TV interview wth a man who had AIDS but didn’t want to make love with a piece of rubber and didn’t see why he ought to give up his God-given right to his pleasures.
My cousin (who I was being taken to the airport to travel to) said, when I told him and his wife the story, "He should be arrested." Nice guy, my cousin, and always partly right (sometimes wholy): they should all have been "arrested," which was the misleading way human rights advocates misrepresented quarantine.
For how many years now have so many avoided sex because of AIDS? How badly has it coloured our world? If the only way to be free of the illness is abstinence or prophylactics and the infected die, it doesn’t take a genius to see that, between life and death here, something’s got to give.
I had a great weekend with my cousins and aunts and, upon return, as I ran with my suitcases to catch the bus, the driver, seeing I was a mere 5 feet away, gunned the engine and peeled away. The AIDS conference being over, the caring is put back in the cupboard and the everyday cups are brought out. Tannic acid, anyone? [spit] Welcome to Toronto.
Thursday, August 17, 2006
UNSCR 1701: Munich, 2006
In 1938, Neville Chamberlain arrived in London waving a piece of paper upon which Herr Hitler had affixed his signature. Chamberlain, beaming, proclaimed "peace in our time." Within months, the Germans had taken all of Czeckoslovakia. Knowing England would not go to war to protect the Sudeteland or even all Czeckoslovakia, Hitler tried his luck with Poland. No reaction but diplomatic condemnation. Austria was soon annexed and within a year of the Munich pact, Germany invaded the low countries and was within striking distance of England.
Many tens of millions dead later we hail UN Security Council Resolution 1701 a diplomatic success because we have deluded ourselves into thinking that it has stopped a war . The international community has expressed its resolve to disarm Hiz'b'allah. But who will do it?
Not the USA! Condi Rice says:
and....
confirmation of how bad this "resolution" is:
Many tens of millions dead later we hail UN Security Council Resolution 1701 a diplomatic success because we have deluded ourselves into thinking that it has stopped a war . The international community has expressed its resolve to disarm Hiz'b'allah. But who will do it?
Not the USA! Condi Rice says:
I don't think there is an expectation that this force is going to physically disarm Hezbollah. I think it's a little bit of a misreading of how you disarm a militia. You have to have a plan, first of all, for the disarmament of a militia, and then the hope is that some people lay down their arms voluntarily. [my italics]see also here.
and....
confirmation of how bad this "resolution" is:
French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy made clear in an interview with Le Monde newspaper that the mission of the larger UNIFIL would not include disarming Hizbollah by force: "We never thought a purely military solution could resolve the problem of Hizbollah," he said. "We are agreed on the goal, the disarmament, but for us the means are purely political. [my emphasis]So Hiz'b'allah will not be disarmed. Meanwhile, back at the ranch:
also here. Denial is a river in Iran too!RAFSANJANI SAYS MUSLIMS SHOULD USE NUCLEAR WEAPON AGAINST ISRAEL [December 14, 2001]
And now, presenting, the madman pursuing [oops! allegedly pursuing nukes!] nukes, communicating with the dead:IRAN DENIES WILLING TO NUKE DOWN ISRAEL [December 30, 2001]
Last Monday, just before he announced that Iran had gatecrashed "the nuclear club", President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad disappeared for several hours. He was having a khalvat (tête-à-tête) with the Hidden Imam, the 12th and last of the imams of Shiism who went into "grand occultation" in 941. -Amir Taheri, April 16, 2006 in the Telegraph.
Wednesday, August 16, 2006
1701
Open letter by Dan Goorevitch at Overful to Canada's Minister of Foreign Affairs here hits all the right notes on the diplomatic piano. See my next post for its utter futility at avoiding war. Here's the big bell:
How can non-state actors who use violence to either destroy fellow states or coerce their policies be stopped if the nations in which they operate can not be held responsible? Lebanon, and all nations, have to be held responsible and accountable for every act, no matter by whom, that is initiated from within its borders. What otherwise is the meaning of national sovereignty but the right to make law, balanced by the responsibility not to harm others outside its jurisdiction? It is this contract that lies at the heart of the nation state and why it works.That's right! A state has a border and within that border it has laws. We respect their national borders and they respect ours. That's how it works. Then we cooperate and help each other against common threats. Lebanon was let off the hook at the UN when UNSCR 1701 was passed.
Tuesday, August 15, 2006
Crystal Clear
from Powerline:
from Powerline:
According to Netanyahu, that situation is that the Sunnis and the Shiites are competing to create an Islamic empire. Both understand that this objective starts with the destruction of Israel. Shiite Iran, by moving to arm itself with nuclear weapons, has become the primary threat.
The proper division of labor for dealing with the threat is as follows: Israel should dismantle Hezbollah and the U.S. should disarm Iran. As to the latter, President Bush has emphasized his commitment to preventing a nuclear Iran, and Netanyahu believes that Bush is truly committed to that imperative. As to Hezbollah, the recent war was only the first round in a protracted battle that Israel will win.
Read more here.
Wednesday, August 09, 2006
A Masterpiece of Deceit!
Below is A Washington Post opinion piece by the prime minister of Lebanon in full, with my fisking in italics.
End This Tragedy Now
© Washington Post
Israel Must Be Made to Respect International Law
By Fouad Siniora
Wednesday, August 9, 2006; Page A17
BEIRUT
A military solution to Israel's savage war on Lebanon and the Lebanese people is both morally unacceptable and totally unrealistic. Israel's attack on Hiz'b'allah in self defence is neither against Lebanon and the Lebanese people, nor is it savage, morally unacceptable or unrealistic. Hiz'b'allah crossed an internationally recognized frontier, murdered eight Israeli soldiers and kidnapped two more, which it continues to hold for ransom. Self-defence is always morally defensible; it is the only realistic option to wars of aggression. Time and again, Israel has sent leaflets warning civilians to get out of the way of attempts to destroy Hiz'b'allah rocket launchers which are being used to send thousands of missiles into Israel, a favour Hiz'b'allah does not extend to its victims in Israeli cities and towns which it targets mercilessly. Mr. Siniora is confused about who is being savage. Hiz'b'allah purposefully places its missiles and missile launchers on and in apartment buildings and other residential neighbourhoods because it knows Israel doesn't take life with pleasure: it is Hiz'b'allah who is guilty of savagery, both to Israel and to their own people who they hold hostage. We in Lebanon call upon the international community and citizens everywhere to support my country's sovereignty and end this folly now. Lebanon has two armies with two commanders: the only threat to Lebanese sovereignty is Hiz'b'allah and its commander Nasrallah: this terrorist militia, which precipitated the present war, is never mentioned in the following (except in its alternate role as one political faction among many) in this long article. We also insist that Israel be made to respect international humanitarian law, including the provisions of the Geneva Conventions, which it has repeatedly and willfully violated. Crossing international frontiers to kidnap and hold soldiers for ranson is undoubtedly a violation of the Geneva Conventions. Mr. Siniora has not named a single instance of Israel's violations though that should be easy for him since he claims that they have been repeated and willful.
As the world watches, Israel has besieged and ravaged our country, created a humanitarian and environmental disaster, and shattered our infrastructure and economy, putting an intolerable strain on our social and economic systems. Israel has not beseiged Lebanon: Hezbollah has! Israel's sole purpose is to get their kidnapped soldiers back and to disarm Hiz'b'allah so they can’t attack Israel again. The Lebanese government had plenty of opportunity to disarm this terrorist group but it didn’t. Claims of damage are wildly overstated and made to look deliberate. In Beirut, water flows and lights go on precisely because Israel has gone out of its way to spare Lebanese infrastructure Fuel, food and medical equipment are in short supply; homes, factories and warehouses have been destroyed; roads severed, bridges smashed and airports disabled. This is indeed unfortunate and we all feel for the people suffering in this war on both sides of the border. One million people have been displaced in Israel and many more have been shut into bomb shelters for a month. No mention of Israeli suffering is ever mentioned in what follows.
The damage to infrastructure alone is running into the billions of dollars, as are the losses to owners of private property, and the long-term direct and indirect costs due to lost revenue in tourism, agriculture and industrial sectors are expected to be many more billions. This ought to be a lesson to all states: look at what happens when any state allows a challenge to their rightful monopoly of men under arms! Lebanon's well-known achievements in 15 years of postwar development have been wiped out in a matter of days by Israel's deadly military might. A nation unable to disarm a terrorist organization that holds its country hostage has no achievements worth talking about. Wisely, he hasn't.
For all this carnage and death, and on behalf of all Lebanese, we demand an international inquiry into Israel's criminal actions in Lebanon and insist that Israel pay compensation for its wanton destruction. The destruction has not been wanton but defensive. Is Hiz'b'allah not responsible for the much larger bill for its destruction in Israel?
Israel seems to think that its attacks will sow discord among the Lebanese. One nation, two armies and two commanders: no, there’s no discord in Lebanon and only the evil Jewish empire is attempting to create it; if you believe this, you’ll believe anything. This will never happen. It already has. Israel should know that the Lebanese people will remain steadfast and united in the face of this latest Israeli aggression -- its seventh invasion -- just as they were during nearly two decades of brutal occupation. The Lebanese people are not united and have been wracked by inter-religious civil war for decades. Israel's response, I must repeat since the lie is repeated, is defensive and not aggressive: it is a response to Hiz'b'allah’s aggression. Each and every Israeli invasion has been precipitated by attacks on Israeli towns from south Lebanon. The people's will to resist grows ever stronger with each village demolished and each massacre committed. There has not been a single village "demolished" (though some have been damaged) and not a single massacre: not one civilian has been targetted, in contradistinction to the Hiz'b'allah attacks on Israeli cities and its people: a purposefully murderous attack. The Lebanese are in a state of civil war. The army is unable to disarm Hiz'b'allah because half the army is on Hiz'b'allah's side and half are against, divided on religious lines. The announcement last night on CTV news by Emile Lahoud that the Lebanese army will fight alongside Hiz'b'allah is proof of a coup d'etat by Islamist forces. The Lebanese people have never been more divided or more brutally abused by their warring leaders.
On July 25, at the international conference for Lebanon in Rome, I proposed a comprehensive seven-point plan to end the war. It was well received by the conference and got the unanimous and full backing of the Lebanese Council of Ministers, in which Hezbollah is represented, as well as of the speaker of parliament and a majority of parliamentary blocs. This is the only mention of Hiz'b'allah in the entire essay: there is not even a hint of its military power. Representatives of diverse segments of Lebanese civil society have come out strongly in favor, as has the Islamic-Christian Summit, representing all the religious confessions, ensuring a broad national consensus and preserving our delicate social equilibrium. If it had a broad national consensus there wouldn't be two Lebanese armies run by two different men.
The plan, which also received the full support of the 56 member states of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, included an immediate, unconditional and comprehensive cease-fire and called for:
· The release of Lebanese and Israeli prisoners and detainees through the International Committee of the Red Cross. thus rewarding the murder and kidnapping of the Israeli soldiers.
· The withdrawal of the Israeli army behind the "blue line." That was done in 2000. It was Hiz'b'allah which crossed that line.
· A commitment from the U.N. Security Council to place the Shebaa Farms and Kfar Shouba Hills areas under U.N. jurisdiction until border delineation and Lebanese sovereignty over them are fully settled. The blue line has already been decided and Israel withdrew beyond it in 2000. Shebaa Farms has never been Lebanese territory: the dispute is between Israel and Syria. Note that the author doesn't entertain any other possibility except Lebanese sovereignty over the dispute areas. Is the UN therefore to act as Lebanon's proxy army?
Further, Israel must surrender all maps of remaining land mines in southern Lebanon to the United Nations.
· Extension of the Lebanese government's authority over its territory through its legitimate armed forces, with no weapons or authority other than that of the Lebanese state, as stipulated in the Taif accord. Rubbish! "The extension of the Lebanese government's authority over its territory through its legitimate armed forces, with no weapons or authority other than that of the Lebanese state, as stipulated in the Taif accord" has only one power of opposition: Hiz'b'allah, which the Lebanese government has refused to disarm, leading to the present crisis. We have indicated that the Lebanese armed forces are ready and able to deploy to southern Lebanon, alongside the U.N. forces there, the moment Israel pulls back to the international border. Oh! They are ready and able, are they? This is a bald-faced lie. A successful coupt d’etat has occurred and Hiz'b'allah now rules Lebanon.
We in Lebanon call upon the international community and citizens everywhere to support my country's sovereignty and end this folly now. You needn't call so far! Why not just place a call to Nasrallah and ask Hiz'b'allah's commander to support your country's sovereignty? Is it possible to have a sovereign state with two armies led by two different men? The disarming of the terrorist Hiz'b'allah militia is the only item on Lebanon's agenda if it is truly interested in recapturing its sovereignty.
· The supplementing of the U.N. international force operating in southern Lebanon and its enhancement in numbers, equipment, mandate and scope of operation, as needed, to undertake urgent humanitarian and relief work and guarantee stability and security in the south so that those who fled their homes can return. The only stability the UN force guaranteed was the buildup of Hiz'b'allah arms, leading to the present war. As for its "mandate and scope of operations," this is all mud: what is clear is that the UNIFIL force didn't even make a move to fulfill their present obligation under Security Council Resolution 1559. Could it be that the author means, by a new mandate, one that strikes down 1559?
· Action by the United Nations on the necessary measures to once again put into effect the 1949 armistice agreement signed by Lebanon and Israel and to ensure adherence to its provisions, as well as to explore possible amendments to or development of those provisions as necessary. By changes in the 1949 armistice, does he mean, perchance, the diplomatic elimination of the state of Israel?
· The commitment of the international community to support Lebanon on all levels, including relief, reconstruction and development needs. Get Iran to pay the bill. They bought the missiles that Hiz'b'allah sent into Israeli towns and cities. Not one word in this whole essay of destruction wrought against Israel.
As part of this comprehensive plan, and empowered by strong domestic political support and the unanimous backing of the cabinet, the Lebanese government decided to deploy the Lebanese armed forces in southern Lebanon as the sole domestic military force in the area, alongside U.N. forces there, the moment Israel pulls back to the international border. Nonsense! If Lebanon had been interested in (or capable of) "deploy[ing] the Lebanese armed forces in southern Lebanon as the sole domestic military force in the area," why on earth haven't they done so? It is not Israel who prevented the Lebanese army to be the sole military force in the area -- or any area of Lebanon -- it is Hiz'b'allah and only Hiz'b'allah.
Israel responded by slaughtering more civilians in the biblical town of Qana. Such horrible scenes have been repeated daily for nearly four weeks and continue even as I write these words. Israel responded, not to the "deci[sion] to deploy the Lebanese armed forces as the sole domestic military force in the area" but to missiles send from the "biblical town of Qana," from where dozens of rocket attacks were initiated against Israel. Israel attacked the rocket launchers and allegedly killed a number of people in the act. There is nothing illegitimate about self-defence. (Note the "biblical" crack: a typical sideswipe at the Christ-killers, like Arafat's Norma Desmond impersonation in 2002: "They're crucifying [H]im again!" in response to Israel's attempt to end the Palestinian siege of the Church of the Nativity.)
The resolution to this war must respect international law and U.N. resolutions, not just those selected by Israel, a state that deserves its reputation as a pariah because of its consistent disdain for and rejection of international law and the wishes of the international community for over half a century. There is a UN resolution that calls for the disarming of Hiz'b'allah, isn't there? Since this is the greatest threat to Lebanese sovereignty, the absence of the mention of the militia is glaring. Israel's pariah status comes from its insistence on survival against half a century of attempts to destroy it.
Lebanon calls, once again, on the United Nations to bring about an immediate cease-fire to relieve the beleaguered people of Lebanon. Only then can the root causes of this war -- Israeli occupation of Lebanese territories and its perennial threat to Lebanon's security, as well as Lebanon's struggle to regain full sovereignty over all its territory -- be addressed. Israel left in 2000: it was not in possession of a single inch of Lebanese territory before this unwarranted attack on Israel. It is tiresome to repeat this but since he repeats the lie, I must repeat the truth: sovereignty depends on one nation having one army and a single authority. None of this is Israel's fault. As to Israel's perennial threat, every single incursion of Israel's has been defensive: the Arab states have been trying to destroy Israel for about 60 years now.
I believe that a political resolution rooted in international law and based on these seven points will lead to long-term stability. If Israel would realize that the peoples of the Middle East cannot be cowed into submission, that they aspire only to live in freedom and dignity, it could also be a stepping stone to a final solution of the wider Arab-Israeli conflict, which has plagued our region for 60 years. "[A] stepping stone to a final solution". Yes, no doubt. They aspire to live in dignity and live instead under governments that afford them neither. This is really a hard swallow. In the end, all people are responsible for their governments and probably get the leadership they deserve. It is the Arab world that has tried to beat Israel into submission. The word "Islam" in fact, means "submission." The state of Israel always has been violently opposed for one reason only: it's Jewish.
The 2002 Arab summit in Beirut, which called for a just, comprehensive and lasting peace based on the principle of land for peace, showed the way forward. (The "All the land or we kill you all" principle.). A political solution cannot, however, be implemented as long as Israel continues to occupy Arab land in Lebanon, Gaza, the West Bank and the Syrian Golan Heights and as long as it wages war on innocent people in Lebanon and Palestine. As Jawaharlal Nehru said, the only alternative to coexistence is co-destruction." Israel, for the umpteenth time, left in 2000. It also completely withdrew from Gaza. All these lands were occupied in a defensive war against a dozen Arab nations who waged wars of annihilation against Israel in 1948-9, 1967 and 1973. The author reveals the deep racism inherent in all his arguments by characterizing all these lands, not as Syrian, Jordanian or Lebanese but as "Arab land."
Enough destruction, dispossession, desperation, displacement and death! Lebanon must be allowed to reclaim its position in this troubled region as a beacon of freedom and democracy where justice and the rule of law prevail, and as a refuge for the oppressed where moderation, tolerance and enlightenment triumph. Amen to the first part: disarm Hiz'b'allah and stop trying to destroy Israel and there will be peace. "[A] beacon of freedom and democracy where justice and the rule of law prevail, and as a refuge for the oppressed where moderation, tolerance and enlightenment triumph?" Full marks for an excellent description of Israel!
The writer is prime minister of Lebanon, now ruled by Nasrallah's Hiz'b'allah.
Below is A Washington Post opinion piece by the prime minister of Lebanon in full, with my fisking in italics.
End This Tragedy Now
© Washington Post
Israel Must Be Made to Respect International Law
By Fouad Siniora
Wednesday, August 9, 2006; Page A17
BEIRUT
A military solution to Israel's savage war on Lebanon and the Lebanese people is both morally unacceptable and totally unrealistic. Israel's attack on Hiz'b'allah in self defence is neither against Lebanon and the Lebanese people, nor is it savage, morally unacceptable or unrealistic. Hiz'b'allah crossed an internationally recognized frontier, murdered eight Israeli soldiers and kidnapped two more, which it continues to hold for ransom. Self-defence is always morally defensible; it is the only realistic option to wars of aggression. Time and again, Israel has sent leaflets warning civilians to get out of the way of attempts to destroy Hiz'b'allah rocket launchers which are being used to send thousands of missiles into Israel, a favour Hiz'b'allah does not extend to its victims in Israeli cities and towns which it targets mercilessly. Mr. Siniora is confused about who is being savage. Hiz'b'allah purposefully places its missiles and missile launchers on and in apartment buildings and other residential neighbourhoods because it knows Israel doesn't take life with pleasure: it is Hiz'b'allah who is guilty of savagery, both to Israel and to their own people who they hold hostage. We in Lebanon call upon the international community and citizens everywhere to support my country's sovereignty and end this folly now. Lebanon has two armies with two commanders: the only threat to Lebanese sovereignty is Hiz'b'allah and its commander Nasrallah: this terrorist militia, which precipitated the present war, is never mentioned in the following (except in its alternate role as one political faction among many) in this long article. We also insist that Israel be made to respect international humanitarian law, including the provisions of the Geneva Conventions, which it has repeatedly and willfully violated. Crossing international frontiers to kidnap and hold soldiers for ranson is undoubtedly a violation of the Geneva Conventions. Mr. Siniora has not named a single instance of Israel's violations though that should be easy for him since he claims that they have been repeated and willful.
As the world watches, Israel has besieged and ravaged our country, created a humanitarian and environmental disaster, and shattered our infrastructure and economy, putting an intolerable strain on our social and economic systems. Israel has not beseiged Lebanon: Hezbollah has! Israel's sole purpose is to get their kidnapped soldiers back and to disarm Hiz'b'allah so they can’t attack Israel again. The Lebanese government had plenty of opportunity to disarm this terrorist group but it didn’t. Claims of damage are wildly overstated and made to look deliberate. In Beirut, water flows and lights go on precisely because Israel has gone out of its way to spare Lebanese infrastructure Fuel, food and medical equipment are in short supply; homes, factories and warehouses have been destroyed; roads severed, bridges smashed and airports disabled. This is indeed unfortunate and we all feel for the people suffering in this war on both sides of the border. One million people have been displaced in Israel and many more have been shut into bomb shelters for a month. No mention of Israeli suffering is ever mentioned in what follows.
The damage to infrastructure alone is running into the billions of dollars, as are the losses to owners of private property, and the long-term direct and indirect costs due to lost revenue in tourism, agriculture and industrial sectors are expected to be many more billions. This ought to be a lesson to all states: look at what happens when any state allows a challenge to their rightful monopoly of men under arms! Lebanon's well-known achievements in 15 years of postwar development have been wiped out in a matter of days by Israel's deadly military might. A nation unable to disarm a terrorist organization that holds its country hostage has no achievements worth talking about. Wisely, he hasn't.
For all this carnage and death, and on behalf of all Lebanese, we demand an international inquiry into Israel's criminal actions in Lebanon and insist that Israel pay compensation for its wanton destruction. The destruction has not been wanton but defensive. Is Hiz'b'allah not responsible for the much larger bill for its destruction in Israel?
Israel seems to think that its attacks will sow discord among the Lebanese. One nation, two armies and two commanders: no, there’s no discord in Lebanon and only the evil Jewish empire is attempting to create it; if you believe this, you’ll believe anything. This will never happen. It already has. Israel should know that the Lebanese people will remain steadfast and united in the face of this latest Israeli aggression -- its seventh invasion -- just as they were during nearly two decades of brutal occupation. The Lebanese people are not united and have been wracked by inter-religious civil war for decades. Israel's response, I must repeat since the lie is repeated, is defensive and not aggressive: it is a response to Hiz'b'allah’s aggression. Each and every Israeli invasion has been precipitated by attacks on Israeli towns from south Lebanon. The people's will to resist grows ever stronger with each village demolished and each massacre committed. There has not been a single village "demolished" (though some have been damaged) and not a single massacre: not one civilian has been targetted, in contradistinction to the Hiz'b'allah attacks on Israeli cities and its people: a purposefully murderous attack. The Lebanese are in a state of civil war. The army is unable to disarm Hiz'b'allah because half the army is on Hiz'b'allah's side and half are against, divided on religious lines. The announcement last night on CTV news by Emile Lahoud that the Lebanese army will fight alongside Hiz'b'allah is proof of a coup d'etat by Islamist forces. The Lebanese people have never been more divided or more brutally abused by their warring leaders.
On July 25, at the international conference for Lebanon in Rome, I proposed a comprehensive seven-point plan to end the war. It was well received by the conference and got the unanimous and full backing of the Lebanese Council of Ministers, in which Hezbollah is represented, as well as of the speaker of parliament and a majority of parliamentary blocs. This is the only mention of Hiz'b'allah in the entire essay: there is not even a hint of its military power. Representatives of diverse segments of Lebanese civil society have come out strongly in favor, as has the Islamic-Christian Summit, representing all the religious confessions, ensuring a broad national consensus and preserving our delicate social equilibrium. If it had a broad national consensus there wouldn't be two Lebanese armies run by two different men.
The plan, which also received the full support of the 56 member states of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, included an immediate, unconditional and comprehensive cease-fire and called for:
· The release of Lebanese and Israeli prisoners and detainees through the International Committee of the Red Cross. thus rewarding the murder and kidnapping of the Israeli soldiers.
· The withdrawal of the Israeli army behind the "blue line." That was done in 2000. It was Hiz'b'allah which crossed that line.
· A commitment from the U.N. Security Council to place the Shebaa Farms and Kfar Shouba Hills areas under U.N. jurisdiction until border delineation and Lebanese sovereignty over them are fully settled. The blue line has already been decided and Israel withdrew beyond it in 2000. Shebaa Farms has never been Lebanese territory: the dispute is between Israel and Syria. Note that the author doesn't entertain any other possibility except Lebanese sovereignty over the dispute areas. Is the UN therefore to act as Lebanon's proxy army?
Further, Israel must surrender all maps of remaining land mines in southern Lebanon to the United Nations.
· Extension of the Lebanese government's authority over its territory through its legitimate armed forces, with no weapons or authority other than that of the Lebanese state, as stipulated in the Taif accord. Rubbish! "The extension of the Lebanese government's authority over its territory through its legitimate armed forces, with no weapons or authority other than that of the Lebanese state, as stipulated in the Taif accord" has only one power of opposition: Hiz'b'allah, which the Lebanese government has refused to disarm, leading to the present crisis. We have indicated that the Lebanese armed forces are ready and able to deploy to southern Lebanon, alongside the U.N. forces there, the moment Israel pulls back to the international border. Oh! They are ready and able, are they? This is a bald-faced lie. A successful coupt d’etat has occurred and Hiz'b'allah now rules Lebanon.
We in Lebanon call upon the international community and citizens everywhere to support my country's sovereignty and end this folly now. You needn't call so far! Why not just place a call to Nasrallah and ask Hiz'b'allah's commander to support your country's sovereignty? Is it possible to have a sovereign state with two armies led by two different men? The disarming of the terrorist Hiz'b'allah militia is the only item on Lebanon's agenda if it is truly interested in recapturing its sovereignty.
· The supplementing of the U.N. international force operating in southern Lebanon and its enhancement in numbers, equipment, mandate and scope of operation, as needed, to undertake urgent humanitarian and relief work and guarantee stability and security in the south so that those who fled their homes can return. The only stability the UN force guaranteed was the buildup of Hiz'b'allah arms, leading to the present war. As for its "mandate and scope of operations," this is all mud: what is clear is that the UNIFIL force didn't even make a move to fulfill their present obligation under Security Council Resolution 1559. Could it be that the author means, by a new mandate, one that strikes down 1559?
· Action by the United Nations on the necessary measures to once again put into effect the 1949 armistice agreement signed by Lebanon and Israel and to ensure adherence to its provisions, as well as to explore possible amendments to or development of those provisions as necessary. By changes in the 1949 armistice, does he mean, perchance, the diplomatic elimination of the state of Israel?
· The commitment of the international community to support Lebanon on all levels, including relief, reconstruction and development needs. Get Iran to pay the bill. They bought the missiles that Hiz'b'allah sent into Israeli towns and cities. Not one word in this whole essay of destruction wrought against Israel.
As part of this comprehensive plan, and empowered by strong domestic political support and the unanimous backing of the cabinet, the Lebanese government decided to deploy the Lebanese armed forces in southern Lebanon as the sole domestic military force in the area, alongside U.N. forces there, the moment Israel pulls back to the international border. Nonsense! If Lebanon had been interested in (or capable of) "deploy[ing] the Lebanese armed forces in southern Lebanon as the sole domestic military force in the area," why on earth haven't they done so? It is not Israel who prevented the Lebanese army to be the sole military force in the area -- or any area of Lebanon -- it is Hiz'b'allah and only Hiz'b'allah.
Israel responded by slaughtering more civilians in the biblical town of Qana. Such horrible scenes have been repeated daily for nearly four weeks and continue even as I write these words. Israel responded, not to the "deci[sion] to deploy the Lebanese armed forces as the sole domestic military force in the area" but to missiles send from the "biblical town of Qana," from where dozens of rocket attacks were initiated against Israel. Israel attacked the rocket launchers and allegedly killed a number of people in the act. There is nothing illegitimate about self-defence. (Note the "biblical" crack: a typical sideswipe at the Christ-killers, like Arafat's Norma Desmond impersonation in 2002: "They're crucifying [H]im again!" in response to Israel's attempt to end the Palestinian siege of the Church of the Nativity.)
The resolution to this war must respect international law and U.N. resolutions, not just those selected by Israel, a state that deserves its reputation as a pariah because of its consistent disdain for and rejection of international law and the wishes of the international community for over half a century. There is a UN resolution that calls for the disarming of Hiz'b'allah, isn't there? Since this is the greatest threat to Lebanese sovereignty, the absence of the mention of the militia is glaring. Israel's pariah status comes from its insistence on survival against half a century of attempts to destroy it.
Lebanon calls, once again, on the United Nations to bring about an immediate cease-fire to relieve the beleaguered people of Lebanon. Only then can the root causes of this war -- Israeli occupation of Lebanese territories and its perennial threat to Lebanon's security, as well as Lebanon's struggle to regain full sovereignty over all its territory -- be addressed. Israel left in 2000: it was not in possession of a single inch of Lebanese territory before this unwarranted attack on Israel. It is tiresome to repeat this but since he repeats the lie, I must repeat the truth: sovereignty depends on one nation having one army and a single authority. None of this is Israel's fault. As to Israel's perennial threat, every single incursion of Israel's has been defensive: the Arab states have been trying to destroy Israel for about 60 years now.
I believe that a political resolution rooted in international law and based on these seven points will lead to long-term stability. If Israel would realize that the peoples of the Middle East cannot be cowed into submission, that they aspire only to live in freedom and dignity, it could also be a stepping stone to a final solution of the wider Arab-Israeli conflict, which has plagued our region for 60 years. "[A] stepping stone to a final solution". Yes, no doubt. They aspire to live in dignity and live instead under governments that afford them neither. This is really a hard swallow. In the end, all people are responsible for their governments and probably get the leadership they deserve. It is the Arab world that has tried to beat Israel into submission. The word "Islam" in fact, means "submission." The state of Israel always has been violently opposed for one reason only: it's Jewish.
The 2002 Arab summit in Beirut, which called for a just, comprehensive and lasting peace based on the principle of land for peace, showed the way forward. (The "All the land or we kill you all" principle.). A political solution cannot, however, be implemented as long as Israel continues to occupy Arab land in Lebanon, Gaza, the West Bank and the Syrian Golan Heights and as long as it wages war on innocent people in Lebanon and Palestine. As Jawaharlal Nehru said, the only alternative to coexistence is co-destruction." Israel, for the umpteenth time, left in 2000. It also completely withdrew from Gaza. All these lands were occupied in a defensive war against a dozen Arab nations who waged wars of annihilation against Israel in 1948-9, 1967 and 1973. The author reveals the deep racism inherent in all his arguments by characterizing all these lands, not as Syrian, Jordanian or Lebanese but as "Arab land."
Enough destruction, dispossession, desperation, displacement and death! Lebanon must be allowed to reclaim its position in this troubled region as a beacon of freedom and democracy where justice and the rule of law prevail, and as a refuge for the oppressed where moderation, tolerance and enlightenment triumph. Amen to the first part: disarm Hiz'b'allah and stop trying to destroy Israel and there will be peace. "[A] beacon of freedom and democracy where justice and the rule of law prevail, and as a refuge for the oppressed where moderation, tolerance and enlightenment triumph?" Full marks for an excellent description of Israel!
The writer is prime minister of Lebanon, now ruled by Nasrallah's Hiz'b'allah.
Tuesday, August 08, 2006
Lebanese Coup d’etat
In a CTV interview with Emile Lahoud tonight , a catatonic journalist lobbed a couple of softballs which allowed the Lebanese president to act tough and save face. He stated that the Lebanese army will fight beside Hiz'b'allah if the Israelis don’t leave Lebanon.
The interviewer might have asked if he thinks it possible for a sovereign state to maintain its sovereignty with two armies controlled by two different men?
It might have been interesting to ask if his pledge to throw the Lebanese army behind Hiz'b'allah didn't signify his surrender to a coup d'etat led by Hassan Nasrallah?
Since Hiz'b'allah leads a small parliamentary party and a large army, one would think the inevitable comparison could have been made between the current Lebanese situation and the Fascist Blackshirts and Nazi Brownshirts of 1930s Italy and Germany.
One would have thought to ask if this represented the rise of Fascism or the rise of a second Islamic republic?
But she didn’t. Nor did she ask if his pledge of support means Nasrallah is de facto head of the Lebanese state.
Hassan Nasrallah is the de facto leader today, a fact the brain-dead media haven’t cottoned onto. Would America allow a militia of a hundred thousand men wanting to rescind the constitution in favour of some other kind of law?
In February 23rd, 2005,
In a CTV interview with Emile Lahoud tonight , a catatonic journalist lobbed a couple of softballs which allowed the Lebanese president to act tough and save face. He stated that the Lebanese army will fight beside Hiz'b'allah if the Israelis don’t leave Lebanon.
The interviewer might have asked if he thinks it possible for a sovereign state to maintain its sovereignty with two armies controlled by two different men?
It might have been interesting to ask if his pledge to throw the Lebanese army behind Hiz'b'allah didn't signify his surrender to a coup d'etat led by Hassan Nasrallah?
Since Hiz'b'allah leads a small parliamentary party and a large army, one would think the inevitable comparison could have been made between the current Lebanese situation and the Fascist Blackshirts and Nazi Brownshirts of 1930s Italy and Germany.
One would have thought to ask if this represented the rise of Fascism or the rise of a second Islamic republic?
But she didn’t. Nor did she ask if his pledge of support means Nasrallah is de facto head of the Lebanese state.
Hassan Nasrallah is the de facto leader today, a fact the brain-dead media haven’t cottoned onto. Would America allow a militia of a hundred thousand men wanting to rescind the constitution in favour of some other kind of law?
In February 23rd, 2005,
Apparently, Mr. Nasrallah of Hiz'b'allah has opted for another route. Will the left recognize a theocratic fascist dictatorship and condemn it? Don’t hold your breath.Lahoud told the Sada al-Balad newspaper that the government "cannot succumb to opposition demands," adding that the only way to solve problems is through dialogue.
"I say to the opposition if you want the government's downfall, you
can work for that in Parliament," Lahoud said.
Thursday, August 03, 2006
Opposition Muzzles CIDA, Red Cross, Lebanese
Alexa McDonough is psychic! She can judge before hearing witnesses. But they all come from a certain point of view, she says, and so their credibility is shaky. Hmm. Don't agree with me? Must be a liar. Yup! That's why I don't vote NDP anymore! Read the post from Canadian Coaltion for Democracies here.
Alexa McDonough is psychic! She can judge before hearing witnesses. But they all come from a certain point of view, she says, and so their credibility is shaky. Hmm. Don't agree with me? Must be a liar. Yup! That's why I don't vote NDP anymore! Read the post from Canadian Coaltion for Democracies here.
Ottawa, Canada - The Opposition Liberal, NDP and Bloc Quebecois parties called for the convening of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development during Parliament's summer recess for the purpose of challenging the government's Middle East policy and the evacuation of Canadians from Lebanon. Such a committee requires that notice be given on the internet, and any potential witnesses can contact the Clerk of the Committee to request standing to provide testimony.
Several groups applied to be witnesses and were accepted by the Clerk of the Committee. These witnesses travelled to Ottawa from across the country on short notice and at considerable personal expense.The committee met on August 1. In the morning, the committee MPs had an opportunity to question the Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, Peter MacKay. In the afternoon, the Opposition MPs, mainly led by Alexa McDonough of the NDP, put forward a procedural motion calling for committee business to be dealt with before the witnesses were heard. The government MPs responded that concluding the committee business before hearing from the witnesses was like passing a verdict in a trial before calling witnesses.
Ms McDonough went further, stating that the witnesses were identified with a single well-defined, narrow position, and challenged their credibility. It should be noted that Ms McDonough made these damaging allegations against witnesses approved by the Clerk of the Committee while knowing neither the witnesses nor the content of their testimony.
Below is the list of witnesses scheduled to give testimony that afternoon whose right to speak was effectively revoked by Ms McDonough and other Opposition MPs:
Canadian International Development AgencyCanadian Red Cross
Canadian Lebanese Human Rights Federation
World Lebanese Cultural Union
Monastery Saint Anthony the Great
Canadian Assembly for Lebanon
Canadian Coalition for Democracies
Khal Ishraki, as an individual evacuee
The subject matter for the hearing was specifically Lebanon, yet Opposition MPs passed a procedural resolution that effectively denied all Lebanese witnesses the right to speak. These witnesses included people with family members in the southern war zone of Lebanon and those directly affected by the evacuation. The Opposition used a procedural motion to silence these voices. As a result, Opposition MPs, with no first hand knowledge of the situation, were able to criticize the government without fear of contradiction from Lebanese witnesses or by CIDA and the Red Cross who were directly involved in the evacuation and humanitarian effort.
Why civilians are dying
in Lebanon: pictures of Hiz'b'allah firing missiles into Israel from residential neighbourhoods. Read it in the Herald Sun
in Lebanon: pictures of Hiz'b'allah firing missiles into Israel from residential neighbourhoods. Read it in the Herald Sun
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)