Antony Loewenstein

Any decent human being should be against the outrageous online censorship employed by the Islamic Republic but do dissidents in that country really want Washington giving them a hand?

The State Department says it is working furiously to increase its capabilities to confront the kind of censorship promulgated by Iran last week, bringing major Silicon Valley companies and top tech executives into the fold, and rushing to develop technologies that can overcome even the most draconian measures.

Is this move by Nicolas Sarkozy about protecting the children or cementing a base that loves the idea of the state intruding on our private business?

The lower house of the French parliament has approved a draft bill that will allow the state unprecedented control over the Internet. Although the government says it will improve security for ordinary citizens, civil rights activists are warning of a “new level” of censorship and surveillance.

For members of the French administration, it is a law against digital crime. For civil rights activists and politicians from opposition parties, it is a plan for censorship that excites fear and loathing — and even conjures up the specter of Big Brother and the surveillance state.

The lower house of the French parliament, the National Assembly, passed the first draft of the bill, known as “Loppsi 2,” on Tuesday. It will now go on for a second reading in the Senate, where it seems likely to pass, thanks to the government’s majority. If the Senate approves the bill, the new law could come into force as early as this summer. The legislation could have far-reaching consequences: Loppsi 2 contains rules that would make France the European country where the Internet is subject to the most censorship, regulation, control and surveillance.

The new legislation could in the future force Internet service providers (ISPs) to shut off access to criminal sites, should they be officially instructed to do so. According to the draft legislation, the law “makes it the responsibility of each Internet service provider to ensure that users don’t have access to unsuitable content.”

…

Under the new French legislation, police and security forces would be able to use clandestinely installed software, known in the jargon as a “Trojan horse,” to spy on private computers. Remote access to private computers would be made possible under the supervision of a judge.

Who said Chinese bloggers are happy with the country’s insanely tight web censorship?

Famous amateur film-maker, Hu Ge, has recently made a new satirical piece on the Internet censorship in China. The 7-minute piece, ‘Animal World: the Home-living Animal’ is styled as an animal-planet type of documentary and has attracted hundreds of thousands of views in a matter of a few days. The piece presents to the audience the so-called ‘home-living animals’, who are in fact China’s tens of millions of netizens.

A curious addition by Robert Fisk to the murder of the Hamas commander in Dubai:

It’s a propaganda war. Whoever killed the Hamas official in Dubai – let’s speak frankly – it’s part of an old, dirty war between the Israelis and the Palestinians in which they have been murdering their secret police antagonists for decades. Whose were the passports? Or should we say “passports”. So here’s a moment to reflect on realities.

Many Dubaians believe that the collapse of the emirate’s economy last year was the revenge of Western banks – spurred on, of course, by the Americans – to punish them for allowing Iranian shell companies to use Dubai as a sanctions-busting base during the cold-hot war between the US-Israeli alliance and Iran. Now the Americans (or the Israelis – you can take your pick) want to turn Dubai into the Beirut of the Gulf. That was actually a headline last week – in The Jerusalem Post, of course – which painted Dubai as dangerous as it was economically calamitous.

But hold on a minute. According to a Dubai “source” of The Independent – readers will have to judge what this means – the security forces of the aforesaid emirate informed a “British diplomat” in Dubai (presumably the consul, since the embassy is in the capital of the United Arab Emirates, Abu Dhabi) of the UK passport details almost six days ago and “did not receive an appropriate reply”. If this is true – the Foreign Office will be wrathful in its denials – then why didn’t the British immediately express their outrage at the use of forged British passports and cough up details of the equally outrageous frauds a week ago? This misuse puts every British citizen at risk.

…

Far too many police forces are now sending their minions to Israel to learn about “terror”. The Canadians actually dispatched a team of cops to Tel Aviv who allowed themselves to wear “suicide vests” for publicity pictures. Air France now hands the US details of all its passengers’ profiles – which, of course, go straight to the Israelis – despite the fact that Israeli security officers (like hundreds of Arab security officers in the Middle East) may well be involved in war crimes.

Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting ask a very good question:

Why are cable channels relying on paid spokespeople and lobbyists as commentators?

What’s the problem with the Jewish National Fund?

The case of murdered Hamas operative Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in Dubai has become a global story. Perhaps the likely culprits (Israel?) are happy about this – after all, the Hamas man is dead – but I doubt it. The Jewish state is once again in the spotlight, its blatantly illegal actions throwing light on the country’s behaviour.

Australian journalist Paul McGeough, author of the book Kill Khalid, about the failed Israeli assassination of Hamas leader Khalid Mishal, provides some historical context for the Mossad essentially harvesting fake passports to carry out its activities:

Now what happened when I came across in researching the Khalid Mishal incident was that quite often what the Israelis do is they borrow the details of a passport, either as a traveller who is going through Immigration.

Or they you know on a Kibbutz or somewhere like that, several of these people are living on Kibbutz’s. They get a friendly operative within the Kibbutz to borrow the passport or simply to purloin it and (inaudible) the details and then they use it to their own end.

Now the Mossad runs what they call their passport factory, Victor Piotrowski, the Canadian-Israeli former Mossad agent wrote graphically about this in his book where he saw thousands of passports from all different countries around the world stockpiled in the passport factory where they could be called upon as need be.

The Israeli press has been having a field-day with this story. Yossi Melman in Haaretz essentially becomes a spokesman for the Mossad itself:

Unless dramatic evidence is found to definitively prove an Israeli connection, it is likely that the State of Israel will emerge from this affair unblemished and the Mossad will continue enjoying a reputation of fearless determination and nearly unstoppable capabilities.

This story in Haaretz is perhaps the strangest of all (from a journalist on the paper who looks very similar to one of the alleged suspects of the killing):

Between the tomatoes and eggplants in my local supermarket yesterday, just as I finished loudly blowing my nose and cursing my recent allergy attacks, an elderly woman approached me and tapped my shoulder. “Good for you,” she said. “You showed those Arabs.”

I nodded in agreement, quickly put away the tissue and straightened my back. After all, my new position as a high-ranking Mossad agent requires a certain dignified mien.

The first phone call came at 8 A.M., when my mother asked gently if I had recently been abroad. Then others called, congratulating me on the outstanding cover story I’d chosen as Haaretz education correspondent, and asking why I hadn’t brought them cigarettes from the Duty Free in Dubai.

Walking the streets, I noticed people were looking at differently – or at least that’s what I told myself.

My wife, of course, was less impressed by my appearance in newspapers the world over as “Kevin Daveron,” a supposed Irishman named by Dubai police as commander of the assassination squad sent to eliminate Hamas strongman Mahmoud al-Mabhouh at his hotel in the emirate.

As usual, Gideon Levy provides the moral heart of the incident:

Only a few weeks have passed since the finest security pundits were wallowing in well-orchestrated magazine cover stories and articles of appreciation for the head of the Mossad, Meir Dagan. These pieces almost totally ignored his dark past in Gaza and Lebanon and adulated his adventurism. We have long forgotten that the Mossad is supposed to be an intelligence-gathering organization, not one that sows death, and that a lawful state does not operate hit squads. To the roars of approval by the pundits, Dagan has just been given another year on job, his eighth. Why? Partly because he’s a specialist at liquidation.

But we shouldn’t complain about Dagan. He has the right to propose reckless operations to his heart’s desire, of the kind that will earn him and his organization compliments and budgets. The responsibility for liquidations lies with the person who approves them, namely Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who learned nothing from the Khaled Meshal fiasco in 1997 and has struck again (if indeed Israel did it) – yet another margin note for the debate about whether Bibi has changed, whether there’s a “new Netanyahu.”

We can believe that the Mossad actually carried out everything that has been ascribed to it, and we can even agree that Mabhouh deserved to die. It’s also possible to understand the desire to take revenge and punish him, as well as the need to combat weapons smuggling into Gaza. We can also continue ignoring, as is our wont, the motive for terrorism: the Israeli occupation. But after the liquidation of Mabhouh with a pillow, we are left in a country that not only dispatches assassins, but in which no questions are asked afterward.

I saw this amazing documentary a few weeks ago. Shot during Israel’s onslaught against Gaza in late 2008 and early 2009, the film-makers were embedded with Palestinian ambulance workers. Israel is clearly seen shooting at unarmed civilians. The territory is under siege with bombs falling all around the terrified population. Zionist terror in its rawest form.

If you’re in Sydney, come along:

A fascinating New York Times feature about the Tea Party movement in the US. To ignore it is foolish but we shouldn’t be under any illusion why growing anger exists in the US. Race, the economy, disillusionment and fear. A toxic mix:

Pam Stout wakes each morning, turns on Fox News, grabs coffee and an Atkins bar, and hits the computer. She is the hub of a rapidly expanding and highly viral political network, keeping a running correspondence with her 400 members in Sandpoint, state and national Tea Party leaders and other conservative activists.

Mrs. Stout forwards along petitions to impeach Mr. Obama; petitions to audit the Federal Reserve; petitions to support Sarah Palin; appeals urging defiance of any federal law requiring health insurance; and on and on.

Meanwhile, she and her husband are studying the Constitution line by line. She has the Congressional switchboard programmed into her cellphone. “I just signed up for a Twitter class,” said Mrs. Stout, 66, laughing at the improbability of it all.

Yet for all her efforts, Mrs. Stout is gripped by a sense that it may be too little too late. Yes, there have been victories — including polls showing support for the Tea Party movement — but in her view none of it has diminished the fundamental threat of tyranny, a point underscored by Mr. Obama’s drive to pass a health care overhaul.

She and her members are becoming convinced that rallies alone will not save the Republic. They are searching for some larger answer, she said. They are also waiting for a leader, someone capable of uniting their rebellion, someone like Ms. Palin, who made Sandpoint one of the final stops on her book tour and who has announced plans to attend a series of high-profile Tea Party events in the next few months.

“We need to really decide where we’re going to go,” Mrs. Stout said.

These questions of strategy, direction and leadership were clearly on the minds of Mrs. Stout’s members at a recent monthly meeting.

Their task seemed endless, almost overwhelming, especially with only $517 in their Tea Party bank account. There were rallies against illegal immigration to attend. There was a coming lecture about the hoax of global warming. There were shooting classes to schedule, and tips to share about the right survival food.

The group struggled fitfully for direction. Maybe they should start vetting candidates. Someone mentioned boycotting ABC, CBS, NBC and MSNBC. Maybe they should do more recruiting.

“How do you keep on fighting?” Mrs. Stout asked in exasperation.

Lenore Generaux, a local wildlife artist, had an idea: They should raise money for Freedom Force, a group that says it wants to “reclaim America via the Patriot movement.” The group is trying to unite the Tea Parties and other groups to form a powerful “Patriot lobby.” One goal is to build a “Patriot war chest” big enough to take control of the Republican Party.

Not long ago, Mrs. Stout sent an e-mail message to her members under the subject line: “Revolution.” It linked to an article by Greg Evensen, a leader in the militia movement, titled “The Anatomy of an American Revolution,” that listed “grievances” he said “would justify a declaration of war against any criminal enterprise including that which is killing our nation from Washington, D.C.”

Mrs. Stout said she has begun to contemplate the possibility of “another civil war.” It is her deepest fear, she said. Yet she believes the stakes are that high. Basic freedoms are threatened, she said. Economic collapse, food shortages and civil unrest all seem imminent.

“I don’t see us being the ones to start it, but I would give up my life for my country,” Mrs. Stout said.

She paused, considering her next words.

“Peaceful means,” she continued, “are the best way of going about it. But sometimes you are not given a choice.”

The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg is the kind of leading American Zionist who likes to monitor the pro-Israel sentiments of the wider community. If you aren’t sufficiently in love with Israel, watch out. It’s a depressing sign of ethnocentrism.

But I have to agree with one of his latest posts about how to deal with mad and often racist emails (of which I get my fair share):

I say, post them. Sometimes. Jeff Weintraub explains why he doesn’t want to activate a comments section on his blog. He cites some of the crazier stuff I find in my in-box as proof of the uselessness of openness, and writes, “I suspect that Goldberg isn’t sharing the more demented, illiterate, and morally obscene kinds of e-mail attacks he gets.” Generally, I do post some of the most demented material. The letters I don’t read, and don’t post, are letters like the one that came in the other day that began, “Dear fucking douchebag Zionist,” which was followed by nine (!) paragraphs of I-don’t-know-what, because I stopped reading once I counted the paragraphs. But I do enjoy letters from Nazis, mainly because of their issues with spelling. The people who really scare me are the Nazis who use proper grammar.

Tony Karon in Time argues that Israelis don’t really have a strong desire for peace with the Palestinians; the status-quo is too comfortable:

The situation may be intolerable for the Palestinians, but for Israel there simply is no immediate downside to maintaining the status quo. Telling Israelis about the specter of apartheid and demographic “time bombs” is like telling Americans that they must fix social security. Nobody disagrees, but don’t hold your breath.

But in the National he continues this argument and underlines the fear in the Jewish state:

The apartheid fear for Israeli leaders is not of the moral turpitude of maintaining such a system – which they already do – it’s a fear of this being recognized for what it is.

An interesting Associated Press story that explains why so many in Gaza are keen to be Hamas policemen. Not because of Islamist ideology but simply getting money to support families.