A striking documentary about male and female Palestinian rappers in the West Bank, Gaza and Israel proper:
Washington is dedicated to human rights, we’re constantly told (well, yes, as long as energy reserves and arms sales are sorted first). Exhibit one:
A group of Democratic senators wants to make a massive arms sale to Saudi Arabia contingent on getting cheaper oil, reports AFP. “We are saying to the Saudis that, if you don’t help us, why should we be helping you?” says Chuck Schumer, a Democratic senator from New York. “We are saying that we need real relief, and we need it quickly. You need our arms, but we need you to cooperate and not strangle American consumers.”
The American establishment must be so proud:
When clerics, ministers and businessmen gathered at a forum in Riyadh in April to discuss women in the workplace, there were no women in sight.
Typically for Saudi Arabia, the women who took part were seated in a separate room so the men could only hear them.
Naomi Klein reports:
With the help of U.S. defense contractors, China is building the prototype for a high-tech police state. It is ready for export.
Ali Abunimah is a Palestinian who resides in Chicago. As the co-founder of the essential Electronic Intifada website, his goal is to give voice to the Palestinian cause and challenge the dominant Zionist narrative of our time. Leading Jewish blogger Phil Weiss writes that people like Ali should be seriously considered as a major figure in the American debate, yet he remains marginalised. Why? Articulating Palestinian rights has never made people popular.
He’s been in Australia this week and spoken at universities, lecture halls and in the media generating a great deal of interest (not least his article in the Sydney Morning Herald detailing his vision for a one-state solution to the Israel/Palestine conflict, also the message of his book, One Country.) He’s explained his ideas elsewhere, too, such as ABC Radio National’s Media Report on the fundamentally flawed reporting of the conflict due to Western bias, ignorance and outright racism. After all, the Israelis are seen as more like “us.”
Last night, in front of an audience of 200 people, I was in conversation with Ali at Sydney’s leading independent bookshop, Gleebooks (photos here.) We covered everything from Zionist attitudes, the rise of Barack Obama and Ali’s belief that the only way to move the issue forward is international isolation of the Jewish state. No country will willingly give up its power, especially when it benefits solely one section of society. Like apartheid South Africa, whites were eventually made to realise that their position was untenable. Furthermore, Israel’s ongoing colonisation of the West Bank has forfeited the possibility of a two-state solution. One-state is now the only answer.
Tonight, at the New South Wales Parliament House, Ali along with a leading Labor and Liberal MP spoke at the 60th anniversary of the al-Nakba commemoration (photos here). It was a moving night of reflections and moderately hopeful thoughts (including tales of the typically ham-fisted attempts by the local Jewish lobby to block access at Parliament House for the event, of which more later.)
Ali said that Israel cannot remain a predominantly Jewish state because Jews themselves will soon be outnumbered by Arabs and Palestinians in Israel and the occupied territories. The world will then have a clear choice: either support an apartheid state or encourage a single, democratic entity. Suffice to say, years of struggle lie ahead.
Ali is a kind, generous, warm, funny and highly articulate man. It was an honour to spend time with him.
The confusing state of living in East Timor (courtesy of one of the growing number of bloggers in the country.)
My following article appears in today’s edition of Crikey:
Antony Loewenstein, author of My Israel Question, writes:
In late 2006, hardline Zionists in Israel and the United States raised the possibility of indicting Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in the International Court of Justice (ICJ) for “direct and public incitement to commit genocide” against the Jewish state.
Former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that, “Iran is a danger to the entire world, because it envisions a 1,000-year Islamic Reich based on nuclear weapons.” A key problem for the case, casually slipped into the Jerusalem Post, was that, “the court is problematic for Israel — it has stipulated that settlements are tantamount to war crimes — and Israel is not a signatory to the Rome Statue upon which it is based.”
Before last year’s Australian election, the then Labor opposition advocated chasing Ahmadinejad in a shameless ploy for the paranoid, Jewish vote. The fact that the case had zero chance of success and was being pursued by leading, discredited neo-conservatives – including former US Ambassador to the UN, John Bolton, who again recently advocated “responsible” bombing of Iran — appeared not to bother Kevin Rudd.
Perhaps most concerning was his acceptance of the widely mistranslated Ahmadinejad comment about wanting to “wipe Israel off the map”. In fact, he said nothing of the sort. The Iranian leader is certainly prone to making outlandish comments about Israel and denying the Holocaust, but that’s no more offensive than a host of Israeli leaders advocating the elimination or ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.
It appears that the Rudd government is still on the case. Yesterday’s front-page story in The Australian breathlessly reported that Attorney-General Robert McClelland is “currently taking advice” on the possibility of pursuing Ahmadinejad. McClelland told the paper that this course of action was preferable to “wholesale invasion of countries”. Well, yes, but what about direct engagement?
Iran’s regional challenge to the American and Israeli-imposed status-quo is the great untold story of the last eight years.
Foreign Editor Greg Sheridan backed the move and Rudd told Sky News that Ahmadinejad’s comments had a “roll-on effect across the Islamic world, particularly those who listen to Iran for their guidance”.
Crikey asked the Attorney-General’s office to clarify the latest developments and a spokesman from his office said that, “the Government strongly supports maintaining pressure on Iran to act as a responsible member of the international community.” Furthermore, “like many in the community, Labor has long expressed abhorrence at the remarks of Iranian President Ahmadinejad. We believe the international community should do all it reasonably can to pressure Iran to be a more responsible global citizen.”
Questions about the pressure from the local Zionist leadership on the government went unanswered.
A Sydney-based ALP source told Crikey that pursuing Ahmadinejad was a pet project for Rudd, not unlike his slavish motion in parliament in March celebrating Israel’s 60th anniversary. The source said that, despite the opposition of many in the ALP, the motion was written with the involvement of the country’s leading Zionist lobby, AIJAC, and was initially far more congratulatory before being tempered.
Regular, public displays of affection for the Jewish state are an article of faith across the political divide. Zionism has become a religion. As we’ve seen with Barack Obama, support for the Palestinian cause virtually guarantees political oblivion.
The following advertisement, sponsored by Australians for Palestine, appeared in newspapers across Australia today, including the Sydney Morning Herald and Australian. I added my signature to endorse the proposal for the Australian parliament to recognise the Palestinian people and their dispossession since 1948.
Democracy is craved, but not at the barrel of a gun (such as the recent call for an invasion of Burma):
A WorldPublicOpinion.org poll of 19 nations conducted around the world finds that, in every nation polled, publics support the principles of democracy. At the same time, in nearly every nation, majorities are dissatisfied with how responsive their government is to the will of the people.
In all 19 nations polled majorities agree with the democratic principle that “the will of the people should be the basis for the authority of government”–a principle enunciated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, whose 60th anniversary is being celebrated this year. On average 85 percent agree–52 percent strongly. Across the 19 nations, 74 percent say that the “will of the people” should have more influence than it currently does.
What to do as a US-backed dictatorship in Latin America? Columbia has only one option:
The Colombian government — which is dogged by controversy over its human rights record — is seeking help from British PR firms to help promote a “modern” image amongst journalists and politicians. Colombia’s deputy head of mission in the UK, Andelfo Garcia, told PR Week that “the stereotype of Colombia is not right. We are a growing country with a good story to tell. We need someone to help us reach out to the UK media, its politicians and its businesses.” The UK-based Colombia Solidarity Campaign and other groups have shone the spotlight on Colombia’s poor human rights record. In the U.S., Colombia has hired Johnson, Madigan, Peck, Boland & Stewart and Andrew Samet from Sorini, Samet & Associates to help lobby the U.S. Congress to pass the U.S. - Colombia Free Trade Agreement. In early April, Colombia terminated its contract with the PR firm Burson-Marsteller, after taking exception to comments by its CEO, senior Hillary ClintonMark Penn. campaign adviser.
Nearly half of all internet users would support a voluntary code of conduct for bloggers and online commentators, according to research.
A survey by legal firm DLA Piper said 46% of web users think bloggers should sign up to a code that reflected the laws on defamation, intellectual property and incitement, with 15% ambivalent and 4% strongly opposed.
Around 34% of bloggers opposed the idea but 32% supported it.
This may sound like a noble idea but in reality it’s a pipe-dream that ignores the reality of the web. Defamation, untruths and stalking are all legitimate concerns online, as in real life, but trying to impose “rules” on comment is futile, to say the least.
Free speech is never absolute (though online these days it often appears to be), but perhaps some basic, online manners should be taught in kindergarten.
Being undercover as a Western journalist in Burma.
My following article appears in the Amnesty International Australia’s Uncensor campaign about human rights in China:
China’s rapid growth is often forgotten when analysing the country’s human rights record, but these issues should not be ignored in the rush for super-power status, writes Antony Loewenstein.
Amidst all the current stories about China and the Beijing Olympics, it’s easy to forget that the country has progressed extraordinarily fast in the past decade. Some facts are in order:
- 30,000: The expected number of Chinese MBA graduates in 2008. The number in 1998: 0
- 500: The number of coal-fired power plants China plans to build in the next decade
- 540 million: Number of mobile phone users in China, with an increase of 44 million in the past six months
- 33: The number of Chinese journalists thought to be held in prisons in 2008
- 22: The number of suicides per 100,000 people, about 50 per cent higher than the global average. Suicide is the fifth most common cause of death in China, and the first among people aged between 20 and 35
- 30: The number of different animal penises on the menu at Guolizhuang, Beijing’s ‘penis emporium’. A yak’s costs about £15, while a tiger’s (which must be pre-ordered) will set you back £3,000
The rise of China continues to fascinate and frustrate the world. Very few other nations would warrant leading articles discussing the “dark side” of its existence.
Of course, China has come a long way in the last years, something revealed by this hilarious news story from 1982 about “sexy adverts” upsetting a Chinese workman. At that stage, advertising had only returned to public visibility after years of being banned as a “bourgeois capitalist practice.”
The last months have revealed intense anger towards perceived Western-led, anti-Chinese media coverage. Death threats against foreign journalists is increasing, according to a recent warning issued by the Beijing-based Foreign Correspondents Club. Chinese bloggers want to talk about patriotism and protestors in Korea who attacked Chinese students during the torch relay. Interestingly, Vietnamese bloggers recently expressed their displeasure about past Chinese behaviour.
Despite these issues, however, the regime is busily trying to present a welcoming face to the hundreds of thousands of visitors expected in August. The news that authorities won’t guarantee web freedom during the Games is a bad omen as is the arrest of yet another freelance writer. Zhou Yuanzhi was charged with “inciting subversion of state power.”
Tibet remains a thorn in the side of the authorities (and a provocative piece in last week’s Financial Times argued that the province had a stronger international law case for self-rule than Kosovo). The Dalai Lama and his cause are still misunderstood in the West. The leader of the Tibetan people is angry towards China but remarkably conciliatory. The charged area of Xinjiang remains under the Chinese jackboot.
While the political masters attempt to avoid potential embarrassments, Western multinationals continue to operate like business as usual (despite Google being investigated by Chinese officials for possibly breaching state secrecy laws by showing “illegal” maps of the country.)
Google co-founder Sergei Brin told last week’s shareholder meeting that he was “pretty proud of what we’ve been able to accomplish in China…Google has a far superior track record than other internet search companies in China.” What’s a little censorship when there is money to be made? Unveiling a translation service to rival search engine’s Baidu’s dominance is a clear sign of future directions. At least Reporters Without Borders asked a few pointed questions at the Adidas shareholders meeting about the company’s attitude to human rights abuse in China. They received little positive response.
The Western fear of China is never far below the surface, however. China bashing is the favoured sport of the American presidential nominees but achieves little. Respectful dialogue between the various sides is the only rational way forward.
President Bush has for the first time revealed the great sacrifice he’s made for the sake of our soldiers: he’s given up golf.
Professional journalists, your days are numbered:
User-generated content has been buzzed about in magazine circles for a few years, but editors—save for a select few—have largely been reluctant to turn over pages from their shrinking folios to readers. Now, a magazine is taking the concept to its extreme: a 100-percent user-generated issue.
For its June issue, Budget Travel has allowed its readers to generate all of the text and photography—only the “40 Best Deals” section was written by staffers.
Interactivity and trust between readers and editors is a successful way to ensure future success. Why shouldn’t consumers have the right to contribute to their own reading lists?
Talking honestly about Palestine in Australia is clearly too challenging for some:
The decision by a Sydney library to dump an exhibition about Palestinian refugees after a visit by counter-terrorism police the night before it opened has been criticised as an act of censorship.
Leichhardt municipal library was to launch the Al-Nakba pictorial exhibition last Friday. A local community group, Friends of Hebron, had developed the display of photos, poems and articles over eight months.
“We set up the exhibition at the library on Thursday night and the librarian … approved the exhibition, and said that it could be seen by children and other people who into the library,” said Carole Lawson, a Friends of Hebron member.
But that night, shortly before the library closed at 8pm, officers from the police counter-terrorism operations arrived at the library.
I’ve been informed that members of the Jewish community and Zionist lobby complained about the existence of the exhibition. That figures. After all, it’s not as if Hebron is a classic example of apartheid.
If You are Not Muslim in Iraq, You are Trash.
A compelling essay co-written by friend and author of American Torture, Mike Otterman.
The significance of the recent chaos in Lebanon has been largely ignored in the West. The Western media frame revolves around demonising the “terrorist” group of Hizbollah and supporting the US-backed government. But what was it really about?
First, As’ad AbuKhalil, professor of political science at California State University and Angry Arab blogger:
…And basically, what happened in Lebanon in the last few days is a partial coup d’etat that was in response to a full coup d’etat that was engineered by the United States and Saudi Arabia and Israel from behind the scene back in 2005, capitalizing on the assassination of Rafik Hariri.
And things have gotten to this point because America basically is responsible, more than their clients in Lebanon. I mean, there were ideas of dialogue in Lebanon, and things were moving in that direction, and then, suddenly, lo and behold, the Assistant Secretary of State of the United States for the Near East, David Welch, shows up in Lebanon, and he basically wanted to stiffen the resolve of the clients and to basically prevent the possibility of dialogue. And then, Walid Jumblatt, one of the clients of the United States and Saudi Arabia and Lebanon today, escalated by deciding on taking the issue of disarming Hezbollah, which is supported at least by half of the Lebanese, and Lebanese parties, including clients of the United States, agreed that the issues of disarming Hezbollah should be left for internal dialogue of the Lebanese themselves.
And one of the best commentators in the region, the Daily Star’s Rami G. Khouri:
The new domestic political balance of power in Lebanon will reflect millennia-old indigenous Middle Eastern traditions of different and often quarreling parties that live together peacefully after negotiating power relationships, rather than one party totally defeating and humiliating the other. Lebanon can only exist as a single country if its multi-ethnic and multi-religious population shares power. As the political leaders now seek to do this, they operate in a new context where the strongest group comprises Iranian- and Syrian-backed Islamist Shiites and their junior partners, Christian and Sunni Lebanese allies. They will share power in a national unity government with fellow Lebanese who are friends, allies, dependents and proxies of the United States and Saudi Arabia.
If a new Middle East truly is being born, this may well prove to be its nursery.
Ali Abunimah, Sydney Morning Herald, May 13:
Israeli leaders understand what they are up against; the Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert, said last November: “If the day comes when the two-state solution collapses, and we face a South African-style struggle for equal voting rights, then, as soon as that happens, the state of Israel is finished.”
This struggle has begun as more Palestinians, recognising statehood is unrealistic, debate and adopt the one-state solution, offering Israelis and Palestinians equal rights in the land they share. Last year, I was part of a group of Palestinians, Israelis and others who published the “One State Declaration”. Inspired partly by South Africa’s Freedom Charter, we set out principles for a common future in a single democratic state. Most Israelis, unsurprisingly, recoil at comparisons with apartheid South Africa. The good news for them is that apartheid’s end did not bring about the disaster many feared. Rather, it was a new dawn for all the people of the country.
UPDATE: Talk about a one-state solution is flowering.
Dickipedia (a wiki of dicks).
China, the Beijing Olympics, Tibet and corporate sponsorship are a toxic mix.
So where to from here, a Chinese blogger asks?
