Page 970«..1020..969970971972..980990..»

An Army Like No Other- The Zionist Project – The Citizen

Posted By on September 8, 2020

In the aftermath of the Holocaust, a survivor finds a safe passage to Israel, his only option for refuge. While on the ship, disgusted with the horrors of war he has witnessed, he refuses to take part in weapons training. On arrival in Haifa, he is promptly arrested, imprisoned and released when he agrees to serve as a medic in the 1948 war.

Years later, the mans son is serving as a lieutenant in the Israeli military. By now, the father, who has never spoken of his initial draft resistance, is proud of the sons service and Israels success as a state.

During the 1967 War, the son overhears an apparent command to execute Syrian prisoners of war in the Golan Heights. It is the sons turn to be horrified by war and the deep gulf between reality and propaganda, as he puts it. He concludes that he needs to get out of the Jewish State.

This family story belongs to Haim Bresheeth-Zabner, and it begins An Army Like No Other: How the Israel Defense Forces Made a Nation, an insightful look into the history of Israeli militarism and the military ethos that marks both state and society.

The author is a documentary filmmaker and film studies scholar who teaches at the School of Oriental and African Studies at the University of London. In this work, he offers both a historical narrative and an analytical framework for understanding why Israel has sometimes been called an army with a state rather than a state with an army.

An Army Like No Other articulates several principal theses. The author argues that militarism is at the core of the Zionist project and that it began long before Israel became a state.

The use of physical force against Palestinian civilians has been a constant from pre-state Israel until today; the military option has always been chosen before diplomacy; and the growth of Israels military-industrial complex, combined with its strategic military alliance with the United States, continually reinforces a militaristic society.

Early Zionist leaders understood that military force would be needed to acquire the land, an imperative for a settler-colonial country. Force would also be necessary to defeat the expected indigenous Palestinian resistance.

Accordingly, the first Zionist armed militia formed in 1909. Subsequently, Zionist militias collaborated with the British military to reinforce the 1917 Balfour Declaration promising a Jewish homeland in Palestine.

The Haganah, the precursor to Israels military, formed in 1920. During the Arab Revolt of 1936-39 against British rule, British forces relied on the militias and Sherut Yedioth, Haganahs intelligence wing, to suppress the uprising.

Sherut Yedioth had accumulated files on Palestinian villagers, identifying nationalist sympathizers. Zionist fighters also participated in the Special Night Squads that helped put down the rebellion through brutal, extralegal methods, including assassinations.

By the end of the revolt, Zionist militias had helped eliminate or imprison thousands of Palestinian military and political leaders.

The author shows how this early military experience helped set the stage for the Zionist massacres and expulsions of the 1948 ethnic cleansing, what Palestinians call the Nakba or catastrophe, such as those at Deir Yassin and al-Dawayima.

These events, Bresheeth-Zabner maintains, helped establish patterns of behavior that have consistently marked the last seven decades: war is the preferred option; war helps expand territory; a preference for offensive rather than defensive military strategies; blurring the distinction between civilian and military spheres of power; using the army to settle and control occupied lands; a deliberate policy of ambiguity to deflect responsibility for war crimes; a constant state of emergency so that Israelis would never feel at peace; and the endless war concept that Israel will never be secure from its enemies.

The first section of An Army Like No Other meticulously examines all of Israels wars from the 1956 Suez War to the 2006 air assault and land invasion of Lebanon.

The author frequently draws on the work of Israeli sociologists such as Uri Ben-Eliezer and Baruch Kimmerling to demonstrate how Israels first prime minister, David Ben-Gurion, sought to create a nation-at-arms.

Part of that aim was to help unite the diverse components of Israeli society, which included the original settler population along with the new arrivals European (Ashkenazi) survivors of World War II and Arab Jews from the Middle East and North Africa. The Israeli military became the crucible for uniting these culturally diverse components into a nation and guaranteeing a state where the military reigns supreme.

The second section of the book examines this militaristic state in more detail, spotlighting Israels military-industrial complex and its evolution as an adjunct to that of the US by specializing in surveillance and population control.

The author also delves into the repercussions resulting from an army that has become an occupation police force. He speculates whether the militarys abysmal performance in the land invasion of Lebanon in 2006 has diminished its value to the US national security establishment.

In the books final section, Bresheeth-Zabner asks whether Israel can be regarded as a democracy and whether it can change from a nation-at-arms to a society capable of seeking peace and embracing human rights for all. The authors pessimism weighs heavily on the concluding chapters.

Bresheeth-Zabner endorses the Palestinian-led boycott, divestment and sanctions campaign as a way of bringing external pressure on Israel.

At the same time, he appears to regard the struggle against Zionist ideology as the principal method for changing Israel internally.

He challenges Jewish Israelis to reclaim the universalist fundamentals of Jewish history and culture and abandon the racist and nationalist precepts of Zionism. They can best do that, he writes, by discarding what he calls the chosen people myth and what he describes as the tradition of zealotry in Jewish history.

He challenges the practices of excommunicating critics, isolationism and separateness, and the rejection of universal humanism in favor of narrow nationalism.

These concluding chapters invoke a multitude of questions that would provide substantial material for a reading discussion group, especially those probing the intersection of religion and nationalism. But this book can be recommended for its introduction alone. Start there.

An Army Like No Other: How the Israel Defense Forces Made a Nation by Haim Bresheeth-Zabner, Verso (2020)

Rod Such is a former editor for World Book and Encarta encyclopedias. He lives in Portland, Oregon, and is active with the Occupation-Free Portland campaign.

Electronic Intifada

Here is the original post:
An Army Like No Other- The Zionist Project - The Citizen

Cleric declares normalization of ties with Zionists ‘Haram’ – Mehr News Agency – English Version

Posted By on September 8, 2020

In a video conferencewith 14 religious figures from the Islamic countries on Tuesday, Sheikh Qassim announced any normalization of ties with the Zionist regime as a betrayal to the Islamic Umma and disaffiliating the religion of God.

The silence of the Islamic Ummah towards the normalization of relations is another betrayal and crime against Muslims, he said.

The senior cleric noted that the Zionist aggression against the Islamic Ummah is going on and the Zionists have targeted the identity of the Muslims and try to completely dominate and humiliate the Muslims.

"Normalization of relations with the Zionist regime is an obvious way to eliminate the Palestinian issue," Sheikh Qassim underscored.

"The normalization of relations is a cruel way to recognize the Zionist regime and legalize its survival and even to expand its domination over the Muslim and Arab world," he said. "It is a way to condemn Islam and the Muslim world."

He added that normalizing relations with the Zionist regime mean condemning the resistance against the occupiers and accepting the destructive role that the Zionists are playing to destabilize the region and the Islamic Ummah.

US President Donald Trump, in mid-August, announced an agreement between Abu Dhabi and Tel Aviv in what he called a 'HUGE breakthrough'. The agreement seeks to normalize ties between the UAE and the Israeli regime.

Iranian Foreign Ministry slammed the agreement as a strategic folly, warning of the consequences of the measure. Meanwhile, Palestinian groups unanimously condemned the measure, naming it as an act of treason.

HJ/IRN84030984

View original post here:
Cleric declares normalization of ties with Zionists 'Haram' - Mehr News Agency - English Version

Former Shin Bet head to Post: Govt is leading Israel to dead end – The Jerusalem Post

Posted By on September 8, 2020

A former head of the Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency) is warning the public that the government of Israel is leading a policy that will take it to a dead end.This is my advice to every Israeli youngster: Dont assume that a leader cares about doing the right thing; their decisions are often motivated by staying in power and not what is best for Israel, said Ami Ayalon, whose memoir, Friendly Fire, was published on Monday.Although the book is termed a memoir, it is about the author only to the extent my life mirrors much of what has happened in Israel over the past 70 or so years, he explained. Its about my personal involvement combating terrorism battles fought, men killed, friends buried and attacks thwarted and... the importance of hope.Ayalon answered to three prime ministers Benjamin Netanyahu, Ehud Barak and Shimon Peres during his nearly five years as director of the Shin Bet. He also met with former prime ministers Yitzhak Rabin and Ehud Olmert.Ayalon has a lot to say about Netanyahu, particularly the prime ministers decision-making under pressure, motivations, election, annexation moves and response to protests.Netanyahu feels trapped, he said. For all these years, he was more a politician than a statesman, but now he has lost the balance completely. He will do almost anything, without boundaries, to continue his rule.But mostly, Ayalon told The Jerusalem Post, When Olmert found himself in jail and Netanyahu became prime minister [for the second time in 2009], it was clear to me that he would do everything to prove there is no one to talk to and nothing to talk about when it comes to the Palestinian peace talks. cnxps.cmd.push(function () { cnxps({ playerId: '36af7c51-0caf-4741-9824-2c941fc6c17b' }).render('4c4d856e0e6f4e3d808bbc1715e132f6'); });A self-described proud minority and I am not ashamed of it, Ayalon said he believes that Israel still must find a way to coexist with its Palestinian neighbors.The title of his book, Friendly Fire, is because he thinks our worst enemy is not the Iranians, Hezbollah, Hamas or Islamic Jihad, he told the Post. Our main threat, our worst enemy is ourselves.Ayalon told three prime ministers unequivocally that peace and security were intertwined, he related in his book. Security cooperation with the Palestinians was key to combating terror, and this cooperation was only possible in the context of genuine hope among the Palestinian public that our occupation would end.If Israel does not maintain itself as a Jewish and democratic state, that will mean the end of Zionism, and this is what we are doing day by day for several years it is only because of us, he said.Through his many years in the Shin Bet fighting Palestinian terrorists, Ayalon formed relationships with the Arab community. He said he learned to see the Palestinians as people and not as terrorists.The most valuable lesson I had learned, Ayalon wrote in his book, is seeing Palestinians as people, not targets.They use terror more than most Israelis I know, he told the Post. Thats what I did fought Palestinian terror. But we are no longer fighting terror. We are fighting the Palestinian people. They will not win over us never. But the way we are fighting them is bringing an end to Zionism.In Ayalons mind, the settlers are the vanguard of frontier Zionism... a latter-day version of the kibbutzniks like my parents, who forged Israels settlement and security ethos.Deeply Jewish in its delivery, the book opens many chapters with quotes from Jewish books or scholars.What is hateful to you do not do to your neighbor, begins chapter 22 with a quote by Rabbi Hillel. This is the whole Torah; all the rest is commentary.Ayalon is a former Shayetet 13 commando, commander of the navy, cabinet minister, Knesset member and a recipient of the Medal of Valor, Israels highest military decoration.With Sari Nusseibeh, former Palestinian National Authority representative in Jerusalem, he established the Peoples Voice peace initiative to help advance peace between Israel and the Palestinians.He is also a member of Commanders for Israels Security, chairman of the Executive Committee of the Haifa Research Center for Maritime & Strategy and chairman of AKIM Israel (the National Association for People with Intellectual Disabilities and their Families).Finally, he organized and was featured in the Academy Award-nominated documentary The Gatekeepers.In Chapter 22, he introduces the reader to the formation of the Peoples Voice initiative.Our strategy... had been to change the narrative of the conflict by taking diplomacy out of the smoky back rooms and into the streets, Ayalon wrote regarding the situation in 2002. The question now was how to get the public to take notice of our proposal.He explained how polls at the time showed that average Israelis and Palestinians were ready for peace. Seventy percent on both sides wanted a two-state solution, the highest number in recorded history. Yet, these same people were calling for blood, Ayalon wrote.He told how he and Nusseibeh picketed the streets to find a diverse group of followers to support them. Ultimately, by October of that year, 90,000 people had signed on and each month another 20,000.He boiled down his message as follows: We need a two-state solution not because we like Palestinians or we think Arafat deserves a state, but because if we dont withdraw from Palestinian territory and acknowledge their right to have tier own state, Israel cannot survive as a Jewish democracy. Continued occupation would inevitably lead to a single state and end to Zionism as we know it.The narrative we chose centered on the self-interest of Israelis who wanted to sit through lunch without a suicide bomber killing them and of Palestinians who wanted to leave their villages without facing a uniformed teenager barking out orders, Ayalon wrote.By 2003, he and Nusseibeh traveled together to share this message with anyone who would listen, including US deputy secretary of defense Paul Wolfowitz and many others.However, nearly 20 years later, there is still no peace.How can a staunch Zionist, who was raised on one of Israels earliest settlements and trained as a kill-or-be-killed elite commando, spearhead a campaign for peace with his enemies? asked Nusseibeh about Ayalon a question that the Shin Bet head tries to answer in the book.But Ayalon also strove to convey a message of optimism for a man who has seen so much in his past and does not like what he sees in the present.For the first time in history, Jews have the power to shape their own future, and they should use it, Ayalon told the Post. However, to chart this future, we have to change the way we understand our past to redesign our narrative.The way we understand our history is the barrier to real compromise because it controls our actions and features and therefore our future, he wrote.In his conclusion, he writes that maybe things have to hit rock bottom before a change can occur.The way I see it, we Israelis might need a few more years of right-wing rule, attacks on Gaza and tightening the choke hold on civil society before we finally realize we are living in a dystopian society that is tyrannical for those under our boots, and toxic and self-defeating for all, he continued.Yet Ayalon said he hopes this is not the reality: The whole state of Israel was created as a result of optimism... When Theodore Herzl said, If you will it, it is no dream. So many people said he was naive, but we did it, he said.If enough people are dedicated to peace, if it is important enough, we could have peace, Ayalon concluded.Friendly Fire can be ordered on Amazon here.

See the original post:
Former Shin Bet head to Post: Govt is leading Israel to dead end - The Jerusalem Post

Zionist Organization of America blasts Biden over candidates promise to renew funding to Palestinian Authority – World Israel News

Posted By on September 8, 2020

Father of American veteran slain by Palestinian says U.S. tax money should not fund Palestinian terrorism.

By Paul Shindman, World Israel News

The Zionist Organization of America released a new video over the weekend calling on Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden to fund American Jobs, not foreign Palestinian Arab Terrorists.

The video attacked a previous Biden election statement that should he win the election, he would renew American government funding to the Palestinian Authority that the Trump Administration had cut due to the PAs continued payment of tens of millions of dollars to Palestinians convicted of terrorist activities.

Joe Biden says hell reinstate funding for terrorist Palestinian Authority (PA) which pays Palestinians to murder Americans & Jews, the ZOA tweeted about the release of its video. Sending U.S. tax dollars to the Palestinian Authority will enable the PA to finance the murder of more innocent Jews and Americans.

ZOA president Morton Klein said years of hard work were needed to turn off the taps on American funding that the Palestinians used in their pay-to-slay program that pays lifetime pensions to terrorists who murder Jews and Americans.

Say it aint so, Joe. Its inhuman to fund foreign terrorists, with American taxpayer dollars, Klein said, adding that this is not about politics, its about policy. The pay-to-slay policy of paying foreign Jew-killers with American taxpayer dollars was ended with the Taylor Force Act and the U.S. administration. It must not be re-started, by any politician from any party.

A 29-year-old U.S. Army veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan, Taylor Force was murdered by a Palestinian in a 2016 stabbing attack while =walking on a seaside promenade in Jaffa during a Vanderbilt University student visit to Israel.

The Taylor Force Act blocks American funding to the PA as long as it continues to pay salaries to convicted terrorists and the families of deceased terrorists.

Our son Taylor was stabbed to death by a Palestinian terrorist while visiting Israel, the terrorists family became eligible immediately for monthly payment for life from the Palestinian Authority for killing an Israeli or an American, Stuart Force, Taylor Forces father, said in a video posted on YouTube last week.

This horrific program is written in PA law, Force said. U.S. taxpayers send hundreds of millions of dollars to the PA which they use to fund those payments.

Theres talk that some politicians want to resume sending U.S. tax dollars to the PA even though they have refused to end their pay-to-slay policy, Force said, urging Americans not to let your hard-earned money [continue] paying the terrorist who killed my son and thousands of other innocent civilians.

Joe BidenPalestinian fundingTaylor ForceUS election 2020Zionist Organization of AmericaZOA

Continued here:
Zionist Organization of America blasts Biden over candidates promise to renew funding to Palestinian Authority - World Israel News

Kashrut by royal decree: The UAE delegations kosher supervisor speaks – The Jerusalem Post

Posted By on September 6, 2020

With normalization between Israel and the United Arab Emirates, kosher food is likely to be more in demand in Dubai, Abu Dhabi and beyond than ever before. Now, it will be certified by the Orthodox Union.Rabbi Yissachar Krakowski, CEO of OU Kosher in Israel, was in the UAE this week to ensure a high level of kashrut for the local caterer, Ellis Kosher Kitchen, which prepared meals for the observant Jewish members of the Israeli and American delegations.Elli Kriel, whose husband Ross Kriel is the lay leader of the Jewish Community of the Emirates, opened her catering service several years ago. The UAE Ministry of Foreign Affairs began to contact her to provide meals for projects involving Jewish people, Krakowski said. He had already been in touch with Kriel as she sought to expand her business.Last week, when it became known that Israeli and American delegations would be heading to Abu Dhabi to get normalization off the ground, Krakowski wondered if he would be heading to the Gulf as well.Sure enough, ahead of the Israeli delegations arrival, Kriel asked if Krakowski could come as well. The UAE government wanted to be sure that the food was fully certified kosher at a level that would be comfortable for National Security Adviser Meir Ben-Shabbat, who is strictly Orthodox.Krakowski received an invitation from the royal court of the UAE to arrive and certify the event.It was different from everything else, except for a recent kashrut certification in Riyadh, Krakowski said. cnxps.cmd.push(function () { cnxps({ playerId: '36af7c51-0caf-4741-9824-2c941fc6c17b' }).render('4c4d856e0e6f4e3d808bbc1715e132f6'); });If you do a program for a nonkosher hotel and you take it over for a week, every little thing becomes a fight, he said. Over here, when you deal with royalty anything, whatever you ask, its there In that way, its easier.Not only was being a royal guest an advantage, but hospitality in the Gulf is an important value that makes people willing to make an extra effort, Krakowski said.If you ask for something, they say, No problem, and its there supersonic fast, he said.Krakowski recounted that Kriel needed truffles for a recipe, and he explained that vegetables are kosher; they just need to be checked for insects. He was brought truffle sauce, which had nonkosher wine, so he could not allow it to be used. Then, a distributor was called, and the Emirati hosts were willing to pay 2,000 dirham (NIS 1,800) to get the truffles for them and they did it within minutes.Everything was like that, Krakowski said.Another unique situation was dealing with kosher plates, cutlery and glasses for the delegation. The Emirati hosts wanted everyone at the meals to have an identical place setting so those eating kosher food would feel totally comfortable. However, that made it impossible to know which plates were used for kosher food and which were for nonkosher food, Krakowski said.The solution was that 150 brand-new sets of tableware were brought out for each meal, with a member of Krakowskis team supervising to make sure they were truly new. The used dishes were then sent to the hotels nonkosher kitchen to be cleaned and used for guests who were not part of the delegation.The Emiratis were very impressed by the level of supervision, Krakowski said.About an hour before the banquet on Monday night, he was in the kitchen when three Emiratis told the chef they were from the royal courts quality-control team, and they needed to sample all the food. The chef told them to return in half an hour.When they came back, I was checking the lettuce for insects, and they were like, Wow, you guys are really serious. They were floored, Krakowski said.Krakowski and the OU plan to continue to be involved in certifying kashrut in the UAE. After the Israeli delegation left Abu Dhabi, he headed to Dubai for projects there.In the long term, when direct flights are open to Israeli tourism, the OU plans to have a permanent kosher supervisor in the UAE. In the meantime, it will send supervisors for specific events.On Wednesday, several Jewish organizations announced they would have a more permanent presence in the UAE.The World Zionist Organization (WZO) will send its first permanent emissaries to be stationed in Dubai in the coming weeks. They will be its first Jewish emissaries to serve in an Arab country.To meet the needs of the Jewish community in the UAE, the matter had been discussed before normalization was announced, Krakowski said, but it was made possible once ties between the countries became official.WZOs pioneers are husband and wife Yaacov and Zloty Eisenstein. They will establish and run a Jewish kindergarten in Dubai, where they will teach the local community about the heritage of the Jewish people and the State of Israel. They will also start an ulpan and arrange events for Jewish holidays and festivals.The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) also said it is exploring cooperation with the Jewish Council of the Emirates in the areas of monitoring extremism in the region and helping dismantle harmful stereotypes about Jews, Israelis, Americans, Muslims and Christians.Recently, the Emirati Jewish community has been subjected to a spike in online hate speech. The ADL will advise on best practices for responding to hate on social-media platforms.The research groups will be chaired by ADL CEO Jonathan Greenblatt and Rabbi Yehuda Sarna, chief rabbi of the Jewish Council of the Emirates. Sarna, who does not live in the Gulf full-time, serves as an adjunct professor at New York University and NYU Abu Dhabi.Sarna said he hopes the normalization deal and the new cooperative initiative with ADL will help grow the relatively small Jewish community in the UAE.

Visit link:
Kashrut by royal decree: The UAE delegations kosher supervisor speaks - The Jerusalem Post

[OPINION] Law and order president? The chaos and violence Trump wants you to be fearful and hateful of is happening now under his watch – Asian…

Posted By on September 6, 2020

President Donald J. Trump participates at a roundtable on donating plasma Thursday, July 30, 2020, at the American Red Cross-National Headquarters in Washington, D.C. (Official White House Photo by Tia Dufour)

DOOMSDAY in America is what President Donald Trump has been scaring people about in his campaign. He warns that if his opponent, Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden, wins in November, then people will not be safe with all the chaos, violence, and killing happening in the country. He claims only he can fix this and bring law and order back in America.

No self-respecting and thinking Republican, Democrat, or Independent will choose to be blind to the truth because the fact is: all that he is warning voters about is already happening under his watch, in Trumps America.

Trump purposely fans the flame of hate, mistrust, and division in America. He emboldens racists, white supremacists and right-wing extremists. This is his own doing. His words, actions and policies have been inciting the chaos, violence and carnage we are now experiencing.

Falling behind in the polls because of his failed leadership, especially in handling the coronavirus pandemic, he uses the tactic that got him elected in 2016: stoking racial and cultural divide. He is desperate to be re-elected to buy time and escape all the lawsuits waiting to be filed against him for all the crimes and transgressions he has committed against the Constitution and the American people.

The violence, looting, and destruction we now see are perpetrated NOT by the peaceful Black Lives Matter Movement protesters rallying against racism and racial injustice in America, but by opportunists, anarchists, right-wing extremists and white supremacists, some of them coming from other states and cities. This is tactically done so Trump can blame protesters and the Democrats, and cast himself as the savior and the hero for the crises he and his administration have created.

Trump has been using people as pawns and props for his fabricated narrative to appeal to his base and to convince those who are still undecided to vote for him, using lies, fear-mongering and doomsday scenarios.

The violence and crimes happening in America are not mainly perpetrated by peaceful protesters, Black Lives Matter activists, Antifa, immigrants and Democrats as alleged by Trump the so-called bad guys in his playbook that he loves to blame and demonize.Here is the truth about the issue from Anti-Defamation League (ADL). ADL is a leading anti-hate organization that was founded in 1913 in response to an escalating climate of anti-Semitism and bigotry, and its timeless mission is to protect the Jewish people and to secure justice and fair treatment for all.

The facts from the ADLs annual Murder and Extremism report that Trump does not really want you to know:

Of the 42 extremist-related murders in the U.S. last year, 38 were committed by individuals subscribing to various far-right ideologies, including white supremacy.ADL ranked 2019 as the sixth-deadliest year on record for extremist-related violence since 1970.

A total of 17 separate incidents were counted last year. The deadliest, by far, was the August white supremacist shooting spree at a Walmart in El Paso, Texas, which left 22 people dead and at least 24 more wounded. Including the El Paso attack, white supremacists were behind 81 percent of the domestic extremist-related murders in 2019.

Right-wing extremists were responsible for 90 percent of such murders in 2019 and for 330 deaths over the course of the last decade, accounting for 76 percent of all domestic extremist-related murders in that time.

Over the last decade, right-wing extremists have been responsible for more than 75 percent of extremist-related murders in this country, said ADL CEO Jonathan A. Greenblatt. This should no longer come as a shock to anyone. Lawmakers, law enforcement and the public need to recognize the grave and dangerous threat posed by violent white supremacy. We cannot begin to defeat this deadly form of hatred if we fail to even recognize it.

The past five years (2015-2019) include four of the deadliest years on record for extremist murders. Last year, the number of extremist-related fatalities in the U.S. declined slightly from the previous year, dropping from 53 fatalities in 2018 to 43 in 2019. But last years total was still higher than 2017, when 41 deaths were recorded.

For the eighth year in a row, firearms were the weapon of choice for domestic extremists.

Guns were involved in 86 percent of last years fatalities. In the past 10 years, 315 of the 435 people (72 percent) killed in the U.S. by extremists were shot to death. The increase in extremist-related shooting sprees in recent years is of particular concern.

These are the people Trump referred to as very fine people after one woman, 32-year-old Heather Heyer, was killed by a white supremacist while she protested at a rally of alt-right groups, who were defending the white supremacists and neo-Nazis in August 2017 in Charlottesville, Virginia.

These very fine people in Trumps playbook were neo-Nazis who staged a torchlight parade, unabashedly chanting anti-Semitic slogans, and roughed up students locked in arms around a statue of Thomas Jefferson. When the violence escalated and became fatal, Trump immediately blamed the alt-left, the Antifa, and defended the neo-Nazis.

In May of this year, Black American George Floyd was arrested and killed by a white Minneapolis police officer who knelt on his neck for eight minutes as he was handcuffed and faced down pleading for his life, saying I cant breathe.

In the wake of this brutal murder, Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement protesters rallied in Minneapolis (and in other parts of the country and the world) to fight against racial injustice. Chaos, looting and violence perpetrated by anarchists, opportunists followed. Trump and his administration were quick to blame antifa without bases in fact.

Antifa is not a single group with a clear organizational structure or leader. It is a decentralized network of activists who dont coordinate. Antifa is a monicker for these people whose common goal is opposing anything that they think is racist or fascist.Experts who have studied antifa say there is no evidence that the fringe, amorphous group is driving nationwide protests, and Trump hasnt cited anything specific as he accused them of doing so, theWashington Postreported.

But according to thePost, even as the protests have been overwhelmingly peaceful in recent days, Trump and Barr have made a concerted effort to implicate antifa involvement in them.

The Trump administrations own intelligence reports reveal that most of the violence appears to have been driven by opportunists. A separate DHS document dated June 17 stated, anarchist and anti-government extremists pose the most significant threat of targeted low-level, protest-related assaults against law enforcement. The document did not mention antifa by name and the documents definition of anarchist extremist

appears to exclude the group, thePostfurther reported. Did Trump tell you about this?The president also did not differentiate the Black Lives Matter (BLM)s peaceful protesters from anarchists who infiltrated the rallies, and did not acknowledge what BLM was fighting against racial injustice and police brutality. Trumps malicious attempt to tie antifa with peaceful protesters is an assault to peoples constitutional right of peaceful assembly to a voice out their legitimate grievance in a democracy.

So who is behind this misinformation about antifa? Twitter has shut down multiple accounts that it says were operated by a white supremacist group posing as liberal groups encouraging violence. This account violated our platform manipulation and spam policy, specifically the creation of fake accounts. We took action after the account sent a Tweet inciting violence and broke the Twitter Rules the company said, as reported by CBS News.

Twitter said the white supremacist group Identity Evropa used one fake account, @Antifa_US, with the intent to call for violence in majority white suburbs, maliciously using the name of the Black Lives Matter movement. Did Trump tell you about this?Yet despite all of this, Trump even wanted to declare antifa as a domestic terrorist group.

Have you ever heard the president denounce white supremacists, right extremists and vigilantes subscribing to far-right ideologies for the violence and deaths they have perpetrated despite all the facts? Did he ever call for the right extremists, and white supremacists to be declared as domestic terrorists? No. He even defends them.

And what about the supposed peaceful protests against the white police officer who shot an unarmed black man seven times at the back, witnessed by his kids in the car in Kenosha, Wisconsin on August 23?

TheNew York Postreported that of the 175 arrested during protests, a total of 105 were not from the city. They came from 44 different cities, including 17-year old Kyle Rittenhouse, the teen accused of shooting dead two men and seriously injuring a third with an assault rifle.

The teenage shooter, along with his mother, had also allegedly crossed state lines and was arrested in his home in Illinois. What were they doing in Kenosha, Wisconsin armed with military-style weapons? The report said police seized more than 20 firearms during the protests, leading to numerous charges for carrying concealed weapons. And did you see the video of the police ignoring this teen as he walked around with his weapon amid the chaos?

And what did Trump do? He defended the teen, who we now know is a Trump supporter. He attended a Trump rally in Iowa, seating in the front row. This kid is not old enough to vote, smoke nor drink but was already in possession of an assault weapon that has killed innocent people.

When Trump was asked if he would condemn the actions of vigilantes like the teen Kyle Rittenhouse, he ignored the question and claimed Rittenhouse probably wouldve been killed if he had acted differently, BuzzFeed reported.

Rittenhouse idolized the police and posted pictures of him on social media posing with guns, in support of Blue Lives Matter. How ironic that he chose to turn an otherwise peaceful protest to tragedy with his knee-jerk vigilante approach to discord.

The president refused to condemn the actions of vigilantes like Rittenhouse even after denouncing the shooting of a right-wing demonstrator in a pro-Trump rally in Portland on Monday, August 31.

This prompted Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden to challenge Trump in a statement: The deadly violence we saw overnight in Portland is unacceptable. I condemn this violence unequivocally. I condemn violence of every kind by anyone, whether on the left or the right. And I challenge Donald Trump to do the same.

Throughout the Republican National Convention, Trump has been branding and selling himself to be the president who will bring back law and order in the United States. He failed to do it as president now, why should we believe he can solve this crisis when re-elected?

Trump accused the Democrats of spreading hate, when in fact, his rhetoric of hate, prejudice and divisiveness against people of color, immigrants, Muslims and his political opponents is the one that has led to the surge of hate crimes in the United States.Portland Mayor Ted Wheeler nailed it when he said:

Its you who have created the hate and the division. Its you who have not found a way to say the names of Black people killed by police officers even as people in law enforcement have. And its you who claimed that White supremacists are good people.

Your campaign of fear is as anti-democratic as anything youve done to create hate and vitriol in our beautiful country.

* * *

Gel Santos Relos has been in news, talk, public service and educational broadcasting since 1989 with ABS-CBN and is now serving the Filipino audience using different platforms, including digital broadcasting, and print, and is working on a new public service program for the community. You may contact her through email at gelrelos@icloud.com, or send her a message via Facebook at Facebook.com/Gel.Santos.Relos.

Gel Santos Relos is the anchor of TFCs Balitang America. Views and opinions expressed by the author in this columnare solely those of the authorand not of Asian Journal and ABS-CBN-TFC. For comments, go to http://www.TheFil-AmPerspective.com and http://www.facebook.com/Gel.Santos.Relos

View original post here:
[OPINION] Law and order president? The chaos and violence Trump wants you to be fearful and hateful of is happening now under his watch - Asian...

SWC calls on YouTube to remove Korean Holocaust denial video – The Jerusalem Post

Posted By on September 6, 2020

The Simon Wiesenthal Center has called upon Youtube to delete a Holocaust denial video posted to the video sharing platform in Korean.The video from Spika Studio denies that 6 million Jews were murdered during the Holocaust, labels Anne Frank as a fraud, legitimizes Hitler's unfair disposition towards European Jewry and alleges that Jews have secretly controlled America for over 50 years."This slick, 25-minute video from 'Spika Studio' by a host named 'Sue' denies 6 million Jews were murdered by the Nazis," said Associate Dean and Director of the SWCs Global Social Action Agenda Rabbi Abraham Cooper. "American Jews and Korean Americans are good neighbors here in Los Angeles and in communities across the United States.""We are proud of our involvement over the last quarter of century, together with Korean human rights activists, the Committee for Human Rights in North Korea, the North Korean Freedom Coalition on behalf of the long-suffering people of North Korea and related human rights issues, including the gassing of political prisoners. Recently, we have seen an uptick of antisemitic postings online, but this video targeting Korean people is designed to demonize the Jewish peoplealive and deadand cast Jews as a secretive, dangerous cabal.The SWC urges YouTube to remove the video and calls on our Korean neighbors to reject its lurid and false messages, Rabbi Cooper concluded. cnxps.cmd.push(function () { cnxps({ playerId: '36af7c51-0caf-4741-9824-2c941fc6c17b' }).render('4c4d856e0e6f4e3d808bbc1715e132f6'); });

The rest is here:

SWC calls on YouTube to remove Korean Holocaust denial video - The Jerusalem Post

Should freedom of assembly be an absolute right? – The Japan Times

Posted By on September 6, 2020

The right of the people peaceably to assemble, as the U.S. Constitutions first amendment calls it, is one of the pillars of liberty. Thats why all liberal democracies guarantee and protect it in some form. But is this right absolute? Could there be, in well-defined cases, a liberal case for abridging it?

This timeless question has just become newly urgent. As I warned might happen, the COVID-19 pandemic has, directly or indirectly, increased social turmoil in many countries, leading more people to assert their right to protest. But as the very different circumstances in Belarus, the U.S. and Germany showed again last weekend, what counts as a primal scream for freedom in one gathering easily turns nefarious and anti-democratic in another.

In Belarus, the protesters are indeed heroes deserving the sympathies of freedom lovers all over the world. Since a fraudulent election on Aug. 9, theyve been bravely marching as their benighted dictator, Alexander Lukashenko, stomps around carrying an automatic rifle and keeps his thugs ready to bludgeon his critics. Types like him disdain freedom of thought, speech or assembly. Thats why philosophers since John Stuart Mill have considered these rights essential.

Elsewhere the picture is more complex, even in the sweet land of liberty. As COVID-19 and Black Lives Matter have blown off Americas veneer of social cohesion, some U.S. cities have of late resembled battlegrounds. Last weekend, supporters of President Donald Trump gathered in Portland, Oregon, and drove downtown in a caravan of hundreds of banner-draped trucks. There they clashed with mobs of anti-fascist counter-protesters. Paintball guns were shot and fists thrown, until actual gunfire erupted and a man lay dead.

Clearly, neither side in this particular exercise of the right to assemble emphasized the first amendments stipulation to do so peaceably. The intention was to antagonize and intimidate opponents, not to air arguments for the betterment of democratic discourse. The ubiquity of guns in America makes any such confrontation potentially lethal.

And then theres the peculiar case of Germany, a country that has been sensitized by its own Nazi history to the dangers that extremists pose. Protest movements against the various coronavirus lockdowns have swept across much of Europe, but theyve grown particularly strong in Germany. This is surprising, given that Germany has controlled the outbreak relatively well and imposed only mild restrictions.

Nonetheless, the crowds of protesters are growing. Many are spouting outlandish conspiracy theories inspired by the QAnon movement in the U.S. and striking anti-Semitic overtones. Increasingly, far-right extremists and even full-blown neo-Nazis are mixing into the crowds.

Last weekend, almost 40,000 demonstrators showed up in Berlin. In the evening, the protest turned violent, as several hundred rioters stormed the barriers protecting one entrance of the Reichstag, Germanys parliament building. Many carried the black-white-red flags of Imperial Germany, a symbol that nowadays stands for the far right, since the Nazi swastika is banned. Three defiant policemen barely managed to keep them out.

Frank-Walter Steinmeier, Germanys president, called the violence an intolerable attack on the heart of our democracy. The government and mainstream political parties all lined up to condemn the transgressions. As hooligans, politicians and ordinary Germans alike are well aware, the Reichstag is where Germanys democracy was literally and metaphorically set afire in 1933.

All of this points to an ambiguity about the freedom of assembly. In places from Belarus to Hong Kong, this right either doesnt exist or has been trampled upon. In the U.S. and Germany the right does exist but is in frequent tension with those who cynically abuse it.

Even in the liberal tradition, freedom of assembly was never meant as an absolute right. Mill famously argued that it can and should be abridged to prevent harm to others.

Berlins interior minister, Andreas Geisel, had tried to invoke this harm principle to stop the demonstration. He argued that the protesters were likely to scorn rules about social distancing and mask use just as they had done at another event on Aug. 1. This would accelerate contagion and put at risk people not even participating. But a court overruled him, arguing that the mere possibility that rules would be broken doesnt suffice.

This reasoning was surprising, given that the harm principle must of necessity apply in advance of injury. What probably moved the court was Geisels tactical mistake of also citing the likely presence of neo-Nazis at the event. As soon as politics was involved, the judges felt they had to err on the side of freedom of assembly.

As well they should. But even the distinction between political opinion and harm isnt always clear, and different nations will draw different lines. In the U.S., free speech protects even Holocaust denial. In Germany and 15 other European countries, as well as Israel, it doesnt, on the reasonable premise that its unbearable and thus harmful to the Nazis victims and their descendants.

Amid the worldwide rise of extremism, liberal democracies are in a bind. If they curtail their hallowed freedoms, they allow half-wits of all stripes to turn their martyrdom into propaganda. But if they provide the loonies a stage, they let cynics avail themselves of democratic rights to undermine the democracies that guarantee them.

Ultimately, the conundrum of liberty is not a legal question but a cultural one. As soon as theres a threat of harm, the state must intervene. But as long as protesters merely mouth off in ways that are disgraceful, the state must stand back. In these cases, its up to the rest of us to speak up and reclaim our democracies from the crackpots and demagogues. Even in 1933, the ensuing disaster could only happen because ordinary Germans allowed it.

Andreas Kluth is a columnist for Bloomberg Opinion. He was previously editor in chief of Handelsblatt Global and a writer for the Economist.

Go here to see the original:

Should freedom of assembly be an absolute right? - The Japan Times

What Facebook Still Needs To Do About The 2020 Elections – Forbes

Posted By on September 6, 2020

The companys decision to stop all new political ads in the week before the election reflects the ... [+] straitjacket in which Facebook has bound itself. (Photo Illustration by Budrul Chukrut/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images)

This week, Facebook announced a series of important changes aimed at countering political disinformation on its platform in the two months leading up to the U.S. election. As the companys founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg rightly observed, This election is not going to be business as usual. Responding to this reality, the company is taking welcome actions including taking down Russian government sponsored sites, banning new political ads in the week before the election, strengthening responses to posts which aim to dissuade voter turnout, and countering political disinformation in the uncertain weeks after November 3rd. All of these measures reflect Facebooks recognition of the enormity of its influence on our political process. As Zuckerberg acknowledged, We all have a responsibility to protect our democracy. Despite these laudable steps and statements, the company still refuses to do what really needs to be done to protect our democracy, namely taking down all provably false political content on its site.

When Facebooks fact-checkers identify false content, the company labels the information as false and demotes the post in users newsfeeds. Generally, they do not apply the same measures to political ads. In defending themselves against calls to do more, Zuckerberg and Facebook have wrapped themselves in a straitjacket, asserting time and again that they are not arbiters of the truth. They maintain they are obligated to allow deliberately and provably false information on their site in the name of free speech. This may have seemed like a reasonable talking point in the past, but it no longer rings true. First, Facebook is not bound by the First Amendment to the Constitution, which protects free speech, because the provision applies to governments, not private companies. And second, Facebooks efforts to take down certain types of false posts proves their willingness to moderate some forms of harmful content.

Indeed, Facebook routinely acts as an arbiter of the truth in other contexts. To cite one recent example, the company has done a commendable job in taking down provably false information relating to COVID-19. It has labeled or removed from the platform false claims of effective treatments and bogus assertions of cures. This is the right thing to do. The decision to take down false posts from the Russian government-sponsored Internet Research Agency this week is another example. The company acted quickly and decisively, taking down Russian-sponsored fake accounts and a website the Russians created to look like a left-wing news site. This was also the right thing to do. The company justified the decision based on their prohibition on coordinated inauthentic behavior. With these interventions, Facebook has shown itself to be capable and effective in monitoring and curating what appears on its site.

However, the company still refuses to take a stand against all provably false political content across its platform. Facebook rightly points out that moderating political content online poses vexing challenges and is very different from the task faced by newspapers, magazines, and other news organizations. Indeed, reviewing the overwhelming amount of content posted on Facebook every minute to identify provably false political information would require substantial effort and incur significant additional cost. But instead of addressing these challenges head on, Facebook is struggling to find loopholes in their self-imposed rule against being an arbiter of the truth. The companys decision to stop all new political ads in the week before the election reflects the straitjacket in which Facebook has bound itself. In effect, the company is saying that for the next seven weeks, it will accept tens of millions of dollars for political ads that contain wild falsehoods without asking any questions. Then, in the eighth and final week, it will stop accepting any political ads in an effort to prevent political disinformation from undermining our democracy. It is safe to assume that cynical political operatives are now rushing to double their ad buys in the days before the ban goes into effect.

Instead of this half measure, Facebook should immediately decline to post deliberately false ads whenever political candidates and their supporters, whether Democrats or Republicans, seek to place them on the platform. Similarly, when people post holocaust denial content, as they still do, Facebook should take it down. And Zuckerberg should stop asserting that he allows deliberately false political content on the site because he believes in free speech. This absolutist constraint is at the root of many of the challenges they face and leaves the company with little room to maneuver effectively without contradicting itself.

In the next two months our democracy will be tested in unprecedented ways. Facebook and the other social media sites did not create the challenges we face, or the political polarization which now roils our society. But theirs is the field on which these issues are being played out. It is up to them to do everything in their power to reject political disinformation online. Despite the challenges and costs inherent in the undertaking, removing provably false political content from their platform is the cost of doing business as a multibillion-user global social media company. Doing so is also vital to preserve our democratic discourse. The clock is ticking.

Continued here:

What Facebook Still Needs To Do About The 2020 Elections - Forbes

What the arrest of a hero of the genocide says about Paul Kagames rule – The Economist

Posted By on September 6, 2020

Paul Rusesabagina, whose story inspired Hotel Rwanda, faces charges of terrorism

Sep 3rd 2020

TOURISTS WHO gawp at gorillas and foreign businessfolk who meet in Kigalis convention centre sometimes call Rwanda the Switzerland of Africa. It has beautiful mountains, clean streets, a functional bureaucracy and low levels of petty corruption and crime. But it differs from Switzerland in ways that casual visitors often miss. Rwandans are terrified of their government. They are constantly watched for hints of dissent, which is ruthlessly suppressed. History is rewritten to suit the present. Heroes can become unheroes overnight.

One such person is Paul Rusesabagina, who as the manager of the Hotel des Mille Collines saved more than 1,200 people from a genocidal army and machete-waving militias that were hunting down members of Rwandas minority Tutsi group in 1994. Although a member of the majority Hutus, Mr Rusesabagina risked his life to keep Tutsis and moderate Hutus safe. He bribed militiamen with booze so they would not attack. When an assault seemed imminent he phoned contacts in the regime, begging them to order the killers back. The genocide ended only after rebels seized the country under the command of Paul Kagame, who is now in his third presidential term.

Mr Rusesabaginas courage inspired a film, Hotel Rwanda. America awarded him the Presidential Medal of Freedom, commending his remarkable courage and compassion in the face of genocidal terror. Some compared Mr Rusesabagina to Oskar Schindler, who risked his life saving Jews during the Holocaust. Yet in Mr Kagames Rwanda, Mr Rusesabagina is now portrayed as the equivalent of a Nazi fugitive, who must be abducted and brought home to justice (see article).

Although Mr Rusesabagina initially won official plaudits in Rwanda, too, this changed after he criticised Mr Kagame for rigging elections and spoke of entering politics. Government officials swiftly (and absurdly) accused him of genocide denial, a crime in Rwanda. Mr Rusesabagina disappeared after flying to Dubai. He reappeared a few days later in manacles in Kigali, Rwandas capital. His family says he was kidnapped. Rwanda says he was arrested through international co-operation.

Mr Kagames opponents have often met with misfortune far from home. His former intelligence chief was strangled in a Johannesburg hotel. A former interior minister was shot in Nairobi after starting an opposition party. But the grabbing of Mr Rusesabagina marks a new level of brazenness.

Rwanda says that he supported armed groups trying to overthrow the government. There is some truth to this: he once called for an armed struggle against the regime. This is a terrible idea, though the government has produced no evidence that he ever tried to turn words into deeds. And dissidents in Rwanda note that they have few options. Elections are a shamMr Kagame won 99% of the vote in 2017, and could remain in office until 2034. Peaceful opponents often end up behind bars, or worse. When Diane Rwigara, a businesswoman, tried to run for the presidency, she was arrested and jailed for more than a year on charges of insurrection. A Rwandan court later said the charges were baseless. Her mother was also held and the familys assets were confiscated.

Western governments occasionally tut at Mr Kagames abuses, but they also sell arms and provide aid to his government. They see Rwanda as an island of stability in a volatile region and him as a leader who gets things done. Yet 26 years after he first shot his way to power, he seems ever less constrained. His authoritarianism, once deemed by many a necessary evil to hold the country together, now risks pushing it back towards conflict. And that, in Rwanda, is a terrifying thought.

This article appeared in the Leaders section of the print edition under the headline "Nowhere to hide"

More here:

What the arrest of a hero of the genocide says about Paul Kagames rule - The Economist


Page 970«..1020..969970971972..980990..»

matomo tracker