Michael
Why does the media, and the various commentators around the Arab-Israel conflict, continue to refer to Palestinian dictator Mahmoud Abbas as "President" or, since Monday, "Prime Minister." The guy's term ran out in 2009, for chrissake. He holds power, but does not do so through democratic means. This makes him a dictator.
So, how come he almost never gets referred to by that term?
Furthermore, how is it that the so-called "pro-Palestinian activists" do not seem to mind that the west bank of the Jordan is being ruled over by a dictator? If a Jewish woman spanks her kid in the parking lot of a shopping mall on the outskirts of Tel Aviv they would be discussing it on Daily Kos as an illustration of Israeli cruelty, yet the fact that the west bank Palestinians are being ruled over by a dictator goes almost entirely unremarked upon.
Somehow I get the distinct impression that these "pro-Palestinian activists" are anything but pro-Palestinian. What they really are is the current iteration of the Nazi anti-Jewish persuasion in the 21st century.
If part of the essence of the 20th century Nazi movement was genocidal anti-Semitism, then that essence, that persuasion, has survived and morphed over time to meet changing circumstances. In this way the "Nazi persuasion" is currently manifesting itself within the progressive-left under the guise, horrendously enough, of "human rights."
If the progressive-left honestly cared about human rights or social justice then they might care about Tibet or Darfur or Congo (where something like 5.5 million people are dead over the last decade, or so, due to that conflict), but they do not. This can only mean that their claims to care about social justice and human rights are entirely hollow. Yet day after day they fling filth at the Jewish state for alleged human rights violations.
It is a cruel irony, indeed.
.
I posted a YouTube about the Palestinian refugees in early January.
ReplyDeletehttp://oldschooltwentysix.blogspot.com/2012/01/apartheid-in-middle-east.html
There is no doubt in my mind that it's now just an obsession against Israel that blinds these voices of morality to most anything else, including the ramifications of their actions.
Try as they might to demonize and act illiberally, I still endeavor to believe they act with altruistic intention, though misguided in the approach and methodology.
The rest of this comment turned into a blog post for me which I hope to post shortly.
Very good, school.
ReplyDeleteI am looking forward to reading your material once you start writing again.
Those in Tibet or Darfur or the Congo are not cool, chic, recognizable "indigenous people." That's a big part of the vapidness of the left's love of the oppressed.
ReplyDelete