Illegal Settlements: Stating the Obvious

Standard

Nobody disagrees that Israel is building illegal settlements on Palestinian land beyond the borders originally approved by the UN.

I think it was wrong for the UN to approve the creation of Israel in the first place.  Thus, despite Israelis unfairly receiving their own state in the Middle East at the expense of hundreds of thousands of innocent Palestinians who were left homeless, Israel still refuses to stay within UN-designated borders.

The UN fully acknowledges that Israel is unlawfully building settlements on land that does not belong to them. It should go without saying that the Palestinians are allowed to defend themselves from their land being stolen from them.  Thus, the resistance of the Palestinians is justified.

Advertisements

“Treason,” They Wrote.

Standard

(Rarely do I defend a political figure, and I really don’t know enough about this person to say I do or do not endorse her, but I still don’t think it’s fair to “frame” anybody for a crime they did not really commit.)

Canadian media has been going wild over the collapse of the Wildrose party.  Danielle Smith, the former leader of the recently dissolved party, has been accused of hypocrisy for telling others not to defect from the party, but then defecting herself.

The accusation of hypocrisy is problematic for many reasons.  First of all, Smith telling others not to leave, but eventually needing to leave herself is understandable.

A good analogy is a human pyramid.  When people start leaving the pyramid, obviously you attempt to keep the pyramid together by telling people not to leave.  However, if too many leave, (and for a “rival” pyramid that is actually quite similar,) eventually there comes a time when one has to call it quits and say that perhaps the best thing to do is for the two pyramids to merge.  Thus, it makes sense for someone to tell people not to leave, but to eventually have to leave as well.

Danielle Smith Wildrose Party

(I have no idea what the Japanese banner says.)

Furthermore, the Alberta Wildrose and Alberta PC parties are both conservative parties.  The federal “Liberal” and Conservative parties of Canada are already fundamentally indistinguishable.  There’s no point in the media focusing on bickering between parties that are fundamentally the same.  All this does is serve as a distraction from the fact that we are being ruled by a one-party system.  Thus, it’s a good thing for parties that are fundamentally the same to eventually merge so a REAL opposition can emerge. (I still think direct democracy is far superior to representative democracy though.)

Furthermore, people in the Canadian media are merely exploiting this incident so they can pretend they care about “hypocrisy” and the public.  People working in mainstream Canadian media are the most shameless, elitist hypocrites of all.  For them to exploit this to pretend character even matters to them is an extension of their hypocrisy.  Why don’t they report on the extreme hypocrisy of Harper condemning attacks on children in Pakistan while supporting the GENOCIDE of children in Gaza? Why is there no discussion of the extreme hypocrisy of condemning ISIS while cozying up to Saudi Arabia?

Nothing is more disturbing than people in mainstream media pretending they themselves have character. (Honest journalists and news people are sidelined or fired.)

Danielle Smith CBC Canadian News

“Yes! A chance to pretend I give a fuck about hypocrisy, character, or the public!” -His true nature

This is how much people actually care:

Standard

Obviously, Western media is going crazy over the anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall as they would over anything commemorating end of apartheid in South Africa.  However, the wall surrounding Gaza also represents horrendous oppression & apartheid.  The amount of attention that wall gets in Western media represents how much genuine concern there is for such matters. The amount of extra time the Berlin Wall gets over the Gaza blockade is how much time/energy is dedicated to creating the illusion of a liberal democracy.

ISIS not enough? How about another Cold War?

Standard

Both Western as well as Russian media sources seem to want to create another Cold War.  (Yes, some people are that evil.)  We can’t forget that within every authoritarian regime there have been propaganda agents diligently working to maintain some type of diversion so that oppression/elitism/inequality are never discussed.  Western propaganda is no different.

This is very dangerous because media trying to stir up Cold War conditions just so they have a constant scare tactic (and a constant source of eye-catching news) can become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

BBC logo

Gorbachev

(Click for link)

RT Logo Question More

Noam Chomsky

(Click for link)

From my perspective, I don’t think the Cold War was nearly as big of a deal as it was portrayed.  I’m positive the elitists on both sides quickly developed a common understanding that such things could be exploited to divert attention away from more pressing matters.  As much as I dislike George Orwell, he was right in depicting three global superpowers dominating the world with a piece left as undisputed territory.

Let’s pretend the West is Oceania, Russia is Eurasia, China is Eastasia and that the Middle East and Africa represent the disputed territories.  Despite the mental gymnastics one must do to visualize something so otherworldly, once this mental analogy is solidly in place, one can begin to see that the tactics of constant warfare, fighting for global dominance, and shifting of alliances seen within the novel also apply to the real world.

Russian media genuinely tries to make the West out to be a bad guy while Western media does the same to Russia (as well as China.)  Both Russian and Western media use chaos and terrorism within “the disputed territories” to their advantage.  However, if that tactic is becoming too obvious, neither have a problem recreating another Cold War stalemate that can be exploited by both sides.  Upon hearing about possible warfare, right-wing extremists will immediately start calling for greater military investment (just like during the Cold War, just like Nineteen Eighty-Four, just like Ancient Rome, etc.) just like they did when Putin and the West first tussled over Crimea:

Daily Signal Logo

Putin Obama

(Click for link)

People pathologically push for conditions where their natural/instinctive drives are selected for.  If someone is a natural born slave driver, they need a system that is oppressive (it doesn’t matter which one as long as there is a demand for slave drivers.)  If somebody is pathologically wired to constantly call for investment in warfare, they will do so regardless of common sense or lessons from history.


(However, there are also those who genuinely do want a more fair and harmonious world and try to push for such conditions since it’s a complete waste of time/energy/resources maintaining gross inequality purely for the sake of those who are good at maintaining it.)

In Chomsky’s defence, I feel RT sensationalized what he was saying:

Chomsky:

“…it’s come ominously close several times in the past…”

Headline:

‘World ominously close to nuclear war – Noam Chomsky to RT’

Genocide and Friends

Standard

Can anybody say they are surprised the world is the way it is, now?

Enforcers and supporters of blatant genocide, just to name a few:

Benjamin Netanyahu

Benjamin Netanyahu

World Leaders:

Other political figures:

Within Canada:

Abroad:

News people and pundits:

Nobel Peace Prize recipients and other “humanitarians”:

“Liberal” Hollywood élite:

(via Hollywood stars sign petition in support of Israel)