Israeli Tolerance

We tolerate other religions, except when we don't

The above Haaretz article provides us with an interesting look into Israeli society. It states that despite claims, often heard by the pro-israel lobby, of Israel's "tolerance", most Israeli Jews view the non-Jewish population with a double standard. This justified bigotry allows for the existence of non-Jewish groups, so long as they remain in the shadows and to do not participate in civil society.

Some facts from the article:

•  Only 50 percent of the sample agreed that Jerusalem was central to the Christian faith
  

•  75 percent believe the state should not allow Christian organizations to purchase land to construct new churches in the city. 
  

•  Seventy-eight percent of religious Jews believe Christianity is "idol worship"

How can any State, in all seriousness, claim to be a model of tolerance when it refuses to acknowledge the freedom of religion of minority groups-i.e. the right of people to build and occupy houses of worship?

One must also be aware of the racial aspect of this religious bigotry-The vast majority of Christians in Israel are Palestinians. Thus, this can and must be viewed through the lense of Israeli Apartheid; the system which has forced an entire people into the role of the "inferior race", and where all acts must be approved from above-by the "superior race". We can now add to the list-in addition to the other human rights the Israeli state has systematically denied or stolen from the Palestinians-the right of freedom of worship.

Israeli Apartheid Week 2009 Trailer

They're all going to laugh at you, Pt.1

Fascist Agendas

Ibrahim maintained that any new government might need at least a year to consider all options and formulate its positions. "I believe that an Israeli government that has a fascist agenda cannot proceed or convince the international community of such an agenda, especially after Israel has just carried out a war on Gaza."

Obama, Afghanistan, and Poppies

Juan Cole has an excellent analysis on Obama's first official policy move in Afghanistan.

Echoing Juan's points, some notes:

• What does Obama hope to gain by increasing troop numbers? As Prof. Cole points out, the US attempt to pacify Iraq using sheer force of numbers has been a resounding failure; Obama knows this, as he made it a part of his campaign in arguing for the US' official withdrawl of combat troops. More than that, the history of Afghanistan shows that an imperial army, be it the Soviets or the US, cannot hope to outlast the Afghan insurgency simply by having more troops, in particular when the root causes remain blantantly unsolved.
• Re: Poppy production. This may play well in the United States. However, it shows a lack of understanding of the material situation of most Afghanis. Poppies for Herion production, as Juan points out, count for nearly 1/3rd of GDP. The people who cultivate these poppies are Afghanistan's rural poor. Poverty has driven them to this situation; Removing a crucial source of income for these poor will do absolutely nothing to better their situation.
• Of course, in 8 years of occupation, the US has been content to do little except engage in skirmishes with guerillas, kill civillians with impunity, and support a government made up of warlords and US-friendly puppets. The people of Afghanistan have seen little actual benefit from the US invasion of 2001-present.
• With NATO's commitment beginning to wind down, the US will once again be in a situation of unilateral occupation. As it stands, I see no reason for this imperial venture to end any differently than the one in Iraq.

I drink the coffee, you read the news

Israeli Right fights over who will brutalize Palestinians Next

The UN will "hold Israel to account." For real this time.

Obama considers UN Anti-Racism conference, bringing the US ever closer to joining the civilized world.

Racist State refuses to attend Anti-Racism conference. In other news, the sky remains blue.

Juan Cole on the biggest Foreign looting of Iraq since the Mongol invasion.

This is why we can't have nice things

I was born and raised Roman Catholic. I still attend Mass on Sundays, despite my own personal and political beliefs becoming ever more contrasting with the Vatican. In my heart of hearts, I'd like to believe one day that those the Church has officially persecuted in the 20th and 21th century for speaking Truth to Power will be officially recognized; and for those who have been excommunicated, their bannings lifted.

This is not one of those times

The development came even as a new report quoted Williamson as having declared in a 1989 speech that “Jews made up the Holocaust, Protestants get their orders from the devil and the Vatican has sold its soul to liberalism.”

Williamson’s views about the Holocaust created an uproar last month when Pope Benedict XVI lifted his excommunication and that of three other bishops consecrated by the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.

“There was not one Jew killed in the gas chambers. It was all lies, lies, lies,” Williamson said in the 1989 speech at Notre-Dame-de-Lourdes church in Sherbrooke, Canada, according to the newspaper.

In the same speech, the paper said Williamson asserted that “the Jews created the Holocaust so we would prostrate ourselves on our knees before them and approve of their new State of Israel.”

The Daily News reported that the bishop also wrote letters in 2001 and 2002 blaming “Judeo-Masonry” for the two world wars and claiming that Jews were bent on world domination. It did not say to whom the letters were sent.

Take your hate-speech elsewhere, Mr. Williamson. We do not need in. Not Catholics, nor Palestinians, nor the anti-Zionist movement.

I would also be remiss if I didn't point out the person behind this bigot being welcomed with open arms back into the Church. Thank you, Your Holiness (Not in the Least).