Support Red Ken!

Ken “Red Ken” Livingstone, the mayor of London, has been suspended from his job for one month for telling it like it is, which has always been his way.

For readers who may not know who Ken Livingstone is, I’ll briefly say that he is what a politician should be, but most politicians are definitely not. He sees politics not as a means to advance the interests of oneself or one’s own class, but rather as a way to make this a better world. This assertion should, on one level, be the obvious job description of a politician, but, on another level, admittedly makes the speaker sound naively out-of-touch with “the real world.” The fact that the politician's obvious job description should appear so unrealistic is itself a clear indication of how thoroughly corrupt most politics is.

The event that has got Ken into hot water with the British Establishment happened when a reporter from the Evening Standard accosted him while he was leaving a party for a gay politician. The Evening Standard, which Ken has described as “a load of scumbags and reactionary bigots,” has been a bitter opponent of Ken Livingstone in every possible way.

When the reporter identified the paper he works for, Livingstone, not knowing anything about the reporter, said “What did you do? Were you a German war criminal?” which is something along the lines of what I might have said had I been in Ken’s shoes. What else can one say to a person who has deliberately chosen to work for a reactionary rag?

The reporter said he was Jewish and therefore found the remark offensive. Livingstone again said what I might have said in his place. He compared the reporter to a “concentration camp guard – you are just doing it because you are paid to.” Wasn’t he right? What was a Jew, supposedly a member of a highly-persecuted minority, doing working for "a load of scumbags and reactionary bigots"? More importantly, shouldn’t we all question who and what we work for?

As Ken’s punishment is far worse than his perceived “crime,” it is clear that there is more going on here than what the official version reveals. The Establishment gets very concerned when someone brooks ultra-radical ideas such as the obligation to question who and what we work for and who our employers are and do. Perhaps Ken was also seen as having questioned the sacred “right to work,” a weapon often wielded by strike-breakers.

The panel that suspended him has accused him of bringing his office into disrepute. That is quite ironic. The office of London’s mayor has never been more highly regarded than during Ken Livingstone’s mayoralty.

Ken Livingstone has repeatedly angered both Zionists and the Establishment by promoting unpopular (among the elite) groups and causes, both in Britain and abroad. Ken’s opponents have now coalesced around the hyped-up charges, that is, around an issue that affects the interests of both groups.

He is being punished for leading marches against the war on Iraq, and for supporting Palestinian rights. He is being punished for linking the local to the global, as he did, for instance, right after the London bombings last July. In other words, he is being punished for being a different kind of politician. But that, I suppose, is exactly how he has “damaged” the reputation of his office. From this point on, all future London mayors, and, God forbid, other politicians, will be expected to live for the people.

Around the world, multi-frontal Zionist assaults continue apace, using different tactics, ranging from terrorism (the destruction of the Askari Mosque in Iraq), to political manipulation (Ken Livingstone’s case), to encouragement of media assaults on Islam (the Danish episode).

Ken has announced he will decide by next week what action to take against the panel’s decision. My guess is that he wants partly to use the time to gauge his support. It is vital to prove to him that he does enjoy wide popular support, both within and without Britain.

If Ken’s appeal fails, he would be responsible for his own legal costs, estimated at 80,000 pounds. I think a proposal to set up a legal defence fund would be a good idea.

Ken has repeatedly stood up for what is right. Now is the time to show that the public (both locally and globally) appreciates the unique politician that he is.
mayor@london.gov.uk
Full contact info

Update:
Ken Livingstone's statement on the suspension of his suspension

Wiped out...

Did Israel plan and carry out the bombing of the Askari (Al-Askariya) Mosque in the city of Samarra, possibly through local agents in Iraq? The bombing was reminiscent of the destruction wrought in 1984 on Sikhism's holiest shrine, the Golden Temple, in the city of Amritsar by orders from Indira Gandhi (who paid for it with her life less than five months later).

Yes, I know, the appearances are different. Amritsar's Golden Temple was destroyed by regular (foreign/Indian occupation) armed forces, whereas the Askari Mosque has been destroyed by "terrorists." Yet, who are these "terrorists"?

I think a strong circumstantial case can be constructed for Israeli involvement in the bombing of the Askari Mosque.

I would rule out Al Qaeda involvement. Contrary to the White House generated propaganda that has been pounded into people's brains for the last five years, Al Qaeda's targets are not selected at random. Rather, they have included two types of targets, and only two types: (1) American interests, and (2) what I would call "American mercenaries." By "American mercenaries" I mean anyone who works for US interests, whether directly or indirectly. This includes, for instance, all collaborators in Iraq, such as Iraqi police forces and their recruits, Iraqi armed forces and their recruits, and so on, not to speak of members of the Iraqi "government."

Also, I don't see what benefit could accrue to Al Qaeda from increasing the level of tension between Sunnis and Shias. And I think Iraqi Sunnis, or Sunnis from any other country, were most likely not the perpetrators of this event. Sunnis would know that this type of event would bring down the wrath of the now-powerful majority Shias down on their heads, as it already has. They have little to gain from committing this type of atrocity. Not to speak of the fact that the Shia Imams buried in that mosque are, as close descendants of the Prophet, revered almost as much by Sunnis as they are by Shias.

I cannot imagine any Iraqi (or indeed any Moslem), no matter how fanatically devoted to the Sunni cause, destroying one of Iraq's age-old symbols of pride and nationhood. And, despite my views on the United States government, I cannot imagine Americans perpetrating an atrocity of historical proportions such as this.

Zionist agents are the only group depraved enough, vile enough, and immoral enough to plan and carry out such an inconceivable horror. The Zionist plan may have been to turn Moslems against each other at the very moment when the whole world is beginning to see through the Zionist mythology that for so long has upheld the State of Israel. Their ultimate end, which to them justifies any means whatsoever, is to perpetuate the Zionist cancer in the middle of the Moslem world.

If Moslems do manage to see through this plot, the immense outrage that is bound to be generated by the destruction of the Askari Mosque, rather than dividing them, may play a part in uniting Moslems against their common enemies, and turn dreams of "wiping out" the State of Israel, this root of all evil in the world, into reality.

• My other posts on related topics:
Myth and Myth-take (with Update)
New Age Zionists
Unity, progress, and purpose
The Poodle's UNcle
What do you care?
Boundless Arrogance II
"Democracy in Action"

"Democracy in Action"

On the basis of my search, coverage of the following Reuters item has been limited to only two newspapers in the world, one in Kuwait, and the other one in India. The Reuters report is here:

U.S. religious group condemns Iraq war

A fuller report appears here:

US churches apologize over Iraq war

No reports of the apology have appeared either in the US or in Canada... And they dare criticize censorship in China.

To their credit, the US media (and media in many other countries) have widely reported the following Associated Press news item:

Churches Debate Pro-Palestinian Divestment

The US reportage is all the more creditable (and incredible) as, in Canada, by contrast, the news item was carried only by The Ottawa Citizen (unless one wants to count a local paper called The Pierceland Herald that I had not previously heard of, which also published the story).

While the United States government and the EU are in the process of suspending the measly aid they have been providing to Palestinians, and Israel is stealing the taxes it has collected from Palestinians, people of conscience are debating divestment in Israel.

Palestinian relatives of prisoners jailed in Israel demonstrate outside the Palestinian Authority headquarters during the swearing-in session of the new Palestinian Parliament

I am at a loss to explain the lack of coverage in Canada because, for one thing, Canada was at the forefront of the anti-apartheid divestment efforts. Perhaps a few relations and equations of power and influence have since then undergone some radical changes in this country. Not to mention direct pressure exerted by foreign governments and their local agents and lobbyists.

Update:

The latest interesting twist in the divestment issue, published by a single source only:

Bishop questions attack by Chief Rabbi over disinvestment decision

• My other posts on related topics:
Truth as a higher degree of deception
Intolerance masquerades as tolerance
Myth and Myth-take (with Update)
New Age Zionists
Unity, progress, and purpose
The Poodle's UNcle
What do you care?
Boundless Arrogance II

New Age Zionists

One striking spin-off of the cartoon controversy has been the apparently sincere support and sympathy that many Jewish organizations and individuals in the “Diaspora” have expressed for Moslems. Being experts at recognizing the kind of defamation that is usually a prelude to far worse things, Jewish organizations have been denouncing the cartoons in a very vocal and conspicuous manner.

While this sudden concern with justice on their part is highly commendable, it does make me wonder where they have been during the last sixty or more years. How could they possibly have missed the daily demonization of Palestinians that has always been a staple of news reports and commentary within Israel? Have these Jewish organizations never realized that the demonization of Palestinians has been a tool in the Israeli state’s arsenal of weapons in its long-term project to eradicate the Palestinian nation?

Meanwhile the Zionist entity itself (that is, “Israel”) has been mute on the current controversy. It is perhaps caught between a rock and a hard place. Were it to denounce the cartoons, it would be showing sympathy for Moslems, which would be contrary to the racism that is of the essence of the Zionist entity. Were it to express support for absolute “freedom of speech,” it would be opening itself up to a plethora of risks, both domestic and external. After all, the very existence of the Zionist entity depends on the world’s continued silence regarding its illegitimate and illegal existence and expansionism.

We are still left, though, with the puzzle regarding the expressions of sympathy by Diaspora Jews. I find it hard to believe that the recent events have been so extreme that they have inspired some sort of conversion on their part. After all, we are talking about a bunch of cartoons, albeit a highly offensive bunch of cartoons. The Jews have for decades “endured” with great equanimity the spectacle of the Palestinian genocide, which many of their own leading figures have compared to the Nazi Holocaust. Surely there is nothing in the current situation that is more troubling than that endless tragedy. And I find it difficult to believe that something has touched them viscerally, so as to make it impossible for them not to react as they have. Had they been so strongly susceptible to being touched viscerally as witnesses to injustice, they themselves would have taken up arms against the Zionist entity long ago.

I am forced to conclude that their expressions of sympathy must be rooted in self-interest. Not so many years ago, the Western newsmedia contained no significant amount of criticism of Israel and its actions. Now, thanks to the Iraq Holocaust, the floodgates of criticism, indeed of vilification, of the US and its minions have begun to open up. And, thanks to President Ahmadinejad of Iran, the status and meaning of the Jewish Holocaust, and even its reality, has become a legitimate subject for debate. Perhaps the said Jewish organizations and individuals wish to restore and reinforce the possibility of assigning to specific events, entities, and persons an aura of immunity from discussion and debate.

• My other posts on related topics:
Myth and Myth-take (with Update)
Intolerance masquerades as tolerance
Unity, progress, and purpose

Intolerance masquerades as tolerance

It was, of course, never about freedom of speech and tolerance for divergent opinions. What it was about was to test the limits that intolerance and xenophobia can be carried to. It seems that those limits have finally been reached and breached.

I think Europe may come to regret this latest shameful indiscretion. Its attempt to humiliate Moslems has backfired, revealing instead some of its own deeply-entrenched hypocrisies. The Empire has no clothes.

While touting the "tolerance" of their societies, Europeans have been busily defending, nay celebrating, the intolerance exhibited by the Danish newspaper. If this kind of bigoted insensitivity is an example of European tolerance, then give me the "narrow-minded intolerance" of the Moslem protesters. They, at least, have the clarity of mind to see what is right, along with the courage to fight for it.

• My other posts on related topics:
Truth as a higher degree of deception
Myth and Myth-take (with Update)
What do you care?

The Contradictory Cuba

I am not one of those people who turn into instant experts on a foreign country after a short visit there. Far from it, and in more ways than one. First, I think understanding a country requires spending a significant portion of one’s life in that country. Second, as I’ll explain, I think understanding Cuba is doubly difficult, because everything about it seems contradictory. In any case, I don’t intend to write a travelog. That is not the sort of thing this blog is about. I'll limit myself to some general comments about some observations that left a deep (and therefore possibly true) impression on me.

Imagine a city with over two million people, hardly any traffic signs or signals and only a handful of marked street names, whose traffic moves in a more orderly fashion than that of a city of similar size in an “advanced” country, say, Toronto.

That is the kind of place Cuba is. Its character is self-contradictory and inexplicable. That is, I think, all the more reason to try to understand it, because I believe its contradictions are the secret of its survival. Cuba did not just happen. I believe the Cuban Revolution happened in Cuba exactly because Cuba is what it is. It is a land where contradictory qualities can be successfully combined, where hope can be combined with despair. We would ordinarily claim such a blend is impossible. But that is only because of our own class prejudices. We are far too comfortable. We think life is about either having a lot of things or not having quite so many things. Life’s circumstances have never forced us to endure real contradictions. We, the so-called progressives, cannot begin to understand human emancipation until we try to rid ourselves of such deeply-ingrained class prejudices.

There is an impossible quality in the Cuban people’s gaze. You find it in old Cuban paintings, as well as in living Cuban eyes. It combines deep melancholy with high hope. I think the Cuban Revolution could only have happened and survived in Cuba, because its people’s character enabled them to endure the incredible suffering that the Empire has imposed on them, so as to hold on to their dignity and hopes for a better future.