15 January 2009
Good riddance to the last war criminal: Dubya Bush
As the clock counts down to the final exit of Dubya Bush, only the most deaf, dumb, blind and intellectually/morally challenged people will miss the worst US president in history. But even amongst those Americans glad to see the backside of that cowboy, some were Dubya supporters until things turned to crap - to use a diplomatic turn of phrase.
It was only when "victory" in Iraq wasn't happening, and most recently, the economy was going down the crap tube, that it began to dawn upon them, maybe just maybe Bush was and is a Loser. And maybe, just maybe, it was legitimate to question his policies and actions.
But it wasn't lost on many people around the world, these late converts weren't driven by moral principle to repudiate the Loser. They began to repudiate the Loser only when an Iraqi victory was slipping away and when they became victims of the still deepening, and soon to be depression.
At no time, did the immorality of an illegal war nor the terrible pre and post-invasion Iraqi civilian casualties cause these late converts to question the crimes being committed in their name. And now, having peddled the neo-con brand of freedom and democracy abroad in the form of Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay, Bagram Prison, kidnappings, torture etc and given the one-fingered salute to the rest of the world, what a surprise America's reputation and standing slid down the crap tube into the moral cess pool.
You know the old saying...one deserves the politicians one elects!
So it was a delightful surprise to see Dubya immortalised in the dying days of his presidency by dodging shoes!
It was only when "victory" in Iraq wasn't happening, and most recently, the economy was going down the crap tube, that it began to dawn upon them, maybe just maybe Bush was and is a Loser. And maybe, just maybe, it was legitimate to question his policies and actions.
But it wasn't lost on many people around the world, these late converts weren't driven by moral principle to repudiate the Loser. They began to repudiate the Loser only when an Iraqi victory was slipping away and when they became victims of the still deepening, and soon to be depression.
At no time, did the immorality of an illegal war nor the terrible pre and post-invasion Iraqi civilian casualties cause these late converts to question the crimes being committed in their name. And now, having peddled the neo-con brand of freedom and democracy abroad in the form of Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay, Bagram Prison, kidnappings, torture etc and given the one-fingered salute to the rest of the world, what a surprise America's reputation and standing slid down the crap tube into the moral cess pool.
You know the old saying...one deserves the politicians one elects!
So it was a delightful surprise to see Dubya immortalised in the dying days of his presidency by dodging shoes!
Finally, in a few days, the last of the troika of war criminals also known as the three stooges, Bush, Blair and Howard, will ride off into the dustbin of history. He hands over a country sliding further into a likely depression, saddled with a likely US$2 trillion deficit, a national reputation in tatters...what more can a country ask for?
Mission Accomplished!
Mission Accomplished!
Labels: abu ghraib, blair, bush, deficit, depression, howard, recession, war crimes
22 June 2008
Echoes of evil in the US military
I missed a significant but notorious 40th anniversary of the My Lai massacre on 15 March 2008.
As official US government and military propaganda then claimed, the massacre was an isolated spontaneous act of mass murder executed by an infantry company, instigated by a Lt William Calley. But as a recent BBC documentary reported, after an exhaustive search of US National Archive records, the truth was quite the opposite.
The relevant records were hidden and uncatalogued (administrative equivalent of burying secrets) in a small portion of an enormous collection of records chronicling US Army operations in Vietnam. Doubtless, the Pentagon hoped that nobody would find the damning reports of Lt General William Peers' inquiry into the massacre. It was for good reason the Pentagon wished to bury the bodies.
My Lai was only one of three hamlets identified for complete destruction by Col Oran Henderson, a brigade commander of the 23rd US Infantry Division (aka Americal Division). As Lt Gen Peers found, Task Force Barker was ordered to "kill everything," raze crops and dwellings, without exception. More than one company, Charlie, was involved in the terrible massacre. Peers found that Bravo company was also involved.
The general recorded some 400 hours of testimony by personnel of all ranks which were also released to the BBC. The accounts claimed mass rapes of women and girls as young as 12; followed by their executions to eliminate witnesses. Hurling terrified civilians into ditches and machine gunning them, SS Stormtrooper style, was recorded in chilling verbal testimonies. This was "winning the hearts and minds" of the local population. It was about keeping Vietnam free and democratic.
Fortunately, a few people survived by feigning death. Lt Gen Peers travelled to interview the survivors in 1970, and found their testimony corroborated the accounts of mass rapes and murders.
"The first shot hit a baby in the head and I turned around and (was) sick" - one soldier. Another: "Most people in our company didn't consider the Vietnamese human…..A guy would just grab one of the girls there and ….they shot the girls when they got done."
"...when they got done..." refers to raping the girls.
A monstrous cover-up was subsequently orchestrated by the division commander, Maj Gen Sam Koster; one which was eventually blown apart by Lt Gen Peers' investigation. However, the findings of Peers' inquiry were so shocking that the Pentagon suppressed the full truth, and instead, claimed the massacre was an isolated incident.
It was instructive then, as now in the context of Abu Ghraib, Haditha and Mahmudiyah, that of 14 officers charged, only the most junior, Calley, was court-martialled and found guilty. Brigade commander, Col Henderson, was acquitted. Yet, as the archived records and report showed, the atrocity was ordered by the highest levels of the divisional chain of command.
The BBC documentary is both fascinating and yet revealing, in that when Abu Ghraib, Haditha and Mahmudiyah are framed in the context of the My Lai massacre, it really seems little has changed in 40 years. No superior values of democracy and freedom are evident, no humanity is shown to innocent civilians, no honour, integrity and accountability are demonstrated by the top brass, and no exemplary leadership worth emulating is to be found in the White House.
Instead evil, identical to that which escaped in My Lai, seems to be evident in Iraq; apparent to all who aren't wilfully blind, deaf and dumb. This evil is an echo of what others were accused of perpetrating in WW2. It only goes to show that nobody has a monopoly on virtue and morality. And those who claim to be the beacons of "democracy and freedom" bring exactly the opposite to those unfortunate enough to be on the receiving end.
Soon, the world will be rid of the nastiest and blackest of the three stooges, Bush, Blair and Howard, who brought unprovoked death and destruction to Iraq. But sadly, there will be no war crimes trials for these criminals. The only thing that will happen to Bush, Blair and Howard is that they will be consigned to the garbage can of history. Truly, a poor punishment for their war crimes.
Therein lies the fundamental and glaring flaw of our so-called "democracies." Who wants to emulate a hypocritical system that fails to hold accountable those who kill in our name, and with our tacit assent?
As official US government and military propaganda then claimed, the massacre was an isolated spontaneous act of mass murder executed by an infantry company, instigated by a Lt William Calley. But as a recent BBC documentary reported, after an exhaustive search of US National Archive records, the truth was quite the opposite.
The relevant records were hidden and uncatalogued (administrative equivalent of burying secrets) in a small portion of an enormous collection of records chronicling US Army operations in Vietnam. Doubtless, the Pentagon hoped that nobody would find the damning reports of Lt General William Peers' inquiry into the massacre. It was for good reason the Pentagon wished to bury the bodies.
My Lai was only one of three hamlets identified for complete destruction by Col Oran Henderson, a brigade commander of the 23rd US Infantry Division (aka Americal Division). As Lt Gen Peers found, Task Force Barker was ordered to "kill everything," raze crops and dwellings, without exception. More than one company, Charlie, was involved in the terrible massacre. Peers found that Bravo company was also involved.
The general recorded some 400 hours of testimony by personnel of all ranks which were also released to the BBC. The accounts claimed mass rapes of women and girls as young as 12; followed by their executions to eliminate witnesses. Hurling terrified civilians into ditches and machine gunning them, SS Stormtrooper style, was recorded in chilling verbal testimonies. This was "winning the hearts and minds" of the local population. It was about keeping Vietnam free and democratic.
Fortunately, a few people survived by feigning death. Lt Gen Peers travelled to interview the survivors in 1970, and found their testimony corroborated the accounts of mass rapes and murders.
"The first shot hit a baby in the head and I turned around and (was) sick" - one soldier. Another: "Most people in our company didn't consider the Vietnamese human…..A guy would just grab one of the girls there and ….they shot the girls when they got done."
"...when they got done..." refers to raping the girls.
A monstrous cover-up was subsequently orchestrated by the division commander, Maj Gen Sam Koster; one which was eventually blown apart by Lt Gen Peers' investigation. However, the findings of Peers' inquiry were so shocking that the Pentagon suppressed the full truth, and instead, claimed the massacre was an isolated incident.
It was instructive then, as now in the context of Abu Ghraib, Haditha and Mahmudiyah, that of 14 officers charged, only the most junior, Calley, was court-martialled and found guilty. Brigade commander, Col Henderson, was acquitted. Yet, as the archived records and report showed, the atrocity was ordered by the highest levels of the divisional chain of command.
The BBC documentary is both fascinating and yet revealing, in that when Abu Ghraib, Haditha and Mahmudiyah are framed in the context of the My Lai massacre, it really seems little has changed in 40 years. No superior values of democracy and freedom are evident, no humanity is shown to innocent civilians, no honour, integrity and accountability are demonstrated by the top brass, and no exemplary leadership worth emulating is to be found in the White House.
Instead evil, identical to that which escaped in My Lai, seems to be evident in Iraq; apparent to all who aren't wilfully blind, deaf and dumb. This evil is an echo of what others were accused of perpetrating in WW2. It only goes to show that nobody has a monopoly on virtue and morality. And those who claim to be the beacons of "democracy and freedom" bring exactly the opposite to those unfortunate enough to be on the receiving end.
Soon, the world will be rid of the nastiest and blackest of the three stooges, Bush, Blair and Howard, who brought unprovoked death and destruction to Iraq. But sadly, there will be no war crimes trials for these criminals. The only thing that will happen to Bush, Blair and Howard is that they will be consigned to the garbage can of history. Truly, a poor punishment for their war crimes.
Therein lies the fundamental and glaring flaw of our so-called "democracies." Who wants to emulate a hypocritical system that fails to hold accountable those who kill in our name, and with our tacit assent?
Labels: abu ghraib, blair, bush, haditha, howard, mahmudiyah, my lai massacre
08 January 2007
Are the Neo-Cons dead yet?
Will the return of a Democrat controlled congress in last November's congressional elections herald the death of the Neo-Cons and their reign of unfettered freedom to cause murder and mayhem abroad? Or has Team Neo-Con just taken a few rounds to the head; only to rise like Lazarus (or more correctly, Dracula) to cause further mayhem later?
To answer this question, I think we will need to set milestones by which we can measure the real death of Team Neo-Con rather than just non-fatal injury. Critical short term milestones would be:
1. Congress investigates the who, how and why involving the fabrication of false evidence justifying the illegal invasion of Iraq.
2. Following the investigation, Congress indicts people like Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Condi Rice, Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith, Eliot Abrams, John Ashcroft, Gen Geoffrey Miller (set up Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib prisons), Richard Perle and last but not least, Dubya the Decider (of criminal acts).
3. Congress acknowledges the number of Iraqi civilian casualties inflicted during the March 2003 invasion.
4. Congress forces the closure of Abu Ghraib and Bagram Airport prisons and indicts senior military and CIA officers for unlawful assault and murder of detainees.
5. Congress demands the prosecution of US military personnel responsible for the murder of an Al Jazeera journalist during the invasion.
Collectively, these would be tangible evidence of repudiating the unlawful actions of Team Neo-Con, and a genuine move towards restoring the badly sullied reputation of the US both at home and abroad. Although the reign of the Neo-Con regime will be judged as one of America's darkest times; doing the above will also prove the regime to be a transient aberration rather than the norm.
We should be greatly encouraged that Congress has already commenced step 1. We can only hope that the momentum will be sustained for the remaining steps.
To answer this question, I think we will need to set milestones by which we can measure the real death of Team Neo-Con rather than just non-fatal injury. Critical short term milestones would be:
1. Congress investigates the who, how and why involving the fabrication of false evidence justifying the illegal invasion of Iraq.
2. Following the investigation, Congress indicts people like Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Condi Rice, Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith, Eliot Abrams, John Ashcroft, Gen Geoffrey Miller (set up Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib prisons), Richard Perle and last but not least, Dubya the Decider (of criminal acts).
3. Congress acknowledges the number of Iraqi civilian casualties inflicted during the March 2003 invasion.
4. Congress forces the closure of Abu Ghraib and Bagram Airport prisons and indicts senior military and CIA officers for unlawful assault and murder of detainees.
5. Congress demands the prosecution of US military personnel responsible for the murder of an Al Jazeera journalist during the invasion.
Collectively, these would be tangible evidence of repudiating the unlawful actions of Team Neo-Con, and a genuine move towards restoring the badly sullied reputation of the US both at home and abroad. Although the reign of the Neo-Con regime will be judged as one of America's darkest times; doing the above will also prove the regime to be a transient aberration rather than the norm.
We should be greatly encouraged that Congress has already commenced step 1. We can only hope that the momentum will be sustained for the remaining steps.
Labels: abu ghraib, bush, cheney, condi rice, feith, neo-cons, neo-conservatives, rumsfeld, wolfowitz
18 November 2006
Message received but not understood
Following middle America's repudiation of six years of madness under Team Neo-Con; expressed during the recent congressional elections, I looked for signs of mea culpa breaking out in Neo-Con land. So far, I'm sorry to say their intellectual honesty about lessons learned from the electoral loss is at the same level as their trousers around their ankles.
An article by Charles Krauthammer published in the Washington Post is an excellent case in point. Krauthammer (a deliciously ironic surname) is one of the key Neo-Con "intellectuals" who cheered the illegal and unprovoked invasion of Iraq. In his article, he says,
"Our objectives in Iraq were twofold and always simple: Depose Saddam Hussein and replace his murderous regime with a self-sustaining, democratic government."
Hold on a minute!
Before the invasion in March 2003, Big Dubya, Poodle Tony and Chi Hua-Hua John thumped their chests and told the world Saddam had NBC weapons which posed a clear and present danger to civilisation as we knew it then. In fact, Big Dubya and his then National Security Adviser, Condi Fried Rice, emphatically denied "regime change" was the agenda.
It was only when the sham claims of NBC weapons were comprehensively exposed as a pack of lies, that "regime change" suddenly became the retrospective casus belli. Imagine Hitler, Mussolini and Tojo employing this sort of retrospective justification for war back in the 1940s. Oh, I forgot, they were on the wrong side - that is, the unrighteous and unholy side - how silly of me!
So now, Team Neo-Con and its "intellectuals" hope that by repeating this sort of reverse deductive reasoning as often as they change their underpants, the public will forget the pack of lies peddled to justify prosecution of an illegal war. You know, back in the days of Nazi Germany, Hitler's propaganda minister, Joseph Goebbels, is reputed to have said that if one repeats a lie often enough, people will eventually come to accept it as the truth!
Krauthammer also says in his article,
"Americans flatter themselves that they are the root of all planetary evil."
Aside from insulting many decent fellow Americans who opposed the war from the start, Krauthammer has simply got it wrong.
It is the Neo-Cons who flattered themselves by thinking they could impose their brand of "Freedom and Democracy" (you know, the type that brought the world Abu Ghraib, the rape and murder of a teenage girl in Mahmudiya, the murder of a grandfather in Haditha) upon a culture founded on completely different traditions and values.
If it took America 230 years to evolve its brand of democracy, why would it take any less time for an apparently backward country rent by religious and tribal differences? How could people like William Kristol, Francis Fukuyama and Krauthammer, regarded as intellectual giants by that curious mutant branch of Republicanism called Neo-Conservatism, not understand something as obvious as this?
You see, the problem with these guys is very simple. They never have to put their necks where their mouths are, when they call for war to be waged across the globe. You can be sure that if these armchair warriors had to front up on the battlefield, they'd suddenly lose their neo-con courage. There's nothing like confronting the reality of being ventilated with bullets and shrapnel to cause armchair warriors to morph into instant pacifists!
Recalcitrant and unrepentant Neo-Cons should prove their brand of "patriotism," courage and unswerving faith in the moral correctness of their beliefs by volunteering to serve at the frontline in Iraq. Anything less must surely invoke derisive dismissal; aside from the fact that they are simply adding more methane to the Earth's long suffering atmosphere.
An article by Charles Krauthammer published in the Washington Post is an excellent case in point. Krauthammer (a deliciously ironic surname) is one of the key Neo-Con "intellectuals" who cheered the illegal and unprovoked invasion of Iraq. In his article, he says,
"Our objectives in Iraq were twofold and always simple: Depose Saddam Hussein and replace his murderous regime with a self-sustaining, democratic government."
Hold on a minute!
Before the invasion in March 2003, Big Dubya, Poodle Tony and Chi Hua-Hua John thumped their chests and told the world Saddam had NBC weapons which posed a clear and present danger to civilisation as we knew it then. In fact, Big Dubya and his then National Security Adviser, Condi Fried Rice, emphatically denied "regime change" was the agenda.
It was only when the sham claims of NBC weapons were comprehensively exposed as a pack of lies, that "regime change" suddenly became the retrospective casus belli. Imagine Hitler, Mussolini and Tojo employing this sort of retrospective justification for war back in the 1940s. Oh, I forgot, they were on the wrong side - that is, the unrighteous and unholy side - how silly of me!
So now, Team Neo-Con and its "intellectuals" hope that by repeating this sort of reverse deductive reasoning as often as they change their underpants, the public will forget the pack of lies peddled to justify prosecution of an illegal war. You know, back in the days of Nazi Germany, Hitler's propaganda minister, Joseph Goebbels, is reputed to have said that if one repeats a lie often enough, people will eventually come to accept it as the truth!
Krauthammer also says in his article,
"Americans flatter themselves that they are the root of all planetary evil."
Aside from insulting many decent fellow Americans who opposed the war from the start, Krauthammer has simply got it wrong.
It is the Neo-Cons who flattered themselves by thinking they could impose their brand of "Freedom and Democracy" (you know, the type that brought the world Abu Ghraib, the rape and murder of a teenage girl in Mahmudiya, the murder of a grandfather in Haditha) upon a culture founded on completely different traditions and values.
If it took America 230 years to evolve its brand of democracy, why would it take any less time for an apparently backward country rent by religious and tribal differences? How could people like William Kristol, Francis Fukuyama and Krauthammer, regarded as intellectual giants by that curious mutant branch of Republicanism called Neo-Conservatism, not understand something as obvious as this?
You see, the problem with these guys is very simple. They never have to put their necks where their mouths are, when they call for war to be waged across the globe. You can be sure that if these armchair warriors had to front up on the battlefield, they'd suddenly lose their neo-con courage. There's nothing like confronting the reality of being ventilated with bullets and shrapnel to cause armchair warriors to morph into instant pacifists!
Recalcitrant and unrepentant Neo-Cons should prove their brand of "patriotism," courage and unswerving faith in the moral correctness of their beliefs by volunteering to serve at the frontline in Iraq. Anything less must surely invoke derisive dismissal; aside from the fact that they are simply adding more methane to the Earth's long suffering atmosphere.
Labels: abu ghraib, condi rice, democracy, freedom, fukuyama, george bush, goebbels, hitler, john howard, krauthammer, kristol, nazi germany, neo-cons, neo-conservatives, neocons, saddam hussien, tony blair
03 August 2006
Terrorists and Freedom Fighters
Consider the following actions of a political organisation:
1. Attacking British military and police personnel
2. Bombing a hotel and killing 91; mostly civilians
3. Assassinating a British politican and peer
4. Murdering 99 civilians over a sample 4 month period
Would the George Bush, Tony Blair and John Howard regimes waste any time in designating it a terrorist organisation worthy of a free holiday in Guantanamo Bay or Abu Ghraib prisons? Would such a bunch of murderers earn Dubya's epithet as Islamic Fascists? You bet.
Would these terrorists deserve to be hunted down all over the world and when caught, brought before Dubya's military tribunals to be found guilty and executed? You bet - especially if you're a pure as the driven snow Neo-Con Christian Fascist!
Now, here's a little more detail behind each of the terrorist actions listed above.
1. A Jewish terrorist organisation called Irgun, killed numerous British military and police personnel from 1944 through 1948.
2. Irgun claimed responsibility for bombing the King David Hotel; causing the 91 deaths.
3. In 1944, Lord Moyne was assassinated in Cairo by Irgun's sister organisation, Lehi.
4. From April 1939 to July 1939, 99 civilians were shot dead or blown to bits by Irgun.
Yet today, when Hezbollah and Hamas are doing no more than emulating Irgun's business model, they stand condemned as terrorists and "unlawful" combatants by the US, UK and Israel. While Hezbollah's and Hamas' terrorist actions cannot be excused nor condoned, sadly, the hypocritical amnesia of the US, UK and Israel furnishes convenient cover to reduce Lebanon into rubble.
Now, if Winston Churchill (who was a friend of Lord Moyne) had remained in power after WW2, and had reduced Jewish held towns and villages in Palestine to rubble - in an effort to kill off Irgun (just as Israel justifies its actions in Lebanon now), would Condi Fried Rice have regarded this as no more than "birth pangs" of a new Israel? Hmm, somehow I think not!
Let's talk a bit more about Irgun. When it was most active against the British, Irgun was led by none other than Menachem Begin. It was Begin who ordered the bombing of the King David Hotel. Considering that such an act today would surely have earned him odium to perhaps the same level as that reserved for Osama bin Laden, Begin instead became the sixth Prime Minister of Israel while leader of the right wing Likud Party.
Under his watch, Begin charged Ariel Sharon with the task of greatly expanding Jewish settlements in the occupied terrorities - the cause of much enmity between Israelis and Palestinians for such a long time. Then in 1982, with Begin still as PM and Sharon as Defence minister, Israel embarked on the ill-advised invasion and occupation of Lebanon. It was during this invasion, that large numbers of Palestinian refugees were massacred in the Sabra and Shatila camps by Lebanese Christian militias allied with Israel.
So things aren't really as objective and balanced as the US, UK and Israel would have the world believe. In their fantasies, the "good guys" have a higher moral standing than the "bad guys". The high moral standing of the good guys allows them to commit war crimes directly or through proxies like Israel, against unarmed civilians; while dismissing the deaths as "birth pangs" of a new Lebanon. Yeah right. Some birth that's going to be in the rubble strewn country!
Yet the reality is that we in the west, not only failed to capture, try and execute an unlawful combatant and terrorist called Menachem Begin, we recognised him as the lawful prime minister of Israel. We compound our hypocrisy by green lighting the systematic destruction of a friendly and democratic Lebanon, all in the name of destroying Hezbollah; an organisation formed to protect Lebanese Shia Muslims during Israel's 1982 invasion of Lebanon.
The US, UK and Australia among others, lauded Menachem Begin as a Freedom Fighter but regard Sheik Hassan Nasrallah (present leader of Hezbollah) as a terrorist. One person's freedom fighter is another's terrorist. Moral hypocrisy founded on expedient values has no bounds in the White House, Downing Street and Kirribilli House, don't you think?
1. Attacking British military and police personnel
2. Bombing a hotel and killing 91; mostly civilians
3. Assassinating a British politican and peer
4. Murdering 99 civilians over a sample 4 month period
Would the George Bush, Tony Blair and John Howard regimes waste any time in designating it a terrorist organisation worthy of a free holiday in Guantanamo Bay or Abu Ghraib prisons? Would such a bunch of murderers earn Dubya's epithet as Islamic Fascists? You bet.
Would these terrorists deserve to be hunted down all over the world and when caught, brought before Dubya's military tribunals to be found guilty and executed? You bet - especially if you're a pure as the driven snow Neo-Con Christian Fascist!
Now, here's a little more detail behind each of the terrorist actions listed above.
1. A Jewish terrorist organisation called Irgun, killed numerous British military and police personnel from 1944 through 1948.
2. Irgun claimed responsibility for bombing the King David Hotel; causing the 91 deaths.
3. In 1944, Lord Moyne was assassinated in Cairo by Irgun's sister organisation, Lehi.
4. From April 1939 to July 1939, 99 civilians were shot dead or blown to bits by Irgun.
Yet today, when Hezbollah and Hamas are doing no more than emulating Irgun's business model, they stand condemned as terrorists and "unlawful" combatants by the US, UK and Israel. While Hezbollah's and Hamas' terrorist actions cannot be excused nor condoned, sadly, the hypocritical amnesia of the US, UK and Israel furnishes convenient cover to reduce Lebanon into rubble.
Now, if Winston Churchill (who was a friend of Lord Moyne) had remained in power after WW2, and had reduced Jewish held towns and villages in Palestine to rubble - in an effort to kill off Irgun (just as Israel justifies its actions in Lebanon now), would Condi Fried Rice have regarded this as no more than "birth pangs" of a new Israel? Hmm, somehow I think not!
Let's talk a bit more about Irgun. When it was most active against the British, Irgun was led by none other than Menachem Begin. It was Begin who ordered the bombing of the King David Hotel. Considering that such an act today would surely have earned him odium to perhaps the same level as that reserved for Osama bin Laden, Begin instead became the sixth Prime Minister of Israel while leader of the right wing Likud Party.
Under his watch, Begin charged Ariel Sharon with the task of greatly expanding Jewish settlements in the occupied terrorities - the cause of much enmity between Israelis and Palestinians for such a long time. Then in 1982, with Begin still as PM and Sharon as Defence minister, Israel embarked on the ill-advised invasion and occupation of Lebanon. It was during this invasion, that large numbers of Palestinian refugees were massacred in the Sabra and Shatila camps by Lebanese Christian militias allied with Israel.
So things aren't really as objective and balanced as the US, UK and Israel would have the world believe. In their fantasies, the "good guys" have a higher moral standing than the "bad guys". The high moral standing of the good guys allows them to commit war crimes directly or through proxies like Israel, against unarmed civilians; while dismissing the deaths as "birth pangs" of a new Lebanon. Yeah right. Some birth that's going to be in the rubble strewn country!
Yet the reality is that we in the west, not only failed to capture, try and execute an unlawful combatant and terrorist called Menachem Begin, we recognised him as the lawful prime minister of Israel. We compound our hypocrisy by green lighting the systematic destruction of a friendly and democratic Lebanon, all in the name of destroying Hezbollah; an organisation formed to protect Lebanese Shia Muslims during Israel's 1982 invasion of Lebanon.
The US, UK and Australia among others, lauded Menachem Begin as a Freedom Fighter but regard Sheik Hassan Nasrallah (present leader of Hezbollah) as a terrorist. One person's freedom fighter is another's terrorist. Moral hypocrisy founded on expedient values has no bounds in the White House, Downing Street and Kirribilli House, don't you think?
Labels: abu ghraib, ariel sharon, blair, bush, guantanamo, hamas, hezbollah, howard, irgun, islamic fascist, israel, king david hotel, lebanon, lehi, likud, menachem begin, osama bin laden, terrorist
