Tuesday, January 20, 2004

Israel's Guilty Conscience

Israel's leaders know that their actions are unjust, inhumane and indefensible; which is why the Israeli ambassador reacted so strongly to this pretty benign piece of artwork. Having torn down the light fixture and thrown it into the water the ambassador defended his actions saying " I could not have acted differently".

Then Ariel Sharon weighed into the furore with :
"We are witnessing the rise of anti-Semitism across the whole world and particularly in Europe where this phenomenon is taking on dangerous proportions ... Ambassador Mazel behaved exactly as he needed to,"

Firstly, aren't ambassadors meant to be diplomats? And just what is the definition of diplomacy? It certainly wasn't on display by the Israeli ambassador. This is just another case of Israel bullying the rest of the world because they don't have a logical argument.

Secondly, and yet again, Sharon has used the word anti-Semitism to evoke sympathy for past injustices, when in fact, in the modern world, people are not anti-Semite, they are anti-Israeli-establishment. And this can only be attritubted to the continued opression of the Palestian people by successive Israeli government. Let's not forget that Israel's own soldiers are now refusing to participate in death missions in growing numbers.

It's very convinent to have the war in Iraq now taking away pages in the local paper and tv news reports which used to concentrate on the ongoing struggle in the disputed territories. Now the news houses can conveniently "re-classify" the "middle eastern struggle" as an entirely different one. This cynical reader has decided that it makes it easier for Israel to get away with their brutal policies without closer world scrutiny.

An Unseen Evil

At times I think to myself that the significance of advances fought for, and won, by our predecessors are lost on today's Western populations. We forget very quickly in our air conditioned offices, cars and homes that we are the lucky few who reap the rewards of centuries of struggle.

A few centuries ago most of us were still subjugated largely to the rich few. Aristocracies have since felt the might of the people in all manner of ways. Industry grew out of technological advances and created a new kind of citizen : the consumer. Society seems not to have moved very far since then. Old systems lie in place to govern new and emerging power sources : the corporation. Pressure is brought to bear on governments by these resource en-riched conglomerates and there's no definable limit to their continual grab for more money and more power.

Corporations are mostly run for the sole purpose of making money grow. The short sightedness of vision on the part of our leaders .. and the corrupting influence of business agendas .. and everyone's undying support of capitalism ... means that democracy is just a rubber stamp to the misdeeds of the elite few.

Sunday, January 18, 2004

911 : Learn the Truth



Arnold the Destroyer

"Schwarzenegger budget to slash health and education in California" - An article posted on the World Socialist Web Site on 17 January 2004.

Outlining his budget proposal, Schwarzenegger made it clear that the poorest constituents will pay for the state's crippling debt. He has blamed spending on social programs for the crisis and proposes to cut budgets by $4.6 billion (plus additional cuts in education and child care programs)

Did you know

  • 6 million residents of California have no health insurance
  • 60 hospitals have shut in the last decade alone.
  • Administration officials admit that a further 110,000 residents will lose health insurance under the proposed cuts (including Medi-Cal and public health services)
  • Welfare for mothers with dependent children will lose $790 million
  • the list of services goes on and on

It's really well worth reading this article right down to the "Roots of the crisis" section. Arnie blames the crisis on Gray Davis's spending on social programs but this is patently false.
"Schwarzenegger and the California Republicans explicitly reject raising taxes on the wealthy to address the budget shortfall. While the budget imposes some $239 million in new fees on hundreds of thousands of students, handicapped people and other ordinary Californians, the governor specifically rejected any tax increases on those making $250,000 a year and more, saying he “despises” tax increases. (Not surprisingly, a statewide poll conducted by the Public Policy Institute of California earlier this week showed 71 percent of Californians would support a tax hike on the rich instead of budget reductions)."