I have to admit Kannu that I didn't know much about Balfour. His main claim to fame for me was the Balfour declaration where it states that the government of United Kingdom looks upon with favour the establishment of a state for Jews in Palestine. Not one of our country's finest hours I'm afraid. This was done around the time of the world war 1 where we were rampantly making promises and playing around with imperialism to the nth degree. Truly horrendous behaviour. What you see in the Middle East today can be drawn directly to the stupid moronic steps we took there son. And that's why I hate foreign interventions. Look at this. Interventions a hundred years back are making my children unsafe. So by stopping interventions, I can make my great great grandchildren safe. Long term son. People don't think long term.
Anyway, that was the history behind the Balfour declaration. But this note actually brought the man alive. He seems to be a ferociously brilliant man with a philosophical bent. I didn't realise his intellectual powers.
Now there's a man to emulate. Whilst I'm not going to say he's a polymath, but still to be so amazing in government, diplomacy and academics is very impressive.
Btw you didn't tell me when you want me to pick you up son on Thursday?
Love
Baba
Jot101: A. J. Balfour
http://www.jot101.com/2015/06/a-j-balfour.html
(via Instapaper)
A good piece from the papers of *L.R. Reeve on A.J. Balfour, as a former U.K. Prime Minister he is the highest ranking subject so far (along with Lloyd George.) As usual Reeve is good on his subject's voice and oratorical skills. Reeve's frequent presence at congresses and symposiums of 'leaders of thought' shows him as an almost Zelig-like figure...He ends on a joke, that if not true, ought to be.
Despite his deceptively ornamental appearance, the late Earl Balfour was a worker. Although his attractive manner was unperturbed and casual, he must have experienced periods of unremitting labour through many months; otherwise he could never have written so many theses and philosophical books, added to political publications, parliamentary labours, constituency engagements and university visits.
His career as a statesman, philosopher and eminent speaker, is too well known to need emphasizing in great detail, but a few outstanding phenomena regarding his life should never be forgotten.
In appearance he was probably the most aristocratic representative of his period, and was the greatest asset to the perpetuators of the class system. When in his seventieth year he was the leader of a mission to America in 1917, he was one of the most popular visitors England could have sent at any time, because he increased our prestige and disarmed criticism. I mention "perpetuators". Let me make it clear I am not suggesting that Balfour was a determined fighter to maintain the contemporary status quo. He seemed to be fully aware that in this world of fluctuations, there must be modifications of the class system, and an acknowledgement that injustices should be eliminated until the rights of all people are recognized.
At one time he was Chancellor of his old university Cambridge. At Trinity College, he was as much at home among professors and dons, as he was in the House of Commons, or a stately mansion. Due to the success of his books on philosophy and politics, he was a most respected figure in the assemblies of learned men. During this phase in his life, less is known about his perfect control of a symposium among leaders of thought. His chairmanship on these occasions was masterly; and possibly his most finished activities in the chair were shown during an international congress of Philosophy at Oxford where at one meeting there was a discussion on Relativity. There I witnessed two unexpected aspects of his personality, the first was his voice. I anticipated a drawl and a Cambridge accent, but on the contrary there was no drawl; certainly an educated, but a robust, decisive voice and manner with no vocal legacy from his university; and I expected a somewhat diffident method of control. Instead, after four days I felt he ought to write an instructive volume on "How to be a Chairman". We all remember congresses and summer schools where sessions have been spoilt by ineffective people in charge. Balfour showed that he had learned aptitudes besides statesmanship, philosophy; authorship and the art of conversation.
Possibly one minor fault during his control at this congress, was when Henri Bergson, the great French philosopher, rose from among the audience to give a short contribution of about five minutes. Bergson looked around and asked in impeccable English, "Shall I speak in English?" As nobody answered he addressed us in French. A pity, for I am sure only a minority understood his language. Balfour should have asked for our native tongue; but I wish now that I had thought to do so.
It is unnecessary to dwell too much on such an intellectually intoxicating congress, but an event on the Sunday afternoon is worthy of mention. It was during an exceedingly vigorous discussion on Morality and Religion. Was a code possible without a belief? The arguments were heated but healthy, and I was particularly interested when Welldon Carr, an extremely attractive-looking man, jumped up.
"When you ask whether Morality is possible apart from Religion I just don't know what you mean:" He quickly sat down, but from the smiles and affirmative nods Carr was probably voicing the opinion of many. When Balfour summed up he gave us his own personal view:
"Of course Morality is possible without Religion; but it would be the harvest of a very impoverished soil." I can never recall his exact words, but he also stated:
"Morality occurs when two Ultimate Ends clash. " It is clear that one cannot delve into all Lord Balfour's many triumphs during his long life, but two major events always command my greatest deference; for each successful result was a justification of his leadership in national affairs. In 1886, when his uncle Lord Salisbury, made him secretary for Ireland, the Irish Nationalists received the appointment with contempt, but before very long the contempt gradually developed into an unwilling respect for one of the most courageous statesmen of his time, who turned one of the most turbulent periods in Irish administration into stability, and defeated the Plan of Campaign. Repeatedly his courage and audacity in Ireland itself won the admiration of friend and foe alike.
The second great achievement was his leadership of the mission to America in 1917. Here a psychologist was needed and was found. Few people know that he was at one time president of the National Institute of Industrial Psychology. His knowledge of human nature was so extensive that Americans took him to their hearts and paid him the unusual compliment of inviting him to address the House of Representatives. His speech was probably faultless, for on great occasions his approach was robust, decisive and logical, and I can think of no man of his generation better able to secure regular, vital co-operation between America and Britain.
Having mentioned one presidential office, may be an opportune moment to look at one or two other major appointments. He was a Fellow of the Royal Society; he became president of the British Association for the Advancement of Science; and as for his crowning glory as Prime Minister of Great Britain he is among the immortals of modern times: such as Disraeli, Gladstone, Asquith and Lloyd George. Macmillan and Wilson are unassailable at the present time. We may know the historian's verdict on their contributions to mankind in another half-century.
An aristocratic and public school background did not prevent Balfour being a good mixer, and he did not believe that the inhabitants of castles are the only ones born to lead. With his great knowledge of philosophy how would he but respect those outstanding philosophers born of low degree from whose books he learned so much. In Trinity College alone, most of the paintings of great men who look down from the walls were born in modest homes. Newton's widowed mother kept a farm; Porson's father was a Norfolk saddler; the great Richard Bentley was self-taught; and from my slight knowledge of great continental thinkers I know many outstanding minds emerged from humble surroundings. Balfour must have quickly realized that in parliament one finds some of Britain's greatest intellects. He certainly appreciated the intelligence of one great Welshman. I trust the story is not apocryphal, for I have read that during his last illness, when informed that the end was near and asked whether he would like a visit from anyone outside the family and household, he expressed a wish to see Lloyd George. Great learning does break down the social barriers of society.
I doubt whether he knew the number of his honorary degrees, graduates' gowns and decorations, but probably he was unusually gratified to be awarded the Order of Merit; and of the many parts he played, I have heard of his captaincy of a golf club, enjoying many holes at beautiful Sheringham, Norfolk; of tennis in his seventies, and of his musical achievements.
His was a long life of varied political experiences; a life of infinite variety which encountered the vicissitudes of outrageous fortune known to most of us. He never hesitated to accept an opportunity to learn of some unusual phase of human experience. I believe it is true that on one occasion he sat with one or two acquaintances in a certain London club which was under the scrutiny of the police. Although suspicion was unwarranted, an officer and several constables entered the premises. The inspector asked one of the group.
"Who are you?"
"Home Secretary," was the unexpected response. The interrogator turned to another:
"I suppose you are the Prime Minister?"
"As a matter of fact I am," replied Mr Balfour.
* The papers of the long defunct literary agency Michael Hayes of Cromwell Road S.W.5 - parts of a manuscript memoir by one L.R. Reeve of Newton Abbot, South Devon. Mr Reeve was attempting to get the book (Among those Present: Very Exceptional People) published, but on the evidence of the unused stamp Hayes never replied and L. R. Reeve published the book himself through the esteemed vanity publisher Stockwell two years later in 1974.
L R Reeve had, in a long life, met or observed a remarkable selection of famous persons. He presents 'vignettes' of 110 persons from all grades of society (many minor or even unknown) they include Winston Churchill, Dorothy Sayers, H H Asquith, John Buchan, the cricketer Jack Hobbs, J.B. Priestley, H.G. Wells, Marconi, E.M. Forster, Duchess of Atholl, Marie Stopes, Oliver Lodge and Cecil Sharp -- 'it is unnecessary to explain that many have known have not known me. All of them I have seen, most of them I have heard, and some of them have sought information, even advice from me." Reeve states that the unifying qualification all these people have is '… some subtle emanation of personality we call leadership, and which can inspire people to actions unlikely to be undertaken unless prompted by a stronger will."
Reeve was a teacher throughout his life and deputy head of 3 London schools, headmaster of Loughborough emergency schools, ex-president of London Class Teachers Association and very early member of the British Psychological Society (55 years)... I calculate he was probably born in about 1900. His style is markedly unexciting but he has much information unavailable elsewhere.. He sent several typed manuscripts to (from the smell) the chain-smoking agent Hayes…
What a man!
Some excerpts:
Modern war is war of penetration in almost all its phases. This may be of two types. Tactical or strategic. Penetration is tactical where armed forces carrying it out are directly supported by the operations of the main armies. It is strategic when no such support is possible. That is when a penetration group is living and operating 100 miles or more in front of its own armies. Of the two types long range penetration pays by far the larger dividends on the forces employed. These forces operating with small columns are able, wherever a friendly population exists, to live and move under the enemies ribs and thus to deliver fatal blows at his military organisation by attacking vital objectives which he is unable to defend from such attacks. In the past such warfare has been impossible owing to the fact that control over such columns, indispensable both for their safety and their effectual use, was not possible until the age of the easily portable wireless set. Further the supply of certain indispensable materials such as ammunition, petrol, wireless sets and spare parts is impossible until the appearance of communications aircraft.
nice one, i like this and am going to use it in my sales organisation 
This leadership quote is brilliant as well
Quite a lesson there isn't there. Here is a man who says to his men, "I am going to do the best for you. I am going to make sure that everything that you want you get. I am going to make sure that you are battle hardened. I am going to make sure that you are fully equipped and trained to take on the Japanese, and then we are going to defeat them, and I am going to make sure that you do it because I am going to do it as well".
nice one, I only wish I can say that….
No wonder these people are so stubborn.
Here is an extract from the Economist. heh. fascinating. Did you know Saladin was Kurdish as well? I didn't. For those who might be interested, he defeated the crusaders and founded his own dynasty. Fascinating story and amusing as well. He was forgotten in Arab lands till the West resurrected him for its own ends, and then the Arabs took to him with gusto. As it so happens, the Eagle of Saladin has been adopted by Egypt, Yemen, Palestine and for some very strange reason UAE and Yemen (there is no connection, lol). But they are stubborn. But one day I have to go to Damascus…its on my list, far too many interesting connections there with history.
heh.
Military Communiqué
Al Qassam Brigades mourns the death of the mujahed Eyad Barhoum
As Al Aqsa Intifada against the occupation assault on the Gaza Strip continues, Ezzeddeen Al-Qassam Brigades has its best men to be in the playground of death to defend their people from any attack by the enemy ... Today, Al-Qassam Brigades mourn the death of the Mujahed:
Eyad Juma'a Barhoum [39 years old]
Yibna neighborhood – Rafah City
The mujahid Eyad was martyred of heart disease in Egypt. He was martyred at dawn on Wednesday September 26th, 2012. He was martyred after a long bright path of jihad, hard work, struggle and sacrifice.
Al Qassam Brigades mourn the death of the Mujahed, reaffirms the commitment and determination to continue the resistance against the belligerent occupation forces.
Finally, may Allah (swt) accept him and his blessed efforts for the path of Jihad and may Allah grant his family patience and solace for his lose.
"To God we belong and to him we shall return."
Ezzeddeen Al-Qassam Brigades
Information Office
September 26th, 2012
I thought you can only be a martyr if you die in action? like killing innocents? Or fellow Muslims? or in some remote cases, actually fighting? But no, if you pop off having a heart attack while shagging a bird, then you can also be a martyr..
how amusing
btw, what happens to the virgins in Heaven? Do they still get allocated to heart attack martyrs? Or is a lesser allocation given? How about if you are called as a martyr but die in a car accident? I am sure when the houris talk to each other after the bonkathon, they must be complaining about how any odd sod riff raff appear and want their services.
I am sure there must be a pecking order. Actual war, you get 72 of the birds, blow up some innocents, you get 32, blow yourself up while making a bomb, you get a safety manual, die of a heart attack or car accident, you share some unwanted sheep? or something?
I loved this and I am going to quote this in full. It is my firm belief that as soon as people start talking about Israel, their brains dribble out of their bottoms (myself included). That’s why I have stopped talking about Palestine and Israel. You see somebody facebooking or emailing about Palestine and Israel and you want to respond? and you immediately should think about how the next few relevant minutes will never return to you in any shape or form in productive use. Plus usually these people are idiots. See below.
From Egypt Independent:
Anonymous gunmen attacked the Rayesa checkpoint outside Arish in Sinai on Friday morning, the 34th such attack in the last 19 months.Checkpoints? You mean, where the military checks to make sure that people aren't transporting weapons and explosives?
Security forces exchanged fire with the assailants, who fled. There were no injuries.
The troops combed the surrounding areas, in addition to inspecting the passing cars and questioning their occupants.
Rayesa checkpoint has been attacked 34 times since the beginning of the 25 January revolution, most recently on 31 August.
The checkpoint is located on the international road leading to Rafah at the east entrance of Arish. It is manned by joint forces of the police and Armed Forces.
A number of checkpoints in Sinai were targeted in August. Egyptian authorities have speculated that radical groups are behind these attacks.
Checkpoints: A Violation of Human RightsSee? I knew that human rights activists were against all checkpoints, everywhere.
Sky McLaughlin
...The very concept of the checkpoint itself stands in gross violation of the human rights of the people. Each human being should be guaranteed the right to emotional and psychological health and security. However the symbolism of these checkpoints has severe psychological repercussions on the people. The implication is that citizens are entirely too dangerous and evil to be allowed the freedom of movement in their own country, or their neighbour’s. The damaging impacts on the psyche, not to mention self-esteem, particularly of young people, are tremendous.
Freedom of movement and the right to physical safety are just two of the fundamental human rights violated by the checkpoints. People are not free to travel from region to region in their own country, and this has far-reaching effects on the relations of the family. Families are split and divided, and cannot join together to provide emotional support and comfort during this time of tragedy and suffering. Fear has become a permanent part of their psyche, as they constantly worry about the time when there may be an emergency in their family, whom they cannot reach in time.
First you create a society that strictly segregates women from men. The idea that women can interface with men is so shocking that they have men selling undies to women. Then finally somebody with one working brain cell figures out that this isn't working. So what do they do? They forbid any man from selling to women. And given that this blithering society forces women into nursing, teaching or stuck within the 4 walls of their home, 28,000 women line up to take up sales jobs.
Then the ministry hires hundreds of inspectors. The stores have to hire male security guards to ensure that only women go into the store. heh. So now we have male inspectors and male security guards checking lingerie shops. Talk about stupidity piling on top of stupidity. I love these guys, its like a whole country fit for a Darwin award. And the best part is that their ideology and philosophy is spreading. More More, we need more of this.
Read this story for the background details.
While in another part of this wonderful world, the government has run a series of campaigns targeting fortune tellers, mannequins and cigarette vendors. I quote:
Police sources told …142 fortune tellers were forced to sign an agreement at the Ministry of Interior pledging that they would not practice their craft. As well as predicting the future, fortune tellers sell amulets for protection and are sometimes called on to solve personal or family problems.
Heh, I betcha they didnt predict that, eh?
And strangely enough,
owners of taxi firms have been warned not to allow any former security officers to work as drivers, police officers said.
Eh? why? what?
I just love reading these kinds of news item. WTF or Facepalm doesnt do justice, its just sitting back and watching this parade of idiocy pass you by while you crack peanuts and throw at these muppets.
I wrote about Assyrians before in an essay. Got some comments there as well. I suggest you might want to read that first if interested in the background to this fascinating community.
Was reminded of this when I read this. The Kurds, however much sympathy I have for them, are frankly a bunch of nincompoops. They should know how they have been treated and one would have expected the Kurds to welcome minorities, but no, they are behaving in the same barbaric manner as Saddam Hussein and other barbarians did in Iran, Turkey, Syria and Iraq. I quote:
Inspired by the violent exhortations of a preacher during Friday prayers earlier this month, hundreds of young Kurdish men in the northern Iraqi town of Zakho went on a riot. Over four days, they set dozens of liquor stores alight, later threatening proprietors with further violence if they dared reopen their businesses. They also attacked an Assyrian church and homes in the neighbouring village of Mansouriyah and destroyed property including four hotels, a health club and an Assyrian social club in Dohuk.
The victims were Assyrians – an ethnically and linguistically discrete people also known as Chaldeans or Syriacs according to denomination – and Yazidis, members of two ancient communities who, like all the vulnerable elements of Iraqi society, have suffered disproportionately in the aftermath of the war.
The staggering upheaval and violence faced by Assyrians has led to a drop in their numbers from at least 800,000 in 2003 to 400,000 today. They represent 35% of Iraqi refugees since the war, as well as an enormous number of Iraq's internally displaced persons.
The sheer ethnic cleansing of Christians from much of what’s the Muslim nations is not mentioned politely but the numbers do not lie. In every country, you will see this happening. Palestine, Egypt, Lebanon, Iraq, Jordan, Iran, etc. etc. Maybe India should offer these Assyrians a refuge, India has a long history of offering refuge to people from the Middle East. If these nincompoops want to kick out their most productive, educated and intelligent lot, then hey, India could help no?
The sad thing is, this pressure on minorities is not going to cease once the Christians have left. These people are cannibals, they devour their own. Once they don't have the Assyrians to go after, they will go after the Druze, the Kurds, the other minorities. When they are gone, they will go after the minority Islamic sects such as the Shia. Oh! I am sorry, they are already doing that (Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan etc.), their behaviour towards the other minorities such as women, gays and the like is already well known. And the Arab Spring has already brought forward the Salafis to the fore.
I welcome this step actually. This Islamism and basic illiberal thought is a boil in the body of Muslims. This shouldn't be lanced before it has gotten seriously ripe and the infection has run its course. So yes, I welcome the Brotherhood and the Islamist Parties taking power and trying to rule their countries with their perverted and bizarre philosophy. Let people know what they are asking for. Let them live in that pressure cooker of religious fanatics and then know that religion is NOT an answer. At this moment, if you go to a cook in a town or a farmer in a village, they will bang their chest and say Islam is the answer because their neighbourhood Mullah has said so (see above on how the pogrom happened).
Iran provides a classic example. See how a bunch of religious morons can drive their country into a ever restrictive circle of hell (Israel provides another example). But rest of the religious sheep need to understand that religion is about you and God. Not about you and the State. When you allow religion to rule your state, then you end up taking the logical step and kicking out or killing everybody who doesn't follow an increasingly narrow interpretation.
You can see when you take the argument ad absurdum infinitum. There will be one man standing in a field filled with empty houses and dead bodies proudly claiming that they have removed all impurity from his society.
Bah!
So what is the relationship between the support for terrorism in public opinion and the relationship with terrorist attacks? Guess what these researchers found?
We find that justification in public opinion for suicide terrorism increases terror attacks on people in countries that are unfavorably regarded. There is a robust positive relationship between the share of the population in a country that at the same time justifies suicide bombings and has an unfavorable opinion of another country, and terrorism originating from the former country.
In other words, there is statistically significant evidence that public opinion does encourage terrorism. In a way, this is a d’oh statement. Terrorism thrives on the oxygen of publicity and then there are various assorted morons and idiots who will support terror as a way to punish other countries. What they do not understand (well, not surprising because its usually religious nutters and other ideologically screwed up people who do this) is that terrorism usually devours them.
So what do people from s Bangladesh, Egypt, Ethiopia, Kuwait, Malaysia, Morocco, Senegal, Tanzania, Mali, Jordan, Lebanon, Indonesia, Turkey, Pakistan, Palestine and Nigeria respond to the PEW survey question?
Some people think that suicide bombing and other forms of violence against civilian targets
are justified in order to defend Islam from its enemies. Other people believe that, no matter
what the reason, this kind of violence is never justified. Do you personally feel that this kind
of violence is often justified to defend Islam, sometimes justified, rarely justified, or never
justified?
On average 23% justified suicide terrorism, with a minimum of 8% support and an astonishingly high 70% maximum support. Highest was in Palestine, Nigeria and Mali, Lowest up was in Egypt, Pakistan and Indonesia. Surprising eh? Palestine I can understand, but Nigeria, Mali, Egypt, Pakistan and Indonesia? The last 3 countries are like factories for terrorists. Some other facets, Nigerian Women were showing more support for suicide bombing compared to men. Here’s the graph
There was another question which was asked, about which countries are most unfavourable to the respondents. Some of the results for the most unfavourable and least unfavourable are amazing and bewildering.
So Bangladesh actually has the lowest unfavourable opinion towards India! and highest towards USA. And what on earth is happening in Ethiopia with least Japan and high Iran? USA seems to be the most hated country across these muslim nations. Extraordinary but what is worrying is the extraordinarily high level of support for suicide bombing and terrorism in all these countries. The next time somebody says that terrorist support in Muslim countries relate only to a very small minority, do ask about the definition of a very small minority because a minority which ranges from 8-70% with an average of 23% aint such a small minority by any stretch of imagination.
What is more interesting about this analysis is not the counter factual history itself but who writes it and where it was published. Gobsmacking.
I quote:
Since 1948, if an Arab politician wanted to be the hero and the leader of the Arab world, then he has a very easy way to do it. He just shouts as loud as he can about the intention to destroy Israel, without mobilizing one soldier (Talk is cheap).The Palestinian misery was also used to topple another stable monarchy, this time in Iraq and replacing it with a bloody dictatorship in one of the richest countries of the world. Iraq is rich in minerals, water reserves, fertile land and archaeological sites. The military led by Abdul Karim Qassim killed King Faisal II and his family. Bloodshed in Iraq continued and this Arab country has seen more violent revolutions and one of them was carried out in the 1960s by a brigade that was sent to help liberate Palestine. Instead it made a turn and went back and took over Baghdad. Even years later, Saddam Hussien said that he will liberate Jerusalem via Kuwait. He used Palestinians misery as an excuse to invade Kuwait.
There were other military coups in the Arab world such as Syria, Yemen and the Sudan. And each one of them used Palestine as their reason for such acts. The Egyptian regime of Jamal Abdul Nasser used to call the Arab Gulf states backward states and he tried to topple the governments of these Gulf states by using his media and his military forces. He even attacked southern borders of Saudi Arabia using his air force bases in Yemen.
Even a non-Arab country (Iran) used Palestine to divert the minds of their people from internal unrest. I remember Ayatollah Khomeini declaring that he would liberate Jerusalem via Baghdad and President Ahmadinejad making bellicose statements about Israel, though not even a single fire cracker was fired from Iran toward Israel.
Published in the Arab News by —Abdulateef Al-Mulhim, is Commodore (Retd.), Royal Saudi Navy. He is based in Alkhobar, Saudi Arabia,
I received this note in an email:
Israel firms look for opportunities in Gujarat
A business delegation from Israel is exploring opportunities for tie-ups with agro-business entrepreneurs in Gujarat, an official said on Wednesday.
According to Gujarat Agro-industries Corporation Managing Director D Thara, a 30-member delegation representing, among others, 17 companies of Israel is currently on a visit to the state to explore the possibility of business tie-ups in the fields of agriculture, horticulture, dairy sector and irrigation.
"We have given them a list of entrepreneurs with whom they can interact," Thara said.
Leader of the delegation Yitzhak Kiriati said: "There is considerable similarity between Gujarat and Israel in terms of agro-zones and water scarcity."
The delegation represents companies with business interests in sectors like water management and drip irrigation, agro-feed, dairy, fisheries, greenhouse, seeds and storage facility.
Israel's consul general in Mumbai Orna Sagiv, who was present at a conference in Ahmedabad Tuesday said that her country was looking for tie-up opportunities with Indian companies in their area of agricultural excellence.
The Gujarat government gave a presentation where it put forward its objective of doubling its irrigated cropped area from the present 3.1 million hectare of a total cropped area of 10.6 million hectare.
So I replied:
that's good news, these firms have some excellent intellectual property, technology and know-how that our people can do with, we should open up even more to these firms. can do nothing but improve our farmers, citizens and and and.
I got a comment saying that Israeli persecutes and does land grabbing, so the trade off is not justified. And my response was:
Well, I suppose it matters if one draws an equivalence between people who just happened to have the same passport. In other words, you are saying that every Israeli firm and person is jointly responsible for the persecutions carried out by Israel, yes?
if that is indeed the case, one will not deal with Thailand, Indonesia, China, Australia, US, Saudi Arabia, UK, etc. etc. which have been accused of the same kind of persecutions or landgrabbing or both. We see the same logic when people draw an equivalence between people who just happen to share religions. I dont think I will like it if somebody tells me that I am not going to be given a job because I happen to share the same sex, religion or nationality as some country, group or religion somewhere. There is a reason why collective punishment is wrong.
For that matter, we are, at this moment, using not less than 2-3 Israeli inventions or discoveries or patents or technologies in the areas of high-tech, biotechnology, medical devices, irrigation etc.. If one is using a mobile phone, using a computer, the internet, etc. etc. then the chances are that one is using Israeli tech. Obviously one has made the judgement call that its worth using Israeli tech :)
We use Israeli technology when it comes to saving the lives of our jawans. The amount of help, tech, knowledge and knowhow that our indian military forces have received from Israeli is massive. So many lives have already been saved. Israeli technology has been used extensively in our communications networks, our medical infrastructure, our research and development infrastructure, and so on and so forth.
So I guess what I am saying is that the question of trade off just does not exist :) The Israeli companies, just like the British, Thai, Chinese, Australian etc. companies all come to trade, we welcome them and we trade right back. :)
Its frankly very amusing how people go all narrow eyed and tunnel vision when it comes to blaming Israel. The fact that the moral equivalence they draw is frankly illogical is besides the point. And you see this time and time again, specially with Israel. And pretty much because every other country, group or religion is excluded, this behaviour is very frequently driven by anti semitism. Simple way to test it, take 100 people who have expressed anti Israeli thoughts, find out where they have exhibited similar thoughts for another country. The vast majority will not have done so for another country. Investigating deeper, you will find that the only difference is that the country is Jewish, hence the anti semitic accusation sticks.
#usefulidiots.
Good!. I quote:
As the UN General Assembly prepares to debate a proposal calling for nations to take action against the defamation of religion, majorities in 13 of 20 nations polled around the world support the right to criticize a religion.
On average, across all countries polled, 57% of respondents agree that "people should be allowed to publicly criticize a religion because people should have freedom of speech." However, an average of 34% of respondents agree that governments "should have the right to fine or imprison people who publicly criticize a religion because such criticism could defame the religion."
The issue of whether freedom of speech should extend to discussions of religion has stirred considerable controversy in recent months. The Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), a group of 56 Muslim nations, is championing a proposed U.N. resolution that calls on all nations of the world "to effectively combat defamation of all religions and incitement to religious hatred in general and against Islam and Muslims in particular."
And who were the dissenters? The typical idiot lot.
Of the seven nations where most people agree with that criticism of religion should be prohibited five have overwhelmingly Muslim populations -- Egypt (71%), Pakistan (62%), Iraq (57%), Indonesia (49%), and the Palestinian territories (51%). Another two -- India (59%) and Nigeria (54%)-- have historically been plagued by sectarian violence.
The United Nations passed one of the finest documents in human history, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. That was its finest hour. If the United Nations now passes this defamation of religion crap, then it will show that idiots are now running the asylum. Freedom of speech is paramount. I can understand India and Nigeria objecting, they have a bunch of howling rage boys and most of the idiots who riot are basically barbarians who haven't evolved from pond life. But they still have hope. But religiously mandated defamation of religion? Good Lord (pun intended), get a grip you idiots.
I think that boycott’s are a stupid idea and they simply do not work. As soon as anybody talks to me about boycotts or I read about it, all kinds of flags go up signifying that the thinking behind the idea is rather patchy and its an emotional response. I move away quietly then.
Here’s a report on how Israel is coping with this. I quote:
On the face of it, the make-up of the Israeli economy should indeed render it acutely vulnerable to boycotts and divestment campaigns. More than most other countries, Israel relies on exports – which account for about 40 per cent of gross domestic product – to fuel economic growth and jobs. The country’s much-admired technology and software industry, meanwhile, is heavily dependent on venture capital funding from abroad, in particular the US.
Yet experts argue that looking at Israel’s reliance on foreign buyers, suppliers and financiers alone is not enough. “Yes, you can boycott Israeli oranges and dates. But what Israel is really good at is providing inputs into other products. That means if you want to boycott Israeli goods, you have to boycott computers and cellphones altogether,” says Dan Catarivas, the director of foreign trade at the Israeli Manufacturers’ Association.
That view is shared by Leonardo Leiderman, an economics professor and the chief economist at Bank Hapoalim, Israel’s biggest lender: “People are not really paying that much attention [to political criticism]. The number of delegations coming here from abroad, whether related to high-tech or the stock market or financial services, is quite amazing.”
And now OECD has invited Israel to join it. Go figure.
And just as I wrote this, I came across this link. Found it funny, lol, there is some paint dripping down her jumper, lol.
Also, read what Amitav Ghosh writes when some anti Israeli rage boys talked about him rejecting the Dan David Prize. He also thinks that boycotts are silly and he doesnt believe in them. And as typical, these people who ask for boycotts are mainly interested in sound arguments, just sound.
Now here’s an interesting item which caught my eye. I knew the history of Jesus of Nazareth where he grew up, but my mental image of Nazareth was always what was illustrated in Nativity Plays, Bible books, paintings and such like. Very clean, idealised village which would not be out of place in modern day Britain. Here’s an example:
here’s another painting, Nazareth by William Gale.
Anyway, you get the idea. But then this announcement popped up. I quote:
The remains of a small house that can be dated back to the time of Jesus have been found in the past days during excavation works in progress in Nazareth, guided by a team of Israeli archaeologists. According to the scientists, this is the first house from that era ever uncovered. "The building that we found is small and modest and it is most likely typical of the dwellings in Nazareth in that period," the archaeologist added, suggesting that "Jesus and his childhood friends may have known this house".
Click on this site and this to see 2 photographs of the currently excavated site which shows the foundations of the house and the walls. The hamlet, unlike what has been portrayed in the paintings and books, was a dirt poor tiny hamlet of not more than 50 families. Interestingly enough, the archaeologists have found a water harvesting system on the roof. What a change and as the LA Times says:
…not far from the spot where the Archangel Gabriel is said to have revealed to Mary that she would give birth to the boy. Today the ornate Basilica of the Annunciation marks that spot, and Nazareth is the largest Arab city in northern Israel, with about 65,000 residents. Muslims now outnumber Christians 2 to 1 in the noisy, crowded city. The archaeological find shows how different it was 2,000 years ago: Christianity and Islam did not yet exist; the Jewish Temple stood in Jerusalem; and tiny Nazareth was near a battleground between Roman rulers and Jewish guerrillas….
There is obviously no Jewish presence now, the number of Christians is dropping precipitously in Palestine and the Jewish state is busy having fun with the Muslims. The archaeologists also found a hidden entrance to a grotto which could have been used by the Jews to escape from the Romans. And Palestine now has underground tunnels to smuggle people and goods in and out of Palestine. In certain cases, not much has changed now has it? And what also surprised me was that nobody has done any politicking on this yet as archaeology in the holy land is inextricably linked with politics down history.
But what has changed is the image of Nazareth in my mind. Instead of the bucolic, green and peaceful town that was imprinted in my mind, it has now converted into a parched, drought ridden, desperately poor, quite dirty, fearful tiny little village of no importance back then. Merry Christmas everybody.
So we have the United Nations, supposedly the saviour of all the refugees all over the world, being upset with the Sri Lankans about the Tamil Refugee Camp. It says that it cannot indefinitely fund the refugee camp. On the other hand, the UNRWA camps have been running merrily for 60 years now. Whether the fault lies with the donor countries or with that giant bureaucracy called as United Nations is an argument for another time, but no doubt that some refugees are more worthy of help compared to others, no? Mind you, some people like keeping the Palestinians as refugees, but that’s another argument.
Also see this data table, quite an interesting way of looking at how refugee populations have shifted and moved around.
nice equality there, old chap.
A very interesting paper indeed. I quote:
Recent Al Qaeda threats and related jihadi propaganda potentially herald a new weapon in the terrorist arsenal: the deliberate setting of forest fires and other conflagrations both to terrorize society and wreck untold economic damage. Beyond the immense, new burdens that would be placed on emergency response personnel, these fires could also create grave environmental crises causing severe pollution from gases escaping into the atmosphere. The strategy of “Forest Jihad,” now being championed by Al Qaeda strategists, is supported and justified theologically by radical Islamic scholars. With this new weapon, the terrorists believe, maximum physical and financial damage can be inflicted to targeted countries at comparatively little risk.
The paper was an eye opener for me. I didn't realise the sheer prevalence of using forest fires as a terrorist weapon. Over the 2 decades in Palestine/Israel, terrorism driven arson in the forest area was quite prevalent. Here’s the message posted as an example:
I quote
English translation of the statement:
“summer has begun so do not forget the Forest Jihad.”
“In the name of God, the Gracious, the Merciful.”
“We pray for God to aid us and heed our calls.”
“Summer has begun so do not forget the Forest Jihad.”
“I call on all Muslims in the United States, in Europe, in Russia,
and in Australia to start forest fires.”
“Praise God and praise God once more.”
“Peace and blessings upon his prophet.”
“The active intellectual scholar, the jihadist Abu Mus'ab Al-Suri, may God set him free, says: Jihad is an art just like poetry, music, and the fine arts. There are people that draw and there are others that are jihadists. They both act upon inspiration.”
“May God ease his calamity and set him free along with all of our imprisoned brothers. It is by the glory of God that his imprisonment has not prevented him from publishing his writings in the form of books and media. The idea of forest fires is attributed to him, may God set him free, as is in this short clip:”
“This call goes out to Muslims in Europe, in the United States, in Australia,
and in Russia to start forest fires.”
“Forest Fires.”
“The Jurisprudence of forest fires, as in 'an eye for an eye'; the amazing results;
and the operational instructions.”
“The Jurisprudence:
Is it permissible to burn trees?”
“Yes, under certain circumstance, such as when the prophet, PBUH
[peace be upon him], burned the Jews' palm trees in Al-Nadir.”
“Ibn Al-Qayyim narrated in [a book entitled] 'I'lam Al-Muwaqqa'in,' that: You should retaliate in the same manner as that in, which you were attacked. He goes on to say that: The punishment for a sin should be a similar sin. He also mentions that: If you should punish, punish as you were punished. This, in essence, justifies that. This suggests that the punishment should fit the crime, for instance in life, in matters of honor, and where assets are involved. Scholars have justified chopping down and burning the infidels' forests when they do the same to our lands.”
“God Almighty agreed to allow the companions to cut down the Jews' palm trees in order to dishonor them [Jews]. This was the Almighty's intention when He said: 'Whether ye cut down (O ye Muslim!) the tender palm-trees, or ye left them standing on their roots, it was by leave of Allah, and in order that He might cover with shame the rebellious transgressors. [Koranic Verse; Al-Hashr, 59:5].' This proves that God Almighty wishes to punish the unjust aggressor. The justification for burning their belongings is their aggression against Muslims and their deception. It is they who burn the Muslims' wealth.”
“This section was taken from a book by active and anonymous [as received] jihadi scholar Yusuf al-Ayiri28 may God accept him, entitled: 'The Truth about the New Crusade.' This is particularly evident in the Chapter regarding the times when it is permissible to kill those among the infidels who would be otherwise protected. The first case in this chapter addresses this topic. This is in the event the book entitled 'I'lam Al-Muwaqa'in' Shaykh Yusuf, may God have mercy on his soul, is unavailable.”
“Ibn Qudamah Al-Maqdasy writes in [his book entitled] 'Al-Muqni' [The Convincer], in the chapter on killing infidels and shelling them with manganese, as well cutting off their water supplies and destroying their fortresses: Concerning the issue of uprooting or burning their trees and plants, there are two views. The first is that it is permissible to do so as long as it does not harm Muslims. The second is that it is not permissible to do so unless it is justified to do so to them, for instance when they have done the same to us. An eye for an eye.”
“Shaykh Sulayman Bin Abdallah Bin Muhammad Bin Abd-al-Wahhab narrates in 'Al-Muqni' that trees and plants can be divided into three groups. The first group comprises [those trees and plants] which need to be cleared for a particular purpose, and can thus be uprooted or burned. This, however, solely on the basis of an undeniable need, as the narrator explains. The second is that group whose uprooting will cause Muslims harm. In this case, it is totally forbidden to uproot or to burn them. The third encompasses all other cases, which can be further divided into two subgroups. The first is a group that it is considered permissible to uproot or burn in the Hanbali [Muslim scholar] school of thought, where the scholars Malik, Shafi'i, and Ibn Al-Muthir followed the Hadith of the Prophet, PBUH, in the case of the burning of the palm trees in Bani Nadir, where God sent down the following: 'Whether ye cut down (O ye Muslim!) the tender palm-trees, or ye left them standing on their roots, it was by leave of Allah, and in order that He might cover with shame the rebellious transgressors.' [Koranic Verse; Al-Hashr, 59:5].”
“This has been taken from page 486 of the book entitled 'Al-Muqn'i Ma'a Hashiyatihi,' published by the Al-Salafiyyah [Salafist] Publishing House in Cairo.”
The first time I heard this term, urbicide, was back when the Bosnian war was raging. Its a term reflecting the direction of utter violence on the city. I was reminded of the photographs of Berlin, Nagasaki and Hiroshima during the second world war for utter destruction. Here are some iconic photographs of Berlin.
And of Nagasaki:
And of Hiroshima:
You dont normally expect to see images of such devastation nowadays. But still it happens. See here for some photographs of Sarajevo.
But despite Sarajevo being in the doorsteps of Europe, we again saw another urbicide in Lebanon, aimed at those truly damned people, the Palestinians.
See the background to this conflict here. And this paper (from which I have shown the pictures above) which brought home the battle. I quote the abstract:
During the summer of 2007, Nahr el-Bared refugee camp in northern Lebanon was the scene of a fierce battle between the Lebanese Armed Forces and a militant Islamist group called Fateh al-Islam. When Palestinian evacuees returned after the conflict, they found Nahr el-Bared utterly destroyed, houses smashed first by shells and bombs, then by vandalism and arson, possessions stolen and broken, offensive graffiti daubed on walls. I argue in this paper that the battle of Nahr el-Bared, and particularly the month of looting and arson that followed the battle, was a case of urbicide in a space of exception. The seemingly unrestricted destruction of homes, the theft of possessions and arson, went beyond any possible military necessity and became the deliberate and systematic erasure of the camp. This urbicide was made more possible by the very nature of the political spaces of the camp, which are in Lebanon but not of Lebanon, in which Lebanese sovereignty and law are not fully enforced, in which a whole range of non-Lebanese actors exercise political power outside the control of the Lebanese state. In these spaces of exception in which the rule of law is suspended, the looting, arson and vandalism took place without sanction. Palestinian homes and lives had become sacred in the sense that they could be destroyed without sanction, without recourse to legal redress, because there was no law.
Here’s a good clip of what the Lebanese Army did to the camp:
Some of the comments that Adam Ramadan makes are truly horrifying. I quote:
Nahr el-Bared was not the named target of Lebanese military action, nor was urbicide the stated aim. The war was against Fateh al-Islam, but that group quickly became conflated with Nahr el-Bared and Palestinian society (Neil Smith's (2001) analysis of the conflation of scales that allowed the events of 11 September 2001 to be seen as an attack on the American nation, and justifying an American attack on Afghanistan, is relevant here). Military actions against Fateh al-Islam blurred more easily with military actions against the fabric of the camp, while across Lebanon Palestinians were subjected to increased surveillance, stop-and-search procedures, and some even spoke of arbitrary arrests and torture. Indiscriminate shelling by the army hastened the evacuation of civilians which, in turn, allowed for more indiscriminate shelling. The Lebanese army sieged the camp for 16 weeks, shelling from the ground, firing air-to-ground missiles from helicopters, and ground troops leading seven assaults on the camp.13 In spite of this fierce siege, the Lebanese army was unable to win a fast and decisive victory against the well armed and well trained fighters of Fateh al-Islam, and army casualties reached 168 by the time the battle ended in early September. The camp was a hostage to the outsiders of Fateh al-Islam, and its houses and narrow alleyways provided the perfect terrain for the kind of urban warfare many of the militants might have experienced in Iraq. Driven to fear and fury by the deaths of so many soldiers by Fateh al-Islam actions, army actions were displaced onto the stones, the buildings, the streets and the infrastructure of the camp. And the state of exception in which the camp existed, coupled with Lebanese discourses of the camps as impenetrable security islands and threats to the Lebanese body, and Lebanese demographic anxieties, allowed a course of action that seemed to maximise the physical destruction of the camp. Particularly after the eventual defeat of Fateh al-Islam, when for a month the destruction continued with looting, arson and vandalism, Nahr el-Bared was erased by urbicide.
Martin Shaw (2004: 141) has argued that urbicide is a form of genocide, but I would not extend this argument to the case of Nahr el-Bared as there was no orchestrated or deliberate killing of civilians: “The deliberate and systematic extermination of an ethnic or national group” (Oxford English Dictionary definition of genocide) did not occur. The camp was shelled widely in the first few days in spite of the presence of a very high and dense civilian population14 (perhaps this was “killing deliberately by mistake” – Amyreh, 2002, in Herold, 2004: 329) but there was an organised evacuation of civilians early in the conflict so that the army could freely target Fateh al-Islam fighters wherever they might or might not be in the camp. Most Palestinians from Nahr el-Bared were displaced to Beddawi, where they were forced to stay in improvised shelters, school classrooms, garages and storerooms, seriously disrupting not only the society of Nahr el-Bared but also that of Beddawi camp which had to host the displaced. And more than a year on, there is still no sign of the Nahr el-Bared being rebuilt, and this prolonged displacement is forcing Palestinians to choose whether to wait for the chance to return to Nahr el-Bared or to attempt to make a new life elsewhere in Lebanon or outside. Lebanon officially opposes Palestinian integration in the country, and unofficially encourages Palestinian emigration. When this agenda coincided with this battle against terrorists in a space without law, the result was urbicide and ethnic cleansing
This is what bewilders me, a son of a refugee myself, is this decades long dependency on being a refugee. These Palestinian refugee camps have constantly been kicked ferociously like Nabatieh in 1973, in Jisr el-Basha in 1976 and in Sabra and Shatila in 1982. These Palestinians have been betrayed by their leaders, their fellow Arabs, their allies (variously USSR, China, USA, you name it) and of course their enemy, Israel. The UN perpetuates their misery. Lebanon and Egypt make it difficult for them to live, breathe or prosper. And still they live on, in their ghettos and concentration camps. The New Jews indeed. And what a situation to be in.
See how the Lebanese celebrated after their victory over the Palestinians in the camp and the Saudi / other assorted terrorists of Fateh al-Islam.
And all this while the urbicide is quietly going on.
And good question. I quote:
Credit to Andy Newman of Socialist Unity for stating the obvious:
Recent report of war casualties in Sri Llanka suggest that the scale of killing is now much worse than we saw in Gaza at the beginning of this year.
To which the commenter logan responds:
I was on a bus yesterday, late afternoon, going past the HofP and saw large numbers of Tamils, but no banners from the left. If this is worse than Gaza why isn’t there a mass mobilisation?
Now you see why the Gaza/Israeli/Palestinian support leaves me cold and them open to accusations to anti-Semitism? Its not just the left. No British teacher association protests, nobody from the journalists association moaning, no lawyer associations pounding the desks. Nothing. Result? Clear and open anti Semitism. The various Muslim Association protests are also the same because more Muslims are killed in Sudan and nary a peep, but that is pretty obvious and the fact that they want to stand up when others kill them and sit when their own kill their own is understandable, they are religiously driven. But nothing explains the behaviour of the British political establishment other than pure and simple Anti Semitism.
Also see the comments, fascinating to see the guys trying to defend this indefensible position.
heh, I just love this.
That’s not the way to catch, but never you mind:
and we have stance challenges, but that’s also ok :)
Next year, its :
Next year, it wants to bring cricket to Palestinians and Jews in Jerusalem.
Wonderful news :)
I wrote about non violence and why it will be very difficult to apply that in Palestine before. Here’s another essay on this topic, very interesting indeed. Some snippets:
So why not adopt the strategy of nonviolent civil disobedience, the methods of Gandhi? That question has been asked for years, by moderate Israelis and by Westerners with sympathy for both sides. It comes packed with assumptions. It implies that Israelis accept a civilian death toll like that in Gaza only when they believe it is the unavoidable price of self-defense. It presumes that Israel remains a society whose citizens would not long allow their government to use deadly force against masses of nonviolent demonstrators. And it suggests that if Palestinians succeeded in shedding the image of terrorists and appeared internationally as saints, they would succeed in bringing unbearable Western pressure against Israel.
But even if patronizing, the question remains valid: Sainthood can work. Britain abandoned India; Montgomery's buses were desegregated.
As an Israeli, to imagine Nasser a-Din al-Masri is disturbing for another reason: This is a fantasy of a political savior who comes from the adversary's side because one's own has no answers. Israeli politics has become a junkyard of broken ideologies. The outgoing government of Ehud Olmert succeeded neither in negotiating peace nor in bringing quiet to the Gazan border with military force. Meanwhile, settlement construction continued, deepening Israel's entanglement in the West Bank. In February's election, a majority of Israelis voted for parties that offered no expectation of an end to the conflict. We have failed to manufacture hope. Let the Palestinians do it.
One potential answer to the mystery of the missing Gandhi is that the presumptions about Israel and the West are self-delusion. That answer says that Israel is ready to use overwhelming force against civilians, even when rockets are not being launched from their midst. It says that Israelis are not the civilized Englishmen of the Raj, that Israeli brutality is the father of Palestinian fury, and that in an age of wide belief in the "conflict of civilizations," the West is mostly willing to avert its eyes when Muslims or Arabs are the victims.
On the face of it, this answer suffers an obvious flaw: The British did not face Indian resistance as if engaged in a cricket match. The Amritsar Massacre of 1919, in which British troops opened fire on a gathering of thousands of peaceful Indians, killing and wounding hundreds, did not convince Gandhi to steal weapons and take to the hills. Rather, it deepened his commitment to satyagraha, non-violent action.
An alternative answer is that the problem is Islam. Palestinian society, says this hypothesis, is 98 percent Muslim, and Islam sanctifies jihad. After Hamas's introduction of suicide attacks to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict--and after 9/11--the hypothesis demands attention. Its own glaring flaw is that Islam has no monopoly on terrorism or holy war. But perhaps a religion whose founder was a warrior has prevented the emergence of an enemy of violence. Perhaps it has no room for the shahid, the martyr, who is willing to die without blowing himself up in a café or bus.
To find why a figure is absent from history is intrinsically more difficult than explaining why he is present. The search cannot yield the certain resolution of a detective novel. Nonetheless, I went looking for the missing Mahatma.
