Why Making Real Time Sense Of Israeli-Gaza War Is So Difficult - Part IV Hamas

This is Part IV on this topic.  Previously:

Preview:  GUERRILLA WARFARE - A brief discussion of guerrilla warfare, then you can watch the classic film on the Algerian war for independence from France:  The Battle Of Algiers.

Part I of this series is here.  It identifies and briefly discusses the following topics I think important to be aware of when confronting the Israeli-Gaza war.

1.  PROPAGANDA, MISINFORMATION, OBLITERATION OF TRUTH

2.  THE PROBLEM OF NETANYAHU 

3A.  HISTORIC ANTI-SEMITISM

3B.  THE HOLOCAUST

Part II is here.  It looks at:

4. GENOCIDE

5. ZIONISM

6. ISRAELI MISTREATMENT OF PALESTINIANS 

7.  TEACH YOUR CHILDREN WELL - PALESTINIAN AND ISRAELI EDUCATION

Part III is here.  It covers

8.  RUSSIAN IMMIGRANTS AND ISRAEL'S RIGHT WING TILT 

9.  IGNORANCE

10.  GUERRILLA WARFARE]

11.  FACTORING IN WHAT'S HAPPENING BEHIND THE SCENES

Part IV, in the end focuses on Hamas, mostly on the 1988 Hamas Charter and the 2017 update.   It has been the most difficult one for me.  I had never read the Hamas Charter of 1988 or the revised charter of 2017.  

And to be clear, I'm just scratching the surface.  My point in these posts is NOT to teach anyone about this subject, but rather to reinforce the idea that few people know the many issues, the complicated histories, the religious nuances, the political machinations to have a strong basis to form anything but the most tentative opinions on the Israel-Gaza war.  Including me.  

But what I've found preparing this post is that Hamas appears to be an extreme Islamic organization not that different from ISIS and the other organizations that want to set up states that adopt laws directly from their interpretation of Islam.  

Doing this research in English is a handicap though. It's relatively easy to find information online about Hamas from Western sources, but finding English reports from Arab or Islamic sources takes a little more work.  Then comparing translations to make sure that what you have is relatively authentic takes longer.  

11.  HAMAS

I've been stuck on this one for several weeks.  I looked up Hamas.  I couldn't find a Hamas website.  I found other sites that posted Hamas' 1988 Charter.  Most are from Western institutions.  Here are two:

Yale University Law Library

Wilson Center 

But I did find one by what ostensibly is an Muslim/Palestinian site:

The Journal of Islamic Studies (I got access to this journal through JSTOR, "a digital library of academic journals, books, and primary sources founded in 1994" that is not directly open to the public.  I have access through the University of Alaska Anchorage library.  If you don't have a university access, you might also try your local library to get access through them.)

The first 'Topic' in Part I of this series of posts is called  Propaganda, Misinformation, and Disinformation.  It's there to remind readers that there are nations out there trying to  misinform the world, even to obliterate any sense of verifiable truth, to create opportunities to change the world to their advantage.  

So, with that in mind, I wanted to make sure what I was reading was real, that it was not propaganda intended to make Hamas look bad.  I've reviewed the various versions of the key document - The Hamas Charter.  They basically say the same things, though different translations use different wording.  For example, it's called a Covenant in one translation, a Charter in another, and a Manifesto in yet another.

I went to all that trouble because I found the Charter (the Islamic Studies version's word) to be alarming.  It's in the same mold as ISIS documents - an Islamic extremist document that weaves Islamic justifications for everything it says. Its tone is:  "We know the Truth and anyone who differs from us is wrong." [See, for example Article 11.]  It calls for the Israeli government to be destroyed and for an Islamic state of Palestine to take over all the land that is now Israeli, Gaza, and the West Bank.  

So I wanted an Arab, Muslim, or Palestinian version to compare to the Western translations.  As I said, while the translators used different words and phrasing, the basic tone and content is the pretty close in the three I looked at.  

It's the kind of document that gives Right Wing Israelis like Netanyahu easy justification for their need to wipe out Hamas.  Because Hamas' goal is to wipe out Israel.  That doesn't give Netanyahu justification to kill tens of thousands of Palestinians who are not Hamas supporters.  But I suspect that Netanyahu feels Palestinians are all Hamas or Hamas sympathizers.  And, again, the Charter gives ammunition for that sort of interpretation.  It tells us that every Muslim is obligated to join the fight to throw out the Jews - including women and children.  [Note:  the 2017 revision distinguishes between Jews and Zionists.]

"When an enemy occupies some of the Muslim lands,   Jihad becomes obligatory for every Muslim. In the struggle against the Jewish occupation of Palestine  the banner of jihad must be raised. (Article 15) (emphasis added)

The Muslim woman has a role in the battle for the liberation which is no less than the role of the man, for she is the factory of men. (Article 17)"

And, presumably, because the Charter seems to justify Netanyahu's stated goal to wipe out Hamas, there's even an Israeli Missions Around the World website which has a page of quotes from the Hamas charter.  

These would appear to be parts of the Charter that Israel would like to share with the world to make their point that Hamas is a terrorist organization whose goal is to wipe out Israel and Israeli Jews and that Hamas will never give up that goal. And thus Israel feels justified in taking extreme action against Hamas.  

Presumably, these are some of the worst things Israel thinks are in the Charter.  But are they accurately portraying the charter?  I'm going to offer you, in the charts below, on the left the Israeli wording and on the right the wording from the Institute of Palestinian Studies.  In some cases I added a little more from the Palestinian translation in [brackets] to give the citation a bit more context.  Again, you can read the whole Charter at the links above to the Yale Library version, The Wilson Center version, and the Islamic Studies Journal. (You'll probably need to get access through a library for the last one.)

I'd note that a revised Charter was publicized in 2017 which I'll address below.  But first let me offer you what Israel says is most offensive along with the same sections as translated by the Institute of Palestinian Studies in the Islamic Studies Journal.  

Israeli Translation

Institute for Palestinian Studies Translation

Goals of the HAMAS: "The Islamic Resistance  Movement is a distinguished Palestinian  movement, whose allegiance is to Allah, and  whose way of life is Islam. It strives to raise the  banner of Allah over every inch of Palestine."  (Article 6)

Differentiation and Independence Article 6: The Islamic Resistance Movement is an  outstanding type of Palestinian movement.  It gives its loyalty to Allah, adopts Islam as a system of life, and works toward raising the  banner of Allah on every inch of Palestine.  [Therefore, in the shadow of Islam, it is  possible for all followers of different religions  to live in peace and with security over their  person, property, and rights. In the absence  of Islam, discord takes form, oppression and destruction are rampant, and wars and battles  take place.]

On the Palestinian side I've added a little more of what they wrote in [brackets] to give more context. 

Israeli Translation	Institute for Palestinian Studies Translation
On the destruction of Israel: "Israel will exist and will continue  to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it."  (Preamble)	Israel will be established and will stay  established until Islam nullifies it as  it nullified what was before it. The  Martyred Imam Hasan  al-Banna  (may Allah have mercy upon him)

Israeli Translation	Institute for Palestinian Studies Translation
"Ranks will close, fighters joining other  fighters, and masses everywhere in the Islamic world will come forward in response to the call of duty, loudly proclaiming: 'Hail to Jihad!'. This  cry will reach the heavens and will  go on being resounded until liberation is achieved, the invaders vanquished  and Allah's victory comes about."  (Article 33)	The ranks join the ranks and the Mujahids join Mujahids and other groups which come forth  from everywhere in the Muslim world answering the call of obligation, repeating “come to Jihad” " -a call bursting forth into the heights of the Heavens, reverberating until the liberation is completed and  the invaders are rolled back and the victory of Allah  descends.

Israeli Translation

Institute for Palestinian Studies Translation

The exclusive Moslem nature of the  area: "The land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf [Holy Possession] consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgment Day.  No one can renounce it or any part, or abandon it or any part of it." (Article 11)

The Islamic Resistance Movement [firmly] believes  that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf [Trust]  upon all Muslim generations till the day of Resurrection.   It is not right to give it up nor any part of it.  (Article 11)   [Neither a single Arab state nor all the Arab states,  neither a King  nor a leader, nor all the kings or leaders, nor any organization -Palestinian or Arab-  have such authority because the land of Palestine is an  Islamic Trust upon Muslim generations until the day of Resurrection. And who has the true spokesmanship for all the Muslim generations till the day of Resurrection?]

Israeli Translation	Institute for Palestinian Studies Translation
The call to jihad: "The day the enemies  usurp part of Moslem land, Jihad  becomes the individual duty of every  Moslem. In the face of the Jews'  usurpation, it is compulsory that the  banner of Jihad be raised." (Article 15)	Jihad for the Liberation of Palestine is Obligatory  When an enemy occupies some of  the Muslim  lands, Jihad becomes obligatory for every Muslim.  In the struggle against the Jewish occupation of  Palestine, the banner of Jihad must be raised.

Israeli Translation

Institute for Palestinian Studies Translation

Rejection of a negotiated peace settlement: "[Peace] initiatives, and so-called peaceful  solutions and international conferences are  in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic  Resistance Movement... Those conferences  are no more than a means to appoint the  infidels as arbitrators in the lands of Islam...  There is no solution for the Palestinian  problem except by Jihad. Initiatives,  proposals and international conferences  are but a waste of time, an exercise in futility." (Article 13)

Initiatives, Peace Solutions and International Conferences The initiatives conflict, what are called "Peaceful  Solutions" and "International Conferences" to solve  the Palestinian problem.As far as the ideology  of the Islamic Resistance Movement is  concerned, giving up any part of Palestine is like giving up part of its religion.There is no  solution to the Palestinian Problem  except by Jihad. The initiatives, options, and  international conferences are a waste of time  and a kind of child's play.  The Palestinian people are nobler than to be  fiddling with their future, rights, and destiny.

Israeli Translation

Institute for Palestinian Studies Translation

Condemnation of the Israel-Egypt  Peace Treaty: "Egypt was, to a great extent, removed  from the circle of struggle [against Zionism]  through the treacherous Camp David  Agreement. The Zionists are trying to  draw other Arab countries into similar  agreements in order to bring them  outside the circle of struggle. ... Leaving the circle of struggle against  Zionism is high treason, and cursed be  he who perpetrates such an act."  (Article 32)

[World Zionism and Imperialist powers try with  audacious maneuvers and well formulated plans  to extract the Arab nations one by one from the  struggle with Zionism, so in the end they can deal  singularly with the Palestinian people.] It already  has removed Egypt faraway from the circle of  struggle with the treason of “Camp David,"  and it is trying to extract other countries by  using similar treaties in order to remove them from  the circle of struggle.”

Again, above, for the IPS translation I've added with [brackets] the previous sentence that the Israeli translation left out.  

I did the same with the quote below.  

Israeli Translation

Institute for Palestinian Studies Translation

Anti-Semitic incitement: The Day of Judgment will not come about  until Moslems fight Jews and kill them.  Then, the Jews will hide behind rocks  and trees, and the rocks and trees will  cry out: 'O Moslem, there is a Jew  hiding behind me, come and kill him."  (Article 7)

[Even though the Islamic Resistance Movement  looks forward to fulfill the promise of Allah no matter  how long it takes because the Prophet of Allah  (saas) says:] The Last Hour would not come until the  Muslims fight against the Jews and the Muslims  would kill them, and until the Jews would hide  themselves behind a stone or a tree and a stone  or a tree would say. Muslim or Servant of Allah  there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him;  but the tree of Gharqad would not say it, for it is  the tree of the Jews (Bukhari and Muslim).3

For more on the tree of Gharqad.

The Israeli site has a few more quotes and then a summary of the Israeli issues with the charter.  You can see that here.

The language of the 1988 Hamas Charter basically calls for an Islamic state - ISIS like - to take control of all the area now occupied by Israel and the Palestinian territories.  It calls for getting rid of all the Jews.  It says attempts at Peace Treaties are useless.  Little, perhaps none, of the Charter is reasonable for Israel to accept as written.  It's essentially a declaration of war.  No country in the world, that has the power to oppose it,  would accept a close neighbor who says similar things about them.  

A revised Covenant was published in 2017. Hamas says that it is merely the consolidation of various changes made by leaders over the years, but which hadn't been codified in a single statement.  

I've read several versions and explanations of the differences between it and the original 1988 Charter.  The Guardian's overview, which came out in 2017, is perhaps the most succinct and direct (though not necessarily the most accurate.)

"Hamas has unveiled a new political programme softening its stance on Israel by accepting the idea of a Palestinian state in territories occupied by Israel in the six-day war of 1967.

The new document states the Islamist movement is not seeking war with the Jewish people – only with Zionism that drives the occupation of Palestine.

The new document also insists that Hamas is a not a revolutionary force that seeks to intervene in other countries, a commitment that is likely to be welcomed by other states such as Egypt."

Here are some other analyses of the changes: (let me warn you - these are not easy reading)

Institute for Palestine Studies' overview of the changes

Rand - "Hamas' Strategic Rebranding"

The Wilson Center 

My main takeaway after reading the Hamas Charter is to sadly shake my head about those who have championed Hamas.  You can only support Hamas if all you know about them is that they are fighting to stop Israeli atrocities.  But if you read their Charter, even with the 2017 modifications, you know this is a radical Islamist extremist group that only recognizes their version of Islamic doctrine.  

The idea that Hamas is fighting to give Palestinian culture its land and culture back seems to me to be terribly wrong.  There never was a strict Islamic state ruled by Islamic law in Palestine.  Not under the British and not under the 400 years of control by the Ottoman Empire. 

There are so many trails to follow to understand this.  For instance, how did Hamas come to power in Gaza?  Here are two links to start your research on that question:

Wikipedia's History of Hamas 

Al Jazeera - History Illustrated, The Story of Hamas And Its Fight For Palestine 

Those two citations are not meant to be exhaustive or even adequate.  They just give a sense of the history that led to Hamas' official formation until now.  Just expanding one's awareness of their ignorance.

Everyone knows about the Hamas attack on October 7 so I don't have to discuss that, except to put it into the context of Topic #10 GUERRILLA warfare and terrorism.  The point is often for the militarily weaker side to commit acts of terror to provoke the more powerful enemy to make horrible counter attacks that will make them look bad in public opinion.  Hamas was wildly successful in this objective.  With help, undoubtedly, from Russian and Iranian misinformation campaigns.  

The Israeli response has been a public relations nightmare.  But my sense is that the far right in Israel simply assumes that an anti-Semitic world will disapprove of anything they do.  That logic lets them do terrible things.  

But I'd remind them that much of the world saw Israelis as heroes after the 1967 war and when they made the Entebbe rescue.  

12.  WHY GETTING JEWS OUT OF ISRAEL SEEMS EASIER THAN NATIVE AMERICANS GETTING EUROPEANS OUT OF THE UNITED STATES?

Topic#12 (it was #13) was at the end of the last post as a heading that I postponed to this post - it made more sense after discussing Hamas.  But as I work on this, I don't think the title clearly expresses the issue I'm wrestling with.  And as I try to flesh it out, it seems it really should be part of Part V.  

It will deal, not so much with options from here, but with the question of how should those options be evaluated.  What criteria should be used?  What factors should be considered?

And to be clear, my ignorance of all of this, while perhaps slightly lower than the ignorance of most people, is still vast.  I'll be raising questions more than supplying answers.  

[It's Saturday March 2, 2024.  I just want to let you know I'm still working on PART IV.]

Why Making Real Time Sense Of Israeli-Gaza War Is So Difficult -Part III

Preview:  GUERRILLA WARFARE - A brief discussion of guerrilla warfare, then you can watch the classic film on the Algerian war for independence from France:  The Battle Of Algiers.

Part I of this series is here.  It identifies and briefly discusses the following topics I think important to be aware of when confronting the Israeli-Gaza war.

1.  PROPAGANDA, MISINFORMATION, OBLITERATION OF TRUTH

2.  THE PROBLEM OF NETANYAHU 

3A.  HISTORIC ANTI-SEMITISM

3B.  THE HOLOCAUST

Part II is here.  It looks at:

4. GENOCIDE

5. ZIONISM

6. ISRAELI MISTREATMENT OF PALESTINIANS 

7.  TEACH YOUR CHILDREN WELL - PALESTINIAN AND ISRAELI EDUCATION

[Part III was going to include a section on Hamas.  But that has turned out to be lengthier than I first imagined.  The Hamas Charter is pretty explicitly an Islamic call to overthrow the State of Israel.  But in the spirit of topic 1 in Part I - Propaganda, Misinformation, and the Obliteration of Truth, I needed to be sure I was not being misled and then I wanted to present it in a way that showed different translations to assure readers as well.  So I'm going to make that Part IV. And I'll probably add a Part V to organize my thoughts after doing all this research and writing.]  

8.  RUSSIAN IMMIGRANTS AND ISRAEL'S RIGHT WING TILT 

I don't have a lot to say about this, other than to say it is an important factor that has helped empower Netanyahu and the Israeli political right wing.  From a Brookings Institute report:

"The over one million people who immigrated to Israel from the former Soviet Union in a wave from the beginning of the 1990s have changed Israel to its core — socially, politically, economically, and culturally. Within the first six years, they formed what became a large secular nationalist political camp that secures right-wing rule to this day."

The immigration of Ultra Orthodox US Jews also plays an important role - especially in the policies of taking Arab land in the West Bank and turning it into Jewish settlements.   While their numbers are tiny compared to the Russian immigrants, their interest in settling in the West Bank exacerbates conflicts with Palestinian Arabs.  

9.  IGNORANCE 

Ignorance by itself is not bad.  We are all ignorant about many things.  Just go in any library and peruse the book titles.  Some topics you know well.  Others not at all.  The important things about ignorance are:

1. You are aware of your ignorance
2. You don't act as though you know what you're talking about on subjects you're ignorant on
3. You recognize that expertise in one area doesn't give you expertise in other areas
4. What we know, what science uncovers, is merely a model of reality.  That model is often incomplete and new discoveries require changes in our models.  So what you learned in the past may be out of date, or it may have been wrong in the first place.

My basic point here is that lack of knowledge, and the lack of awareness of one's ignorance, combines with Topic 1:  PROPAGANDA, MISINFORMATION, OBLITERATION OF TRUTH, to make thinking out the Israeli-Gaza situation even harder than it already is.  The rest is some background to own ignorance.

Ignorance doesn't mean stupidity.  It means that someone hasn't been exposed to certain knowledge, information.  Perhaps one has lived in one location forever and been around people who mostly look and think and behave like them. 

First radio, then television, and then the internet have made it easier to escape such isolation and to learn more about the world and the people in it.  [And I'm not saying that never having been more than 100 miles from your home is necessarily a bad thing either. Being grounded in a geographic location can give someone connections and insights that people without such permanence lack.]

Spending a year as a student in Germany made me see things I could never have seen had I stayed home.  I don't mean so much that I saw Germany and Europe, but more that I saw my life growing up in California from a whole different perspective.  Learning that I could exist reasonably well without using English also rearranged my brain.

When I first arrived to teach English in Thailand so many years ago, I was gaining ability in my Thai language skills, and rapidly learning about my community and Thailand.  It took me six months before I realized:

As much as I was learning, the volume of what I didn't know, grew ten times faster.  My ignorance wasn't growing, just my awareness of my ignorance was growing..   

As a blogger, I'm reminded daily about how much I do not know.  I'm constantly googling to learn more about the background of someone or something I know little or nothing about.  It's a constant fight to resist unconsciously filling in, from my prejudices, what isn't said about something I learn about in the news or online.  I write something and then realize I don't know if it is true or not and have to verify it.  

The internet makes such fact-checking much easier than it ever was before, but I come to this having spent years painfully tracking references in bound volumes that then led me to track down the books and journals that might hold the answer.  I've had to go through articles by people who make conflicting arguments, and then had to look for more evidence that would give one side more likelihood of being accurate than other positions.  

A friend pointed out that he's not so sure the internet makes it easier because there's so much disinformation.  Experience in critical thinking and sleuthing is important on the internet.

That's why Topic 9 - IGNORANCE is closely related to Topic 1 (in Part I) PROPAGANDA, MISINFORMATION, OBLITERATION OF TRUTH.   And why Propaganda is the very first topic.

Without a substantial foundational web of of knowledge, it's hard to figure out 

• where to store in your world view every new bit of data
• how to evaluate its accuracy
• when and how to shift your own understanding of a particular subject

10.  GUERRILLA WARFARE - I covered this as much as I think I will  in a previous post that invites to you see the movie The Battle of Algiers.  Here's the link to that post, which was like a sneak preview to this series of posts.  

11.  FACTORING IN WHAT'S HAPPENING BEHIND THE SCENES

I've just finished reading Michael Nolan's Ike's Gamble.  It's 258 pages focused on President Eisenhower's policy toward Egyptian leader Gamal Abdel Nasser from 1954-1959.  Nolan uses a vast volume of State Department files that only have been recently made public, reviewing the memos sent by different State Department officials as well as other correspondents and notes taken by people then and there.  

I understand the people protesting Israeli killing of tens of thousands of Palestinian civilians.  I  understand and share the frustration of US citizens who object to the US supplying weapons to Israel to carry out the attacks.  I get that people want President Biden to pressure Netanyahu to call a cease fire.  I think that is a legitimate request.  But the people who then condemn the Biden administration and say they won't vote for him because of Israel, well those folks I don't get at all.  

There is so much going on behind the scenes that we know nothing about, that we really have no idea of exactly what the Biden administration is doing to try to stop the attacks in Gaza.  The Nolan book makes that point very clear.  It also makes it clear that they may or may not be doing things that will help the situation improve.  

[Sorry, a bit of editorial here:  But for sane US citizens to argue that Israeli policy is a good enough reason to not vote for Biden, when the alternative is Trump, suggests to me incredible shortsightedness.  There is nothing that Trump will do to improve the situation of Palestinians.  Nothing.  He's cozied up to Netanyahu.  He helped to move the Israeli capital to Jerusalem, something Palestinians vigorously opposed.  In fact, it's clear he would do his best to end the US experiment in democracy.]

Here's a  Tweet that makes the same point on a different subject that also reminds us that much goes on behind the scenes that we will only learn about much later on if ever.

The takeaway: Much of DOJ’s investigative work takes place out of the public eye. DOJ speaks through its filings. And just because the public doesn’t see action/movement on a matter, that doesn’t mean nothing is happening. End

— Anthony Coley (@AnthonyColey) December 19, 2023

13.  WHY GETTING JEWS OUT OF ISRAEL SEEMS EASIER THAN NATIVE AMERICANS GETTING EUROPEANS OUT OF THE UNITED STATES

This was originally going to follow the section on Hamas.  Since I'm moving Hamas to the next post, it makes sense to move this one as well.  But if you're curious - be my guest and think out, even write down what you would write on this question and see how similar your ideas are to what I'll write.  That's always a good way to move from a passive to an active reader.  

 

Hope to see you soon with Part IV.  I'll make this link live when it's ready.  

Does The 14th Amendment Section 3 Apply To Trump?

 In one of the amicus briefs before the Supreme Court, attorneys Vikram Amar and Akhil Amar makes a very compelling case that Section 3 does in fact apply to Donald J. Trump.  But he adds to the debate the historical background to the language in the Section.  I encourage you to read the Brief.  It's written in very clear and plain English and tells a remarkable story of why it was written to disqualify people like Donald J. Trump from the Presidency.

He tells us that many aspects of the Constitution and its Amendments are not merely theoretical , rather they are there in response to specific"the event, the evil, the mischief" and that Justices did best when they 

"Over the centuries, America’s best constitutional interpreters, both on and off the bench, have generally excelled when they first spotted and then heeded the key historical episode—the event, the evil, the mischief—that prompted a given patch of constitutional text.

For example, the Constitution forbids those under age thirty-five from the presidency. Why? Because of a concern about dynasties—young favorite sons of famous fathers, such as William Pitt the Younger, the British prime minister in 1787, who took office at age 24. The Constitution’s requirement that a president be “natural born” had nothing to do with C-section babies or Shakespeare’s Macbeth, and everything to do with the Founders’ anxieties about European noblemen who might seek political power in America. Article I’s rules for congressional membership were crafted with Englishman John Wilkes in mind, as were the later rules of the Fourth Amendment. The first sentence of the Fourteenth Amendment repudiated specific language in Dred Scott. The equality commands of Section One of the Fourteenth Amendment aimed especially at ending Black Codes in the Deep South. In affirming fundamental rights from state and local abridgment, Section One had centrally in mind—among other things—the urgent need to protect freedom of speech, freedom of worship, and the right to keep guns for personal protection."

Much of the brief discusses the historical events that cause Section 3 to be written the way it was:  John Floyd's actions, as President Buchanan's Secretary of War to move soldiers from and ammunition to Southern and his attempts to prevent the newly elected President Abraham Lincoln from being sworn in as President by Congress.

In the end, this momentous case is easier than it may at first seem, once one understands the historical events that triggered Section Three.

The insurrectionary betrayals perpetrated by Floyd and other top officials in the lame-duck Buchanan Administration went far beyond the abandonment of southern forts. They also involved, through both actions and inactions of Floyd and his allies, efforts to prevent President-elect Lincoln from lawfully assuming power at his inauguration.

Even before the inauguration, alarms rang out in Congress about the First Insurrection already underway. On February 1, 1861, Pennsylvania’s Representative John W. Killinger declared on the House floor that “preparations are actually threatened to take possession of this Capitol, and prevent the inauguration of the President elect. So far has the conspiracy progressed, that it . . . holds within its grasp the sworn officers of the Government. . . . Before Mr. Lincoln is inaugurated, this District will be the theater of commotion, and it may be, of violence.”11 Later that month, Killinger’s fellow Pennsylvanian James Hepburn Campbell echoed this point about oath-breaking insurrectionists: “[T]his treasonable conspiracy, to resist the inauguration by force of arms, . . . has drawn within its fatal vortex chiefs of the Cabinet.”12 And on February 18, 1861, Floyd’s successor in the War Department—Joseph Holt, himself true to his oath—confirmed that oath-breaking insurrectionists such as Floyd had indeed aimed to prevent the inauguration: (emphasis added)

But in one obvious and high-profile respect, Section Three as enacted went far beyond the early draft. It referred to all insurrections, past and future, and not merely to “the late insurrection” of the 1860s. It laid down a rule for the benefit of generations yet unborn—for us today, if only we are wise enough and faithful enough to follow its words as written and intended. (emphasis added)

Why is this important?  I imagine most readers have already figured it out.  Amar is showing the Justices that the language in Section 3 are based on actions that are almost identical to Trump's.  They leave no ethical way for the Justices to sidestep the fact that this Section was written to prevent people like Trump who had sworn and oath to protect the Constitution and then violated that oath by, Floyd's case and Trump's, trying to prevent the certification and inauguration of a duly elected President.  Not only in the 1860s, but "to all insurrections, past and future."

In addition to providing the story of Floyd, Amar also highlights the fact that Colorado, like every state, has the power to create its own election rules.  And Amar goes through, in Part Two, a list of twenty questions that have been raised by this case.  

In Part Two, we shall canvass a wide range of issues raised by this case and explain why many of them are easy. Of course the president is an “officer” covered by Section Three. Of course a detailed congressional statute is not necessary to implement Section Three. Of course an ineligible person is ineligible unless and until amnestied. Of course a person can engage in an insurrection with words as well as deeds. Of course an insurrection can begin locally. And so on.

Will five justices find this and other arguments persuasive?  We already know that Justice Thomas' wife strongly supported the insurrection and he has not recused himself from this case so far.  But what about the others?  

Leaving Trump off the ballot in Colorado well might make any difference.  Colorado has been more blue than red lately and Biden is likely to win there.  So those Justices who generally don't let the constitution get in their way to support the far right, could go along in this case.  But if Colorado doesn't have to put Trump on the ballot, how many other states - particularly purple states - copy them?  That will be the rub members of the Court's staunch right wingers.

 

Their Music Survives

A friend sent me a link to an audio program about the music of the Holocaust - music written and performed by concentration camp musicians.  The program is very sad and very inspiring at the same time.  Worth listening to.  

I don't see a way to embed the audio here, so here's a link to the website that has it:

https://www.blogger.com/u/0/blog/post/edit/30897652/6944961309403824554

Well worth a listen when you are doing something you can do while listening.  

The transcript begins:

"Mat Edelson (HOST): To be a Jewish composer or musician under the Third Reich’s reign of terror meant your next note could be your last. At first their works were banned as being degenerate, their contributions to the musical canon erased from public display. Later, as the murderous frenzy exploded in the ghettos and concentration camps, composers and musicians imprisoned there refused to be stilled. On scraps of paper they penciled their inspirations, praying that even if they died, their music would survive. Miraculously, it has. In this documentary, we’ll meet conductors, musicians and others rediscovering this lost generation of music and performing it for new audiences worldwide. They’re using this music to educate, to remember, and to correct an historical injustice. Join us now for Their Music Survives.?

 

Seattle Outing - Food And Art

Our grand parenting duties shrink back as our granddaughter gets older and has more autonomy and more activities to fill up her time.  That's not a bad thing.  We still get to spend lots of time with our daughter and granddaughter, but I also have plenty of time to read, think, write, and delete emails  that never seem to slow down.  Even as I unsubscribe to emailers I never subscribed to, new ones seem to find me.  

But we had an anniversary yesterday and we decided to take the ferry and wander around downtown Seattle.  

It's been pretty rainy, but the sun made itself known as we approached the ferry terminal.  

We tried the post office on 1st Street, but it was closed for lunch.  

So we made our way to Pike Place Market for some clam chowder.  The seats weren't that comfy, but the chowder was hot and the guy with the red sleeves kept up a constant entertaining chatter.  

We wandered a bit through the market.  Then across the street to a kitchen ware shop where we found a gift for our granddaughter and her dad.  We stopped in at H-Market for a look around.  Then made it to another post office where I was able to send my package.  I had the book in an envelope I'd received a different book in, but the clerk immediately told me I should buy a new envelope which would be cheaper than buying a roll of tape for the envelope.  While we waited, another customer asked another clerk if he could tape the address label on and was told to buy a roll of tape ($3.99).  This is new.  Post office personnel used to be helpful.  I guess Trump's postmaster who's apparently still in charge, thinks saving pennies is better than making customers feel like coming back.  

Then to the Seattle Art Museum.  I'm always taken aback by how much it costs to enter major museums these days.  I know it costs money to run things, but art is a major expression of a culture and museums are a serious part of public education.  If we can pay to be the most armed country in the world, we ought to pay even a percent of that for public art museums.  But I quickly got over that as we interacted with what was on the walls, the floors, and even the ceiling in places.  

There's clearly a change in how museums display items.  There's a lot of obviously intentional diversity.  There's mixing up of pieces of different eras and cultures to find (or at least claim to find) commonalities.  

And I was particularly struck by the universality of human art - both geographically and in terms of time.  We tend to think that we are smarter and more skilled than people who lived hundreds or thousands of years ago.  Certainly a fair chunk of today's US population (like those who believe their cult leader is going to improve their lives) aren't nearly as wise as the brightest people in past generations.  

On the left is Charles d'Amboise.  The painting was done about 1505 (just over 500 years ago) by Bernardine de'Conti who lived in Milan about 1470 -1522.  

The description says:

"The French nobleman Charles d'Amboise became the governor of the Duchy of Milan after it was conquered by France.  The collar of scallop shells and knots denotes the Order of SaintMichael, granted to him about 1505, perhaps the occasion for commissioning this portrait. 

D'Amboise was a friend and patron of Leonardo da Vinci, but he hired a more conservative artist for his portrait and chose to be portrayed in a classic profile view, which records his features but provides no psychological insight.  He most likely wanted to link his image with the great rulers of the ancient past, depicted in side views on coins and medals like those shown in the case nearby  D'Ambroise himself was an avid coin collector as he proudly demonstrates here."

I'm going to assume the curator knows a lot more than I do about art and this painting.  But I'm not sure why a side view can't provide psychological insight, or that a full face portrait can.  But what little we learn tells us a great deal.  With a different haircut, or maybe just a baseball cap, he could fit in walking down the street today.  There was a hierarchy of which he was in an upper level, and he collected coins.  And the painter could easily get work in today's world.  Both could probably fit into 2024 fairly easily with a little bit of coaching on the advances of science.  

The one on the right is not as old (about 1699), painted by French artist  Nicolas Colombel who lived from 1644-1717.  He died fifteen years before George Washington was born.  He was a year younger than Isaac Newton, but died ten years before Newton.  Nevertheless, the story of Cupid (Eros) and Psyche is much older.  Wikipedia tells us:

"Eros and Psyche appear in Greek art as early as the 4th century BC"

The curator wrote the following to accompany this painting:

"The jealous goddess Venus sent her son Cupid to make Psyche fall in love with a horrible monster.  Instead, Cupid became enamored himself and installed Psyche in a palace where he visited her at night so that she couldn't learn his identity.  One night she stole a peek at his beautiful face.  Startled awake, Cupid left immediately, and his palace vanished.  Psyche wandered the earth search for her lover, performing impossible tasks set by Venus in hopes of winning him back.  Finally, Jupiter intervened:  he made Psyche a goddess and reunited her with Cupid, giving their story a happy ending.  Here Cupid has just abandoned Psyche, who chases him as he hovers out of reach.  This moment allows Colombel, a French artist who was trained in Rome, to show the Roman countryside - the appropriate setting for this classical myth." 

So this story goes back 2500 years, yet we have the same human emotions and conflicts: a woman possibly falling in love with a monster (how many battered wives are there today?);  a forbidden young love;  a jealous and vengeful mother-in-law (no they aren't married, but Venus was Cupid's mother).  I'm not sure why the curator thinks the Roman woods to be the appropriate background, perhaps because the Romans appropriated much of Greek culture including their myths.  

I knew from the beginning this post was going to be much too long, so let me jump to another exhibit - this of Ausralian aboriginal artists.  

These large detailed paintings speak to me in a language I can't identify.  They tell stories of people and worlds I do not know.  Yet they move me a great deal.  This is a beauty and a visual language that still exists, outside of Western culture.   

Here's detail of a painting called Kalipinypa Rockhole (2003) painted by Elizabeth Marks Nakamara.  The curator writes:

"Lightning bolts that ignite the sky are the source for this striking white maze.  Kalipinypa is an important site where ancestral forces swept in with a huge storm that caused lightning to flash and water to rush across the country.  They left behind a rock hole surrounded with sandhills that are seen here as vibrant patterns created by dotting that fuses into lines that wiggle ever so slightly.  Elizabeth Marks Nakamara was married to the renowned artist Mick Namarari.  She watched his painting for years but did not begin to paint herself until after his death in 1998."

One more from that collection.  There's no story with the description - just the facts: 

" Marapinti, 2016

Acrylic on canvas

Nanyuma Napangati

Australian Aboriginal, Pintupi people,

Papunya, Western Desert, Northern Territory,

born 1940"

Most of what I know about Australian Aboriginal culture comes from Bruce Chatwin's book Songlines, which I wrote about here.  And songlines (check the link, really!) are clearly part of this art.  Truly a book worth reading.  

Another descriptor at this exhibit read:

"'Dreaming is an all-embracing concept that provides rules for living, a moral code, as well as rules for interacting withthenatural environment' - Jeannie Herbert Nungwarrayi(Walpiri speaker) 2000

Dreaming is known by Pintupi speakers as Tjukurrpa.  Tjukurrpa is called a template for a dynamic duty or way of observing laws passed down by ancestors - the powerful shape-shifting creators who formulated the earth's features, people, and culture.  Dreamings stimulate intellectual and emotional life, as people recall extensive genealogies and ceremonial song cycles that describe the ancestors' adventures.  No country - the lands, waters, flora, and fauna of an area - is without a trail of their presence, which offers a living continuum of wisdom for all to learn from.

Dotting was a biodegradable at for for centuries - on ceremonial objects, in sand paintings, and on painted and adorned bodies.  Dots of ochres, down, feathers, and leaves could at times totally overcome a human form, enabling dancers to enter a mythic envelope as they enacted ceremonies. Dots began appearing in painting as a echo of this sacred significance.  Some contend they help conceal sacred knowledge, and others suggest they express the flash of ancestral power.'

Surely, there's nothing here more supernatural than believers of Western religions embrace.  

There was so much more reshaping edges of my brain and heart.  The ways of human beings haven't really changed all that much since homo sapiens appeared.  When politicians call for STEM education that leaves out art and music and humanities, we leave students with a huge hole.  Science has given us a way to tinker with nature, but without a study of the human spirit and behavior and morality, we leave out the part that helps us make decisions about what technology is worth pursuing and what is likely to give us more pain than joy.  

We are reminded about this daily - from the movie Oppenheimer, to politicians' inability to pass gun reform that would significantly reduce the loss of life, to the onset of AI as a profit making venture that has the possibility of eliminating people's ability to discern truth.  

Why Making Real Time Sense Of Israeli-Gaza War Is So Difficult -Part II

This is a truly touchy topic all around.  I'm listing here some of the aspects that I feel are critical to understand (no, be aware of is a more realistic goal).  Assume that I am torn in different directions and not pushing an answer one way or the other.  

Part I of these posts gives an intro to these posts and covers:

 1.  PROPAGANDA, MISINFORMATION, OBLITERATION OF TRUTH

2.  THE PROBLEM OF NETANYAHU 

3A.  HISTORIC ANTI-SEMITISM

3B.  THE HOLOCAUST

PART II

4.  GENOCIDE

The word "genocide" was coined to give a name to what happened to the Jews during the Holocaust.   

"Seventy years ago this fall [2014], the word "genocide" made its debut into the English language, on page 79 of the 674-page Axis Rule in Occupied Europe [which you can find here in Reading 3], in a chapter called "Genocide—A New Term and New Conception for Destruction of Nations."

The writer was Raphael Lemkin, a Polish-born lawyer who had fled the persecution of the Holocaust and moved to the United States in 1941. A few months after his arrival, he heard a radio address in which British Prime Minister Winston Churchill told listeners about the horrors of World War II. . .

[Lemkin] decided to create a name for the crime without a name. He came up with genocide, which he defined as the destruction of a nation or an ethnic group. He said he created the word by combining the ancient Greek word genos (race, tribe) and the Latin cide (killing). In 1948, nearly three years after the concentration camps of World War II had been closed forever, the newly-formed United Nations (UN) used this new word in the "Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide," a treaty that was intended to prevent any future genocides."

The US Holocaust Museum defines the term in more detail 

"Genocide is an internationally recognized crime where acts are committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group. These acts fall into five categories:

• Killing members of the group
• Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group
• Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part
• Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group
• Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group

There are a number of other serious, violent crimes that do not fall under the specific definition of genocide. They include crimes against humanity, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and mass killing."

Netanyahu would argue that his intent is to secure Israel from terrorist attack, not to kill Palestinians.  

Whether what's happening in Gaza is genocide or one of the other crimes listed probably doesn't matter too much, but I'm sure those fighting against Israeli bombing in Gaza are relishing the irony of charging Israelis with genocide.   

Since I wrote these words on genocide, the South African complaints about Israeli genocide to the  International Court of Justice has become available.  In it, starting from page 60, they quote a number of Israeli officials, in different ways saying things that suggest Israeli intent to obliterate Gaza.  Here's just one example from Prime Minister Netanyahu:

"The Israeli Prime Minister also returned to the theme in his ‘Christmas message’, stating: “we’re facing monsters, monsters who murdered children in front of their parents . . . This is a battle not only of Israel against these barbarians, it’s a battle of civilization against barbarism”.445 On 28 October 2023, as Israeli forces prepared their land invasion of Gaza, the Prime Minister invoked the Biblical story of the total destruction of Amalek by the Israelites, stating: “you must remember what Amalek has done to you, says our Holy Bible.  And we do remember."

"The Prime Minister referred again to Amalek in the letter sent on 3 November 2023 to Israeli soldiers and officers.447 The relevant biblical passage reads as follows: “ The Prime Minister referred again to Amalek in the letter sent on 3 November 2023 to Israeli soldiers and officers.447 The relevant biblical passage reads as follows: “ Now go, attack Amalek, and proscribe all that belongs to him. Spare no one, but kill alike men and women, infants and and sucklings, oxen and sheep, camels and asses."

This is the tenor of the evidence of intent that the South African complaint offers to International Court of Justice.  And as I write this, I always keep in mind the possibility that this whole document is a fake, that the quotes are fabricated.  But I don't think so.  Some of the Prime Minister's remarks are almost identical to the "Civilization versus Savages" theme  I posted above in Section 2 on Netanyahu that appeared in his 1995 book.  

But remember, these are like the prosecutor's opening argument.  It's their side of the story.  The defense hasn't yet had a chance to put things in context or to refute the arguments.  

Because I'm taking forever to write this, I can add the Israeli response.  Ha'aretz, the oldest Israeli newspaper, has this report on the Israeli response to the South African allegations.

[Being mindful of Issue #1 - Propaganda, Misinformation - the first link in the previous sentence is to the Encyclopedia Brittanica  article on Ha'aretz.  The second links to their report.]

5.  ZIONISM

This is another term that gets bandied about.  I'm not going to try to define it here, but you can see a couple of differing definitions/commentaries at the links below.

Wikipedia's treatment

The Foreign Policy Institute's take

The Promise and Failure of Zionism

Many people seem to have trouble distinguishing between Zionists, Jews, and Israelis and use two or all of those terms interchangeably to mean the same thing.  As though all Christians believe the same thing or act the same way.  People who identify (or are labeled) Jews come in many flavors, beliefs, ideologies, lifestyles.  The same is true of Israelis.  

6.  ISRAELI MISTREATMENT OF PALESTINIANS 

After World War II much of the world was shocked to learn of the mass extermination of Jews by the Nazis.  (If you don't believe the Holocaust happened, don't comment here.  I'll delete it as soon as I see it.  Rather educate yourself and get past your ignorance.)  Among Jews, the campaign to create a Jewish state in historic Israel was not universally supported.  But after the war, with many displaced Jewish refugees, many of them survivors of the Holocaust, sentiment supported establishing the state of Israel.  The newly formed United Nations approved. 

For the first years, the world heard heartwarming stories of the "Land of Milk and Honey," of the miracle in Israel making the desert bloom  When Israel was attacked in 1967 by surrounding Arab countries, Israel fought back and quickly defeated their enemies and kept the territory they took.  Moshe Dayan was an international hero, easily recognized with his black eye patch.  

But from the beginning the story wasn't so rosy.  Jews forced Arabs to abandon their homes and land.  Many fled to other Arab countries.  Over the years attempts to establish peace were thwarted by Palestinian rejection of the idea of Israel even existing.  Israeli supporters in the West used this rejection to show the Arabs were intransigent.  But it's clear that from the Arab perspective, the creation of Israel was similar to other colonial conquests where the indigenous people were simply removed for the colonists.  Even if the colonists were themselves a displaced people.

In the last 20 years or more, Israel has increasingly been a very oppressive ruler over the occupied territories.  Israel's annexation of West Bank Arab lands to build settlements for Israelis has exacerbated things.  People began talking about an Israeli apartheid. One can easily see similarities between the occupation and the way Black Americans are frequently treated by the police in the US.  

It's clear that many Israeli soldiers treat Palestinians with disdain. There are many places you can read about this, but I would offer Colum McCann's Apeirogon as a good place to start. [I highly recommend  reading Apeirogon]  It's the story of one Palestinian and one Jewish father who have both lost teenage daughters to the violence in Israel.  They are brought together and work with a group that advocates for peace and understanding.  There are very detailed descriptions of the indignities that Palestinians suffer daily.  

I believe that this treatment comes from 

• Israelis always feeling threatened (and Hamas does its best to stir up those fears) and 
• the ethnocentrism evidenced in Netanyahu's belief they are fighting a noble war between civilization and savagery.  [See Part I on Netanyahu]

As I mentioned in the post on The Battle of Algiers, people with little or no power, dominated by another people with lots of power, have few options other than guerrilla warfare.  

I'd also mention that other Arab countries tended to not take Palestinians as refugees into their countries.  One explanation was that by making Israel the collective enemy of Arabs, they could distract the Arab world from intra-Arab conflicts, and they could distract their own citizens from protesting their own authoritarianism.  Another explanation has been they simply didn't think they could handle the influx of so many Arabs with a somewhat different history in their own countries. 

7.  TEACH YOUR CHILDREN WELL - PALESTINIAN AND ISRAELI EDUCATION

There are lots of articles about how Palestinian schools teach hate, such as this 2022 Times of Israel headline:

"UNRWA textbooks still include hate, antisemitism despite pledge to remove — watchdog

Israeli organization says that rather than taking the material out of the 2022 curriculum, the UN Palestinian refugee agency has merely taken it off its public education portal"

It takes a little more digging to find counter arguments such as this one from The Palestine Chronicle by Rima Najjar:

Zionism is an insidious ideology. Its ideologues often gain traction by well-placed and oft repeated constructs – in films and TV series, in posts and comments on social media, and even in academia. So, it is no wonder that people end up having ideas about certain things, like the nature of Israel, the Zionist Jewish state, or the nature of Palestinian Arab culture and identity, or the nature of Jewish culture and identity, as if by osmosis.

One of these “memes” in the air, if you will, is the oft repeated comment by hasbara agents on social media that says Palestinians teach their children to hate Jews. This notion can also be found in numerous attacks on the Palestinian Authority curriculum with the same accusation of “teaching children to hate Jews”, when in fact, the opposite is true, as is often the case with Zionist propaganda (see Nurit Peled-Elhanan’s Palestine in Israeli School Books: Ideology and Propaganda in Education – Library of Modern Middle East Studies).

My understanding is that 

"'teaching children to hate Jews', when in fact, the opposite is true, as is often the case with Zionist propaganda"  

doesn't mean the Palestinians teach their kids to love Jews, but rather means that Israelis teach their kids to hate Palestinians.  

Michael Kaplan gave this example, in 2014, of Jews teaching their kids to hate Palestinians.  When Israelis Teach Their Kids To Hate. 

Two, more thorough, academic studies of Israeli text books suggest it's more subtle, but just as invidious.  

Here's the abstract of 2012 book by Nurit Elhanan-Peled

"The present book presents a critical multimodal study of one aspect of the Israeli-Zionist narrative as it is reproduced in school books of three disciplines: history, geography and civic studies. It consists of an analysis of the visual and verbal texts that represent the 'others' of Zionist Jews, namely Palestinians – both the citizens of Israel and the non-citizens who have been living under a military regime in the occupied Palestinian territories since 1967.The book shows that Israeli textbooks use racist discourse, both visually and verbally to represent Palestinians."

I only could find a few passages at the link to the publisher, but here's one to give you a sense of the book:

"... Texts present Palestine before 1948 as barren land and empty territory, abandoned since biblical times, waiting for Jews to redeem it while expunging Palestinian history and culture transforming 'Palestinian Arab students into "present absentees" as they learn about "the land of Israel"' (Abu-Saad, 2008: 24) without them. These texts are 'designed to "de-educate", or dispossess, Indigenous Palestinian pupils of the knowledge of their own people and history' (Abu-Saad, 2008: 17;Al-Haj, 2015;Mazawi, 2011;Peled-Elhanen, 2012;Raz-Karkotzkin, 2001). Textbooks construct Palestinians as 'backward, unproductive and untrustworthy; or even more negatively as murderers or rioters' while Jews engage 'in a justified, even humanitarian, war against an Arab enemy that refused to accept or acknowledge the existence and rights of Jews in Israel' (Abu-Saad, 2019: 101; Bar-Tal, 2001;Meehan, 1999). ..."

A 2020 Ha'aretz article - eight years later than the Elhanen book -  describes a Tel Aviv University study:

"Ben-Amos set out to explore how Israeli textbooks and pre-college matriculation exams address the occupation. He calls the situation 'interpretive denial.'”

Ben-Amos set out to explore how Israeli textbooks and pre-college matriculation exams address the occupation. He calls the situation “interpretive denial.” . . .

In most textbooks, “the Jewish control and the Palestinians’ inferior status appear as a natural, self-evident situation that one doesn’t have to think about,” he writes in an article to be published in a book on teaching history edited by Eyal Naveh and Nimrod Tal. . . .

Ben-Amos says the textbooks’ ignoring of the occupation or attempts to normalize it stem from self-censorship. In the absence of clear guidelines, nobody wants to be blacklisted and denounced, which was the fate of teachers and publishers who tried to convey a more nuanced message than the one permitted by the Education Ministry. . . .

Elhanen has continued writing articles on the subject of how 'the other' is treated in Israeli schools and textbooks.  You can see a list of books and articles here, some with links to full text.

I did find one more book- Palestinians in Israeli Textbooks (2016) - which seems to  say that it was bad in the past, but things are much better now.  

It's hard to find ways to peace when Palestinian children are regularly taught in schools and in the streets  to hate Jews and when Jewish children are given texts that either omit Palestinians or reinforce the idea that Jewish superiority over Palestinians is the natural order of things. 

Though as one Palestinian responded (paraphrasing), "Palestinian kids don't need to be taught in schools to hate Jews.  They pick that up by living under Israeli occupation."

Part III is still being written.  Here's the link.  

Why Making Real Time Sense Of Israeli-Gaza War Is So Difficult -Part I [Updated]

I've avoided posting about the Israeli-Gaza war for a number of reasons. (The one exception is this post recommending folks watch the Battle of Algiers.) 

The LA Times screenshot below articulates the thoughts behind my hesitation. 

Not that I'm either, but it does feel like people are being forced to pick a side and then attacked for it.  For many nuance is a copout.  

I've been thinking about this post since Hamas attacked Israel.  I've been writing it for about six weeks. Writing, at least the way I write, forces me to learn, to confront those statements I'm not certain about (most) with internet searches and trying my thoughts out on friends.  

The post has been growing organically.  As I write some things, later news events cause me to look up other assertions relevant to all of this.  

This post isn't supposed to be answers, but rather an annotated list of things (yes, I'd like a better word than that, suggestions?) people should know about before taking a firm position on the situation.  Each item is worthy of its own book length discussion. Most of these issues are intertwined.  Separating them into discrete items makes it easier to talk about them, but can be misleading, so read with caution.  Here's the list as it stands today (January 18, 2024)

1.  PROPAGANDA, MISINFORMATION, OBLITERATION OF TRUTH

2.  THE PROBLEM OF NETANYAHU 

3A.  HISTORIC ANTI-SEMITISM

3B.  THE HOLOCAUST

4.  GENOCIDE

5.  ZIONISM

6.  ISRAELI MISTREATMENT OF PALESTINIANS 

7.  TEACH YOUR CHILDREN WELL - PALESTINIAN AND ISRAELI EDUCATION

8.  RUSSIAN IMMIGRANTS AND ISRAEL'S RIGHT WING TILT 

9.  IGNORANCE 

10.  HAMAS

11.  GUERRILLA WARFARE

12.  WHY GETTING JEWS OUT OF ISRAEL SEEMS EASIER THAN NATIVE AMERICANS GETTING EUROPEANS OUT OF THE UNITED STATES

I've 'finished' 1-8.  I've decided that this is too long for most readers, so I'm going to break it down into several posts, starting with 1 through 3B.  A version of 11 - Guerrilla Warfare - is already up offering you the movie Battle of Algiers.  

1.  PROPAGANDA, MISINFORMATION, OBLITERATION OF TRUTH

Democracy requires citizens have access to information - how organizations work, who has power and how they use it - that enables us to make intelligent choices in how we lead our lives and who we vote for to represent us in government. 

Politicians and citizens have always bent the truth in their favor, but today the truth is almost unrecognizable. Trump's Republican Party realizes their ideas are outmoded and they can only win major elections by lying and subterfuge.  Right wing billionaires scheme to protect their wealth and ability to do as they please without regard to others.  Foreign authoritarian governments (ie Russia, Iran, China) have an interest in 'proving' to their citizens that democracy cannot work and destroying democracy in the US would be their greatest victory.  

Here's an Anchorage Daily News headline Dec. 19 2023 on a Washington Post story:

"The rise of AI fake news is creating a ‘misinformation superspreader’"

The story it makes my argument:

"Historically, propaganda operations have relied on armies of lowpaid workers or highly coordinated intelligence organizations to build sites that appear to be legitimate. But AI is making it easy for nearly anyone — whether they are part of a spy agency or just a teenager in their basement — to create these outlets, producing content that is at times hard to differentiate from real news."

So, starting off this discussion, I'd note that from even before the Hamas attack on Israel, false information was being spread to support and attack anyone who ventured to comment on this topic.  Russia sees it as a way to peel off voters from Biden to improve Trump's election to a second term knowing Trump would much more vigorously support Russia's plans in Ukraine and the world.  

It's also a way to divert world attention away from Ukraine and onto Israel.  (This may be just a brief sentence, but I suspect it's an important factor.)

While I think today (in January) the outline of the war is clearer than it was when I started, there is constant misinformation spread in mainstream media as well as social media.

2.  THE PROBLEM OF NETANYAHU 

Before Netanyahu was ever prime minister I found a book he authored on the bargain table at Borders Books in Anchorage.  So this was before 1996 when he first became prime minister.  I read the book and was appalled.  What I remember most vividly was a sentence where he said something to the effect of "I never met an Arab I could trust."  I didn't keep the book, but I've looked on line to see what books he wrote before 1996.  Wikipedia lists Netanyahu's books.  Here are the ones published before 1996:

• International Terrorism: Challenge and Response. Transaction Publishers. 1981. 
• Terrorism: How the West Can Win. Avon. 1987.
• Fighting Terrorism: How Democracies Can Defeat Domestic and International Terrorism. Farrar, Straus and Giroux. 1995.

All these are edited books, with Netanyahu providing the introduction.  What I recall was more of an autobiographical work.  But I can't find any reference to such a book by Netanyahu before the 2022 autobiography.  

But I did look at an online preview of Terrorism: How The West Can Win. [click on Preview at the link].  This is an edited volume and Netanyahu introduces other speakers at a conference, so these excerpt probably cannot be directly attributed to Netanyahu.  But he has organized this conference and invited the presenters.  Netanyahu edited the book and presumably decided what went in and what didn't. [And we'll see later that this sentiments reappear in the current crisis.]  

The book ignores the idea of terrorism being the last resort of an oppressed people who have no legal way to protest their condition or change it.  Rather it is Civilization versus the Savages.  He quotes Gibbons of the fall of the Roman Empire 

Then he goes on to say that the same dynamic is happening today - civilization vs. the savages.  

This is the language that Europeans used to justify conquering non-Christian lands in the 16 and 1700s.  It's how the US government justified removing Native Americans from their land and killing those who resisted.  And one might argue, how the current Israeli government seems to treat Palestinians in the West Bank as they confiscate their property to make room for Jewish settlers in the West Bank.

I don't know what Netanyahu says about the Jewish terrorists who fought against the British occupiers of Palestine in the first half of the 20th Century.  The deadly bombing of the King David Hotel in 1946 was organized by future Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin.  The book preview does include the index which does list   "King David Hotel Incident on page 45", but the preview on line doesn't go to page 45. In fact it has no page numbers.  He specifically rejects the idea that "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter."  But what about the Colonists who threw tea into Boston Harbor, or Ho Chi Minh who fought the French and then the Americans to free Vietnam from colonial rule?  

Netanyahu has also  been the subject of criminal prosecutions and huge public demonstrations against his weakening of the judicial branch of government.  Some have argued that pursuing this war is a way for Netanyahu to distract the nation from his legal problems.

It would be interesting to know the relationship between Netanyahu and Henry Kissinger about whom Netanyahu Netanyahu said we "have known one another for 'many years,'”  They seem to be kindred spirits.  

"Kissinger believed in power and disdained abstract ideas about progress, fraternity, democracy and freedom, ideas that America disseminates around the world. In his 1994 book “Diplomacy,” he justified national interests as the desired basis of foreign policy, calling on American leaders not to abandon this even after winning the Cold War.

His approach was congruent with Israel’s foreign policy, which since the days of Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion believes in force while harboring deep reservations about international institutions and norms such as human rights and weapons control. That is why the harsh criticism of Kissinger by the left as the person directly responsible for mass murder, atrocities in Cambodia, Laos and Chile, Bangladesh and Timor, and for the bloody and needless prolongation of the Vietnam War, is heard in Israel only among a small circle of anti-American leftists."  (from Haaretz)

My sense of Netanyahu is that he is an absolutist on Arabs and terrorists and sees the civilian deaths resulting from the bombing of Gaza are, in his mind, completely justifiable as he attempts to rid Israel of terrorists.  

3A.  HISTORIC ANTI-SEMITISM

I don't want to go through the history of anti-semitism here.  Go to the link if you need a briefing.  I mention it here only to say that the reactions to the Israeli-Gaza war are aggravated by the latent pool of historic anti-semitism that persists in the world today.  

Further we have the conflation of Israeli, Jew, and Zionist.  And the assumption many have of Israelis, of non-Israeli Jews, and Zionists being a unified organism that all support Netanyahu's policy of bombing Gaza.  Each of the groups has divisions and groups who support and oppose, to varying degrees, the bombing.  

It's easy for people who know little or nothing of other countries to group all the people as being united.  But just as the United States has many divisions, so do all other countries. 

I mention this because there are people with strong opinions about the war who really have little or no experience with or understanding of the many different types of Jews or Israelis, who know nothing about the history of the geography and politics of the Middle East, particularly the land where Israel is located.  

Many Jews feel - and the current tolerance on the right of Neo-Nazis verify those feelings - that anti-semitism is alive and well today in the world and that no matter what Israel does they will be vilified.  An Orthodox Jew told me once, he didn't care what the world thought, because it didn't matter what Israel did, they would always get blamed.  

3B.  THE HOLOCAUST

The details in this section are a little rough, but I think the general point is valid.

The loss of 6 million Jews during WW II, seems to have stirred the world to allow the establishment of a Jewish state in what had been the British held territory in Palestine.  There was a moral high ground that Jews had.  And they managed to tell a story of a people who escaped hell on earth to create the Land of Milk and Honey and the miracle of Making the Desert Bloom.  In 1967, these survivors repelled the attack from various Arab neighbors.  Moshe Dayan was an international hero. 

But things went downhill from there.  I suspect part of the problem was that Israelis wrapped themselves in the story of surviving the Holocaust and slogan "Never Again."  They used these to justify taking Arab property and forcing many Palestinians to flee as protecting themselves from another Holocaust.  And Arabs who refused to acknowledge the right of a State of Israel to exist, gave some legitimacy to this idea.  

But in refusing to become the victims ever again, they slipped into the role of the oppressors in the West Bank and Gaza.  There's enough fault on both sides, but using the Holocaust to justify their treatment of Arabs to the world and to themselves, meant that they began losing the PR war among the rest of the world.

[Update - January 19, 2024, I found this comment today in an article by Nurit Elhanan of Hebrew University:

"The only thing that unites the antagonistic Jewish ethnic groups in Israel is fear of the enemy and the quest for a Jewish national 'purity' along with the belief only a Jewish majority and a strong Jewish army can prevent another Holocaust, this time perpetrated by the Palestinians or other Muslim powers, such as Iran." [emphasis added]

So, this is the end of Part I.  Part II is now (1/21/24) up.   Part III is now done.  Still more parts will appear soon.  

About 92% Of IOWA GOP Didn't Vote For Trump

 

You might think from headlines like these that Trump scored a great victory in the Iowa caucuses yesterday.  Even headlines that just said he won are telling the wrong story.

They focused on the horse race.  Just on the candidates and their votes.

The real story for me is about the GOP who simply didn't vote.  

Let's look at this chart from @analogmeat on Spoutible:

I've checked the numbers and they're good on the results percentages, but the Iowa Capitol Dispatch says that as of last week  there were 687,000 registered Republicans voters in Iowa, fewer than in the chart.

The real story, it seems to me is this:

Barely 8% of Iowa registered GOP voters voted for Trump.

Just under 8% of Iowa registered GOP voters voted for candidates other than Trump.  

About 84% of Iowa registered GOP voters DID NOT VOTE.

Put another way, 92% of Iowa registered GOP voters DID NOT VOTE FOR TRUMP.  

That seems to me to be the big story.  Most GOP stayed home.  Sure the weather was bad, but even so, that sounds like a huge vote of no confidence for the GOP front runner.  Or for the other GOP candidates for that matter.  

Maybe I'm missing something here.  Maybe only a small percentage of Iowa voters have participated in the caucuses historically.  But if that's the case, it's the media horserace coverage of elections - who's winning and by how much - that have made this farce into something of national significance.  

I'm sure Mike in Iowa will fill me in if I'm wrong.