Smile Don't Frown

’…By the twisted logic of Zionism Israel can impose a blockade on Gaza that systematically starves civilians, leaves them to die without medicine, destroys their sewage and power systems, leaves them utterly dependent on international aid delivery which it imposes the most grotesque restrictions on; then it can demonise and assault an aid flotilla intended to break the blockade, fire on the residents, murder people in their sleep, the better to deter anyone from attempting to violate its supremacy in Palestine again; then it can manufacture whatever story it requires to force a hostile world to accept its actions, muddy the waters, juggle narratives, befuddle and confuse people…’[1]

Indeed, Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu has, rather confusedly, “expressed regret after at least nine people died when troops stormed ships trying to break the Gaza blockade”, making sure to add that Israeli soldiers were “clubbed, beaten and stabbed” by activists trying to deliver aid to Gaza. Netanyahu said, “Our soldiers had to defend themselves, defend their lives or they would have been killed.” [2] Of course – Israel is always defending itself.

William Hague has said there is “a clear need for Israel to act with restraint and in line with international obligations”, but I don’t think this latest act of Israeli terrorism will stop him trying to change the law on universal jurisdiction to abolish the ability to bring private prosecutions for international crimes in the UK so that war criminals like Tzipi Livni can pay us a visit. [3]

Imagine if Iran had attacked a ship in international waters, killing innocent people – would the media be talking about the incident in terms of how bad it was for Iranian PR? Of course not, but it’s Israel not Iran, which allows Jonathan Marcus to write that “the deaths threaten to make what was always going to be a potential public relations disaster for Israel into a fully-fledged calamity”. [4] He also writes that “taking over vessels at sea is no easy task, even if the units carrying out the mission are well trained”, assuming that Israel had the right to attack the ships, which it didn’t.

I repeat: Imagine if Iran had done this. As it is, Israel – a country with nuclear weapons that continually refuses to abide by international law – has done this. So what happens next?

[1] http://leninology.blogspot.com/

[2] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/10199480.stm

[3] http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/may/30/change-universal-jurisdiction-law

[4] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/10198737.stm

I suppose it’s a bit obvious to say that Brian Haw ought to be given a medal – like the one Barack Obama won. [1] I had a chat with him four years ago, and though I found the wild look in his eyes slightly off-putting, the twice-broken nose, fantastic battered helmet and, most of all, the photo exhibition of uranium-riddled Iraqi babies reminded me why I admired him so much. Now the police have moved him along on a day that was ‘supposed to celebrate British democracy’. [2] ‘Sam Fryers, 25, a former soldier who runs the camp’s IT tent, pitched in the shadow of Winston Churchill’s statue, said: “I can understand that it might look like an eyesore, but you have to think about the message … This is about getting the troops out of Afghanistan.”’

I still find it mind-boggling that MPs walk(ed) past Brian Haw’s display of melted babies and have only been able to think how untidy it all looks. Maybe they just never looked close enough. Maybe they thought the photos were mere drawings. Maybe they have no soul. Again, such an obvious thing to say…

[1] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8405033.stm

[2] http://stopwar.org.uk/content/view/1893/1/

David Miliband visited Worcester recently, about a mile from where I was having my tea. Miliband is keen to stress that Israel is a “close friend” of  Britain’s. [1] Our new Foreign Secretary William Hague says that he’s a “natural friend” of Israel. [2]

The Tories promised change in their election campaign even though the word conservative means ‘tending to oppose change’, ‘moderate’ and ‘traditional or restrained in style’. [3]

Hague, like Miliband, wants to change the law to make it safe for Israeli war criminals like Tzipi Livni to visit Britain. I have no idea what’s moderate or restrained about bombing innocent people (and then saying that “there’s no humanitarian crisis”) [4] nor do I know what’s moderate or restrained about stealing land, demolishing homes, locking up thousands of people without trial, and collectively punishing 1.5 million civilians through a siege that denies or restricts the basic essentials of life. I suppose at least with Israel this sort of behaviour is traditional.

‘Is Israel a terrorist state? Well yes according to official definitions…If the capturing of Gilad Shalit is a terrorist act, well, then Israel’s regular practice supported by the US is incomparably worse. And that’s quite apart from repeated aggression and other crimes. I don’t like Hamas by any means, there is plenty to criticize about them, but if you compare their actions with US and Israel, they are minor criminals.’ [5]

[1] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8415161.stm

[2] http://stopwar.org.uk/content/view/1880/1/

[3] http://www.thefreedictionary.com/conservative

[4] http://www.haaretz.com/news/arab-league-slams-livni-remark-there-s-no-humanitarian-crisis-in-gaza-1.267362

[5] http://www.countercurrents.org/voniati160209.htm