Miles Report No. 33.
(1) Rob Anders, David Horowitz, and Nelson Mandela.
(2) Elizabeth Mays is just another politician after all.
(1) Rob Anders, David Horowitz, and Nelson Mandela.
“Liberated South Africa is one of those epic messes the Left created and promptly forgot about.”
Canadian MP Rob Anders denied Nelson Mandela the unanimous support for being an Honorary Canadian Citizen in 2001, and apparently still maintains those views according to CBC news. (http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/rob-anders-still-no-fan-of-nelson-mandela-1.2454052)
Apparently Rob Anders wishes to stand on the wrong side of freedom with David Horowitz. Horowitz is well known for his far-right Zionist positions that include demonization of Islam and uncritical support of Israel and Judaism. (Although his right wing family values need a little practice as he has been married four times). However the argument here is that simple statement quoted above in relation to Nelson Mandela about the Left creating the mess in South Africa.
If Horowitz and Anders were to read their history, their current events, they would know that it was the right that created the mess in South Africa:
“the battle for the soul of the African National Congress was lost to corporate power and influence… We readily accepted that devil’s pact and are damned in the process. It has bequeathed to our country an economy so tied in to the neoliberal global formula and market fundamentalism that there is very little room to alleviate the dire plight of the masses of our people.”
former South African Intelligence Minister Ronnie Kasrils: http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/12/06/the-mandela-years-in-power/?
In other words, the global elites recognized the Mandela government partly on the basis of its acceptance of the Washington consensus without taking the path of democratic socialism. The money makers and owners of South Africa remained mainly the white corporate bureaucrats that were in place before apartheid ended. The truth is that none of “neoliberal economics” nor “globalization” nor “free markets” nor “free trade” nor “neo-conservative” positions are designed to support the greater masses of the people of the world. They are designed to harvest the wealth of the world for the corporate and political elites, the “one per-cent” who control the wealth and power of the world.
Fear of apartheid
Israel has created its own apartheid state that generates much criticism from South Africa, and while the features of Israeli racism and apartheid are different than in South Africa, the definition of apartheid remains valid for Israel. The Palestinians live under legal, physical, and military separation created by the Israeli state powers. The racism is obvious in the many laws that limit the freedoms and basic human rights of the Palestinian people and which are illegal under international human rights law, the UN Charter, and the Geneva Conventions (all of which Canada is signatory to).
The physical separation is obvious with the open air imprisonment of the Gaza population, the creation of the many settlements on illegally occupied land, and the road system that divides Palestinian land even further, and the many military checkpoints and blockades that severely limit the movement and livelihood of the Palestinian people.
No fear of hypocrisy
Prime Minister Harper is going to visit Israel for the first time next year:
"I look forward to visiting the Middle East early next year to explore ways of strengthening peace and security, stimulating sustainable economic growth, and promoting essential Canadian values, such as tolerance and human rights, across the region," a statement from Harper's office said. http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/stephen-harper-to-visit-israel-in-2014-1.2447312
This is pure hypocrisy from someone who supports Israeli apartheid and like Horowitz is a devoted Zionist, albeit a Christian one. The tired rhetoric of “Canadian values” is mostly common sense and nothing particularly Canadian, but for both Anders and Harper, these words ring hollow with their full on support of the racist and apartheid Israeli regime.
His visit with Mahmoud Abbas will probably be touted as one of supporting the quisling manner in which Abbas bows down to Israeli pressure. Abbas is not a legally elected representative of the Palestinian people and is able to control what remains of the Palestinian West Bank through the funds donated by the U.S. and Canada to maintain the charade of the ongoing peace process.
(2) Elizabeth Mays is just another Canadian politician after all.
“We don’t support any forms of boycotts of Israel: we oppose those.”
“I think that dialogue is important and I think there are many good people who belong to this organization but who have not thought through what the real politic of life in the Middle East; the positive role that Israel plays as the bulwark of democracy in the Middle East....the Green Party and I have felt that decisions by the State of Israel have not been in the best interests of peace in the Middle East.”
“ recognizing the importance of the good work the State of Israel does in the world,”
“...the Green Party of Canada is very strongly supportive of the existence of the State of Israel, recognizes the importance to the Canadian community of having a strong and stable democracy in the Middle East, while at the same time feeling that it’s okay for friends to offer advice and criticism. We do believe in dialogue”
Well, Ms. Mays, it appears that while you may be very well versed and articulate when it comes to matters of the environment, you international human rights standards leave a bit to be desired. The last part about dialogue is apparently your main pitch...and while you dialogue many others are acting. This is true with environmentalism (the Sea Shepherd Society, Greenpeace, the First Nations “idle no more” campaign) as it is with the situation in Israel.
While the dialogue of the so called peace process has been ongoing for thirty plus years, the Israelis have been acting, creating “facts on the ground” that are designed to deny the Palestinians any form of contiguous territory from which to create a sovereign state. Oh sure, they may be granted a conditional “independence” within which Israel controls all access, and pretty much all economic functions, but it would be an apartheid bantustan style setup (so what do you think of Mandela and boycotts, Ms May?). Your desire for dialogue will only continue the de facto permission given to Israel to build its illegal settlements.
As for Israel’s democracy and its good work it does in the world, I would like to know what you think these are. Perhaps it is all the military hardware and software they have created for the express purposes of crowd control and outright battlefield killing? Perhaps it is the militarized nature of their industrial economy that supports all that killing? Perhaps it is their refusal to sign the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (as Iran has done, and is now willing to act on the demands of the mostly western powers? Or perhaps their denial of the already mentioned UN Charter, international human rights laws, and the Geneva Conventions that you support?
And then there is this bit about Israel’s decisions for peace in the Middle East. Does that include attacking Egypt pre-emptively in the 1967 war? Does that include attacking and occupying southern Lebanon for many years? Or perhaps it was the wonderful Cast Lead murder of a thousand plus Palestinians in Gaza - I suppose you consider the proportionate as well? Or the later attack on Palestine that again left thousands dead and homeless? Does that include the ongoing military occupation and blockades that control the West Bank and Gaza?
An answer would be wonderful, but do not expect me to dialogue about it. I advocate, I don’t dialogue.