How deep is the US treachery?

The Radical

Melanie - you claim Lebanon has been delivered back into the hands of "its Syrian oppressors". Yet you omit to mention the country which has oppressed Lebanon most severly and directly over the past three decades, invading and occupying Lebanon for twenty-two years and then, in 2006, launching a war against Hizbollah which killed a thousand Lebanese civilians, wounded another four thousand, drove a fifth of the country's population out of their homes and left the already-war-torn nation with billions of dollars of damage. That country is of course Israel, which continues to occupy the Shebaa Farms (not to mention the Golan Heights). It is Israel which oppresss Lebanon and which cynically undermined the so-called 'Cedar Revolution'. radicalopinions.blogspot.com

dsquared

I don't think that we can necessarily assume that the treachery stops at the boundaries of Israel. After all Ehud Barak attended the evil Annapolis conference too, and appears to be ready to take part in Bush's black scheme of infamy. I think it's entirely possible that the current Israeli government has at least one "Manchurian candidate" in it, placed there as "sleeper" agents in the 1970s. We will only know for sure when the mushroom clouds start rising. That's satire, by the way. Do you have literally no sense of embarrassment with these ridiculous conspiracy theories?

ed fisjer

The "so-called" Radical. The Shebaa farms have never belonged to Lebanon. Syria perhaps, if you consider absentee landlords using the local arab peasants as indentured/slave labour as ownership but not Lebanon. Likewise the "Lebanese" Israel attacked aren't Lebanese but a motley crew of "Palestinians" that the Lebanese let into their country into an act of suicide in the early '70's, and pro-Iranian beardies.

korova

Looks like Melanie has been sucked into a Loose Change type conspiracy theory. The irony is, her previous post is entitled 'Reason Fights Back'. Looks like 'Reason' is on the ropes and 'Conspiracy' is the likely victor.

J. Isaacs

The Return of the Radical. Fearing its imminent demise at the hands of laughing-stock cube makers or being sucked under by the bottom of the blog, the shrivelled frozen Radical makes a desperate late migratory flight to the Shebaa Farms. Here it can add a new cry to its now wearisome "radicalopinions.blogspot" - that of "Cedar Revolution." But, alas, this merely warns native species of its presence and alerts eagles that prey is there for the taking.

BJ

Let's face reality the "Cedar Revolution" stood little chance of surviving Israel's most recent attack and invasion of Lebanon. If there is a lesson from either this or the spectacular US failure in Iraq it is a reminder that war never has the results its cheerleaders expect or desire.

Bob Latchford

'the wind of freedom' in Lebanon? Ms Phillips, dont make me laugh....how on earth is a country where your seat in parliament is dependendent on your religion a bastion for freedom & democracy?

Robert

I wish I could find grounds to dismiss Ms. Phillip's analysis of a likely American decision to abandon Israel and Lebanon but I can't. The recent actions of the American State Department at Annapolis and the American intelligence agencies release of a deceitful NIE are proof of a horrible change of course.

Ephraim Radner

dsquared is obviously an agent provocateur planted by the Iranians to distract attention from their fiendish plan. By pretneind that it is satire, he hopes to discredit anyone who stumbles on the truth. Everyone will realise this after the mushroom clouds have risen, but until then, we must defend civilisation as best we can.

Phillip Reece

Lets imagine a world were we listened to kommie korova, That nice man Saddam would still be in charge in Iraq AND Kuwait and would have a nuclear arsenal at his disposal as well as a quarter of all the worlds oil, Those nice tolerant multicultural taliban would still be in charge in Afghanistan harboring a man whose organisation killed thousands in New York, That nice Argentinian junta would still be in power and in possesion of the Falklands, Those nice North Koreans would have re united the Korean peninsula under their benign rule, What a heart warmimg prospect all that is, I know your a crazed communistic loony who thinks everyone else will pay a horrific price while you laugh your head off, But it is YOU and your kind these people hate the most, Best of luck in your brave new world commie cos you are gonna need it....Big Time.

Adam B.

Radical, your ideas are not radical at all but rather the revisionist history of the far left that we have heard a million times before. Israel did not "launch a war" against Hizbollah, it was the other way around. In an unprovoked attack, Hizbollah kidnapped two soldiers from inside Israel, killing a further eight in the process. It then started to launch its indiscriminate rocket attacks onto northern Israel BEFORE Israel responded. A million Israelis had to flee their homes in the north of the country as 4000 katyushas rained down. The Hizbollah onslaught, which deliberately targeted civilian urban areas, caused billions of dollars of damage. The soldiers are still missing, and Hizbollah has even refused to confirm whether they are alive to their families. And the UN has declared that Israel withdrew from every square inch of Lebanon, so where do you get this rubbish about the Shebaa farms? From Hizbollah, the fascistic terrorist group whose charter declares its intention to commit genocide against every living Jew? So you may want to revise your hate-filled rant and deal with facts instead of fiction.

korova

"Radical, your ideas are not radical at all but rather the revisionist history of the far left that we have heard a million times before. Israel did not "launch a war" against Hizbollah, it was the other way around. In an unprovoked attack, Hizbollah kidnapped two soldiers from inside Israel, killing a further eight in the process." Looks like you are the revisionist Adam B. True, you do trumpet the mainstream media line, but the truth is that Hezbollah's action was a retaliation for the Israeli governments kidnapping of two civilians. The idea of it being 'unprovoked' would be hilarious if it were not for the context. Your next sentence is even more laughable: "The Hizbollah onslaught, which deliberately targeted civilian urban areas, caused billions of dollars of damage." The implication being that Israel did nothing wrong. These were the words of General Dan Halutz: "If the soldiers are not returned, we will turn Lebanon's clock back 20 years." The Israeli government also authorised the use of white phospherous during the war as well as cluster bombs (there were over a million bomblets around Lebanon at the end of the war). Furthermore, despite repeated claims by the reactionary right to defend the indiscriminate killing of civilians by the IDF, there was no evidence that Hezbollah embeded themselves amongst the civilian population. Investigations after the war proved that only 250 of the 1,109 victims were Hezbollah fighters and that Israel was guilty of targeting civilain areas. Oh, and there is the small matter of the Winograd Commission where Ehud Olmert confessed that they had been planning a war with Lebanon before the soldiers were even captured. Their capture was nothing more than a convenient excuse. One other thing, I suggest you look up the word 'fascism' because it is quite clear that you haven't a clue what it means. I am no Hezbollah fan, but they certainly cannot be characterised as 'fascist', particularly as it draws support from Christians, as well as Muslims, in Lebanon.

Rubicon

We all know history has proven beyond any doubt that sacrificing nations such as Lebanon, just as the allies sacrificed the Slovakia's & Poland, only whet the appetite of despotic aggressors. The free world under appeasers seems to continue to believe they can negotiate promises of freedom & peace with despot's intent on totalitarian rule of any and/or all! Churchill must be rolling over in his grave. Unfortunately, it will take many deaths & much destruction, plus actual threats to the lands of the appeasers, before any will actually admit their policies are as vacuous as their foolish idea's for a utopian world socialist government under the United Nations where all live in peace & all share equally, no matter what their contribution to actual accomplishments! Israel has tried to walk away from Lebanon repeatedly, but is forced to return to stop unwarranted & despicable attacks on civilians by rocket attacking terrorists!

Turner

Let's not forget that many regions of Southern Lebanon are still uninhabitable due to the presence of unexploded Israeli cluster bombs. With friends like Israel,who needs enemies?

Lee Jakeman

The USA is going the same way as Europe. At the moment, the place is full of smug "it couldn't happen here" types who gleefully "predict" that Europe will be Islamist by such and such a date. When you take a closer look at the US, however, you find that their politicians, behind the scenes, are signing "North American Union" treaties with the Canadians and Mexicans - all behind the backs of the American people (sound familiar?). There is also an Hispanic demographic threat to the US which is every bit as violent and menacing as the Islamic one in Europe. You don't hear too much about this at the moment because, unlike the Islamic threat, the Hispanic threat isn't "topical". Visit the "wehategringos" website sometime and you'll see what I mean. The USA is definitely moving leftwards and downwards, along with the rest of so-called civilisation.

Kotzabasis

Whenever Intelligence fails to find the truth logic comes to its rescue. The theocratic leadership of Iran is concerned solely with its LUNGE FOR POWER in the region. And the acquisition of nuclear weapons is a necessary component of that power in the eyes of the mullahs. It's in this logic that the answer to the conundrum whether Iran has stopped or not its nuclear program lies, and NOT in the uncertain or politicaly deliberate estimates of the NIE. This calculus of COST-POWER analysis about Iran's geopolitical ambitions compels the Bush administration from NOT taking the option of a strike off the table.

john mcdonald

The US is in the hands of cowards and appeasers now - maybe the worst time in the planets history for it to happen - Israel is now on its own - this appeaser block in th US believes if they can just mollify the "Arabs" by throwing Israel to the lions all will be well with the world - move over Chamberlain - you are about to be out-appeased!!

Alex

And what do you think of Obadiah Shoher's arguments against the peace process ( samsonblinded.org/blog/we-need-a-respite-from-peace.htm )?

BJ

Remarkable how on Planet Mel the all powerful Saudi Lobby has gone from dictating the terms of Annapolis last week to jumping astride the "strongest horse" of Iranian influence (as that old US Orientalist Bernard Lewis has been wheeled out to tell us) Didn't the Osmonds write a song about strongest horses? or was that "Crazy Horses"?

Fred Beloit

Some one person or some committee of two or three is responsible for the wording of the NIE. I want to know who he/she/they are. I want to know their job title and name. There is no reasonable argument for keeping this information secret. Then I want to know what steps will be taken to try to depoliticize this document.

Adam B.

Korova, Oh dear. Yet more unsubstantiated "claims" without evidence. It is you who clearly has no idea what the term "fascist" means. It is defined in the Oxford English Dictionary as a "nationalist and authoritarian" movement. Hizbollah meets both criteria. In fact, it shares the antisemitism of the Nazis, hence the popularity of "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" and "Mein Kampf" amongst Hizbollah supporters. Hizbollah's charter calls for the killing of every Jew on this planet. Strange you don't seem pertubed by any of this. You fail to cite any evidence for your groundless contention that Israel kidnapped two civilians, whilst your claim that Hizbollah did not mix itself amongst the civilian population is indeed revisionist junk. You fail to even acknowledge that Hizbollah fired the first shots, or that its rocket attacks were completely indiscriminate, deliberately targeting civilian urban centres. You have no problem with any of this. Where do your "facts and figures" come from? You cite no sources. And where on earth did you hear that Ehud Olmert (of whom I am no fan) "confessed" to wanting to start a war and used the rockets of Hizbollah as an excuse? He said no such thing at the Winograd investigation. Korova, we can all claim anything we like, but some of us have to live in the real world.

korova

Ah yes, the real world. A place not visited by yourself for sometime. Well done for finding the definition of 'fascist', curious as it rather proves my point. Hezbollah are hardly nationalist. The true nationalists in Lebanon are the Kataeb Party (other wise known as the Phalange). Interestingly, Hezbollah are often accused of the murder of Phalange leaders (such as Antoine Ghanem) and they are clearly on opposite sides of the political spectrum. The Kataeb Party is also directly linked to the Nazi Party, although you don't very much hear that when one of their number are murdered. I would suggest that you are more likely to find Nazi literature in their hands than Hezbollah's. You would be hard pressed to consider Hezbollah nationalist as they hardly put the interests of the state above all other considerations. Here's another definition for you: Nationalism: Aspirations for national independence in a country under foreign domination. That would be more befitting of the Phalange (who are opposed to Syrian influence) than Hezbollah (who have links to Syria). The fact that Hezbollah draws support from Christian groups in Lebanon as well seems to fly in the face of what most people recognise as 'fascist'. On to your next points. I confess I am confused by some of them. It goes without saying that I object to the very idea of 'killing every Jew' (source?), as you call it. That you could suggest anything else is ridiculous and offensive. Do a search for the Gaza individuals captured the day before. You'll find evidence if you look. As for the claim about Hezbollah did not embed themselves, try here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,2164090,00.html. You may also be interested to know that this same report was used by some rightists to show that Hezbollah did fire into civilian areas. Odd that they, like you, chose to ignore this part of the report. Revisionist junk? No, facts my friend. Presumably if you reject these findings in the report you also reject the findings in the same report that claim Hezbollah fired into civilian areas. Myself? I accept both conclusions. Hezbollah and Israel fired into civilian areas, of that there is no question. Your next point is truly odd. You said: "And where on earth did you hear that Ehud Olmert (of whom I am no fan) "confessed" to wanting to start a war and used the rockets of Hizbollah as an excuse?" I actually said: "Ehud Olmert confessed that they had been planning a war with Lebanon before the soldiers were even captured." This from Haaretz: "Olmert has told the Winograd Commission that his decision to respond to the abduction of soldiers with a broad military operation was made as early as March 2006, four months before last summer's Lebanon war broke out." http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/834572.html Your arguments are totally absurd. I was totally opposed to all the acts committed during that atrocity last year. You seem to be only concerned with the atrocities committed on one side and you fail to even ackowledge the deaths on the Lebanese side who were, afetr all, the innocent parties in a war between Hezbollah and Israel. Your complete disregard for the lives of these innocents speaks volumes. One last point, your arguments would be less laughable if, when complaining about a lack of citations, you provide some for your more outlandish statements: "the popularity of "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" and "Mein Kampf" amongst Hizbollah supporters." Source? You really are quite an absurd person whose grip on reality is tenuous at best. According to you, Israel did no wrong and was entirely blameless. Tell that to the 1,109 people who died in Lebanon.

Adam B.

Korova, I seem to have upset you. I fully understand that innocent Lebanese were killed in the war, and yes, this is tragic. Unfortunately, it is the nature of war that civilians pay the price, and if you want to avoid it, don’t start a war. Hizbollah recklessly started a war by firing its missiles into Israel and kidnapping its soldiers from within Israel’s own sovereign territory. It then showed scant regard for either Israeli or Lebanese civilians. The key difference is that Israel tried to avoid civilian deaths, and expressed regret when they inevitably occurred, whilst Hizbollah sought to kill civilians, and celebrated when it succeeded. If you can’t see the difference, then I suggest you have no moral compass. I care about all civilians, it is you who only focuses on one side. (Incidentally, we killed ten times more German civilians in our bombing raids in WW2 than the Germans killed British civilians. Going by your logic, Britain must have been wrong in WW2). Hizbollah describes itself as a “nationalist resistance”, it is you who says it isn’t nationalist. I don’t understand your point about it not being fascist because it draws some support from some Christians (most of whom do not support Hizbollah - 77% according to a French poll taken last year). Fascist organizations can take support from many sources. I accept your point about the Phalange, but this does not negate the Nazi salutes given by Hizbollah members, nor the frequent admiring references to the Nazis and anti-Semitic diatribes on Al Manar (Hizbollah TV) broadcasts. “The Protocols” were even turned into a popular soap opera on Al-Manar. At least you seem to concede that Hizbollah has called for the killing of every Jew on earth. I can’t find anything about your spurious claim about civilians being abducted in Gaza. Perhaps you can enlighten me about these innocent civilians? Your quote from Haaretz makes absolutely no sense. How can Israel have decided to respond to the abduction of the soldiers before they had been abducted? Unless of course you mean that Israel had a contingency plan in the event that soldiers were abducted, which is hardly a shocking revelation. Every country has military contingency plans in the event of a hostile act. (It hardly appeared that Israel had a plan when the soldiers were abducted anyway, and it seemed taken by surprise initially with a very tentative and hesitant response). Your implication in your previous posting was that Israel wanted to start a war, which is not what Olmert said at all. It was actually Hassan Nasrallah who said that Hizbollah had planned its attack on Israel five months before the war started. You say you were totally opposed to all acts of atrocity committed in the war last year. Yet in your initial posts you chose only to attack Israel, without a peep about Hizbollah. It is not that I think Israel can do no wrong, (which I never contended), it is you who thinks it can do no right.

dsquared

It gets even worse! I have just heard on the news that British forces have "handed over" Basra Province to the Iraqis (and therefore to their puppet-masters, the Iranians)! Surely Gordon Brown cannot hold on to power after this base and humiliating act of treachery! We must demand his immediate resignation, to be replaced by a Government Of National Unity, led by Melanie Phillips.

korova

Adam B - yes, I did only attack Israel, that was an effort on my patr to provide a counter-balance to your previous posting that attacked only Hezbollah. Put the two together and you haev balance. If you had not written such a one-sided piece, I would not have been moved to comment. As for fascism and Islam, this is a recent phenomenon by the right echoing some elements on the left. Anything they oppose is called 'fascist' and the argument is closed. For the record, there is an excellent piece on fascism and Islam by Stefan Durand: ...Islamism must be seen as a contemporary phenomenon, both new and distinct. It is true that Muslim fundamentalist movements exhibit certain traditional features of fascism: a paramilitary dimension, a feeling of humiliation and a cult of the charismatic leader (although to a relative degree, and scarcely comparable with the cults of the Führer or the Duce). But all the other fundamental ingredients of fascism -- the expansionist nationalism, corporatism, bureaucracy and the cult of the body - are generally lacking in Islamism. In addition, Islamist movements are often trans-national and far removed from the integral nationalism characteristic of the European fascism of the 1930s. Fascism was by nature imperialist and expansionist. Although Al-Qaida cells operate in many countries and some Islamist movements do dream of reconquering Andalusia or Sicily and restoring the caliphate, organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah - however disreputable their religious ideology and armed operations - are struggling against territorial occupation. The religious absolutism of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan made it more like medieval obscurantist theocracies than the fascist regimes that emerged in industrialized countries after the First World War. The corporatist dimension inherent in fascism, its almost total merger of state, industrial enterprises and professional bodies, is lacking in the Islamic context... The existence of a "partisan state" is a necessary condition for the exercise of fascist power, but these Islamist groups are most often non-state organizations marginal to, or persecuted by, the authorities of the countries in which they are based... Islamist movements make an instrument of religion and try to use it as an ideology, but they do not intend to create "a new man," as was the case in fascist Europe. They propound archaic religious and social precepts rather than an overall coherent ideology. The popular success of these movements is often due to factors unconnected with ideology. http://mondediplo.com/2006/11/05islamofascism Fascism has become a rather lazy term to describe anything that one opposes. However, when you look at the regimes in Nazi Germany, Mussloni's Italy and Franco's Spain, they are nothing like the beliefs espoused by Hezbollah.

Chip

Though I find long discussions on fascism and Islam fascinating, I'll run with the tree words on Islam I read in a book: "portable theocratic state." Seems to encompass all the phenomena we see today globally.

Melfan

"Surely Gordon Brown cannot hold on to power after this base and humiliating act of treachery! We must demand his immediate resignation, to be replaced by a Government Of National Unity, led by Melanie Phillips" I am sure that such a solution would be of much greater value to Britain than that provided by Consensus Parties at Westminster.