Israel Declared Terminal--More Or Less

There is a yarn running around the web. The yarn first came out last March and died quickly and very quietly. However, it is back with a vengeance spurred no doubt by the Goldstone Report and its adoption by the UN Human Rights Council.

The original source of the yarn in both its original and latest incarnations is Press TV, the state owned organ of the mullahs of Tehran. It has been picked up and built upon by both Arab and Far Left sites. The links are examples. A more inclusive list would tire the Geek's arthritic fingers.

Allegedly, per a man named Franklin Lamb, who is identified by Press TV as "an international lawyer," CIA did a study on the future of Israel. The study concluded that even with US support and assistance Israel as it currently exists has a life expectancy of no more than twenty years.

The reasoning according to Lamb and his assorted interpreters residing behind the pessimistic assessment is predicated upon two factors. One of these is the increasing willingness of Americans generally to accept a "one-state" as opposed to the current "two-state" solution to the never-ending Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The second is demographics, specifically the great disparity between Arab and Israeli lactation rates.

These two factors combine in a synergistic fashion with the American emphasis on democracy to assure that Israel will become a secular or at least a non-Jewish state governed by the Arab Muslim majority. Lamb and others take notice of the number of Israelis who hold dual citizenship--including some half million who are Americans as well as Israelis.

Commentators argue that the coming Arab majority will push many Israelis to invoke the other half of their dual citizenship capacity to leave Israel for the US, Russia, and other destinations. The initial CIA report purportedly makes reference to the "unexpectedly" rapid collapse of the White minority regime in South Africa and the equally "unexpected" implosion of the former Soviet Union to justify the conclusions of the impending death of Israel.

Leaving aside the degree of "unexpectedness" in both cited historical precedents, it is fair to look at the differences between Israel and either South Africa under White rule or the Soviet Union. While those who are passionately anti-Israel might wish it otherwise, the Jewish state is not dependent upon pure coercion to maintain its coherence. Both White dominated South Africa and the old Soviet Union were completely dependent upon the power of the state to coerce their citizens into obedience.

For many decades the Soviet Union and South Africa also relied upon the appeal of a specific ideology. In both cases the faith attenuated over time leaving only naked force to continue the status quo.

Israel relies upon both ideology and religious conviction to uphold social and political coherence within its population. The secular ideologies of democracy, free enterprise, and liberal institutions such as an independent judiciary, a free press, and universal education link well with the ancient tenets of a faith which has been tested repeatedly during centuries of persecution and attempted eradication. The several pillars of belief which unify the Israeli population also connect the Israelis with both coreligionists and ideological affiliates around the world.

This means that the government of Israel does not have to rely upon force alone to maintain its existence--or that of the state. Force is needed not for domestic security and regime maintenance purposes but rather for deterring or defeating external threats. This is not at all akin to the situations which existed in the years prior to collapse in either South African or the Soviet Union.

The Geek has to admit he has read some really, really out-to-lunch assessments coming from CIA. To the best of his knowledge and belief he has never run across one which ignored basic realities such as the vast gulf between the internal dynamics of Israel and both South Africa and the Soviet Union which are alleged to exist in the cited report. While it is possible that the Agency has been hiring the mentally incompetent in recent years, it does seem unlikely.

Rather the eager resuscitation of the March Press TV story is based in the reinvigorated desire on the part of the anti-Israel players around the world to further the cause of delegitimizing the Jewish state. The Goldstone Report, or to err on the side of accuracy, the adoption and forwarding to the Security Council of a resolution based on a part of the Report by the UNHRC, has given a new and improved impetus to the campaign of delegitimization.

The Obama administration and many on the Left of the American political spectrum are both frustrated with the state of play in the Mideast and willing to see Israel as the reason. It is as if the administration and others expect "more" from the civilized, Western Israelis than they do from the comparatively speaking uncivilized Arabs.

Leaving aside the arrogance and patronization implicit in this attitude, the emphasis on Israel's responsibility for the deadlock in the "peace process" is simply factually wrong. While the Israelis are far from guiltless in the blocking of peace, the Arabs still hold the record for both poor negotiating capacities and sheer cussed intransigence.

The Arabs--and not simply those who fall under the rubric of "Palestinians"--now want the US and the West to carry their water. The desire, hope, and apparent strategy of the Arab and Muslim countries is to force the West generally and the US in particular to wash their collective hands of the latest incarnation of the eternal "Jewish question."

Israel has never been seen as "legitimate" in the eyes of the Arab and Muslim countries. Nor will it ever be perceived of as being such. Not as long as the Koran is read and believed.

Now the Arab and Muslim states hope to transmit their view of Israel's inherent lack of legitimacy to the people and governments of the West. The recent growth of Israel bashing and flat out antisemitism in many Western countries has undoubtedly given much encouragement to the men behind the new strategy.

Antisemitism is never far below the surface in any Western country including the US. (The Geek remembers well when his best friend in high school was rejected by an Ivy League college because the institution had already admitted its full quota of "those of the Hebrew faith.") It is easy to invoke a stylishly covered form of antisemitism by re-branding Israel as "fascist" or "Nazi" or "apartheid."

It is even easier to indict Israel as a genocidal power intent on committing crimes against humanity. This is the true import of the UNHRC adoption of a carefully selected portion of the Goldstone Report. It is also the import of the presumably "leaked" CIA "death-of-Israel" study.

The play given to the Lamb revelations by Press TV and other Arab/Muslim outlets both on the web and in more traditional modes is to be expected. After all, these states and people have opposed Israel since the very earliest days of Zionism. Having proved repeatedly their own incompetence at ejecting the Israelis by force or terror, it is not surprising they now hope to make the West--most importantly, the US--the executioner of Arab dreams.

What is truly pathetic--not surprising--simply pathetic is the eagerness with which the American political Left has embraced the Arab/Muslim cause.

It is pathetic because Israel was established by European Leftists. It's vision was that of European Socialists. The country initially prospered because of Leftists. Its strongest supporters in the US were from the Left. During the Eisenhower administration the Democratic Party, particularly the Left segment, repeatedly excoriated the President for his principled refusal to supply weapons to the new state of Israel. When Ike blew the whistle on the Franco-British-Israeli invasion of Egypt in 1956, the Democratic standard bearer, Stevenson, criticized the decision harshly.

Even during the Great Land Grab War of 1967, the American (and European) Left loudly sang the praises of the IDF. The Arab states got no comfort from the democratic Left anywhere outside of France. They certainly received no support from the American Left. The Yom Kippur War six years later saw the same resounding support for Israel from the American Left--even the farthest fringes.

With a remarkable amnesia, the Left has abandoned this heritage. With an utter lack of both consistency and principles, the Left, even the moderate Left, has rushed to the cause of "Palestine" and the "Palestinians." They have warmly embraced the feudalists of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Jordan, and the authoritarians of Egypt, Syria, and Iran. They have kissed and made up with the terrorists of Hamas and Hezbollah--and of Fatah (or the Palestinian National Authority, if you insist.)

In the process, the Left has given the finger to the Israelis, to democracy, liberal institutions, and social justice. If that isn't pathetic, then the Geek does not know the meaning of the word.

What About Muslim Anti-Semitism?

In an add-on to yesterday's post on the PRESS-TV article (http://www.presstv.ir/Detail.aspx?id=56834&sectionid=3510303) and a closely related interview confusing "hate" speech and free speech (http://www.presstv.ir/Detail.aspx?id=6244&sectionid=3510302), the Geek has a question for the alleged signers of the open letter to the West, "Thousands of academics, intellectuals, poets, writers, artists, journalists and scientists of the Islamic countries."

The question?

Here it is. Where are your righteous protests regarding the decades of anti-Semitic diatribes, cartoons, films, songs and writings?

Or don't Jews count as religious people deserving the same respect as that which you demand for Muslims?

It can't be that Jews are not a religious people, can it? After all your whining missive specifically mentions Moses and Abraham. Aren't they major figures in the Hebrew Bible, the Christian Old Testament? Doesn't the Prophet Mohammad make some favorable reference to them?

If it is--as your own writing implies--true that Judaism is a religion deserving respect then why don't you condemn the defamation of Jews and Judaism conducted for years, decades, centuries by Muslims?

Or perhaps your "intellectual" sensibilities are non-existent with respect to the vile billingsgate spewed by Muslim governments, Muslim non-governmental entities, Muslim clerics, Muslim individuals. Perhaps you don't believe that true believers in the Religion of Peace and Tolerance would--could--act in such a disgusting, inhuman way.

Well, Deep Thinking and Profoundly Offended Intellectuals, take a look at the web. You might try http://www.jcpa.org/JCPA/Templates/ShowPage.asp?DRIT=3&DBID=1&LNGID=1&TMID=111&FI=D=253&PID=0&IID=644&TTL=Major_Anti-Semitic_Motifs_in_Arab_Cartoons. That particular post dates back a few years, so you might take a virtual walk through http://www.terrorism-info.org.il/site/html/search.asp?isSearch=yes&isT8=yes&searchText=T99&pid=119&sid=15&preview. This site is current through the past month.

Both sites are Israeli but don't worry, neither has cartoons of Mohammad. They only show Muslim cartoons, children's books and scribblings for grown-ups(?) of a virulently anti-Semitic nature. The Geek is sure that no Muslim "academic, intellectual, etc" could possibly be offended.

Before the Geek leaves this subject and returns to matters of the real world, there are a couple of final points regarding the open letter.

The Geek would really appreciate it if the folks at PRESS-TV or whoever wrote the open letter could use the English language with precision. It would. for example, be both nice and accurate if the term "intellectuals" had not been employed to describe the "signers."

Why?

Simple. Intellectuals have been long noted for their constitutional inability to subscribe unquestioningly to dogma. An intellectual has too darn much fun playing with ideas to believe for a nanosecond that censorship is somehow justified. This, after all, was why the Communist Party not only in the US but the USSR had so much trouble co-opting authentic intellectuals and why intellectuals made up such a distinguished portion of the population in the frozen Gulag.

Then there is the word, "scientists." Islamic science is an oxymoron. For centuries the best that could--or can--be said of Islamic countries is that they produce technologists. Derivative technologists at that.

Science cannot flourish in rigid, authoritarian environments such as those which typify Islam dominated countries. While the Geek acknowledges the accomplishments of Muslim astronomers, physicians and mathematicians a thousand and more years ago as Europe lay intellectually prostrate under the heel of a repressive Church, in recent times, science--the methodical seeking after incremental truths about the universe and all that is in it--has been conspicuous by its absence in Muslim societies.

The Geek can believe that the letter was written by journalists. It has all the superficiality and notes of special pleading that characterize the product of journalists. The Geek can even believe that poets were involved in crafting the letter. It has the lack of firm connection with the cold world of reality which gives poetry its piquancy.

Most of all, the Geek can believe that the letter, like the interview and all the other outpourings of outraged Muslim sensibilities, was the product of insecure men.

Men driven by fear.

Men who accept the principles of doublethink.

Men who would mob together and chant, "Death to -----!" Men who accept, even applaud the killing and maiming of women as the will of the deity.

Men who approve of suicide bombers attacking non-combatants.

In short, men lacking in courage. Men without manliness.

Some Muslims Are Awesomely Insecure

The Geek was all cranked up to post on the current violence in South Africa, but a post from PRESS TV ( ohttp://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=56834&sectionid=3510303) out of Iran caught his attention. And rankled him.

Once again (some) Muslims are making a mighty moan about the West. The West apparently is a monolithic monster breathing satanic fumes of Islamophobia and similar foul odors of blasphemy. Worse, the loathsome Moloch of the West justifies its conduct by invoking a patently secular totem--Free Speech.

The nerve of the Secular Savages of the West astonished the writers of this open letter, identified on as "Thousands of academics, intellectuals, poets, writers, artists, journalists and scientists of the Islamic countries."

It strikes the Geek that this panoply of deep thinking desperately offended academics, intellectuals, et cetera, possess an extremely shallow understanding of the post-Enlightenment trajectory of Western Europe and the United States.

Perhaps they have to appreciate that the Enlightenment and its aftermath are not universally well-regarded in either Europe or the United States.

Perhaps the size of the Christian Fundamentalist movement which contains a significant number of Enlightenment deniers (at least in the US) has eluded them.

Perhaps they have missed the explosive rise of multi-culturalism in the post-Modernist period not only in the US but Europe as well.

More importantly these anonymous "academics, intellectuals" et cetera have overlooked that the West has undergone a number of fierce, violent conflicts over the past centuries all of which have been predicated to a significant extent upon the right of the individual as opposed to the authority of the community.

Ultimately the conflicts have ended in favor of the individual. The individual has been acknowledged to possess certain basic rights. Chief among them has been the right to free expression construed broadly and its essential twin, freedom of inquiry.

The rights of free inquiry and expression are particularly protected in the United States. As a result expression is notably raucous, boisterous and occasionally quite tasteless in the US.

(Intellectual honesty requires the Geek to admit he is periodically offended by some of what he sees, reads or hears.)

Religion is not off-limits for discussion--even attack. Nor should it be. Religion, like politics and economics is part of the human experience and as such is fair game for investigation, debate and disagreement.

That's the way it should be. As soon as one area of human discourse is ruled sacrosanct, no other area is safe. The reasons for insulating one specific arena of discourse out-of-bounds are immaterial. The harm is done by the prohibition.

Most Western governments and societies recognise this. They are secure enough in their values and identities not to seek the imposition of cordons sanitaires.

Apparently most Islamic governments and societies lack the same measure of security in values and identities. They not only need off-limit signs--they demand them.

If these insecure Muslims demanded thought police and mental shackles be applied only to themselves, this might be lamentable, unfortunate and ultimately counterproductive, but it would be their right.

The problem comes when the Legion of the Insecure demand that all humans be confined in the prison of Islamic sensibilities. This is neither ethically justifiable on any grounds nor allowable.

If Islam is the final, most highly perfected form of monotheism as the open letter from the Terminally Offended indicates, then why are they so insecure about it?

It seems to the Geek that certainty of correctness should lead to serenity when under putative attack. If cartoons, or grade school kids naming a rabbit Mohammad or even a US Army sergeant shooting up a copy of the Quran shakes the base of a religion adhered to by 1.5 giga-people, one can only wonder about the strength of that base.

Muslims howling about slander under the rubric of free speech are not the first to seek limits on the ability of individuals to write, speak, read or hear all forms of opinion or the manifold contradictory facts abounding in the world. Limits have been attempted--and failed--even in the US.

Remember all the well-intentioned efforts by assorted state legislatures back during the Fifties to purge our university campuses of "communists?" Recall all the state imposed bans on "communist" speakers or the possession by libraries of "communist" literature?"

The Geek thought at the time as did many of his contemporaries--the supposed beneficiaries of these "protect our precious children" enactments--that if free enterprise economics and democratic processes were so inherently good, what was the need to stifle opposing perspectives?

Censorship whether for political or religious reasons, no matter how presented, is not simply wrong. The imposition of limits on speech whether to protect the minds of children or to guard the sensitivities of (some) Muslims is simply a sign of underlying insecurity.

Censorship screams, "Maybe what I/we believe isn't right after all."

Censorship screams with fear, deep and primordial, "Maybe I'm wrong."

Censorship is the coward's way out of real debate.

Press TV Doesn't Know Diddly About US History

There they go again! The Iranian agency, Press TV, warps, distorts, and mutilates US history as it gins out propaganda under the guise of "objective reporting."

We're all used to the media distorting fact to meet the requirements of propensity, prejudice, and predilection. Nothing new about it. US media--both mainstream and alternative--have been known to commit felonious assault upon American history. It seems to come with the territory.

The Geek usually just shakes his head sadly as he reads or hears yet one more nauseating twisting of historical reality to fit present needs.

It's different this time. This time the Geek is flatly rankled. This time the self-proclaimed reclaimer of media purity from the icky, nasty liars of the Western media has sliced and diced the realities of American history to meet the propaganda needs of the mullahocracy.

Worse, Press TV has chosen a subject--biological and chemical warfare research--which is both highly emotional and has a history poorly understood by the vast majority of even well-educated people. Choosing this subject for propagandistic treatment is a cheap shot. A low blow.

The Geek, who is, after all, a military historian who has lived in more archives than he cares to remember, pouring over the most recently declassified documents, has some expertise in the area of biological and chemical warfare. He is equipped by virtue of his education and experience to comment on the warped account provided by Press TV.

The problem is that space prohibits taking on more than a few of the specifics of Press TV's fabrications through misrepresentation. But, first take a look at the Iranian bill of particulars. http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=24716&sectionid=3510303.

Now, The Geek Talks Back! Or, Truth In History Is A Good Thing.

The Tuskegee Syphilis Study really happened. You can read the whole, sad, sick story in Jones, Bad Blood. This book came out a quarter century ago. It was written by a professor of history at the University of Houston. Jones and his book had a brief moment in the celebrity spotlight. It contains the cliched "rest of the story" which eluded Press TV

The lads in Tehran have the problem of pellagra wrong. In 1935, as the result of a pioneering study conducted on both black and white citizens in the so-called Pellagra Belt in the American south, the cause of the metabolic disorder was determined and effective countermeasures through diet change were developed. The difficulty came in convincing people to change time honored dietary customs.

The malaria experiments of 1940 and many successive years conducted on convicts in a number of state and federal prisons were done with the individual's consent and for the valid reason of determining effective prophylactic measures other than quinine. The results spared many US personnel in the South Pacific and other theaters of war from the debilitating disease. As the war moved toward Japan, the local populations also benefited.

You bet we, like the British, experimented in protective measures to counter toxic weapons such as mustard gas. Military personnel, conscientious objectors, and convicts were all used. While the Geek has real problems with the concept "informed consent" in this work, it was critically necessary and certainly better than the German and Japanese practice of conducting experiments on concentration camp inmates.

To show how out-to-lunch the crew at Press TV are, get a grip on this. The British, Canadian, and American governments pressed ahead with research, development, testing, and production of biological weapons, such as anthrax during World War II. Churchill had to be actively resisted in his stated desire to use anthrax on German cities in early 1944. (The winning argument was the truth. Not enough had been produced yet. And, the target cities might be uninhabitable for fifty years.)

Had Press TV been aware of history, the merry bunch could have used this one fact instead of the reams of misinterpretation and falsification they did use.

Had enough? The Geek has.

One last howler though, if you would indulge the ole Geekmo. He isn't much of a techno-wonk, but even the Geek knows that there is a vast difference between uranium hexafluoride gas used in the gaseous diffusion method of enrichment and fluorine.

(BTW, Press TV dudes, fluoride is a specific compound including fluorine. It is not a chemical element,)

Fluorine gas is very nasty since it is a highly active oxidant. Because it is active, fluorine can be combined with a number of other substances. Some are quite toxic. Others are not. The devil is in the details. Fluoridation of drinking water may be controversial but it does not and never did involve the old Atomic Energy Commission.

The Geek is officially bored with beating down the evil little straw men put up by one component of the Iranian noise machine. If you want, go over the roster of Press TV claims. Pick one you like and pass it on to the Geek.

The we can play Truth In History again.