Stalking the bourgeoisie

Ah...this makes me positively nostalgic. Next stop the Winter Palace? :)

The ugly face of neo-McCarthyism

Listen very carefully to this unofficial spokesperson for the Harper government, during a frankly unequal contest between himself and British MP George Galloway.

Meir Weinstein, aka Meir Halevi, is a former representative of the banned Kach party of Israel, a man who refused to condemn the mass murder of Palestinians at prayer by Baruch Goldstein, the leader of the Canadian branch of the Jewish Defence League, an organization cited by the FBI in 2001 as a "right wing terrorist group."

He now speaks for Canada.

There's something of the comic-opera incompetent about Weinstein. But don't be fooled. He has the ear of the Canadian government, and (to use what appears to be his favourite phrase) he seems to be acting as Jason Kenney's "proxy agent."

In any case, his gang of thugs will be investigating Canadian anti-war and church groups:

"We will be looking into these organizations in Canada that have invited him [Galloway], their links to terror groups as well."

And if Galloway attempts to be heard in Canada "by other means" (presumably electronic)?

"[I]f he uses those other means, we will see to it that the Canadian government will be monitoring every individual and organization that will have anything to do with it ..."

NB: Not the Jewish Defence League--the Canadian government. Coming soon to a wiretap near you?

[big h/t: POGGE]

CSIS demands an investigation

...of CSIS. Now, that's interesting.

Twelve days to April 3, and counting.

"The most moral army in the world," cont'd.

Res ipsa loquitur.

[H/t reader "forgot to buy tinfoil"]

Popinjays

popinjay (plural popinjays)

1. A garrulous and conceited person; a coxcomb, dandy, fop
2. (dated) a parrot or green woodpecker
3. a wooden parrot, or similar object, stuck on a pole as a target to be shot at
4. A heraldic (or other) representation of a parrot

In 2005, George Galloway, UK Respect MP for Bethnal Green and Bow, and ardent "pro-life" campaigner, famously referred to his arch-nemesis, Christopher Hitchens, as a "drink-soaked former Trotskyist popinjay."

Someone has been trying to keep up. Defending the absurd notion that the windbaggery of Mr. Galloway is somehow a threat to our national security, a spokesperson for the virginal Jason Kenney, Alykhan Velshi, referred to Gorgeous George as "someone who has provided financial support to Hamas, a banned terrorist organization in Canada, and someone who is, in a sense, a popinjay for those Taliban fighters who are trying to kill Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan."

Whoops, wrong usage: I think the man meant some kind of shill. But, nevertheless...

I was reminded of the famous debate that took place a few months later between Hitchens and Galloway on the subject of the second Gulf War. You can get it all here--just keep following the links. As I've said before, that encounter reminded me of a fight I once witnessed between two out-of-condition middle-aged cabbies in Ottawa, both breathing hard and neither able to land a punch. A pair of popinjays, in fact, garrulous, conceited, and eminently target-worthy. Vast sky-darkening flights of pompous rhetoric. They sounded as though they'd been separated at birth.

And now George has been denied entrance into Canada. Showing off his new skill in having it both ways, former human rights advocate Michael Ignatieff fumed about free speech and the lack of evidence that he is a security threat, but then concluded with a classic bit of Liberal-speak: "And of course if there is [a threat], as a responsible public official I will accept what security services say on Mr. Galloway."

Get used to it, folks. Conservatives, at least, make it plain; Liberals make it everything at once.

But to the issue before us now. Frankly, I find it difficult to get on board with my political allies on this one. It's not that I want him barred; it's just that I don't care very much that he has been. I know, I know, slippery slopes and hempen ropes and all that. First they come for the popinjays...

There's just something not right about this guy. There. I've said it. But obviously he wasn't intending to enter Canada to break any laws. Objectively, there's no reason not to let him in, and no reason, for that matter, to bar the CODEPINK folks either--these were blatantly political decisions by a government of ideologues.

I'm just not going to lose much sleep over this. So put me on a pole and take aim, already.

Pussy exposed! (safe for work)

Warren Kinsella has outed the displeasing Blazing Cat Fur. He's the husband of Kathy Shaidle.

Surely not even eHarmony could come up with a better match than this. (Whoops, did I say "match"?)

Weekend contest: the new "anti-Semitism"

Our virginal Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism Jason Kenney, is on a tear these days. Fresh from slashing a grant to a Muslim organization allegedly guilty of "anti-Semitism," he is now vowing a "zero-tolerance approach toward anti-Semitism" in which recipients of all government grants will be screened.

As I've mentioned before, the new "anti-Semitism," as opposed to the so-called "new anti-Semitism," is a label too often used by elements of the Right to silence opponents of Israeli state policy. Ditto "anti-Semitic" and "anti-Semite."

I'm trying to choose my words carefully, by the way, because one commentator here some time ago argued that even to say this is anti-Semitic. The natural reaction to being slurred in this fashion now has a name. It's called the "Livingstone Formulation," and it's deployed thus: to object to being silenced implies that there are silencers, and we all know who you think they are. So if you're accused of anti-Semitism, button your lip and slink away, please. And stop complaining about being silenced.

Alas, some of us just can't shut up. We take noisy exception, for example, to former human rights advocate Michael Ignatieff's recent decorticated attack on Israeli Apartheid Week and CUPE-Ontario's opposition to joint weapons research projects. And we're more than a little critical of Canada's own Matthew Hopkins and his "zero-tolerance" policy, which he has already begun to implement by shutting down a language instruction program whose chief beneficiaries were Chinese.

Now, many have probably noted that each fresh example of demonization tends to be prefaced with a little disclaimer: "Of course, not all criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic." (Actually, Kenney has not seen fit to deliver even that mild assurance.) So a little two-part contest is in order, and let's try to keep it light and humorous.

First, readers are invited to suggest a criticism of Israel that might theoretically pass this bar. Contestants should make a good argument to defend each example, but should also come up with creative counter-arguments that would make these examples "anti-Semitic."

For instance: slow bus service from Airport City to Tel Aviv. Argument: such a benign comment couldn't possibly be anti-Semitic, because not only is it true, but some of the bus drivers might be Arabs. Counter-argument: why are you singling out bus service in Israel when you can never get a bus into Ottawa from Barrhaven? Anti-Semitism! No government grant for you!

Secondly, suggest a novel application of the term "anti-Semite." Entries will be judged on their degree of vacuousness. (No supporting arguments are necessary: indeed, they would be counter-productive.) In the 1960s, an era populated by its own demons, a baseball player in the American League once said that any pitcher throwing a beanball was a "Communist." That's hard to top in the present context, but do try.

Contest closes sometime Sunday evening, whenever the distinguished panel of judge gets around to it.

UPDATE: (March 23) This proved to be quite a challenge. There were many entries, but more than a few were incomplete. I'd have to award the 1st prize to "forgot to buy tinfoil" for this entry, with Adam C. a close runner-up for this one. No third prize, but honourable mention to M..er, "knygathin_zhaum," for historical recall here, and (by popular demand) to Mordechai for some of the subtlest humour I have encountered on a topic known to be fraught.

The liberation of Gaza

"We have the most moral army in the world," declared Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak earlier this week.

His troops say otherwise.

In reports from Israeli newspapers Haaretz and Maariv, we now learn that a lethal combination of racism and indiscipline was unleashed upon the terrorized population of Gaza during the Israeli assault.

Here are a couple of highlights, from actual members of the most moral army in the world.

Aviv: "One of our officers, a company commander, saw someone coming on some road, a woman, an old woman. She was walking along pretty far away, but close enough so you could take out someone you saw there. If she were suspicious, not suspicious - I don't know. In the end, he sent people up to the roof, to take her out with their weapons. From the description of this story, I simply felt it was murder in cold blood."

Zamir: "I don't understand. Why did he shoot her?"

Aviv: "That's what is so nice, supposedly, about Gaza: You see a person on a road, walking along a path. He doesn't have to be with a weapon, you don't have to identify him with anything and you can just shoot him. With us it was an old woman, on whom I didn't see any weapon. The order was to take the person out, that woman, the moment you see her."

---

Ram: One mother and her two children didn't understand and went to the left, but they forgot to tell the sharpshooter on the roof they had let them go, and it was was okay and he should hold his fire and he ... he did what he was supposed to, like he was following his orders."

Question from the audience: "At what range was this?"

Ram: "Between 100 and 200 meters, something like that. They had also came out of the house that he was on the roof of, they had advanced a bit and suddenly he saw then, people moving around in an area where they were forbidden to move around. I don't think he felt too bad about it, because after all, as far as he was concerned, he did his job according to the orders he was given. [Emphases added]

There are more accounts to come.

[H/t Marie Ève and reader ajsuhail]

Wingnuts on parade

A metre-and-a-half of flailing get a new venue.

A blood-sucking parasite calls a torture victim a "fascist."

Canada's Best Blogger™ says I'm a "terrorist sympathizer" (this story isn't over by a long shot--stay tuned).

Harper's idea of a "science minister": evolution in high heels. Too much information. Bring back Barney!

Coleman: still crazy after all these months.

And one of the pancake brigade is now trying to dig his way back to decency. Good luck with that. Mocking dead opponents, it seems, isn't everyone's cup of tea, even on the Right.

Have a good weekend, folks. I know I will.

Impeccable timing by a wily pol?

Am I the only one harbouring no doubt unworthy suspicions about Transport Minister John Baird's sudden eruption into the media regarding the plight of Canadian citizen Bashir Makhtal?

I have blogged about Makhtal before. He's been stuck in an Ethiopian prison for two years or so, with apparently precious little help from us. We certainly haven't heard much concern expressed by our government on the subject--until very recently. Now Baird is telling us that "Canada will be watching what happens...very closely" during Makhtal's trial in Ethiopia. Three foreign ministers, Peter MacKay, David Emerson and Lawrence Cannon, we are assured, have been on the case all along, not to mention Conservative MP Deepak Obhrai. "In all my years as an elected official," says Baird, "I have never personally seen such a strong and sustained focus on one consular case."

This is exciting, isn't it--how all the stops have been pulled out at the highest levels to help a fellow-citizen? Obhrai has even met with the Ethiopian Prime Minister to express our concern.

But all of this surfaces just as another case is coming to a head--that of citizen Abousfian Abdelrazik, marooned in our embassy in Khartoum, Sudan, separated from his family for more than five years, imprisoned, tortured, and--thus far--prevented from returning home by Foreign Affairs officials and the Harper government. (Obhrai visited him, too, and saw his torture-scars first-hand, but Foreign Affairs lawyers tried to suggest that they were self-inflicted.) Suspicions have been raised that citizens who are brown and Muslim, and have found themselves in trouble in faraway places, just don't seem to get the Brenda Martin treatment.

In fact, Abdelrazik, rather than getting assistance from his government, has been the subject of some cruel little games by the authorities. He was promised travel documents if he could find a plane to fly him home; then, when he did just that last Fall, he was told that he needed a paid-up ticket--which he could not afford to buy. And anyone who wanted to help him out with the needed funds, we were informed, would be facing ten years in jail.

Now, just as the Abdelrazik case is coming to a head, with editorials in the Montreal Gazette and the Globe and Mail and the Toronto Star, sterling on-going coverage of the case by Globe reporter Paul Koring, and an act of civil disobedience by many Canadians who went ahead and bought him his ticket anyway, the Makhtal case has burst upon the scene.

Different standards for non-white citizens? Hell, no. Makhtal "is a Canadian citizen," thunders Baird. "His passport is identical to yours and mine, his rights and responsibilities as a Canadian are exactly the same."

Baird is absolutely right, of course, and it would be churlish, I suppose, to question the purity of his motives. But will Abousfian Abdelrazik, having complied against all odds with the government's latest condition, be on his plane home on April 3, travel documents in hand, to be reunited with his family after six years? Are "his rights and responsibilities as a Canadian...exactly the same" as mine, yours and John Baird's?

Let's wait and see. Not a few Canadians will be "watching what happens next very closely."

Black magic

I don't pretend to be an economist. But when it comes to the stock market, I think my opinions (read: guesses) are every bit as good as those of the practitioners of the dismal science. I get an image of folks in black robes dancing around a cauldron, muttering spells and throwing in eyes of newt, toes of frog, poisoned entrails--anything to stimulate the economy--and, in their heart of hearts, simply hoping for the best.

Here's an example of what I mean:

"Historically, rallies within bear markets have lasted about two months, or just over 40 business days from the establishment of a bottom," said Andrew Pyle, investment adviser at ScotiaMcLeod in Peterborough. "Based on that, we would appear to be in the early stages of one, although rebounds in a declining market have lasted much less, as seen last year."

We hear this sort of thing all the time. It's like the ticking of a clock, background noise, the sound of breathing. It's a blur of concepts. That expert really seems to know what he's talking about. It's colour commentary on an economy gone sour, part of the play-by-play, Jim Hughson in a three-piece suit.

And it's bunk.

The stock market is a form of gambling, and like other games it's largely about psychology. The economy can do well, but the stock market poorly, and vice-versa--there is a loose association between the two, but nothing is guaranteed. Obviously a healthy economy encourages people to invest, which contributes to an even healthier one, but also to risk-taking, corner-cutting, the invention of incomprehensible financial instruments, and indecent over-exposure, as everyone tries to get a piece of the action. Then someone or something puts a pin in the balloon, and we start all over again.

But the point is, there's no science at the core of any of this. It's a game of chance.

Look at the paragraph quoted above. "Historically" is the first word. I always wince when I see it. If there were really rigid laws to be extracted from the vast complexity of transactions, feelings, circumstances and communicated insanity that is the stock market, that would take all the fun out of it. Wouldn't it? Looking for patterns in history is a mug's game. There are no laws, no patterns, no regularities, just wiseass folks playing various systems, and we all know, or should know, how those work in Vegas.

Rallies, we are told, like sunspots, last for a predictable period, in this case 40 business days after a "bottom" has been "established." It is written. Well, no, actually it's not. We "appear" to be in the early stages of a rally (safe to say after the last six days of, well, rallying), but, as last year showed, it can be less than forty days. And, of course, when the herd begins to believe in recovery, that self-fulfilling prophecy will produce a "rally" that could go on for months or years.

In other words, things may be getting better--after all, the TSX is up 13% or so in the past week--or they may not. The "rally" could be of short or long duration, if in fact it is a "rally" at all (our expert won't commit himself, using the word "appears"), because that's what history teaches.

I can talk like that. Make me a CEO, and keep those bonuses coming. Never mind the nasty threats that Congress is making to all those AIG instant millionaires--a 91% tax will still leave a lot of money to fire up the yachts. Executive overcompensation, in fact, seems to be the only sure thing in these uncertain times.

I admit it: I'm an econopeasant. Rebuttals from those in the know are welcome. Just don't talk like Andrew Pyle.

Funes wins!

Another domino has fallen. Mauricio Funes, the FMLN candidate for President of El Salvador, has put an end to twenty years of rule by the ARENA party, founded by the infamous Roberto D'Aubisson, a death squad leader and School of the Americas graduate whose nickname, "Blowtorch Bob," referred to his favourite torture device.

El Salvador bloggers are pleased. So am I, even if he's playing it cool for now. All of the left-of-centre governments in Latin America--even that of Venezuela's Hugo Chávez--have had to trim their sails to a greater or lesser degree, as they find their place within the conjuncture of forces in which their countries are enmeshed--popular support versus well-financed domestic opposition, the global marketplace, and, of course, the brooding presence of the US.

Funes' background is in journalism; he has no guerrilla experience. But his party has a long and distinguished history of struggle and resistance. Let us hope that he can keep its vision alive, as the Axis of Good in Latin America continues to take on new members.

Abousfian Abdelrazik: we have work to do

From Project Fly Home:

CALL TO SUPPORT ABOUSFIAN ABDELRAZIK
(16 March 2009)

Count down to 3 April: Less than three weeks to hold government to its promise

Abousfian Abdelrazik is a Montreal man whose name may take its place among a growing list of victims of a Canadian version of 'extraordinary rendition'.

Internal government memos and other documents released under the Privacy Act reveal that, like Abdullah Almalki, Ahmad El Maati and Muayyed Nureddin - all imprisoned and tortured in Syria on the request of the Canadian Security
Intelligence Service (CSIS) and the RCMP, as confirmed by the federal Iacobucci Inquiry - Mr. Abdelrazik was also jailed on the recommendation of CSIS, while on a visit to Sudan. In prison, he was beaten and tortured. In this horrific context, he was interrogated by CSIS officials complicit in his arrest.

Eventually released and cleared of all suspicion by Sudan, as well as the RCMP and CSIS, his many attempts to return home to Montreal have been blocked rather than aided by Canadian officials. Since the story became public in late April 2008, Mr. Abdelrazik has been living in 'temporary safe haven' in the Canadian Embassy in Khartoum. (More background, including media coverage: www.peoplescommission.org/abdelrazik.php.)

Project Fly Home

In March 2009, in a mass civil disobedience action, over one hundred people joined together to buy a plane ticket home for Abousfian Abdelrazik, even though the Canadian government made it a federal offence to directly or indirectly finance or collect money to support Mr. Abdelrazik.

The group of contributors to the ticket, now almost 150 people, stretches from Vancouver to Iqaluit
to Newfoundland and reflects the groundswell of support for Mr. Abdelrazik and popular outrage and disgust at the treatment of him. Contributors include farmers, law professors, labour union representatives, artists, filmmakers, lawyers, workers, doctors, former Cabinet ministers, grandmothers, students and more. To date, the
government has not decided whether or not it will charge the group.

* See list of contributors at www.peoplescommission.org/files/abousfianMedia/FinalList.pdf.
* Video and audio from press conference announcing that the ticket was bought will be posted shortly at www.peoplescommission.org/abdelrazik.php.
* Open letter from James Loney (one of the contributors) to the MP in his riding: www.peoplescommission.org/files/abousfianMedia/JamesLoneyLetter.pdf

The plane ticket strips away another excuse the government has used to prevent Abousfian Abdelrazik from returning home. In December, the government stated in a letter to Mr. Abdelrazik's lawyer that he must present a fully-paid-for plane ticket before Passport Canada would agree to issue an emergency passport. Mr. Abdelrazik's passport expired while he was in prison in Sudan.

The flight leaves Khartoum on April 3rd. An emergency passport can take less than 24-hours to issue. The government was given three weeks to issue the passport.

How you can help:

1. In order to ensure Mr. Abdelrazik's safe return to Canada, Project Fly Home is seeking public endorsements from organizations across Canada. Please send all endorsements to projectflyhome@gmail.com. Endorsers will be listed as "organizations supporting the public campaign to bring Abousfian Abdelrazik home to Canada".

2. Join the list of people who have contributed to the return flight at the risk of being criminally charged for collecting money to support Mr. Abdelrazik. Although the ticket is already purchased, additional contributions are being accepted and names will be added to the list of contributors: the money raised will pay for other campaign expenses and the remainder will be offered to Mr. Abdelrazik when he returns to Canada, as a tiny, symbolic reparation for the crimes and injustices that have been committed against him. To join, email projectflyhome@gmail.com.

3. Please send brief letters of solidarity to Mr. Abdelrazik at projectflyhome@gmail.com. These letters will be read to him in Khartoum.

Project Fly Home
www.peoplescommission.org/abdelrazik.php
projectflyhome@gmail.com

Meanwhile, the wingnuts have raised their ugly heads at last. They've convicted Abdelrazik in absentia--and his supporters here as well. Another reason why the Conservatives must never, ever, be permitted to gain a majority.

¡Viva la Muerte!

Recent execrable posts by some of the Usual Suspects, in which the killing of an unarmed protester by an Israeli Defence Forces bulldozer operator has occasioned much giggling and snickering, have prompted me to look a little more closely at the fast-disappearing line between the fascist mindset and that of some prominent blogging conservatives.

A little history first, because it's necessary.

José Millán Astray, the founder of the Spanish Legion and a key figure in the fascist government of Francisco Franco, was the man who popularized the slogan "Long live death." At what these days would be called a "panel discussion" shortly after the outbreak of the Spanish Civil War, he had a famous confrontation with the Basque philosopher and writer Miguel de Unamuno. The following passage is long, but it's worth the read, because it outlines two "ideal types" of political sensibility, about which the reader might draw certain conclusions and uncover various parallels and comparisons:

Professor Francisco Maldonado decried Catalonia and the Basque Country as "cancers on the body of the nation," adding that "Fascism, the healer of Spain, will know how to exterminate them, cutting into the live flesh, like a determined surgeon free from false sentimentalism."

From somewhere in the auditorium, someone cried out the motto "¡Viva la Muerte!" As was his habit, Millán-Astray responded with "¡España!"; the crowd replied with "¡Una!" He repeated "¡España!"; the crowd then replied "¡Grande!" A third time, Millán-Astray shouted "¡España!"; the crowd responded "Libre!" This was a common Falangist cheer. Later, a group of uniformed Falangists entered, saluting the portrait of Franco that hung on the wall.

Unamuno, who was presiding over the meeting, rose up slowly and addressed the crowd: "You are waiting for my words. You know me well, and know I cannot remain silent for long. Sometimes, to remain silent is to lie, since silence can be interpreted as assent. I want to comment on the so-called speech of Professor Maldonado, who is with us here. I will ignore the personal offence to the Basques and Catalonians. I myself, as you know, was born in Bilbao. The Bishop," Unamuno gestured to the Archbishop of Salamanca, "Whether you like it or not, is Catalan, born in Barcelona. But now I have heard this insensible and necrophilous oath, "¡Viva la Muerte!", and I, having spent my life writing paradoxes that have provoked the ire of those who do not understand what I have written, and being an expert in this matter, find this ridiculous paradox repellent. General Millán-Astray is an invalid. There is no need for us to say this with whispered tones. He is an invalid of war. So was Cervantes. But unfortunately, Spain today has too many invalids. And, if God does not help us, soon it will have very many more. It torments me to think that General Millán-Astray could dictate the norms of the psychology of the masses. An invalid, who lacks the spiritual greatness of Cervantes, hopes to find relief by adding to the number of invalids around him." Irritated, Millán-Astray responded: "¡Muera la inteligencia! ¡Viva la Muerte!" ("Death to intelligence! Long live death!"), provoking applause from the Falangists.

It is no surprise, really, that even "moderate" conservatives have a certain fondness for Franco, who, after his victory, proceeded to execute 200,000 Spaniards who did not share his conservative values. Some conservatives literally do want us dead. It is not people like myself who are blurring the line between fascism and conservatism, but conservatives themselves, who have claimed this monstrous historical figure as one of their own, and who almost inevitably prefer violence to argument.

Death to intelligence. Long live death.

Now, before Chris Selley comes over here to admonish me for painting with too wide a brush, I need to point out that there are indeed people of the conservative persuasion who find all of this sado-political embrace of violence and death as repellent as I do. My grandfather, a true-blue Tory of the old school, would have been disgusted. Frequent commenter Peter has no time for these lubricious political reveries either, nor do some of the more humane folks over at the new Western Standard. Profoundly civilized, all of them, and I could name many, many more.

But the problem with the category "conservative" is that it contains too much and too many. And that's hardly the fault of those of us who can discern, in conservative ranks, the foul and diseased psyches that found such apt expression in the words of Astray and do today in the comments to which I linked above. It's up to conservatives to clean their own house; perhaps it will take their own bloodless civil war to do it.

Death to intelligence. Long live death. For all that the Left must carry on its conscience, such scrofulous sentiments have never been laid at our door.

Which brings me, once again, to Rachel Corrie, a no-doubt naive and idealistic young American peacenik who was crushed to death by an IDF bulldozer as she demonstrated peacefully against Israeli actions outside Gaza. Well, no. In fact it doesn't bring me to Corrie at all, but to the maggot-ridden psyches of those who find her death a cause for amusement.

(I don't want to discuss the Corrie incident itself. I don't know whether the IDF killed her deliberately or by mistake. None of that is relevant to the points I am making here.)

Naive and idealistic young men and women join our own armed forces, as well. Most if not all of them believe in the Afghanistan mission, some of them are sent there, and some have been killed there. Many of us oppose that war, believing, with Stephen Harper, that it cannot be won. But I would defy anyone to find a single comment from any of us on the progressive side of the aisle about our troops that rivals the filth pouring out of the various orifices of conservative bloggers at the moment about Rachel Corrie.

Do we mock those dead soldiers? Do we make fun of them, and joke about their deaths, and urge our friends to eat hamburgers in their memory when they have been blown to bits by IEDs?

Unthinkable. It would be nauseating to us. If the word "civilized" has any meaning at all, it surely applies to those who reject the depravity of rejoicing in the violent deaths of those with whom we disagree.

Fascism is not only action and state structure: it is also a state of mind. Death to intelligence. Long live death. And we have come to know the friends and allies of fascists for what they are, because the mask of civility inevitably slips, and when that happens it can never be replaced.

The symptoms are manifest, if sometimes ambiguous. When fascists are under attack, for example, they go after the attacker. Claim it's all about freedom of speech, and protest that it's principle that's at issue, and you might even persuade some of us that you're on the level. Goodness knows I've been sceptical, but not to the point of imagining that they're all crypto-fascists themselves. Just maybe a little...soft on fascism. Now, frankly, I'm not so sure.

After all, when you come right down to it, neo-Nazis are social conservatives, with familiar views about abortion, same-sex marriage, immigration, Muslims, "race," patriotism, and (for obvious reasons) Human Rights Commissions. So when one of them falls afoul of Richard Warman, there's almost certainly a little chord of sympathy that resonates in the breasts of the oh-so-principled Speech Warriors™.

Nor are all neo-Nazis devoid of the tactical sense to hold their anti-Semitism for the time being and make Muslims the new Jews instead. That sort of thing is called "bridge-building," and it obviously helps them in their quest to achieve what in certain circles would count as respectability. Of course, they remain free to attack B'nai Brith and the Canadian Jewish Congress as they've always done--in language completely indistinguishable from the dreck you can find, for example, over at Ezra Levant's place.

But as noted, fascism is a sensibility as well as a politics. And I think, at this point, that we have ample evidence of it in conservative ranks. We don't even require the usual clues--the flags, the Celtic crosses, the unsavoury backgrounds, the unguarded racist comments--to let us know that something's up. No, the purulence of a diseased sensibility, and its leakage into the blogosphere and elsewhere, will suffice: by the odour of decay you may know them. Long live death.

Conservative civility

An oxymoron. But you knew that. Don't forget to check out the comments.

[H/t: who else?]

UPDATE: (March 17)

Killing unarmed demonstrators is funny.

Dying of thirst

Quillagua is a little town in Chile, almost dead now, that will stand as a suitable monument to the apparently antique notion that water is a public resource to which all should have access. Chile's current experiment in weak social democracy has done nothing to reverse the former Pinochet regime's selling off of water rights to big mining and agribusiness interests.

The town, situated in what the record books call the driest place on earth, had long been nurtured by a river that flowed by it. But pollution from mining killed the shrimp in the water and made it unusable for livestock; and now mining interests have bought up nearly the entire water supply, reducing the river to an on-again-off-again trickle. The population of Quillagua has dropped to one-fifth of what is was only twenty years ago.

So far, private companies are permitted to dictate water "policy" in Chile. The people of Bolivia, however, rose up to throw out a government a few years ago who had sold all conceivable water rights to Bechtel. It had been made illegal for Bolivians even to collect rainwater.

Water "stakeholders" are presently gathered in Turkey to discuss the problem of increasing water shortages in the world. It's a fraud. As Maude Barlow puts it:

It's really just a big trade show put on by the big water companies. There is going to be no mention of water as a human right. They don't want to support that because they see water as a commodity to be sold on the open market.

She ought to know. Access to water is a human right--but just as the Harper government has made the right to pay equity a matter for negotiation, so too the multinationals and their First World backers are forcing some of the poorest people in the world to negotiate for that access.

Negotiate they will. And the Bolivian people have pointed the way to one (and perhaps for them and many others, the only) successful negotiating strategy. If your opponent starts out with more pieces than you, and uses some of your own against you as well--just kick over the damn chessboard.

Fair and balanced

University administrations, the Harper government, Michael Ignatieff, Hillel, B'nai Brith, the Canadian Jewish Congress, and assorted cranky columnists from the National Post and elsewhere, as well as the editors of the Toronto Star and the Globe and Mail, have formed a united front over the past few weeks, to defend Israel from its critics and to caricature, defame and demonize those critics.

Prominent people within the Jewish community have spoken out against this new McCarthyism--but the corporate media are trying to suppress their voices.

Pass this on, reprint it in your blogs, get the word out.

The following statement was rejected by both the Toronto Star and the Globe and Mail (as an op-ed). Please help this important statement get into broad circulation - pass it on to your networks (faculty, community, MPs, university presidents, unions etc.). You may also wish to write to the Star and Globe editors and express your dismay that they have chosen not to publish it.

Jewish Canadians Concerned About Suppression of Criticism of Israel

James Deutsch, M.D., Ph.D.

Judith Deutsch, M.S.W., R.S.W.

Miriam Garfinkle, M.D.

Over 150 Jewish Canadians signed a statement expressing their concerns about the campaign to suppress criticism of Israel that is being carried on within Canada. The signatories include many prominent Canadians, including Ursula Franklin O.C., Anton Kuerti O.C., Naomi Klein, Dr. Gabor Mate, and professors Meyer Brownstone (recipient of Pearson Peace Medal), Natalie Zemon Davis, Michael Neumann, and Judy Rebick.

The signatories are particularly concerned that unfounded accusations of anti-Semitism deflect attention from Israel's accountability for what many have called war crimes in Gaza. They state that B'nai Brith and the Canadian Jewish Congress have led campaigns to silence criticism of Israel on university campuses, in labor unions and in other groups. Immigration Minister Jason Kenney and Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff unquestioningly echo the views of these particular Jewish organizations.

They strongly state that they are against all expressions of racism. While firmly committed to resisting any form of prejudice against Jewish people, their statement explicitly states that these spurious allegations of anti-Semitism bring the anti-Communist terror of the 1950s vividly to mind. The statement underlines the immeasurable suffering and injustice to the Palestinian people due to the severe poverty, daily humiliations, and military invasions inflicted by the State of Israel.

Statement: Jewish Canadians Concerned about Suppression of Criticism of Israel

We are Jewish Canadians concerned about all expressions of racism, anti-Semitism, and social injustice. We believe that the Holocaust legacy "Never again" means never again for all peoples. It is a tragic turn of history that the State of Israel, with its ideals of democracy and its dream of being a safe haven for Jewish people, causes immeasurable suffering and injustice to the Palestinian people.

We are appalled by recent attempts of prominent Jewish organizations and leading Canadian politicians to silence protest against the State of Israel. We are alarmed by the escalation of fear tactics. Charges that those organizing Israel Apartheid Week or supporting an academic boycott of Israel are anti-Semites promoting hatred bring the anti-Communist terror of the 1950s vividly to mind. We believe this serves to deflect attention from Israel's flagrant violations of international humanitarian law.

B'nai Brith and the Canadian Jewish Congress have pressured university presidents and administrations to silence debate and discussion specifically regarding Palestine/Israel. In a full-page ad in a national newspaper, B'nai Brith urged donors to withhold funds from universities because "anti-Semitic hate fests" were being allowed on campuses. Immigration Minister Jason Kenney and Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff have echoed these arguments. While university administrators have resisted demands to shut down Israel Apartheid week, some Ontario university presidents have bowed to this disinformation campaign by suspending and fining students, confiscating posters, and infringing on free speech.

We do not believe that Israel acts in self-defense. Israel is the largest recipient of US foreign aid, receiving $3 million/day. It has the fourth strongest army in the world. Before the invasion of Gaza on 27 December 2008, Israel's siege had already created a humanitarian catastrophe there, with severe impoverishment, malnutrition, and destroyed infrastructure. It is crucial that forums for discussion of Israel's accountability to the international community for what many have called war crimes be allowed to proceed unrestricted by specious claims of anti-Semitism.

We recognize that anti-Semitism is a reality in Canada as elsewhere, and we are fully committed to resisting any act of hatred against Jews. At the same time, we condemn false charges of anti-Semitism against student organizations, unions, and other groups and people exercising their democratic right to freedom of speech and association regarding legitimate criticism of the State of Israel.

Signatories:

Abigail Bakan
Adam Balsam
Sharon Baltman
Julia Barnett
Lainie Basman
Jody Berland
Sam Blatt
Geri Blinik
Anita Block
Elizabeth Block
Sheila Block
Hannah Briemberg
Mark Brill
Stephen Brot
Meyer Brownstone
Eliza Burroughs
Smadar Carmon
Gyda Chud
Charles P. Cohen
Nathalie Cohen
David Copeland
Natalie Zemon Davis
Eliza Deutsch
James Deutsch
Judith Deutsch
Abbe Edelson
Jack Etkin
Elle Flanders
Danielle Frank
Ursula Franklin
Dan Freeman-Maloy
Miriam Garfinkle
Alisa Gayle
Jack Gegenberg
Mark Golden
Brenda Goldstein
Sue Goldstein
Cy Gonick
Marnina Gonick
Rachel Gotthilf
Amy Gottleib
Kevin A. Gould
Daina Green
Lisa Frances Greenspoon
Ricardo Grinspun
Cathy Gulkin
Rachel Gurofsky
Deboran Guterman
Yesse Gutman
Freda Guttman
Judy Haiven
Michael Hanna-Fein
Jean Hanson
Jan Heynen
Maria Heynen
Adam Hofmann
Jake Javanshir
Jeannie Kamins
Marylin Kanee
Howard S. Kaplan
Gilda Katz
Maxine Kaufman-Lacusta
Mira Khazzam
Bonnie Sher Klein
Mark Klein
Martin Klein
Naomi Klein
Joshua Katz-Rosene
Ryan Katz-Rosene
Judy Koch
Anton Kuerti
Jason Kunin
Aaron Lakoff
Michael Lambek
Natalie LaRoche
Richard Borshay Lee
Andy Lehrer
Gabriel Levin
Gabriel Levine
Joel Lexchin
Kim Linekin
Abby Lippman
Lee Lorch
Martin Lukacs
Audrey Macklin
Elise Maltin
Richard Marcuse
Wayne Mark
Gabor Mate
Arthur Milner
Anna Miransky
Dorit Naaman
Joanne Naiman
Neil Naiman
Michael Neumann
David-Marc Newman
David Noble
Clare O'Connor
Robin Ostow
Andre W. Payant
Jenny Peto
Simone Powell
Chanda Prescod-Weinstein
Fabienne Presentey
Yacov Rabkin
Diana Ralph
Naomi Rankin
Judy Rebick
Ester Reiter
Jillian Rogin
Richard Roman
Joseph Rosen
Herman Rosenfeld
Martha Roth
Marty Roth
Ruben Roth
E.Natalie Rothman
B. Sack
Ben Saifer
Miriam Sampaio
Jacob Scheir
Fred Schloessinger
Alan Sears
Shlomit Segal
Edward H. Shaffer
Noa Shaindlinger
Ray Shankman
Eva Sharell
Elliot Shek
Sid Shniad
Max Silverman
Samuel Singer
Elizabeth Solloway
Susan Starkman
Greg Starr
Jonathan Sterne
Jeremy Stolow
Rhonda Sussman
Vera Szoke
Joe Tannenbaum
Howard Tessler
Marion Traub-Werner
Ceyda Turan
Sandra Tychsen
Cheryl Wagner
Jon McPhedran Waitzer
David Wall
Naomi Binder Wall
Kathy Wazana
Karen Weisberg
Barry Weisleder
Paul Weinberg
Judith Weisman
Suzanne Weiss
Abraham Weizfeld
Ernie Yacub
B.H. Yael
Yedida Zalik
Melvin Zimmerman

[h/t Terahertz Atheist, Chrystal Ocean, rabble.ca]

Painful memories

Scientists have discovered a way of erasing emotions associated with a traumatic event in mice, with the precise application of a toxin to those brain cells that contain the bad feelings that accompany the memory. While the memory might remain, the emotions associated with it are wiped out when the cells are destroyed.

The notion is nothing new. For many decades there was a preparation for women in labour called "twilight sleep," a combination of morphine and scopolamine, which suppressed both the actual pain and the memory of it. It's rather out of fashion now, but I believe that my late partner was administered some form of it when an emergency caesarian had to be performed without prior anaesthesia.

Is memory-editing the next step to paradise on earth, or to a dystopic society in which our personal past can be manipulated, optimized, falsified? For it is only a matter of time, I think, before neuroscientists learn not only how to erase memories, but how to implant new ones.

I'm not trying to ring the alarum bells like Margaret Someville, for whom every advance in medicine and genetics threatens damnation. I have no religious agenda here. But there is much to discuss nevertheless: the nature of the self, the part played by memory in our own accounts of ourselves, the effects of selective memory removal on what remains, the use of our own or someone's else's fallible judgement in determining what memory to erase--or to add.

What if we had the choice of possessing implanted memories--a failure could "remember" prodigious successes, a person with an unhappy childhood could be given memories of ideal, loving parents. How would this impinge upon other embodied memories, conscious or unconscious?

As for erasure, would we want to extinguish the feelings that we experience in losing a loved one, for example? Those deep in grief might be tempted. But all that, too, was part of what we were to each other, and a point at which the world changed. Fear the memories and the sense of loss? Be plunged occasionally into deep depression? Certainly. But would we wish these memories simply to disappear? Or, worse, to retain them--and feel nothing?

A minor excursion into consequences here. Comments welcome as always.

Ficki your fave!

Balbulican of Stageleft has a great little game going on at the moment--write a few paragraphs* of purely fictive biography about your favourite--or not--blogger.

Hint: Be quick, because a lot of the ripe ones have already been, well, fickied.

Hint: Kate McMillan is still available. Fly, my pretties, fly.

*Correction: Actually, one paragraph, but rules are made to be broken.

Abousfian Abdelrazik--coming home?

Have ordinary citizens prevailed? From a press release today from Project Fly Home:

Ticket bought for Abdelrazik, flight leaves on 3 April

One hundred people call the government’s bluff on Abousfian Abdelrazik

Montreal, 12 March 2009 – Over one hundred people across the country have joined together to buy a plane ticket home for Abousfian Abdelrazik, even though the Canadian government has made it a federal offence to directly or indirectly finance or collect money to support Mr. Abdelrazik.

“This plane ticket strips away another excuse the government has used to prevent my client from returning home,” said Mr. Yavar Hameed, holding the ticket – purchased by 115 people - at a press conference in Montreal.

In December, the government stated in a letter to Mr. Abdelrazik's lawyer that he must present a fully-paid-for plane ticket before Passport Canada would agree to issue an emergency passport. Mr. Abdelrazik’s passport expired while he was in prison in Sudan.

“He has the ticket. Now he needs the travel document. The flight leaves Khartoum on 3 April. An emergency passport can take less than 24-hours to issue. The government has three weeks,” stated Mr. Yavar Hameed, Mr. Abdelrazik’s lawyer.

“Canada is responsible for Mr. Abdelrazik’s detention and torture in Sudan,” stated Mr. Dominique Peschard, president of the Ligue des droits et libertés. “Rather than admitting its responsibility and correcting the situation, Canada has persisted in violating Mr. Abdelrazik’s rights by denying his inalienable right to return to his country.”

Under federal law, anyone who dares to contribute money to purchase a ticket for Mr. Abdelrazik’s return risks federal prosecution. The group of contributors to the ticket stretches from Vancouver to Halifax and reflects the groundswell of support for Mr. Abdelrazik and popular outrage and disgust at the government’s criminal treatment of him. Contributors include well-known figures and regular people; farmers, law professors, labour union representatives, artists, film-makers, lawyers, workers, former Cabinet ministers, grandmothers, students and more. (See full list at www.peoplescommission.org/abdelrazik.php.)

Internal government memos and other documents released under the Privacy Act reveal that, like Abdullah Almalki, Ahmad El Maati and Muayyed Nureddin – all imprisoned and tortured in Syria on the request of CSIS and the RCMP, as confirmed by the federal Iacobucci Inquiry - Mr. Abdelrazik was also jailed on the recommendation of CSIS, while on a visit to Sudan. In prison, he was beaten and tortured. In this horrific context, he was interrogated by CSIS officials complicit in his arrest. Released and cleared of all suspicion by Sudan, as well as the RCMP and CSIS, his many attempts to return home to Montreal have been blocked rather than aided by Canadian officials.

“Mr. Abdelrazik's ongoing torment, part of an illegal pattern of the Canadian government targetting its own residents for overseas detention, continues to this day, despite disingenuous assurances from officials in Ottawa that things have changed,” said Warren Allmand, former Solicitor-General of Canada and another donor. “Canada must end its extraordinary rendition program and stop putting up roadblocks to Mr. Abdelrazik's return,” added the Montreal-based human rights advocate.

Meanwhile, the independent Facebook group has contributed to this cause as well. I hope any remaining funds will be used to help our fellow-citizen Abousfian Abdelrazik settle back in with his family.

Over to you, Stephen Harper. Will he get his travel documents, or was this just another sadistic little game?