Saturday, March 01, 2025

 

Netanyahu Views the Hostages as His Excuse To Restart the Slaughter

Western leaders and media are helping bolster a propaganda narrative about the Israeli captives that makes the resumption of Israel’s slaughter all but inevitable

 Posted on

Israel sustained the West’s support for its slaughter in Gaza for 15 months only through an intensive campaign of lies.

It invented particularly heinous Hamas war crimes, such baby beheadings and mass rape, for which no evidence has ever been produced. Conversely, it played down its own, even graver war crimes in response to Hamas’ attack on Israel.

With Hamas’ October 2023 crimes ever-more distant in the rear-view mirror, and Israeli crimes still all too visible in Gaza’s complete destruction – amounting to a “plausible” genocide, according to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) – Israeli leaders have been desperately trying to shift attention to a fresh narrative battleground.

They need a new set of lies to justify resuming the slaughter. And as ever, the western establishment media are actively assisting.

Both Hamas and Israel are playing a predictable propaganda game, using the regular exchanges of Israeli and Palestinian hostages in the ceasefire’s first phase to seize the moral high ground.

Israel once again has all the cards, care of rock-solid western support, and yet once again it is failing to win the public relations war.

Which explains why Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu threw another of his temper tantrums at the weekend, this time blaming Hamas for stage-managing the release of Israelis in what he called “demeaning” and “humiliating ceremonies”.

Israel and its supporters were particularly incensed, it seems, by one of the captives, released on Saturday, beaming on stage as he warmly kissed two of his captors on the forehead.

On his walk to the handover with Red Cross staff, he put his arm around one of the captors’ shoulders in another moment of apparent affection.

Two other Israelis – up for release in the next round – were filmed watching from a car nearby, excited at the prospect of freedom and pleading with Netanyahu not to sabotage their release.

Blow up ceasefire

Predictably, western media, including the BBC, echoed Israel in suggesting these were somehow far more serious violations than Israel killing over 130 Palestinians since 19 January, when the ceasefire began, in hundreds of attacks on Gaza.

The media have similarly given fleeting coverage to Israel’s new wave of destruction, this time in the Occupied West Bank. Thousands of homes have been demolished, ethnically cleansing entire communities.

Western outlets have signally failed to note that these war crimes are also gross violations of the ceasefire agreement.

Now Netanyahu has exploited the apparent cosy relations between some of the Israeli captives and Hamas as a pretext to blow up the ceasefire before the second phase can begin next week. That is when Israel is expected to fully withdraw from Gaza and allow its reconstruction.

Buses carrying hundreds of Palestinian hostages due for release on Saturday were forced to turn back, returning them to their prisons. Even according to Israel’s own assessments, the vast majority of these Palestinians have not been “involved in combat“.

Many, including medical personnel, were seized off Gaza’s streets following the 7 October Hamas attack. They have been held without charge, tortured and subjected to barbaric conditions that Israeli human rights groups have compared to “hell”.

Genocidal slogans

It would be nice to imagine that Israel and its supporters were genuinely concerned that, in parading its captives in public, Hamas had violated their rights to dignity under international humanitarian law. But don’t be fooled – or foolish.

Even before Israel reneged on the hostage exchange, it had vowed that Palestinians would be subjected to their own forms of degrading treatment. They would be forced to wear T-shirts emblazoned with slogans supporting Israel’s genocidal actions against the people of Gaza.

And Israel’s supporters appeared none too concerned about the sensitivities of the 600 Palestinian hostages due for release on Saturday whose buses returned them to their torture camps in Israel just as they could scent freedom.

But in any case, Israel’s own hostages have been a low priority for Netanyahu from the outset.

If Israel really cared so much about them, it would not have carpet-bombed Gaza for 15 months.

Instead it would have grabbed the chance for a ceasefire and prisoner swap not last month – as it was forced to do under heavy pressure from incoming US President Donald Trump – but last May, when it was offered a deal on exactly the same terms.

If Israel cared so much for the captives, it would not have used US-supplied, 2,000lb bunker-buster bombs that not only destroyed huge swaths of Gaza indiscriminately but flooded the tunnels where many of the Israelis were being held with toxic gases.

If Israel cared so much for the captives, it would not have set up undeclared “kill zones” across Gaza, where Israeli soldiers shot anyone and anything that moved.

Three shirtless Israelis waving white flags of surrender were gunned down by Israeli troops in precisely such circumstances in December 2023.

Doing as it pleases

The Israeli captives are useful to Netanyahu and his slimy apologists only in so far as they help prop up a narrative that justifies genocide.

Cornered by Trump, the Israeli prime minister had calculated that securing the return of at least some of them was the price he had to pay – to placate the new US president and much of his own public – before he could resume the mass murder of Gaza’s children.

He has repeatedly made clear that he has no intention of moving towards a permanent ceasefire after phase one, the main prisoner exchanges.

For Netanyahu, the importance of the Israeli captives is solely in providing him with a route back to the genocide.

Hamas, on the other hand, has every incentive to use the small window provided by the release of the captives to suggest it is not the bogeyman of Israeli-engineered and western-enforced dogma.

It hopes its carefully managed releases show how much it is still in charge of Gaza, despite Israel’s destructive rampage.

And Hamas has reason to cultivate reasonable relations with the Israeli captives – not least to soften its image with foreign publics, and make it harder for Netanyahu to return to the genocide.

Israel, of course, has no such reciprocal incentive. As the far stronger party – one that, even before 7 October 2023, had been holding the entire population of Gaza hostage through a 17-year siege of the enclave – it can do as it pleases, secure in the knowledge that its claims will never be subjected to proper scrutiny by the western media.

Freed Palestinian prisoners testifying to their torture, sexual assault and rape – confirmed by international human rights monitors – have been simply ignored.

‘Stockholm syndrome’

Despite the odds being stacked in Israel’s favor, the differential realities are so stark that Israel is losing the propaganda war, nonetheless. Which is why Netanyahu has no interest in continuing the prisoner exchanges a day longer than he is required to.

The problem is that the captives released by Hamas are mostly not helping his cause. They are hindering it.

There was brief relief from Israel’s genocide apologists – noisily echoed by the western media – that one group of Israeli hostages released earlier this month looked nearly as pale and emaciated as the hundreds of Palestinian hostages released by Israel.

There was wall-to-wall outrage at the condition of this small group of Israelis, when there has been utter indifference to the even more wretched condition of freed Palestinians.

But in most cases, the released Israelis have looked reasonably healthy, especially given that Israel has been denying the entry of food and water into Gaza for 15 months and that most of the captives have had to be held deep underground to keep them safe from the Israeli bombing campaigns that have leveled almost all of Gaza.

Of even more concern to Israel, however, the captives have emerged mostly looking relaxed around their captors.

On the defensive, Israel’s supporters have dismissed these scenes as staged for the cameras or argued that the captives are suffering from severe “Stockholm syndrome” – a psychological condition in which hostages are said to identify with their captors.

Possible though this may be, it is difficult not to ponder why we have seen no Palestinian captives looking or sounding similarly affectionate towards their Israeli prison guards.

‘Little time left’

However western publics weigh the evidence before their eyes, it offers little in the way of succour for Israel.

These scenes between Hamas and the captives are hard to square with the still-dominant, and evidence-free, narrative presented by Israel – and recycled by western establishments – that Hamas are barbarians who behead babies and conduct mass rape.

In reducing Hamas simply to monsters, Israel’s goal was to dehumanise the entire population of Gaza – to justify its genocidal crimes.

And yet the scenes of the captives demonstrating a human connection to their Hamas captors make that idea harder to sustain.

If Hamas might not be quite as evil as western publics have been led to believe – if its members’ behavior might be no worse than, or even better than, that of Israel’s soldiers and prison guards – what does that say about the reliability of western media coverage of the preceding 15 months of genocide?

And even more to the point, what does it say of our own western barbarism that our elected leaders have so casually accepted the murder of many tens of thousands – and possibly hundreds of thousands – of Palestinian civilians in Gaza in supposed revenge for Hamas’ 2023 attack?

What are we to make of Israel’s claim to the moral high ground when its leaders have explicitly declared their genocidal intent towards Gaza’s children – telling us the entire population is implicated in Hamas’ attack and are therefore legitimate targets?

What moral high ground can Israel occupy when, even during a supposed ceasefire, it has violated the terms of the agreement more than 250 times and refused to actually cease fire?

What moral high ground is Israel occupying when it drops notices over Gaza, as it did last week, restating its genocidal intent if Palestinians there fail to submit to Trump’s plan to ethnically cleanse the entire population?

The leaflet, issued by the “Israeli Security Agency”, warns: “If all the people of Gaza cease to exist… No one will feel for you, and no one will ask about you… There is little time left – the game is almost over.”

It ends by urging Palestinians to collaborate: “Whoever wishes to save themselves before it is too late, we are here, remaining until the end of time.”

Racist calculus

Similarly, Israel has been seeking to exploit high emotions over the deaths in Gaza of the Bibas family – an Israeli mother and her two small children taken hostage on 7 October – by engaging in wholesale disinformation.

After their bodies were returned at the weekend, Israel immediately claimed that they had been killed by their captors – in their case, not Hamas but a criminal gang, known as Lords of the Desert, that seized the family after also managing to break out of Gaza in October 2023.

Let us assume for a moment that Israel’s story of the family’s murder “in cold blood” is factually correct.

Whereas it might be understandable – if monstrous nationalism – for Israelis to care more about those three deaths than the slaughter and maiming by the Israeli military of tens of thousands of Palestinian children in Gaza, why are western politicians and media adopting the same racist calculus?

Why are the deaths of three Israeli innocents so much more significant, so much more newsworthy, so much more painful than the deaths of tens of thousands of Palestinian innocents?

But in fact, there are very good reasons to believe that Israel is lying once again, and that this is just a reheating of its “beheaded babies” fiction that originally whipped up the mood for genocide.

The Bibas family were widely reported killed by Israeli carpet bombing in November 2023, early on in Israel’s genocide.

Hamas offered to return their bodies – along with the still-alive father – shortly after their deaths. Entirely cynically, as pointed out by Palestinian analyst Muhammad Shehada, Israel rejected the offer so it could “deliberately pretend they were still alive and capitalize on the narrative of Palestinian ‘monsters’ holding a baby hostage”.

Now the Bibas family’s suffering is being exploited by Israel and its supporters – aided by the media – to whip up support for a return to murdering Palestinian babies in cold blood.

The likelihood is that the Bibas family, like many thousands of Palestinian families, were torn apart by US-supplied bombs. That might explain the initial mix-up of body parts that led to a Palestinian woman rather than Shiri Bibas, the mother, being returned to Israel before Hamas was able to correct the mistake.

In a sign of how little credibility Israeli officials have on this matter, the surviving members of the Bibas family barred government ministers from attending the funerals on Tuesday.

Avalanche of complaints

The western media’s complicity in these all-too-obvious manipulations has been fully on show once again.

An investigation by Declassified UK last week found staff from the BBC, Sky News, ITN, the Guardian and Times all testifying that Israeli propaganda “reigned supreme” at their outlets.

Disgruntled staff at the Guardian had compiled a spreadsheet with a “mountain of examples” of the paper “amplifying unchallenged Israeli propaganda… or treating clearly false statements by Israeli spokespeople as credible”.

A Sky journalist said the channel had imposed a whole set of unwritten rules that applied exclusively to coverage of Israel: “It’s a continuous battle to report the truth.” Any time Palestinians were humanised, or Israeli spokespeople scrutinised, the channel would face an “avalanche of phone calls and complaints”.

Threats to withdraw Sky’s access to senior Israeli officials or to bar the channel’s correspondents from the region had the desired effect, impacting “what was and wasn’t said on air”.

BBC staff once again spoke of a culture at the state broadcaster in which Palestinians were routinely dehumanised, in stark contrast to the treatment of Israelis.

One of its journalists noted that “the use of the word genocide is effectively banned, and any contributor who uses this word is immediately shut down”.

Which is the context for understanding the BBC’s decision at the weekend to remove a documentary on Gaza briefly available on its streaming service iplayer.

Gaza: How to Survive a War Zone, a largely child’s eye view of the destruction of Gaza, was the first effort by the state broadcaster to properly humanise Palestinians – a full 16 months after Israel began its “plausible” genocide. Watch it here:

Cowardly media

Pro-Israel groups, which have ghoulishly rationalised the slaughter of Gaza’s children every step of the way, were inevitably going to throw a hissy fit. And the BBC, equally predictably, was bound to cave at the slightest pressure.

But even by the dismal standards of establishment media cowardice, this was a low.

Pro-Israel lobbyists accused the BBC of supporting terrorism and peddling disinformation because the film’s main narrator, 14-year-old Abdullah, is the son of a Hamas government deputy minister.

Ayman al-Yazouri is termed a “terrorist leader” in an official complaint to the BBC penned by 45 Jewish journalists and media executives.

The lobby’s objections, however, are the real disinformation – depending on the central premise of Israeli-inspired, draconian UK legislation that conflates any relationship to Hamas, Gaza’s government, with terrorism.

Israel has taken hundreds of medical personnel in Gaza captive, and then tortured them, on precisely the grounds that they are associated with terrorism because they work in public hospitals overseen by the Hamas administration.

Similarly, al-Yazouri, who studied his PhD in environmental chemistry at a UK university and then worked at the United Arab Emirates’ education ministry helping to devise its science curriculum, was recruited on his return to Gaza to the education and agriculture ministries. That was for his specialist skills, not because he is a member of Hamas.

His son Abdullah, who was educated at the one English-speaking school in Gaza, was presumably selected for no more sinister reason than that he was one of the few children in Gaza who could fluently narrate to BBC audiences in their native tongue.

In any case, Abdullah’s narration is entirely unremarkable: it simply introduces the characters as they struggle through a humanitarian catastrophe engineered by Israel that the audience can see for themselves on the screen.

Extraordinary pressures

The children whose stories are told – and have now been deleted – were selected for clearly journalistic reasons: because they are doing compelling things under extraordinary pressures, from becoming a superstar chef on Tiktok, despite an Israeli-imposed food blockade, to volunteering at a hospital to ferry those maimed in Israeli attacks from ambulances to waiting doctors.

Otherwise, the documentary’s framing is entirely Israel-friendly: Hamas is cursed by a suffering population more than Israel; what the world’s highest court suspects is a genocide in Gaza is described simply as a “war”; and the Israelis taken captive by Hamas, even soldiers, are uniformly referred to as “hostages”.

The documentary poses a danger for Israel not because of its politics but because of its humanising of Gaza’s children, who have been slaughtered in such enormous numbers.

What pro-Israel lobby groups fear – apart from a final segment in which an ambulance crew is attacked by Israeli Apache helicopters – is any portrait of Palestinians that contradicts Israeli propaganda: that every person in Gaza, even the children, are terrorists who have brought death and destruction down on their own heads.

That is an argument that should resonate only with psychopaths. And yet our broadcasters accept it unquestioningly, as does the government of British Prime Minister Keir Starmer.

Make no mistake: it is an argument justifying genocide. That is something western leaders and media ought to be working strenuously to avert. Instead they are helping craft a propaganda narrative that makes the resumption of genocide all but inevitable.

Jonathan Cook is the author of three books on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and a winner of the Martha Gellhorn Special Prize for Journalism. His website and blog can be found at www.jonathan-cook.net. This originally appeared in the Middle East Eye.

Manifest Destiny in the Histories of the US and Israel


For Palestine and Palestinians, 14 May 1948 was a fateful day in its 4,000-year history.   It was also historically pivotal for the United States.  Paraphrasing British author, George Orwell, it is essential to rediscover the past in order to gain control of the present and save the future.

Eleven minutes after David Ben-Gurion, head of the Jewish Agency, declared Israel a state in May 1948, President Harry S. Truman recognized his claim, giving legitimacy to Ben-Gurion’s bogus declaration.

In 1947, thirty-three members of the newly-created United Nations General Assembly (57 then) voted in favor of Resolution 181, recommending the partition of historic Palestine into Jewish and Palestinian states.  Truman, undeterred by the fact that the UN Security Council had not voted on the resolution, which would have made it binding on all members, threw the full weight of the United States behind it.

Truman’s decision to position Israel as a citadel of U.S. imperialism in the Middle East has boomeranged and has resulted in the United States being despised in much of the world.  Rather than protect U.S. interests in the region as planned, Israel has imperiled them.

As we have seen since the 7 October 2023 insurrection, there are no limits on U.S.-Israeli brutality and on the suffering they have been willing to inflict on the Palestinians in order to preserve their imperium in the region.

Imperial arrogance on the part of American presidents is, of course, not new.  It reached new heights, however, when President Donald J. Trump threatened to take over, “to own” Gaza and remove (euphemism for ethnically cleanse) Palestinians from their ancestral land to foreign destinations. The Zionist colonizing baton in Gaza would essentially be passed to American imperialists.

Trump revealed his illegal plan for Gaza during a recent (11 February) White House press conference.  As humiliated King Abdullah of Jordan looked on, he said:  “We’re going to hold it; we’re going to cherish it… It’s fronting on the sea. It’s going to be a great economic development job.” When asked by a reporter under what authority are you permitted to take the sovereign territory of Gaza; he smugly responded, “U.S. authority.”

Interestingly, Trump’s claim to take over Gaza reminded me of “Manifest Destiny,” a term coined by John L. O’Sullivan in his 1845 essay in the New York Morning News.  In it, he argued that the United States was within its rights to take the entire continent, including my home state of Oregon (then a territory jointly occupied by the U.S. and Britain); he wrote: “…And that claim is by the right of our manifest destiny to overspread and possess the whole of the continent, which Providence has given us for the development of the great experiment of liberty and federated self-government entrusted to us.”  O’Sullivan even suggested that Canada would eventually request annexation.

Manifest Destiny, the ideology of the divinely ordained right of Americans to expand westward, finds similar expression in Israel, whose leaders use the Old Testament to claim a “divine right” to all of historic Palestine.  Racism, supremacy and ethnic cleansing are rooted in both expansionist gospels.

Trump’s bombast about taking Gaza, Canada, Greenland, Panama, Ukraine’s rare earth minerals, and renaming the Gulf of Mexico are current expressions of the imperial mindset that has resulted in decades of coups and wars across the globe.

Israel’s “from the river to the sea” expansionism is manifest in its annexation of the Syrian Golan Heights, military occupation in parts of southern Syria and Lebanon, in its genocide in Gaza and continued theft of Palestinian land and property in the West Bank and Jerusalem.

It is not surprising that the United States that has yet to confront its history of ethnic cleansing of Native Americans and horrific legacy of enslaving and lynching Black Americans would be callously indifferent to the plight of Palestinians.

Not only are the ideologies of the U.S. and Israel similar, their histories are  comparable in many ways.   Consider if you will: land theft, violent removal from ancestral land, ethnic cleansing, military occupation, forced confinement on reservations, continued and rabid hostility from squatters (“settlers”) and resistance by the oppressed to colonization.

The genocide of the Native people of North America was a 200-year catastrophe.  Israel’s genocide of Palestinians, begun over 78 years ago, has never ended.

In many ways the Palestinian Nakba (catastrophe) and American Indian “Trail of Tears” are analogous.

During the Nakba, over 750,000 Palestinians were violently expelled from their historic homeland by Zionist forces and made refugees to make way for a Jewish state in 1947-1949.  During the ensuing Arab-Israeli War (1948-49), 78 percent of historic Palestine was seized and occupied by Israel.  The remaining 22 percent came under Arab control until the 1967 War.

Between 1830 and 1850, during the “Trail of Tears,” an estimated 100,000 southeastern Native Americans were forcefully removed from their ancestral homeland and made refugees in “Indian Territory” (now Oklahoma).

Both peoples lost millions of acres of ancestral land to European “settlers.” Approximately 4,244,776 acres of Palestinian land was stolen by Israel during and immediately after the establishment of the Jewish state in 1948.  Indigenous people across the contiguous United States lost 98.9 percent of their historical lands.

Manifest Destiny in North America meant that by the late 1800s, in the interest of white settlement and exploitation, virtually all Native Americans had been killed or restricted to reservations surrounded by hostile “settlers” and military forts.

Although many tribes resisted occupation, they were overwhelmed by the superior firepower of the U.S. Army.

The Israeli regime, using the Old Testament as a deed to all of Palestine, continues to build illegal “settlements” (at least 250) in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem, land captured in the 1967 War.  Over 700,000 hostile Jewish Israeli “settlers” surround ever-shrinking Palestinian towns and villages.  Settler aggression against Palestinians is tolerated and often encouraged by Israeli occupation forces.  Movement is severely restricted, hindered by hundreds of checkpoints, road blocks and barriers.

Since its forced intrusion into the Middle East, Israel, with Washington’s steadfast support, has had no reluctance about dropping bombs indiscriminately on Palestinian civilians and their Arab neighbors to kill and traumatize.

Recent revelations regarding the former regime of President Joe Biden in planning the air attacks on Gaza has revealed the depth of American cruelty and disdain for Palestinian lives, which all U.S. regimes have shared.

In addition to providing Tel Aviv with weapons of mass destruction, for example, including bunker-busting bombs, the United States coordinated closely with Israel on massive strikes on residential buildings.  They did so knowing that more than 100 civilians would be killed in order to kill a single Palestinian resistance commander.  Entire residential blocks were leveled to crush tunnel passages and to flood them with deadly carbon monoxide gas, which is released by bunker-buster bombs.  In some cases, the gas killed Israeli captives – three of whom were killed by asphyxiation as a result of such bombing on 10 November 2023.

In addition, it appears that Israel has implemented its deadly Dahiya Doctrine in Gaza – a military strategy that involves the large-scale destruction of civilians, civilian infrastructure and property in order to avoid protracted guerrilla war and to inflict immense suffering so that the population will ultimately turn against the resistance.

After 15 months of daily bombardment, 200,000 survivors of the genocide returned to northern Gaza to claim what was left of their homes.

It is difficult to imagine the U.S.-Israeli imperium taking a different path after decades of racism and exploitation.  American poet, Robert Frost, in his 1915 poem, “The Road Not Taken,” might offer direction:

“I shall be telling this with a sigh
Somewhere ages and ages hence:
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I –
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.

From Truman to Trump, Palestine is America’s fork in the road.

Dr. Behnam is a political scientist who specializes in comparative politics with a focus on West Asia.

© 2025, M. Reza Behnam, Ph.D.

 

Modern Times and Ancient Truths


Eighty-nine years ago this month, the film Modern Times, starring Charlie Chaplin, was released. Considered one of the greatest movies ever, it was a comedic but savage critique of industrial capitalism and a prescient indictment of the alienated modern life to come, as Chaplin’s character, the Little Tramp, worked on an assembly line where he suffered a nervous breakdown from the stress and repetitive nature of the work.

But the film ends on a hopeful note, as the Little Tramp and his beloved Ellen hit the road and walk away from the mechanized life. It is a poetic call to replace the iron discipline of the machine life with rebellious spontaneity.

In All Consuming ImagesThe Politics of Style in Contemporary Culture (Basic Books, 1988), Stuart Ewen writes:

In Modern Times we confront a factory world which increasingly usurps human initiative. Within the scope of the film, people are trapped beneath the thumb of productivity, their bodies and souls shaped and overwhelmed by the assembly line. The priorities of such a world submerge human needs; misery and homelessness abound. People are seen as useful only if they can be plugged into the productive apparatus. Otherwise they are tossed aside like garbage.

Today, the Little Tramp, has been replaced by big Trump and his sidekick, Elon Musk, owners and operators of the new AI Digital factory Internet system, posing as saviors of the Little Tramp.

Just the other day, Musk, with an imagined twinkle in his eye and little boy grin, tweeted out on his bullhorn X (Twitter): “We are on the event horizon of the singularity.”

By the “Singularity” is meant the time when the machines – computers and artificial intelligence – exceed human control and dominate society. For technologists like Musk and his ilk in and out of government and in Silicon Valley, the idea of a machine run world is heaven on earth. A place where death will be defeated by synthetic means and love reduced to a passionless technique. This is the myth of the machine that has grown from a superstitious cult to a world-wide religion with the cell phone its cult object.

*****

Up in the lake and down in the river the ice is breaking up. In the house a few little black bugs have appeared. The maple sap is running. And we have seen flocks of robins and cedar waxwings eating leftover berries that have clung to the bare ruined choirs of the trees and bushes. Even the turkey vultures have returned to perch everywhere, looking down like caring teachers over students’ desks, as if to say – wake up, look around, these are resurrection days.

*****

By the late 1980s, the “Little Tramp” was pitching computers for IBM in a series of advertisements. His problems were again portrayed as caused by industrial chaos, but as Ewen writes:

But this time the solution is different. Beleaguered Charlie is saved by the computer, the quintessential modern instrument of order, control, surveillance. Here the frenetic conditions of modern life are solved by modern technology. The 1936 film had pointed an idealistic way out. The ad points the way back in. The critique has been turned on its head, packaged and used against itself.

Now the “smart phone” is sold as the way out and the way in, as resurrection battles singularity.

*****

Even the bears are waking up around here. A guy I know said that on his way home the other night he saw one walking down Main Street. Now this is a nice little tourist town in the Berkshires of western Massachusetts, not a town in northern Canada, so I was a bit surprised by his sighting. It became somewhat clearer after I asked him where he was coming from and he said he had been down in The Well, a local bar, having a few drinks with an old girlfriend who had told him he had always been her true love but she had to marry the local police chief for protection. Confused, he asked her what did she need protection from. When she said – life, and got up and said good night, he ordered another round. Soon after that the bear appeared.

*****

Now we have crossed over to a country led by a man and his sidekick so sick that no words are needed. Their use of artificial intelligence is fulfilling the dream of Filippo Tommaso Marinetti, the Italian fascist, friend of Mussolini, and founder of the art movement called futurism, whose claim was that “the entire human drama revolves around the machine.” It was a ruse for power cached within an artistic manifesto based on the belief that the machine was the new god with supernatural powers beyond human control – very similar to AI and the alleged final coming of the singularity. “War,” said Marinetti, “is the father of all things … the culminating and perfecting synthesis of progress.”

Anyone who thinks this is what it means to Make America Great Again had better think quick – you have been deluded. This video is a shocking, psychopathic, and fitting result of years of U.S. supported genocide in Gaza.

*****

I look forward to Ash Wednesday on March 5, the day on which as a young man I went to church to have the priest rub ashes on my forehead and say, “Remember, Ed, that you are dust and back to dust you will return.”

I no longer go to the priests, but I will still feel the ashes and those sacred words. I will do so on a little tramp up by the lake and into the woods, where perhaps I will detect the tracks of that bear my friend saw walking through town. He exists in us all.

And the night before that walk, I will drink deeply from the well – what my father learned to call “the smiles” from his Irish Uncle Tim, a blacksmith for the NY Fire Department, who so called the Irish whiskey he drank – and I will smile, knowing I will die with the winter and be resurrected in the spring as the sap rises.

It is Resurrection time, and despite the machine people, God rises in us all as we resist their machine dreams, and rejoice.

Edward Curtin writes and his work appears widely. He is the author of Seeking Truth in a Country of LiesRead other articles by Edward, or visit Edward's website.

 

Ho Hum at Sea: Anti-China Hysteria Down Under


The conduct of live-fire exercises by the People’s Liberation Army Navy Surface Force (the Chinese “communists”, as they are called by the analytically strained) has recently caused much murmur and consternation in Australia. It’s the season for federal elections, and the opposition leader, Peter Dutton, thinks he’s in with more than a fighting chance. Whether that chance is deserved or not is another matter.

The exercise, conducted in international waters by a cruiser, frigate and replenishment ship, involved what is said to have been poor notice given to Australian authorities on February 21. But the matter has rapidly burgeoned into something else: that what the Chinese task fleet did was mischievously remarkable, exceptional and snooty to convention and protocols. It is on that score that incontinent demagogy has taken hold.

Media outlets have done little to soften the barbs. A report by ABC News, for instance, notes that Airservices Australia was “only aware of the exercises 40 minutes after China’s navy opened a ‘window’ for live-fire exercises from 9.30am.” The first pickup of the exercises came from a Virgin Australia pilot, who had flown within 250 nautical miles of the operation zone and warned of the drills. Airservices Australia was immediately contacted, with the deputy CEO of the agency, Peter Curran, bemused about whether “it was a potential hoax or real.”

Defence Chief Admiral David Johnston told Senate estimates that he would have preferred more notice for the exercises – 24-48 hours was desirable – but it was clear that Coalition Senator and shadow home affairs minister James Paterson wanted more. Paterson had thought it “remarkable that Australia was relying on civilian aircraft for early warning about military exercises by a formidable foreign task group in our region.” To a certain extent, the needlessly irate minister got what he wanted, with the badgered Admiral conceding that the Chinese navy’s conduct had been “irresponsible” and “disruptive”.

Wu Qian, spokesperson for the China National Ministry for Defence, offered a different reading: “During the period, China organised live-fire training of naval guns toward the sea on the basis of repeatedly issuing prior safety notices”. Its actions were “in full compliance with international law and international practice, with no impact on aviation flight safety”. That said, 49 flights were diverted on February 21.

Much was also made about what were the constituent elements of the fleet. As if it mattered one jot, the Defence Force chief was pressed on whether a Chinese nuclear-powered submarine had made up the task force. “I don’t know whether there is a submarine with them, it is possible, task groups occasionally do deploy with submarines but not always,” came the reply. “I can’t be definitive whether that’s the case.”

The carnival of fear was very much in town, with opposition politicians keen to blow air into the balloon of the China threat across the press circuit. The shadow defence minister Andrew Hastie warned listeners on Sydney radio station 2GB of “the biggest peacetime military buildup since 1945”, Beijing’s projection of power with its blue-water navy, the conduct of two live-fire exercises and the Chinese taskforce operating within Australia’s Exclusive Economic Zone off Tasmania. Apparently, all of this showed the Australian Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese, to be “weak” for daring to accept that the conduct complained of was legal under international law. “Now that may be technically right, but that misses the deeper subtext, and that is China is now in our backyard, and they’ve demonstrated that we don’t have the will to insist on our national interest and mutual respect.”

There are few voices of sensible restraint in Australia’s arid landscape of strategic thinking, but one could be found. Former principal warfare officer of the Royal Australian Navy, Jennifer Parker, commendably remarked that this hardly warranted the title of “a crisis”. To regard it as such “with over-the-top indignation diminishes our capacity to tackle real crises as the region deteriorates.” Australia might, at the very least, consider modernising a surface fleet that was “the smallest and oldest we’ve had since 1950.”

Allegations that Beijing should not be operating in Australia’s exclusive economic zone, let alone conduct live-fire exercises in international waters, served to give it “a propaganda win to challenge our necessary deployments to North-East Asia and the South China Sea – routes that carry two-thirds of our maritime trade.”

The cockeyed priorities of the Australian defence establishment lie elsewhere: fantasy, second hand US nuclear-powered submarines that may, or may never make their way to Australia; mushy hopes of a jointly designed nuclear powered submarine specific to the AUKUS pact that risks sinking off the design sheet; and the subordination of Australian land, naval and spatial assets to the United States imperium.

Such is the standard of political debate that something as unremarkable as this latest sea incident has become a throbbing issue that supposedly shows the Albanese government as insufficiently belligerent. Yet there was no issue arising, other than a statement of presence by China’s growing navy, something it was perfectly entitled to do.

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.comRead other articles by Binoy.

 

Remembering Nuclear Victims 71 Years after the Castle Bravo Test


Pushing for the Abolition of Nuclear Weapons and War


March 1 marks 71 years since the U.S. used its biggest ever nuclear weapon—on Bikini Atoll in the Marshall Islands. The bomb was 15 megatons, 1,000 times more powerful than the bomb dropped on Hiroshima.

Between 1946 and 1958 the U.S. detonated 67 nuclear weapons in the Marshall Islands. The blasts vaporized whole islands, carved craters into the shallow lagoons, and exiled hundreds of people from their homes. The Castle Bravo blast was the largest of all, sending particulate and gaseous fallout around the entire planet. We published this article on the 70th anniversary last year in LA Progressive.

What was once called Castle Bravo Day is now called Nuclear Victims Remembrance Day – a day to remember the many people who have suffered untold pain, sickness, death and environmental damage resulting from the entire nuclear cycle. From uranium mining on Indigenous lands, to poisonous fallout from nuclear testing, to actually being bombed with nuclear weapons, nuclear weapons are bad news for all concerned.

Even more concerning is the nuclear “Sword of Damocles” that hangs over all life on Earth, and which haunts our collective conscience. Will we be the nuclear victims of the future? What about our children and grandchildren?

Notable now are the Trump administration’s tentative initiatives to end the bloody war in Ukraine and establish peaceful relations with Russia. Any moves in this direction bring a sigh of relief. We can hope that one of the major threats of nuclear war is being reduced. President Trump even spoke about cutting the military budget by 50%, in tandem with the other superpowers, Russia and China. Trump said we could stop building new nuclear weapons! Peace-loving people cannot count on Trump’s words. We certainly do second that emotion, however. We should take this opportunity to encourage the U.S. government to take steps toward the abolition of nuclear weapons.

Fortunately, we have more than just hope.
 Many people around the globe are actively supporting the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW). According to the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), 94 countries have signed on to the Treaty, and 73 nations have ratified it, meaning that half the world’s states are now on board.

The 3rd Meeting of the States Parties – all the countries that have signed the TPNW will be meeting March 3-7 at the United Nations in New York City. Among the many activities, the national coalition Warheads to Windmills is organizing several “hybrid” events (in person and online) on Wednesday, March 5, and Friday, March 7.

Veterans For Peace will host an online event this Thursday, March 6. K.J. Noh, Norman Solomon and Ann Wright will speak about Arming Armageddon: How US Militarism to Could Lead to Nuclear War.

The Golden Rule anti-nuclear sailboat is busy the weekend of March 1-2, with events in Humboldt Bay on the northern California coast, the homeport of the storied 34-ft. wooden ketch whose crew of Quaker peace activists attempted to stop U.S. weapons testing in the Marshall Islands in 1958. A Saturday morning Nuclear Victims Remembrance Day event in Eureka will be followed by a Sunday afternoon Golden Rule Film Festival in Arcata.

There’s no better way to remember the nuclear victims than to work to prevent more nuclear victims in the future. We must continue to educate ourselves and our communities about the looming danger of nuclear war. We must push for the abolition of nuclear weapons as a means of conducting war – and for the abolition of war as a means of conducting foreign policy.

The People Want Peace.

Gerry Condon and Helen Jaccard -- for ten years -- have coordinated the voyages of the Golden Rule anti-nuclear sailboat, a national project of Veteran For Peace. They can be reached at vfpgoldenruleproject@gmail.comRead other articles by Gerry Condon and Helen Jaccard.