Only in Israel can One Right So Accurately and So Passionately About the World.

Article by Uri Avery, one of the world's best writers on the Middle East. Like most of his fellow Israeli's he's able to say things the rest of us would love to say. And in the spirit of Semitic Solidarity...he get's published by Arab News .....Salaam et Shalom:

http://www.arabnews.com/?page=7§ion=0&article=107283&d=28&m=2&y=2008 Kosovo, Israel and Palestine Uri Avnery, uri-avnery-admin@mailman.sweethome.co.il

A Serbian is driving down the highway in the wrong direction, listening to music on the radio. Suddenly the program is interrupted by an urgent announcement: “Warning! A crazy driver on the highway is going in the wrong direction!” “Only one?” the Serb exclaims, “All of them!” “Wow!” the thought crossed my mind when a Serbian friend told me this joke, “How much they resemble us!” And indeed, much as Serbs are different from Israelis, it seems that we have a lot in common. Both peoples believe that “the whole world is against us”. Both are completely convinced that they are absolutely in the right, even when everybody else is telling them otherwise. Like the Israelis, the Serbs are also immersed in their past. For them as for us, history is more important than the present. The future is a hostage of the past. Many centuries ago, the Serbs lived in Kosovo. According to them, that patch of ground was the cradle of their nation. There, in June 1389, the defining event of their history took place: the great battle against the Ottoman Turks. The fact that the Serbs were decisively beaten does not diminish the memory. It also does not matter to them that afterward, a people of Albanian descent took root in the country. In their eyes, the people that has now been living in Kosovo for many centuries is “foreign”, the country is “the patrimony of our forefathers” and “belongs to us because our religion (the Eastern Orthodox) says so.” Doesn’t that sound at bit familiar? In World War II, the feeling of solidarity between Serbs and Jews was cemented. Our heart was, of course, with the courageous partisans. The Jews who succeeded in reaching Tito’s liberated areas were saved from the Holocaust. Serbs and Jews were murdered together in the Croatian concentration camps, which were so gruesome that even SS officers shuddered when they visited them. The death of Tito and the collapse of his regime did not put an end to the feeling of solidarity. On the contrary. Our Rightists fell in love with Slobodan Milosevic. Ariel Sharon supported him publicly. Perhaps he liked the combination of deeplyvfelt victimhood and merciless brutality. All this explains the mixed feelings many Israelis have toward the declaration of independence of Kosovo. I am afraid that in this matter, too, my views diverge from those of many other Israelis. My heart was with the masses of Albanian Kosovars who rejoiced and danced this week in the streets of Pristina. They reminded me of the masses celebrating in the streets of Tel Aviv some 60 years ago, when the UN General Assembly decide to set up a Jewish state (It also decided to set up a Palestinian-Arab state, but that has been well-nigh forgotten.) This week, people throughout the world are debating the question: Do the Kosovars have the right to a state of their own — or not? International law is being analyzed, possible precedents examined, learned arguments raised pro and contra. To me this seems irrelevant. When a population decides that it is a nation, behaves like a nation and fights like a nation — well, then it is a nation and has the right to its own nation-state. That is the only test that counts. And the Kosovars have stood this test. Therefore, there is a Kosovar nation, and it has a right to a state. Long Live the Republic of Kosova! The midwife of the independent Republic of Kosovo was the genocidal Milosevic. When he decided to carry out a murderous ethnic cleansing and to drive out millions of Kosovars from their country, he put an end to the right of Serbia to go on ruling Kosovo. It proved again how right Thomas Jefferson was when he demanded, in the American Declaration of Independence, “a decent respect for the opinion of mankind”. Milosevic, like his admirer Sharon, had only contempt for the opinion of mankind. They were both wrong. as was Stalin when he asked contemptuously: “How many divisions has the Pope?” The establishment of the Republic of Kosovo is a punishment for Milosevic, much as the establishment of Israel was a revenge on Adolf Hitler — even if it was the Palestinians who paid the price. The conscience of mankind was outraged by the monstrous expulsion, and this time it did have divisions — or at least squadrons. The US Air Force bombed Serbia and compelled Milosevic to stop the despicable operation. The Kosovars returned to their homes, and since then independence was only a matter of time. The lesson of the Kosovo chapter is simple: Since World War II, one can no longer commit genocide without the conscience of the world being aroused and action taken to stop it. Sometimes this happens late, even shockingly late, but in the end the selected victim will stand on his feet again. A more general question arises: When does a national minority have the right to secede and establish a nation-state of its own? If the Kosovars have this right, why not the Basques in Spain? The Corsicans in France? The Tibetans in China? The Tamils in Sri Lanka? The Kurds in Turkey, Iraq, Iran and Syria? The Luo in Kenya? The Darfurians in Sudan? That is a subject best left to professors of political science. Reality has its own language. No one case is the same as another. There is no international tribunal to decide, according to established standards, who has this right — and who does not. The matter is decided in practice: when a particular population is determined to achieve independence at any cost, and when it is ready to fight and sacrifice for its independence — then they have the “right” to independence. The aspirations of a minority depend also on the attitude of the majority. A nation that is wise enough to treat its national minorities with decency and accord them real equality will succeed in keeping the state intact. Countries like Canada and Belgium understand this and endeavor to prevent the breaking up of the state. But when the dominant people mistreat the minority — as the Serbs did in Kosovo and the Russians are doing in Chechnya — they reinforce the motivation to achieve independence. * Yugoslavia has broken up, and now even Serbia has broken up. The unity of Canada and Belgium is fragile. Kenya is breaking apart between ethnic units (“tribes”). In many place around the world, minority peoples are dreaming about new nation states of their own. * Apparently, a paradox. A small state, even a medium-sized state cannot maintain real independence in a world that is inevitably moving towards globalization. States like Germany and France are compelled to transfer large chunks of their sovereign powers to regional superstates, like the European Union. The French economy and the German Army are subject to Brussels more than to Paris and Berlin. So what is the sense in creating even smaller states? The answer lies with the power of nationalism, which is not decreasing, but rather the opposite. One hundred or two hundred years ago, Corsica could not defend itself. To be secure, it had to be part of the French kingdom. The Basque homeland could not sustain an independent economy and needed to be part of a larger economic unit, like Spain. But today, when decisions are made in Brussels, why should Corsicans and Basques not have their own states and be separate members of the EU? That is a worldwide tendency. Separate nations do not unite in new states, but on the contrary, existing states break up into national components. Anyone who believes that Israelis and Palestinians will unite tomorrow in one state does not live in the real world. The slogan “two states for two peoples” is relevant today more than ever. So Israel, approaching its own 60th anniversary, should recognize the Republic of Kosovo and wish it well.

Sanity Restored

It was Valentines Day an hour ago but since I didn't have any wonderful sexual experiences other than having a wonderful steak at Botak Jones's for dinner, I've decided not to write about ST Val's and the yearly enrichment excrercise for floorist, chocolate and card makers.

Instead, I'd rather focus on the happy news that the US Senate has passed a bill to make the CIA subject to the same rules as the military when it comes to intorogations. Finally, the US Congress is doing the job it was elected to do - keeping a check on an executive branch that has spent billions, if not trillions and lives of millions in an effort to keep its cronies wealthy.

One of the most revolting experiences of the past eight years has been to listen to American politicians lecture the world on things like human rights, due process of the law and fair trade. These same politicians are the same people who see no problem with committing torture and ignoring due process as well as spending other people's money on shit.

Perhaps I'm being in unfair to American politicians as a whole. After all lots of regimes around the world torture people quite happily. American politicians are not the only people who have problems solving money. However, while American politicians may not be the only people doing awful things, their actions matter because they actually affect the rest of the world. America has rightfuly claimed the moral authority to lead in so many fields and so, because the USA has set itself as the world's moral leader, it needs to live up to the high standards that it has set. Seriously, in terms of geopolitics, who cares if Loation politcians act like shits, it does not affect the rest of us outside Loas. However, whenever American politcians act like shits, it does hurt the rest of us in some way or another.

The WORST legacy of the Bush Administration will be without a shadow of doubt, the flushing of America's global credibility down the toilet, bringing the World's Greatest Nation to being on par with the very terrorist that it claims to be fighting against. The rest of us may have had our disagreements with the USA but in the end we always respected the nation for its moral supperiority. America was the place where everyone was equal under the eyes of the law. This was supposed to be the ONE country where anyone with a dream and a talent could succeed. America was the one place where men in uniform didn't have the right to beat the shit out of you whenever they were bored.

Apparently, September 11 has changed that. The Bush Administration believes and has sold this idea to Hollywood that it's ok to throw away your principles because this "New Enemy" does not play by the same rules. I remember writing a letter into the Straits Times arguing against torture and then finding that some twat had written a response on the internet about how misguided I was - Why.....the terrorist did not respect things like due process.

Well, true, due process of the law and not using torture does tie the hands of the "Good Guys" behind their backs. But as Chris Paten, former EU Commissioner, Hong Kong Governor and Conservative Politician points out - this is THE ONLY WAY to fight the terrorist. The reason is simple - fighting terrorist is as much a moral battle as it is a military one. Terrorist, whether it's Irish Catholics and Protestants or Jews and Muslims in Palestine, depend on their "Cause" - they get their support because somebody out there thinks they are fighting for something worthwhile. So, the only way to beat terrorist is to show the people that they claim to be fighting for that you are morally supperior. This means doing things like following due process of the law and not torturing people for the sake of it.

Bush and Gang, none of whom actually fought any war at a combat level don't see things that way. They argue that its necessary to torture people to save....AMERICAN lives and they point to the fact that since September 11, 2001 there have not been any terrorist attacks on American soil. What they fail to see is the fact that the terrorist don't need to strike the US of A. They have more fun shooting American soldiers in Iraq, Afgahnistan and other parts of the world. In the mean time, Bush and Gang are playing into the hands of the terrorist, proving to people like Palestinians, Arabs and other Muslims that the US of A is really against them. Osama and his Gang announce to the world that the USA hates Arabs and supports Israel's occupation and destruction of Arab lands.

So, guess what? Bush proceeds to give us, Abu Gharib and the enclosure of Gazza. Just when you thought they couldn't get any stupider and prove in the eyes of every Abdul, Khalid and Mahmoud in Arabia that Osama has a valid point, Bush proceeds to rush cluster bombs to Israel as they're busy "Turning the Clock Back" on Lebanon. But so what? All these actions are necessary to destroy the "terrorist infrastructure." What the Cheerleader didn't seem to realise is the fact that he's been the best thing to Al Qaeda's recruitment.

For eight years, the Bush Administration seemed bent on being the poster boys for Al Qaeda's recruitment and nobody seemed to have the will or the capacity to stop them. Which is not true because, well the US Congress is designed to check the executive. When Congress was in the hands of the Republicans, they gave their boy a blank cheque to get American troops killed. Then in 06, the Democrats came in and until today, didn't really do a better job.

So now, the CIA has to play by some rules, which is a step in the right direction for the Americans. The Cheerleader has said he'll veto but at least the Senate is regaining some sanity.

It also seems like the Republicans are doing something somewhat sane too. While lots of fuss is being poured on Hillary and Barak, McCain has somehow emerged as the obvious choice for the Republicans. I don't agree with everything McCain says or does. He's become a bit of an arsehole since the Cheerleader beat him for the nomination. However, there is one area which Old John has got right - Torture under any name is inexcusable and does not work. Old John should know - he actually fought in a war and he actually was captured and tortured. At the very least, Old John will restore the idea in what is fundimentally a good country and culture that the idea of torture is unacceptable.

Gamblers Ramblers.

I had a very interesting call from a young man today. The young man wanted to know if I gambled and was rather curious as to why, I, a "Heartlander" did not take part in the usual Chinese New Year activity of - "Gambling." Gambling as it stands, is the most UNCHINESE part about me. I've understood the desire to throw away money I didn't have on the roll of a dice or a series of numbers. That's not to say I don't appreciate risk taking per se - I, of all people have taken more than my fair share of risk. However, I like to think that I either played with skill or simply chose to ignore the options put infront of me.

For some reason, the Chinese cannot help not gambling. Go to any racetrack in the world and inevitably you'll find that there will be a Chinese getting ready to place his last pennies on the horses. It's the same with casinos, the largest punters are inevitably the Chinese. Much as Confucious tried to talk about "moral order," the Chinese people have developed a culture devoted to gambling and the pursuit of luck. While Christians and Muslims pray to get to heaven and Hindu's and Buddhist pray for better reincarnation prospects...the Chinese think nothing of asking the devine for tips on tomorrow's lottery numbers.

Seriously, the Chinese are crazy when it comes to gambling. It's no wonder why Hong Kong looked after its Jocky Club and Singapore has thrown the dice on future economic growth on....casinos. With 75% of its population being Chinese, you're bound to make aload of money when it comes to the gamblers. Tax regimes in places dominated by Chinese (Hong Kong and Singapore) are exceedingly reasonable - governments released it was pointless fighting with people to get them to pay a range of taxes when the people would happily give the same amount of money through lotteries and other forms of gambling.

It's not that I don't appreciate the odd flutter or so. When you go to places like Las Vegas, it's part of the etiquite that you gamble a little, rather like when you sit at a restaurant you make it a point of ordering something. I appreciate games like poker, Mah Jong and bridge - such games are highly educational and require an element of skill. Even horse racing requires skill - it involves things like studying bloodlines, jocky history, track conditions and so on. I grew up with a stepfather who studied these things. Gambling properly requires discipline - you need to control your fear and greed. The first time I played blackjack in Vegas, I was such a wreck, the dealer needed to calm me down and beer did not taste so good. But somehow I was able to finish the game ahead.

But the thing is people don't gamble that way and casinos love this. They love to throw away money on games that require no skill - merely luck. Sometimes they win big ....but most time...people simply don't know when to quit and people who are ahead promptly lose every penny.

What is it about sane and rational people when it comes to thinking they can make billions at the throw of a dice? The answer is most of them get greedy and that brings them down in the most unfortunate way.

Ah Meng RIP

Gong Hai Fat Choy to all who are reading this. The official public holiday for Chinese New Year has come and is thankfully gone and we are now getting back to work, though as tradition has it, things will probably be slow this time of the week.

Anyway, the Year of the Rat started out relatively well on the personal front and on the scale of global politics, things went as well as one can expect them to. Americans whinned about how they were not in a recession and mean Chinese were lending them too much money and evil Arabs were keeping prices of oil high but only in delated US dollars. In Singapore, however, things were a little interesting. With a budget round the corner, the nation decided to stop, and pay respects to departed old lady. What's particularly interesting was the fact that the old lady was non other than Ah Meng, a 48-year old (which is very old in Animal Years) Orang-u-Tan.

The fact that 4000 people turned out at the Zoo to pay respects to an ape, is a heart warming tale. It does wonders for my faith in Singaporeans - we are, beneth our money minded, grouchy, crude, ungracious and hypocritical exteriors - just humans, with the capablity of showing emotions that are good as well as bad.

Ah Meng was more than just an Ape. In a nation that has only been independent for 42-years, Ah Meng was a symbol of something good. Ah Meng was someone that we grew up with. She was part and parcel of every Singaporean family - mine included- for quite sometime. I remember the name Ah Meng as a kid and one of the fondest childhood memories I have was of Tara's birthday part in the Zoo with Ah Meng, and a limur called Jay Jay. I think Tara could not have been more than 4 at the time. That memory was so powerful that we made our mother build a story-book world around us, with Ah Meng as one of the leading characters.

I thnk that as we all got older and caught up in the cynicism of daily life, Ah Meng remained as a symbol of something good and innocent in all of us. The Grand Old Lady of the Zoo (Though with a name like Ah Meng, most of us thought she was a guy) was simple in her out look on life and she remained happy with the simple pleasures of life while the rest of us needed to invent reasons to buy goods to make us happy.

I have not been to the Zoo for many years. I think the last time I went was to a friend's wedding but even then I was far away from the animal enclosure. But that didn't mean that I didn't have my childhood facination with Ah Meng. This simple Ape lived a life that was enough to make us in the so called higher status of the evolutionary change, and for that I will miss her.

Sure Signs that You're Being Screwed

I've often compared the difference between a steady job and free-lancing to the difference of being a wife and whore. The steady employee is like a wife. He or she is married to the institution they work for. Whether you're in the public or private sector, your life evolves around the institution you are married to.

A free-lancer on the other hand is like being a whore. You have to please a variety of institutions that pay you and you have utterly no security in your source of income. Your life depends on keeping a variety of people happy.

Each has its own pluses and minuses. Wives supposedly have the security of a loving husband but are somewhat obliged by the sexual moods of their husbands. Whores have no security in life but at least they get paid before they get fucked. A wife is more likely than a whore to enjoy old age. A whore would be lucky to reach old age. But there is one area in which whores, ooopppps free-lancers have an advantage - that is they become smarter about signs of when they're getting screwed.

Here are of list of phrases that should send alam bells ringing:

I want to/I'm doing this to HELP you. - With the exception of Mother Therresa, few people are truely alturisitic and more importantly, in the business world, people approach you for commercial rather than alturistic motives. People who tell you they are dealing with you to HELP you are usually too dishonest to admit their motives and make a pathetic effort to disguise things as altruism.

Let me be FRANK/ HONEST with you - Why do people need to declare their honesty? People who are honest are just that and don't need to declare it. The appropriate response is "you mean you weren't before?"

This is for CHARITY - what charity - the Association for Diabled Charlatons? This is usually the best way to get you to work for cheap.

Here are some phrases which you should be shot if you believed them!

I'll DOUBLE YOUR MONEY - most of us are greedy shmucks and never think through the fine print. Investments take time, money and work - qualities most of us lack! We are so desparate to not expand any of these things that we become eager to believe anyone who promises to save on any of these things. Somehow due dilligence is thrown to the wind. Nobody seems to check and analyse if the guy can really save you time, money and effort. - Most investments in the financial market yield about 10% per annum. Anything that doubles your money in a day is called a gamble.

I give x,y,z of earnings to CHARITY - unless your a listed company where you have to declare these things, you don't need to declare your good needs unless you need the world to impress people with your good deeds. There's a good reason why Christ declared that the best way to give alms was SILENTLY. Besides, most people who INVEST their money don't care about who give their money to - they're interested in how much you can make them. - Although I have nothing against NON PROFIT organisations per se, people who talk about Not for Profit usually make profits that are so obsene the tax man would be living with them if they declared them. - In one of the few incidences we can credit the British Government for being ultra clever was not falling for Richard Banson's publicity stunt that he'd run the National Lottery for Charity - in actual fact, he was taking his profits out in service charges (which were higher than the guy running the lottery for profit).

It belongs to GOD/ This is GOD's WORK. - God, as Colin Powel once said (way before he joined the Bush II Administration) should be left out of public policy. Powel should also have also mentioned that GOD is not in the REAL ESTATE and MLM. OK, I have nothing against tithing per se but why do people like to think that they have an EXCLUSIVE on the Almighty. I don't know but the older I get I notice that the people who claim EXCLSIVITY over GOD don't have it - or perhaps I've been noticing that people who ask you to GIVE MONEY FOR GOD, usually do it from SWANKY BUILDINGS that any half-wit will tell cost lots of money to maintain. People who claim that "WE ARE GOD's CHOSEN," "THIS BELONGS TO GOD," "WE ARE DOING IT FOR GOD," actually have a very poor opinion of God or an over inflated opinion of themselves. REAL MESSENGERS of GOD are exceedingly humble and uninterested in the trappings of worldly posessions or status.

Trust me, I have billions - People like to be around RICH people and nothing impresses people more than the appearance of glamour. REALLY RICH people don't need to APPEAR RICH nor do they need to DECLARE they are rich. Todate, Bill Gates flys coach. Warren Buffet continues to opperate out of Omaha, away from the glitz and glam of New York or LA. Neither needs to write books about HOW they GOT RICH. By comparison you have Donald Trump who is so BUSY telling you how to get rich......nobody seems to have noticed the banks moving in on his projects.

I KNOW x,y,z - We all know the rich and powerful. As I write this, I can claim the aquaintaince of 5 kings, 4 Presidents and 3 billionaires. Technically, I wouldn't be lying. I do know George Bush - I've seen so much of him on TV and read the litterature about him - how can I NOT KNOW him. The question that the SEEMINGLY WELL CONNECTED never want to tell you is - DO THEY KNOW ME. Technically, I do know George Bush ....but does he know me?

Other Signs to beware of

WHITE PEOPLE - I have nothing against Caucasians per se. Some of my best friends and loved ones are Caucasians. However, Caucasians are human like the rest of us and just as there are clever, kind, genuine, capable, classy Caucasians - there are an equal if not greater number of STUPID, CRUEL and DOWNRIGHT DISHONEST CAUCASIANS. - It's a fact that Asians, Arabs and Africans need to remember when they deal with CAUCASIANS.

BRANDED GOODS - Brands are basically personalities and I am in the business of promoting and building brands. However, one should be suspicious of people who need to let you know they're wearing brands. Certain things in a guys wardrobe may not necessarily look right just because they're BRANDED. Li Ka Shing for one, takes pride in the fact that he wears a cheaper watch than the reporters who interview him.