Confederate flag fight

I've been seeing a lot of posts on this confederate flag business, cheering for the flag, disparaging the flag. So. . .

First I'm going to say I personally don't put any stock in any flag. Pledging allegiance to any thing, especially a flag, is ridiculous to me. *takes cover* Taking pride in your particular neighborhood, state, country, etc to the extreme that you are ready to fight if someone states an opinion or looks at you funny- this over an accident of your birth in a particular place? Why?? An arbitrary border is more important than people starving, people being mistreated by other people, trashing the environment we ALL depend on to live?

On one hand, it's just a flag and it's your right to fly anything you want. Fine. And it's in the past and who cares about flags anyway. They're meaningless. Not to mention, taking down a flag isn't going to get rid of racism, racial profiling, police brutality, poverty and the rest of the inequalities slavery helped entrench. . .

On the other hand,
Why are we up in arms over our "right" to fly this flag that represents division of this country that I'm guessing a lot of people upset over the contentious flag coming down will say they will fight and die for, are so proud to be citizens of, are ready to kick people out of if they aren't sufficiently loyal to ( remember 'love it or leave it'?). It represents to so many the allowing of people to hold others captive and say they are property by law and fighting for this "right".. Like drawing Muhammad, sure, you have the right and it's no big deal to you, but do you really want to be the lout who finds the one thing most hateful and throws it in someone's face simply because you have the right to do it? Your "freedom" to do this trivial thing trumps another human being's right to live in peace? It reminds me of kids all trying to be the first through the double doors in college when we're all going to the same place and have plenty of time to walk several feet to a seat- or adults tailgating and cutting people off on the road- you'll get there, don't be a baby, your time is no more or less important than anyone else's. Your rights and "rights" are no less important than anyone else's. You are not special. I am not special. With all this claiming of trivial rights we are becoming a nation of people to take offense too easily. And I say "becoming" like this is new. . . but that's another soapbox. A nation of babies. We are children. I mean, you can blame Muslims for getting offended at cartoons and black folks for being offended by cloth, but you don't see it's equally stupid or more so to claim your rights are being violated when you can't put cloth anywhere you want or make everyone (not to say all confederate flag supporters are religious, just an example) abide by your religious law (abortion, gay marriage opposition) or say and do hateful things simply because YOU have the right. I know what the response will be. I agree, you can go too far bending over backwards for people, making allowances for all the quirks, but lets have some balance and common courtesy and respect and introspection. And grow the heck up.

7/26/15 edit- I heard a great comparison in the last few weeks on possibly the BBC's World Have Your Say, but maybe Democracy Now or the Diane Rehm Show because I've been listening to all of them and they're mixed up in my head. Some folks want to say the Civil War was more about states' rights than slavery, though this represents a shift from the actual event. Or they want to say that individual soldier's reasons were protection of home, family, farms, their state and not necessarily slavery. A guest on the show pointed out that the same was true for the Iraq invasion. We used 9/11, WMD and terrorism to go to war, those were the reasons (never mind that they turned out to be wrong!). Individual soldiers' reasons for going can be very different- freedom, protection of family or country, responding to a stated need, or because it's their job. It would be false to use those reasons as the reason we attacked Iraq. Ignoring the bigger picture is not accurate or helpful in understanding that time period as in the case of the Civil War.

Australia joins Britain in sticking it to Israel over Dubai debacle

Go Australia!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/asia_pacific/10145459.stm

We in the US would never do such a thing. "Punish" a friend for acting against our interests? And by punish I mean fire them for breaking the rules. What kind of friend does that anyway? Anti-Semites of the worst kind. And don't forget the self-hating Jews.

Australia's foreign minister said these were "not the actions of a friend".

How dare they accuse Israel of not being a friend? Don't they know that Israel is always right, always a victim? Even when they trample other peoples' rights and lives. Never forget. Never again. Never again let it happen to anyone because we value human life/rights- or never let it happen to Jews again; we will trample anyone in our path?

Sarcasm aside, it's pretty sad that I think this quote is profound and worth posting, but such is the state of the US relationship with Israel. It has become so big that it dwarfs even our own interests, laws and safety.


Edit June 2010: Ireland also expels an official over this mess.
http://www.france24.com/en/20100615-ireland-expels-israeli-diplomat-over-dubai-hit

**********
**********
And Israel sticks it back to the world... banning Chomsky, yet another intellectual on their "list."

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/after-denied-entry-to-west-bank-chomsky-likens-israel-to-stalinist-regime-1.290736

Now Chomsky, too? Add him to the list. Some democracy!

After denied entry to West Bank, Chomsky likens Israel to 'Stalinist regime.'

"The official asked me why I was lecturing only at Bir Zeit and not an Israeli university," Chomsky recalled. "I told him that I have lectured a great deal in Israel. The official read the following statement: 'Israel does not like what you say.'"

Chomsky replied: "Find one government in the world which does."

"The young man asked me whether I had ever been denied entry into other countries. I told him that once, to Czechoslovakia, after the Soviet invasion in 1968," he said, adding that he had gone to visit ousted Czechoslovak leader Alexander Dubcek, whose reforms the Soviets crushed.

Britain bans Savage and a look at Israel

Maybe some think I'm reaching, here, to compare this thing in Britain with Israel, but really I'm not. It's about freedom of speech and the government's place. What happened in Britain may be surprising, but in Israel, it's chronic-- and there's the whole issue of controlling the West Bank and denying residents entry (this should get at least as much attention as the Savage ban--it's more absurd and wrong!)...

CNN made the point that Savage was getting more publicity from this than going over there quietly, so he should be glad. Kinda funny. They kind of implied that he really couldn't complain like he was and I'd have to say yes and no...

Now on to the post I wrote earlier...

OK, people are up in arms about Britain banning loudmouth Michael Savage. Maybe they aren’t up in arms, but they are talking about it with a hint of surprise or shock in their voices.

Look at Israel’s list of banned individuals. They are supposed to be democratic, Western, open, etc as well. Are we as shocked at Israel’s antics as we are at Britain’s? Do we expect such repressive behavior form Israel that it’s not worth talking about? Or do we prefer to sweep such things under the rug given that we are committed to giving them billions of dollars a year for all eternity and this is really embarrassing?

Some of Israel's banned:
(a comprehensive list of some 3000 or more is beyond my ability, but this is quite lengthy)

Israel deports former pop star Cat Stevens
http://abcnews.go.com/International/Story?id=83179&page=2

Israel bars Arab parties from election
http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article10187.shtml

Christian deported from Israel for mission work
http://www.ifamericansknew.org/cur_sit/christian-deported.html

deported for human rights work
http://indymedia.org.nz/newswire/display/76130/index.php

deported from Israel
http://www.imemc.org/article/53454

many witnesses denied entry
http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article4859.shtml

Richard Falk denied entry and deported
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/85022

Norman Finkelstein denied entry
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull&cid=1211434094376
10 year ban
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/05/27/finkelstein/

The Beatles were banned for some time-- and they may yet deny the Pope, apparently.

Denied entry to Christian clergy
http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article9177.shtml

Israel denies entry to Muslim wife of Jewish Iranian immigrant
http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/848044.html


Here's the West Bank issue and Israel's denial of entry that could be considered ethnic cleansing, as residents aren't allowed back in, Muslim or Arab spouses of Jews are routinely denied in order to force families to move or be torn apart, these are just some examples.

And then there’s the issue of Israel not allowing “foreigners” and foreigners in and out of the Occupied Territories..
http://www.democracynow.org/2007/1/18/entry_denied_palestinian_americans_among_thousands


Number of people denied entry into Israel up 61 percent since 2005
http://www.haaretz.co.il/hasen/spages/992670.html

Question and 'professor fired for speaking out'

Question to anyone who wants to answer: Is having a professor removed or denied tenure (Kovel, Finkelstein) for criticizing Israel at all similar to firing a person for analyzing and/or condemning governments of other countries (i.e. France, China, Iran, Cuba for human rights, communism, lack of freedom of speech, etc.)- or is it apples and oranges or is one more acceptable or crazy to you than the other?

***
Generally, Americans get up in arms about crackdowns on freedom of speech. This is one of the things that makes our country. It's why many come here from other countries to live.

When someone gets fired for criticizing Israel, the crowds clear out, people look the other way. No one wants to be called anti-Semitic for defending (even factually correct) criticism of Israel.

Let me just say it-
CRITICISM OF ISRAEL IS NOT ANTI-SEMITISM!
HATRED OF JEWS (or technically Semites, which would include Arabs, ironically) IS ANTI-SEMITISM!

Here is Joel Kovel's statement after being fired from Bard:
http://www.muzzlewatch.com/2009/02/19/joel-kovel-accuses-bard-of-firing-him-for-his-anti-zionist-scholarship/

Here's a piece that goes into the criticism = anti-Semitism bit:
http://www.counterpunch.org/landau03132009.html

The end of this article made me chuckle:

“Long Live Israel,” scream the US fans. “Anyone who doesn’t like our team is an anti-Semite.” I want to shout: “Go Back to Israel where you didn’t come from.”

***

This also got me thinking about those wrongly accused (Sami Al-Arian) and how easy it is for people to accuse and how hard it is to prove innocence and get your reputation back.

http://harpers.org/archive/2009/03/hbc-90004539

http://www.commondreams.org/views03/1116-07.htm

Free speech ?

No such thing. Guess it was only a matter of time, really. Perhaps I had way too much faith in people.