Disclaimer (if you’ve read this before, please skip to the article.): Those of you that have been reading my articles may have noticed a sudden turn to some extreme opinions and some extreme language over the last two to four articles or so. I probably should have written this disclaimer previously, but I have no staff or even editor to suggest certain steps, that in retrospect, now seem prudent. While being an independent journalist allows me many freedoms, sometimes I overlook or just plain forget things. As a journalist writing fact based opinion pieces, I have decided to experiment with introducing satire into my writing, and will probably continue to mostly experiment with this method for a few months very regularly, and then it will become a part of my regular three times a week submissions, though not everyone.
I have been a big fan of mediums that have utilized this form of writing and expression in journalism. I have admired the way it is used in The Daily Show and The Colbert Report, and how both shows use it to discuss things we normally would not discuss in public or that the mainstream media is afraid to discuss due to a fear of offending their audiences, losing sponsors, offending or rattling management, losing potential big interviews because people with egos much larger than theirs are afraid or offended or being boycotted by the only two political parties we are currently allowed to have in this country.
I have always admired the Onion for the way it does satire, and have even been fooled once, before I knew what the Onion was.
I also admire new alternative media sources, like Vice, that do real reporting, but often on stories and topics we would not normally read about or hear about. They are of course, nonetheless very interesting and a breath of fresh air into what is often a stale mainstream media. It’s like the old 60 Minutes before they got scared and started hiring pro-war defense industry insiders, like Lara Logan, and complacent borderline tabloid journalists, like Anderson Cooper, (just waiting for the addition of one of the TMZ peeps to their roster). (60 minutes does still have its “there they are” moments, though infrequently, and I applaud them for it.)
Just like 60 Minutes used to, Vice and outlets like it, report fearlessly, and bring us new stories on things we never thought about, and sometimes didn’t want to think about or had our minds made up about already. Vice, and venues like it, come from a young, fresh and fearless point of view. As a person that writes and researches, I find that extremely important, especially amidst today’s watered down pasteurized milk media that rotates the same five stories until we are forced to change the channel. Vice, and news sources like it, also utilize satire and comedy.
I have also reported on things we don’t like to talk about, like military prostitution, defense contractors molesting children and pimping sex slaves overseas to members of our own military and even our military’s lavish spending on golf courses, and I will continue to do so, and more.
As with all good satire as used in journalism, there will be facts, and I will still use links to my sources as always, put documentation I find import and for the education of the public online for free (like that gained from my FOI requests) and the subject matter will be serious. There will always be a kernel of truth in every article in terms of the views and opinions. But the language, and sometimes imagery, that seems racist, sexist, homophobic and extreme or anything else is just my experimenting with a device I have not yet mastered, and I have no sponsors, nor anyone to answer to. I would hope, especially when taking into consideration all my previous work, the satirical mechanisms should be obvious. At the same time, I have a degree in Landscape Architecture, and was not trained in writing, so I may be a little off and clumsy, till I work it out of course.
I hope my regular readers will stick with me, as it seems they have. I am still writing about things I have an interest in or care about and that will be on display first and foremost, but so will my sense of humor, sense of extreme humor and ridiculousness and initial two left feet. If there are some people not ready for this style of writing, I apologize, but that will not hinder my efforts. It will get ridiculous, extreme sounding, offensive sounding and intimately real. If you aren’t ready for it, not all my opinion based journalism will be for you. But all my stories will all contain facts, and links to my sources, as always – almost all.
For those that will and have stuck around, obviously you got it, and thanks. These are extreme positions and opinions I do not hold, but that allow me to explore writing in new ways. The wording and language is convoluted, pumped up, nutty and purposefully insane. Hell, you’ll even find made up words. It may not be effective as humor or satire, but it’s my attempt, no more. It’s just comedy, like Sarah Silverman or Dave Chapelle, just nowhere near as successful admittedly. You obviously can tell the difference and find my reporting and perspective important or informative, if not just entertaining, whether you agree with my opinions or not, or whether I have successfully honed my wit or not. As I will never run for public office, I really have nothing to lose in selecting the topics I will choose to research and cover, nor the satirical methods I will use to cover some of them. I really feel that it is important to always push the envelope. I hope you can see this very much. Time does not wait for humans; neither will my writing, my friends. :D
Now for the dirty …
We are just now beginning to learn many things about the world we live in, that we simply did not know before on the whole. There’s no doubt we were very naïve about certain things happening outside our world that are very interconnected to the world in which we live. I mean we realize we can’t be aware of everything, but there are certain things we’ve simply been kept in the dark about. There are certain things that have many sides to them, that we’ve only been allowed to hear one side of. In a society where the government keeps telling us we’re free, you have to wonder why on certain issues the information we get is so one sided. Why they allow our information to be blocked for interests that aren’t even American.
Of course, the most recent conflict waged by Israel against Palestinians has really opened our eyes to this stark reality. In the past they have been really good at hiding what they were doing to the Palestinians, and all the anti-Arabism racism it involved. Our news sources were complicit. They had no issues pointing out Al Qaeda and ISIS as crazed religious fanatics that said they had the right to kill, bomb and take land because their interpretation of a book says so. But they never told us that Israel is a nation of crazed religious fanatics that said they have the right to kill, bomb and take land because their interpretation of a book says so.
But, this time they didn’t have to, because the crazies in Zionist land did what all nut bag governments eventually do, they went too far. The deaths were mounting up by the tens then hundreds and all because three teens got killed and kidnapped? I mean that’s never happened before in recent memory, ever, anywhere. Before this, they keep saying, “Iran’s crazy! Iran’s crazy!”, but Iran never did that… ever, and we knew it. Saddam Hussein never did that, hell, Al Qaeda never killed so many because three teens got kidnapped and killed. The total is well over 2000 now, two thirds of the amount of people killed on 9-11… because three teens got kidnapped? Who does that, I mean American kids get killed in Mexico by narco terrorist every year? But … we never did anything like that.
“Wait, I thought Israel was normal”, we said to ourselves, but the truth is, they have been nuts the whole time, they just worked really hard at hiding it, but now the internet shows us what our media outlets won’t, and as it turns out, it was a whole lot.
Voices of experts previously marginalized were getting serious attention online. As it turns out they had been right all along. Our media was lying to us. There was a reason Noam Chomsky is considered the preeminent intellectual alive today, Normal Finkelstein and even Alison Weir all began getting a lot of online attention, because people were saying to themselves, “this is looking too much like Iraq. What our media, elected officials and the pundits are telling us, is not adding up to what the Israelis are doing. I mean this just looks nuts.” And the more you read the more you realize … it pretty much is about as nuckin futs as it gets. There was this picture of the Israelis as victims driven to create this huge military because of a need to defend against unprovoked aggression from people Zionist crazies painted as and often openly referred to as “savages” (should have been the first red flag right there).
But the truth of the Israel military is much more disgusting and repulsive and online sources like Breaking the Silence and Miko Peled have begun to lay it out for us. In his book, The General’s Son, Miko Peled talks about some of his training to become a member of Israel’s Special Forces earning his red beret and what he describes is certainly not what our special forces go through at all. In his book he says, “I went to basic training at the famous paratroopers training camp in Sanur, in the West Bank near the Palestinian city of Jenin.
“[…] Sanur was located in a green and pastoral area of the northern West Bank. The base was by a tall, menacing hill on top of which sat a tomb of a Muslim Sheikh. We marched up and down that hill more times than I care to remember.
“I did not think much of the fact that this was Palestinian land until our first nightlong march. We had to carry heavy equipment and move quickly and in complete silence. Despite my exhaustion, I couldn’t help but notice we were marching on cultivated land and trampling somebody’s crops. I walked as fast as I could to catch up to our sergeant and tried to tell him the crops were being destroyed. I had no idea how naïve my comment was. He ordered me to remain silent and keep marching.
“[…] As our training advanced, we began participating in simple security missions that included patrolling the streets of Palestinian towns like Ramallah, the Old City of Jerusalem and remote villages in the West Bank. Not once did I have a clue why we were there or what we were securing. All I ever saw were civilians going about their business. When we were in more remote areas, we saw nothing but the typical pastoral landscape of the West Bank, terraces with grape vines and olive groves.
“I remember once getting prepared before a patrol in Ramallah. We were given batons and handcuffs. In those days there was no uprisings, no protests to speak of, no Intifada. We were a small highly skilled infantry unit, specializing mostly in anti-tank warfare, and I remember thinking, Why are we in a city full of civilians, and what are we supposed to do with these batons and handcuffs?
“Our lieutenant briefed us before we were sent to Ramallah. He said we were to walk up and down the streets and if anyone so much as looked at us we were to beat them, or as he put it, ‘Break every bone in their body.’ This seemed pretty extreme: to break people’s bones just because they looked at us. How could anyone avoid looking at us? We were a platoon of fully armed soldiers in the middle of a city of civilians. I seriously did not get it.” Yes, Black and Latino Americans living in the inner city really do have much in common with Palestinians, though the Palestinian situation is much more extreme, as we all are now learning.
And those Hollywood so-called “liberals” that are somehow oddly enough “I have the right to steal your land cause my religion tells me to” Zionists simultaneously? Oh they act normal enough but when it comes time to burn Palestinian babies and burn brown skinned grandparents, it’s all crazy Zionist, “Our book says so”, ironically enough this includes Bill Maher, who might consider calling his next movie, “Hypocrilous” or maybe “I’m Religulous Too”.
As for terrorism, the above passage from Miko Peled’s book is not just isolated stuff. Henry Siegman, former head of the Synagogue Council of America, former National Director of the American Jewish Congress & a former senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations was asked in an interview to respond to something Benjamin Netanyahu said as he was happily preparing to bomb Palestinian children in Gaza. Netanyahu said, “I know that in our society, the society of Israel, there is no place for such murderers. And that’s the difference between us and our neighbors. They consider murderers to be heroes. They name public squares after them. We don’t. We condemn them, and we put them on trial, and we’ll put them in prison.” (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/182574)
Henry Siegman responded by saying, “Benny Morris published a book […] Righteous Victims, in which he said […] the IDF finally had to open up […] that Israeli generals received direct instructions from (David) Ben-Gurion during the War of Independence to kill civilians, or line them up against the wall and shoot them, in order to help to encourage the exodus, that in fact resulted, of 700,000 Palestinians, who were driven out of their—left their homes, and their towns and villages were destroyed. This was terror, even within not just the terrorist groups, the pre-state terrorists, but this is within the military, the Israeli military, that fought the War of Independence. And in this recent [a book by] Ari Shavit. He describes several such incidents, too. […] One of the people who—according to Benny Morris, one of the people who received these orders [was] none other than (Yitzhak) Rabin, […] he executed civilians.
“Shavit […] had an interview with Benny Morris and said to him, ‘My God, you are saying that there was deliberate ethnic cleansing here?’ and (he) said, ‘Yes, there was.’ and he says, ‘And you justify it?’ and he said, ‘Yes, because otherwise there would not have been a state.’ […] and that was one of my turning point myself, […] He would not follow up and say, ‘Well, if that is a justification, the struggle for statehood, why can’t Palestinians do that? What’s wrong with Hamas? Why are they demonized if they do what we did?” (http://www.democracynow.org/2014/7/30/henry_siegman_leading_voice_of_us)
The media being blocked from reporting on both sides is nothing new. In her book, Against Our Better Judgment Alison Weir digs up the history of our media being coerced into looking the other way from early on. She writes, “As historian Richard Stevens notes, Zionists early on learned to exploit the essential nature of the American political system: that policies can be made and un-made through force of public opinion and pressure. Procuring influence in the media, both paid and unpaid, has been a key component of their success.
“From early on, the Zionist narrative largely dominated news coverage of the region. A study of four leading newspapers’ 1917 coverage showed that editorial opinion almost universally favored the Zionist position. Author Kathleen Christison notes that ‘editorials and news stories alike applauded Jewish enterprise, heralding a Jewish return to Palestine as ‘glorious news.” Other studies showed the same situation for the 1920s. Christison writes:
“’The relatively heavy press coverage is an indicator of the extent of Zionist influence even in this early period. One scholar has estimated that, as of the mid-1920s, approximately half of all New York Times articles were placed by press agents, suggesting that U.S. Zionist organizations may have placed many of the articles on Zionism’s Palestine endeavors.’
“’At one point when the State Department was trying to convince Israel to allow Palestinian refugees to return, Secretary of State Marshall wrote:
“’The leaders of Israel would make a grave miscalculation if they thought callous treatment of this tragic issue could pass unnoted by world opinion.’
“Marshall underestimated the ability of Zionists to minimize the information on Palestinian refugees reaching Americans. A State Department study in March 1949 found the American public was ‘unaware of the Palestine refugee problem, since it has not been hammered away at by the press or radio.’
“As author Alfred Lilienthal explained in 1953:
“’The capture of the American press by Jewish nationalism was, in fact, incredibly complete. Magazines as well as newspapers, in news stories as well as editorial columns, gave primarily the Zionist views of events before, during, and after partition.’
“When the Saturday Evening Post published an article by Milton Mayer that criticized Jewish nationalism (and carried two other articles giving opposing views), Zionists organized what was probably the worst attack on the Post in its long history.
“Zionists inundated the magazine with vitriolic mail, cancelled their subscriptions, and withdrew their advertising. The Post learned its lesson, later refusing to publish an article that would have again exposed it to such an onslaught, even though the editor acknowledged that the rejected piece was a ‘good and eloquent article.’
This was typical in a campaign in which Zionists exploited sympathy for victimized Jews, and when this did not sufficiently skew reporting about Palestine, used financial pressure. Lilienthal writes: “’If ‘voluntary’ compliance was not ‘understanding’ enough, there was always the matter of Jewish advertising and circulation. The threat of economic recriminations from Jewish advertisers, combined with the fact that the fatal label of ‘Anti-Semite’ would be pinned on any editor stepping out of line, assured fullest press cooperation.’
“Author Christison records that from the moment partition was voted by the UN, ‘the press played a critical role in building a framework for thinking that would endure for decades.’ She writes that shortly before May 15, 1948, the scheduled beginning of the Jewish State, a total of 24 U.S., British, and Australian reporters converged on Palestine.
“’Virtually all reporting was from the Jewish perspective,’ reports Christison. ‘The journals the Nation and the New Republic both showed what one scholar calls ‘an overt emotional partiality’ toward the Jews. No item published in either journal was sympathetic to the Arabs, and no correspondent was stationed in Arab areas of Palestine, although some reporters lived with, and sometimes fought alongside, Jewish settlers.’
“Bookstores were inundated with books espousing the Zionist point of view to enthusiastic press reviews. Conversely, the few books published that dared to provide a different perspective were given scathing reviews, when they were reviewed at all.
“When Professor Millar Burrows of the Yale School of Divinity, a distinguished scholar and archaeologist, wrote Palestine Is Our Business, the American Zionist Council distributed a publication labeling his book ‘an anti-Semitic opus.’
“In fact, Professor Burrows’ life history showed the opposite. He had been one of the organizers and Vice-President of the National Committee to Combat Anti-Semitism and had long been active in the interfaith movement in New Haven.
“In his book Burrows wrote, ‘A terrible wrong has been done to the native people of [Palestine.] The blame for what has happened must be distributed among all concerned, including ourselves. Our own interests, both as Americans and as Christians, are endangered. The interests of the Jewish people also have suffered. And we can still do something about it.’
“Burrows emphasized: ‘This is a question of the most immediate and vital concern to many hundreds of thousands of living people. It is an issue on which one concerned with right and wrong must take a position and try to do something.’
“Burrows wrote that imposing a Jewish state on Palestine violated the principle of self-determination, and noted that the ‘right of a majority of the people of a country to choose their own government would hardly be questioned in any other instance.’
“Burrows criticized what he termed ‘pro-Zionist reporting,’ and pointed out that a ‘quite different view of the situation would emerge if the word ‘resistance’ were used” when describing Palestinian and Arab fighting in 1948. He wrote that the ‘plan for Palestine advocated by the Arabs was a democracy with freedom of religion and complete separation of religion and the State, as in this country.’
“In his conclusion, Burrows stated: ‘All the Arab refugees who want to return to their homes must be allowed and helped to do so, and must be restored to their own villages, houses, and farms or places of business, with adequate compensation from the Government of Israel for destruction and damage.’
“He also stated: ‘Homes must be found in this country or elsewhere for Jews desiring to become citizens of other countries that Israel, and their religious, civic, social, and economic rights must be guaranteed.’
“In their onslaught against him, Zionists accused Burrows of ‘careless writing, disjointed reporting and extremely biased observation.’”
The lack of balance in our media that has always been there is, in part, aiding Israel in brutally and racially oppressing Palestinians, like police officers do people of color in America and ISIS do to Yazidis in a tiny part of Iraq, not Syria. Israel’s atrocious murders and massacres, like the one we just saw, are the greatest recruiting tool for Al Qaeda and its affiliates in ISIS. We force a permanent solution, and we stop the Zionist and Al Qaeda terrorists all at once.
Obama knows it, but his grandaddy taught him killing those of color is sometimes wonderful. And he never hesitated to triple the Iron Dome budget while never giving Palestinians an Iron Dome. He has allowed shipments of weapons to go forth again to Israel so they can replenish their stocks and kill even more the next time. With his blessing. That’s cause Obama’s granddaddy taught him oppressing people of color is important same as the Clintons believe, as if they were really champions of civil right why weren’t they marching in Ferguson when it was all happening? Where were their statements of support?
A rapist in Harlem just doesn’t cut it anymore. Black Americans don’t have to be oppressed anymore. Yazidis in their tiny little area of Iraq, not the whole of Iraq or Syria, don’t have to be oppressed anymore. And gracious, isn’t it time we stop oppressing Palestinians? I mean what did they ever do, except be there first?
To read about my inspiration for this article go to www.lawsuitagainstuconn.com .