I was called a traitor by a Conservative MEP in a committee meeting of the European Parliament to which I was giving eyewitness evidence on the UK’s complicity in torture and extraordinary rendition. Doubtless that is recorded in the minutes of the meeting, which means I am marked down on a forest of European Parliament paper as a traitor in each of the European Union’s 24 official languages.
Nobody turned a hair, least of all me. There were some giggles as the Tory MEP immediately walked out of the meeting, which was viewed as childish. But nobody thought of it as way outside the normal levels of political discourse. Indeed it was quite mild by European parliamentary standards. It is, of course, perfectly true that I used to represent the United Kingdom and now it is my dearest wish to destroy it as an institution. It is therefore arguable that I am technically a traitor. I am not scared of names.
My Scottish readers will have realised that this disquisition on treachery is a reference to the Labour Party’s published dossier of evil cybernats. The majority of those cited qualified as evil because of use of the word traitor. I am devastated I did not get included. I am unsure that my ego will ever recover.
It seems to me that, in an argument which revolves around what constitutes a nation, the idea of treachery to the nation is one that logically is bound to intrude, on all sides. Indeed it can be shown to intrude into the entire discourse around unionism and nationalism over centuries. I have used the term myself.
It seems to me context is important. There is a legitimate discourse on whether treachery to either the United Kingdom or to Scotland is involved in the independence conundrum. To make plain that some consider a position or act as traitorous has a place in robust political debate. I deplore the idea that politics must be reduced to genteel commonplaces over tiny areas of disagreement. Passion is important. But to imply violent retribution is different, and comes under bullying and threat.
“Traitor” should not be shunned like a racist epithet. It carries a meaning which is important.
Macky, 9:54 am; yes, and the UK electorate just voted for five more years of cut-backs and pounding the poor, and millions of them by voting UKIP indicated that they think the problems are caused primarily by immigration. So let’s give up on ourselves as well as the Israelis. In fact, why don’t we just campaign for a nuclear war and be done with civilisation altogether?
Lots of traitors here
A long and detailed report on the inside of the caliphate under IS, our Saudi/Qatari backed criminals who despise human rights. It is questionable whether the saudi Israeli alliance in Yemen would also extend to IS. IS is used by Cameron to get at Assad, and mission creep will soon see us bomb Syrian forces rather than IS positions.
I seriously question the apparent accord between Hamas and Bibi’s right wing forces, it looks like a trap and smells like a trap. I would not be surprised if IS has already infiltrated Ghaza with the help of Israel, trying to undermine Hamas.
This report speaks of the arbitrary justice meted out by IS executioners, how people feel visa vis this violence and how they struggle to not put their head over the paraphet.
The report nevertheless is tainted with the Quilliam Foundation being asked to sift through documents, declaring some of them fakes, never to appear again.
‘When it came to documents that allegedly originated with IS itself, SPIEGEL consulted with experts from the London-based Quilliam Foundation and the Middle East Forum in Philadelphia to evaluate their quality and authenticity. Quite a few documents were eliminated as fakes.’
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/reports-of-everyday-life-under-the-islamic-state-a-1041317.html
The terrorist get paid well, ehem, better pay than on a Qatari world cup building site. with a little luck, some might be traitors to their cause.
“He filled the form out, allowed himself to be photographed and signed up. In the next building, he was provided with a Kalashnikov and 100 rounds of bullets. Ibrahim says he was initially deployed as a watch man in Tal Afar, where he was supposed to guard a base and identify Shiites he knew. His pay was $260 a month, $60 more than he got working in construction. He had three days off each week which he could use to visit his family. His life improved in many aspects. After all, the Islamic State looks out for those who enter into war on its behalf.
Bonuses for marriage are paid and foreign fighters can get up to $1,500. One-time child subsidies of $400 per child are standard in addition to subsidies for food of $65 a month. Compared to the alternative, it’s a pretty comfortable living.”
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/islamic-state-offers-fighters-more-money-than-other-jobs-a-1041612.html
@Clark, you asked me last night on the Moderating thread;
“Macky, what do you think “irrational” means?”
Well your post at 10.31 am is your latest example; I honestly don’t think you are capable of engaging in a rational discussion.
Macky, my comment at 10:31 is an example of a rhetorical argument.
I asked you a question which you have not answered. What do you think “irrational” means? Here’s a big clue. ir-RATIO-nal
Nevermind, thanks for your Der Spiegel links; they are informative and your 10:43 link brings me hope – IS is maintained by a structure; if the structure can be altered or replaced, IS can be changed.
I would not be surprised if IS has already infiltrated Ghaza with the help of Israel, trying to undermine Hamas.
Probably unnecessary, as Israel has already infiltrated Gaza on its own account. And contraindicated by Israel’s apparent recognition that Hamas isn’t firing all the rockets. This is new. If Islamic Jihad sent a firework into God’s Own Desert, the retaliation would be against Hamas. Some distinction in scale and targeting seems to have crept in now.
While I’m sure Daesh/Isis is sometimes steered in the right direction* by Western interests and Israel, and while there is no doubt it gets Gulf funding – from states we are extremely keen to deal with – the assertion that it is consciously an element of Western strategy rather than a convenient proxy IMO needs a lot more substantiation than I’m seeing. The Israelis will stir any situation to their local advantage, of course, but promoting a situation in which the stronger party of Hamas and Daesh takes over Gaza is hardly to their advantage. Particularly if Daesh feel themselves safe enough to concentrate on the Golan (despite Israel’s ironic protectors there, Hizb’ullah) or move in through Jordan.
Still, we’ll see. Sadly.
*Iran’s friends
Macky, your objections to my arguments – or rather, to me, personally – are circular. I’ll illustrate:-
Do you see? Nowhere do you define y. It is an empty accusation.
IS is maintained by a structure; if the structure can be altered or replaced, IS can be changed.
Hmmm. Truer to think, perhaps, that IS is a structure. It thinks of itself as a state. The clue is in the name. Sure, it can be changed, and will be, as soon as the power-bases within it consolidate themselves and the usual corruption creeps in. But right now and for the next couple of generations, if you suggest that maybe salafist-sharia law is a bit strict and beheading people for sorcery isn’t the done thing, you are announcing that you are an enemy of this state and your point will be rejected unless it is well-packed with explosive.
Using the term traitor is itself a treacherous business, as shown in the classic exchange between Nikita Krushchev and Zhou Enlai (or Chou En-lai):
Nikita Khrushchev was very proud of his working class origins. Although from a poor family, he had risen to be Premier of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.
On a visit to China, Khruschev started teasing Chou En Lai, because Chou En Lai’s family had been wealthy merchants. Khrushchev went on and on about Chou En Lai being of the capitalist class, whereas he Khrushchev was truly working class.
Eventually Chou En Lai got irritated . He said
“There is something we have in common”
“What?”
“We are both traitors to our class!”
@”Old” Abe Rene: Why should the mods delete your mean-spirited posts?
Ba’al, excellent comments from you, as usual. 11:24 am:
I agree, but it doesn’t need to be conscious, does it? That’s a major problem with human nature and the human condition – justifications will be found for supporting obnoxious behaviours if those behaviours happen to have desired results.
This applies as much to “Al Qaeda” etc. as to IS/Daesh; such extremists commit atrocities fairly randomly, but each incident can be spun to serve some purpose, such as justification for total surveillance, air strikes upon Libya or Syria, strengthening “domestic security”, etc. etc. etc.
Being a “non-deliberate policy” (to coin a phrase) means there will never be any documents that could be leaked to expose it.
@Clark, If you really can’t see that your whataboutery example, has no relevance to the issue being discussed, then irrationality is maybe just one of your problems.
The topic is whetever within Israeli society there is any significant support for a fair & just accommodation with the Palestinians, ie a genuine desire for peace; You have tried linking to a Poll to show that there is, whereas the same poll when examined beyond a superficial glance, actually show the opposite. Indeed anybody who has closely followed the I/P issue for a period of time, already knows that your position is just baseless shallow wishful thinking.
(I think I’m going to have to clue myself with all the technical terms for the debating fallacies often employed here, your one I think is probably an “Appeal to Consequences Fallacy”)
…And the British people voted Blair back in, or didn’t, with 26 percent of the vote, and voted the Conservatives back in with 23 percent of the vote – and this time Netanyahu got, guess how many – 25 percent of the Israeli vote. So either you hate everyone, or simple mathematics, not to mention humanity, says you cannot froth about the evil Israelis.
Not that that will stop people – hate is so much easier than reality and complexity.
Macky, YET again, what do YOU mean by “irrationality”? Or is it just a stick to beat me with, in which case, why me?
Macky, people are just people, everywhere. Or are you claiming some inverted form of “Israeli Exceptionalism”? Because if you are, that is a form of racism.
Technicolour, thank you for such a clear example of a RATIONAL argument.
Macky, why do I call Technicolour’s argument “rational”? Do you see the RATIOS (expressed as percentages) in his comment?
(Macky’s next comment is delayed while the goal posts are being moved)
No Clark, I’m actually walking away to let you carry on effectively talking to yourself, as I get more sense out of my cat’s meowing than trying to reason with you.
Macky, you haven’t tried to reason with me. As ever, you have merely insulted me. Which will help the Palestinians no end, I’m sure.
Macky, OK, for the sake of argument I’ll temporarily accept the assertions from you, Lysias and Daniel that (1) the vast majority of Israelis want conflict with the Palestinians and (2) there is no point supporting any peace movement in Israel.
So now what? How do we best proceed from here?
Clark: Let “Mad” Macky be with his/her schoolyard insults, please. For the 1000th time, why do you bother?
glenn_uk, I bother because myself and Macky are not the only users of this site. I could just ignore it, but Macky won’t. Macky will continue to praise and massage the false ego of everyone he wishes to encourage, and direct smears at everyone he wishes to discredit, constantly working to build his cabal to oppose Craig and the work of this site, and redirect it to his own unstated ends.
Looking at the Israeli elections in greater depth supports Macky’s opinion, though. Top four parties:
Likud 23.4%. Policy on Palestine, obfuscate, delay, stall initiatives, pretend interest in 2-state solution while encouraging settlements. Bombing civilians r us.
Zionist Union 18.67%. Policy on Palestine: Bantustans. Demilitarise, by force, the Gaza Strip.
Joint List 10.54% Disparate and ideologically divided coalition of non-Zionists. Abbas asked them to support the Zionist Union, presumably because they’re not Likud.
Yesh Atid 8.81%. Currently urging Netanyahu to bomb Gaza again.
Others (in order):
Kulanu – moderately in favour of something like a 2-state solution.
Jewish Home – nationalist, Modern Orthodox. Pro-settlement, annex Area C
Shas – shifted sharply to the right recently, now pro-settlement, World Zionist Organisation member
Yisrael Beitanyu – Libermann’s barking nationalist party. Sweep Palestinians into the sea.
United Torah Judaism – Ultra-Orthodox, will support parties engaging inpeace process because more concerned with other issues, and…
Meretz – regards itself as Knesset representative of Israeli peace movement. Two-state, anti-occupation, etc.
Last. 3.93%.
TY Wiki.
Hardly a ringing endorsement of the preferred international solution, is it?
New Labour, Conservatives, Lib Dems….the UK must be ringingly endorsing austerity. Except, as polls of the *parties’ members* show, it isn’t.
“Additionally, in the midst of demonstrations calling for revenge and attacks on Arabs, Tag Meir organized a rally in downtown Jerusalem attended by thousands of people under the banner “We mourn, we don’t take revenge.” Speakers at the event included opposition leader Isaac Herzog (Labor), MK Nitzan Horowitz (Meretz), Jerusalem council member Rachel Azaria, and leading Orthodox Rabbi Benny Lau.”
http://www.nif.org/stories/our-issues/social-issues/tag-meir-coalition-responds-to-hate/
Ba’al, your figures leave over 43% of the Israeli electorate unaccounted for.
I found this set of polls interesting (the domain seems to be failing DNS lookup today; it was working last night):
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Society_&_Culture/ispopal.html
It depicts complex and varied opinions among the electorate. Considering the circumstances of Israel, I found more than half of it remarkably encouraging.
Clark, can I suggest just cutting and pasting this masterly bit of give-away dishonesty:
“No Clark, I’m actually walking away to let you carry on effectively talking to yourself, as I get more sense out of my cat’s meowing than trying to reason with you.”
when needed. What more does anyone need to know?
Spot the oblivious irony & hypocrisy !
“Mad” Macky be with his/her schoolyard insults, please”
Cue dramatic music & spot the “TRAITOR” !!
“constantly working to build his cabal to oppose Craig and the work of this site, and redirect it to his own unstated ends.”
Spot the absurdly false comparison;
“New Labour, Conservatives, Lib Dems….the UK must be ringingly endorsing austerity”
Technicolour, can you link me to any UK Polls that samples the UK populations views specifically on austerity, as we do have for Israelis specifically on the Palestine Issue ?
I do take your point, Technicolour. But “we” voted for the Tories. Despite the thousands at anti-austerity rallies. That poll is the one that mattered. Of those that voted for the Zionist Union’s Labor component, how many, I wonder, did so solely because of its policy of engaging with the Palestinian issue?
I mean, probably all Israelis want peace in one form or another. Who the hell wants to get up in the middle of the night and go to the shelter? Or not, in Gaza where it is impossible to find shelter. Netanyahu wants peace, course he does. Libermann wants peace, which can most logically be achieved by kicking the Pals out completely. The devil is in the detail of what the terms are. We all love fluffy bunnies, but some of us bunny-lovers see rabbits primarily as a menu item.
So I think a discussion of the demand for peace in Israel is a bit more convoluted than you’re letting on. And it certainly doesn’t hinge on demonstrations by the demonstrably few who are still thinking straight in Israel.