It's still Good to do Good

Sometimes people's acts of goodness and kindness towards others goes unappreciated. Sometimes people turn bitter when they encounter rejection and pain when their favours go unreturned. But who is to say that people will ever appreciate certain acts of goodness? Maybe some people are just like that--ungrateful for favours done unto them.

And then are other types of people who understand that doing the right thing may cause some individuals to hate them for it. But yet, they still do it. Is there any inherent incentive for doing good or do individuals do good just for the sake of doing good?

Whatever the answer philosophy or psychology or sociology may have, just know that: doing good for others may in return, allow others to do good towards you and maybe... just maybe the world wouldn't be so messed up like it is today.

Repeating History

As the saying goes: Those who don't know history are destined to repeat it 

This couldn't have been more truer in the context of genocide, war, apartheid and occupation. There have been plenty of the above since the end of World War II. With the end of World War II, the world, or rather, world leaders, have made a promise of never again. I would like to ask these world leaders: why the blind eye and deaf ear to the world's atrocities today?

In today's political context, it has been proven again and again that the leaders do not represent the will and voice of the people. Corporate interests take precedence over people's interests. Tax cuts for big corporations take precedence over social spending on healthcare and education.

What the people need to do is mobilize ideas together and create change for a better future. A future without genocide, a future without war, a future without apartheid, a future without occupation.

France: Burqa Ban

With over 25 000 rapes a year in France,
Sarkozy decides to ban the Burqa

The justification Sarkozy puts forward for the ban on the burqa is as follows:

"Imprisonment behind a mesh . . . is not the French republic's idea of women's dignity".

That justification already is incorrect. 

First of all, what classifies as women's dignity? If that question were to be posed to people, there is no doubt that everyone will have a different definition of what that would mean. Second of all, you, Mr Sarkozy, are not a woman so you cannot explain to women what a woman's dignity consists of or means. This question should be posed to women to receive their comments and feedback on what it means for them. It is similar to asking a man how does it feel to wear a hijab. He cannot answer that because a man does not wear the head covering. You can ask that man's wife, daughter, sister or aunt, and then you will have your answer.

Second of all: Western ideas of "freedom of religion and expression" apply to ALL persons and not just to a selected group. By specifically targeting a small minority of women who themselves choose to wear the face veil, this infringes on the very ideas that France claims to uphold: individualism and dignity. France is setting up the stage for other countries to do the same.

This is not protecting human dignity; rather it is Islamophobic and it is anti-Muslim.

No Fly Zone over Gaza

No Fly Zone over GAZA

When Libya initiated its protests and revolution against Moammar Gaddafi, there were plenty of calls for a No fly zone. Libya is very much different from Gaza, and the rest of Palestine. For one, Libya has about 2% of the world's supply of oil. It is for this reason, among others, that made the no fly zone argument appealing to the imperialists such as the United States and its allies. 

Gaza has been under a siege for over 2 years. To be price, 1397 days under a blockade. And over that time span, not once has there been a call for a no fly zone from any imperialist. It is only very recently that the Arab League has initiated a call for a No fly zone over Gaza.

My question to you is: 

Why did the Arab League wait so long to make this call?

Don't the lives of Gazans matter? Are they not human as well? Don't they want the same as any other human being on this planet: feeling safe from Israeli warfare?

Answer to all three: YES.

The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy

THE GREAT BENEFACTOR

Since the October War in 1973, Washington has provided Israel with a level of support dwarfing the amounts provided to any other state.  It has been the largest annual recipient of direct U.S. economic and military assistance since 1976 and the largest total recipient since World War II.  Total direct U.S. aid to Israel amounts to well over $140 billion in 2003 dollars. [2]

Israel receives about $3 billion in direct foreign assistance each year, which is roughly one‐fifth of America’s foreign aid budget.  In per capita terms, the United States gives each Israeli a direct subsidy worth about $500 per year. [3]

This largesse is especially striking when one realizes that Israel is now a wealthy industrial state with a per capita income roughly equal to South Korea or Spain. [4] Israel also gets other special deals from Washington. [5]

Other aid recipients get their money in quarterly instalments, but Israel receives its entire appropriation at the beginning of each fiscal year and thus earns extra interest.  Most recipients of American military assistance are required to spend all of it in the United States, but Israel can use roughly twenty‐five percent of its aid allotment to subsidize its own defense industry.  Israel is the only recipient that does not have to account for how the aid is spent, an exemption that makes it virtually impossible to prevent the money from being used for purposes the United States opposes, like building settlements in the West Bank.

Moreover, the United States has provided Israel with nearly $3 billion to develop weapons systems like the Lavi aircraft that the Pentagon did not want or need, while giving Israel access to top‐drawer U.S. weaponry like Blackhawk helicopters and F‐16 jets.  Finally, the United States gives Israel access to 2intelligence that it denies its NATO allies and has turned a blind eye towards Israel’s acquisition of nuclear weapons. [6]

Footnotes:

[2] According to the U.S. Agency for International Development’s (USAID) “Greenbook,” which reports “overseas loans and grants,” Israel has received $140,142,800 (in constant 2003 dollars) from the United States through 2003. Downloaded from the “Greenbook” web site [http://qesdb.cdie.org/gbk/] on November 8, 2005.


[3] According to the “Greenbook,” Israel received about $3.7 billion in direct aid from the United States in 2003. Israel’s population according to the International Institute for Strategic Studies [IISS] and the CIA is 6,276,883. IISS, The Military Balance: 2005‐2006 (Oxfordshire: Routledge, 2005), p. 192; http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/.  
That averages out to $589 per Israeli. If one assumes the same population size and $3 billion in total aid, then each Israeli receives $478.


[4] See http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/; World Bank Atlas (Washington, DC: Development Data Group, World Bank, September 2004), pp. 64‐65.


[5] For a discussion of the various special deals that Israel receives, see Clyde R. Mark, “Israel: U.S. Foreign Assistance,” Issue Brief for Congress (Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, April 26, 2005).  


[6] Avner Cohen, Israel and the Bomb (New York: Columbia University Press, 1999); Seymour M. Hersh, The Samson Option: Israel’s Nuclear Arsenal and American Foreign Policy (New York: Random House, 1991).