SIDEBAR
»
S
I
D
E
B
A
R
«
About this website

SydWalker.Info is a personal website. I live in tropical Australia near Cairns. I oppose war, plutocracy, injustice, sectarian supremacism and apartheid. I support urgent action to achieve genuine sustainability and a fair and prosperous society for all. I rely upon - and support - free speech as defined in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (see below).

with the dawg

"Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers"

Blog Issues

Unless otherwise indicated, material on this website is written by Syd Walker.

Anyone is welcome to re-publish material sourced from this site, as long as the source is acknowledged with a hyperlink.

Material from other sources reproduced here is presented on a 'Fair Use' basis. I try to cite references accurately. Please contact me if you have queries, comments, broken link reports, complaints - or just to say hello.

Boycott Apartheid!
Boycott
Misc Menu
 
February 2012
S M T W T F S
« Jan    
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
26272829  
Search this website
And the winner is… JASP!
Sep 2nd, 2009 by Syd Walker

During August, I had a poll running on this website in which I invited visitors to vote for the name they thought best suited to the small nation-state in the Middle East commonly known as ‘Israel’ since its inception in 1948.

Here are the results:

Naming The Beast

I didn’t ‘push’ the poll by actively urging people to vote. That invites the Hasbara crowd to fly-by in a rage, like a swarm of angry wasps. So I just let nature take its course.

Now, I’ll admit to some bias. I consider this website is visited by a selection of the smartest people on earth. My dog (rumoured to have an IQ of 250+) assures me most material here is crafted, like fabulous tropical flowers, to attract the most discriminating pollinators.

Therefore I shall take heed of this poll-of-the-well-informed and follow the popular will. Personally, I voted for ‘Rothchildistan’ – but in hindsight the democratic process has yet again come up trumps.

What acronym should I use for the ‘Jewish Apartheid State in Palestine’? Is it JASP – or JASIP? Should that be put to the vote as well?

Marwan Barghouti

Nelson Mandela was released long ago: FREE MARWAN BARGHOUTI!

On a more serious note, the vote that’s really needed to sort this tangle is the vote that’s never allowed to happen: that’s a one-vote, one-value poll of all people associated with the land of Palestine in recent times, whether by birth, direct descent or immigration.

An initial question well worth asking is whether a majority actually want segregation on a long-term basis. Most people in the world don’t. Could it be that the people of Palestine – as a whole – prefer unity and real democracy?

Such a vote could launch the region – and the world – onto a peaceful trajectory. It could help turn the Jewish Apartheid State in Palestine into a genuine democratic country. It would help bring an end to segregation in the Holy Land and stimulate general disarmament.

That’s what worked in South Africa. Post Apartheid South Africa has its problems too – but at least today it’s not a widely-despised, nuclear-armed. international pariah.

A similar process can work in the still-fractured land of Palestine, correcting the historical error of 1948.

The Jewish Apartheid State in Palestine is the sour, maggot-ridden fruit of the greatest holocaust the world has known to date: The Second World War – a cataclysm that plunged the world into chaos and caused the deaths of some 60 million people.

We should spit out this rotten fruit and pick from the tree of peace and reconciliation.

Thou Shalt not Kill: a popular trend
Aug 31st, 2009 by Syd Walker

It’s often said – and probably true – that Australia has become more secular over the last couple of generations. Yet while the influence of Church Christianity may have waned – that doesn’t say much about Australians’ changing beliefs on social issues.

Scott Steel’s well-researched blog Pollytics.com carries a very informative article entitled: Our Changing Views on the Death Penalty.

Scott summaries the results of a recently-published opinion poll by Roy Morgan Research: Australians say penalty for murder should be Imprisonment (64%) rather than the Death Penalty (23%)

Changing views on the death penalty in Australia since 1947

Changing views on the death penalty in Australia since 1947

Roy Morgan has been conducting the same poll within Australia since 1947. Scott has turned the results of polling over the last sixty years – presented in tabular form by Roy Morgan Research – into graphs that show the long term trends very clearly.

The results of more questions related to this topic – and other graphs displaying comparable trends – are available in the Pollytics.com article.

It’s a fascinating piece of research.

I have an antipathy to institutionalized murder and find these results a welcome indication that support for more humane polices continues to grow.

While our political elites have been seduced and cajoled into supporting the war mongering, liberty-restricting policies of Australia’s misguided ‘allies’, Australians as a whole are much less keen on violent solutions to complex problems.

Opponents of citizen-initiated referenda often cite the death penalty as an example of why putting more power in the hands of the public might lead to blood-thirsty, mob-rule type polices – ergo (the argument goes) it’s ‘safer’ to let politicians make the decisions at arms reach from the will of the general public.

These long-term data suggest it has been a false argument for quite some time.

The Only Democracy in the Middle East
Jul 28th, 2009 by Syd Walker

‘Israel’ is such a democracy it’s about time the whole world gets the opportunity to vote on its name.

Palestine wiped off the map

Palestine wiped off the map

This never occurred in 1948 – a regrettable oversight that can now be corrected.

If you have additional suggestions, please post comments below

Keep them clean! (I don’t mean ‘ethnically clean‘)

_____________________

Some people believe the State of 'Israel' is an illegitmate term. What do you prefer?

  • Jewish Apartheid State in Palestine (JASP) (33%, 13 Votes)
  • Rothschildistan (23%, 9 Votes)
  • The Zionist Entity (15%, 6 Votes)
  • Israel (10%, 4 Votes)
  • Ziocolony (8%, 3 Votes)
  • Other (8%, 3 Votes)
  • The Shitty Little State (3%, 1 Votes)

Total Voters: 39

Loading ... Loading ...
Bad Losers
Jun 15th, 2009 by Syd Walker

In the last week, two significant elections were held in the middle east. In both cases, high voter turnout was reported

Lebanon Election June 2009: the winners celebrate

Education Minister Bahiya al-Hariri and Prime Minister Siniora celebrate victory in the Lebanese election

The Lebanon went to the polls just over a week ago to elect a new Parliament. Interest centered on whether a Hizbollah-backed alliance (known as the 8th March Coalition) would win more seats than the ruling, more pro-western coalition of parties known as the 14th March Coalition. In the event, it failed to make the headway anticipated by some western observers.

The losing side immediately accepted the results of the election and pledged support for the next government. The western mainstream media, needless to say, gloated. It was smiles all round on the BBC, CNN and FOX.

Last Friday came the Presidential election in Iran. In this case, there was considerable anticipation within the western mass media that the current President might be defeated by a candidate perceived as more liberal and pro-western.

In this case, the west’s favoured candidate lost – rather decisively. Immediately the call went out protesting the election result. At the time of writing, it’s reported that the USA has yet to recognize the result; as usual, the Australian Government is following America’s ‘lead’. Vice President Biden is, however, quoted as saying that the USA will still negotiate with the Iranian Government. That’s patronizing, when you think about it – but it could be worse.

Tehran protests

Protestors in Tehran, the day after the election

There’s been a lot of focus, in the western media, on ‘repression’ following the election. We hear that anti-Ahmadinejad protestors were quickly dispersed by police. Not good… Even so, reports also seem to indicate that some protestors hurled rocks. I invite anyone to try that in London or Washington these days and see how you get along.

Of course, the more transparency in elections, the better – whether they occur in America, Iran or anywhere else. Ideally, humanity would have evolved a sufficiently co-operative and harmonious world society by now so that observers from outside – representing the world community – would always be welcome to help monitor elections. But we’re not quite there yet.

There has been widespread concern about massive electoral fraud in the USA at successive elections – mainly due to widespread use of ‘black box’ electronic voting which left no paper trail or other means of auditing announced results. Suffice it to say that the USA, given its own recent history, is ill-placed to lecture anyone on bodgy elections – except perhaps to explain how elections can be rigged on a grand scale.

Mir Hossein Moussavi

Mir Hussein Moussavi: declared victory on the basis of his own exit-polling; an old trick

Supporters of Mir Hossein Moussavi,, the leading challenger in the Iranian election, took to wearing green sashes during the campaign. It lead some western observers to speculate about whether Iran was to experience a post-election ‘Green Revolution’, rather like the Soros-funded and inspired colour revolutions that had been so effective in bouncing official winners in the Ukraine and Georgia a few years back.

The Iranian Government – and the Iranian people as a whole – are not stupid. They have been noticing these CIA/Zionist sponsored shenanigans around the world for some considerable time. It was to be expected they’d ensure nothing similar happened in Iran. It has not.

What should be equally clear, however, to those who live in the real world as opposed to the bubble-reality of the western mainstream media, is that the objective basis for such a ‘revolution’ does not exist in Iran, c. 2009.

Most Iranians want change – including more civil and media freedom. But they do not want another western coup; their elders still remember the CIA/MI6 coup in the early 1950s that toppled Iran’s elected leader of the day. They have a deep distrust of Israel and certainly do not want pro-Zionist leadership or influence in their own country.

How do we know this? A month or so before the Iranian election, the Terror Free Tomorrow: The Center for Public Opinion, the New America Foundation and KA Europe SPRL conducted quite detailed telephone surveys of Iranian public opinion. These were published under the title: Results of a New Nationwide Public Opinion Survey of Iran before the June 12, 2009 Presidential Elections. It had two subtitles: Ahmadinejad Front Runner in Upcoming Presidential Elections and  Iranians Continue to Back Compromise and Better Relations with US and West.

Presidential Election Poll for Iran, May 2009

Presidential Election Poll for Iran, May 2009

It is reasonable to be suspicious of the results; these are ‘insider’ organiations within the western power structure. But there’s no possibility, for that very reason, that the results were pro-Ahmadinejad propaganda.

The survey showed rather clearly that Ahmadinejad was way ahead of Moussavi, with two and a half times as much support. At that time, however, there were still a lot of undecided voters.

Ahmadinejad embraces Chavez

Presidents Ahmadinejad and Chavez embrace in 2008: both are grinning winners

Judging by the official final result, Moussavi did pick up some of these late-to-decide voters. But he didn’t get them all – and the incumbent was already well ahead.

Responses in the survey to questions on the economy and foreign affairs help explain President Ahmadinejad’s electoral success. His policies represent mainstream opinion. Ahmadinejad is widely perceived as the friend of the poor; Moussavi, by contrast, was regarded as the ally of the wealthy.

President Ahmadinejad could be decribed the ‘Hugo Chavez’ of his own, very different, society. He’s not an aberration. He represents the popular will of the majority in a society that’s sophisticated, but still poor by western standards.

Obama and Chavez grinning

Two more grinning elected Presidents

Juan Cole, an American academic generally considered on the left, takes an entirely different view. Cole clearly believes the Iranian election was rigged: see Class v. Culture Wars in Iranian Elections: Rejecting Charges of a North Tehran Fallacy.

It’s possible that ‘conspiracy theorists’ such as Professor Cole are right – although I don’t believe he makes a convincing case.

I’d like to know how Cole explains the ‘Terror Free Tomorrow’ polling data. Was it rigged in Ahmadinejad’s favour as well?

Obama Chavez handshake

The 'had enough of Zionist-rule' shake?

People who believe in conspiracies as broad as that are usually ridiculed. Paranoia sometimes gets the better of them. They may end up reading too much, for example, into the grins of Obama and Chavez when they met at the recent Americas Summit.

They are especially prone to fret over innocent gestures such as a friendly handshake (even though it may, in fairness, have looked suspicous to an occultist…)

___________________

See also:

»  Substance:WordPress   »  Style:Ahren Ahimsa