Ken O' Keefe.

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: Ken O' Keefe.

Postby American Dream » Sun Jul 28, 2013 1:51 pm

slimmouse » Sun Jul 28, 2013 12:39 pm wrote:
Maybe he gets donations from his good buddy, David Duke.


You know what Solace, that quote of yours got me thinking about good old Mr Duke.

It would appear to me at least, that if someone like Mr Duke didnt exist, then the Control system would have to invent him.

I'd be tempted to offer the talented Mr Duke a lot more credit, If for example he'd been on the Gaza flotilla with OKeefe, Cynthia Mckinney and other people who despise the kind of oppression being meted out to fellow human beings in Gaza , inhumainity which is both partially and fully supported by a litany of apologists, cowards and murdurers by proxy, many of whom apparently represent us !

So I guess we shouldnt be surprised at the apparent indefatiguable nature of Mr Duke.

When Im looking for state assets, he'd be at the head of my list of suspects. Even if by chance he's little more than simply a wtting idiot.


A bigger problem I think is those "stealth bombers" who start off sounding kinda sorta reasonable and then keep busting out with greater and greater levels of destructive and crazy-sounding ideas not backed by good thinking and good evidence.

It is those people who become a real liability for the good folks who accepted them under one set of circumstances only to find that those circumstances keep changing and changing, generally for the worse...
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Ken O' Keefe.

Postby seemslikeadream » Sun Jul 28, 2013 1:56 pm

Israel abuses Palestinian children, UN reports find

Saturday, July 27, 2013
By Steven Katsineris
Since it was founded in 1948, the Israeli state has neglected the rights of Palestinian children, who have been deliberately ill-treated. Many Palestinian children have been killed, injured, jailed, tortured or used as human shields by Israel.

In attacks on Palestinian territory, Israeli forces have intentionally targeted playgrounds, schools and other areas frequented by children. Between September 2000 and April 2013, the Israeli occupation forces killed 1518 Palestinian children. This is equivalent to one Palestinian child killed by the Israel army every three days for almost 13 years.

The number of Palestinian children injured by the Israeli military since September 2000 has reached 6000 — or four children injured every three days.

Moer than 9000 Palestinian children have been arrested, detained or jailed since September 2000. That’s six children jailed every three days.

These children have often been detained without charge and subject to abuse and mistreatment, including torture, by the Israeli army and prison officials.

Palestinian prisoner support group Addameer says most of these children report being subjected to ill-treatment and having confessions extracted from them during interrogations. Forms of ill-treatment used by Israeli soldiers include slapping, beating, kicking, violent pushing, threats and even sexual assault.

There are now 238 Palestinian children under the age of 18 being held in Israeli prisons. And 47 of these are under 16.

United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) Report on Palestinian Children in Israeli Military Detention sin March said: “It is understood that in no other country are children systematically tried by juvenile military courts that by definition, fall short of providing the necessary guarantees to ensure respect for their rights.

“All children persecuted for offenses they allegedly committed should be treated in accordance with international juvenile justice standards, which provide them with special protection.”

After a growing number of allegations of ill-treatment of children in Israeli military detention, UNICEF conducted a review of Israeli military practices related to Palestinian children. The main report was based on 400 cases documented since 2009.

It said Palestinian children who were detained by Israeli military are subjected to “widespread, systematic and institutionalised” ill-treatment in violation of international law.

UNICEF estimated that in the West Bank, Israeli military and security forces arrest about 700 youths between the ages of 12 to 17 years old each year, often from their homes at night. They are blindfolded, often painfully restrained, and subject to physical and verbal abuse while transferred to interrogation, where they are coerced into confessions without access to lawyers or family.

Also, children have been shackled during court appearances and made to serve sentences in Israel. UNICEF stated these findings, “amount to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment according to the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Convention against Torture”.

In a report on Israeli treatment of children in June, the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child condemned Israel’s army and police for a range of human rights abuses against Palestinian children.

The body expressed its “deepest concern about the reported practices of torture, and ill-treatment of Palestinian children arrested, persecuted and detained by the military and police.

The report said Palestinian children are routinely arrested by Israeli soldiers during night-time sweeps, with hands tied painfully and blindfolded. Israeli authorities then often also transfer youngsters to detention centres with informing their parents.

The detained Palestinian children then regularly subjected to, “physical and verbal violence, humiliation, painful restrains... (were) threatened with death, physical violence, and sexual assault against themselves or members of the family,” according to the report.

As well as spotlighting abuses in the occupied territories, the UN committee also expressed grave concern at the high number of Palestinian youngsters who have been held in Israeli jails.

The report estimated that 7000 children — mostly aged from 12-17 years of age, but some as young as nine — had been arrested, interrogated and detained since 2002 — an average of two a day. It stated that dozens of children aged between 12 and 15 are being held in Israeli detention centres.

The UN committee obtained information from a variety of sources, including UNICEF and other UN bodies, military informants and Palestinian and Israeli rights groups. Israel did not co-operated with the UN committee on requests for information on the issue and rejected the report.

The committee said: “These crimes are perpetrated from the time of arrest, during transfer and interrogation, to obtain a confession, but also on an arbitrary basis as testified by several Israeli soldiers as well as during pre-trial detention.”

The Israeli human rights group B’Tselem said the treatment of Palestinian children violates the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Forth Geneva Convention. Although humanitarian groups stress that Israeli soldiers do not have the right to detain or arrest children under the age of 12, this frequently occurs in the occupied West Bank.

Addameer said a 12 year old Palestinian child could be held by Israel for up to 18 months before trial, unlike an Israeli child of the same age, who cannot be legally held.

Violence has been mounting in the occupied West Bank as Israeli settlement building has risen, reaching a seven year high according to the Peace Now group. With the rise and expansion of illegal Israeli settlements comes the confiscation of more Palestinian land, the destruction of their homes, olives and citrus groves and crops, creating more antagonism and conflict.

Last year, there was an unprecedented rise in the number of Palestinian children arrested by Israeli forces. Addameer reported that an average of 200 children were arrested and detained each month.

Most children were arrested after being accused of throwing stones at Israeli occupation forces or settlers, an offence that can carry a 20 year sentence. But children in high conflict-areas of the West Bank are frequently arrested indiscriminately and held in detention with little or no evidence.

These arrests are often used to deter Palestinian children from engaging in protests against the occupation. Palestinian children are also subject to attacks by Israeli forces and settlers on a daily basis.

Despite Israel ratifying international human rights treaties, it consistently breaks these international human rights laws, with Israeli military and prison ill-treatment of against Palestinian children being both widespread and systematic.

Israel continues to carry out systematic human rights violations against Palestinian children. Its soldiers and officials act with immunity, with those responsible for violence against children not held accountable.

The UN and various human rights groups have, over many years, documented many instances of abuse. But the international community has failed to act to protect or improve the situation of Palestinian children.

The world must demand Israel end its abuse of Palestinian children and respect their fundamental human rights. Otherwise, the words in the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of the Child are hollow statements without meaning, or and offer no protection to the children of Palestine.

- See more at: http://www.greenleft.org.au/node/54616# ... TuWHB.dpuf
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Ken O' Keefe.

Postby slimmouse » Sun Jul 28, 2013 2:03 pm

A bigger problem I think is those "stealth bombers" who start off sounding kinda sorta reasonable and then keep busting out with greater and greater levels of destructive and crazy-sounding ideas not backed by good thinking and good evidence.

It is those people who become a real liability for the good folks who accepted them under one set of circumstances only to find that those circumstances keep changing and changing, generally for the worse..


Would you be prepared to help me with a few examples. In all seriousness btw.

Im kinda naieve on this front in recent history.

But Im sticking with Duke and Chomsky for the time being lol.
slimmouse
 
Posts: 6129
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 7:41 am
Location: Just outside of you.
Blog: View Blog (3)

Re: Ken O' Keefe.

Postby seemslikeadream » Sun Jul 28, 2013 2:03 pm

WEEKEND EDITION JULY 26-28, 2013


Myra Noveck & the New York Times:
Another Journalist with Children in the Israeli Military
by ALISON WEIR
The New York Times recently published a news brief, reporting that Israel is going to re-investigate an incident in which an American citizen, Tristan Anderson, was permanently maimed.

Anderson suffered extensive brain damage (part of his frontal lobe was destroyed) and paralysis, and was blinded in one eye, after Israeli soldiers shot him with a tear gas canister intended as a “barricade penetrator” from inappropriately close range. According to eyewitnesses, Anderson was shot as he was taking photographs in a Palestinian village after an unarmed protest against the illegal and extensive confiscation of village land.

Israeli forces have a history of shooting unarmed protesters with these canisters, which one expert likens to “a small missile.”

Yet the New York Times report, “Israel Reopens Inquiry Into Activist’s Injury” (July 11, 2013, P. 9) reveals few of these details.

The Times article states that Anderson was injured when he was hit in the head by a tear gas canister and is partly paralyzed and blind in one eye, but does not mention his extensive brain damage and that his paralysis is over half his body. It doesn’t reveal that the type of canister used is extraordinarily destructive or that it was fired at such close range.

The report also omits the fact that this incident is part of a pattern, even though Israeli forces have killed at least two Palestinians with these canisters, and shot out the eye of an American student with another. According to a report by an Israeli organization, Israeli forces “frequently fire tear-gas canisters directly at demonstrators.”

The Times report states that the protest was “against the extension of Israel’s separation barrier in the West Bank” without citing the villagers’ actual complaint — the confiscation of their land and, thus, livelihood by Israel. It similarly fails to mention that over previous decades Israel confiscated over 80 percent of the village land and now intends to take between a quarter and a third of what remains to build the “barrier.”

Finally, the Times report repeats, without attribution, the Israeli security forces’ claim that the shooting occurred “during a clash,” implying that it happened accidentally during a violent engagement, ignoring eyewitness testimony that the protest had dissipated and most people had gone home.

The byline on the Times report is Myra Noveck. Noveck has bylined a number of stories for both the New York Times and its European affiliate the International Herald Tribune, where ZoomInfo lists her as a contributor.

Noveck is frequently cited in New York Times news reports as a contributor to stories, and a prominent Israeli newspaper calls her the Times’ “deputy bureau chief” for the Times’ Jerusalem bureau, its bureau for covering Israel-Palestine.

From information she has posted online, it appears that Noveck is an American who moved to Israel after college. According to Torah in Motion, which promotes Jewish dialogue and speakers, two of her children were serving in the Israeli military as of 2012. It is unclear whether her children are currently still on active duty or whether they are now serving as Israeli reserve soldiers.

In either case, it appears that while Noveck has been writing and contributing to news reports about Israel and about the Israeli military, her children have been serving in it.

Such a situation appears to constitute a clear conflict of interest – even according to the Times’ own ethics standards – and should normally cause a journalist to be assigned to a different area of reporting.

When it came to light in 2010 that then chief of the Times’ Jerusalem bureau, Ethan Bronner, had a son in the Israeli military, even the Times’ own ombudsman concluded that Bronner should be reassigned.

In response to requests for information and interviews with Noveck and Times Executive Editor Jill Abramson, a Times spokesperson issued a written statement claiming that Noveck is “not a reporter,” but merely a “long-time news assistant in The Times’s bureau in Jerusalem.”

The statement went on to say: “She works under the direction of our bureau chief primarily doing translation and research. She is an Israeli citizen. If she has children and they are also Israeli citizens, presumably they would be required to serve in the military*. This situation would not constitute a ‘breach with impartiality.’”

I wrote back pointing out (1) that Times’ conflict of interest requirements include family members and (2) that Noveck’s byline appeared on a news report. The spokesperson then admitted that Noveck “on rare occasions received a byline” but still maintained that “she is not a reporter.”

However, the Times’ published ethics standards generally extend ethical requirements ”to all newsroom and editorial page employees, journalists and support staff alike.”

Reporters Frequently Have Ties to Israeli Military

This incident is part of a pattern of ethics violations concerning reporting on Israel.

Isabel Kershner, a senior Times reporter in the region, is an Israeli citizen whose husband, according to Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (Fair) works for an Israeli organization, the Institute for National Security Studies (INSS), which has close ties to the Israeli military and is “tasked with shaping a positive image of Israel in the media.”

A FAIR study of articles that Kershner had written or contributed to since 2009 found they had overwhelmingly relied on the INSS for analysis about events in the region.

A multitude of journalists at the Times and elsewhere have had close personal and family ties to the Israeli military – almost none of them ever disclosed, including the previous Times bureau chief Ethan Bronner, as noted above.

Jonathan Cook, a British journalist based in Israel, quotes a Jerusalem bureau chief who stated: “… Bronner’s situation is ‘the rule, not the exception. I can think of a dozen foreign bureau chiefs, responsible for covering both Israel and the Palestinians, who have served in the Israeli army, and another dozen who like Bronner have kids in the Israeli army.”

Cook writes that the bureau chief explained: “It is common to hear Western reporters boasting to one another about their Zionist credentials, their service in the Israeli army or the loyal service of their children.”

For more information on journalists’ pro-Israel conflict of interest violations see ”US Media and Israeli Military: All in the Family,” “Jodi Rudoren, Another Member of the Family: Meet the New York Times’ New Israel-Palestine News Chief,” “Ethan Bronner’s Conflict With Impartiality,” and ”AP’s Matti Friedman: Israeli citizen and former Israeli soldier.”

It would appear from this pervasive pattern that many of the owners, editors, and journalists who determine U.S. reporting on Israel-Palestine believe that normal ethics requirements don’t apply in regard to Israel.

This situation holds serious consequences for the American public. American taxpayers give Israel over $8 million per day (more than to any other country) and, as a result, most of the world views Americans as responsible for Israeli actions, exposing us to escalating risks.

Osama Bin Laden and others have often cited U.S. support for Israeli crimes as a primary cause of hostility against us.

It is thus essential that Americans be accurately and fully informed. This is unlikely to happen while those reporting for American news media (whether “reporters” or “assistants”) have such close ties to Israel and its powerful military forces.

Witnesses Describe Soldiers Shooting Protesters with High-Speed Canisters

Anderson was shot in 2009 after a protest in the Palestinian village of Ni’lin in the West Bank. Since 2007 Ni’lin villagers and others have been demonstrating against the illegal Israeli confiscation of up to a third of the village’s land (following previous confiscations in which the majority of the village’s original land was taken by Israel).

Gabby Silverman, a witness to the shooting of Tristan Anderson, describes the incident: “Tristan had wandered off with his camera. I was looking at him. And out of nowhere, they opened fire on us. The first shot they fired, they got Tristan.”

Anderson is now in a wheelchair with permanent brain damage. He is hemiplegic (paralyzed on the left, formerly dominant, side of his body). He is blind in his right eye and part of his head and frontal lobe were destroyed.

The kind of canister Israeli forces shot at Anderson is particularly dangerous, according to their manufacturer itself. The shells have a range of several hundred meters, yet Israeli soldiers fired at Anderson from approximately 60 meters away.

The canisters’ manufacturer, Combined Systems, Inc. (CSI), classifies them as “barricade penetrators” and advises that they should not be fired at people. A spokesperson for an Israeli human rights organization says, “It’s like firing a small missile.” Because of an internal propulsion mechanism, they hurtle through the air at 122 meters per second.

CSI is reportedly the primary supplier of tear gas to Israel. A watchdog group reports that the company flew the Israeli flag at its Jamestown, Pennsylvania, headquarters until, in advance of a planned Martin Luther King Day demonstration, CSI took it down and replaced it with the Pennsylvania state flag.

According to an in-depth report on CSI by Pennsylvania professor Dr. Werner Lange, the company was founded by two Israelis, Jacob Kravel and Michael Brunn.

A month after Anderson was shot, a Palestinian nonviolence leader was killed by this same type of tear gas canister when an Israeli soldier shot it into the victim’s chest (the fifth Palestinian killed in Ni’lin by the Israeli military in a year and a half).

The next year Israeli forces fired a similar canister at a young American art student, Emily Henochowicz, destroying one eye. An eyewitness reported that an Israeli soldier intentionally aimed the canister at Henoschowitz while she was participating in a nonviolent demonstration.

In 2012 another Palestinian was killed when an Israeli soldier shot him in the face with what appears to have also been a long-range CSI canister.

The occupying Israeli forces have consistently suppressed the Ni’lin villagers’ unarmed protests against the stealing of their land. As of 2012, Israel had arrested more than 350 villagers, killed 5 – including a 10-year-old child – injured “multiple” protesters with live ammunition, and broken the bones of 15 people with tear gas projectiles, according to the villagers’ website, created to document the situation.

There are similar reports from other Palestinian villages, where several other protesters have died from tear gas fired by Israeli forces.

It is unfortunate that almost none of this was even hinted at in Myra Noveck’s New York Times report.

*While military service is required for both males and females in Israel, only about 50 percent actually serve; many Israelis have refused to serve in the Israeli military for reasons of conscience.
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Ken O' Keefe.

Postby American Dream » Sun Jul 28, 2013 2:18 pm

slimmouse » Sun Jul 28, 2013 1:03 pm wrote:
A bigger problem I think is those "stealth bombers" who start off sounding kinda sorta reasonable and then keep busting out with greater and greater levels of destructive and crazy-sounding ideas not backed by good thinking and good evidence.

It is those people who become a real liability for the good folks who accepted them under one set of circumstances only to find that those circumstances keep changing and changing, generally for the worse..


Would you be prepared to help me with a few examples. In all seriousness btw.

Im kinda naieve on this front in recent history.

But Im sticking with Duke and Chomsky for the time being lol.


I know you don't agree, but I was thinking of figures like David Icke, Gilad Atzmon, "Israel Shamir", and Kenneth O'Keefe.

All have functioned similarly.
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Ken O' Keefe.

Postby slimmouse » Sun Jul 28, 2013 2:27 pm

Well, Im outa this one AD. Big heads up to SLAD for the links though.

Its important that ongoing genuine fascism is being observed and reported, however you define the term.

Im sure AD and solace would agree with that at least ?
slimmouse
 
Posts: 6129
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 7:41 am
Location: Just outside of you.
Blog: View Blog (3)

Re: Ken O' Keefe.

Postby seemslikeadream » Sun Jul 28, 2013 2:28 pm

oh yeah here we go again putting Atzmon in with the Icke way to go AD way to go...love the predictably...and the stupidity
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Ken O' Keefe.

Postby American Dream » Sun Jul 28, 2013 2:29 pm

slimmouse » Sun Jul 28, 2013 1:27 pm wrote:Well, Im outa this one AD. Big heads up to SLAD for the links though.

Its important that ongoing genuine fascism is being observed and reported, however you define the term.

Im sure AD and solace would agree with that at least ?


Oh yes, there really are fascists and there really is an antifascist movement.
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Ken O' Keefe.

Postby slimmouse » Sun Jul 28, 2013 2:37 pm

Oh yes, there really are fascists and there really is an antifascist movement.


Hows it doing just now?

Any examples of recent success from non "stealth-bombers"?
slimmouse
 
Posts: 6129
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 7:41 am
Location: Just outside of you.
Blog: View Blog (3)

Re: Ken O' Keefe.

Postby seemslikeadream » Sun Jul 28, 2013 2:57 pm

American Dream » Sun Jul 28, 2013 1:18 pm wrote:
slimmouse » Sun Jul 28, 2013 1:03 pm wrote:
A bigger problem I think is those "stealth bombers" who start off sounding kinda sorta reasonable and then keep busting out with greater and greater levels of destructive and crazy-sounding ideas not backed by good thinking and good evidence.

It is those people who become a real liability for the good folks who accepted them under one set of circumstances only to find that those circumstances keep changing and changing, generally for the worse..


Would you be prepared to help me with a few examples. In all seriousness btw.

Im kinda naieve on this front in recent history.

But Im sticking with Duke and Chomsky for the time being lol.


I know you don't agree, but I was thinking of figures like David Icke, Gilad Atzmon, "Israel Shamir", and Kenneth O'Keefe.

All have functioned similarly.


Cynthia McKinney thinks Gilad is human...or do you want to spread your hate to Cynthia also?


the Icke thing is getting really really old AD....really really old
Last edited by seemslikeadream on Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Ken O' Keefe.

Postby American Dream » Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:00 pm

slimmouse » Sun Jul 28, 2013 1:37 pm wrote:
Oh yes, there really are fascists and there really is an antifascist movement.


Hows it doing just now?

Any examples of recent success from non "stealth-bombers"?


Particularly potent and connected in Greece. Doing their best to terrorize, injure or kill scapegoats- as well as publicize their movement(s)- lots of other places. So the question is not whether the fascists should be confronted but how, and how much, and how this fits into the bigger picture...
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Ken O' Keefe.

Postby seemslikeadream » Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:01 pm

How does Israel fit into your bigger picture AD?

Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Ken O' Keefe.

Postby American Dream » Sun Jul 28, 2013 10:59 pm

http://epsilonisepsilon.blogspot.com/20 ... cracy.html

Thursday, August 9, 2012

Ken O'Keefe and the Crackpot-ocracy

I used to respect Ken O’Keefe. I really did. I thought he had a lot of guts to stand up to the Israeli commandos on board the Mavi Marmara during the attempt to break the blockade of Gaza in 2010. Nine Turkish citizens, one born in America, were killed by the Israelis and along the way they managed to bloody up Mr. O’Keefe’s pug pretty good. He looked like a hero to me, this man. So, after reading an interview he did with Ha’aretz explaining what happened on the vessel I looked him up on facebook and I friended him. He sent me a brief message asking me what I thought might be some good ideas for the next flotilla. I wrote him back with my opinions! I was stoked! Here I was this nobody living out in West Texas, and this big shot activist was asking me for my ideas on breaking the blockade. It felt like a gratifying moment, and perhaps at the time it was.

Today though, things are a little bit different, and it took me all of two seconds to hit the ‘unfriend’ button.

The reason why things are different between me and ol’ Ken is really quite simple: he went on a radio show the other day hosted by David Duke, an alleged P.hD who in a previous life was a Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan and politician from my home state of Louisiana, and afterwards praised the host on his facebook page. I’ve written about Duke before in relation to pro-Palestinian circles, because I feel that people who don’t know about this man should be warned exactly what it is they are getting in bed with where he’s concerned. I take the subject of this lifelong hustler and bigot very seriously. Every day I wake up to the reality that my hometown of Metairie, a New Orleans suburb, enthusiastically voted Duke into the Louisiana House of Representatives in the late 1980s. He was only there for one term but just the fact that he was there at all makes me sick to my stomach every time I think about it. I’m deeply shamed that the people I grew up around could be so blind and openly racist, and one of the reasons why I write what I do is the hope that someday someone from Metairie will be remembered for something other than Klan robes stashed in their closet. This is a very personal thing to me.

So imagine my surprise when I read this on Ken’s thread yesterday. I’m going to repost some of it here, but if you don’t believe me you can look it up yourself. This is what Ken O’Keefe said about Duke: “I had a lovely 2 hour conversation with David yesterday and as per usual, the slander and lies made about anyone who is truth telling is obvious.” I mean, O’Keefe actually posted this on his wall! If he’d gone on Duke’s radio program and gotten into it with his host about the disingenuous way Duke has pirated criticism of Israel for his own dark purposes I would applaud. Obviously, this was not Ken O’Keefe’s purpose here. When he says Duke is, “a courageous truth teller” and that he has “massive respect” for the white supremacist, it’s clear to me what his purpose was. Like anyone who makes a living off of books or radio shows promoting themselves through some political agenda, O’Keefe is pressing the flesh with someone he thinks can help him do business. But, David Duke is no-one anyone should regard as being above board, and the fact that Ken O’Keefe is going to such lengths to defend his associations with a man who once paraded around the campus of Louisiana State University in a Nazi uniform holding up a sign that said “Gas the Chicago Seven” leads me to conclude that I made a mistake on him. I thought O’Keefe was a courageous man who put his life on the line for the people in Gaza. I thought he could be trusted.



I don’t think these things anymore.



The downside to the new citizen journalism of the internet is that it has opened wide the door for people who either don’t know what they’re talking about or are deliberately misleading and lying to those who read their words and watch their videos. O’Keefe, Duke, and others out there form what you could call a Crackpot-ocracy, a hermetically-sealed realm where facts and opinions are interchangeable and only those who are ‘in’ on the joke get the cryptic import of their message. They tend to travel in the same circles, and it seems in America in particular there is a huge market for this drivel, from successful hucksters like Glenn Beck and Alex Jones to the folks in the cheap seats at Rense Radio, a website run by a Jeff Rense who, according to his Wikipedia page, actually has a legitimate media background from his days of working as a reporter and news anchor for TV stations in California and Oregon. Rense has a long-standing reputation as both a UFO- and 9/11 conspiracy theorist, and from a brief glance at the hosts listed on his website’s programming its clear David Duke is not alone in his conspiratorial thinking at the portal, although he is by far the most notorious and noxious. Whether Duke’s presence here is a sign that Rense knows the value of having a freak or two in his circus, or he himself is really a jack-booted white supremacist behind that magnificent shock of graying 80’s Hair Metal hair, I have no clue. As with O’Keefe, the very fact that he is willing to associate himself and his advertisers with such a figure speaks ill of his judgment in any case.

So, I don’t know what else to do about Ken O’Keefe at this point. This guy used to go on mainstream media outlets in England to protest the American invasion of Iraq. Now he hangs out with and lauds former Klansmen for their ‘anti-Zionist’ conspiracy theories. I know that there were many people associated with the Mavi Marmara incident, Haneen Zoabi and Iara Lee for starters, who are real activists that have taken courageous, and consistent, stands on Israel/Palestine. By doing what he’s done, Ken O’Keefe has tarred all their names and their hard work with a connection, however marginal, that Abe Foxman over at the ADL can rightly say is one with a known anti-Semite and racist. How easy it will be now for StandWithUs and other Israel lobby shops to put O’Keefe’s face next to Duke’s in a photo on one of their hasbara leaflets and make the assertion that the former Marine is not to be trusted and that Zionism is not racism. They can argue the opposite, that people in pro-Palestinian circles are closet anti-Semites, and in this instance it will be hard to refute that claim.

Ken O’Keefe has done the cause of equal rights and justice in the Middle East a huge disservice, and I wash my hands of him. He’s let me down, and he’s let a lot of other people down, and should be exiled with the UFO crowd to Crackpot-ocracy Isle.
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Ken O' Keefe.

Postby seemslikeadream » Sun Jul 28, 2013 11:00 pm

Israel Declares US Citizens on Aid Ship ‘Terrorists’
Gulf War Vet Was Opponent of 2003 US Invasion of Iraq
by Jason Ditz, June 06, 2010
Image
Update: While the Israeli military’s statement does not make this clear at all, a second American citizen is on their list of five “confirmed terrorists” on board the Mavi Marmara. Fatima Mohammadi, a lawyer from the Chicago area, was accused of transporting “banned electronic components” to Gaza, which given the extent of the blockade could be anything from a laptop computer to a cellphone with an unusually good camera. Mohammadi is listed by Israel as an “Iranian” but CBS news in Chicago makes it clear she is an American citizen. Mohammadi was released without charges and other than a bruise from the butt of an Israeli rifle hitting her arm was apparently unharmed. She is already back in Chicago.



Israel’s convoluted claims of secret terrorists being on board the Gaza-bound Mavi Marmara aid ship, despite no one being charged with any such crime, took a leap forward today when the Israeli military decided to name names.

Among the official “terrorists” named by the Israeli military but mysteriously already released was US citizen and long-time antiwar activist Kenneth O’Keefe, who the military claimed was plotting to “train and establish Hamas commando units.”

O’Keefe, a former US Marine and veteran of the first Gulf War, may be remembered by some as the leader of a group of antiwar protesters who went to Iraq in early 2003, ahead of the US invasion, to organize the Human Shield Action to Iraq.

O’Keefe and some 80 other non-violent activists stayed in Baghdad throughout the initial invasion, holding positions in Iraqi orphanages and hospitals in an attempt to prevent them being attacked by the invading troops. None of the protesters were injured, and none of the sites they protected were attacked.

Since leaving the US military O’Keefe has been an outspoken advocate of non-violent protest. He was injured while in Israeli custody, reportedly after being beaten in detention, and is now in an Istanbul hospital recovering.



Ken O’Keefe, Activist on the Mavi Marmara, Speaks


Jun 12, 2010 by KATHY KATTENBURG
I have no doubt that many readers will reject the substance of this statement out of hand. Before you do that, however, I urge you to read Ken O’Keefe’s entire statement. I did. I certainly don’t take everything he says as Mt. Sinai truth. (One example: he makes an oblique reference to the Armenian genocide as a “past injustice” and of course without using that terminology, and he praises modern-day Turkey as an avatar of humanity and justice, which is, to say the least, overblown – even if in this particular action (the aid flotilla) they acted admirably.)
However, that doesn’t mean everything he tells us here is false, either. For example, you will recognize the central hook of his account — the fact that he was one of the activists who disarmed three Israeli commandos after they shot two activists to death at close range — as his version of the Israeli claim that three commandos were kidnapped and threatened with lynching (or actually lynched, in Israel’s illogical parlance, since they are all three still alive). I see no reason to favor the Israeli account over his, given that we know for a fact now that all nine murdered activists were shot with hails of bullets and several of them at point-blank range in the head. Does that mean we should give O’Keefe’s account credence over the Israeli’s? I do, but that doesn’t mean you have to. However — it also doesn’t mean you have to dismiss it as anti-Israeli, anti-Semitic, anti-Zionist propagandistic garbage, either. You have a third choice: to consider it thoughtfully and ask yourself if it might be at least partially truthful and accurate.
Here is part of O’Keefe’s statement — the part that relates directly to what happened on the Mavi Marmara.
I said this straight to Israeli agents, probably of Mossad or Shin Bet, and I say it again now, on the morning of the attack I was directly involved in the disarming of two Israeli Commandos. This was a forcible, non-negotiable, separation of weapons from commandos who had already murdered two brothers that I had seen that day. One brother with a bullet entering dead center in his forehead, in what appeared to be an execution. I knew the commandos were murdering when I removed a 9mm pistol from one of them. I had that gun in my hands and as an ex-US Marine with training in the use of guns it was completely within my power to use that gun on the commando who may have been the murderer of one of my brothers. But that is not what I, nor any other defender of the ship did. I took that weapon away, removed the bullets, proper lead bullets, separated them from the weapon and hid the gun. I did this in the hopes that we would repel the attack and submit this weapon as evidence in a criminal trial against Israeli authorities for mass murder.
I also helped to physically separate one commando from his assault rifle, which another brother apparently threw into the sea. I and hundreds of others know the truth that makes a mockery of the brave and moral Israeli military. We had in our full possession, three completely disarmed and helpless commandos. These boys were at our mercy, they were out of reach of their fellow murderers, inside the ship and surrounded by 100 or more men. I looked into the eyes of all three of these boys and I can tell you they had the fear of God in them. They looked at us as if we were them, and I have no doubt they did not believe there was any way they would survive that day. They looked like frightened children in the face of an abusive father.
But they did not face an enemy as ruthless as they. Instead the woman provided basic first aid, and ultimately they were released, battered and bruised for sure, but alive. Able to live another day. Able to feel the sun over head and the embrace of loved ones. Unlike those they murdered. Despite mourning the loss of our brothers, feeling rage towards these boys, we let them go. The Israeli prostitutes of propaganda can spew all of their disgusting bile all they wish, the commandos are the murderers, we are the defenders, and yet we fought. We fought not just for our lives, not just for our cargo, not just for the people of Palestine, we fought in the name of justice and humanity. We were right to do so, in every way.
While in Israeli custody I, along with everyone else was subjected to endless abuse and flagrant acts of disrespect. Women and elderly were physically and mentally assaulted. Access to food and water and toilets was denied. Dogs were used against us, we ourselves were treated like dogs. We were exposed to direct sun in stress positions while hand cuffed to the point of losing circulation of blood in our hands. We were lied to incessantly, in fact I am awed at the routineness and comfort in their ability to lie, it is remarkable really. We were abused in just about every way imaginable and I myself was beaten and choked to the point of blacking out… and I was beaten again while in my cell.
In all this what I saw more than anything else were cowards… and yet I also see my brothers. Because no matter how vile and wrong the Israeli agents and government are, they are still my brothers and sisters and for now I only have pity for them. Because they are relinquishing the most precious thing a human being has, their humanity.
In conclusion; I would like to challenge every endorser of Gandhi, every person who thinks they understand him, who acknowledges him as one of the great souls of our time (which is just about every western leader), I challenge you in the form of a question. Please explain how we, the defenders of the Mavi Marmara, are not the modern example of Gandhi’s essence? But first read the words of Gandhi himself.
I do believe that, where there is only a choice between cowardice and violence, I would advise violence…. I would rather have India resort to arms in order to defend her honour than that she should, in a cowardly manner, become or remain a helpless witness to her own dishonour. – Gandhi
And lastly I have one more challenge. I challenge any critic of merit, publicly, to debate me on a large stage over our actions that day. I would especially love to debate with any Israeli leader who accuses us of wrongdoing, it would be my tremendous pleasure to face off with you. All I saw in Israel was cowards with guns, so I am ripe to see you in a new context. I want to debate with you on the largest stage possible. Take that as an open challenge and let us see just how brave Israeli leaders are.

Read more at http://themoderatevoice.com/76147/ken-o ... IxY24Uu.99
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Ken O' Keefe.

Postby Searcher08 » Mon Jul 29, 2013 8:18 am

By doing what he’s done, Ken O’Keefe has tarred all their names and their hard work with a connection, however marginal, that Abe Foxman over at the ADL can rightly say is one with a known anti-Semite and racist.


Reflecting out loud... my context for the first section is to do my best to step int the values of the writer - at NO POINT during this post am I judging what is said as good or bad.

1 So what the Abe Foxman says is what is the priority here??

How easy it will be now for StandWithUs and other Israel lobby shops to put O’Keefe’s face next to Duke’s in a photo on one of their hasbara leaflets and make the assertion that the former Marine is not to be trusted and that Zionism is not racism.


2 So what the zionists of Stand By Us say is what is important? And the strength of their argument?

They can argue the opposite, that people in pro-Palestinian circles are closet anti-Semites, and in this instance it will be hard to refute that claim.


3 So the arguments of the zionists are what matters, especially when what they (eg ADL) says may decrease the power of our message / argument?

Ken O’Keefe has done the cause of equal rights and justice in the Middle East a huge disservice, and I wash my hands of him. He’s let me down, and he’s let a lot of other people down, and should be exiled with the UFO crowd to Crackpot-ocracy Isle.


So because
What the zionist Abe Foxman says is a priority here
What the zionists of Stand By Us say is important here
The arguments of the zionists are important here
The negative effects of the zionists arguments on our cause are due to O'Keefe

And therefore
He has failed me and everyone in the equal rights and justice movement.

Therefore
He should be banished to a place where they talk about UFOs .

- a statement which I unpack as
O'Keefe should not simply be disconnected from, but efforts made to prevent other (people / organisations / ideas) from connecting with him. Also his position should now be subject to ridicule.

**************************************************************************
My analysis:
**************************************************************************
I took as a starting point trying to understand the frame of perceptions of the writer.
And have perhaps found the fundamental difference in perception which has given rise to the the 'split' on R.I.

One set of people are playing the game(*)
(*)game as in 'people engaged in activities and processes within relatively consensus-agreed framework by the people involved, towards an end result, with certain principles in operation'.
called:

What will advance my political activist cause towards the result I want?

Within that game, one of the axioms/rules is
The Association Principle:
"Will the association with a particular person or set of ideas lead to / move away from a successful result?

"The more closely a person or set of ideas is seen as leading toward a successful political activist end result, the stronger and closer the connection with them should be"

(exaggerated to illustrate...)
Working Class Arab women eco-activists for Justice in the Middle East, publishers of 'Permaculture as a model for Gaza justice activism'
= YES, as an example of people / organisations / ideas to seek strong connection with.

The less closely a person or organisation or set of ideas is seen as leading towards a successful conclusion, the weaker and more distant the connection wth them should be
Yale Christian Aryan Nations Wives for Hedge Funds for Justice in the Middle East, publishers of 'Turn Gaza into a libertarian Bitcoin hub' :) = NO - an example of people / organisations / ideas to seek a mininal or no connection with.

There is also what might be called the
OOF Opposition Opinion Former Principle
(eg in the above article, the ADL is an Opposition Opinion Former)

The degree to which a connection with a person or set of ideas could be used to increase the strength or negative impacts of messages by an Opposition Opinion Former is the degree to which that connection should be avoided.
to illustrate:
Abe gets a report on "Vassar Jewish students for Justice in Gaza" and shakes his head sadly but no mail out campaign ==> Good idea, create connection
Abe gets a report on "IHR says Palestine is no ones business but Palestinians" and goes ballistic and organises a big media campaign equating Palesinians with Holcaust Deniers ==> Bad idea, avoid connection.

No doubt the above is very approximate...


I suggest that the other set of people at R.I. are broadly either

A Not engaged in playing that specific game (ie are not *actually* political activists)

B Are playing a different formulation of the activist game which rejects the

Association Principle
"The more closely a person or set of ideas is seen as leading toward a successful political activist end result, the stronger and closer the connection with them should be"

perhaps with a

Non-Association Connection Principle

= Connections can be established which are not contingent on them leading to a successful political end result

and / or

reject the
OOF (Opposition Opinion Former) Principle.
The degree to which a connection with a person or set of ideas could be used to increase the strength or negative impacts of messages by an Opposition Opinion Former (OOF) is the degree to which that connection should be avoided.

perhaps with a
Non-OOF(Opposition Opinion Former) Principle
Connections (with people / ideas / organisations) can be established which are not contingent on the reactions of Opposition Opinion Formers (OOFs)

My take is that these are axiomatic for the people involved. In other words completely different starting points. My intuition is that they describe fundamentally different approaches to interacting in the world and to activism.

- and that it is equivalent to having a pitch with a ball game both sides call "Activism" being played but with two entirely different sets of rules - literally like soccer and rugby on the same pitch.

Even when each set of people stay within their rules with good intentions, the interaction of the rules (eg soccer player tackles in their world, trips up in rubgy player's world - rugby player handles the ball in their world, soccer player calls foul in theirs etc etc) - this will create intense conflict that cannot be resolved at the level of goodwill and player - player interaction,
because it is at the level of the rules of the game, not the players involved.

(edited for clarity)

I would really appreciate some thoughts on this...
User avatar
Searcher08
 
Posts: 5887
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2007 10:21 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 160 guests