portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article reposts united states

imperialism & war

Howard Dean calls Iraqi PM an "anti-Semite"

On Tuesday, leading Senate Democrats said in a sharply worded letter that Al-Maliki's "failure to condemn Hezbollah's aggression and recognize Israel's right to defend itself raises serious questions about whether Iraq under your leadership can play a constructive role in resolving the current crisis and bringing stability to the Middle East."
"The Iraqi prime minister is an anti-Semite," the Democratic leader [Dean] told a gathering of business leaders in Florida. "We don't need to spend $200 and $300 and $500 billion bringing democracy to Iraq to turn it over to people who believe that Israel doesn't have a right to defend itself and who refuse to condemn Hezbollah."

I'm sort of with the RNC on this one: "It is incredibly troubling that Howard Dean would seek to score cheap political points by attacking the democratically elected prime minister of Iraq."

 link to news.yahoo.com

So much for the Democrats. What's really bugging me, apart from the obvious hypocrisy, is that I'm assuming PM Maliki is of Arab descent, which makes him a Semite. Thus, accusing him of anti-Semitism seems ignorant as well as ridiculous.
An Arab 27.Jul.2006 11:42


The modern definition of an Arab is not racial, not religious and not even political; it is purely ethno-liguistic. Maliki, even though he is politically an Islamist, not an Arab nationalist, and racially he has the typical looks of the Aramite branch of the semitic tree, IS a native speaker of Arabic and he is a citizen of a predominately Arab country. Therefore, by language and culture he is an Arab. The Arabic language and culture is semitic, so he is a semite in that sense, as well. That also makes him more semitic than the many of the world's Jews, incidentally, who do not speak the semitic Hebrew language daily, and whose culture has been heavily influenced by non-semitic cultures. Most American Jews, for example, are culturally as Euro-American as anyone.

Dean is really stupid for saying that, both because of the ignorant accusation of anti-semitism, but even moreso, because a leader of the so-called Democratic wing of the Democratic Party should not be seen as endorsing or defending Israel's invasion of Lebanon. This invasion is going to go badly for the Israelis and those who blindly endorse what they do. Even if they manage to pull out an apparent military victory on the ground, and a diplomatic victory in the UN Security Council, by getting a mostly French (the creators/colonizers of the "nation" of Lebanon) peacekeeping force to take over their role when the IDF withdraws from Southern Lebanon. In the longer run, though, whoever ends up trying to occupy and pacify Lebanon is going to have a disaster on their hands. Does France really want an "Iraq" of its very own, at this point? If Israel has to withdraw before achieving what they can portray as military victory, then the invasion is going to be viewed immediately as a terrible defeat and a mistake, even among supporters of Israel. So Dean is taking his stand on quicksand, and he's going to take the Democrats' left wing with him. This means that both wings of the Democratic Party are going to be undermined by their support of Israel by 2008.

I guess that means I'll have to vote for Nader again.