Jimmy Carter is an Anti-Semite.

For those of you who are not aware who Jimmy Carter is, eff off right now.
Jimmy Carter is one of the only American presidents who has helped achieve any progress in the Middle East; it was under him that Egypt and Israel signed a peace agreement and have never engaged in hostilities since (Camp David Accords). Yay. For over 3 decades he’s been heavily involved in the affairs of the Middle East (even after his presidency), and for even longer has been a strong proponent of human rights. While he’s definitely not considered America’s greatest president (probably largely thanks to how Americans felt his administration handled the the Iranian hostage crisis, which was a huge embarrassment for him ), he was, in my own opinion, a good one, as he was a nice, gentle, good-natured politician who actually seemed concerned about things other than political gains (concerned about the environment, equality of opportunity, diplomacy with hostile countries, fought for national healthcare against his own party, etc). He didn’t let the end of his presidency stop his political career — he is still heavily involved in human rights organizations, diplomacy, and especially middle east conflicts.

Recently, Carter has come under fire for his latest book: Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid, a book criticizing the Israeli Elite of Politicians, not the Israelies themselves, as creating a system in Palestine similar to the South African Apartheid. He states that it is this Israeli Elite which is holding up the peace process. And I know, to a lot of people that’s DUN DUN DUNNN ..but what about Hamas? The Suicide bombers? Well, as Carter puts it, there hasn’t been a Hamas related attack on Israelies since 2004–when the ceasefire was called. That’s not to say of course that no violent acts against Israelies have occurred period — but they were not Hamas related. Carter also brings up the point how these people are brought to this desperation because of this apartheid-sort-system put in place in the occupied territories as well as the severe human rights violations. Now — I’m not going to get into everything he talks about, because that’s not what I’m wanting to discuss. I’ll discuss Israeli human rights violations and the mistreatment of not only Palestinians but Israeli Arabs later. What I want to discuss is the aftermath of this book, how it’s been perceived and how its proven the exact point it wanted to make.
If you’d like to know what the story behind the book is in Carter’s own words, you can listen to an mp3 version or read the transcript here.

The book has been out for a couple of weeks now, and it has recieved little to none attention within the media. Everyone is running from it. Before the book even came out, you had Howard Dean and Nancy Pelosi strongly condemn Carter for the title of the book, saying he did not represent the Democratic party in any shape or form. According to Carter, he knows the title of the book is provocative, but that doesn’t necessarily mean it’s negative. He wrote this book to point out the severe lack and fear of not only criticizing bu just discussing Israel’s policy towards the Palestinians and wishes that this book would promote the discourse so sorely needed within America. Well ..he promoted discourse alright, unfortunately all of it just aimed at him.

I was watching the CBC when I first heard about this book and saw the Carter interview. I’m not going to lie, I was pretty damn shocked myself that he called what Israel was doing in Palestine something similar to an Apartheid–something so completely unheard of because seriously, when was the last time you heard any major American politician say anything to that effect about Israel? Especially someone who has the status of being a former President?

I ended up enjoying listening to President Carter, and was looking forward to the commentary which always follow these sorts of things on the CBC. Well ..commentary followed alright, but it was the biggest load of shit I had heard in a while. Professor Stein from the University of Toronto sat in as the “expert” and right away labelled this book as a clear indication of the “unravelling of a president”. She basically said that Carter had lost his wits and had essentially written an apocalyptic book for the Jimmy Carter Center. She blamed Carter, a mediator, for taking a position on the matter — although, I’m preeeeeeeeeettty damn sure the United States hasn’t been the most neutral of mediators itself — and said that the title inflicted a harsh label which would demote discourse, because it was attacking one of the involved parties. She then of course emphasized that she would have been just as appalled if the title of the book read: Palestine: Peace not Terror. Uh, yeah, let me just dial the number of my good friend. You may know him, Professor Stein—bullshit? Go into your local Chapters (because I’m guessing UT’s libraries suck) and check out the History/Political Science/Middle East sections. I see more books blaming the ‘terror’ of the Palestinians or Muslims (in their titles mind you) than I see drunken university students — and that’s saying a lot. Oh yes Professor Stein, books like The Age of Sacred Terror: Radical Islam’s War Against America by Daniel Benjamin and Steven Simon, or Because They Hate: A Survivor of Islamic Terror Warns America by Brigitte Gabriel, or Christians, Muslims, and Islamic Rage: What Is Going On and Why It Happened by Christopher Catherwood clearly aren’t placing harsh, antagonistic labels on a whole people. Nope, they’re not even making that distinction between religion and political or ethnic frustration. Nooope. Furthermore, the professor didn’t even discuss what Carter wrote in the book nor did she try to refute anything–instead she kept throwing ad hominems and for someone in the academia business, she should have been well aware of that logical fallacy.

In fact, all of the negativity towards this book has been towards the title — no one is saying anything about whats actually written in the book, and it’s most likely because no one is reading it. And that’s what concerns me the most–DUDES, DIDNT YOUR ELEMENTARY SCHOOL LIBRARIANS EVER TELL YOU TO NOT JUDGE A BOOK BY ITS COVER? Good grief, batman.

The lack of attention this book is getting, the severe negative reactions it has recieved from prominent politicians, and the general backlash at Carter in the United States prove that there is intolerance within the U.S towards the criticisms of Israeli policy and strategy — or hell anything related to Israel. And not only criticism mind you, but also just pure discussion. It is so taboo. It seems as though if you dare to do either — you’re immediately labelled an anti-Semite. What a form of censorship eh. Mel Gibson making the Passion of the Christ was not anti-Semitic. That’s what happened, get over it the Pope forgave the Jews, let’s all be friends blah blah blah. Drunk Mel Gibson spouting hatred towards of the Jews? Yes, yes that is anti-semitism. Cartoons made about Jews as misers? Yes, purely anti-semitic. Cartoons made of Sharon eating Palestinian childern? No, that is not anti-semitic — since when does Sharon or any Israeli politician represent the whole of the Jewish people? Whoa, hey, I used to badmouth Bush all the time, I guess that makes me Anti-Christian. Hey, watch out, don’t criticize Mugabe, why ..you’ll be an everyday Kramer!
Criticizing Americans doesn’t make you anti-Christian. Criticizing Palestinians doesn’t make you Anti-Arab/Muslim/Semitic. Criticizing Canadians doesn’t make you anti-hockey. But criticizing Israel makes you anti-semitic? Am I missing some logic here? I know that some people will respond “Well, Israel’s prime identity lies within it’s Judaic religion”–really? So, all of its policies, military strategies, it’s hack of a democracy — it’s all within the boundaries of Judaism? Please. The Israeli government often receives harsh criticism from the Israelies themselves–does that make them also anti-semitic?

Support Palestine/bash Israel on its hack of a democracy/condemn it for it human rights violations and you’re an Anti-Semite. Makes sense to me!

The United States (along with you, Canada ..you’re not that amazing) needs quit having double standards and figure out where it stands. It needs to stop trying to hide behind a shoddy curtain of ambiguity which claims it is the mediator in the middle east issues, but fully outright supports Israel and shys from any criticism. Without allowing for open discourse without this method of censorship which labels anyone who says anything anti-Israel as anti-semitic the United States can never play up to be that mediator it claims it is. How can peace be achieved when you place all the blame on one side? How can the American people truly know what is going on in this infamous region when you won’t let them openly question and criticize? But I guess to really achieve this, you have to want it — and the U.S seems to show no interest in wanting such an atmosphere. So while Israel continues its human rights violations; while the U.S continues to turn a blind eye, Carter’s book, along with several others like it, will continue to gather dust.

Let Freedom Ring

Look one way or another and you’re bound to see someone protesting for the freedom of one thing or another.

I have taken the liberty of compiling a list of afew things which are currently on the “Need to be Freed” list — all those which are crossed out have already been ‘freed’. I’ll keep adding.
Enjoy.

FREE:

Tibet, Kashmir, Palestine, Winona, Universal Healthcare, the Whales, Iraq, Africa of its debt, Mumia, Fat, the Children, North Koreans, Martha, Gifts, Quebec, Webhosting, the Cuban five, Afghanistan, Speech, Breasts, Political prisoners, Muslim Women, Chechnya, Smiles, Music,the Animals, Mandela, T.V of Seinfeld reruns, Haiti, Darfur, the Slaves, font, Press, Taiwan, LTTE, Irish Protestants, and Newfoundland.

Sex and the City: A Sociological Hit!

When an intelligent male friend of mine, a sociology major mind you, told me about his guilty love for the HBO and sexual cultural phenomena Sex and the City, I couldn’t help but spit out my non-diet fair trade soda. He defended the show and his adoration; he said it was a great sociological study and really an interesting reflection on our perception of women and sex. That got me thinking, but I ended up silently dismissing it. A show based on the idea of casual sex really wasn’t something I could relate to. And it really wasn’t a subject which I found just encapturing.

However, things have lately changed. No, I didn’t get sexually active. But yes, I have gained an interest in sex theory, sexual culture, gender perception of sex, sexual effects, and all that jizz.

On any given night, you will find me lying in bed trying not to think about how I haven’t done the readings for my law class for about 3 weeks now. I will be carelessly switching through the channels not knowing what I’m looking for. My perverted subconscious knows, but I don’t. After 46 channels, I’ll end up on a Boston channel which is constantly showing Sex and the City at night. I’ll put the remote down, cuddle up in my blanket and watch.

And observe, of course.

I still have to think about their names sometimes, but I have the characters of Miranda, Samantha, Charlotte and Kerri perfectly understood. I can imagine them in my old high school. I can imagine having known them. I know their personal problems, the ones they don’t discuss in the show, and I know what goes through their minds. I mean, look at them–they’re the four perfectly protypical new age, post-modern, sexually adventurous females. There’s the cute ditz, the sultry exhibitionist, the brain, and the hopeless romantic always finding love in all the wrong places ..and writing about it. We’ve all known these prototypes. For christ’s sake, some of us are them! So it’s easy to relate. I find myself relating to Kerri to the most–minus all the sex stuff. It’s odd to even think that—but I’m the person who related to Cartman the most off of South Park, so it makes sense to me in my head. I guess I’m able to to relate with Kerri because of her exceptional writing skills. And I guess her ability to realize things about her own life through the experiences and happenings in the lives of others. She rarely learns anything on her own–someone usually says something insightful, often unbeknowst to them, and it fits in perfectly with her current personal situation/column entry.

Kerri’s column is probably my favourite part of the show. It’s one of the biggest reasons as to why I watch it–her voice sounds as though it belongs in my head. It’s pretty boss, if you ask me. However, there are some certain aspects of the show which really concern me and are the most intense reasons as to why I don’t change the channel after watching Samantha make her move on some other random in a bar. It’s fascinating to see a show created on the premise of the sexual lives of women, two taboo topics which together make the most taboo topic. However, what strikes me so harshly is how there doesn’t seem to be any other side to the lives of these four friends. The show is about four females living their lives through the constant need of validation through sexual means, often by the opposite sex–and maybe once or twice by the same sex. If something isn’t right in their sex lives, something just isn’t right with them. Case in point, the Threesome episode. After meeting a guy who suggests having a threesome, Charlotte asks her friends’ opinions. The discussion leads to the question “so, which one of us would you do it with?” and no picks Miranda. Charlotte picks Kerri, Kerri picks Samantha, Samantha picks Charlotte. The effect this has on Miranda is honestly shocking. I would understand the whole “it feels like we’re picking teams for dodgeball again” — but to become obsessed with something to the extent of answering an ad by a couple wishing to experiment just to see if they’d pick you? Good lord.

Not to mention, these women seem to have no other problems in their lives except for those revolving around sex, men, and the like. Once in awhile, a family issue may pop up (i.e Miranda’s unintentional abandonment of her daughter while she unintentionally prioritizes work over family), but regardless–sex, sex, sex. And I KNOW people will argue “Well no shit sherlock, that’s the premise of the show”—but what is this premise achieving? If you ask me, all it’s done is helped kickstart the new sexual revolution. Sex and the City is one of my own earliest memories of women’s sexual lives and autonomy being spoken about so bluntly and openly. With more edge, and more “making love? no, fucking” kind of umph. But what has it done? Just turn on goddamn Oprah or Dr. Phil, all you’ll see is the Samantha, Charlotte, Kerri, Miranda prototypes splashed all over T.V talking about single life in the 30s, and 40s. Talking about being sexually autonomous. About their love for buying shoes. About how they feel a void and just want to meet the right guy.

And we all know who the right guy is–it’s Big. All these women are looking for Big. They’re looking for the kind of lives the Sex and the City women live. They want to be fashion icons in their little microsmic societies, they want to to hold onto their sexuality and spread it all over your face. They want to have an on-again-off-again, charismatic man who’s perfect in their lives and not realize it until they’re in fucking Paris with a Russian who doesn’t give a flying shit about them.

It’s a T.V show, yeah, but it’s both a thought-provoking reflection on our society–and one of the elements which has helped perpetuate that female mainstream sexual culture. Is it a good thing? I don’t think so. I like the show, yeah, but it concerns me when I realize that the women I’m watching just lead sexual lives. I mean, life has many aspects to it–political life, social life, work life, personal life, sex life — but it honestly seems as though these women engage only in social and sex, which seem to go hand in hand.

Good show, good show.

Are you on Myspace? Kill yourself.

You’re contributing to the negative course our world is taking. You’re contributing to the demise of physical interaction;socialization. You’re blurring the line between reality and virtual reality. You’re contributing to an increase in social ineptness. You’re helping create deceptive personas. You’re putting yourself at more risk.

Really generalized? Maybe. Harsh? Who cares. The internet is desensitizing us anyway.

Sites like Myspace, Hi5, Nexopia (Canadian based site; explosive on the west coast) and recently Facebook, are contributing to a whole new level invasion of privacy, self security, and depersonalization (if this isnt’ a real word, I call dibs) of relations.

I’m not going to lie, I have accounts on all those sites. I created a myspace account about 5 times, before compromising my beliefs–but not entirely. Of my 23 friends, about 8 are Stephen Colberts, 3 are Jon Stewarts, the rest are other comedians and a couple are some real friends of mine. I don’t use it to meet people, I don’t use it to keep in contact with friends. I use it stalk comedians, and some hip hop artists here and there. If I want to meet people, I join community/school organizations and clubs. If I want to keep in contact with friends, why, I use the age old mediums known as msn, email, and telephones! What can I say? I like my communication like I like my hip hop: old school. I had Hi5 when it was new, but only because someone wouldn’t stop bugging me about it and I got it to shut them up. This was before I knew of myspace or nexopia. I have a Facebook account–this I DO use to keep in contact with friends–but those who don’t use msn, or any chat program. I’m not huge with cells either. Facebook is very great, however, if you’re into school organizations–seriously, it’s a great way to advertise campus events, elections, political issues, and whatnot. Facebook was a great medium, however with it’s recent opening to the whole public it’s sacrificed its individuality.

I have a nexopia account as well–and that site is the reason I am writing this. No other site, not even Livejournal (ugh, yes, I had an account), hit me more personally and encompassed my life as much as this site. I casually visit myspace, to see which new comedian I can stalk. I casually visit Facebook to see what’s going on in the groups of which I am a part, and so forth. I never used Hi5 and deleted my accounts ages ago. I haven’t livejournal’d in ages. I have many blogs, but I have commitment issues and get bored easily.

Nexopia (formerly Enternexus) was truly something else. I’m not afraid to admit I was addicted. And I don’t mean that at all in a loose way. I would have denied it, honestly, a year ago—today, I have come to terms with it.

It’s pathetic to think about in retrospect, but ..hindsight is always 20/20. I joined the site at the suggestion of a friend, not really understanding what it was. This was back in grade 11. The site, originally, was based off of the idea of networking with other Canadians via profiles and forums, and also user ‘attractiveness’ rating. I never was interested in the rating system. Maybe because of my strong abhorration of vanity ..or maybe because of my low self esteem. Meh, same shit, different pile.

The site, originally, creeped the shit out of me. Guys from another province would message me and hit on me and this was new to me. I didn’t understand why they would do that. Eventually, I got over that and ventured into the forums. My first addiction was the politics and debate forum–it was actually pretty good and I contribute a lot of my current knowledge to discussions with a few in that forum. Then I moved onto casual talk forums, and that’s where the demise began. During the nights where I had nothing to do, I’d spend hours on my computer just yapping away with strangers from the same province or from across the world.

Okay, now I’m just babbling–I’m going to cut through all the build up and straight up get to my point. In my two and a half years on that site, I realized and observed some crazy things. One doesn’t have to be a psychologist, or a sociologist to understand when people have severe social and personal problems. That’s what I saw on that site and experienced to an extent. So many of the individuals on that site are completely CONSUMED by it. There is no differentiation between that site and their actual lives. As a girl from my high school put it, “So, Nexopia is the new social hang out eh?”

Terrifying words.

I met people off of that site, I won’t lie. Many I regret, some I don’t. Will I do it again? I can’t be sure at this moment.

I remember trying to move away from the site, however at that same time my best friends had gotten accounts–and my life was only further consumed.

Conversations began to revolve around individuals we had encountered on the site. Now, I hate gossip. Period. Gossip about people you know, is just bad. Gossip about people you haven’t even seen or met — that’s just worse. I admit, I got consumed in that as well at times, but never too much.

Luckily, I never got to the extent of consumption that most people on that site achieved. I was able to function without it, and happily, but it was still a big part of my life.

What the site taught me about the internet is it’s ability to create deception. On the internet, you can honestly live the American dream–you can be, whatever it is you want to be. You don’t have the socially-accepted attractiveness? Worry not, angles, fuzzy webcams, makeup, and just faceshots can make you drop dead gorgeous. Not too intelligent, but hold ignorant opinions? Don’t worry, the internet doesn’t require you to reply within seconds–so take your time and take severe advantage of google and wikipedia. Thesaurus.com is also very helpful. No friends? No interesting life story? It’s okay, you can always make shit up. People won’t know the truth unless you meet them and interact with them. But, if that’s not your goal, and you’re just looking for some socialization, some affiliation–the kind you can’t seem to find in reality, then you’re fine with your deceptions.

This is what these “social networking” sites are doing. They are not only contributing to the personal problems that some people have with self esteem, social ineptness and so forth, but also with creating a depersonalized generation; a generation which communicats not face to face–but face to screen.

Then there’s the issue of privacy and personal security. Yes, we are young, we want to be loved, we want to talk and communicate with our friends. We want to attract the opposite sex to us, we want to meet interesting people. Yes, that’s all a part of the human condition. However, what are we sacrificing with these sort of social networking sites for this ..reach of friendship? You never truly know the sort of person you’re dealing with on the other end of the moniter. You never know when someone from the internet will recognize you. And you never know when something from your internet-related past will come to haunt you, in your future. We all DO live in the now. That’s our generation, because that’s what we’re told. We’re told that we should concentrate on the now, we should sieze the day–but, to sound like a granny, we shouldn’t. We should take into consideration the outcomes of our actions. That does not restrict the fun we can have–but it does put things into perspective.

And then there’s personal security—anyone remember the dude in the US who kidnapped the six young girls and killed one? Just happened a couple of weeks ago. They’re saying he had gained a lot of information on them from the one and only—Myspace.

So, yeah, I am being a little hypocritical to an extent–I have a myspace account, I have a Facebook account, I have a (frozen–meaning no access) nexopia account. But, where I do differ from many other users of such sites is that I’ve realized the major downside to all that virtual fun. So, I’m basically done with it. I’ve overcome my addiction, and its a great feeling. I don’t want to spend my nights on the internet, chatting it up with people I don’t even know. I don’t want to ‘network’ over the internet. I want to shake hands, I want to sit across with people over a nice cup of caramel corretto and talk about why I am so wonderful and attractive.

The internet is a double edged sword. So, just be careful how deep you stab it in.

There was really no better way of saying that.

p.s you’re not a goddamn model. You’re not going to be in the next issue of Indie International, so stop with the scene/emo/indie/asstard pictures and poses. And it’s funny that you identify yourself by the bands you listen to, the books you read, the political ideologies you follow. BUT THAT’S FOR ANOTHER DAY! Huzzah.

The Kamikaze days are over, Folks.

Let the Japanese run the world, they seem to love peace. There’s photographic evidence.

I think it’s pretty logical and perfectly fine that we can judge an entire people based on how they are portrayed in magazines and Gwen Stefani music videos. Pictures and videos of cute, young Japanese girls (or possibly Koreans but are fooling no one but themselves) dressed up in outfits influenced by punk, burlesque, disco, Tim Burton, and gay culture, are all over the internet. Happy young girls, and even some happy young boys. All smiling, and flashing a peace sign.

The best part is, you can actually witness such flashing! Disneyworld is no longer the only Oriental tourist hotspot–they’re everywhere now! It’s like they’re multiplying in crazy numbers! Someone introduce them to birth control or more strict restrictions on travel visas!

Just kidding.
Any place is a place for a photo op for a Japanese tourist, or any other Oriental tourist for that matter. Where there’s a camera, some sort of background, there’s a Japanese individual gesturing a V, and it’s definitely not for Victory.
How poetic; peace knows no tourist-hotspot boundaries.
Peace is this new sort of cultural phenomenon; it’s the latest trend. The Japanese have seemingly caught on to it, and as they are lightyears ahead of the rest of us in terms of trends, it means we’ll catch on in about 20 years.

Or are we already catching on?

Google japanese people + peace sign and instead of getting actual Japanese folk, you’ll find an array of pictures of non-Japanese people flashing the two fingers. Do even more prodding, and you’ll find that the number of young, white wasted girls in clubs throwing up the peace sign is insanely high! Myspace is another wonderful peace-sign-crazy-girls search engine. Profiles and profiles of pictures and pictures of young girls, often non-Japanese, smiling in a gleeful manner and showcasing how they’ve already caught on to the ‘trendiness’ of ‘peace’.

Popularized by Gwen Stefani, with some help from the genius that is Pharrell, Japanese pop culture is seeping into our pop culture, and it is injecting the mainstream with images of peace. If all the pictures on google, clubzone, and myspace and all the much music/mtv female vjs desperately trying to sustain their youth prove anything–it is that peace is for everyone, NOT just Japanese girls in screwed up outfits and hairstyles.
So, is the vintage notion of peace making a big comeback? Are we, as a society, now more willing to accept the scandalous, and scantily clad idea of peace? Are we now okay with seeing it being thrown around so freely in the form of a hand gesture? And in public? On our T.V? Our beloved Much Music? In Seventeen?!?!

Only time, and potential nuclear threats, will tell what it all really means, if we all really are in the early stages of revisiting the idea of peace.
As usual, females, nature’s bandwagoners, are the first to have grasped tightly to this upcoming, and hot trend. It’s only a matter of time before the males decide to jump on as well. Although, history does show that trends which are first advocated by women tend to be discarded eventually by the opposite sex, often attached with the attributes of being too “irrational”, “subjective”, and “idealistic”. I say love, he says Blallistic Missile Defence system!

So, there you have it.

Peace.

It’s the latest thing.