Israel’s Massacre Feast at Qana
Ooops, they did it again!
After having massacred 4 unarmed UN observers, killed 500+ Lebanese civilians, destroyed 90% of Lebanon’s transport and energy infrastructure, Yahweh’s glorious sicaries decided to revisit one of their most famous works of martial art: the 1996 Qana massacre.
Ooops, they did it again!
After having massacred 4 unarmed UN observers, killed 500+ Lebanese civilians, destroyed 90% of Lebanon’s transport and energy infrastructure, Yahweh’s glorious sicaries decided to revisit one of their most famous works of martial art: the 1996 Qana massacre.
Today, in the early hours of the morning, Tzahal’s noble knights rode over Qana in their shining US-made, US-equipped, and US-paid fighter jets.
It was Sunday, the day of worship in gentile Christian culture.
And Qana is the place where this “weird Jesus cult” started when the beloved King Herod ruled over Israel.
His modern successor, Prime Minister Olmert, probably couldn’t resist the subtle symbolism: razing Christianity’s birthplace on a Sunday…Yeah that would be grand! The faithful few in Washington would love it!
It only took a few minutes for the IDF’s Air Force to massacre 55 people (mostly women and children) on that sunny Sunday in that small southern city…
They did a great job, were very fast, very neat and very clean!
“Praise be to Yahweh, the God of Yisrael, for he has shown me his marvelous loving kindness”
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UPDATE:
Lebanon’s bravest blogger M. Bashir has a poignant description of the carnage:
“The pictures of the rescuers of the civil defense pulling the children from under the rubbles are horrific. Some of them were crying so were some of the photographers. Israel cut off the roads between the villages and cities. It hits moving cars, trucks and ambulances. It hits convoys of civilians fleeing. Those in Qana thought it would be safer to stay put. They were wrong. Now they are dead.”
And Floridian philosopher Pierre Tristam sheds a crude light on the difference between Reagan and Bush, or shall I say the chasm of infamy that separates courage from cowardice:
“In 1982, remember, Ronald Reagan intervened himself that massacre-ridden August to threaten Israel with an end to the negotiations. Once that was done Israel quickly bowed its head and talked. What we have now is failure of communication, planned and willed between Washington and Jerusalem, while arms shipments from a few quite American factories rush their way to their promised shred of the Holy Land, Qana-style.”
UPDATE:
Lebanon’s bravest blogger M. Bashir has a poignant description of the carnage:
“The pictures of the rescuers of the civil defense pulling the children from under the rubbles are horrific. Some of them were crying so were some of the photographers. Israel cut off the roads between the villages and cities. It hits moving cars, trucks and ambulances. It hits convoys of civilians fleeing. Those in Qana thought it would be safer to stay put. They were wrong. Now they are dead.”
And Floridian philosopher Pierre Tristam sheds a crude light on the difference between Reagan and Bush, or shall I say the chasm of infamy that separates courage from cowardice:
“In 1982, remember, Ronald Reagan intervened himself that massacre-ridden August to threaten Israel with an end to the negotiations. Once that was done Israel quickly bowed its head and talked. What we have now is failure of communication, planned and willed between Washington and Jerusalem, while arms shipments from a few quite American factories rush their way to their promised shred of the Holy Land, Qana-style.”
posted by Dr Victorino de la Vega at 6:41 AM
18 Comments:
Israeli Chief of Staff knocks, enters Olmert’s office, salutes ….
Olmert: “ Take a seat General. That rotweiler bitch is on her way back here to waste my time. Why the hell she just didn’t stay on her old man’s farm chopping cotton I’ll never know and I’m taking a lot of flak from everyone except the White House about the hundreds of civilian deaths in the Lebanese campaign. Incidentally, not too many Hezbollah casualties. Please explain.”
Chief: “Talking about civilian casualties, I passed a Mossad team mortoring the Arab quarter of Haifa early this morning.”
Olmert: “None of your damn business General, what about the Lebanese civilians?”
Chief: “All accidental. Truth is sir, our troops really couldn’t hit a bull in the ass with a handful of wheat.”
Olmert: “Huh!”
Chief: “ Yeah! Years of bible reading by menora candlelight has ruined their eyesight. And all that damned head nodding. Addled their brains. Just before they squeeze off a shot, they start this head nodding to lock in with Yahweh and the bullet goes off anywhere. Probably kills a civilian.”
Olmert: “You’re trying to piss me off General, right? Hey, that might work with the Americans but the Europeans aren’t going to buy it. What about all that shelling by the artillery and tanks.”
Chief: “Worried about their commander myself. Thinking of having the guy sectioned, actually. Give the damned idiot a map to read and he seems to think that he’s looking at the Torah. I thought he was nuts when he asked me to point out where the Roman Army was camped. And the blasted navy! Seems as though that ships Captain was too busy reading the Talmud and forgot to turn on the ship’s defensive system.”
Olmert: “Spare me the details General. What about those goddamned fly boys? Doesn’t seem to be any problem with one guy’s eyesight. Put a hole right through the centre of the Red Cross sign on top of that ambulance in Lebanon. What’s his excuse?”
Chief: “Sat in on his debrief myself sir. Appears to be another map reading error. The pilot claims that he was actually aiming at the Seventh Day Adventist Church in downtown Gaza.”
Olmert: “Oh,Gawd! What about the bombing of the U.N. observation post? Explain that one. Kofi’s been belting my ear all day about it.”
Chief: “Pilot was munching on a bagel apparently. Dropped it on the cockpit floor and as he reached down to retrieve it, accidently knocked the bomb release. Could happen to anyone.”
Olmert: “General.”
Chief: “Sir?”
Olmert: “Get the f*** out of my office!”
Chief: “Talking about civilian casualties, I passed a Mossad team mortaring the Arab quarter of Haifa early this morning.”
Olmert: “None of your damn business General, what about the Lebanese civilians?”
Sadly, a truer-than-real-life exchange between Ehud and the IDF’s Chief of Staff…
For some very profound non-verbal observations about life in Beirut visit Mazen Kerbaj over at Kerblog
I should have mentioned this a while ago:
For the record, I resent the term "Tex Aviv" to describe the current situation. Bush was born in Connecticut, and his subsequent parody of Texan culture and bubba outlook is not representative of the whole. Furthermore, there are significant groups within Texas that do not support his policies (especially in the Middle East), namely Central Texans.
Be well and keep up the good work on eviscerating the idiocrats.
Are Qana's children screams as they are dying Rice's 'Pangs of Birth' of her 'New Middle East' ?
I said in a previous post that Ms Rice does not know what it is to have a child and to loose it. I am really sorry and I want to apologize. As I hear Ms Rice talking about the 'Pangs of Birth' of the 'New Middle East', it comes to my attention that Ms Rice was pregnant for a while now and that she is just giving birth at this very moment. The happy father is Olmert and the state of Israel. The process seems however difficult because it has been going on for a while, since July 12th. In fact, Ms Rice have been trying to have a Middle Eastern child for a long time. It started in 2003 with the invasion of Iraq. But this child was practically born dead and, as every mourning mother, it took Ms Rice a long time before admitting this fact. Now, as it seems, after recovering from this initial tragedy, Ms Rice is poised to have a child in Lebanon. Ms Rice is in full labor right now and has asked the father to speak to the press. We have this declaration from Israel's prime minister about the latest developments in Rice's efforts to have a Middle Eastern child:
''...And I have received the full support of the US administration (and 70% of the American public), and the US Secretary of State assures me that she only hears the "pangs of birth" of the New Middle East with every cry and scream from women and children under the rubble all over Lebanon. Secretary Rice has asked for more cries and screams of women and children in the rubble of destroyed buildings in Lebanon because she strongly feels that the "pangs" are very necessary for the birth of its "New Middle East."''(Dixit Angry Arab)
If things were to go wrong for Ms Rice this time, my advice for her is to change the father. This is an incestuous relation and it cannot lead to the birth of a healthy child, let alone a birth 'tout court'. May be she can try switching sides if she really want to have a Middle Eastern child after all. But I know, right now, of no other ME man, potential child bearer and would-be father, who would want this woman. Today, Lebanese prime minister Fouad Siniora told her she is not welcome in Lebanon. Hard times ahead for Ms Rice.
On the sixth day, God turned to the Angels and said: "Today, I am going to create a land called Lebanon, it will be a land of outstanding natural beauty. It shall have tall majestic mountains full of snow, beautiful sparkling lakes cutting forests full of all kinds of trees, high cliffs overlooking sandy beaches with an abundance of sea life."
God continued, "I shall make the land rich so to make the inhabitants prosper, I shall call these inhabitants Lebanese, and they shall be known as the most friendly people on earth." "But Lord", asked the Angels, "don't you think you are being too
generous to the Lebanese? "Not really", replied God, "just wait and see the neighbors I am going to give them!"
Mazel tov!
Ca y est: The birth pangs of one hundred million miscarriages of justice.
The unsexed Lady Macbeth of the West looms over the Middle East with a benign smirk, to her right on a gossimer leash strung with glistening tax dollars, the snapping pit bull of Israeli zealots.
Her afterbirth: the pan-Arabian dolchstoss that leaves generations imporverished and hate-filled; the long knife of ersatz diplomacy firmly nestled in the back of the terror-filled, democratic, sovereign nation, among others.
Shhh media... the baby is hemorrhaging...
The World without Zionism:
http://kcfrog.net/zionism/
It's only fair to give you a chance to respond to this post.
“It's only fair to give you a chance to respond to this post”
Well…eh…thanks for giving me the opportunity to refute your abusive accusations!
Your systematic use of the worn-out concept of “anti-Semitism” is quite ridiculous: it’s precisely because of people like you (and other fools emulating Prokofiev’s proverbial Peter) that words end up loosing their original meaning.
You remind me of a character named Walter Sobchak [played by John Goodman in Joel Coen’s masterpiece “The Big Lebowski” a.k.a. “The Dude’s Adventures”] who says:
“I'm talking about drawing a line in the sand, Dude. Across this line, you DO NOT...
Also, Dude, ‘chinaman’ is not the preferred nomenclature. Asian-American, please […] Whereas what we have here? A bunch of fig-eaters wearing towels on their heads, trying to find reverse in a Soviet tank. This is not a worthy adversary”
;))
FYI, I’m a complete agnostic and I condemn all forms of REAL intolerance and bigotry, be they ethnic, religious, or social.
Or, as in the case of the state of Israel, all of the above combined!
For the record, I only believe in Athens’ humanist philosophy and Rome’s rational-legal polity, which constitute the bedrock of our civilization.
I have absolutely no sympathy whatsoever for rightwing white supremacist ideologies, nor for radical Islamic fundamentalism, a sinister Middle-Eastern school of thought based mainly on the first five books of the Bible (a.k.a. The Pentateuch or “Torah”) and the bigoted Talmudic Law of Babylon…
zionist strategy: Be agressive and when attacked, turn hysterically into a rightist victim in the name of anti-semitism. Emmanuel, you cannot claim exclusive property of semitism. Zionists have made the world forget that Arabs are semites too. Anti-semitism has a context. Its context is Europe. it has no meaning when applied to the middle east where all people are semites. There is no theoretical or practical meaning. Not one Aran country deported its jews and gave them to Nazis, despite seeing in the germans a possible aviour from their colonial masters Britain and France, most European countries did.
Anti-semistism is an emoty word in the middle eastern context !
Emmanuel said...
I didn't accuse you of being an anti-semite, Behemoth, and I don't think that you are. I accused Victorino and gave specific arguments. If you don't agree, feel free to tell me why my arguments are invalid. For instance, you don't agree that there's something anti-semetic about the picture of the beast eating the little child?
July 31, 2006 6:30 PM
Behemoth101 said...
For instance, you don't agree that there's something anti-semetic about the picture of the beast eating the little child?
Saturn Devouring His Son
Oil on plaster transferred to canvas, 4' 9 1/8" x 2' 8 5/8"; Prado, Madrid
You half-wit.
Isn't it funny how anticipating hatred from another person is the biggest pretext for an individual's genuine hatred?
July 31, 2006 7:24 PM
Even if it's a painting taken from a different context (like Roman mythology) in the context of that particular post it can be seen as having a totally different meaning.
"You half-wit"
How very mature of you...
"Isn't it funny how anticipating hatred from another person is the biggest pretext for an individual's genuine hatred?"
Who do you think I hate? Victor? The Lebanese? Arabs?
"Your systematic use of the worn-out concept of “anti-Semitism” is quite ridiculous: it’s precisely because of people like you (and other fools emulating Prokofiev’s proverbial Peter) that words end up loosing their original meaning."
I've said it myself - too many people have used the term before, so now it's like crying wolf.
How do you see the Pilate reference? "Yahwe's Sicaries"?
"Emmanuel, you cannot claim exclusive property of semitism"
Okay, so replace anti-Semitic with anti-Jewish.
Remember, my problem isn't with the criticism - I criticize Israel too.
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
you don't agree that there's something anti-semetic about the picture of the beast eating the little child?
Even if it's a painting taken from a different context (like Roman mythology) in the context of that particular post it can be seen as having a totally different meaning. ”
No.
I don’t agree.
As my old compadre el Tejano Central said earlier this is NOT IN ANY WAY an “anti-Semitic” work of art.
And the “innocent victim” in the painting is clearly an adult i.e. NOT a “Lebanese baby”.
Clearly, Chronos/Saturn is not depicted as a “Semite” whatever that means, but as a tormented old man devouring his victim, and, first and foremost, being devoured by fear, prejudice, hate…
This is what our Greek masters taught us (see my earlier comment).
This is what Francisco de Goya meant.
And, if you knew the history of the Iberian Peninsula (or say of 19th century European art…), you would know that Francisco Goya was actually a leading progressive mind who courageously condemned the despotic reign of king Ferdinand VII of Spain- the reactionary monarch had restored anti-Semitic legislations after the defeat of Napoleon’s Grande Armée…
“ How do you see the Pilate reference? "Yahwe's Sicaries"? ”
I’ll tell you how.
As SECULAR rhetorical symbols, which have become part of our shared cultural heritage.
These characters appear in many Pagan as well as Christian Roman history books: they have moved away long time ago from 1st century Palestine/Judea into what is usually called Classical culture.
Now, let me ask a question:
Why is it that when say some libertine “Infidel” Western poet insults the Philistines of the world, we never hear a word of complaint from Hamas or the PLO?
Why is that when some bigoted rightwing American fascist criticizes “decadent Hollywood Moguls”, we always hear the Anti-Defamation League but never CAIR’s “homegrown Mohammedan lobby” or the Pakistani embassy in Washington?? After all, it is their sacred Islamic Califs who are being “insulted”, associated with cinematic sin, pornography and what have you!
In other word, why the double-standard?
Cordially,
V.
PS You seem to be a decent person. In a way, I’m kind of sorry we had to go through this bitter exchange…but you started it, and I’m the rancorous type- must be my (partly) Lebanese genes or something!
:))
Haram, j'eprouve de la sympathie pour lui maintenant...
merci pour le charmant riposte!
Quote: "Chief: “Talking about civilian casualties, I passed a Mossad team mortoring the Arab quarter of Haifa early this morning.”"
If that isn't blood libel, what the hell is?
1. Since when is radical Islam based on the Torah and Talmud and not the Quran and Hadith?
See Point N°2 below.
2. What's bigoted about Talmudic Law?
A lot.
Like the harsh criticisms of heathens and other “ignorant” gentiles
Death penalty for apostates and adulterers
The “moral” and “spiritual” inferiority of women.
The “imposture” of Yesu(s) the “wicked crook”…etc.
All these “divine truths” were later rephrased into “legitimate” (“Sahîh”) Islamic a-Hadith by Imam Al-Bukhâri.
Of course, The Anti-Defamation League will say that “In distorting the normative meanings of rabbinic texts, anti-Talmud writers frequently remove passages from their textual and historical contexts. Even when they present their citations accurately, they judge the passages based on contemporary moral standards”
But that argument is lame for if a legal norm is truly part of an old-fashioned cum reactionary “historic context” why not abandon it altogether?
How can we persuade ultra-conservative Muslims in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan to cancel the most intolerant elements of Sharia’a Law if we don’t purge the Talmud of all bigoted rules in the first place?
3. Are you calling Judaism a sinister school of thought?
No.
Why should I?
I’m just condemning some overtly racist and misogynic regulations found in the Old Testament and the Talmud of Babylon.
Contemporary Judaism in itself represents much more than the ancient Scriptures in question.
In Israel, Europe and North America, many liberal, modernist and secular Jews actually reject these old-fashioned legal norms.
On the other hand, tens of millions of Protestant (e.g. Seventh Day Adventists) and Islamic fundamentalists (e.g. Wahhabis) the world over still believe these legal norms to be the “unalterable word of God” …
Post a Comment
<< Home