Ambulance and politics

A friend just sent this to me, it encapsulates the relationship between civic and politic societies so well, that I had to post it here. The song is in Urdu and is called Umeed-e-sahar, with English captions, and the lyrics are by a famous Pakistani poet Faiz Ahmed Faiz:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjaNQFChkCY

For the Left, war without Bush is not war at all

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/For-the-Left_-war-without-Bush-is-not-war-at-all-8119694-53506047.html

By: Byron York
Chief Political Correspondent
August 18, 2009

Remember the anti-war movement? Not too long ago, the Democratic party's most loyal voters passionately opposed the war in Iraq. Democratic presidential candidates argued over who would withdraw American troops the quickest. Netroots activists regularly denounced President George W. Bush, and sometimes the U.S. military ("General Betray Us"). Cindy Sheehan, the woman whose soldier son was killed in Iraq, became a heroine when she led protests at Bush's Texas ranch.

That was then. Now, even though the United States still has roughly 130,000 troops in Iraq, and is quickly escalating the war in Afghanistan -- 68,000 troops there by the end of this year, and possibly more in 2010 -- anti-war voices on the Left have fallen silent.

No group was more angrily opposed to the war in Iraq than the netroots activists clustered around the left-wing Web site DailyKos. It's an influential site, one of the biggest on the Web, and in the Bush years many of its devotees took an active role in raising money and campaigning for anti-war candidates.

In 2006, DailyKos held its first annual convention, called YearlyKos, in Las Vegas. Amid the slightly discordant surroundings of the Riviera Hotel casino, the webby activists spent hours discussing and planning strategies not only to defeat Republicans but also to pressure Democrats to oppose the war more forcefully. The gathering attracted lots of mainstream press attention; Internet activism was the hot new thing.

Fast forward to last weekend, when YearlyKos, renamed Netroots Nation, held its convention in Pittsburgh. The meeting didn't draw much coverage, but the views of those who attended are still, as they were in 2006, a pretty good snapshot of the left wing of the Democratic party.

The news that emerged is that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have virtually fallen off the liberal radar screen. Kossacks (as fans of DailyKos like to call themselves) who were consumed by the Iraq war when George W. Bush was president are now, with Barack Obama in the White House, not so consumed, either with Iraq or with Obama's escalation of the conflict in Afghanistan. In fact, they barely seem to care.

As part of a straw poll done at the convention, the Democratic pollster Stanley Greenberg presented participants with a list of policy priorities like health care and the environment. He asked people to list the two priorities they believed "progressive activists should be focusing their attention and efforts on the most." The winner, by far, was "passing comprehensive health care reform." In second place was enacting "green energy policies that address environmental concerns."

And what about "working to end our military involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan"? It was way down the list, in eighth place.

Perhaps more tellingly, Greenberg asked activists to name the issue that "you, personally, spend the most time advancing currently." The winner, again, was health care reform. Next came "working to elect progressive candidates in the 2010 elections." Then came a bunch of other issues. At the very bottom -- last place, named by just one percent of participants -- came working to end U.S. involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan.

It's an extraordinary change in the mindset of the left. I attended the first YearlyKos convention, and have kept up with later ones, and it's safe to say that for many self-styled "progressives," the war in Iraq was the animating cause of their activism. They hated the war, and they hated George W. Bush for starting it. Or maybe they hated the war because George W. Bush started it. Either way, it was war, war, war.

Now, not so much.

Cindy Sheehan is learning that. She's still protesting the war, and on Monday she announced plans to demonstrate at Martha's Vineyard, where President Obama will be vacationing.

"We as a movement need to continue calling for an immediate end to the occupations [in Iraq and Afghanistan] even when there is a Democrat in the Oval Office," Sheehan said in a statement. "There is still no Noble Cause no matter how we examine the policies."

Give her credit for consistency, if nothing else. But her days are over. The people who most fervently supported her have moved on.

Not too long ago, some observers worried that Barack Obama would come under increasing pressure from the Left to leave both Iraq and Afghanistan. Now, it seems those worries were unfounded. For many liberal activists, opposing the war was really about opposing George W. Bush. When Bush disappeared, so did their anti-war passion.

Byron York, The Examiner's chief political correspondent, can be contacted at byork@washingtonexaminer.com. His column appears on Tuesday and Friday, and his stories and blog posts appears on www.ExaminerPolitics.com ExaminerPolitics.com

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/For-the-Left_-war-without-Bush-is-not-war-at-all-8119694-53506047.html

Israel, eviction and the "demographic bomb"

story: http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2009/08/2009825148146153.html
video: http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2009/08/2009829211514936.html

This news story reminded me of the ticking "demographic bomb" that more and more Israelis, including the current PM Benjamin Netanyahu, consider to be an existential threat to "Jewish Israel" http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&hs=OUE&q=demographic+bomb+israel&aq=f&oq=&aqi=g1

In simple terms, it's established by many reliable estimates like http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3367706,00.html, that non-Jewish Israeli population (Muslims, Christians, Druze Arabs etc.) will exceed the Jewish population by 2035, currently their number stands somewhere around 20% according to Israeil sources, although some claim that the actual percentage is higher and is deliberately underrepresented by Israel.

Israel now seems to have only a few options, none of which, could be considered desirable by a decent soul:

1) Illegal eviction of rightful citizens
2) Put legal and social pressures on Arabs to decrease their numbers
3) Genocide

Since option 3 is worse, and 2 is rather 'iffy', it seems like Israel has embarked upon option 1, this story being just the beginning ... I wonder if the "free world" is going to stand around as it did before or will there be a change this time around?

story: http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2009/08/2009825148146153.html
video: http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2009/08/2009829211514936.html