"Massacre at Jenin: What happened?"
I saw this headline all over-- or several variants of it.
The editorialist of the New York Post [17 April] appears to have made up his mind,
in "the massacre that wasn't" below:--------

http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/editorial/45844.htm
-------&------
by way of counterpoint--

http://www.amnestyusa.org/countries/israel_and_occupied_territories/




http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0419/p01s04-wome.html

http://www.haaretzdaily.com/
--------------------------***--------------------------

-in my experience,
Britain's BBC News Service and our Christian Science Monitor

http://www.csmonitor.com/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/

are the most sober and reliable internet news sources available.
(I invite you to look at them and use them, first as news sources, as I do,
but also as tentative sounding boards by which to judge my influences.)
------------------------------***-------------------------------
More next week. Jenin is looking worse by the hour, even allowing
for the propaganda value that both the Palestinean Authority and Israel seek to mine and think they need. No matter the outcome, it looks like it will be a crucible for Sharon's Likud party. For me the incredible irony is Bush's perceived dithering on Palestine/Israel, and its counterpoint, his perceived
strength, the amorphous war on terrorism...he has an opportunity to be Carter, and a far stronger hand in dealing with these two adversaries than is readily apparent. Peace is more possible than people allow for when the need for it is greater( like right now). If the unlikely president can bring himself to be an even more unlikely peacemaker, he may therebye act far more concretely to safeguard our future than by bombing Afghan caves while Bin Laden watches it on cable hundreds or even thousands of miles away. (And laughs at him, no doubt.) But I fear that while history is giving him an opportunity to be Carter, he furtively longs to be Reagan...

More on the Middle east on the 22nd. In the meantime here is my review of
Michael Moore's new book, Stupid White Men.


I'm Right, you're wrong, etc.

Much as I hate to admit it, this book is occasionally entertaining, and it's certainly a fast read. Nevertheless, it is a kind of entertainment that leaves the bitter aftertaste of smugness.

Writing like this galvanizes and embitters people on both sides. And-- more to the point-- ultimately this hurts the cause of progressives like Moore, as the vast center of people who vote in general elections for A or B are NOT political junkies, and are repulsed by this kind of bombast. Just because "They" have some loud-mouths who argue for right-wing causes is no reason to be similarly uncivil. The majority of Moore's arguements are either full of holes*, or offered more substantively elsewhere. Although Moore goes on at some length about the inequities of the post-election manuevering of November 2000, he offers nothing new.

(If you're interested in a more rigorous arguement for why you should have reservations about the Post Election of 2000, I'd recommend Alan Dershowitz's Supreme Injustice, or Jeffrey Toobin's Too Close to Call.)

Likewise, if you are interested in some thoughtful narratives about why a progressive political agenda should matter to you, I'd recommend Mickey Kaus's The End of Equality, Michael Walzer's Spheres of Justice, Naomi Klein's No Logo, and especially The Politics of Rich and Poor by Kevin Phillips, which,sadly, is out of print.

On the other hand, if all you care about is making your obnoxious ultra-conservative neighbor look foolish the next time you have a cook-out and he gets drunk and makes fun of your politics, then I suppose Michael Moore has written a book for just such an occasion. Just remember that when both of you are sober, he'll make fun of you for voting for Nader and helping re-elect Dubya. Or perhaps he'll wait,to congratulate you on how superior you are to the poor schmos who vote for A and B-- on inauguration day.

*See the recent[March]Salon.com article about Moore's numerous factual errors. It may also be available on spinsanity via a cursory search...

Good luck, Colin Powell. For once since January 2001, it appears that the forces of martial bluster in the Bush II administration are quiet, and you and your approach take center stage. It's difficult not to wonder, however callous it may sound, if while all the hundreds of Palistineans and Israelis killed in the past two years may have left your boss unmoved, it was the attack on the Church of the Nativity, along with Sharon's public dismissal of Dubya's line in the sand, that finally moved your president to give you the keys to the US foreign policy car.