A modest propsal for peace

Obviously, I have been away from this blog for some time. It happens every year in December and January, and perhaps next year I'll just admit in advance that I can't keep up with holiday-time demands and continue to write frequently. At any rate, I hope to be back to normal frequency from now until the end of November of this year.



There is a workable solution to the central problem of the Middle East. I refer, of course, to the unending hatred between Israel's right wing, terrorist-born leaders and the equally murderous Islamic extremists who want Israel wiped out.

The solution is not obvious, at least to the great majority of Americans who get their ignorance fully cooked from this country's corporate “news” media, but more intelligent readers will grasp the concept when it is laid before them.

Therefore, with great humility, I lay it before you:

Probably the only possibly action that does not end with the annihilation of humankind, is to move Israel to what is now called Texas.

Other locations also could work, but Texas is by far the best.

Don't laugh.

Any objections that will at first occur to you are easily washed away by pure reason.

For example: Some readers may reflexively point out that Texas already is occupied and possesses a semblance of government.

So what?

In 1948, a western world steeping in guilt over what happened to European Jews under the sadistic madmen from Germany -- and wetting its pants in fear of the Irgun and other Zionist terrorists -- had no qualms about brushing aside the Arabic people who had occupied what was then Palestine for a thousand years or so.

We, the western world, simply declared that Palestine was, in a moment, Israel, a Jewish state. We allowed, indeed encouraged, the new country to strip the former residents of their homes, olive groves, gardens, and all livelihoods and drive them out. We nodded in understanding when the newly designated Israelis bulldozed entire villages and towns – often with no more than an hour's notice – and, indeed, occasionally gunned down men, women and children who were slow to get moving.

After all, who has more right to murder, torture and brutalize innocent human beings than those who, as innocent human beings, were murdered, tortured and otherwise brutalized by someone entirely different from their own victims. Vengeance on the not guilty, we could call it.

Why, do tell, should we treat Texas and Texans any differently?

In fact, the similarities between Palestine and Texas are striking.

It was widely said in western Europe and the United States in the late 1940s and early '50s that the people of Palestine were followers of a peculiar and suspect religion (that is, a religion different from those commonly practiced here). The word also spread widely that they had done little with the land they occupied -– there were hardly any tall buildings or supermarkets -- so it made sense to replace them with those whose religion was at least familiar to us and who would “turn the desert into a garden.”

Well, Texas is populated, to the extent it is, by people who mostly are at least nominal members of a peculiar religion –- it's called Southern Baptist, or Baptism or Baptistry or some such –- and who have done almost nothing useful with the property.

(Vulgar people and those who need to belittle others whom they would destroy in order to strengthen their sense of superiority are prone to call those peculiar religionists “water heads” or “dunkers.” We won't encourage that, but we will be understanding.)

We must declare that Southern Baptists have every right to their religion, and that it does not, in itself, make them wasters, drunks and prone to violence and pickup trucks. But, privately, we know that they are not the moral equals of Episcopalians, Methodists and Lutherans. Just look at the rates of divorce, domestic abuse and alcoholism.

But, religious rights aside, they must go.

It is fair to point out that while Texas has the shell of a democratic system of government, it does not, in fact, practice democracy -- which makes it very like both Israel and Hamas-ruled Gaza in respect to governance.

Evidence is everywhere.

Israel's Supreme Court ruled a couple of weeks ago that the Israeli government must allow news reporters into Gaza and give them room to move around and report what they see and learn. Israel's government and its military have refused to honor that ruling because they don't like it and “what the world doesn't know won't hurt us.” Thus, there is no rule of law. (There are dozens of other easily available examples of the dismissal of law.)

In Texas, legislators did not like the possibility of substantial numbers of their body being replaced through honest elections; the legislators redistricted the entire state so that liberals are permanently relegated to a safely small minority in their legislature and congressional delegation, regardless of the wishes of the wider population.

Equally, one of the people Texas sent to Washington –- the very one who chiefly engineered the redistricting, oddly enough -– was pretty much forced to avoid running for re-election after having been censured three times by colleagues in Washington and having been indicted for criminal activity. He, Tom DeLay, has been “awaiting” trial for three years, but no trial is in sight; it will not happen unless and until acquittal can be guaranteed before proceedings begin. Thus, there is no rule of law. Dozens of other examples can be found to support that statement.

So let's bring in the Israelis to drive out the beer-swilling, spouse beating water head fornicators and create a garden spot of the now largely wasted area called Texas.

But the region is part of the United States?

So what? We're not doing anything with it, certainly nothing that benefits mankind.

Some also may question where the Texans can go. That is no more a problem that was the relocation of Palestinians who, remember, occupied their homeland a whole lot longer than have today's Texans.

Push them over the borders into New Mexico, Oklahoma, Arkansas, and Louisiana, all of which are largely occupied by similar peoples. Better yet, drive them, as proud early American occupiers did the continent's native peoples, to places even more suited to their lazy, ignorant, unproductive lifestyles and weird religions.

Mississippi would be perfect.

As in the Middle East, some of those already occupying the other spaces may object to having large numbers of refugees thrust upon them, especially with no international help to sustain the newcomers, to feed and house them, but, hey, you can't make an omelet...

There are benefits to the plan beyond the obvious.

For one thing, Israel's population has grown very rapidly since we encouraged them to kick out and/or eliminate Palestinians in 1948. Various sources say most growth now is internal, rather than through immigration. Despite the generally effective methods previously mentioned, many Arabs/Palestinians remain within Israel's borders. The Arab population is growing more rapidly than the Jewish population, which scares the hell out of the ruling class of Israelis despite the fact that the Arab “citizens” are all but entirely disenfranchised and Israel is, officially, a Jewish state.

(Israel's government just adopted a law that makes Arab political parties illegal. See comments above about rule of law.)

From it's first day as an officially recognized country, the leaders of Israel admitted –- actually bragged -– that they had no intention of staying within the internationally declared borders. Almost all of the country's early leaders (many of whom were flat-out unrepentant terrorists) wrote of their intention to expand, although western journalists ignored their statements in that regard. Later political leaders have not repudiated the expansionist intent.

So, when we move Israel to Texas, we will leave the Palestinian/Arab residents to be absorbed again into the new Palestinian state, or protectorate or whatever it becomes. Not our problem.

Some Americans almost certainly will raise the question of cost. Even if we merely herd the present Texans on foot to their new locations, some cost is involved. And, of course, there will be a great cost attached to moving Israel to Texas.

I assure you it is not a problem.

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), a powerful organization of Zionists who hold U.S. citizenship, raises enormous sums of money at the drop of a hat. That money now is mostly used to buy American politicians, control U.S. public opinion about Israel, abuse Palestinians and publicly castigate anyone with different views. The money can easily be shifted to the cause of moving Israel to Texas.

Using AIPAC for the cause has the additional great benefit of bringing great pressure to bear on anyone who might object to the relocation plan.

The American “news” media are terrified of taking any position not thoroughly supported by AIPAC. More, the organization's long-standing tactic of labeling anyone who opposes it on any subject as “antiSemitic” tends to intimidate into silence almost everyone who thinks of taking a stance contrary to the organization or Israel's right-wing government.

The citizens of New Israel will have far less population density than they now have so it should be a considerable number of years before they begin pushing at the United States to the north, east and west and Mexico to the south. Perhaps the additional land will, in fact, suffice until such point that later generations lose the expansionist desire. It's possible.

Unfortunately, it also is possible that former Texans –- known for their adoration of guns and violent recreation -- may begin sniping and firing rockets into New Israel from their new locations. In truth, it's almost a sure thing. But I'll leave that to other heads to explore. I've done my bit.

I'll also leave to more experienced and clever people the choosing of a new enemy.

Hamas, now in control in Gaza, has been presented as the new Al Quida, or Taliban, or, at any rate, the presently most-cited devil's disciple. And, indeed, Al Quida and the Taliban have long since lost their grip on the attention of the American public. Their place on the fear scale has slipped to the level of impotence. Hamas, as touted by Israel and the U.S. government, has kept American hearts palpitating, but Hamas recruitment will immediately sink to almost nothing as soon as Israel moves, and many of its present members will melt away. (Indeed, Hamas never would have existed without Israel's help.)

The American arms industry, fronted by right wing politicians and “pundits,” will require a new and frightening foe in order to maintain profits. But they've been completely successful over many years in manufacturing such foes as needed, and that success no doubt will continue.

------------------

Gaza, the center of the present conflict, has 1.5 million people held captive in 140 square miles. That's roughly 10,000 people per square mile. Imports of even essentials such as food and medical supplies, are greatly limited. The residents are not allowed to leave; Israel even denies visas to young people who have been accepted as students at foreign universities. Some sources say unemployment is more than 40 percent, and human rights organizations report that a very large percentage of the population is routinely malnourished.


Israel has a bit more than 7.3 million people in 7,850 square miles, a space about the size of new Jersey. That's about 935 people per square mile, although various demographic studies indicate that Arab residents are considerably more crowded than others.

Texas has 23.5 million people in 268,601 square miles – about 87.5 people per square mile. Lots of room.