Bulletin N°431



2 January 2010
Grenoble, France

Dear Colleagues and Friends of CEIMSA,

Viva Palestina Update continues to document on the Internet the progress of the International Aid Convoy, as it snakes its way into Gaza bringing medicine and food supplies to the besieged population of one-and-a-half million defenseless men, women, and children --victims of constant Israeli aggression.

Meanwhile, the Anglo-Saxon legal system seems to be stirring, as arrest warrants have been issued by English courts for Israeli political leaders accused of crimes against humanity:  On December 12, an arrest warrant issued by a British court against former foreign minister Tzipi Livni over her role during the massacres in the Gaza Strip beginning in December 2008. In September 2009, pro-Palestinian activists sought to have Defence Minister Ehud Barak arrested over his role in the Gaza killings, but a court denied the request on the grounds of his temporary diplomatic immunity. Whereas in 2005, retired Israeli general, Doron Almog, avoided arrest in Britain by returning to Israel without leaving the plane that had landed him in London after he learned an arrest warrant had been issued against him.

We are looking at a monumental clash between two ideological paradigms: The Palestinian People, are they emblematic of anotherTrail of Tears (like the one that followed the U.S. Indian Removal Act of 1830), are they destined to be removed from their homeland, as were the Cherokees, Creeks, Chickasaws, and Choctaws; or do they represent another post-colonial history, like Angola, where the Portuguese masters had to abandon their power in 1975, and either leave their former colony or integrate into the new post-colonial society under construction?

The 4 items below might offer readers some hope, in this New Year season, that a rational post-imperialist world may yet be possible. Certainly, the only chance for such a hope to ever be realized in the future is through continual activities, in the present, by heroic peace activists, such as those described below. At no time has our future been more threatened than it is today, and we should honor those creative and committed persons who, guided by their knowledge of the past, do not cease working for new forms of relationships which, if allowed to flourish, can only produce new hope for our collective future.

Item A. is a Viva Palestina Update series of Video films from Information Clearing House.

Item B., sent to us by Professor Edward S. Herman, is an article by Rick Rozoff in which he predicts the continuation of U.S. aggression through this year, and until the bitter end.

Item C., sent to us by Professor Fred Lonidier, is an article by Mark Rudd on the much needed skills of community organizing, as a pedagogy of the future.

Item D. is an exchange of mail at the start of this year, between two members of the French Societe des Anglicistes de l'Enseignement Superieur, myself and Professor Pierre Lagayette, of the Sorbonne, in which the Professor accuses me of using the SAES correspondence network to distribute "propaganda," "disinformation," and "antisemitic" ideas. The last letter, in this series of three, is my reply to these false charges.

And finally, we invite CEIMSA readers to join Noam Chomsky in his talk on "Gaza, one year later":


and the Democracy Now! (30 December) coverage of the

Gaza Freedom March Protests

Francis McCollum Feeley
Professor of American Studies
Director of Research
Université Stendhal Grenoble 3

from Information Clearing House:
Date: 1 January 2010
Subject: Viva Palestina Update.

The Anglo-Saxon legal system seems to be stirring, as arrest warrants are being issued for Israeli political leaders accused of crimes against humanity.
Meanwhile, Viva Palestina Update continues to document the international . . .

Viva Palestina Convoy on their way to Gaza

Update on the Viva Palestina 3 Convoy that was stuck in Jordan due to Egyptian issues. Now back on the move and onwards to Gaza.


Press TV Video
Back On The Move Towards Gaza
(1 January 2010)



Viva Palestina Convoy Continues Journey To Tartus Port
by Kuzaimah Idris
(December 31, 2009)

While the rest of the world usher the arrival of 2010 with cheers and fireworks, members of the Viva Palestina convoy of 450 are expected to usher the New Year on a ship in the Mediterranean sea.

And as this news was written, the 220 trucks and ambulances loaded with humanitarian, educational aid and medical supplies was on their way to the Port City of Tartus in northern Syria.

The convoy continued their journey from here at 10.30am local time, after a day's delay, due to logistical problems.

The 230km journey to Tartus Port, through the town of Home and Hama, is expected to take between four to five hours.

And if everything goes as planned, the convoy of world nationals, will board an awaiting ship to get them to the Egyptian El-Arish Port city.

However, if the convoy were to be stranded in Tartus Port, the group would have no choice but to spend New Year's eve under tents and dreadfully cold temperatures at night, in the northern port city.

Though tired and exhausted, members of the convoy had not shown any sign of giving up their quest to deliver aid worth US$1 million (RM3.5 million) to the Palestinians in Gaza.

They hope when they reached El-Arish port, the journey to Gaza via Rafa by land would proceed smoothly.

The convoy started off from London on Dec 6 and had earlier planned to reach Gaza by Dec 27, a year after the Zionist atrocities against the Palestinians.

from Edward Herman:
Date: 31 December 2009
Subject: 2010: U.S. To Wage War Throughout The World.

My apologies for such a grim New Year's Eve offering, but the reality principle has to take precedence!
ed herman

2010: U.S. To Wage War Throughout The World
by Rick Rozoff

January 1 will usher in the last year of the first decade of a new millennium and ten consecutive years of the United States conducting war in the Greater Middle East.

Beginning with the October 7, 2001 missile and bomb attacks on Afghanistan, American combat operations abroad have not ceased for a year, a month, a week or a day in the 21st century.

The Afghan war, the U.S.'s first air and ground conflict in Asia since the disastrous wars in Vietnam and Cambodia in the 1960s and early 1970s and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization's first land war and Asian campaign, began during the end of the 2001 war in Macedonia launched from NATO-occupied Kosovo, one in which the role of U.S. military personnel is still to be properly exposed [1] and addressed and which led to the displacement of almost 10 percent of the nation's population.

In the first case Washington invaded a nation in the name of combating terrorism; in the second it abetted cross-border terrorism. Similarly, in 1991 the U.S. and its Western allies attacked Iraqi forces in Kuwait and launched devastating and deadly cruise missile attacks and bombing sorties inside Iraq in the name of preserving the national sovereignty and territorial integrity of Kuwait, and in 1999 waged a 78-day bombing assault against Yugoslavia to override and fatally undermine the principles of territorial integrity and national sovereignty in the name of the casus belli of the day, so-called humanitarian intervention.

Two years later humanitarian war, as abhorrent an oxymoron as the world has ever witnessed, gave way to the global war on terror(ism), with the U.S. and its NATO allies again reversing course but continuing to wage wars of aggression and "wars of opportunity" as they saw fit, contradictions and logic, precedents and international law notwithstanding.

Several never fully acknowledged counterinsurgency campaigns, some ongoing - Colombia - and some new - Yemen - later, the U.S. invaded Iraq in March of 2003 with a "coalition of the willing" comprised mainly of Eastern European NATO candidate nations (now almost all full members of the world's only military bloc as a result of their service).

The Pentagon has also deployed special forces and other troops to the Philippines and launched naval, helicopter and missile attacks inside Somalia as well as assisting the Ethiopian invasion of that nation in 2006. Washington also arms, trains and supports the armed forces of Djibouti in their border war with Eritrea. In fact Djibouti hosts the U.S.'s only permanent military installation in Africa to date [2], Camp Lemonier, a United States Naval Expeditionary Base and home to the Combined Joint Task Force - Horn of Africa (CJTF-HOA), placed under the new U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) when it was launched on October 1, 2008. The area of responsibility of the Combined Joint Task Force - Horn of Africa takes in the nations of Djibouti, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Kenya, Seychelles, Somalia, Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda and Yemen and as "areas of interest" the Comoros, Mauritius and Madagascar.

That is, much of the western shores of the Arabian Sea and the Indian Ocean, among the most geostrategically important parts of the world. [3]

U.S. troops, aerial drones, warships, planes and helicopters are active throughout that vast tract of land and water.

With senator and once almost vice president Joseph Lieberman's threat on December 27 that "Yemen will be tomorrow's war" [4] and former Southern Command chief and NATO Supreme Allied Commander Europe Wesley Clark's two days later that "Maybe we need to put some boots on the ground there," [5] it is evident that America's new war for the new year has already been identified. In fact in mid-December U.S. warplanes participated in the bombing of a village in northern Yemen that cost the lives of 120 civilians as well as wounding 44 more [6] and a week later "A US fighter jet...carried out multiple airstrikes on the home of a senior official in Yemen's northern rugged province of Sa'ada...." [7]

The pretext for undertaking a war in Yemen in earnest is currently the serio-comic "attempted terrorist attack” by a young Nigerian national on a passenger airliner outside of Detroit on Christmas Day. The deadly U.S. bombing of the Yemeni village mentioned above occurred ten days earlier and moreover was in the north of the nation, although Washington claims al-Qaeda cells are operating in the other end of the country. [8]

Asia, Africa and the Middle East are not the only battlegrounds where the Pentagon is active. On October 30 of 2009 the U.S. signed an agreement with the government of Colombia to acquire the essentially unlimited and unrestricted use of seven new military bases in the South American nation, including sites within immediate striking distance of both Venezuela and Ecuador. [9] American intelligence, special forces and other personnel will be complicit in ongoing counterinsurgency operations against the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) in the nation's south as well as in rendering assistance to Washington's Colombian proxy for attacks inside Ecuador and Venezuela that will be portrayed as aimed at FARC forces in the two states.

Targeting two linchpins of and ultimately the entire Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America (ALBA), Washington is laying the groundwork for a potential military conflagration in South and Central America and the Caribbean. After the U.S.-supported coup in Honduras on June 28, that nation has announced it will be the first ALBA member state to ever withdraw from the Alliance and the Pentagon will retain, perhaps expand, its military presence at the Soto Cano Air Base there.

A few days ago "The Colombian government...announced it is building a new military base on its border with Venezuela and has activated six new airborne battalions" [10] and shortly afterward Dutch member of parliament Harry van Bommel "claimed that US spy planes are using an airbase on the Netherlands Antilles island of Curaçao" [11] off the Venezuelan coast.

In October a U.S. armed forces publication revealed that the Pentagon will spend $110 million to modernize and expand seven new military bases in Bulgaria and Romania, across the Black Sea from Russia, where it will station initial contingents of over 4,000 troops. [12]

In early December the U.S. signed a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) with Poland, which borders the Russian Kaliningrad territory, that "allows for the United States military to station American troops and military equipment on Polish territory." [13] The U.S. military forces will operate Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) and Standard Missile 3 (SM-3) batteries as part of the Pentagon's global interceptor missile system.

At approximately the same time President Obama pressured Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan to base missile shield components in his country. "We discussed the continuing role that we can play as NATO allies in strengthening Turkey's profile within NATO and coordinating more effectively on critical issues like missile defense," [14] in the American leader's words.

"Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu has hinted his government does not view Tehran [Iran] as a potential missile threat for Turkey at this point. But analysts say if a joint NATO missile shield is developed, such a move could force Ankara to join the mechanism." [15]

2010 will see the first foreign troops deployed to Poland since the breakup of the Warsaw Pact in 1991 and the installation of the U.S's "stronger, swifter and smarter" (also Obama's words) interceptor missiles and radar facilities in Eastern Europe, the Middle East and the South Caucasus. [16]

U.S. troop strength in Afghanistan, site of the longest and most wide-scale war in the world, will top 100,000 early in 2010 and with another 50,000 plus troops from other NATO nations and assorted "vassals and tributaries" (Zbigniew Brzezinski) will represent the largest military deployment in any war zone in the world.

American and NATO drone missile and helicopter gunship attacks in Pakistan will also increase, as will U.S. counterinsurgency operations in the Philippines and Somalia along with those in Yemen where CIA and Army special forces are already involved.

U.S. military websites recently announced that there have been 3.3 million deployments to Afghanistan and Iraq since 2001 with 2 million U.S. service members sent to the two war zones. [17]

In this still young millennium American soldiers have also deployed in the hundreds of thousands to new bases and conflict and post-conflict zones in Albania, Bosnia, Bulgaria, Colombia, Djibouti, Georgia, Israel, Jordan, Kosovo, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Macedonia, Mali, the Philippines, Romania, Uganda and Uzbekistan.

In 2010 they will be sent abroad in even larger numbers to man airbases and missile sites, supervise and participate in counterinsurgency operations throughout the world against disparate rebel groups, many of them secular, and wage combat operations in South Asia and elsewhere. They will be stationed on warships and submarines equipped with cruise and long-range nuclear missiles and with aircraft carrier strike groups prowling the world's seas and oceans.

They will construct and expand bases from Europe to Central and South Asia, Africa to South America, the Middle East to Oceania. With the exception of Guam and Vicenza in Italy, where the Pentagon is massively expanding existing installations, all the facilities in question are in nations and even regions of the world where the U.S. military has never before ensconced itself. Practically all the new encampments will be forward bases used for operations "down range," generally to the east and south of NATO-dominated Europe.

U.S. military personnel will be assigned to the new Global Strike Command and for expanded patrols and war games in the Arctic Circle. They will serve under the Missile Defense Agency to consolidate a worldwide interceptor missile network that will facilitate a nuclear first strike capability and will extend that system into space, the final frontier in the drive to achieve military full spectrum dominance.

American troops will continue to fan out to most all parts of the world. Everywhere, that is, except to their own nation's borders.

1) Scott Taylor, Macedonia's Civil War: 'Made in the USA'
   Antiwar.com, August 20, 2001
2) AFRICOM Year Two: Seizing The Helm Of The Entire World
   Stop NATO, October 22, 2009
3) Cold War Origins Of The Somalia Crisis And Control Of The Indian Ocean
   Stop NATO, May 3, 2009
4) Fox News, December 27, 2009
5) Fox News, December 29, 2009
6) Press TV, December 16, 2009
7) Press TV, December 27, 2009
8) Yemen: Pentagon’s War On The Arabian Peninsula
   Stop NATO, December 15, 2009
9) Rumors Of Coups And War: U.S., NATO Target Latin America
   Stop NATO, November 18, 2009
10) BBC News, December 20, 2009
11) Radio Netherlands, December 22, 2009
12) Bulgaria, Romania: U.S., NATO Bases For War In The East
    Stop NATO, October 24, 2009
13) Polish Radio, December 11, 2009
14) Hurriyet Daily News, December 30, 2009
15) Ibid
16) Black Sea, Caucasus: U.S. Moves Missile Shield South And East
    Stop NATO, September 19, 2009
    U.S. Expands Global Missile Shield Into Middle East, Balkans
    Stop NATO, September 11, 2009
17) World’s Sole Military Superpower’s 2 Million-Troop, $1 Trillion Wars
    Stop NATO, December 21, 2009

from Fred Lonider :
Date: 30 December 2009
Subject: What It Takes to Build a Movement.

When Spontaneity Fails ...
What It Takes to Build a Movement

by Marc Rudd

Since the summer of 2003, I've crisscrossed the country speaking at colleges and theaters and bookstores, first with The Weather Underground documentary and, starting in March of this year, with my book, Underground:  My Life with SDS and the Weathermen (William Morrow, 2009). In discussions with young people, they often
tell me, "Nothing anyone does can ever make a difference."

The words still sound strange: it's a phrase I never once heard forty years ago, a sentiment obviously false on its surface.  Growing up in the Fifties and Sixties,
I, and the rest of the country, knew about the civil rights movement in the South, and what was most evident was that individuals, joining with others, actually
were making a difference. The labor movement of the Thirties to the Sixties had improved the lives of millions; the anti-war movement had brought down a
sitting president, LBJ, March 1968, and was actively engaged in stopping the Vietnam War. In the forty years since, the women's movement, gay rights, disability
rights, animal rights, and environmental movements have all registered enormous social and political gains. To old new lefties, such as myself, this is all self-evident.

So, why the defeatism? In the absence of knowledge of how these historical movements were built, young people assume that they arose spontaneously, or, perhaps,
charismatic leaders suddenly called them into existence. On the third Monday of every January we celebrate Martin Luther King Jr. having had a dream; knowledge of the movement itself is lost.

The current anti-war movement's weakness, however, is very much alive in young people's experience. They cite the fact that millions turned out in the streets in the
early spring of 2003 to oppose the pending U.S. attack on Iraq, but that these demonstrations had no effect. "We demonstrated, and they didn't listen to us." Even
the activists among them became demoralized as numbers at demonstrations dropped off very quickly, street demonstrations becoming cliches, and, despite a big
shift in public opinion in 2006, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan droned on to today. The very success of the spontaneous early mobilization seems to have contributed to the anti-war movement's long-term weakness.

Something's missing. I first got an insight into articulating what it is when I picked up Letters from Young Activists: Today's Rebels Speak Out, edited by Dan Berger, Chesa Boudin and Kenyon Farrow (Nation Books, 2005). Andy Cornell, in a letter to the movement that first radicalized him, "Dear Punk Rock Activism," criticizes the conflation of the terms "activism" and "organizing." He writes, "activists are individuals who dedicate their time and energy to various efforts they hope will contribute to social, political, or economic change. Organizers are activists who, in addition to their own participation, work to move other people to take action and help them develop skills, political analysis and confidence within the context of organizations. Organizing is a process, creating long-term campaigns that mobilize a certain constituency to press for specific demands from a particular target, using a defined strategy and escalating tactics." In other words, it's not enough for punks to continually express their contempt for mainstream values through their alternate identity; they've got to move toward "organizing masses of people."

Aha!  Activism = self-expression; organizing = movement-building.

Until recently, I'd rarely heard young people call themselves "organizers." The common term for years has been "activists." Organizing was reduced to the behind the scenes nuts-and-bolts work needed to pull off a specific event, such as a concert or demonstration. But forty years ago, we only used the word "activist" to mock our enemies' view of us, as when a university administrator or newspaper editorial writer would call us "mindless activists." We were organizers, our work was building a mass movement, and that took constant discussion of goals, strategy and tactics (and, later, contributing to our downfall ideology).

Thinking back over my own experience, I realized that I had inherited this organizer's identity from the red diaper babies I fell in with at the Columbia chapter of Students for a Democratic Society, SDS. Raised by parents in the labor and civil rights and communist or socialist movements, they had naturally learned the organizing method as other kids learned how to throw footballs or bake pineapple upside-down cakes. "Build the base!" was the constant strategy of Columbia SDS for years.

Yet, young activists I met were surprised to learn that major events, such as the Columbia rebellion of April 1968, did not happen spontaneously, that they took years of prior education, relationship building, reconsideration on the part of individuals of their role in the institution. I.e., organizing. It seemed to me that they believed that movements happen as a sort of dramatic or spectator sport: after a small group of people express themselves, large numbers of bystanders see the truth in what they're saying and join in. The mass anti-war mobilization of the Spring 2003, which failed to stop the war, was the only model they knew. I began looking for a literature that would show how successful historical movements were built. Not the outcomes or triumphs, such as the great civil rights March on Washington in 1963, but the many streams that eventually created the floods. I wanted to know who said what to whom and how did they respond. One book was recommended to me repeatedly by friends, I've Got
the Light of Freedom: the Organizing Tradition and the Mississippi Freedom Struggle by Charles M. Payne (University of California Press, 1995). Payne, an African-American sociologist, now at the University of Chicago, asked the question how young student organizers of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, SNCC, had successfully organized voter registration and related campaigns in one town, Greenwood, Mississippi, in the years 1961-1964. The Mississippi Delta region was one of the most benighted areas of the South, with conditions for black cotton sharecroppers and plantation workers not much above the level of slavery. Despite the fact that illiteracy and economic dependency were the norm among black people in the Delta, and that they were the target of years of violent terror tactics, including murder, SNCC
miraculously organized these same people to take the steps toward their own freedom, through attaining voting rights and education. How did they do it?

What Payne uncovers through his investigation into SNCC in Greenwood is an organizing method that has no name but is solidly rooted in the traditions of church women
of the rural South. Black churches usually had charismatic male ministers, who, as a consequence of their positions, led in an authoritarian manner. The work of the congregations themselves, however, the social events and education and mutual aid were organized at the base level by women, who were democratic and relational in style. Martin Luther King's Southern Christian Leadership Council, SCLC, used the ministerial model in their mobilizing for events, while the young people of SNCC, informed by the teaching and examples of freedom movement veterans Ella Baker and Septima Clark, concentrated on building relationships with local people and helping them develop into leaders within democratic structures. SNCC's central organizing principle," participatory democracy," was a direct inheritance from Ella Baker.

Payne writes, "SNCC preached a gospel of individual efficacy. What you do matters. In order to move politically, people had to believe that. In Greenwood, the movement was able to exploit communal and familial traditions that encouraged people to believe in their own light."

The features of the method, sometimes called "developmental" or "transformational organizing," involve long-term strategy, patient base-building, personal engagement between people, full democratic participation, education and the development of people's leadership capabilities, and coalition-building. The developmental method is often
juxtaposed to Alinsky-style organizing, which is usually characterized as top-down and manipulative.

For a first-hand view of Alinsky organizing, though it's never named as such, by a trained and seasoned practitioner, see Barack Obama's book, Dreams from My Father (Three Rivers Press, 1995 and 2004). In the middle section of the book, "Chicago," Obama describes his three years organizing on the streets and housing projects of South Chicago. He beautifully invokes his motives, improving young people's lives, but at the same time draws a murky picture of organizing. Questions abound: Who trained him? What was his training? Who paid him? What is the guiding ideology? What is his relationship to the people he calls "my leaders?" Are they above him or are they manipulated by him? Who are calling whose shots? What are the long-term consequences? It's a great piece to start a discussion with young organizers.

While reading I've Got the Light of Freedom, I realized that much of what we had practiced in SDS was derived from SNCC and this developmental organizing tradition,
up to and including the vision of "participatory democracy," which was incorporated in the 1962 SDS founding document, "The Port Huron Statement." Columbia SDS's work was patient, strategic, base-building, using both confrontation and education. I, myself, had been nurtured and developed into a leadership position through years of close friendship with older organizers.

However, my clique's downfall came post-1968, when, under the spell of the illusion of revolution, we abandoned organizing, first for militant confrontation (Weatherman and the Days of Rage, Oct. 1969) and then armed urban guerilla warfare (the Weather Underground, 1970-1976). We had, in effect, moved backward from organizing to self-expression, believing, ridiculously, that that would build the movement. At the moment when more organizing was needed to build a permanent anti-imperialist mass movement, we abandoned organizing.

This is the story I tell in my book, Underground.  It's about good organizing (Columbia), leading to worse (Weatherman), leading to horrible (the Weather Underground). I hope it's useful to contemporary organizers, as they contemplate how to build the coming mass movement(s).

-- Mark Rudd lives and teaches in Albuquerque, N.M. He can be reached at www.markrudd.com.

from Francis Feeley :
Date: 2 January 2010
Subject: Discussion of British Legal judgements of Israeli Policy in Gaza and an attempt to end this discussion within the French academic circle, SAES.

Below are copies of three letters that are part of an exchange conducted at the start of this year through the SAEA electronic correspondence system, discussing the Anglo-Saxon legal community's response to the 2008-2009 massacres in Gaza by Israeli forces. Professor Lagayette of the Sorbonne questions my motives and I reply.
F. Feeley

Date: Fri, 01 Jan 2010 22:21:05 +0100
To: saes@univ-pau.fr
From: Francis FEELEY <francis.feeley@u-grenoble3.fr>

Dear Colleagues,
The Anglo-Saxon legal system seems to be stirring, as arrest warrants are being issued for Israeli political leaders accused of crimes against humanity.
Meanwhile, Viva Palestina Update continues to document the international "Viva Pasestina Convoy" on their way to Gaza (1 January 2010) :

Francis McCollum Feeley
Professor of American Studies
Director of Research
Université Stendhal Grenoble 3


At 23:15 01/01/2010, you wrote:
To: Francis FEELEY
From: Pierre Lagayette
Subject: Re: [SAES]  INFO: Gaza enters the new year.

Mr. Feeley,
Doesn't it appear to you that the link between the "Anglo-Saxon" culture (in which the SAES can legitimately be interested) and the Gaza/Palestinian issue is a little bit stretched. I must say I am rather incensed at the way you spread your propaganda over the SAES professional list -- especially when it comes into hiccuped form. We by now know where to place you in our academic ladscape, so why bother your colleagues with reported rantings about Israel and your own antisemitic leanings. Please find another support for your disinformation work. Thanks.

Pierre Lagayette
Paris IV - Sorbonne


Date: Sat, 02 Jan 2010 21:59:37 +0100
To: Pierre Lagayette
From: Francis FEELEY
Subject: Re: [SAES] INFO: Gaza enters the new year.

I do not know you, and what is more you do not know me. We have never met. The ad hominem nature of your first contact with me is disturbing to my family, and my to friends. Under normal conditions I'd request an apology from you for this boorish behavior, but obviously this would be asking a great deal more than you are equipped to provide, this seems obvious.
I don't know how informed you are about British Law, or about the activities of British Member of Parliament George Galloway. Perhaps you know a great deal about both, and perhaps you have followed the recent affairs of Israeli leaders in English courts: an arrest warrant was issued in London three weeks ago for Tzipi Livni over her role during the massacres in the Gaza Strip, beginning in December 2008. Four months ago, Defense Minister Ehud Barak was protected only by diplomatic immunity from an arrest warrant over his role in the same Gaza massacres, and in 2005, retired Israeli general Doron Almog was obliged to remain on his plane at the London airport when he learned about the warrant for his arrest, and he left England on the same plane, without disembarking --again the charge was crimes against humanity.
These are all legitimate issues concerning British civilization --and not, as you say, "propaganda" and "disinformation." Your errors in judgment (not to mention your faulty logic) are alarming, Professor Lagayette, and your attempts at character assassination are reprehensible. I'm very sorry that you have felt the need to stoop so low in expressing your disagreements with me, and it surely exposes more about yourself than it could ever reveal about me.

In utter disappointment, your colleague,
Francis Feeley