As the floodgates of diplomatic cables
has recently been unleashed via Wikileaks, I was inspired to do some
fresh perusing of the newly available files. Originally looking for
what the cables had to say about anarchists, I stumbled upon the following lines in a document
classified as "SECRET" under the subject heading "COMBATING
EXTREMISM IN GREECE":
Greek society also views enhanced police capabilities with a jaundiced eye. Greeks are hypersensitive to any perceived limits on personal freedoms; as an example, security cameras around town have been vandalized. Members of Parliament have also inveighed against their use; attempts to pass off the cameras as trafficams have been only partly successful.
While I knew the
Greeks were less tolerant than Americans of police abuses (since
police collaboration with the Nazi's in WWII), I found the phrasing
of these lines to be somewhat interesting. The Greeks aren't
described as vigilant about preserving their rights, they are rather
described as "hypersensitive." And the author seems to
lament that "attempts to pass off the cameras as trafficams have
been only partly successful." While this phrasing in
itself should be something of an embarrassment, it's somewhat telling
in how issues are presented and phrased. And, presumably, Americans
have fallen for the tactic of trying to pass off surveillance cameras
as trafficams.
Upon further
reading... I'd like point out how, in the cited cable, anarchists are
conflated and categorized with neo-Nazi's. Similarly, ill-defined
"extremist groups" are accused of "targeting" the
U.S. embassy:
Above all, the United States is Public Enemy Number One in Greece -- domestic extremist groups regularly target the U.S. embassy to protest against both past history and current "American hegemony."
Now, any group
which may protest the U.S. wars or trade policies is also conflated
with "extremist groups" like the neo-Nazi's. I suppose one
should expect to find Godwin's Law evoked in such a large volume of
text like that released in the cables, but this seems particularly
cynical to me. Anyway... it seems that when tens of thousands
protest the ongoing wars and the militarism of the United States,
they are "extremists." Just like the millions of others around the globe who protested the war in Iraq during the
biggest day of protest in the history of the world, it is they who
who are the extremists and apparently need to be put into check. And
protesting at the U.S. embassy isn't just that, it's "targeting"
the U.S. embassy. The bias is in the subtle details of the words,
and phrases, and conflated associations.
Another example of
extremism, anti-semitism even, is described thusly:
At the same time, Greece has longstanding ties to the Palestinian cause and Arafat personally; Greece was the last member of the EU to establish diplomatic relations with Israel (1990). In modern colloquial Greek (as in the modern Arab world) there is often no distinction between "Jewish" and "Israeli." The problem is compounded by almost universal opposition to Israeli policies in the Occupied Territories.
Certainly it's
inaccurate to refer to all Jewish people as Israeli's, but if
actually used interchangeably that way in the common parlance... I'm
not convinced it's worthy of listing such information under a heading
of "ANTI-SEMITISM" or proof thereof. Much more to the
point, however, is that opposition to Israeli government policies in
Palestine certainly does not necessarily imply anti-semitism. Many
proud Jewish people, even some Israelis, oppose those policies -- and
they are certainly not anti-semitic. To present the aforementioned
information as proof of anti-semitism, is intellectual incompetence
at best, and intellectual dishonesty at worst.
There will undoubtedly be more to come as the diplomatic cables are examined more thoroughly.
No comments:
Post a Comment