FOOLS IN HIGH PLACES - A LETTER TO THE STAR

Will be ever be rid of foolishness in high places? Not too long ago, an Ivy-league 'star' professor boldly proclaimed 'the end of history', leaving one to wonder if he even understood history. Then Pulitzer-prize winning journalist Bob Woodward admitted on Larry King's show, after the American force occupying Iraq found no WMD whatsoever, that he had truly believed that Saddam Hussein and Iraq were threats to America. Like most of the leading lights of the North American media and academia, he had been apparently unaware that Iraq had been bombed 'back to the stone-age' ín 1991, then kept on its knees (if not its back) with economic sanctions, harassed incessantly with UN arms inspections, and tortured with ad-hoc bombings by the US and UK air-forces whenever the leaders of those countries needed a boost in their domestic political ratings.

Still... foolishness is more benign than the thinly disguised lies of leading historians like Niall Ferguson who write about 'Armageddon' if Iran acquires nuclear energy which even environmentalists around the world are now touting as the preferred solution to global warming and the crisis caused by the limits to supply of fossil fuels. Apparently the Oxford-educated and Harvard-employed Dr. Ferguson is unaware that Iran doesn't even have an army or navy of any significance, let along nuclear weapons, whereas the supposed target of Iran's hostility - Israel, has every type of conventional, chemical, biological and nuclear weapon in abundance, and is a partner with the US in cutting edge 'research' to maintain an invincible superiority over its Islamic neighbours.

(What the erudite Oxonian-at-Harvard does know beyond any doubt however, is that Iran is EVIL, while the US, UK, and Israel are not...The learned Professor holds these truths to be self-evident...no proof necessary.... No surprise then, that he is adviser to John McCain..)

I eagerly launched into the half-page the Star generously gave Professor Laxer on Wednesday June 4, expecting to learn something, what will all the photos of international leaders and the sexy title - 'Etiquette of Empire', only to discover it was largely hot air. What is Dr. Laxer's point - that American Presidents have traditionally found time for leaders that matter, while snubbing those that don't? This is information? Such behavior by US presidents has been no different from that of any gangster, bully, social matron, queen-bee, or what-have-you. It is to be found everywhere- in the petty politics and back-stabbing of workplaces, social and sports clubs, even occasionally in families. It's called human nature, I think, or at least the unsavoury part of it.

So in his ode to pomposity, did Dr. Laxer have a point? Apparently yes - he wanted to signal to Barack Obama that he must learn quickly the so-called 'etiquette of empire', The Professor is wrong, dead wrong. We don't need more American bullying and war-crimes, euphemistically called unilateral action. We need a new approach. If Mr. Obama does become President, and follows through on his stated intent to meet (without pre-conditions) with leaders of nations called the axis of evil by a man 80% of Europeans consider the world's biggest terrorist and threat to peace, this would be a major step to reducing international tension, conflict and tragedy.

Unfortunately, Mr. Obama has already begun to back-track, as evidenced by his pledge to Florida's Jewish voters to maintain America's one-sided support for Israel. Political realities may allow one the audacity of hope, but not apparently the audacity to act on that hope.

Still, it would be nice if people from academia and the media gave good counsel, instead of foolish ones. They need to remember Julius Streicher. It is not just those who kill that are criminal, but also those who provide the intellectual justification for the killing.