Myself I was impressed by Obama's offering himself to the Muslim world as a leader, the supple use of the Koran and of Islamic teaching, the embrace of his own Muslim background, and the willingness to dive into women's freedom. The students here were wild for him on this basis too, many of them say the speech was "amazing," a word I heard again and again from them. Several have told me how moved they were by his appreciation for Islamic prophets.
They seem to be willing to be led by him, on democracy, on women's rights. Though yes he mispronounced the word hijab, as hajib, still he exceeded expectations by a mile. Here 's the student section:
My disappointment with his statements on Israel-Palestine was echoed by a few of the students I've talked to. I should say that mostly they said that he was wise to avoid particulars, and that it is healing to try and move the conflict into the past; but a couple of students expressed disappointment and even resentment on the issue. He did not say anything new or concrete. The putting of Jewish refugees from the Holocaust in the same basket as Palestinian refugees doesn't work. The language on settlements was not strong enough, and there was no real condemnation of Israel's treatment of the Palestinians. Gaza is "intolerable," but who is responsible for that intolerableness? He mentioned Israel as little as he could, a medical student said to me. And "smacked" a democratically-elected government, Hamas.
Having called for boldness and the expression of private thoughts (the high watermark of the race speech), he chose well-worn ideas.
Though the description of Jerusalem as an open city, without using those words, does make it clear that he was only pandering when he said "undivided" to AIPAC.
I felt proud of my president throughout, and loved the joy of the students crying Obama. What a great thing to see a world leader. And grabbing at hope, I saw in his repeated statements against colonialism, against the Iraq war, against states that discriminate against minorities, and for the American revolution because all men are created equal–I saw in this theme some recognition of the injustice that is at the center of our policy in the eyes of the Muslim world.
Why don't you try PROVING him, then… :-) You can't figure out a thing he says… (Martillo himself can't figure what he himself says…)
They already signed the 30 billion dollars to Israel for the next ten years.
Martillo, you are self-promoting again… Boring… Bring some facts and rational logic and you might be worthy of consideration. Until then, you are just a kook. Whyd does MondoCrap attract antisemitic kooks so effectgively?
Obama is the president who makes a lot of promises but then breaks them at breathtaking speed. Civil libertarian liberals are still fuming at the man (indefinite detentions, anyone?). I'm always amazed at easily Obama can dazzle a crowd, even though that crowd knows, deep down, he will betray them.
They should move to Spann Ranch, out in the desert; they can pick up where the Manson Family left off.
Hey certain GM ceos had contracts too; we live in times when we need to look closely how our taxpayer dollars are spent.
You really don't get that "Israeli" is not the equivalent of "Jew" do you?. international law makes it illegal for non-citizens of an occupied territory to transfer into and live in the territory. That means all Israeli citizens, regardless of their ethnic or religious persuation. Arabs living in Israel are citizens of Israel, as are Jewish Israelis, and thus have a right to live in their country of citizenship, as much as you would apparently wish otherwise. You are so blinded by your bigotry you can't even think straight.
What's the problem? The Allies told the Nazis there were certain places they could not live too. For example, all the lands Hitler originally conquered; we then also transferred 15 plus million ethnic Germans back to Germany though they had lived in their former homelands for centuries. We shouldn't reward zionist theft.
Actually, if there was no ethnic cleansing of Arabs in Israel, Arabs would be the vast majority of Israeli citizens by now, since in the territory that Israel won in 1948 over nearly one million non-Jewish Arabs and only around 600,000 Jews lived at the time. Next, Jake will prove to us that no Jews were ethnically cleansed from Germany because there are over 250,000 Jews now living in Germany.
In what time frame are you meaning Jake? Are you talking about two thousand years ago or in the last centuries that lead up to the Palestinian Nakba 60 years ago?
See, Joachim, they think they know more about you than you do yourself. That's very typical of them.
It's worse, in the sense that increasingly now the Israeli Jews refuse to employ Arabs even as peons, preferring to import east Asians.
Having decided on the basis of heaven knows what disinfo site that you are really a Syrian Arab, Joachim, they are going to keep saying it ad nauseam until, they hope, you totally explode and discredit yourself with some infuriated retort. Again, very typical of them. It's an interrogator's trick, a bully's trick.
"Richard, it seems to me that you use the language of balance rather than proposing an actual commitment to balance" David, of course he does. Anything else would be anti-semantic.
Rachel Corrie has inadvertantly become ziocaines greates talisman or fetish. All you got to do is say her name, and the ZIonist-supporters ductless glands open wide, and the endorphins pour out. Yes, sir, ziobots, don't ever stop taking pleasure in a young idealistic and pretty girl's death. America will turn its purses and hearts inside out for you.
Jake, I doubt you'll make it a week after the blog's owner gets home. I'm sure you are just the reason he pays for this comment section.
Rowan, let's see how long it lasts. I somehow can't see it going on for much longer.
Israeli settlers need to get off of Internationally recognized Palestinians land. Period
Ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XxxMppPxXCw http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XxxMppPxXCw Ethnic cleansing http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XxxMppPxXCw
Haj Amin, the Mufti was installed in power against the wishes of the majority of Palestinians by the Zionist Jew, Herbert Samuel. More Zionists collaborated with the Nazis than Palestinians, many of whom fought on the side of the Allies.
"Any other people would have done exactly the same." The Roma didn't. And they suffered as much in the Holocaust, and throughout their history (and continue to do so) as the Jews. Although I don't agree with the idea that hating Jews is the solution to the problem.
even though that crowd knows, deep down, he will betray them The exploitation of hope.
My President made clear that the U.S. Israel alliance and friendship is unbreakable and strongly affirmed Israel's right to exist. I am proud of my President.
"would like to see blown up by the Palestinian resistance.. " – more or less sums up your deranged worldview. What a piece of work.
Right, because Mr. Martillo made so many forceful "arguments". Like inciting violence and calling for murder. Talk about clowns…
Worth reposting, Ghassan Kanafani lays out in detail how the British prevented any other Palestinian leaders from emerging and preferred Mufti for an enemy: — It had already gone some way in pursuing a policy of relying on the local Zionist force and handing over to it many of the tasks of repression, which were increasing. However, it did not destroy the bridge which it had always maintained with the class led by the Mufti, and it was in this field and at this time in particular that the British played a major role in maintaining the Mufti as the undisputed representative of the Palestinian Arabs. Their reserves of the leadership on the right of the Mufti were practically exhausted so that if the Mufti were no longer regarded as the sole leader, this would "leave no-one who can represent the Arabs except the leaders of the revolt in the mountains", as the British High Commissioner for Palestine said.89 http://www.newjerseysolidarity.org/resources/kana...
My commitment to Palestinians is that I regard them (the civilians, not the murderers among them) as human beings, and desire a peer relationship of good neighbor to good neighbor between Israel and Palestine. I don't diminish the very negative imprint of the Hamas decade of gruesome terror on civilians, and its continuance in the shelling of civilians in Sderot. The shelling of Sderot and neighboring towns is more irritation, salt on wounds, indicating a continuation of its willingness to brutalize for political ends on the part of Hamas. I'm glad that they are voluntarily restraining from shelling civilians now, but I'm not confident that it is founded on a recognition of the humanity of the Israeli residents, or in any acceptance of Israel's self-governance. I suspect that it could be political timed for other internal or international agendas. Its ok. Hopefully they are in a "we'll see" attitude, and that absences of provocation will result in absences of violence, which will result in normalization eventually. I do consider that Hamas is a peer player in the violence, including the assault on Gaza, if not the extent of it. The significance of the military aid is far less in the implied authorization for Israeli actions, and is NOW far more a means of relationship, a statement of mutual trust, that gives the current US administration a voice in Israel's actions. Absent that current moderating voice, Israel could easily devolve to some more desparate actions, say like bombing Iran. The relationship is whats important, BOTH the closeness and the accountability that Obama is exerting and that Bush failed to (the oppossite, he enabled).
1) "My commitment to Palestinians is that I regard them (the civilians, not the murderers among them) as human beings" You don't consider people who commit violent acts to be human? Gosh, it's going to be tough to settle this thing, then. 2) In your formulation, Palestinians who commit violence against civilians are murderers, and inhuman to boot. Israelis who commit violence against civilians are simply carrying out ration policy. That's not balance. Don't pretend it is. 3) Ask anyone who's had a U.S.-made MK-80 bomb dropped on their house, a U.S. made and provided armored CAT D-9 bulldozer destroy their house or their agricultural land, had a relative shot with a U.S. made and provided small arms or tear gas canisters, etc., etc., whether they think that military aid is just important as "relationship." $3 billion represents half of Israeli military expenditure in the occupied Palestinian territories. 4) Are those foreign entities that provide or attempt to provide weapons to Hamas merely "maintaining a relationship"? If they made some rhetorical effort at accountability, would that excuse them for fueling conflict (as the Amnesty International report on arms transfers to Israel and Palestine was called)? So my point is this: stop using balanced language, when what you actually mean is that it's good to fund violent Israeli policy, bad to fund violent Palestinian actions; good to maintain a relationship with Israel by sending weapons and protecting them in the UN; bad to maintain a relationship with Palestinians by doing the same things. That's not balance. It's the opposite.
Fan–Good observation. Phyllis Bennis has a great analysis of that framing, and how it effects policy work and the BDS movement. Check it out: http://endtheoccupationblog.blogspot.com/2009/06/...
I find it mind-boggling that people in these comments pin the blame on Israel's "right wing supporters" in America. It's absolutely flabbergasting to see the lengths to which people have either deluded themselves or are simply ignorant of the nature of Israeli "support" in the United States. How people can on one hand pretend to engage in detailed and complicated discussion on the Israeli-Palestine conflict, and on the other perpetuate claims based on such shallow if not flatly ignorant beliefs is beyond me.
"China while China is the biggest creditor of the US debtor nation" It's not. It's the largest foreign creditor. There is a tremendous difference. I am not surprised, however, that someone such as yourself – like many if not most others – is unaware of this tremendous difference.
"The "unipolar moment" is over, Phil." It's ending, but it's far from over, and what will take its place is a multipolar system in which the United States still retains roughly its previous relative power in most instances but sees nations such as China pulling into the parking lot of the ballpark.