I always miss the best lines. A friend, Ilene Cohen, spotted the best line in Henry Siegman's takedown of Richard Haass, president of the Council on Foreign Relations. It's the last one, below:
Forty plus years into this conflict and into the creeping Israeli annexation of territory in the 22 percent of Palestine left the Palestinians, Haass pleads for patience for the situation to "ripen" before we try to end it by putting forward an American plan. He maintains that what is missing is not ideas, but the will and ability of the parties to compromise. Haass notes that "Palestinian leadership remains weak and divided; the Israeli government is too ideological and fractured; U.S. relations are too strained for Israel to place much faith in American promises."
One would have thought the problem has been placing faith in Israeli promises.
The difference between urging delay and more assertive American facilitation is slight.
The difference between advocating for Israeli reforms and reconciliation, and a single state is enormous.
What the hell does your first sentence have to do w/ the 2nd?
You don’t understand?
The difference between urging a moderation of US policy is civil and within the range of normal differences within an advisory organization.
The difference between advocating for reform and for revolution is oil and water.
The difference between advocating for reform and for revolution is oil and water.
about as radical as placing faith in Israeli promises.
How the f* more more moderate does US policy have to be towards Israel, given it defies US policy and international law regarding the 42 year expansion of Israeli settlements, eating what’s left(22%) of the pie while pretending it only wants to divide it up fairly? And the taxpayer funds and every unique perk the USA gives to Israel and no other state proceeds non-stop? Does anyone here think Witty is not crazy?
Witty writes pretentious drivel. You’re the crazy person for bothering to answer.
I’m still confused, Witty. Why do you consider the restoration of Palestinians to their own land to be the “death” of Israel?
Do you honestly believe Jews must live separately from the rest of us, and that someone must be stolen from to make that possible?
Doesn’t Judiasm itself posit as prime lever us as distinct from the Other?
Paint it how you many, God made us the real victims of his special duty, or God made them it, it’s clearly a distinction Witty wants to hang on to at any cost; and he’s doing his best to assure the cost goes to the Other.
You got savor the chutzpah of someone who believes that they made a contract with God.
The real chutzpah, I’d say, is someone who claims a contract with God and even goes through the motions of rites and rituals of old and doesn’t even actually believe in God.
“I’m still confused, Witty. Why do you consider the restoration of Palestinians to their own land to be the “death” of Israel?”
It seems even supporters of a 2 state solution seem to believe this. In fact, any deaparture from the status quo is the death of Israel in their mind.
The line that really cracked me up in Haass’ article was:
ROFLMAO!
Thanks for the morning laugh. Do people who write like this realize how utterly idiotic they sound and just hope that no one notices, or are they so swaddled in their own sophistry that they don’t even recognize their own oxymorons?
“are they so swaddled in their own sophistry that they don’t even recognize their own oxymorons?”
I think that’s it. For the most part these people just talk to each other and if they do listen to outsiders, it is with condescension and contempt. You can get a weekly dose of this with the New York Times Sunday Week in Review section–the writers normally talk as though US officials have the best of intentions and are doing their best to raise the rest of the world to our elevated moral standards.
The “situation” is like a guy who steals a pizza from another guy and promises to let him have a slice, all the while eating every slice. When the situation is “ripe” the entire pizza will be digested.
This is what the Zionist program has been all along, and the US has either been complicit or stupid enough to believe Israeli promises.
Actually, potsherd, the gentile congress people and political hack leaders care first for their continued power and perks. It’s been the same througout history wherever elite gentile and disapora jewish leadership meet. You can be sure who will be holding the bag. That would be average gentiles and average jews.
“This is what the Zionist program has been all along, and the US has either been complicit or stupid enough to believe Israeli promises.”
Superbly put. This is what Witty means when he says Obama is getting results.
When the situation is “ripe” the entire pizza will be digested.
Yes, and the Palestinians will be berated for refusing Israel’s “generous offer.”
Richard Haass, like all seemingly thoughtful and influential American Jews, resorts to the last line of defense against any tangible movement forward in the peace process by Israel: “It’s not the right time.” Haass is better than this. I wonder if the essay was actually drafted by Elliot Abrams, who is well known for his mind-bending logic in support of Israeli colonization.
Pingback: the great American awakening is upon us (and the CFR is clueless) · News at PaperBoyo.com
Pingback: the great American awakening is upon us (and the CFR is clueless) capital university
Pingback: Possible raise wouldn't have big effect on Dennison's retirement … | Educational Montana
link to nytimes.com
Fayyad’s Road to Palestine
THIS is the great American wakening.
“THIS is the great American wakening. ”
Yeah, that’s as close as teh Palestiniasn are ever going to gt to their own styate – a promise from Obama that he might tell the Israelis off.
Cohen. What drivel.
His aim, Fayyad told me, was an end to the “security pluralism” that produced a “state of chaos and militias.” It was this chaos, he said, that fueled the violent schism between Fatah in the West Bank and Hamas in Gaza, undermining past Palestinian attempts to build the rudiments of statehood.
‘Security pluralism’. Quite a euphamism.The violent schism between Fatah and Hamas is the result of the unwillingness the US, Israel and Fatah to accept the democratic results of parliamentary elections in 2006.
Fayyad, 58, is a small, precise, U.S.-educated man with a very ordered mind. He builds long, intricate sentences with an academic bent and is given to words like “axiomatic” or “purview.” For almost a decade his home was the World Bank; he’s hardly a political firebrand. Armed struggle has never been his thing. But right now he is a man with a mission.
This is the sort of repulsive, elitist self-love that is the signature of NYT’s journalism. But right now ‘the man who uses words like ‘axiomatic’ is on a mission.’ What is this paragraph supposed to mean in the context of the peace process?
That mission is a two-year program, begun last August, to ready Palestine for statehood by the second half of 2011. It represents a break with past Palestinian failure in that it espouses nonviolence — “an ironclad commitment, not a seasonal thing,” he said — and is focused on prosaic stuff like building institutions (police, schools, a justice system, roads and an economy) rather than exalted proclamations.
Now we are getting somewhere. Another variation on the ‘Israel isn’t quite warmed up yet, and needs a bit more foreplay’ before negotiations can recommence meme.
The program has secured explicit backing from the “Quartet” of the United States, Russia, the European Union and the United Nations, the group that last month called for “a settlement, negotiated between the parties within 24 months, that ends the occupation which began in 1967 and results in the emergence of an independent, democratic and viable Palestinian state living side by side in peace and security with Israel.”
And what of the Israeli obligations? What control does Fayyad have over the continuing expansion of settlements, and the removal of illegal settlements? How is it that Cohen is capable of this species of gooey Israeli-free analysis?
I don’t know, but I’m sure Fayyad is the best hope for Palestine in a very long time. He’s building it rather than ballyhooing it.
There we are. The fuzzy, content-free platitude so dear to commentary here, alliteration and all. ‘Building-Not Ballyhoo’. Fits neatly on a bumper sticker, and is just as profound.
The easy argument against him is that he’s isolated politically — opposed by Hamas in Gaza and regarded with suspicion by the Fatah old guard in the West Bank. The argument for him is that he’s getting things done, improving people’s lives, and Palestinians are tired of going nowhere.
In other words, Fayyad has no popular support even amongst Fatah, but he is a Western-educated quisling whose compliance can be assured, and if not, the US and Israel will pull the rug out from under him.
“Every day we do work consistent with that to create the sense of a state growing. Bad things happen every day but you’re bound to have a lucky bounce and we have to be ready for it.”
Yes, a lucky bounce. Or a bolt of lightening. Or ‘the winning numbers in tonight’s lottery drawing.’ What optimism. Or is something else at work.
Fayyad is tired of the paralyzing claims of the past. “Let us not allow ourselves the luxury of acting as victims forever,” he said.
No, that is a luxury reserved for Israelis.
But what about Hamas, representing some 40 percent of Palestinians, those in Gaza, whose charter calls for Israel’s destruction and whose opposition to Fayyad is fierce? A “major problem,” an “Achilles’ heel,” the prime minister conceded, but insisted that statehood, as it took form, could prove a unifying theme.
Translation: “Who gives a f*ck what Gaza wants? If they come crawling back after suffering through another 18 months of a blockade and shucking off Hamas, all the major decisions will be made by then anyway.”
“Is it possible,” he told me, “given past experience, that we may find ourselves in spring of next year without progress being made?
“It is possible. But I believe, instead of sitting on our hands and waiting to get a perfect alignment of the stars, if we get busy helping ourselves, in realizing our dream of having strong and effective institutions of state, we make this outcome less likely. That’s a good enough bet for me.”
‘Sitting on our hands’ ‘Perfect alignment of the stars’ ‘Realizing our dream’? Christ, this is pretty limp stuff from the literary genius capable (*gush*) of using multi-syllabic words like ‘axiomatic’ and ‘purview’.
If he is making progress, and MANY people agree that he is, then to hinder is effort is something less than support of the Palestinian people.
No one believes he’s making profess but you Witty.
Whatever good Fayyad might be doing, it shows contempt for Palestinians to choose their leaders for them. Not that you care about that.
Yeah, Witty, we get it–your heart yearns for justice for the Palestinian people. Why, you even like crackers and beans.
Abbas appointed Fayyad because Western aid was contingent upon the bureaucrat’s ascension, and the infusion of money is being used to undermine independent Palestinian politics. This tactic has been used a thousand times before, in Haiti and Afghanistan for example. It’s not fricken’ rocket science.
Pingback: » 520 FOX CT, GREAT FALLS Montana Real Estate – MLS 10-786 | Montana Real Estate
Pingback: Bestsellersworld.com » Bug’s Trip to the Store by K.M. Groshek
Pingback: Bestsellersworld.com » Husband and Wife by Leah Stewart