I watched Thursday's State Department show on the peace talks on C-Span the other night and was left with a sense of despair.
There were very few people in the fancy rooms and little sense of excitement. The leaders all seemed motheaten, except for Netanyahu, who always reminds me of a landlord or a mob boss. George Mitchell is the most impressive, but even he looks out of date and a little hard of hearing. (Here's a link to the Clinton, Netanyahu, Abbas table. And here to George Mitchell.)
Clinton seems to know she's screwed. She appealed over the heads of Abbas and Netanyahu to real people over there-- and implicitly to you and me at our dinner tables-- not to desert her.
I want to conclude by just saying a few words directly to the people of the region. Your leaders may be sitting at the negotiating table, but you are the ones who will ultimately decide the future. You hold the future of your families, your communities, your people, this region, in your hands. For the efforts here to succeed, we need your support and your patience. Today, as ever, people have to rally to the cause of peace, and peace needs champions on every street corner and around every kitchen table. I understand very well the disappointments of the past. I share them. But I also know we have it within our power today to move forward into a different kind of future, and we cannot do this without you.
Translation: these guys can't deliver a newspaper.
Abbas has dignity and Netanyahu is frightening. Abbas spoke concretely of the final-status issues, including water, and called on Israel to honor its commitment re settlement building, while Netanyahu spoke emotionally about his only real topic, Israel's security:
In these 12 years, new forces have risen in our region, and we’ve had the rise of Iran and its proxies and the rise of missile warfare. And so a peace agreement must take into account a security arrangement against these real threats that have been directed against my country, threats that have been realized with 12,000 rockets that have been fired on our territory, and terrorist attacks that go unabated.
Translation: We have remote control machine guns in towers set up to kill Gazans, and we will never give up the Jordan Valley.
Then Netanyahu ratcheted it up, with "the blood of innocents":
The last two days have been difficult. They were exceedingly difficult for my people and for me. Blood has been shed, the blood of innocents: four innocent Israelis gunned down brutally, two people wounded, seven new orphans. President Abbas, you condemned this killing. That’s important. No less important is to find the killers, and equally to make sure that we can stop other killers. They seek to kill our people, kill our state, kill our peace. And so achieving security is a must.
Kill kill kill. Or as Sydney Levy of Jewish Voice for Peace says, "while the U.S. government condemned Tuesday's brutal attack, it never condemned even the assault on Gaza almost two years ago, when over 1400 people, mostly civilian, including over 400 children, were killed. This disproportionate response is an indicator of the apparent inability of the U.S. to be an 'honest broker' in these talks." No wonder the rooms seem empty.
It is common to hear the analysis that Israel needs nothing from these talks because the conflict is being managed, while the Palestinians need a deal to get freedom. I don't buy this and neither does George Mitchell. The Palestinians haven't had freedom in their entire history. Most Israelis may be complacent, but the soul of their society is shriveling, and any intelligent Israeli senses the loss of the world's good opinion. Israel is stuck in an earlier era of history and daily losing legitimacy, due to rightwing ethnocentric politicians like Netanyahu.
Mitchell said as much at the end, when he appealed for a sudden shift in the weather:
we believe that there are dynamic changes that [can] occur. There are more obvious difficulties that lie ahead for both sides if they don’t reach agreement that may be even more obvious than they were five or eight or 12 years ago.
You have to remember that these leaders must weigh two things. They must weigh the difficulties they face in getting agreement and they must weigh the difficulties they will face if they don’t get an agreement. And we believe it’s a very powerful argument that if you subject these to careful, reasoned, and rational analysis, to conclude that the latter difficulties, if they don’t get an agreement, will be much greater and have a much more profound impact on their societies than those they face in trying to get an agreement.
Mitchell wasn't talking about the Palestinians there. He was saying that if Israel doesn't make sacrifices, in a hurry, it faces a choice of official apartheid, ethnic cleansing or one-state. He understands that the 62-year-old Jewish state is now at risk; he is despairing too.
Jeffrey Blankfort has suggested a possible motive for these talks is to head off a separate effort by the Europeans.
That sounds reasonable and highly plausible. There certainly have been many indications from the EU that they plan on pushing forward with a proposal that would include Gaza. It seems the US has cut them off at the pass.
If Pres. Obama’s team has this motive, they are fools. If Europeans actually have any backbone to take the initiative, these sham talks will only embolden them.
I think they are fools, anyway, for taking on the Israel Lobby early term and not being willing to go all the way to the mat. I wonder who gave Pres. Obama such incredibly poor advice.
to head off a separate effort by the Europeans
Which Europeans? Merkel? Sarkozy? Cameron? Putin? Berlusconi? There is no European political will to do anything substantive on the subject of I/P, and when it comes to shams, they are perfectly happy to leave those to the only remaining superpower.
I think two European countries have taken steps to support the BDS movement. More flotillas to Gaza could increase the urgency for action.
I don’t live in Europe so I don’t know much about what is happening there. I agree with you that their record is not inspiring. Why does Germany want the U.S. to attack Iran?
I think two European countries have taken steps to support the BDS movement.
Norway and Sweden are marginal in terms of European politics, and even the decisions taken by Norwegian and Swedish state pension funds focus on Israeli companies complicit in settlement-construction and military industries – as opposed to Israeli companies and institutions in general. Furthermore, the actions and positions of European (including Scandinavian) trade unions should not be confused with the actual foreign policies of European governments. The trade unions are still progressive and significant in most European countries, but are mere shadows of their former selves in terms of real power and influence.
There is another thing to consider, and that is that Israel would refuse any mediation likely to exert any meaningful pressure on it. Both Netanyahu and Obama are certainly aware of this and so, would have nothing to fear from any European initiatives. In theory, Europe could exert significant economic pressure on Israel, but is about as likely to do so as the US is to suspend aid.
Shmuel,
You may be right with your pessimism. However, I don’t think this is an all or nothing proposition. The situation right now is fluid and changing and other countries could follow the examples of Sweden and Norway. I believe the governments of Merkel and Sarkozy are in political trouble and they could be replaced by more independent-minded politicians as has happened in Denmark and Britain. I think more pressure will build up on Israel even if a European peace process never materializes.
“Furthermore, the actions and positions of European (including Scandinavian) trade unions should not be confused with the actual foreign policies of European governments.”
At the same time, I think historically, social movements come first and then the politicians and “leaders” are dragged into doing something.
From your mouth to the Commission’s ear, Edward, but from where I sit (Rome), it ain’t gonna happen. I’m not that familiar with Danish politics, but Cameron has certainly been no improvement on I/P (Conservative Friends of Israel and all that), nor do any of the alternatives to Europe’s mildly beleaguered centre-right governments look any more promising than the current set of louts. European trade unions are no longer significant as social movements and to the extent that they have any influence on society, that influence never quite makes it into the halls of power and policy – whether in Bonn, Paris or Brussels.
I don’t know where you live, but I often get the feeling that US progressives idealise Europe. In some ways things here are better, but when it comes to I/P, it’s mostly window-dressing. Europe follows the US lead (on this and so many other issues), pursues the interests of its own moneyed elite (i.e. increasing and preserving wealth and privilege) is in love with its own “cleverness” and “moderation”, and still struggles under mountains of Holocaust guilt. No salvation here, I’m afraid.
I was going to do a silver lining thing, but I’m not in the mood.
Shmuel,
I share your skepticism to some extent. My impression here in the U.S. of Europeans is that they are middle class bourgeoisie types who lack the ability to empathize much with people living under tyrannies. I do think there is a positive aspect to Cameron’s election, because he has been speaking about the need to normalize relations with the U.S. and not slavishly follow U.S. policies as a kind of satellite. This may not lead to much change on the I/P front, however.
“Jeffrey Blankfort has suggested a possible motive for these talks is to head off a separate effort by the Europeans.”
An Australian professor/analyst explained it succinctly the other day. The whole thing is theatre. As Netanyahu would not stop building settlements hopes for peace are null..What’s behind this circus is for Israel to keep getting the $3b aid from the US and for Abbas his $3 million (or whatever)..As simple as that.
It’s a game of “Pin the Blame.” A replay of the game where Arafat got pinned.
“He was saying that if Israel doesn’t make sacrifices, in a hurry, it faces a choice of official apartheid, ethnic cleansing or one-state.”
Hardly a choice. That is the goal of the Israelis (the people, not merely the gov): one ethnically cleansed state with apartheid laws to address the stubborn debris.
I don’t know why this fact gets stated as though it were some kind unintended consequence when it is obviously Israel’s reason for being. That the world isn’t making this point explicit now only shows that The Process is a far more ridiculous sham than the one you describe.
What Israel wants is official acceptance of their apartheid state. That’s what this process is all about – putting the seal of approval on the permament occupation. They want something to hold up whenever Palestinian rights are brought up: “They signed the agreement, the world signed the agreement, no more complaints will be heard.”
Sorry, but I disagree. Falling under the protectorate of the US empire is, in terms of world acceptance, ‘official enough’ –everything else is just ornamentation.
You could argue that Israel is looking ahead, to the time when the US can no longer afford Israel. But that’s why the empire has spent the last 10 years unleashing Chaosistan from the ME up to the borders of China; there’s no better defense for a small, unpopular state like Israel than a global mess.
No, The Process will grind on until there is either no empire left to shield Israel or no remaining potential threat. Oddly, the Palestinians will get a little breathing room until the US as attack dog has exhausted itself for its Israeli master.
What you say would be true whether or not any “peace” negotiations were held. It doesn’t explain why BYahoo is so eager for this agreement.
That’s not correct. The Israelis need the peace process, not peace. The Process, and the laughable, Python-esque state of war it implies exists between the Palestinians and Israelis, provides cover for untold sums of US aid, financial and diplomatic, and casts the US in the role of Israeli watchdog. Take that away and it’s impossible to justify US support.
There was no ongoing process during the last 2 years, and I didn’t notice the taps shutting off.
Both you guys can be and are right:
In the short term, especially while now that the U.S. is deep in the Big Muddy over there directly, the U.S. needs a peace process and hopefully a deal much moreso than Israel. Witness even Biden saying that what goes on in the West Bank and J’slem impacts our troops. So while damn near all recent U.S. Presidents urged and even sponsored peace talks so as to try to take as much edge off arab/muslim anti-Americanism, it’s esp. acute now.
In the longer term though even the the Likudniks know and want a deal, desperately. In the short term, in accord with my first paragraph, you’ll note that Bibi basically had to be hauled to these talks, first being forced to say the term “two-states”, then throwing up precondition after pre-condition.
But, as is also shown by Bibi’s far-more voluntary and repeated statements demanding that the P’s recognize Israel as “a jewish state,” even he knows that without *something* like a piece of paper singed by the P’s, Israel is never going to be able to undertake the measures necessary to ensure and maintain a jewish-dominated state and get the U.S. to stand by it (much less fund it).
Ergo, what he desperately wants is some piece of paper with the P’s—damn near any piece because it can then be spun any which way but esp. saying anything about Israel’s “jewish nature,”—and that’s a big big part of the end ballgame for him. Right now, a deal isn’t so important to him because there’s more land to get, and maybe a more supine Palestinian authority to put in power which will sign a better piece of paper later. But for Bibi, Israel damn sure wants and needs that piece of paper in the future for when the phrase “ethnic cleansing” gains more ground, because not all that long into the future Israel isn’t just going to have to do something about the arabs in its occupied territories, but its arabs in Israel proper too.
Sure he knows there will be screaming then. But he also knows that with “a deal” Western politicians will seize on that piece of paper to say “well we’re sick of the I/P issue and after all, the Palestinians made a deal….”
Really? That’s kind of a disappointment. I read your posts, you know better than that . . .
“On January 22, 2009, President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton appointed Mitchell as the administration’s Special Envoy to the Arab-Israeli peace process, formally known as the “Special Envoy for Middle East Peace”.[23] The appointment was seen as an indication of the new Obama administration’s increased focus on the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. The choice of Mitchell allowed Obama to demonstrate the seriousness and sincerity of his intentions regarding the peace process, without forcing him to immediately embark on a specific initiative before conditions were yet ripe. An analyst at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars said Mitchell’s appointment “says to the world, ‘I care about this issue; be patient with me.’”[23] Abraham Foxman, the National Director of the Anti-Defamation League, has stated that, “Sen. Mitchell is fair. He’s been meticulously even-handed.”[24]”
link to en.wikipedia.org
Process. Like a Cuisinart.
Sounds right. Netanyahu needs to keep US rolling along towards
Israel’s planned attack on Iran, which assumes US backing; this needs the prop of on-going peace process/piece of paper to spin (look what the Zionists like Netanayahu’s father’s generation did with the Balfour Declaration which merely unilaterally promised
a homeland IN the Mandate and on condition the natives didn’t lose any rights there) in light of US being already involved in two wars in the Middle East. And the 30 billion guarantee over the next 10 years is also already spent in the plan to assure Israel’s continued and expanded hegemony in the region. Meanwhile too, Netanyahu has a lot of guys kissing up to the Chinese to follow in place of England, France, and USA lights dimming in the new global economy grid.
saying anything about Israel’s “jewish nature,”…….. for Bibi, Israel damn sure wants and needs that piece of paper in the future for when the phrase “ethnic cleansing” gains more ground, because not all that long into the future Israel isn’t just going to have to do something about the arabs in its occupied territories, but its arabs in Israel proper too.
stop this train i wanna get off… honestly won’t anyone stop this train? hold on palestine….hold on.. i love you and i’m not alone.
nope, annie. No one will stop it. They haven’t done it yet and they won’t do it now.
In response to my post slowereastside wrote:
“Really? That’s kind of a disappointment….”
Well, given I disappoint myself so frequently all’s I can say is sorry, but I guess I still don’t see where what you wrote here about Mitchell helps your argument, or conflicts with my interpretation of the situation—esp. whereas in fact I think it strengthens it.
So as to be specific and as to the former, I don’t see how—vis a vis your what I understand is your main contention that Israel neither wants nor needs any final piece of paper deal—Mitchell’s appointment is evidence either for or against same.
And this seems true even recognizing the smart nuance you have in your position conceding that Israel can only *seem* willing to engage in any process now so as to assuage the U.S.
Secondly then it seems to me that what you reproduced about what Mitchell’s appointment means simply buttresses my contention that the U.S./Obama really do want some process going on now and progress so as to take as much edge as possible off arab/moslem hostility to the U.S. esp. when we’ve now got guys in the field and would love some lessened hostilities so as to be able to claim victory and withdraw them.
In sum, the U.S. is pushing talks and progress trying to “appease” the arab/moslem states as much as possible, and Israel is willing to show up at the process and say it wants progress to try to appease the U.S. as much as possible, but also because in the long run it’s going to want some piece of paper (which will no doubt have to be produced through some process or other) to secure itself the state it wants.
Stated again, my take anyway. Perhaps however I’ve misunderstood yours.
Sorry Sin, wasn’t replying to you but to potsherd who said that there was no process for the last 2 years. My point was to show that Mitchell spent 2009 having his chain jerked in the name of The Process.
From Alexander Cockburn including Blankfort quote:
. . .
For his part, Abbas is no longer president of the Palestinian Authority, which has no democratic mandate among the vast majority of Palestinians. They voted for Hamas and regard Abbas as a quisling, who exists solely by the favor of US money, Pentagon security advisors and Israeli support. Hamas expressed its opinion of the meeting by killing four Israeli settlers. (Half a million illegal Jewish settlers have been the most conspicuous consequence of the “peace process.”)
Tactically, Netanyahu has an easy hand to play. He can proclaim Israel’s hopes for peace, yet warn that Israel’s security interests are paramount. He can lecture Obama on Israel’s primal fears of obliteration, yet not be too reticent in indicating that Israel can obliterate its enemies and is quite prepared to do so. Israel’s nuclear arsenal hover spectrally over the proceedings.
When the moratorium expires in three weeks he will allow settlements to go forward, which in turn will prompt Abbas to threaten to act upon his commitment to abandon the talks if this occurs, a scheduled duty, as Jeffrey Blankfort predicted here on our site last week. Israel will continue its rightward lunge, with dissent increasingly purged in an increasingly vicious political environment. The Obama Plan will join all the other diplomatic ruins in the desert of dry bones — the most conspicuous feature of all maps attempting to depict the search for a “just solution” in the Middle East.
Why is Obama even making the effort? As Blankfort says,
“Every US president since Nixon has made an effort to end Israel’s occupation for US strategic reasons, and every one of them has run up against the Lobby and, in the end, proved unable or unwilling to spend the political capital that would be required to enforce their will on Israel. In every instance Congress has stood on Israel’s side and never more so than during the Obama administration. The three presidents that did challenge Israel, Ford, Carter, and Bush Sr., were eventually forced to retreat and were turned out at the polls.”
Now why, given this history, did Obama try his hand? Blankfort suspects that there was pressure from the US’s European allies to do so because
“the continuance of the I-P conflict jeopardizes their security and society far more than it does that of the US and there have long been calls for the EU to activate its own ‘peace initiative’ and it would be likely to do so if the US withdrew from the field. This is the last thing that either Israel or the Lobby wants so that is why we see the Lobby elements in every administration, currently Ross, Emanuel, et al, making the push for Obama’s involvement even though they know it is bound to fail.”
. . .
link to counterpunch.com
Emphasis added throughout this post.
.
Jeremy Scahill:
(1)
See also:
(2)
#1 Has already been in place for some time now.
#2 Is pending US government approval.
thank avi. bookmarked. i’ll start spreading it around.
Triple Canopy seems the ideal anti-Muslim force. If the US wants to prove it is in a war against the Muslim religion, hiring Triple Canopy is the way to go.
‘QUESTION: Ron Kampeas from JTA [Jewish Telegraphic Agency]. It appears from this morning that obviously there weren’t any substantive concessions. There were – there have been rhetorical concessions. President Abbas talked about security, which is something that Netanyahu has wanted him to talk about, and Netanyahu yesterday at the dinner talked about recognizing the Palestinian claim that they’re – that the Palestinians live there.‘
Mwa ha ha ha — here’s a basis for agreement: if Palestinians will concede Israel’s ‘right to exist,’ Israel in turn will admit that Palestinians exist (to the horror of masada2000). Or at least the JTA will. Everybody happy!
No one likes me saying this but some kind of “force’ has to be applied to Israel to ever reach a settlement of I/P. It can be financial or military force.
Financial force would be my first choice.
Consider this; Israel’s GDP is only 200 billion.
I doubt most, even on here know the full extent of US propping up of Israel.
3 billion a year in regular aid, another 3.75 billion in loan guarantees every year, another billion for 6 agencies that fund ‘joint’ projects in Israel for hi tech, energy, etc., 7 billion in Israeli tariff free exports to the US every year, half a billion in US pension fund investments in Israeli bonds every year, 500 million in tax deductible donations to Israel every year, emergency aid for their 1973 economic emergency, 10 million to resettle Russian Jews, restocking of US military supplies in Israel that are used by the IDF in their various attacks with Gaza and Lebanon, below cost jet fuel shipments to Israel every year, millions for US missile shield defense for Israel,…I could go on and on but it would take hours.
You even have to go into the pork ear marks in congress to keep up with the steady flow of US taxpayer money to Israel like this year’s Ackerman ear mark of 10 million for a hospital in Israel. ..in fact out of all 30 ear marks of Ackerman , all of them except five were for Jewish owned companies and companies doing business with Israel. You would have to work every day, all day just to keep tabs on the money that is funneled out of the US to Israel on a daily basis.
And this is not even considering the reparations aid that comes from Germany, the hundreds of lawsuits and payoffs from banks and corporations for the WWII claims that go to Israel to be disbursed.
Also consider that 28% of the Israeli public doesn’t work, the largest portion being the hasidic jews because they are supported by the State and not required to work or serve in the IDF.
Shut off the money. It’s our money and I say shut the pipeline down for our own sake if not for Israel’s.
This would bring their delusion of Greater Israel in Palestine to a screeching halt. Those who like to pretend that “Israel can’t be told”
what to do are dreaming….all any US president has to do is ‘whisper’ in someone’s ear that the US is no longer supporting Israel and it is over for Israel if they don’t change their ways.
Exactly so.
Cutting off or substantially reducing aid to Israel would give the numerous billionaires and near-billionaires who are the real power centers of the Israel lobby a chance to demonstrate how sincere is their Zionism.
To be blunt these people have sufficient resources to offset any reductions of US aid. But would they do so? I suspect many of them would greatly tone down their dual loyalist war mongering if they had to pay for much it out of their own pocket rather than burden the hapless US taxpayer as they have been doing for generations.
Cutting out the middlemen, much more efficient.
Actually if every jewish millionaire or billionaire gave every cent he had to Israel it still wouldn’t match one year’s worth of overall US taxpayer aid to Israel.
Besides the things I listed are hundreds of other giveaways like surplus military equipment and etc…then there is the strong arming the US does on other countries to make them trade with Israel. One of the most recent ones was the US refusing to accept Egyptian cotton goods for import to the US and changing their free trades zones unless they included at least 18% Israeli goods…like ribibons and buttons…in their Egyptian producted goods…a move which cost Egyptians jobs.
No, not every single jew or zionist in the US or elsewhere combined could provide Israel the support necessary to keep it going. To say nothing of the US UN vetos without which Israel would already be long gone.
Israel has been the largest, longest running con game in the universe.
If we dumped Israel a lot of US pension funds would lose a considerable amount becuase Israel would not be able to meet it’s obligations, the whole ponzi scheme would go down…but…because the US also guarentees the Israeli bonds they are put into the US would have to make good on those…which in the long run would be a drop in the bucket compared to continuing to support Israel.
Like a banker who has pumped more and more money into a bad loan trying to save the borrowers project and his bad loan money, eventually he has to cut his loses and write it off or let the bank go bust with the borrower.
The US people will always pay the bills. Just as Wall Street counts on it and has been bailed out, so Israel has the same mentality and calculation. The record shows they are the realists, not the idealists.
Even if a tad of reform comes, there’s always a workaround built in; most Israelis were not upset by OP Cast Lead at all, and they still are not upset and have voted by the ballot and with their feet for expansive settlements. Golda Meir sided with those who felt the land captured by the Israelis during the ’67 War should be settled by Israelis and simultateously retained the support of those who favored giving up that land in exchange for peace. Nothing substantial in Israel’s mentality has changed since then. Radicals? Moderates? That template doesn’t work significantly when it comes to most Israelis. What works is the firm deep core faith that the goyhim sheeple will always be out for the next pogrom. Meanwhile, those sheeple are to be used in history’s in-between times.
Yep. Tell it to our fellow Americans; Fox News on now is telling us about the most recent poll taken regarding the Bush Jr regime’s decision to attack Iran–Despite the plethora of facts revealing the fraudulent inducement, two-thirds of Americans say attacking Sadam and pulling his statue down was the right thing to do; the other side of course said it was all BS. This doesn’t give me confidence Netanyahu won’t get his way and Iran will be attacked with our rescue of Israel automatic. At this point, that’s all that really creepy guy cares about.
>> Kill kill kill. Or as Sydney Levy … says, “while the U.S. government condemned Tuesday’s brutal attack, it never condemned even the assault on Gaza almost two years ago, when over 1400 people, mostly civilian, including over 400 children, were killed. This disproportionate response is an indicator of the apparent inability of the U.S. to be an ‘honest broker’ in these talks.”
Israel and the U.S. are hypocrite nations. They profess peace, justice, tolerance and respect for democracy while they practise neither. Israel is not a “partner” in the current negotiations – it is the dictator. And the U.S. – to anyone who isn’t blind or stupid – is a completely biased mediator.
“Translation: these guys can’t deliver a newspaper. ”
“Translation: We have remote control machine guns in towers set up to kill Gazans, and we will never give up the Jordan Valley. ”
My translation, Phil must live his moral responsibility of indefatigable motivation for peace.
Expressions of cynicism this early are not accurately an observation, but a propagation.
It is possible that no consentable product will emerge from the next year. It is NOT a reality.
You did the backdrop of Israeli and Palestinian flags, Palestinian flags, present. Same height, same size.
Not nothing.
Some topical tension. Respect and intention for actual peace will carry the day.
“You did the backdrop of Israeli and Palestinian flags, Palestinian flags, present. Same height, same size.”
Yes Witty, flags and green yarn, that’s what it’s all about right? Never mind that settlement expansion is unstopable with 67% of Israelis suporting it, and that Netenyahu had rejected the 1967 borders.
Never mind the Witty himself has stated elsewhere, in so many words, “Palestine never existed.” Like a chameleon, his rhetoric changes color to suit his particular mode of intellectual deception at any given time.
>> My translation, Phil must live his moral responsibility of indefatigable motivation for peace.
>> Expressions of cynicism this early are not accurately an observation, but a propagation.
You do realize that “expressions of “indefatigable motivation for peace” are not accurately an observation either, but merely a propagation, yes? For someone interested in facts, it’s odd that you would suggest Mr. Weiss act as a cheerleader rather than as an impartial observer.
The fatigue is the observation.
In your case, it’s lazyness.
The observation is fatigued.
Stop trying to sound inscrutable. It makes you out to be a snake oil salesman.
No. The reason for the fatigue is the observation: Obama has already green-lighted Zionist pleasure: link to redress.cc
>> The fatigue is the observation.
The observation of fatigue is cynical, making it not an observation but a propagation.
Thats cute Eljay. You are “clever”.
You don’t get my point?
That the radical left has given up on its progressive values of urging self-determination of peoples’, instead adopting a negativist vengeful interpretation of “justice”.
>> Thats cute Eljay. You are “clever”.
“Cute” is the new buzzword.
>> You don’t get my point?
If you had made your point in real words the first time around, I might have understood it.
>> That the radical left has given up on its progressive values of urging self-determination of peoples’, instead adopting a negativist vengeful interpretation of “justice”.
To expect a person or nation to be held accountable for crimes committed is far from “a negativist vengeful interpretation of ‘justice’”. Your biased mind permits you to overlook that fact when Israel is the nation to be held accountable.
>> eljay: If you had made your point in real words the first time around, I might have understood it.
Correction/clarification: Your initial point was clear:
>> RW: … Phil must live his moral responsibility of indefatigable motivation for peace. Expressions of cynicism this early are not accurately an observation, but a propagation.
Translation: Phil should tirelessly work for peace. Expressing cynicism is a propagation of failure in the “peace process” and not an observation of the reality of said process.
My comment: For someone interested in facts, it’s odd that you would suggest Mr. Weiss act as a cheerleader rather than as an impartial observer.
To re-paraphrase: You don’t want cynicism, you want cheerleading.
You followed up with the meaningless:
>> RW: The fatigue is the observation.
Which you then twisted into a brand new point:
>> RW: The radical left has given up on its progressive values of urging self-determination of peoples’, instead adopting a negativist vengeful interpretation of “justice”.
This has nothing to do with your initial point. Or, if it does, the meaning is buried deep beneath a layer of your pseudo-intellectualism.
When I initally joined this site, I spoke out against the harsh comments that were levelled against you. Over the course of the intervening months, I have come to appreciate why people have very little to no patience for you. Not only are you dishonest about your motives, you are hypocritical in your positions, deluded about your “humanism”, pretentious in your delivery and seemingly oblivious to your incredibly obvious bias.
“It is possible that no consentable product will emerge from the next year. It is NOT a reality.”
You talk such rubbish Witty.
Nentyahu delacred that he would reject any dicsussion about 1967 boders. The talks were dead before they even started.
So not only is expressions of cynicism this early are not accurately an observation, is a certainty.
Netanyahu declared that he regarded the 67 borders as not the basis of the agreement from Israel’s perspective.
That does not preclude an equal territorial result, nor does it preclude that the borders of Palestine/Israel not be a confidently viable Palestinian statement.
He declared in effect, “we are entering a design process to meet clearly articulated needs, in which the objective conditions have changed from the last time we met”.
A realistic view.
I don’t get it, Witty. The Israelis can rape, murder and steal as much as they like and you always consider the option that some fraction of that crime spree can be legitimized by turning stolen Palestinian land over to Israeli control. Meanwhile, if the Palestinians do so much as toss a firecracker or a stone, that “proves” to you that they don’t even deserve a state!
That’s “realism” to you?
“Netanyahu declared that he regarded the 67 borders as not the basis of the agreement from Israel’s perspective”
That perspective being that the West Bank belongs to Israel.
“He declared in effect, “we are entering a design process to meet clearly articulated needs, in which the objective conditions have changed from the last time we met”.”
Yes, the facts on the ground have changed and there is less land for the Palestinians.
So yes, it is a realistic point of view – a one state point of view.
“He declared in effect, “we are entering a design process to meet clearly articulated needs, in which the objective conditions have changed from the last time we met”.
A realistic view.”
Witty’s way of supporting facts on the ground. The objective conditions have changed because Israel keeps building more settlements. And as Chaos said, some fraction of the crime spree can be legitimized by returning part of the stolen property.
Translation: these guys can’t deliver a newspaper.
perfect
That the dissolution of the Jewish state (not its people) is imminent should be cause for celebration, not despair. Of the other possibilities that author Weiss suggests, neither an even more severe system of apartheid nor ethnic cleansing can prevent the truth from getting out, that the Palestinian’s the victim, the settler’s (every Jewish Israeli*) the victimizer. Which leaves the one state solution as the only viable alternative. What’ll it take? Only that Jewish victimizer and victimized Palestinian sit down together for the purpose of working things out based upon one equals one with liberty and justice for all.
RE: “I watched Thursday’s State Department show on the peace talks on C-Span the other night and was left with a sense of despair.” – Weiss
SOME ENCOURAGEMENT: Skeptics Could Doom Mideast Peace Talks to Fail ~ By Ira Chernus, Common Dreams, 09/03/10
ENTIRE ARTICLE – link to commondreams.org
*except, that is, for settlers who are part of the resistance – as in apartheid South Africa where many whites sided with African freedom-fighters.
One of the absent Quartet members — the prominent British war criminal Tony BLiar, now posing as an auteur — faced a citizens arrest attempt by Kate Sullivan of the Irish Palestine Solidarity Movement.
link to uk.news.yahoo.com
A fine movie by Roman Polanski, The Ghost Writer, savages Blair as a US poodle. Which suggests that the real war criminals live here.
link to guardian.co.uk
The subject matter in The Ghost Writer is certainly reminiscent of Blair’s relationship with the Bush administration.
Whether the story is a work of fiction or not, it certainly raises some very interesting questions concerning that period and US/UK relations.
As a cinematic work of art I enjoyed the movie and found it to be well-directed and scripted. It’s a good thriller.
Ugh Jim, that creep’s been turned into a Stepford Zionist! Aside from being so in love with himself (and money, now he’s out of office) he’s parrotting all the anti-Iran stuff, fearmongering about the terrible dangers the West faces from “radical Islam” and so on and sickeningly on!
Little bit of a riot in Ireland to welcome the scoundrel today.
“Abbas has dignity”
And nothing else.
Questionable how applicable we’d want to make obscure Star Trek references to this discussion, but:
I would make the counter-argument that, after being muscled by Obama into trying to help bury the Goldstone report, Abbas doesn’t even have that.
Yep, and Mitchell alone “looks impressive.” Given his experience, that’s what he sees as his job it seems. He must be looking at how many more times he can pack up overnight and hit the road, aging, leaving his family once again as his bones creak more every day. He’s like Liz Taylor who insisted on powdering her nose and putting on lipstick as she was wheeled to the hospital so they could extract her pain pill congestion from her lungs. Blair is Eddie Fisher.
I share much of the skepticism voiced here on the chances that any good will come out of these talks. There is no evidence that the WB settlement movement can be reversed. The political support for keeping the WB by the Israeli people is over-whelming. Therefore, the big question is: Why has Obama risked so much on these latest talks with so little chance of success?
It makes sense for Israel to pursue these talks, because as has been pointed out over and over again, the peace process gives Israel the cover to expand its hold on the WB. Peace process yes, peace no. Blankfort’s suggestion is that these talks will preempt any efforts by the EU to solve the problem makes some sense, at least from Israel’s perspective but it does not explain why Obama is willing to risk so much for what is only a tactical delaying tactic for Israel’s sake. I really have no answer to this question.
Here is a suggestion. Certainly, people in Obama’s circle of advisors are as much aware of this problem as we are. Is it possible that they might have access to information that we do not have? Could it be that some level of sanity has broken out among the zionist billionare club and AIPAC and they are starting to realize that successful annexation of the WB could completely undermine the whole Israel as a Jewish state concept? That it has finally occurred to them that ethnically cleansing the WB of its non-Jews might not work? If the answer to these questions is yes, then maybe there is a chance that the Zionists are prepared to provide a truly viable Palestinian state on the WB.
I realize these speculations are pretty extreme, but I remain puzzled by what Obama is doing otherwize.
There will be no attack on Iran as long as the Israelis understand that the price would involve a big loss (thousands) of Jewish lives. Iran’s ability to hit back effectively is the ONLY thing preventing a catastrophic regional conflagration IMHO.
Which is why Israel is so hysterical that Iran has the ability to hit back and might develop the ability to hit back even harder.
The “Iran threat” isn’t the possibility of Iranian aggression, it’s the possibility that Iran could defend itself.
An EU official is being branded an anti-Semite by the European Jewish Congress for expressing skepticism about the peace talks, says the Telegraph:
link to tinyurl.com
The libel of Jewish power? Actually Jeffrey Goldberg wrote a book with that exact title — Jewish Power. So it’s only a libel if gentiles say it? Maybe somebody should codify these byzantine unwritten rules.
Meanwhile, Moshe Kantor demonstrates the accuracy of de Gucht’s assertion about the impossibility of rational discussion. Kantor can’t dispute the claim, since he personifies it.
People have been upset at De Gucht before for his ‘undiplomatic statements’, but I have difficulty seeing him as someone who doesn’t get diplomacy. I’d say he sometimes decides the time is ripe for saying things that should be made clear when others think the time is not ripe.
There was another antisemitism alert a week earlier when a major banker(Thilo Sarrazin – funny name) said racist things about muslims, and he also said ‘all Jews share a certain gene’. It was hard to make out in the noise what jewish organisations protested against that, since it’s a favorite zionist theme.
This statement by Sen. Mitchell really struck me. After one year, team Obama hopes to have in hand,
How many years do you suppose one would need after the framework agreement, if one could be reached, to get to a peace treaty and then its implementation.
I am not holding my breath.