Breaking Analysis On A Possible Obama Peace Plan

-

obama.netanyahu.jpg
(Photo Credit: Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)
New America Foundation/Middle East Task Force Director and Middle East Channel Editor Daniel Levy provides an excellent “breaking analysis” of David Igantius’ and Helene Cooper’s reports yesterday that the Obama administration is considering proposing a comprehensive peace plan for Israel and Palestine.
Levy’s analysis is too nuanced to allow me to do it justice by excerpting it, but I will highlight one counter-intuitive point that Levy has been making for awhile: that the settlement fracas has actually pushed Benjamin Netanyahu into an uncomfortable position.

It is Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu who has, inadvertently, confronted the administration with Kurtzer’s truisms and helped create a learning curve of what one might call “policy review by painful experience.” Netanyahu helped provide a moment of clarity, demonstrating that confidence cannot be built incrementally, that settlements will not be frozen, and that East Jerusalem cannot be ignored. If one is to ascribe strategic foresight to the Obama administration (and that may be merited), then what they have done is to walk the Israeli prime minister down a corridor in which, in part due to his own actions, the exit routes are being sealed and a moment of real choice is approaching.
As I argued here back in September, the Obama settlement-freeze strategy took Netanyahu out of his comfort zone (of interim measures and economic peace). In rejecting the freeze, Netanyahu found himself not only facing but embracing the thing he most abhors — endgame peace negotiations. The latest round has taken this a step further, now making a discussion of Jerusalem inescapable. The more Netanyahu demands recognition of Israeli neighborhoods in East Jerusalem, the more obvious and unavoidable the flip side becomes — namely, that Palestinian East Jerusalem and Palestinian neighborhoods will need to be recognized as part of the Palestinian capital and state. He continues to be walked down that corridor.

Levy’s article can be read here.
— Ben Katcher

Comments

148 comments on “Breaking Analysis On A Possible Obama Peace Plan

  1. nadine says:

    questions, you have to remember that the Palestinians have never had control over who rules them. Arafat was appointed by the Arab League. Today Fatah and Hamas get funding by Iran, as well as Europe and the UN who don’t care how radical they are. They have a political culture where radicals declare moderates “collaborators” and kill them without trial. The Palesitinians’ leaders have traditionally been more interested in perpetuating misery as a weapon of war than in improving conditions.
    Since Oslo, a generation has been raised with non-stop incitement; PA TV and schools pump out the message that Israel is illegitimate, temporary, and is a crime every minute it exists because the Jews are European thieves with no connection to Palestine, which, they claim, has been an Arab country since forever.
    About the tea parties: I do absolutely deny that their message is racist at all. The tea parties are about fiscal conservatism. Can I say that not one of the million people who have come to a tea party rally is a racist? No, I can’t say that.
    But I have no patience with the idea that it is racist to criticize Obama the same way Bush was criticized every day, just because Obama is black. Obama is President; Presidents get criticized; Bush got an unprecedented amount of abuse, 10 times anything Obama has gotten. They made a movie fantasizing about assassinating Bush, for crying out loud. If it wasn’t racist for Bush it’s not racist for Obama.
    Also, you must remember how differently the media covers the tea parties from the anti-Iraq War protests. In the anti-war protests, there were usually some pretty wild characters on the speaker’s platform, so CNN would interview some earnest young couple with a baby in the crowd, who desired nothing but world peace.
    In the tea parties, the speakers tend to be ordinary small business owners, so CNN trolls around for the nuttiest guy, the one guy who has painted an Obama=Hitler sign and tries to provoke him into screaming. Side note on watching protests: check whether signs are hand made or pre-printed. If it’s really grass roots, most signs will be hand made. They are at tea parties.

    Reply

  2. Carroll says:

    Just for nadine…
    How to Market Gaza as an Israeli success story: The complete guide
    The following guide was inspired by a report by the Government of Israel, summarizing Israel

    Reply

  3. questions says:

    Oh, and interestingly, Rian Fike from kos is reporting that the Tea Party is siding with the teachers in FLA! Wow, they might go with Crist if he vetoes the bill to gut the unions — it’s a massive state intervention into local self-government. (And a massive giveaway to educational testing companies, and a massive busting of a really strong union.) Florida politics is maybe going to be interesting!

    Reply

  4. questions says:

    Paul, it depends on the kind of pressure. And what I really support is something that would be EFFECTIVE. Pressure that makes some group of US citizens feel like they are DOING something (just like the denunciation of Kremer thing a few weeks ago here) isn’t really doing anything at all.
    I really think knee jerk action for action’s sake is foolish and counterproductive.
    As a quick analogue, since it’s just occurred to me, homelessness is a horrible and huge problem in the US, especially in northern cities in the winter. People freeze to death in the streets, the shelter system is often unsafe, many of the homeless here are actually veterans and they are suffering enormously.
    The problem is real and something must be done.
    IF we take the kneejerk first notion and act on it — just provide people comfortable enough SROs or apartments, what ends up happening in the real world is that those who are marginally housed (on couches, spare rooms, or friends’ places) give up their marginal housing so that they can get permanent housing through the housing program. The program then ends up overwhelmed and can’t house many who deserve housing.
    So what do you do when the direct and obvious and easy thing to do turns out, counterintuitively, to be not merely ineffective, but actually counterproductive? If you house people, you cause homelessness, the very thing you were trying to prevent.
    I have no problem thinking through the possibility of counterproductive outcomes of goodhearted policies. It doesn’t seem odd, inexplicable, or outright false. There are so many instances of compensatory behavior for safety devices, idiotic and lousy outcomes for seemingly good policies, loss of interest after half-hearted measures are put into place to make me question all sorts of policy possibilities.
    Even from the NYT article I pasted above — those who protested the PA by voting for Hamas got what they voted for, but not necessarily what they wished for.
    My goal for the I/P situation is a sustainable, workable, manageable, actual end to the killing and imposition of suffering. Emphasis on “sustainable” which means it’s got to be seen as legitimate by all parties, “workable” which means that it can’t be a pie-in-the-sky fantasy, “manageable” which is probably redundant, and “actual” which means that I want something that squares with reality.
    All the armchair POA-ing and Carrolling isn’t going to get peace that conforms to these criteria. At least, in my opinion.
    You definitely have a repeated concern with my backing off DENUNCIATION and simplified tales of human behavior. Well, denunciation is armchair life at its best, and human behavior isn’t simple. So simplified characterizations of who’s good and who’s bad, easy solutions like the boycott/sanction movement are not going to create the kind of attitudinal changes that will lead to real getting along.

    Reply

  5. questions says:

    Most likely, since it’s from the NYT, this is the article I was thinking of:
    “Many of the professionals here reject Hamas

    Reply

  6. questions says:

    POA, I read some article that interviewed some number of Gazans who said that they voted for Hamas to protest corruption, not because they wanted Hamas in power. I will see if I can find a link….
    Is it THE most common response to Hamas? I don’t know, but I’m at least not making this up.

    Reply

  7. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “I think that the regret over having voted for Hamas expressed by many Gazans …..”
    Care to buttress that assertion with some sourcing? I doubt it.
    Nadine already shovels enough shit in here for both of you, there’s no need for you to add to the pile.

    Reply

  8. Paul Norheim says:

    DELEGITIMIZATION – THE NEW BUZZWORD…
    More from Haaretz, in extenso – due to the virus issue, and
    because this is quite interesting stuff that mirrors discussions
    on the threads here at TWN:
    “Last update – 18:53 13/04/2010
    Want to delegitimize Israel? Be careful who you mess with
    By Nathan Guttman, The Forward
    Delegitimization – it’s the new buzzword in the world of pro-
    Israel activism.
    The term, used to describe a broad spectrum of anti-Israel
    protests, has become a major rallying point for the American
    Jewish community and is the up-and-coming cause for Jewish
    organizations.
    In particular, supporters of this emerging advocacy effort point
    to the campaign to boycott, divest from and sanction – BDS –
    Israel as a primary marker distinguishing “delegitimizers” from
    genuine critics. It’s a campaign that has gained traction on the
    left in recent years. And in the past few months, pro-Israel
    advocates have begun to mobilize against what they perceive to
    be efforts to delegitimize Israel as a Jewish state, whether via
    BDS or other means.
    “The delegitimization and BDS movement is nationally
    coordinated, and it requires a national response,” said William
    Daroff, the Jewish Federations of North America’s vice president
    for public policy. “We need to move forward as a community to
    counter this cancerous growth.”
    But while supporters of Israel see the fight against
    delegitimization of the Jewish state as a new frontier in the pro-
    Israel battle, critics believe that the term is used mostly to
    discredit opposition to Israeli policies.
    “To be frank, the ‘de-legitimization’ issue is a fraud,” historian
    Tony Judt, director of New York University’s Remarque Institute,
    wrote in an e-mail to the Forward. Judt, a harsh critic of Israel,
    said: “I know no one in the professional world of political
    commentary, however angry about Israel’s behavior, who thinks
    that the country has no right to exist… ‘De-legitimization’ is
    just another way to invoke antisemitism as a silencer, but
    sounds better because [it’s] less exploitative of emotional pain.?
    Judt has written that he believes Israel’s settlement policies have
    made a binational one-state outcome to the Israel-Palestinian
    conflict all but inevitable – a stand that has led Israel advocates
    to label Judt himself a delegitimizer.
    In the past year, JFNA and the Jewish Council for Public Affairs
    adopted resolutions calling for communitywide action against
    delegitimization. And the American Israel Public Affairs
    Committee?s executive director, Howard Kohr, outlined a plan
    to fight Israel’s delegitimization by demanding the state?s
    admission into international bodies, such as the Organisation
    for Economic Co-operation and Development.
    A March 10 meeting in New York marked the most significant
    attempt yet to formulate a communitywide response to this
    perception of delegitimization. Israeli officials and participants
    from major Jewish organizations and federations discussed the
    possibility of creating and funding a mechanism to track and
    respond to what they see as delegitimization efforts.
    As a first order of business, participants raised the need to
    educate the Jewish community about the issue.
    “Members of our community need to be knowledgeable and
    need to be able to answer to these allegations,” said Martin
    Raffel, JCPA’s senior vice president. “There is no one-size-fits-
    all solution. We will have to have tailored responses for each
    constituency.”
    But seeking a response to delegitimization requires a clear
    definition of the problem. An in-depth study released in March
    by the Reut Institute, a Tel Aviv-based think tank, identifies
    delegitimization as an organized movement and goes to great
    lengths to define the elusive term in a way that draws a line
    between what authors of the 92-page report see as legitimate
    criticism of Israel and forms of protest that fall under the
    delegitimization category.
    “We are asking people to go into the nuances. We need to keep
    in mind that not everyone is an Israel hater, but not everything
    is Israel’s fault,” said Gidi Grinstein, Reut’s founder and
    president.
    The think tank’s paper defines delegitimization as criticism that
    “exhibits blatant double standards, singles out Israel, denies its
    right to exist as the embodiment of the self-determination right
    of the Jewish people, or demonizes the state.”
    But, as Grinstein pointed out, identifying Israel’s delegitimizers
    can be tricky, since most do not see themselves as denying
    Israel?s right to exist.
    “The effectiveness of Israel’s de-legitimizers, who represent a
    relatively marginal political and societal force in Europe and
    North America, stems from their ability to engage and mobilize
    others by blurring the lines with Israel?s critics,” the Reut paper
    states.
    Would the students who disrupted the February 9 speech of
    Israeli ambassador Michael Oren at University of California,
    Irvine be delegitimizers? For most activists in the Jewish
    community, the answer is clear.
    “They definitely are,” said Michael Kotzin, executive vice
    president of Chicago’s Jewish federation. “Instead of asking
    [Oren] about Israel?s policy, they are denying him the right to
    speak.”
    Kotzin said that many of those pursuing the delegitimization
    agenda are naive and are exploited by activists who deny
    Israel’s right to exist.
    According to Israel supporters dealing with the issue, the key is
    focusing not on the protesters’ actions but on their intentions,
    even if they do not acknowledge these intentions publicly.
    “You need to dig under the surface and see what drives them,”
    Grinstein said. “Most of the students who protested Oren’s
    speech don’t understand the subtleties and believe they are not
    engaged in delegitimization, but those organizing them are.”
    Nancy Kricorian of CODEPINK, a women’s anti-war group, might
    be seen as such an organizer. Kricorian coordinates CODEPINK?
    s boycott campaign against Ahava cosmetic products because
    the products are manufactured on a Jewish settlement in the
    occupied West Bank. But she rejected the thought that she was
    seeking to delegitimize the state. “This is only a way of
    changing the subject,” said Kricorian. “All we want is [for] Israel
    to respect human rights and international law. I don’t see how
    that delegitimizes Israel.”
    At the same time, the broad-based coalition of Palestinian civil
    society groups that launched the BDS movement in 2005
    declares that one of its goals is to promote the right of
    Palestinian refugees to return to the homes they lost –
    sometimes through mass expulsion – during Israel’s 1948 War
    of Independence. A 1948 United Nations Security Council
    Resolution endorsed this right, but Israel rejects it on the
    grounds that the flood of returnees would spell the end of Israel
    as a Jewish state.
    Reut and advocates for Israel argue that singling out Israel and
    demanding that it adhere to higher human rights standards
    than its adversaries is another form of delegitimization.
    Yet, a higher standard for Israel is something that Judt, for one,
    unapologetically upholds. “People will say, ‘Why are we picking
    on Israel? What about Libya, Yemen? Burma? China?'” he writes
    in the March 25 issue of the London Review of Books. “Fine.
    [But] Israel describes itself as a democracy, and so it should be
    compared with democracies, not with dictatorships.”
    As a country in “a difficult relationship” with its neighbors, Israel
    should be allowed a “certain margin of behavior,” Judt
    acknowledged in his email. But Israel’s relative strength
    compared to other regional nations gives it “even less excuse
    for criminality, law-breaking or violence than they do,” he said.
    Amos Guiora, a law professor and former Israeli army senior
    military counsel, objected that Israel is judged by double
    standards even when compared with other Western
    democracies. Guiora, noted that attacks by German and
    American forces in Afghanistan that caused heavy civilian
    deaths received less censure from the international community.
    “By what standard does Israel want to be judged?” Guiora asked.
    His reply was, “By a standard in which you judge countries that
    are in a very, very special situation.”
    Those seeking to distinguish legitimate criticism of Israel from
    delegitimization cite another criterion: the labeling of Israeli
    policies as “apartheid.”
    Yet, in recent years mainstream Israeli leaders have used the
    word to describe the danger the country faces if it does not
    resolve its conflict with Palestinians.
    Recently, Ehud Barak, Israel’s defense minister and Labor Party
    leader, said bluntly, “If millions of Palestinians cannot vote, that
    will be an apartheid state.”
    Grinstein warned that fighting delegitimization must not
    devolve into hasbara, or public relations. The struggle, he said,
    is both about confronting those who question Israel’s right to
    exist as a Jewish state and making sure Israel pursues a path of
    seeking peace and an end to the occupation.
    The Reut document states, “Clearly, an Israeli and Palestinian
    comprehensive Permanent Status Agreement that establishes a
    Palestinian state and brings about an ‘end of conflict’… would
    weaken the grounds of Israel’s de-legitimization.” ”

    Reply

  9. Paul Norheim says:

    “Last update – 08:40 14/04/2010
    Poll: Most U.S. Jews approve of Obama’s approach to Israel
    By Natasha Mozgavaya, Haaretz Correspondent and Haaretz
    Service
    Despite claims that that Israelis are wary of U.S. President
    Barack Obama, a new poll released on Tuesday shows that most
    American Jews view their leader and his dealings with Israel in a
    positive light.
    According to the 2010 Annual Survey of American Jewish
    Opinion, conducted by the American Jewish Committee, 73
    percent of American Jews characterize relations between Israel
    and the U.S. today as “very positive” or “positive.”
    In addition to this, 55 percent of American Jews approve of the
    way the Obama administration is handling U.S.-Israel relations.”
    ———————————-
    You may read more in the online edition of Haaretz, but I won’t
    provide a link due to virus issues on that website – at least on
    Windows machines.

    Reply

  10. Paul Norheim says:

    So, to sum up, Question, you warn against putting pressure on
    these enfants terribles, because that wold make them even more
    terrible?
    And no political means – except for, say, some incremental
    educational initiatives – because political changes could be very
    dangerous and unpredictable?
    Only a long term multi-culti maturation of these nasty
    teenagers – the Arabs learning Hebrew and the Jews learning
    Arab and so forth?
    Or would you think that English, Swahili, or perhaps Swedish
    could serve as a cultural bridge between the cultures?
    If you detect a certain amount of irony in these questions,
    you’re correct.

    Reply

  11. questions says:

    Obama is absolutely right that the immediate and regional players have to want a solution for a solution’s emergence. You can’t really beat a child into good behavior, though you certainly can beat a child. What you’ll create, though, is a monster.
    The real “solution” is generational cultural change brought about by some combination of, umm, fatalism (!) — that is, acceptance of the existence of the other side — and a little bit of David Laitin-style interest manipulation such that what becomes a really great social position is to be a multi-lingual, multi-cultural translator with dare-I-say-it loyalties to both sides such that the sides start collapsing on each other at the fringes while maintaining some sections of purity.
    The racial over/undertones within the Tea Party (nadine, please don’t deny that there are racially motivated tea partiers even as there are some who are not so motivated) should remind us that the US hasn’t yet figured out the whole dual culture/dual race society. We have a wide range of intermarriages and love across the boundaries, we have translators of all sorts (including bureaucracies) whose main job is to work between cultures, and we have some purists who arrange their lives to the best of their abilities to avoid the scary other.
    Israel needs all of these moments as well (and I’m guessing much of that exists already at low levels and without much political umph), and at some point, the translator/shuttle-back-and-forth people will achieve some political power.
    The real hope, then, is that at the moment of the ascendancy of the betwixt and between people, there’s some room to push through legislative and institutional initiatives. (There is an unfortunate circularity problem — you need some institutions in place to get to the political moment of shift, and the political moment of shift is what makes the institution-building possible. No one said it would be easy!)
    The biggest problem, in comparing the I/P scene to the US race scene, is that for the I/P scene to be worked out, BOTH sides and then some have to be ready at about the same time. For the US, aside from Black Panther-style resistance (which I don’t know a whole lot about), most Blacks were welcoming of participation in the basic institutions of American civil society. Thus, really, white people had to do the work of inviting.
    In I/P, it’s unclear to me how many Palestinians are in this same position. I think that the WB institution building shows that there’s momentum in that direction. I think that the regret over having voted for Hamas expressed by many Gazans also shows that there’s some interest in this direction. But there’s nothing firm and definite and institutional and declared about the willingness.
    As long as the Palestinians give wiggle room to the Israeli purist/terrorized/right wing, Israel will remain in this paralyzed moment. If the non-violence movement really takes off, if (as I posted ages ago) the Palestinians hand roses to Israeli soldiers, if the commitment to peace looks firm, institutionally backed, and ripe, then suddenly the cultural translators within Israeli society will have a lot more political space within which to push for something like peace.
    The job of outsiders, then, is to help create some kind of space for bi-cultural, bilingual negotiators to do what they do best. We should want to subtract from the tension, not add to it.
    The lit on multi-culti, bilingual community structures might be a better place to start than, say, the lit on Islam and Judaism. Abstract from the specific circumstances and look more at bi-cultural tensions and maybe there will be something useful someone has figured out.
    There’s likely nothing in the fight that’s really religion-specific, and lots that is pretty standard operating procedure when gangs from two neighborhood high schools bump into each other on the streets after the school board closes schools, stops the busing, and shoves the kids together without the predominance of inter-cultural negotiators to help out.
    At any rate, triumphalism, condemnation, over-the-top rhetoric, declarations of axes of evil and the like — none of this has ever helped two groups get together. And indeed, together is what is needed.
    (Education policy and foreign policy are one and the same! So get Arne Duncan out of the Ed Dept and send him to the ME!)

    Reply

  12. Carroll says:

    Posted by nadine, Apr 14 2010, 12:29AM – Link
    No, Carroll, you don’t get it. It’s Obama who is going to be cut loose, in November. Nate Silver’s latest prediction for Congressional races is that the Democrats will lose 50 seats in the House.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    The fate of Israel and I/P is no longer up to just Israel and the US…that’s what you don’t get.
    If ObamaUSA bowed out completely, other powers would..and actually already have been moving into the fray.
    And Obama gave them an opening to do so…the more distance he puts between Israel and his US efforts the bigger the opening for other to move.

    Reply

  13. Carroll says:

    Well, some people ‘get it’. Although as usual they have to throw in anti semitism instead of just admitting it’s what they are doing with the Jewish connection to the Jewish state, that brings the backlash..but anyway it’s a realization in the right direction.
    The Holocaust won’t protect Israel forever
    By Nehemia Shtrasler
    Tags: IDF, Holocaust, Israel news
    But strengthening the IDF does not depend upon us alone. It depends on this country’s status, which in turn depends on the nations of the world and public opinion. Sixty-five years after the horrors of the Holocaust became clear, more and more voices in Europe say to Israel: No more. Guilt feelings as well have their limits. From now on we’ll treat you like a normal country. You will be judged by your deeds, for better or worse.
    And indeed, the latest reports reveal that the number of anti-Semitic incidents rose sharply in 2009. This is a new kind of anti-Semitism that combines the ancient hatred with strong opposition to the occupation. In other words, time is working against us. Support for Israel and for bolstering the power of the IDF can no longer be taken for granted. The world’s guilt feelings are gradually becoming dulled, making it possible for the global criticism of the occupation of Palestinian territories to strengthen.
    And because in the West it is public opinion that ultimately determines how governments act, we must reach an agreement that will get us out of those territories and make Israel a moral and just country once again.
    This is because the Holocaust flak jacket won’t last forever. It is cracking as we watch, and soon it will no longer be able to protect us. ‘

    Reply

  14. nadine says:

    No, Carroll, you don’t get it. It’s Obama who is going to be cut loose, in November. Nate Silver’s latest prediction for Congressional races is that the Democrats will lose 50 seats in the House.
    Negotiations are foundering because the Palestinians won’t talk and Obama won’t say a word against them, because he’s pro-Palestinian. But Congress and the rest of America notices what’s going on, especially the moderate voters who understand now that Obama sold them a bill of goods about being pro-Israel in the campaign. The majority of the country, 67% according to Gallup, supports Israel.
    There will be no two state solution, not because Israel won’t give it, but because the Palestinians don’t want one. Here’s the result from a new survey of 1800 Palestinians conducted by An Najah University:
    Do you accept the creation of a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders with some land exchange as a final solution for the Palestinian problem?
    Yes 28.3
    No 66.7
    No opinion/I do not know 5.0
    Do you support or reject making Jerusalem a capital for two states: Palestine and Israel?
    I support 20.8
    I reject 77.4
    No opinion/I do not know 1.8
    http://www.imra.org.il/story.php3?id=47709
    Like Dan Kervick noticed, Obama ran out a trial balloon about imposing a solution on the Mideast. It just landed with a thud.

    Reply

  15. Carroll says:

    Posted by nadine, Apr 13 2010, 10:28PM – Link
    Looks like the trial balloon didn’t float. From the Jpost:>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    Nadine, you really are a fool. You don’t get it.
    Obama is not saying ‘go ahead Israel we’re with you’…he’s saying …” proceed at your own risk Israel”. As long as Israel remains intractable they are going to be cut loose from ObamaUSA one thread at a time. Israel will give him the scissors to snip those threads.
    And it can come in many forms…like the US pursuing it’s own interest and bargains and alliances in the ME regardless of Israel’s enemy list.

    Reply

  16. Carroll says:

    Posted by Sweetness, Apr 13 2010, 7:29PM – Link
    More and more, I like Roger Cohen at the NYT. He’s got a good
    perspective, like in today’s column…
    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/13/opinion/13iht-
    edcohen.html
    Carroll, I missed your posts on those bills in Congress. If you
    could repost, I’d appreciate it.
    My point, put another way, about the Nazism=Zionism is that
    it’s besides the point. I could probably make a better case that
    the US has been Nazi-like than Israel–in terms of the nature of
    its policies, the number of people it’s killed at home and around
    the world, the racism at the core of its founding and how many
    people it killed as a result, the geographic reach of its policies
    and war machine, even some of its guiding doctrines like
    Manifest Destiny.>>>>>>>>>>>>
    I would not disagree with that. I think the US’s actions (in modern times) has come from greed, hubris and the sense that we are the ‘masters’ of the universe and we will assert our ‘rule’.
    If our leadership was strictly about being the super cop and moral leaders or even national security we would have done and be doing things a lot differently.
    However I see the zionist- Israel’s attitude as more similar to the nazis in the sense that the main force behind their aggression is about “preserving” and ’empowering’, in the wrong way, some kind of ethnic and religious, if not national ‘purity’, then national ‘majority’ or ‘tribe’.
    Would there be anything wrong with trying to ‘preserve’ some ethnic or religion or tribe normally? No, not unless you did it the way the nazis did it or the way Israel is trying to do it.
    At any rate, I lay 90% of the blame for I/P on the US government, always have. They ‘let’ themselves be politically corrupted to the point of standing by and watching some hellish, out of all proportion devastation and carnage like Gaza and Lebanon and didn’t lift a finger to stop it.
    Again in the words of the German author, we are accepting things we would never have accepted before, we have lost our moral principles…at least our leadership has.

    Reply

  17. nadine says:

    Looks like the trial balloon didn’t float. From the Jpost:
    Obama: US cannot impose peace
    By HILARY LEILA KRIEGER
    14/04/2010 02:54
    Saying Israelis and Palestinians may decide they are ‘unprepared’.
    WASHINGTON

    Reply

  18. nadine says:

    Sweetness, it is fair to count words on all sides, giving more weight to words that come from people who command states or armies, as being more able to put their words into action. Paul wants to ignore words he considers “distasteful” even when they come from heads of state.
    Where do you get your impression of “teabaggers”, MSNBC? The tea party movement is not racist at all. The tea party movement is against Obamacare, higher taxes, and is pro fiscal sanity.
    The claim that the movement is racist is a smear, a complete invention by a Democratic caucus terrified of a popular movement on the right. We are supposed to believe that somebody yelled racist epithets at black congressmen – who marched through the DC crowd in hopes of inciting such an incident — when a thousand video cameras & cellphones were running, and yet nobody got any footage. So they went and claimed it happened anyway. Did you just fall off a turnip truck, to buy that story? Breitbart has offered a $10,000 reward for footage. No takers. I have seen Youtube footage of that march. Protesters were yelling “Kill the bill!”. Nothing else.

    Reply

  19. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Goebbels……
    “Now it will be easy,” he wrote in his diary on February 3, “to carry on the fight, for we can call on all the resources of the State. Radio and press are at our disposal. We shall stage a masterpiece of propaganda. And this time, naturally, there is no lack of money.”
    http://www.jpost.com/Israel/Article.aspx?id=42902
    Israel’s newest PR weapon: The Internet Megaphone
    Foreign Ministry is urging supporters of Israel to become cyberspace soldiers in the PR battle.
    http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Hasbara
    Hasbara
    From SourceWatch
    Hasbara refers to the propaganda efforts to sell Israel, justify its actions, and defend it in world opinion. Using contemporary euphemisms, it is Public diplomacy for Israel, or using a pejorative interpretation, then it is apologia. Israel portrays itself as fighting on two fronts: the Palestinians and world opinion. The latter is dealt with hasbara. The premise of hasbara is that Israel’s problems are a matter of better propaganda, and not one of an underlying unjust situation.

    Reply

  20. Sweetness says:

    More and more, I like Roger Cohen at the NYT. He’s got a good
    perspective, like in today’s column…
    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/13/opinion/13iht-
    edcohen.html
    Carroll, I missed your posts on those bills in Congress. If you
    could repost, I’d appreciate it.
    My point, put another way, about the Nazism=Zionism is that
    it’s besides the point. I could probably make a better case that
    the US has been Nazi-like than Israel–in terms of the nature of
    its policies, the number of people it’s killed at home and around
    the world, the racism at the core of its founding and how many
    people it killed as a result, the geographic reach of its policies
    and war machine, even some of its guiding doctrines like
    Manifest Destiny.
    But I don’t do that because the US isn’t Nazi Germany and
    neither is Israel. And though both countries have and have had
    serious moral flaws in their policies, they are both redeemable,
    IMO. Others can come to different conclusions; I’m not going to
    argue about it.
    Yes, the Nazi movement started off small, but everything small
    doesn’t necessarily grow big. And an unofficial summit whose
    members are scattered worldwide isn’t the same as a party
    running in elections seeking to gain control of a country. For
    once, perhaps, Israel’s highly splintered political system is a
    good thing.
    At the same time, if we’re worried about small things growing
    into big things, we’ve got a small, but growing militia movement
    here…a tea party that seems to have taken over the Republican
    party…and lots of talk of violence, racism, etc. I have to tell you
    that there is barely a Republican who doesn’t strike me in his or
    her rhetoric as bat shit crazy and emboldened. Every day seems
    to bring forth a new stunner. Sometimes I think half the country
    has drunken some sort of Hate Portion No. 9.
    Taxed Enough Already? Really? Taxes are the lowest they’ve
    been in my 58 years on this planet, AFAIK.
    That said, if Nadine is willing to say this…
    “Where there’s a will there’s a way, as the saying goes. When
    Hitler first published Mein Kampf, neither he nor Germany had
    the means of implementing any of his plans, and European
    sophisticates dismissed it as mere rhetoric for the masses.”
    …and this:
    “Words are always the first step.”
    …then I don’t think the Summit and its published plan can, nor
    should, be simply dismissed. Words DO matter. And the fact
    that the Summit has quite a few high level people–people with
    influence and position–and is publishing this deeply immoral
    “plan” is disturbing to me and worth denouncing.
    It took blacks CENTURIES to get their freedom. 650,000 people
    had to die before they could be freed from slavery. It took
    another 150 years before they became enfranchised. And we
    still aren’t there yet, as the teabaggers and others remind us.
    There is no reason to bring down the curtain on the prospects
    for two states living side by side in peace. Cynically giving up
    because there’s “no way” to move forward is NOT the Jewish way,
    IMO. We don’t have to finish the work, but we’re not allowed to
    give up trying.

    Reply

  21. nadine says:

    questions, plenty of people on the right feel bad when people lose their homes — but point out that this is the inevitable consequence of the government acting to put millions of people into homes who had no business being there; they just didn’t have the income or assets to ever pay back the loans they were taking.
    This is where the CRA comes in: it enabled the whole subprime bubble, which in turn enabled a whole slew of bubbliscious shady dealings, non-regulating regulators using historical data that the new conditions had invalidated, wink-wink-nudge-nudge deals between Fannie and Freddie and the Treasury, smart shorters helping to blow up the bubble even more, the better to feast on the implosion, etc etc.
    You don’t see the CRA’s involvement because you don’t think in economic terms. Absent the CRA and Fannie & Freddie’s backing, the housing bubble might have happened anyway, but it would have been much smaller and it wouldn’t have generated a full-scale panic when it burst. Government manipulation and skewing of the mortgage market created huge opportunities for the shady dealers because they undermined the market structures that had previously functioned to keep such big bubbles from happening.
    Don’t drink the DNC kool-aid on ACORN, questions. If you go to Breitbart’s biggovernment.com, you’ll see that the original ACORN tapes, all posted there, never had fancy dress beyond Hannah Giles’ tight dress and hoop earrings. This is a red herring to distract from real issues. In the case of Clark Hoyt, the pudding who acts as apologist, er, ombudsman, for the NYT, it’s just another chance to apologize for some tiny reporting misdemeanor to avoid addressing real reporting felonies.
    I wish ACORN was dead. But knowing how they operate, they are reorganizing under new names and with new government funding.

    Reply

  22. questions says:

    nadine, you lost me on that last note — I was quoting Carroll in order to refute, and I thanked Paul above for noting the non-official-ness of the “Jerusalem Summit”. I think the chances of mass expulsions are just about the same there as they are here for undocumented Mexicans in the US — you just can’t expel massive numbers of people, even if there is some vague OR real legal issue.
    I don’t ever frenzify over Carroll’s stuff. Or over yours. But I am wondering, have you been reading the drippings of post mortems on the banking crisis — looks more and more like corruption, shady money moves, and conflicts of interest and less and less like the CRA (not that I ever actually thought the CRA had much to do with anything…..)
    You should always follow the stories AFTER they leave Fox and IBD — the truth starts dribbling out, but the MSM tends to run the shortes of OOOPS corrections. The NYT Ombudsman did note that in fact O’Keefe and his babe weren’t playing dress up in the ACORN offices even though the video made it seem so. But ACORN done died already. Too little too late. Will anyone on the right feel bad when someone loses his home or has trouble with a landlord or a tax problem and can’t find help?

    Reply

  23. Jerry says:

    Economies of the world unite!

    Reply

  24. nadine says:

    Paul,
    Where there’s a will there’s a way, as the saying goes. When Hitler first published Mein Kampf, neither he nor Germany had the means of implementing any of his plans, and European sophisticates dismissed it as mere rhetoric for the masses.
    However much you may think the comparison in bad taste, it happens to be history that should be borne in mind when you hear somebody advocating genocide day after day, as Hezbullah’s al Manar does. As Rwanda radio did before the genocide of the Tutsis. The first step in any genocide is convincing large numbers of people that the group to be exterminated is both subhuman and an intolerable threat. Words are always the first step.

    Reply

  25. nadine says:

    questions, as I tried to explain, Amira Hass is not a reliable source. So far I have seen nobody else publish anything like this story. If it was remotely like what she describes, somebody would. So my first reaction to the story is that I don’t believe it as written. It may be something that is being used to keep Hamas operatives out of the WB to prop up Fatah (which is a real on-going program). Or she may have made it up, or be relying on Palestinian sources who made it up. So don’t jump to conclusions about it.
    As for this “Jerusalem Summit”, it isn’t a real plan. This is some extremist’s website. Don’t you know enough by now not to go into a frenzy over stuff Carroll dredges up by trolling the web?

    Reply

  26. Jerry says:

    The convergence of interests between the U.S., China, The Muslim World, Russia, India, Japan, and Western Europe will force a settlement since the parties involved in the dispute are not able to reach agreement.
    In the process both Iran and Israel will lose any nuclear capabilities.
    The world is changing; proxy wars are a thing of the past. Self-interest has become mutual self-interest.
    Don’t get left behind.

    Reply

  27. questions says:

    “The shocker for me a while ago was finding the bills in congress ‘against” formation of a Palestine state and the amount of sponsors they had….what the hell?”
    Carroll, please read up on why it is that bills are introduced into Congress with no one’s intending their passage. It might help ease your distress.
    Congress is a subtle institution and should often not be taken literally. Votes for bills are not always for them, votes against bills are not always against them. Introducing bills often has nothing to do with a desire for actual legislation.

    Reply

  28. Carroll says:

    And let me comment on the “emotional” vr. the ‘cerebral’ discussion on this particular issue.
    You have one side, the side that wants to ‘force thru’ their goal, that has been forcing it thru, that has done this primarily by playing on the ’emotions’ of Israelis and Jews and others dedicated to the Israeli vision of Greater Israel.
    You have the other side, me and others, who try to ‘arouse’ emotions ‘against’ the injustice we see in I/P, Israeli actions and the crass tactics of some of their supporters.
    If reason, logic, historical experience, justice and the calmness of law were ruling this issue..well then it wouldn’t be an issue. It would have been settled a long time ago.
    Yes I do indeed want to ‘rile’ people up on this. Not to do harm, although some temporary harm may be done to some feelings and real harm to the actual guilty, but to do ‘the right thing’ and to protect what is important about our own country.
    Humans being what they are, for most of them, for better or worse, emotions will override dispassionate reasoning in their decisions and opinions most of the time. If that were not true we would all be driving black Fords.

    Reply

  29. Carroll says:

    Posted by Sweetness, Apr 13 2010, 9:58AM – Link
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    “And the fact that it’s couched in “humanitarian” terms makes it tenfold worse.”
    Exactly, that “guise” of civility makes it even more evil.
    And it is true this may be a small group, but Nazism started off as ideology among a nugget of committed fanatics also and look what happened there. The German who was quoted above had it right. People get acclimated thru fear and hate to small injustices against a group, and then
    to a bigger one, and then a bigger one,
    and then because no one stops it along the way, it grows into a horror.
    The shocker for me a while ago was finding the bills in congress ‘against” formation of a Palestine state and the amount of sponsors they had….what the hell?
    Our policy, the world policy, has always been two states, Israel and Palestine, and yet congress is actively undermining any possible 2 state solution…thereby undermining any possible peace.
    Just as they cheered on Israel’s attack on
    Lebanon in 2008.
    And this type of thing….inspired no doubt by Netanyahu’s confidence in the power of the lobby
    on congress and propaganda to defy a US President’s efforts toward peace..
    “US and Israel: An unsettled alliance
    By Daniel Dombey and Tobias Buck
    Published: April 12 2010 20:21 | Last updated: April 12 2010 20:21
    Leading Republicans have voiced sharp criticism of the tougher line on Israel.
    That kind of support leads some Israelis to believe Mr Netanyahu can, and should, defy US pressure.
    As Dore Gold, the president of the Jerusalem Centre for Public Affairs and a former Netanyahu adviser, says:

    Reply

  30. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “He’s actually proposed some good (and truly) humanitarian measures having to do with kids”
    Only those that belong to the master race. Its obvious he feels no such charity towards the children of his “racial inferiors”.
    Its interesting seeing you deny the similarities between the actions of the nazis anbd the actions of the zionists. You call such a comparison “inaccurate”, despite the FACT that we outline REAL, ACCURATE, and VERIFIABLE similarities. I note you offer no examples of inaccuracy, or concrete disapute against those accurasies we offer. In fact, your post outlines some real accuracies to our argument that there are very real similarities.

    Reply

  31. Sweetness says:

    I wouldn’t call it “bad taste,” Paul, even though I know what you’re getting at.
    It’s inaccurate and it leads to bad ideas and sad solutions.
    Worst of all, it gets everyone riled up and miles of ink are spilt as the two sides battle it out.
    I remember back during Vietnam how the left was fond of saying that the US had become like Nazi Germany. Slavery…Jim Crow…corporatism …corrupt government killing MILLIONS of innocent Vietnamese. And we were right to say that the US WAS pretty bad in many ways.
    But we weren’t Nazi Germany, and I don’t think we were even close to becoming Nazi Germany. LBJ resigned, ultimately, because Walter Cronkite had turned against the war. That couldn’t have happened in Nazi Germany-:)
    But, of course, if you pointed this out to your fellow lefties, you’d be accused of being soft on evil and morally lax.

    Reply

  32. Sweetness says:

    Nadine, if you read the two articles Carroll posts, it’s pretty clear this is not a case of “illegal immigrants” getting a plane ticket back home and some money for a hot meal.

    Reply

  33. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “Look for a conference in Egypt establishing the new State of Palestine at the end of 2010”
    “Soon, thereafter, the U.S. Marines will be on the ground to ensure the agreement”
    Well, that pretty much cinches it, Jerry. You’re detached from reality.

    Reply

  34. Paul Norheim says:

    According to my delicate sensibilities, there is a notable
    distinction between vague metaphorical predictions of Israel’s
    demise on one hand, and actually planning a Holocaust and
    possessing the means and determination to implement it on the
    other hand.
    But that’s perhaps just me. I guess street fighters don’t do
    nuances. But then you shouldn’t be bothered when your
    opponents claim that Israel treats the Palestinians the way
    Himmler treated the Jews in the 1940s. Why care about nuances –
    except if you are an insulated Scandinavian intellectual, right?

    Reply

  35. nadine says:

    Paul, George Orwell wrote this prophetically in 1943. Substitute “Norwegian” for “English” and he has you exactly pegged:

    Reply

  36. nadine says:

    Paul, Ahmedinejad is not criticizing the policies of Israel. He is predicting its imminent demise, while denying the Holocaust ever happened…and racing to build nuclear weapons. At this point the Israelis are a whole lot more interested in their chances for survival than in your delicate Norwegian sensibilities.

    Reply

  37. nadine says:

    “It may be bad taste but it’s a form of ‘fighting fire with fire’..as they say” (Carroll)
    More like fighting history with lies, the better to rationalize the hatred that drives you.

    Reply

  38. Paul Norheim says:

    Posted by Carroll, Apr 13 2010, 3:11AM
    “””””””””””””””””
    Posted by nadine, Apr 13 2010, 3:29AM
    “””””””””””””””””
    —————————————-
    Ok, I rest my case. Didn’t expect that any of you would agree
    with me on this anyway. The good news is that Carroll
    recognizes that the historical comparison is slightly bad taste.
    The bad news is that Nadine doesn’t. (Always more bad news
    from Nadine…) In any case: Have fun throwing swastikas and
    mustaches at each other; and may Ahriman and Beelzebub bless
    both of you street fighters!
    —————————————-
    As for Marcus, I wouldn’t mind if he went hiding in that fridge
    immediately – and stayed there. I don’t expect him to listen to
    my suggestions either. Unfortunately. Just my two cents, as
    always.

    Reply

  39. Jerry says:

    Look for a conference in Egypt establishing the new State of Palestine at the end of 2010.
    Soon, thereafter, the U.S. Marines will be on the ground to ensure the agreement.
    There will be two contiguous states living side by side quietly praying that, Thank God, somebody saved us from ourselves.

    Reply

  40. Carroll says:

    Posted by marcus, Apr 12 2010, 5:21PM – Link
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    What you need to do marcus in the event of an attack on Canada by Iran is run and hide in your refigator.
    Be sure to pull the fridge door shut once you’re in and you’ll be perfectly safe….and so will the rest of us.

    Reply

  41. nadine says:

    If a group actively promotes genocide against the Jews, by this I mean broadcasting the literal sentiment that all the Jews in the world should be killed, is it still bad taste to make Holocaust comparisons? If a group denies the last Holocaust even happened, but predicts the imminent demise of the state of Israel, is it still bad taste to refer to the (allegedly non-existent) Holocaust?
    Hizbullah and Hamas do the first, and Iran does the second. It seems rather perverse to ignore the evidence.
    And no, the Israeli government does not do either to the Palestinians.

    Reply

  42. Carroll says:

    Posted by Paul Norheim, Apr 13 2010, 1:35AM – Link >>>>>>>>>>>
    It may be bad taste but it’s a form of ‘fighting fire with fire’..as they say.
    As long as Israel and zionist exploit the holocaust and wield the Hitler/nazi threat to ‘excuse’ their own behavior and agenda it’s going to be turned back on them.
    People hate hypocrites and if you listen to what people and world leaders are saying it’s much like this…”where the hell do the zionist get off pleading the fifth because of the “holocaust” and the nazis 65 years ago when they are doing similar things to the Palestinians right now?”
    It’s the old street fight mentality…they bring a knife to the fight, you bring a gun. They escalate the fight, you escalate,…whoever last the longest and does the most the damage wins.
    There are no Queensbury rules when the other side doesn’t believe in rules…the first time they hurled anti semite to legitimate criticism of Israel by such respected figures as Carter and Tutu and others the gloves were off.
    When Israel and it’s unconditional supporters picked this fight, and they did pick it, they should have expected to get knocked around. They over estimated their get out of jail free card privilages.

    Reply

  43. Carroll says:

    Posted by Paul Norheim, Apr 13 2010, 1:35AM – Link >>>>>>>>>>>
    It may be bad taste but it’s a form of ‘fighting fire with fire’..as they say.
    As long as Israel and zionist exploit the holocaust and wield the Hitler/nazi threat to ‘excuse’ their own behavior and agenda it’s going to be turned back on them.
    People hate hypocrites and if you listen to what people and world leaders are saying it’s much like this…”where the hell do the zionist get off pleading the fifth because of the “holocaust” and the nazis 65 years ago when they are doing similar things to the Palestinians right now?”
    It’s the old street fight mentality…they bring a knife to the fight, you bring a gun. They escalate the fight, you escalate,…whoever last the longest and does the most the damage wins.
    There are no Queensbury rules when the other side doesn’t believe in rules…the first time they hurled anti semite to legitimate criticism of Israel by such respected figures as Carter and Tutu and others the gloves were off.
    When Israel and it’s unconditional supporters picked this fight, and they did pick it, they should have expected to get knocked around. They over estimated their get out of jail free card privilages.

    Reply

  44. Paul Norheim says:

    Speaking of bad taste…here is an excerpt from a Haaretz op-ed
    today (I hesitate to provide a link right now, due to virus issues
    on the Haaretz web page, especially if you are on a Windows
    PC):
    “Equating Iran nukes with Holocaust highlights Israel’s isolation
    By Haaretz Editorial
    Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu used the official ceremony
    for Holocaust Remembrance Day on Sunday to warn about the
    Iranian threat. “The world gradually accepts Iran’s statements of
    destruction against Israel and we still do not see the necessary
    international determination to stop Iran from arming,”
    Netanyahu said, calling on “all enlightened countries” to
    strongly condemn Iran and act with “genuine determination” to
    prevent it from building nuclear weapons.
    This is not the first time Netanyahu has equated the Iranian
    threat with the Jewish Holocaust in Europe. The comparison is
    mistaken and damaging. Independent and sovereign Israel is
    not weak like the Jewish communities in Poland, Hungary or
    Germany, which could not defend themselves against the
    murderous Nazis and their collaborators.”
    ——————————-
    I should wish that we all here at TWN, discussing contemporary
    issues related to the Middle East, could agree on the following
    basic points:
    1) It’s bad taste to equate Iran today with the Jewish Holocaust
    plans and implementations.
    2) It’s bad taste to equate Hamas today with the Jewish
    Holocaust plans and implementations.
    3) It’s bad taste to equate Israel’s treatment of Palestinians
    today with the Jewish Holocaust plans and implementations.
    4) It’s bad taste to equate every current threat (perceived or real)
    with World War II, and those who hesitate to employ military
    force against those imagined or real threats as repeating
    Chamberlain’s appeasement strategy before World War II.
    Following these simple rules would immediately improve on the
    quality of the discussions, but I have no illusions that people
    will take notice of these suggestion. In any case, that’s my two
    cents.

    Reply

  45. Carroll says:

    “Maybe Carroll should call this sack of shit Brownback’s office and ask his phone minion if Brownback actually supports this latest strategy Israel has concocted for erasing Palestinians. I haven’t got the patience for it.”
    O.K. I’ll do that, I am curious to see what kind of reply I would get on the ‘transfer plan’ of the Summitt. I called several including Hoyer and Pelosi when that letter from congress on the Biden’insult’ went out…and I recorded the calls. Interestingly, I think I discovered that some politicans now record incoming calls to their office. My husband’s study phone has a built in recorder that can record all conversations and doesn’t emit any beep or signal. However when I called Hoyer’s office I noticed the distinct sound of a recording notification…this could have meant they were recording their calls coming in or that they have a device that alerts when they are being recorded. I haven’t heard it on other congressional phones or before just recently.
    It may have something to do with the death threats and etc they are getting from the right wing crazies because of the health care bill.

    Reply

  46. Carroll says:

    Posted by PissedOffAmerican, Apr 12 2010, 11:19PM – Link>>>>>>>>>>>>
    Actually I am giving them some slack (so far) by referring to them as ‘midget nazis’ instead of full grown/blown nazis….but they may get to that designation yet. Let’s see what happens next.
    Meanwhile I am going on being the ‘alarmist’ as I have been for several years and I am going to keep ringing that bell loud and clear. If Israel doesn’t end up going so far as do some kind to mini-genocide on the Palestines similiar to what the Germans did to the Jews, wonderful!..I won’t mind being considered foolish and alarmist. I would mind not having raised alarms about it if signs point to that possibility…and I consider it a possibility.

    Reply

  47. Paul Norheim says:

    Ok POA,
    let me try to answer this. Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians
    somehow mirrors some of the things Hitler did to the Jews in
    the 1930’s, but it’s extremely inappropriate to compare
    ANYTHING Israel does to the Palestinians with the systematic
    genocide in the first half of the 1940’s. It’s a matter of
    proportions.
    As a political metaphor, Adolph Hitler is bad taste, in my view,
    just like the Chamberlain “appeasement” reference frequently
    employed on contemporary circumstances – regardless of
    whether it is used by the Bush family to get rid of Saddam, by
    Zionists to weaken Iran, or by anti-Zionists to attack Israel.
    And this is why I think it’s better to let the facts – like some of
    the important stuff that you and Carroll have referred to and
    linked to on this thread – speak for themselves, instead of
    pulling Hitler’s mustache up from your circus hats all the time.
    Emotionally, I guess it works like a drug – for the commenter.
    But I think it distracts the readers away from the serious issues
    that are been discussed.

    Reply

  48. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Thanks for sharing, Jerry.
    And your idiotically optimistic drool about Obama’s “strategy” was a real gift too. Are you gonna stick around and make a bigger fool of yourself, or is this as good as it gets?
    And Paul…
    I’m a little curious. What aspect of Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians DOESN’T mimic what Hitler did to the Jews?

    Reply

  49. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Yeah, the “midget” part bugs me too.

    Reply

  50. Paul Norheim says:

    Yeah, the “midget nazi” stuff may be disturbing, but I have to say
    that the actual content Carroll linked to and referred to would be
    much more disturbing to any sane and sober person than
    Carroll’s emotions and characterizations.

    Reply

  51. Jerry says:

    PissedOffAmerican says,
    “Calling these jackasses is like pissing off the stern while your spinnacker is full.
    I say
    that is an apt discription of reading his hysterical postings.

    Reply

  52. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “Moreover, Haaretz as a paper has just gone to war with the the entire Israeli military/national security apparatus, by hiring Anat Kam, who stole thousands of classified documents, publishing a story based on them, and paying one of its staff reporters to stay in London in order to impede the investigation. If Uri Blau hadn’t been a reporter, his ass would already be in jail”
    Here you see the slimey despicable hasbarist making criminals out of those who have exposed the criminals. The real story here is not what Kam or Blau did, but what they actually exposed about the IDF.
    Lets see, what is more egregious, EXPOSING war crimes and crimes against humanity, or COMMITTING war crimes and crimes against humanity….
    hmmmm…
    eenie meenie miney moe.
    Anyone wanna hazard a guess what our resident jackboot will pick?
    Egads, we have some true scumballs squatting in Congress, don’t we? Maybe Carroll should call this sack of shit Brownback’s office and ask his phone minion if Brownback actually supports this latest strategy Israel has concocted for erasing Palestinians. I haven’t got the patience for it. Calling these jackasses is like pissing off the stern while your spinnacker is full.

    Reply

  53. Paul Norheim says:

    Sweetness,
    on this page:
    http://www.jerusalemsummit.org/eng/donate.php
    there is a list to click on at the left side; you may start at the top,
    where I went, and click on “Presidium”. There you’ll find Baroness
    Caroline Cox, US Senator Sam Brownback, Professor Daniel Pipes
    etc…

    Reply

  54. nadine says:

    Yes, marcus, the desire to call zionists Nazis is deeply unhinged. But it fulfils deep needs in anti-Semites who have been frustrated from saying what they think about Jews since WWII because of the bad name the Nazis gave to anti-Semitism. Ans: call Israelis Nazis and your problem is solved.
    Can we please try to keep just enough hold on sanity to acknowledge that Israel has neither exterminated the roughly 4 million Arabs who live inside the old Mandate borders, nor expelled them to Jordan? Whether you like Israel or hate it, these are facts and should not be a matter of dispute.
    As for Amira Hass’ claims: Amira Hass has long been a fringe pro-Palestinian voice at a left-wing paper. So writing up standing orders regarding illegal infiltrators as the prelude to mass deportations is old hat for her. Let’s see if any other paper thinks there is a story here, or if these orders will just be used to deport suspected Hamas operatives back to Gaza at the request of the PA.
    Moreover, Haaretz as a paper has just gone to war with the the entire Israeli military/national security apparatus, by hiring Anat Kam, who stole thousands of classified documents, publishing a story based on them, and paying one of its staff reporters to stay in London in order to impede the investigation. If Uri Blau hadn’t been a reporter, his ass would already be in jail. Instead, he was allowed to do a deal and cooperate. He lied to the investigators then fled to London. He refuses to give back the documents or say what he did with them.
    Haaretz turned itself into Pravda trying to defend this conduct, but I think they may find this is too much even for an Israeli society very tolerant of free press shenanigans. When you start handing classified military papers over to who-knows-whom that could get soldiers killed (in Israel, that’s everybody’s son and brother), you have a crossed a line. Or else why is Uri Blau hiding out in London rather than cooperating with the investigation?

    Reply

  55. marcus says:

    talking about lame people your president is dissapointing alot of us allies INCLUDING CANADA
    Here in canada we take the iranian regime in power today much more seriously than your president does,their human rights record as well as the danger they pose for nuke proliferation to terrorists hamas hezzbolla or al queda.
    It is canada that attempts to cesure iran at the UN not America,your current coddeling of terror regimes and snubs of western allies is very quickly dimming the light that used to be America
    BTW if the US forces Israel to hit Irans nuke sites by itself the US had better be there to help contain the fall-out – otherwise it will cease to be the UNITED states you`ll have a civil war (another one) on your hands with many states opting out of Obamas America
    What a collosal fraud this nuke summit is,the stated aim is to contain loose nuke material yet the single greatest danger IRAN is being allowed to nuclerize. WAKE_UP AMERICANS your being led down a garden path by deranged people.

    Reply

  56. marcus says:

    Carroll is seriouslly unhinged
    first off expelling illegal immigrants is something we do in canada-nobody calls us nazis for protecting our borders or enforcing the legal immigration procedures btw we accept more genuine refugees per capita that any other western country including the US
    It really demonstrates how deranged this person is, canada does it all the time-nothing not a peep-israel does it and their nazis
    In the past couple of decades aprox.300,000 jews have moved to the west bank ( some people say illegally) in the same period 500,000 or more arabs have moved there I see nothing at all wrong in giving these migrants a financial incentive to move on
    We do the same thing here in Canada, south americans who have come through your porous southern border find their way up to canada-we give them welfare while the deportation process takes place then a re-settlement check and a plane ticket out. No one calls us nazis
    The whole israel/nazi coparison is so lame its deranged

    Reply

  57. Sweetness says:

    “Take a look at the Board members and other members of the
    Jerusalem Summit…as well as their speakers and ‘think fellows’.
    Where is the link for “Board Members”? I couldn’t find it.

    Reply

  58. Carroll says:

    Nazism- Zionism, same difference,same mentality,..doesn’t matter… this is how it happens and how it ends up if no one stops them.
    An excerpt from
    They Thought They Were Free
    The Germans, 1933-45
    Milton Mayer
    But Then It Was Too Late
    “What no one seemed to notice,” said a colleague of mine, a philologist, “was the ever widening gap, after 1933, between the government and the people. Just think how very wide this gap was to begin with, here in Germany. And it became always wider. You know, it doesn

    Reply

  59. Carroll says:

    *”This suggestion could only have been created in
    America.”
    Take a look at the Board members and other members of the Jerusalem Summit…as well as their speakers and ‘think fellows’.
    It is a mixture of zionist from Israel, the US and European countries..it’s basically international.
    On their board however you will find a US congressman or two, US professors, all well known zionist. How scary is it that a US congressman would be part of this? Scares shit out of me.
    *”One may wonder why the “Jerusalem Summit” proposes this
    suggestion? Besides the fact that the “international community”
    will certainly not pay for it, but regard the suggestion as racist
    at its core, the fact remains that – like it or not – the concept of
    national identity plays a large role, not only within the Jewish-
    Israeli community, but also within the Palestinian community”
    No need to wonder, as I have said numerous times…these people are insane…they are so insane they think this is a reasonable proposal.
    They are so insane they don’t realize how the world would see right thru their “humane solution” for what it actually is.
    Just like Hitler’s first ‘reasonable’ solution for the Jewish problem was deporting the Jews for the good of Germany and the Aryan race…that kind of insane. Racist, bat-shit crazy, delusional, cultist kind of insane.
    And do note how they say it would be no problem for Israel to pay for this. Really? then why do we give them billions every year?
    And do note how they say it would only cost half of what the US spent on Iraq.
    And remember they had to get the US to give them 10 billion just to resettle Russian Jews in Israel.
    So who do you think they have in mind to pay for this if it ever came about?
    And do note the previous posts of mine that linked to US congressional bills that ‘forbid’ any Palestine state and suggest punishments for any countries that would recognize it.
    So they have already accomplished the ‘delegitimizing step of the idea of a Palestine state.
    Freaking nazis, midget nazis maybe but still nazis. I agree with POA, what’s the damn difference between gassing a bunch of people or herding them into the open air prison of Gaza and starving or bombing shit out of them…dead is dead.

    Reply

  60. Paul Norheim says:

    For what, Questions?
    Just curious.

    Reply

  61. questions says:

    Paul, THANKS!

    Reply

  62. Paul Norheim says:

    “This ladies and gentlemen is the “Zionist ideal” the “Jewish
    State”. Read it…see how depraved and morally blank they
    actually are. These people are the 21st century Nazis.” (Carroll)
    Carroll, in which sense does this New York based “Jerusalem
    Summit” organization and the people behind it represent the
    “Zionist ideal” and the “Jewish State”? To me this sounds more
    like a typical American idea: “You can’t resist this once-in-a –
    lifetime offer to get rid of your identity and solve all your
    problems! Please accept our generous gift of cash and a ticket
    to a country where you’ll certainly feel at home (preferably
    Indonesia) – and we promise that you’ll fulfill your dreams!”
    By the way, I recommend reading the FAQ on their website,
    because it expresses the paradoxes of the concept of a Jewish
    nation in interesting and disturbing ways… Among other things,
    their suggestion also clearly intends to dissolve the Palestinian
    identity to preserve and enhance the Jewish identity.
    Those who represent the Jews in Israel and those who represent
    the Palestinians in the occupied territories both claim that their
    identity is important. But the key argument of this “Jerusalem
    Summit” organization seems to be that the Jews in Israel are
    more wealthy and content than the Palestinians; thus it would
    be easier to dissolve the Palestinian identity by individually
    offering a generous amount of money for leaving, than to
    dissolve the Jewish population in Israel. Money talks, especially
    when you live in misery.
    There was once something called the “Jewish problem”. These
    people suggest a solution of something they identify as the
    “Palestinian problem”.
    A quote from Wikipedia – (back to 1938):
    “The Madagascar Plan was a suggested policy of the Nazi
    government to relocate the Jewish population of Europe to the
    island of Madagascar.
    The evacuation of European Jews to the island of Madagascar
    was not a new concept. Paul de Lagarde, an anti-semitic
    orientalist scholar, apparently first suggested the idea in 1885
    (…)
    The leaders of Nazi Germany seized on the idea, and Hitler
    signed off on it in 1938. In May 1940, Heinrich Himmler, in his
    Reflections on the Treatment of Peoples of Alien Races in the
    East, declared: “I hope that the concept of Jews will be
    completely extinguished through the possibility of a large
    emigration of all Jews to Africa or some other colony.”
    For the “Jerusalem Summit” people, exporting Palestinians to
    Muslim countries with “similar socio-economic conditions” –
    and with a considerable sum of money as incentive – probable
    seems more viable than the suggestion to send the Jews to
    Madagascar. They obviously also hope that “the concept of
    Palestinians” – to paraphrase Himmler – with this suggestion
    will be “extinguished”.
    A historical equivalent of this suggestion could perhaps be – if
    we go back to the 1950’s or 60’s – to export the black Africans
    in South Africa to other African countries as a “humanitarian”
    approach to solve the conflicts and problems within the
    Apartheid regime, and to stimulate the economies of the African
    host countries by offering the individuals and their families a
    large amount of money.
    One may wonder why the “Jerusalem Summit” proposes this
    suggestion? Besides the fact that the “international community”
    will certainly not pay for it, but regard the suggestion as racist
    at its core, the fact remains that – like it or not – the concept of
    national identity plays a large role, not only within the Jewish-
    Israeli community, but also within the Palestinian community.
    Probably a bigger role, compared to money, than orthodox
    marxists and American free marked fundamentalists would like
    to think. This suggestion could only have been created in
    America.

    Reply

  63. Carroll says:

    This ladies and gentlemen is the “Zionist ideal” the “Jewish State”. Read it…see how depraved and morally blank they actually are. These people are the 21st century Nazis.
    http://www.jerusalemsummit.org/eng/hs_short_eng.htm
    The Humanitarian Solution
    – A Synopsis –
    A. Assessment
    1. The conventional-wisdom paradigm for the resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has failed woefully, bringing nothing but misery and despair to both sides

    Reply

  64. Carroll says:

    A letter from Desmond Tutu to the divestment-sponsors at the University of California, circulated by Emily Schaeffer, human right lawyer in Israel/Palestine, who asked Archbishop Tutu to write the letter.
    Dear Student Leaders at the University of California

    Reply

  65. Carroll says:

    “Mass Deportations of West Bank by Israel”
    …has hit all the major MSM and press……WP,NYT,NPR, Fox,ABC, MSNBC, The Herald, Guardian, SF Sentinel, ,UK Independent, Gulf News, The National, Boston Herald, LA Times, Irish Independent, PRAVA, Reuters, IPS, AP and on and on…
    Border Police scuffle with a Palestinian man near Hebron on Saturday.
    (Reuters)
    Last update – 14:29 11/04/2010
    IDF order will enable mass deportation from West Bank
    By Amira Hass, Haarezt
    Tags: West Bank, IDF, Israel news
    A new military order aimed at preventing infiltration will come into force this week, enabling the deportation of tens of thousands of Palestinians from the West Bank, or their indictment on charges carrying prison terms of up to seven years.
    When the order comes into effect, tens of thousands of Palestinians will automatically become criminal offenders liable to be severely punished.
    Given the security authorities’ actions over the past decade, the first Palestinians likely to be targeted under the new rules will be those whose ID cards bear home addresses in the Gaza Strip – people born in Gaza and their West Bank-born children – or those born in the West Bank or abroad who for various reasons lost their residency status. Also likely to be targeted are foreign-born spouses of Palestinians.
    Advertisement
    Until now, Israeli civil courts have occasionally prevented the expulsion of these three groups from the West Bank. The new order, however, puts them under the sole jurisdiction of Israeli military courts.
    The new order defines anyone who enters the West Bank illegally as an infiltrator, as well as “a person who is present in the area and does not lawfully hold a permit.” The order takes the original 1969 definition of infiltrator to the extreme, as the term originally applied only to those illegally staying in Israel after having passed through countries then classified as enemy states – Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon and Syria.
    The order’s language is both general and ambiguous, stipulating that the term infiltrator will also be applied to Palestinian residents of Jerusalem, citizens of countries with which Israel has friendly ties (such as the United States) and Israeli citizens, whether Arab or Jewish. All this depends on the judgment of Israel Defense Forces commanders in the field.
    The Hamoked Center for the Defense of the Individual was the first Israeli human rights to issue warnings against the order, signed six months ago by then-commander of IDF forces in Judea and Samaria Area Gadi Shamni.
    Two weeks ago, Hamoked director Dalia Kerstein sent GOC Central Command Avi Mizrahi a request to delay the order, given “the dramatic change it causes in relation to the human rights of a tremendous number of people.”
    According to the provisions, “a person is presumed to be an infiltrator if he is present in the area without a document or permit which attest to his lawful presence in the area without reasonable justification.” Such documentation, it says, must be “issued by the commander of IDF forces in the Judea and Samaria area or someone acting on his behalf.”
    The instructions, however, are unclear over whether the permits referred to are those currently in force, or also refer to new permits that military commanders might issue in the future. The provision are also unclear about the status of bearers of West Bank residency cards, and disregards the existence of the Palestinian Authority and the agreements Israel signed with it and the PLO.
    The order stipulates that if a commander discovers that an infiltrator has recently entered a given area, he “may order his deportation before 72 hours elapse from the time he is served the written deportation order, provided the infiltrator is deported to the country or area from whence he infiltrated.”
    The order also allows for criminal proceedings against suspected infiltrators that could produce sentences of up to seven years. Individuals able to prove that they entered the West Bank legally but without permission to remain there will also be tried, on charges carrying a maximum sentence of three years. (According to current Israeli law, illegal residents typically receive one-year sentences.)
    The new provision also allow the IDF commander in the area to require that the infiltrator pay for the cost of his own detention, custody and expulsion, up to a total of NIS 7,500.
    The fear that Palestinians with Gaza addresses will be the first to be targeted by this order is based on measures that Israel has taken in recent years to curtail their right to live, work, study or even visit the West Bank. These measures violated the Oslo Accords.
    According to a decision by the West Bank commander that was not backed by military legislation, since 2007, Palestinians with Gaza addresses must request a permit to stay in the West Bank. Since 2000, they have been defined as illegal sojourners if they have Gaza addresses, as if they were citizens of a foreign state. Many of them have been deported to Gaza, including those born in the West Bank.
    Currently, Palestinians need special permits to enter areas near the separation fence, even if their homes are there, and Palestinians have long been barred from the Jordan Valley without special authorization. Until 2009, East Jerusalemites needed permission to enter Area A, territory under full PA control.
    Another group expected to be particularly harmed by the new rules are Palestinians who moved to the West Bank under family reunification provisions, which Israel stopped granting for several years.
    In 2007, amid a number of Hamoked petitions and as a goodwill gesture to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, tens of thousands of people received Palestinian residency cards. The PA distributed the cards, but Israel had exclusive control over who could receive them. Thousands of Palestinians, however, remained classified as “illegal sojourners,” including many who are not citizens of any other country.
    The new order is the latest step by the Israeli government in recent years to require permits that limit the freedom of movement and residency previously conferred by Palestinian ID cards. The new regulations are particularly sweeping, allowing for criminal measures and the mass expulsion of people from their homes.
    The IDF Spokesman’s Office said in response, “The amendments to the order on preventing infiltration, signed by GOC Central Command, were issued as part of a series of manifests, orders and appointments in Judea and Samaria, in Hebrew and Arabic as required, and will be posted in the offices of the Civil Administration and military courts’ defense attorneys in Judea and Samaria. The IDF is ready to implement the order, which is not intended to apply to Israelis, but to illegal sojourners in Judea and Samaria.”
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    F****** little midget nazis.
    AND BTW…al-Sadr is back and Iraqis are marching carrying US and “Israeli flags” to burn and demanding American troops get out NOW.
    http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/IBR926426.htm
    Supporters of Shi’ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr signs with images of U.S and Israeli flags, with shoes hung on them, during a demonstration in Najaf April 9, 2010. Anti-U.S. cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, …

    Reply

  66. nadine says:

    Jerry, I think you mean archeology or paleontology, not history. History usually refers to periods with written records.

    Reply

  67. Carroll says:

    Getting worse….
    First is an article on mondo about the IDF now using dogs to send after stone throwing children.
    Soon as a picture appears, and it will, of a dog attacking a child I’am faxing it to WH with the appropiate comment.
    Second is this:….
    “Israeli military order will enable mass deportation from West Bank”
    by Paul Woodward on April 11, 2010
    For those of us who in a practical sense really don

    Reply

  68. Jerry says:

    Nadine,says,
    “Jerry, the deep Jewish connection to Jerusalem dates back 3000 years, which rather predates America.”
    Sorry, kid, but Americans go back 10,000 years in North America.
    I admire Jewish history but it is nothing compared to American history.

    Reply

  69. Jerry says:

    Clearly, Obama’s speech in Cairo set a precedent in American foreign policy: everybody counts, there are no longer ‘special’ relationships to the exclusion of anyone in any aspect of American foreign policy.
    It takes time to get your team up to speed, for them to become familiar with the lay of the land and build the relationships needed. Who would foolishly doubt that Jones, Gates, McMullen, Mitchell, Holebrook, Eichenberry ,Biden, and team are not up to the challenge.
    The treaty President Obama signed with Russia on reducing nuclear threats is another part of his strategic plan. In the treaty, he sets forth what he will and will not do. It would be nice if the Senate would approve it, but that is not necessary, because for the next three or seven years, other nations know what to expect from President Obama, what to expect from the U.S..
    Only America has the ability to take out Iran’s nuclear capability, but the best way to do that is from within not without. As a nation, Iran is dysfunctional now, and that is all that is necessary to ensure ists continual freefall.
    The endgame can’t be far away,now; freedon in Iran and Palestine. But Israel, it remains to be seen, can they man up or will they flame out. It is their choice; it is their future.

    Reply

  70. nadine says:

    Ray Takeyh of the Council for Foreign Relations tries to tell the Obami that linking a Mideast settlement to doing something about Iran is a recipe for achieving nothing on either front:
    Break the Iran-Mideast Peace Link
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/09/AR2010040905075.html
    I think Obama and the Joint Chiefs are just terrified of Israel acting on its own against Iran, not without reason. But Obama’s conspicuous displays of weakness and readiness to live with an Iranian bomb may breed the thing he fears.
    Israel is not ready to live with the bomb in the hands of a religious nutcase like Ahmedinejad, whose Defense Minister Vahidi is a terrorist wanted by Interpol. The Gulf Arabs are equally terrified. A nuclear armed Iran would hold all of them hostage. They might be driven into some kind of covert alliance with Israel — if Israel decides to act.

    Reply

  71. nadine says:

    Jerry, the deep Jewish connection to Jerusalem dates back 3000 years, which rather predates America. The Old Testament, which refers to Jerusalem over 600 times, the Temple, “If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, may my right hand lose its cunning”, “Next Year in Jerusalem”, the Wailing Wall, all of Jewish history.
    Jerusalem is a living city with 800,000 inhabitants. It doesn’t have any “pseudo” parts. Is Queens a “pseudo” part of New York City?
    It’s doubly true when you consider that the very center of Jerusalem, the Old City, the part that was nearly the whole city 100 years ago, falls into the part that the Obama administration has just renamed “occupied East Jerusalem”.

    Reply

  72. Jerry says:

    Revivalism has run its course once again in American affairs, and with that, there is a lessening of importance in the significance of the allaince with Israel because Israel as a protector of the Holy Land becomes less significant in American policy. As Christianity itself declines in significance, the Alliance declines even more.
    In America Israel is slowly seen more as a nuisance to be gotten rid of, rather than, a moral imperiative to be helped. No douby, America is not central to the survival of Israel, but one generation from now a significant number of Americans will no longer be interested in the political affairs of Israel.
    It is important to remember, if you run out the clock, the game is over, win or lose.

    Reply

  73. marcus says:

    I think the US or the US with a coallition of 60+countries (which could and should have happened) should bomb the arak and bushier sites tommorrow–a SURPRISE ATTACK- thats for sure. Nobody I know would like to be threatened or have their liberty inhibited-to not be able to travel the world safely-up here in Canada were a little tired of American backbackers sewing -on a maple leaf patch.
    We never really liked that btw.
    Iraq and iran will sign a mutual defence pact one day and that is a formidable foe – who you would not want armed with hundreds ofPlutonium suitcase bombs

    Reply

  74. Jerry says:

    Nadine:
    You say, “The notion that Jews are inventing their connection to Jerusalem to please conservative Christians is absurd.”
    Why is it absurd?
    It doesn’t seem absurd when you see how they use each other in America.
    Nor did I say Jerusalem, I was referring to any part of a pseudo-Jerusalem that could be used as a bargaining chip.
    But again, if it is absured, why is it absurd.

    Reply

  75. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “……and thats fine with me”
    Of course. Its what we would expect from your kind of racist and murderous scum.

    Reply

  76. marcus says:

    It has been 90 years that israel is trying to establish their national soverignty over land that was promised to the jews in 1917 ( or was it 2000 BC ) however long it takes it`s coming,that`because Israel has THE MIGHT AND THE RIGHT
    POS and adolph; be careful what you wish for !
    If the US attempts to impose an unacceptable settlement (through it`s traditional imperialistic hubris) it will force Israels hand,due to the ongoing security issues which will intensify due to the raised expectations caused by Obama; the entire west bank will be annexed, a semi-permanent curfrew will decend on the arab enclaves,and a exodus (in the tens or hundreds of thousands of arabs)will be the result of the fighting that will occur,history will repeat itself.These arabs will be displaced 30 or 50 miles into pal parts of the hashemite kingdom whose illegetimete government will be overthrown and replaced with a pal leadership.Then hundreds of thousands of jews and not so jewish will pour into the liberated west bank.
    Obama by not recognizing Israel as the strong horse in the region and the guaranture of stability will initiate this turn of events,and thats fine with me

    Reply

  77. Carroll says:

    Posted by PissedOffAmerican, Apr 11 2010, 1:57PM – Link >>>>>>>>>>
    O.K….I’ll go do it now.

    Reply

  78. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “Funny how only Palestinians can be “literally decimated” while having their numbers go nowhere but up…”
    While being pushed onto an ever decreasing plot of land. Funny how that works, isn’t it? You bigoted sack of shit.

    Reply

  79. PissedOffAmerican says:

    BTW Carroll, and others….
    Here is an opportunity to nudge a popular and irresponsible member of the so called “Fourth Estate” into doing the right thing, or at least, to inform her fans that she IS NOT doing the right thing.
    Please contribute a comment or two. If I do it alone, I will be banned from the site forthwith.
    http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2010/04/10/4139616-links-for-the-49-trms#comments

    Reply

  80. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Palestinian economic stability threatened by Israel, other Arab countries
    A soon to be released report from the International Monetary Fund praises the efforts of the West Bank government and other supportive governments (especially in the West) for the growth in the Palestinian economy. But the West Bank’s new healthy growth rate is threatened by Israel and other Arab states, the New York Times’ Jerusalem bureau chief Ethan Bronner reports.
    Israeli shekels
    Oussama Kanaan, IMF mission head for the Palestinian territories, remarked of their findings:

    Reply

  81. nadine says:

    Ah yes, Carroll, those horrible Jews and that horrible Jewish lobby! that’s what it really boils down to, now isn’t it? It must really gall you that American support for Israel is at 63%, according to Mr. Gallup: http://www.gallup.com/poll/126155/support-israel-near-record-high.aspx I have a news flash for you: we Jews may be good at lobbying, but we’re not that good. Americans like Israel all by themselves.
    Funny how only Palestinians can be “literally decimated” while having their numbers go nowhere but up…I thought “literally decimated” meant you lost at least 10% of your population, or more. Did you read the report I posted from the latest Economist on how well Gaza’s economy is doing these days?

    Reply

  82. Carroll says:

    Posted by Sweetness, Apr 10 2010, 2:07PM – Link
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>
    Well, you almost got it right. But Israel isn’t my single issue…it’s just the biggest example of my main issue.
    “Corruption” of our democracy and political system ‘is’ my single issue. I believe that is where most of our problems..and our people’s..and some other countries people’s problems ….stems from.
    That’s where Israel comes in and it rates first place in my US corruption scale…I see our unconditional support of Israel and everything it has done to be ‘The Most Outstanding Example’ of our government corruption because..We.. our government, has allowed a client state to literally decimate a part of another land and people; women and children, for years and years, as in Gaza, and allowed it to cause such uncalled for wanton destruction of life and property as Israel did in Lebanon ….for ‘ domestic political considerations’….money and votes.
    Israel-Palestine is The One single conflict we could stop without firing a shot or spending a dime..with just ethical, moral action in congress.
    It is to me,.. ..well, I can’t even find words bad enough to describe this kind of depraved moral corruption in this government…it’s sickening.
    It’s not possible for humans to get any lower than that…trading money and votes and political favors for dead Palestine children…’and’.. dead Israelis. And the Jewish lobby and those Jews and those Gentiles in congress who allow it and support it with American money and legistation and UN vetos are responsible for every single one of those dead.
    If I had a magic wand the guilty would disappear in a puff of smoke in a eye blink.

    Reply

  83. rc says:

    Benjamin Netanyahu’s little snub of Obama in declining the US’s nuclear (beat up Iran and N. Korea) conference accounts for little in exposing US & Israeli politics to the internationally important question: does Israel have nuclear weapons?
    Actually Netanyahu’s snub is more towards China which is attending both US and Iran organized conferences and has the bargaining hand. Sending in #2 is exactly what China did at COP15.

    Reply

  84. Sweetness says:

    That’s a fair request; I will.

    Reply

  85. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Hamas: Documents Revealed by Ha’aretz Enough to Sue Israel’s Leaders
    Xinhua
    April 9, 2010
    A Hamas movement’s spokesman said on Friday that the secret documents revealed by the Israeli media on the Israeli war on Gaza are enough to be a proof to sue the Israeli leaders at international courts.
    An investigative report published in the Israeli Ha’aretz Daily Thursday revealed documents showing that the Israeli army leaders gave instructions to soldiers to kill Palestinians “in cold blood” instead of arresting them.
    The Israeli journalist Auri Blaw said in his report that the Israeli army has apparently violated the instructions of the Israeli high court of justice, adding he has documents showing that soldiers executed Palestinians without trial.
    Sami Abu Zuhri, Hamas spokesman in Gaza said in a press statement sent to reporters that revealing the documents in the Israeli media “has to reinforce real efforts to take the leaders of the occupation to international courts to sue them for committing war crimes against humanity.
    “Ignoring these documents and these facts that Israel committed war crimes in Gaza would encourage the Israeli occupation to keep committing more crimes against the Palestinian people,” said Abu Zuhri.
    continues……
    http://uruknet.com/index.php?p=m64953&hd=&size=1&l=e
    This chapter of Israeli history, and the media’s “recording” of that history follows the usual course. It is being portrayed as a matter of espionage and journalistic malfeasance. But in fact, the REAL story here is what these documents reveal; That it is a matter of policy and directive that IDF soldiers routinely murder non combatants. In fact, they are ORDERED AND INSTRUCTED to do so.
    Once again, the narrative is being manipulated and driven in a diversionary direction in order to conceal the real import of what Israel has done, is doing, and will do. Here, the parallel to Nazi Germany and its actions must be drawn, in spite of the fact that such a comparison recieves the same kind of diversionary derision employed when the accusation of “anti-semitism” is used to change the narrative. The issue becomes the use of the “nazi comparison” rather than whether or not the comparison is accurate or warranted. The truth, when one cuts through the social unacceptability of giving words to the truth, is that Israel’s action ARE IN FACT very similiar to the actions of the Nazis. The warsaw ghetto, the arrests of Jews, the public campaigns demonizing the Jews, and the purposeful murder of the Jews are ALL dynamics and acts mimicked by Israel in its treatment of the Palestinians. If a family of Palestinians is marched into a house that is subsequently targeted with artillary fire, how does that differ from marching a family of Jews into a gaseous shower?
    And here we see documents revealed that PROVE that Israeli soldiers are actually TASKED to MURDER citizens based SOLELY on their ethnicity, race, or religion. This is not the kind of behaviour that was routinely exhibited by the nazis? It is time to give words to the obvious, rather than hide behind a veil of “respectability” or “correctness” when describing Israeli behaviour. It can only be considered cowardice to fail to voice the truth for fear that the truth will expose you to insult and derision. That insult and derision is only designed to silence you, and to maintain an inaccurate and propagandised narrative that has been the only voice for far too long.
    Israel is committing the same kinds of crimes Nazi Germany did, for the same kinds of reasons. And we are aiding and abetting them.

    Reply

  86. nadine says:

    Sweetness, Malley has a long anti-Israel record and a long paper trail. You could say that he grew up in it, as his parents were personal friends of Arafat and radical anti-Israel leftists with long careers of their own. Simon Malley, his father, was born in Egypt of a Syrian family.
    You are right that Malley worked for Clinton, not Arafat. I had his position confused with Hussein Agha, his co-author on the many pro-Arafat papers. So I stand corrected in that. Malley just functioned as an Arafat aide and propagandist.
    Blog comments are not the place to lay out a dissertation. Why don’t you look up some of Malley & Agha’s numerous articles in Foreign Affairs and read them for yourself? Compare them to what Dennis Ross wrote. As for other State Dept types defending him, there are all kinds of political motivations (like maybe the wish to be employed in an Obama administration) that come into play. Notice the date of that defense.

    Reply

  87. Sweetness says:

    Nadine…then you are asserting what, normally, you’d have to show.
    You believe your interpretation of various things are fact, which is
    fine–but it’s not persuasive to someone who isn’t already
    persuaded. But I think we can PROBABLY agree that Ross isn’t
    “pro-Palestinian”…and probably Sandy Berger isn’t either…and they
    both chose to defend him. Also, we can probably agree that Malley
    wasn’t an “aide to Arafat.” Yes?
    We can even say that Malley was factually wrong about Arafat re the
    suicide bombers. But it’s a whole another thing to say he’s “pro
    Palestinian and anti-Israel.” Those are much bigger statements.
    Otherwise, you end up sounding like Carroll who wants to say (in
    effect) that Americans who disagree with her about what America’s
    true interests are…and campaign for their views…are traitors, or
    firsters, or dual loyalists, or something.

    Reply

  88. nadine says:

    More on J Street funding. True, Arab money per se is not enough of a red flag, although AIPAC, ZOA etc don’t get any. But the Jerusalem Post has more information (sorry I have to link to American Thinker, but the Jpost doesn’t keep its links to old articles working)
    ” [S]ome of the contributors play key roles in the organization. The finance committee’s 50 members — with a $10,000 contribution threshold — include Lebanese-American businessman Richard Abdoo, a current board member of Amideast and a former board member of the Arab American Institute, and Genevieve Lynch, who is also a member of the National Iranian American Council board. The group has also received several contributions from Nancy Dutton, an attorney who once represented the Saudi Embassy in Washington.
    Smaller donors include several leaders of Muslim student groups, Saudi- and Iranian-born Americans, and Palestinian- and Arab-American businessmen who also give to Arab-oriented PACs.
    Additionally, Nicole Shampaine, director of the State Department’s Office for Egypt and the Levant, gave $1,000 last summer. Lewis Elbinger, who used to serve in Saudi Arabia, gave a combined $150.
    A State Department legal adviser said there were no laws or codes prohibiting employees from donating to groups doing advocacy work on the policies they are formulating.
    “The State Department ethics rules don’t prohibit contributions to lobbying groups,” she said. ”
    http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/08/j_streets_arab_and_muslim_dono.html
    Ed Lasky at American Thinker adds
    “The National Iranian American is all but a de facto Embassy for the Iranian regime. The president, Trita Parsi, is an apologist for the Tehran regime and has actively promoted the end of sanctions geared towards preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons. Parsi actually wrote a book castigating the ties between American and Israel . In his book, he takes aim at the so-called Israel Lobby in America and conjures up anti-Semitic conspiracy images while doing so. And a member of the board of his group is a donor to J Street — which supposedly, if you listen to its leaders and read its material — lobbies for Israel in America! Needless to say, not a strong sign that J Street is that supportive of the America-Israel relationship. I can hear objections about guilt by association already but… the NAIC is a pro-Iranian group that has routinely worked to weaken American-Israel ties and that is indisputable.”
    So to recap, major (>$10,000) donors/finance committee members and board members are also associated with:
    National Iranian American Council is anti-Israel and pro Iranian government
    The Arab American Institute, which aims to be an Arab version of AIPAC, is also anti-Israel
    George Soros is anti-Israel, and his aide Mort Halperin is on the board
    All these contributors and committee members and board members make sense if J Street’s aim is to be an anti-AIPAC organization that weakens American-Israeli ties. If J Street is supposed to support Israel, not so much.

    Reply

  89. nadine says:

    Sweetness, we aren’t arguing about whether J Street claims to be pro Israel. It does. We are arguing about whether it is actually pro Israel.
    As for Malley, I read all the articles he published in 2000 and 2001. He is pro Palestinian across the board & was twisting himself in knots to act as Arafat’s apologist, because he really had to deny the obvious: that Israel had gone way over all its previous red lines to extend the best offer that was possible for PM Barak to offer, maybe even better than he could have gotten the Knesset to vote for, 100% Gaza, 95% WB + land swaps to make 100%, and that Arafat had refused, not countered, gone home and boasted proudly “I turned over the table” and continued the terror war of the second intifada. 2001 and 2002 were the high points of suicide bombers blowing up Israeli restaurants and buses.
    So Malley was instrumental in the Palestinian effort to deny Arafat was in charge of the terror war (it was later conclusively proved when Israel raided his office and found POs for suicide bomb belts with his signature), mis-describe the Israeli offer as far less than Clinton or Ross said it was (“bantustans”), calling everybody but Arafat a liar, make excuses for why the offer couldn’t be accepted or countered, etc. This effort began in earnest about mid 2001 when the Palestinians saw how much diplomatic harm they had done to themselves, and Malley’s efforts for them were heroic. Israel’s survival is not much of a concern for Robert Malley. At all. So in short, I don’t care what fellow State Dept types say about him.
    Charles Johnson is a strange case. He became a conservative post 2001, but he broke with the right around 2007 for reasons that nobody can quite figure out (his explanations make no sense) and has turned LGF into a weird little exercise in authoritarianism, where only posters who tell him how great he is are allowed.

    Reply

  90. Sweetness says:

    Nadine…

    Reply

  91. nadine says:

    “I read the Pajama Party thing, which is
    related to Little Green Footballs. It

    Reply

  92. nadine says:

    questions, with J Street, the Jewish community is drawing away from them as it becomes clear that they are not really pro Israel at all; their function is to give cover to Obama’s anti-Israel positions. They are there so Obama can say “Jewish organizations support my policy” no matter what he does.
    The question of Arab and Iranian money is telling because these sources are opposed to Israel’s survival — there is no way they would give a penny to any organization that they truly felt was pro Israel. That’s why you shouldn’t brush off the connection. If somebody claimed to be a pro civil rights organization, and you found out he was getting money from the KKK, wouldn’t you find that significant?
    Even more telling is the question of who sits on the board, and for what end? Robert Malley, for example. He was Arafat’s aide; he wrote tons of articles after Camp David arguing that Arafat was not at fault for refusing the offers, didn’t launch a terror war, was an innocent lamb, etc, basically calling Bill Clinton and Dennis Ross liars. He is an Obama adviser, the one who had to step down from the campaign when he was found to be negotiating with Hamas. His positions are pro Palestinian across the board. Okay, why would he be on the board of a pro Israel group? Short answer: he wouldn’t be. Logical inference: J Street isn’t really pro Israel.
    Nobody is saying real organizations that are dovish or left-wing can’t and don’t exist. Nobody says this about Tikkun, Peace Now, or Bitter Lemons, all left wing organizations. Even conservative Likudniks who think Rabbi Lerner is as wrong as he can be, don’t say he is not pro Israel; they just think his policies are bad for Israel. But J Street looks like a different case.
    Here’s a question for you: please tell me what pro Israel positions J Street has actually taken?

    Reply

  93. Sweetness says:

    POA writes:

    Reply

  94. Carroll says:

    This is interesting…
    http://www.thenational.ae/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100410/FOREIGN/704099830/1011
    A theory on Arabs practicing reverse discrimination against Jews for the purpose of losing in court and thereby setting legal precedents to challenge Israeli discrimination against Israeli Arabs.
    No doubt would hurt some Arab business but might be a good ploy to either overturn some racist Israeli laws or failing that, accentuating in actual legality the apartheid-like practices of Israel.

    Reply

  95. PissedOffAmerican says:

    So this racist piece of work, Nadine, thinks that all Arab money is “anti-Israel” money.
    I strongly suggest anyone following her horseshit visit the link she provided, which of course leads to other links. Note the wording used by these called “reputable” sources. “Ojective” or “unbiased” is hardly a sensible conclusion to be reached when one reads the body of her “evidence”.
    For instance…

    Reply

  96. nadine says:

    Jerry, you have now received the standard response from one of the TWN faithful anti-Semites: insult the messenger.
    The facts of what Jerusalem neighborhoods are where can be confirmed by looking at a map. This isn’t a matter of opinion.

    Reply

  97. Neo Controll says:

    Jerry, you have now received the official Israeli response, brought to you by the local habarist. Take it with a grain of salt.
    — NCHQ

    Reply

  98. nadine says:

    Jerry, most of central Jerusalem is east of the Green Line, and was thus not traditionally Arab only but mixed, e.g. the Old City, divided into Jewish, Muslim, Christian and Armenian quarters.
    So the answer is: some of what gets called “East Jersalem” was traditionally Arab, and some of it was Christian, Armenian, and Jewish. The Jews were ethnically cleared out of East Jerusalem in 1948. Lots of it is new development on formerly undeveloped land, such as Ramat Shlomo, the Jewish neighborhood that was used as a pretext for the fight this time around.
    Olmert offered Abu Mazen Arab East Jerusalem for a capital in his 2008 offer, so such an offer could be on the table again some time in the future if conditions permitted.
    The notion that Jews are inventing their connection to Jerusalem to please conservative Christians is absurd.

    Reply

  99. Jerry says:

    Is there really an entity called East Jerusalem or is this just a plot of land to be used as a bargining chip, a figment of the imagination,
    a pretense of the Isralies used to gain support of the conservative christians in the U.S.A.
    a plot of land to be surrendered, even though it has always been Palestinian, as a concession in final two state negotiatios?
    Maybe the End Time is indeed near, not for the world but for the conservative christian power grab…sanity will indeed prevail in the long term.

    Reply

  100. nadine says:

    “Talk about your big, fat, airy trial balloons.
    Cooper and Ignatius on the same day?”
    Yup.
    “I don

    Reply

  101. nadine says:

    Signing the NPT would give the UN power over
    Israel. Since the UN’s opinion of Israel is
    controlled by the Arab bloc, Israel doesn’t want to
    do that.

    Reply

  102. nadine says:

    Sweetness, yes, the J Street director, Jeremy Ben
    Ami, has admitted in an interview that about 10%
    of their money comes from Arab/Iranian sources.
    See this research piece on J Street:
    http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/showdown-on-j-street/
    He keeps getting questioned, naturally, on why
    Arab or Iranian government donors would want to
    donate to a “pro Israel” organization.
    J Street’s position against Iran sanctions was
    public. I believe they have softened it lately in
    response to near universal disgust from the Jewish
    community. FYI, Daniel Levy, whom Steve Clemons
    keeps posting on TWN, was one of the founders of J
    Street.
    This is becoming a popular DC setup: the “popular”
    institution that represents a “large constituency”
    – except that it has very few members, and
    actually gets the vast majority of its funds from
    large donors, not subscriptions, and the names of
    the large donors and their real intentions remain
    hidden. CAIR works that way. It has only about
    3,000 members but runs around pretending it speaks
    for millions of American Muslims.

    Reply

  103. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Censorship and Israel

    Reply

  104. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “The question in Jewish America is, is J Street pro-Israel at all?”
    This type of statement from Nadine pretty much tells ya all you gotta know about the wretched hasbarist liar. Are there any American Jews reading this that want this despicably dissingenuous and bigoted mouthpiece to speak for them?
    So what about it, Wig-Wag? Is there any evidence that J-Street is “anti-Israel”? Is there any evidence that “The question in Jewish America is, is J Street pro-Israel at all”? And if not, why don’t you tell Nadine to just shut the fuck up and stop embarrassing American Jews with her ceaseless horseshit? Are you actually proud to have this liar and fanatic pimping for Israel?

    Reply

  105. Sweetness says:

    Nadine, thanks for your comments.
    Do you have any back up for this assertion?
    “It gets a good chunk of its money from Arab and Iranian sources. It opposes sanctions on Iran.”
    On another front…
    What say you about Israel joining the NPT? Seems to me this is a no-brainer. As we see with all the countries who are signatories–notably the US and Russia–it hasn’t hurt their deterrent capability.

    Reply

  106. Dan Kervick says:

    Talk about your big, fat, airy trial balloons. Cooper and Ignatius on the same day?
    I love this theatrical touch: Obama just came moseying in to some room in the White House where six former national security advisors happened to be talking to the current one about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and they all told him about this great new approach

    Reply

  107. Dirk says:

    Interesting little item over at Juan Cole’s Informed Comment:
    …”But there is another possible explanation for Netanyahu staying away from a summit on nuclear security issues in Washington. It is that the Israeli prime minister is protesting a new White House policy of refusing visas to Israeli scientists, engineers and technicians who work at the Dimona Reactor/ nuclear bomb factory. Up until recently they had been free to attend technical and scientific conferences and pursue advanced classes at US universities. The visa denials were reported in the Israeli newspaper Maariv by Uri Binder on Wednesday April 7: “Nuclear Reactor Workers Not Wanted in United States.” It was translated by the USG Open Source Center. The article reports that Israeli workers at the Nuclear Research Center Negev (NRCN) in Dimona are complaining bitterly at the humiliation of being excluded from the US, saying the turn-downs are an “offense” against them “and their families.” (???) Moreover, the Dimona bomb plant is suddenly finding it difficult to import technical components and equipment from the United States. The restrictions, they say, are unprecedented. They also claim a double standard, alleging that the Obama administration is being “lenient” toward Iran.
    In fact, Iran is a signatory of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, is at the moment largely in compliance with it, has no nuclear arsenal, and does not even have a nuclear weapons program. (The treaty allows countries to enrich uranium for fuel, which is all that Iran is known to be doing). Yet the US has an extensive regime of economic sanctions on Iran, along with UN Security Council sanctions, both of which Obama is attempting to ratchet up. In contrast, Israel is actively constructing more and more nuclear warheads, which it is stockpiling, and which its leaders occasionally brandish at other Middle Eastern states. The Israeli arsenal, in turn, spurs a Middle East arms race.
    Obama has just signed a new START treaty with Russia in Prague aiming to reduce the nuclear arsenals of each country by a third, to 15,000. Obama appears to believe that by taking such a step, he can shore up the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, whereby signatories pledge not to develop nuclear weapons. He will have more moral authority to go to the UNSC and ask for more severe sanctions against Iran.
    Obama’s attempt to reduce warhead stockpiles in the US (he will need the Senate’s ratification of the treaty) has been met with a campaign of ridicule and misinformation among Republican politicians and their television channel, Fox Cable “News.” As usual in these matter, Jon Stewart at the Daily Show presents the best take-down of completely false RNC talking points:
    The Daily Show With Jon Stewart Mon – Thurs 11p / 10c The Big Bang Treaty http://www.thedailyshow.com
    In fact, nuclear warheads are extremely dangerous to all of us, and the fewer there are in the world, the better. How many do you really need for deterrence? Pakistan’s 14 little bombs are alleged to have deterred an Indian attack on that country in the summer of 2002. If only one of the 14 was dropped on Delhi, after all, the devastation would have been enormous. With the big nuclear powers, the size of the arsenal itself should be a form of deterrence. It is not impossible that an extensive nuclear exchange could blow away the ozone layer, which keeps us from being sunburned to death. It could throw up so much dust into the atmosphere that two years of night would ensue, which would kill all life on earth (i.e., the dreaded ‘nuclear winter.’) As Stewart noted, Ronald Reagan’s own negotiations with the Soviet Union aimed at reducing warheads by a third, in his own day.
    Obama appears to have a nuclear strategy that deploys arsenal reduction among the great powers as a platform on which to pursue non-proliferation and perhaps even the roll-back of some existing nuclear stockpiles. As with Israel’s stubborn insistence on continuing to steal Palestinian land and to blockade the Gazans– which ensures continued violence– so its rogue nuclear operation is ultimately a threat to the international security of the United States.
    The Israeli scientists at Dimona have it backwards. It is they who are providing a justification to Iran and giving it a motivation to close the fuel cycle and have at least nuclear latency or the ‘Japan option,’ as a way of countering Israel’s policy in the region.”

    Reply

  108. nadine says:

    Sweetness, David Goldman, aka Spengler, who writes for the Asia Times, has a theory about Obama’s imposed peace plan: that it isn’t about Mideast peace at all. That Obama doesn’t care if it works or doesn’t work, doesn’t care about the Palestinians at all. Spengler thinks the only purpose of the plan is to chain Israel down so it can’t attack Iran, so that Obama can make an alliance with Iran.
    This strikes me as plausible, and certainly ties in with the ideas Flynt Leverett is propagating.
    Of course, it’s strategic insanity. It’s the strategic equivalent of telling the opposing soccer team: “I’m tired of playing. Would you give me a rest if I just stood here and kicked five own goals for you?” Iran’s interests are diametricly opposed to our own; Iran is a revolutionary power, both in itself and as an exporter. But then Obama doesn’t believe in ideology (except his own) and doesn’t like American power much anyway, so he’s happy to give it away.

    Reply

  109. Carroll says:

    ROTFLMAO…so much for that ‘only democracy’ in the ME.
    What democracy is all about
    By Uri Blau
    Haarezt
    The telephone call I received about a month ago should not have been a surprise. “Your apartment in Tel Aviv has been broken into,” the voice on the other end of the line said. “Everything’s in a mess and it’s not clear what has been taken.”
    Half an hour later, sweating in a Bangkok phone booth, mosquitoes flying around me, I spoke to the policeman who came to the apartment.
    “Looks like they were looking for something,” he said.
    Advertisement
    I had been told of Anat Kam’s arrest earlier, in China, where I landed with my partner at the beginning of December. When I left Israel I had no reason to believe our planned trip would suddenly turn into a spy movie whose end is not clear. I certainly didn’t think I’d have to stay in London and wouldn’t be able to return to Tel Aviv as a journalist and a free man, only because I published reports that were not convenient to the establishment.
    But the troubling information from Israel left me with no alternative.
    Experiences I had read about in suspense novels have become my reality in recent months. When you’re warned “they know much more than you think,” and are told that your telephone line, e-mail and computer have been monitored for a long time and still are, then someone up there doesn’t really understand what democracy is all about, and the importance of freedom of the press in preserving it.
    When you discover that anonymous complaints about you containing a lot of detailed personal information have reached various investigation authorities, it is clear you have been marked by forces bigger and stronger than yourself. These forces won’t hesitate to take steps reserved for states I don’t think we want to resemble. So when they explained to me that if I return to Israel I could be silenced for ever, and that I would be charged for crimes related to espionage, I decided to fight. Sorry for the cliche, but this isn’t only a war for my personal freedom but for Israel’s image.
    The Kafkaesque situation I found myself in forces me to return to basics. I am a journalist and my aim is to provide the reader as much information as possible and in the best way, with maximum objectivity. It’s not a personal agenda, or a matter of Left or Right. In my years of work for Haaretz my name has appeared, alone and with others, above exposes dealing with public figures and institutions of all kinds, from Avigdor Lieberman, through Ehud Olmert and Ehud Barak to the Peres Center for Peace. None of those exposes could have been published without the help of sources and corroborating documents.
    All the exposes in military or defense matters were vetted by military censors before publication, whether regarding the time Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi was a civilian and businessman or about the IDF’s priorities in tracing Gilad Shalit. Or the story about how the IDF apparently violates the High Court of Justice’s instructions regarding targeted assassinations. This story showed the readers authentic documents exposing the banality of executions with no trial.
    It is clear to me that these reports were not always pleasant to read – neither to their subjects nor to the reader. But it doesn’t matter, because the journalist’s job is not to please his reader, employer or leaders. It is to provide people with the best tools to judge and understand the goings-on around them. Every journalist knows that exposes cannot be released without evidence – but no Israeli journalist has known until now that such exposes could have him declared an enemy of the state and find himself in jail

    Reply

  110. Carroll says:

    P.S.
    After just posting the above I heard on CNN that Netanyahu was ‘snubbing” the US by not showing for the Washington nuke summit. LOL

    Reply

  111. Carroll says:

    Poor Netanyahu…afraid to come I guess. Maybe he’s scared they will humilate him by making him sit in a baby chair down below all the other attendees like the Israeli PM did to humilate the Turkish amb.
    “Netanyahu won’t attend nuke summit in US”
    PM cancels trip after discovering that several Muslim states will be seeking to bring up Israel’s failure to sign NPT during Washington summit; ‘These states intend to exploit occasion to slam Israel,’ senior source says
    Roni Sofer Latest Update: 04.09.10, 00:28 / Israel News
    Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will not be heading to Washington next week for the nuclear summit organized by US President Barack Obama.
    The PM made the decision Thursday after finding out that several Muslim states intend to bring up Israel’s failure to sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Earlier, the PM’s Office issued an official statement announcing the trip.
    “In the last 24 hours we received reports about the intention of various states that will be present at the Washington conference to go beyond the issue of preventing nuclear terror,” a senior source in Jerusalem said. “These states intend to exploit the occasion in order to slam Israel. The prime minister expressed his displeasure over these intentions, and he will therefore not be traveling to the summit.”
    “Israel is usually represented by ministers or specialists at international conferences dealing with this subject,” the source added.
    Minister for Intelligence Affairs Dan Meridor will be representing Israel at the conference instead of Netanyahu along with an expert team.
    No plans for Bibi-Obama meeting
    Officials in Jerusalem are concerned that Arab states and their supporters would seek to exert pressure on Israel over its reported nuclear capabilities. In addition, Netanyahu had not yet responded to demands made by President Obama in respect to efforts to renew the talks with the Palestinians.
    Netanyahu was not scheduled to meet with President Obama during the summit; only nine world leaders of the roughly 46 in attendance are expected to meet with the president.
    According to the information received by Jerusalem, eight or nine Muslim countries intend to bring up the issue at the conference. Some of the information is premised on unequivocal remarks by summit organizers.
    The information prompted PM Netanyahu to reconsider his attendance at the summit, as he does not wish to make Israel the focus of public criticism over its failure to sign the NPT.
    Hours after the announcement was made, The White House said Israel had informed it of the decision. White House National Security Council spokesman Mike Hammer said the Israeli government “has informed us” of the decision to send Meridor instead of Netanyahu to the nuclear security summit.
    “We welcome Deputy Prime Minister Meridor’s participation in the conference. Israel is a close ally and we look forward to continuing to work closely on issues related to nuclear security,” Hammer said.
    AFP contributed to this report

    Reply

  112. Carroll says:

    Posted by PissedOffAmerican, Apr 08 2010, 9:19PM – Link
    You people really don’t get it, don’t see reality. These pieces of shit that are now steering the ship of state in Israel will stop at NOTHING to pursue the desired end. I am surprised Carroll doesn’t see it,
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    Oh, I see it alright. I know exactly what Israel will try to do.
    BUT…I think they are being watched so it might not be as easy as in the past.
    Remember in Bush’s last year when the US commander paid a visit to Israel’s military and said that the US didn’t want any more ‘accidents” like the USS Liberty? That was a warning. The USS Liberty didn’t accidentally come up in his lecture.
    Of course to the batshit crazy as the delusional Israelis are, being watched means nothing because they think they can lie their way out of anything or claim the holocaust made them do it.
    I argued from the beginning that eventually the US military would be the one, and would be the only one, who could turn around US policy on Israel.
    Now that is what the top brass is doing.
    Obama (and congress) has now ‘been told’ by his own commanders that I/P jeopardizes US security & interest. That fact is also now out in the public sphere. And the Israeli firsters are in a dizzying frenzy trying to cover it up.
    This puts Obama as much on the spot as Netanyahu.
    Obama has turned the Israelis game back on them and played it well so far.
    But..here’s the danger…will Obama try to find a middle way, a way to protect US jewish concerns for the political coffers and a way to protect US interests at the same time? If he tries this he will lose. One, there is no end to jewish demands on Americans for Israel. Second, whatever he does now for Israel that goes against what his military command has advised will be seen by Americans as not in their own interest. So Obama will lose both the jewish vote and a large portion of the American voted by trying straddle that fence.
    He needs to channel Ike and make a stand.
    So what’s Obama’s going to do? That’s the trillion dollar question.

    Reply

  113. nadine says:

    Yes, Paul, I think Israel’s borders should be determined by negotiation, which happens to be what Resolution 242 says. The Green Line is the truce line of 1949. That’s all. I don’t think you get to a) not recognize Israel b) try to destroy Israel seval times, then c) demand a complete do-over on the wars you just lost. If the Palestinians want a final border, let them do a deal.

    Reply

  114. nadine says:

    “Nadine, I’m left with the impression that you feel that the US has no role to play in resolving this conflict and that, from the US stanpoint, it isn’t important to resolve it.” (Sweetness)
    With any diplomatic problem, Sweetness, the most important thing is to assess when there are openings. Because it’s not like the act of pushing for a solution is risk-free; on the contrary, it comes with high risks; in the case of I/P, it generally comes with a sizable body count.
    If the Palestinians had one leadership which looked like it was interested in building Palestine; if it toned down the incitement, and quietly worked on the ground for a modus vivendi, then I would feel completely differently, and be all for pushing Netanyahu to make a generous offer — and so would a majority of Israelis.
    The Israelis want peace, and have shown that they are willing to make concessions and take risks for it. Give them a little credit for knowing if there is an opening or not. There isn’t one now.
    The threat from Iran prevents it, since Iran funds all the radical groups, the radical Fatah Central Committee prevents it, the Palestinian civil war prevents it, and above all Hamas prevents it. Obama’s response is to pretend none of these problems exist, and to beat up on Israel.
    This is totally counter-productive and will lead to more violence, as I explained already. Meantime, the real problem, Iran, is not being addressed at all. Worse, the Left has this insane idea that an I/P peace would mollify the radicals, when it would drive them nuts. Remember, Hamas rise as a terrorist organization was during Oslo – they were desperate to derail what they regarded as blasphemous treachery to the Cause.
    So the short answer is that there is no way forward on I/P right now, while Iran funds the radicals. Wisdom means taking conditions into account.

    Reply

  115. Haim says:

    This “plan” is a pig that would not fly.

    Reply

  116. somewhatimpressed says:

    Until now I’ve taken Obama to be little more than a lightweight cosmetic mole on the US corporate chin. However, I’m prepared to consider he may just be a very shrewd dude after all, especially if he flushes out this Israeli bullshit and shows it for the scam it is.
    Everyone knows it, everyone can see it, and most are bemused at how brazen, full frontal denial of facts and logic can manage to intimidate weak willed government for so long.
    This simple 101 technique in itself is no secret to paralyzing the host (i.e. the US system of governance and culture). It worked with Cheney’s GWBush finger puppet, but this time the US may just have elected an intelligent man (in the full sense of the word) with his eye on Ithaca. How does it go? Keep your friends close and your enemies even closer.
    Whether this ‘soft’ approach can be ascribed to Obama or to ‘higher powers above’ is a mute point. However it does seem to be rattling the political rats in their organized criminal sewers.
    Obviously the time is up for the policy of ‘ambiguity’ and a duet by Turkey and Egypt on this issue now signals a new start to peace processes in the Middle East. Or at least it should if not smothered by media bias.
    We cannot expect much from those camp drones in Saudi Arabia

    Reply

  117. Paul Norheim says:

    As most of you know, I don’t see any point in discussing
    anything with Nadine. But let me provide an enlightening
    excerpt from the Moscow suicide thread somewhere below – it’s
    from an exchange between Dan Kervick and Nadine:
    “Posted by Dan Kervick, Apr 04 2010, 9:20PM:
    …Lets cut to the chase: are you saying that if Israel established
    a border on the pre-1967 line, they couldn’t successfully and
    rather easily defend it?
    (…) I talk of cutting to the chase because I have gone around in
    these circles for several years now with Israel’s deputized global
    sob patrols. And I have found after one hacks through the usual
    thickets of noisy kvetching and excuses, and the gripes about
    what some Arab did back in 1933 0r 1946 or 1971, they usually
    settle down eventually and just admit they want the freaking
    land.
    It always starts with “How dare you say that awful thing about
    us just wanting to take the land?!” and ends with “Sure we want
    the land! Why shouldn’t we take the land?!” This is the standard
    comedy act of Israel’s noise machine.”
    ————————————-
    “Posted by nadine, Apr 05 2010, 12:56AM:
    (…) Yes, I’m saying that. Those are not defensible borders. I
    don’t think you can ever have examined a map to say that. You
    think it’s “easy” to defend borders that leave your country nine
    miles wide at points? when surrounded by suicidally-hostile
    neighbors who won’t even recognize your existence?”
    (…)
    —————————————–
    “Posted by Dan Kervick, Apr 05 2010, 7:51AM:
    OK, Nadine, so Israel wants to annex additional Arab land so
    that their country won’t be so narrow. Correct?”
    —————————————–
    “Posted by nadine, Apr 05 2010, 2:01PM:
    Yes, Dan, they would like more of the stateless land (…)”
    ——————————————–
    End of excerpt; end of discussion between Dan and Nadine at
    that thread.

    Reply

  118. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “I doubt that people like Reid and Hoyer can continue to pay visits to Israel celebrating their newest settlements the way they did until recently. Maybe I’m wrong or naive. We’ll see”
    Maybe? I guarantee you’re wrong. Netanyahu spits in Obama’s face daily in regards to the settlements, and Obama just takes it.
    Heres what will happen;
    This piece of shit Netanyahu will promise “concessions”, which will be fictitious. Hillary, our media, and this coward Obama will compliment Netanyahu on his “concessions”, and in return for Netanyahu playing his appointed role and pretending to give in, we will assume a more hawkish stance on Iran.
    And the Palestinians will continue to be erased.
    And these sacks of shit like Hoyer don’t need to actually travel to Israel to undermine a “hardline” with Israel. They have the majority AND the minority when it comes to Israel, and Obama can’t do jack shit with no one in Congress standing behind him.
    You’re wrong on this one, Paul. Obama is a damned eunich in regards to Israel. His own party, and his Secretary of State, have cut his balls off.
    He’s a one termer, and when the GOP gets back in power, Israel can REALLY start erasing those nasty heathen Muslim inferiors with impunity. And I don’t mean JUST Palestinians.
    “The question in Jewish America is, is J Street pro-Israel at all?”
    If this lying bigot Nadine speaks for Jews, than I’m becoming a raging anti-semite.

    Reply

  119. Paul Norheim says:

    POA,
    yes, until now Netanyahu treated the US congress as if it was his
    favorite concert piano. Thanks to Obama, and especially the
    pianist himself, I have the feeling that the Israeli PM from now of
    is restricted to playing the Grand with four fingers on his left
    hand.
    And after Petraeus’ recent statements I wouldn’t be surprised if
    certain keys on that Grand Piano are now conspicuously out of
    tune, almost silent, or completely mute.
    I doubt that people like Reid and Hoyer can continue to pay visits
    to Israel celebrating their newest settlements the way they did
    until recently. Maybe I’m wrong or naive. We’ll see.

    Reply

  120. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “The question in Jewish America is, is J Street pro-Israel at all?”
    Thats fuckin’ bullshit.
    Nadine, you are a liar.
    Give us one credible single source or statistical evidence for a statement like that. You are so full of shit, Nadine. Don’t you have any pride or self respect?

    Reply

  121. nadine says:

    Paul, J Street was set up and funded as a left-wing opposition organization to AIPAC. Mort Halperin (Soros’ aide) and Robert Malley (Arafat’s aide and current Obama Mideast advisor) sit on its board. It gets a good chunk of its money from Arab and Iranian sources. It opposes sanctions on Iran.
    The question in Jewish America is, is J Street pro-Israel at all? I wouldn’t use J Street to measure the zeitgeist. As for Carroll’s wishing Obama to take it to the public, I say, the results will not be what she (or he) expect if he tries. Obama will only rally his progressive base and continue to lose independents and Republicans. Obama might be the first Democrat to lose the Jewish vote, as Jewish voter see how badly they were deceived.
    As for Netanyahu, he already has a centrist Israeli government. He is in coalition with Labor, which is to the left of Kadima. Ehud Barak, the Labor PM who negotiated with Arafat and Clinton at Camp David and Taba in 2000, is Defense Minister. If Tsipi Livni would be more malleable, it’s not that she’s more to the left, but that she is weaker and wooly-headed.
    Obama has brought his knack for uniting the opposition to this struggle with Netanyahu. None of the proposed Mideast settlements (of which it is said that we know what they look like) discussed uprooting hundreds of thousands of people and giving away the Jewish presence in the center of the Jerusalem, in the Old City or the new Jewish neighborhoods. No Israeli PM could propose it and survive, whatever his party.
    As for the Palestinians, they continue to have a low grade civil war. Extensive (even coercive) attempts at mediation by the Saudis and Egyptians have yielded nothing. If they did unite, it would be around Hamas’ ideology, which does not permit, as a matter of non-negotiable religous principle, recognition or peace with Israel. The West Bank would soon follow Gaza in becoming a base for Hamas rockets.

    Reply

  122. PissedOffAmerican says:

    What is the “american side”??? I don’t see it.
    Whose America? Lieberman’s? Alan Dershowitz’s?
    You are dreaming if you think this gutless politician Obama is going to stand up to 99% of the United States’ Congress, and their task master, Netanyahu.

    Reply

  123. Paul Norheim says:

    Correction: PA ” being politically too clever to be credible”

    Reply

  124. Paul Norheim says:

    “Lobe also ‘gets it’..take it to the public Obama on what is best
    for US security, flank yourself with military, and watch how fast
    the public lines up behind you. That’s all Obama needs to
    do…use his bully pulpit in the name of US security..then watch
    congress start sweating blood.” (Carroll)
    Yes, I think this is correct. Add phenomenons like J-Street as
    expressions of discomfort with AIPAC positions within the
    Jewish-American community, and you may see a climate change
    on this in America as well. We’ll see. But Petreaus’ statements
    were crucial here, and difficult to argue against.
    Two crucial questions remain open, however:
    1) Will Israel make a choice – and in which direction?
    The advantage with Netanyahu as PM is the admirable clarity his
    priorities provide to the rest of the world and within Israel. If he
    now – to avoid an even more direct collision with America – is
    forced to exclude some hardliners and include someone from
    the Israeli “center” into his government, will we then get more
    fog, BS, and nice talk instead of real choices and commitments
    from the Israeli side?
    2) Will the Palestinians be able to unite politically and speak
    with one credible POLITICAL voice?
    Even if the two main factions on the Palestinian side were able
    to unite in a formal way, the question remains: How politically
    mature is Hamas, after the attack on Gaza, and after being
    boycotted by almost everyone everywere after being elected, to
    deal – in cooperation with the PA – with the central issues
    involved in a two state solution? Will they approach this as
    guerilla soldiers, or are they capable of thinking as politicians?
    This kind of transition has proven to be very difficult in many
    African countries in the last couple of decades, to mention
    recent examples, and no one should expect a smooth transition
    in this case either. Secondly there are issues like corruption
    within the PA faction, and being politically too clever to be
    clever etc. but that is well known.
    To sum up: Things are looking brighter on the American side
    right now. However, a lot of questions remain open regarding
    the Israeli and the Palestinian side.

    Reply

  125. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “Settler groups are pushing to evict two more Palestinian families from their homes in the East Jerusalem neighborhood of Sheikh Jarrah, part of a wider program to demolish Palestinian homes in the area to make way for 200 housing units designated for Jews”
    http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1161341.html
    So, uh, this is happening in the face of Obama’s “ultimatums” and deadlines for a response? (Which, incidentally, passed some time ago.) And where is Hillary and Obama’s response to this arrogance and disrespect? Have you ever seen such pathetic cowardice and dismally inept diplomacy as that exhibited by these two??
    Horseshit. This empty suit, this posturing fake Obama has neither the balls nor the team to take on Israel. You don’t “impose” anything when the target of your demands has our Secretary of State attired in designer kneepads, and 99% of Congress down on all fours mewling “Yeah baby, stick it to me”.

    Reply

  126. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “What do you see as the way forward?”
    She’s gotcha on hold until she checks the script.
    This is interesting….
    Israel in OECD: Israel Set to Join Club of Richest Nations
    by Jonathan Cook*
    After painstaking efforts, it looks as though Israel might be admitted to the OECD this year, even though the conditions of extreme poverty in which its Arab population is kept fly in the face of the organization

    Reply

  127. Sweetness says:

    Nadine, I’m left with the impression that you feel that the US has no role to play in resolving this conflict and that, from the US stanpoint, it isn’t important to resolve it.
    Is this true?
    What do you see as the way forward?

    Reply

  128. JohnH says:

    I get it POA. Interesting that the most logical time for Obama to propose a comprehensive settlement is November, exactly the deadline Israel is now giving Iran…
    Any terrorist act, fabricated so as to be attributable to an Iranian or a Palestinian, could be used to justify a massive Israeli operation, designed to drag in Uncle Sam and derail the “peace process” and gobble up more Palestinian farm land.

    Reply

  129. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “…..paying attention.”

    Reply

  130. PissedOffAmerican says:

    You people really don’t get it, don’t see reality. These pieces of shit that are now steering the ship of state in Israel will stop at NOTHING to pursue the desired end. I am suprised Carroll doesn’t see it, and I am suprised at JohnH’s naivete.
    If any international course of action is pursued that imposes a “solution” onto Israel, they will work covertly to derail the process through false flag terrorist attacks that lead straight back to the Palestinians. Simply put, they will murder Americans, and blame it on the Palestinians. The scale with which they will do this depends upon the scale of the percieved “threat” to their ultimate agenda.
    This IS NOT a “maybe”. It is logic based on past Israeli behavior. If anyone reading this does not think Israel is capable of such a policy, you have simply not been paying.
    The greatest gift to Israel, at this point in time, would be a media extravaganza, featuring a few thousand dead Americans, slain at the hands of some Muslim wackjob with easily traceable ties to Hamas. Just call it a “trifecta”. A nasty murderous “jihadist”, with ties to Hamas, that came over with an Iranian passport, would be the jackpot.
    Ask the sailors of the Liberty, or the parents of Tristan Anderson, if Israel gives a shit about the lives of American citizens.
    And make no mistake, there are neocons, AMERICAN neocons, that would help Israel do this.

    Reply

  131. nadine says:

    Carroll, tell it to the Palestinians. They are ones who never present a plan but say NO to everything they are offered, making more demands instead of concessions. That’s why the parties never meet in the middle like they would in normal negotiations.
    What’s going to happen is another humiliation for the Obama administration, with a side of war in the Mideast. If there isn’t a peace plan acceptable to both sides, the US can’t want peace more than the parties. Which is why previous Presidents had sense enough not to try imposing a solution. In fact, previous Presidents promised the US wouldn’t try to impose a solution, another agreement that Obama has unilaterally abrogated. Think Israel trusts US promises now?
    Senator Schumer of NY has been “working behind the scenes,” according to Ed Koch. He must be in a state of near panic. He’s up for reelection this year and the last thing he needs is for Obama to lose the Jewish vote for him.
    BTW, Obama reassured Jewish voters more than once during the campaign that Brzezinski and Malley were not and would not be his advisors on Israel. So who do we see devising this policy, according to the NYT? Snowcroft, Brzezinski and Malley. What a shameless liar Obama is. There is so much buyer’s remorse out there, this election is setting up to lay 1994 in the shade.

    Reply

  132. Carroll says:

    nadine….
    Do you want a Jewish State or not?
    Cause if you do, you will have to accept half a loaf, you will not get the whole pie.
    And if Israel doesn’t accept a scaled back version of their zionist dream then it isn’t gonna last as Jewish state.
    You can write a trillion words on it, and rant and rave, but that’s what it’s going to come to. And it’s gonna come to that regardless of what the US might or might not do. The only difference is how much longer it’s gonna take, how many more people are gonna die and how much more despised Israel will end up being in a long drawn out ending.
    So take your pick, half a loaf or nothing.

    Reply

  133. JohnH says:

    Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir provided the smoking gun, revealing Likud’s intentions and techniques in an interview with Ma’ariv:
    “Moderation should relate to the tactics but not the goal. That is how I acted as prime minister. In my political activity I know how to display the tactics of moderation, but without conceding anything on the goal–the integrity of the Land of Israel. In my eyes, anyone who is not in accord with this, does not belong to the national movement…What is this talk about ‘political settlements’? I would have carried on autonomy talks for ten years, and meanwhile we would have reached half a million people in Judea and Samaria.”
    There you have it–stonewalling as the essence of Likud policy. But, of course, intransigence was accompanied by ritual condemnations of the Palestinian side for lack of cooperation. Netanyahu and Sharon never deviated from these policy.
    Nadine is simply perpetuating the charade.

    Reply

  134. DonS says:

    The Israel Firsters seem to be stumbling over themselves like spoiled little 5 year olds in an attempt to poison the chance that any serious peace attempt might succeed. Why, one asks, would it be in anyone’s interest to inveigh against the advancement of peace?
    What’s the problem when the alternatives are not good: 1) continued deprivation for Palestinians 2) continued erosion of viability for the Jewish state.
    No, one must assume that having had a far right wing mindset imbued, congealed with a radical zionist prejudice, the only possible result is to sabotage everything that upsets the status quo (except for Israeli expansion), and unquestioned US political, monetary, and emotional support.

    Reply

  135. JohnH says:

    Nadine, I already did translate the substance–Netanyahu said “no” to “imposition” of a peace plan. At least now we know who’s intransigent.
    As for Rick Richman’s piece, the multiple plans are a good indication of “peace processism,” a series of offers designed to give one side the appearance of a sincere commitment to peace but designed to be non-starters by the other side.
    We saw this with the incomparably incompetent Condi’s offer to talk to Iran, but only after Iran had agreed to whatever the US demanded. Or Obama’s offer to provide medical isotopes, maybe someday after Iran had turned over all its enriched uranium.
    There are lots of ways to sabotage negotiations, and Israel has mastered most of them over the last 60 years.

    Reply

  136. nadine says:

    good comment from Rick Richman:
    “The

    Reply

  137. nadine says:

    I didn’t know you read Arabic, JohnH. Care to translate?

    Reply

  138. nadine says:

    “It’s then up to the
    Palestinians to agree, and if they fail to agree to a truly fair plan,
    then that point will be there for all to see.” (Sweetness)
    For all to see? Will Carroll see it? You know the answer to that. No more will Obama. Israel’s previous offers have vanished, they never happened. If it’s not good enough for the Palestinians, it’s the Israelis’ fault. The Israelis get punished for making an unsatisfactory offer, no matter what, no matter how painful, no matter how close it came to what the Palestinians were claiming they wanted. Gee, let’s think, what result does that guarantee?
    However, I don’t see why it has the wide implications you state.
    Yes, it will build on some prior understandings, as you point
    out, but the fact is, the process is stalled.”
    No, no, no. It doesn’t BUILD on prevous understandings; it ABROGATES them, thus devaluing the worth of American promises to anybody now or in the future.
    Like Tom Barnett said, strategically stupid with a capital DUH! We’ll be lucky if this idiot Obama doesn’t set the entire Mideast aflame.

    Reply

  139. JohnH says:

    Nadine, according to El Hayat, Netanyahu already said “No.”
    Looks like intransigent Israelis beat your “intransigent Palestinians” to the punch.
    http://www.daralhayat.com/portalarticlendah/128237

    Reply

  140. nadine says:

    Sweetness, if Obama tries this, it will spark another war along the lines of the Israeli operations in the WB in 2002 or Gaza in 2009.
    That’s because the Palestinians have figured out that Obama will never blame them, no matter what. They have tested the idea by running around Ramallah naming squares etc for the biggest terrorists of the PLO…not a peep from Obama.
    So, the logical conclusion (if you think like Fatah or Hamas) is not only to refuse a deal, but to start another intifada, sending the maximum number of missiles, suicide bombers, etc, you can manage, secure in the knowledge that any reactions you force the Israelis to take, will only increase US-Israeli friction, which is a good result for Fatah and Hamas. They themselves can sit safe and sound, secure in their eternal non-white non-Western blameless underdog-ness. They can even demand new payments for the injuries they suffered stemming from their own actions.
    It’s a no-brainer, Sweetness. It’s what will happen if Obama pushes this idiocy. Wait and see.
    Let’s hope cooler heads prevail. Such as the Congressional Democrats, anxious not to lose the Jewish/pro-Israel vote in what is already going to be a terrible election for Democrats.

    Reply

  141. Sweetness says:

    Nadine, if this is essentially the same plan that Israelis have
    offered in the past as you say, they should have no problem
    agreeing to it. No imposition there. It’s then up to the
    Palestinians to agree, and if they fail to agree to a truly fair plan,
    then that point will be there for all to see.
    However, I don’t see why it has the wide implications you state.
    Yes, it will build on some prior understandings, as you point
    out, but the fact is, the process is stalled. So in THAT sense,
    there is nothing, or very little, to build on. I don’t think it
    should signal to other countries anything other than the idea
    that US will work hard to make progress on conflicts that are
    important to us, the parties involved, and the world.
    Fearing that war will break out has to be risked because we and
    they are ALREADY in a position where war could break out.
    Whether the parties are engaged in “peacing” or not, war has a
    way of breaking out over there. That’s just a fact.

    Reply

  142. nadine says:

    This imposed plan idea avoids looking at the elephant in the living room: the fact that negotiations have foundered on Palestinian intransigence. The Palestinians refuse to countenance any plan that would leave Israel standing. However many times they say they want a state in the West Bank and Gaza, their actions say something different.
    “The Times’ Cooper goes into some detail on what a plan might look like regarding borders, security, refugees, and Jerusalem, and in truth most of the details are already known.”
    …plans with those known details have already been offered and refused. Olmert offered Abu Mazen 97% of the West Bank with land swaps to make 100%, 80% of settlements ripped up, 100,000 Jews deported, the Palestinian capital in East Jerusalem, certain number of refugees let into Israel: refused without an answer.
    Naturally Olmert’s offer has been dropped down the memory hole, as it is too inconvenient to this administration to learn from experience. The devil is in the details, and these know-it-alls think they don’t need to know them. They are even leaking against Dennis Ross, that inveterate peace-processor, as a Netanyahu agent, just because he is trying to explain to them that an imposed plan won’t work.
    So far, all Obama has done is encourage the Palestinians to say NO by adding new demands that Netanyahu cannot meet, which of course the Palestinians must echo. This was the opposite of his intention, but seemingly he cannot from his mistakes, only make them again on a larger scale. When the Palestinians say, ‘we won’t take the deal,’ will Obama pressure them, or only demand more and more and more from the Israelis? So far the signs are for the latter; which of course means that the deal is guaranteed to fail in advance.
    Then, there is that little detail called “Hamas”, who will kill any Palestinian who agrees to anything, doubly guaranteeing there will be no agreement.
    Netanyahu will also refuse; and have the entire Israeli political spectrum solidly behind him. Israel made many previous concessions under an understanding with America the settlement would be negotiated between the two parties; and that the new border would take account of the major settlement blocs. That was part of Oslo; part of Sharon’s agreement with Bush, which is now disappeared as it had never been.
    This detail has wide diplomatic ramifications, because it implies to every country with any understandings with the USA, that Obama considers his administration to be the Year One of American diplomacy, and all prior understandings are subject to change without notice.
    It’s not a question of whether an imposed plan will fail; it will fail. It will be another big humiliation for the Obama administration. The only question is, how large a Mideast war will it start?

    Reply

  143. Sweetness says:

    Hope Obama moves forward with this…and it works.

    Reply

  144. Carroll says:

    MIDEAST: Obama Said to Mull Israel-Palestinian Peace Plan
    By Jim Lobe*
    WASHINGTON, Apr 7, 2010 (IPS) – Amid still-unresolved tensions over Jewish settlement expansion in East Jerusalem, two major publications reported Wednesday that President Barack Obama is seriously considering proposing later this year a U.S. peace plan to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
    Both the Washington Post and the New York Times reported on a Mar. 24 meeting between Obama and former national security advisers who served under both Republican and Democratic administrations and who expressed support for launching a U.S. initiative designed to break the longstanding deadlock and achieve a two-state solution.
    The meeting, which was organised by Obama’s national security adviser, ret. Gen. James Jones, reportedly reached a consensus that the failure so far to make tangible progress toward a peace agreement was harming U.S. security interests throughout the region, including efforts to isolate Iran and other anti-Western forces, and that the Israelis and Palestinians were unlikely to reach a comprehensive agreement by themselves.
    Putting forward a U.S. proposal, presumably based largely on understandings reached between the two sides at negotiations at Camp David in 2000 and at Taba, Egypt, in early 2001, would mark a major departure in U.S. policy, which has long insisted that final peace terms can only be arrived at by the parties themselves.
    Such an initiative would likely be strongly opposed by the right-wing government of President Binyamin Netanyahu and its supporters here. Indeed, the latter wasted little time in denouncing the idea of advancing a U.S. plan as “dangerous”.
    “Palestinians will conclude that they have no reason to negotiate seriously, or to make concessions, when Obama may deliver what they want on a nice platter while Israelis will conclude that Wahsington no longer takes their security seriously, so they must toughen their stance,” wrote Elliott Abrams, former President George W. Bush’s top Middle East adviser on the neo-conservative Weekly Standard website.
    The two reports come amid continuing tensions between the Obama administration and Netanyahu that were set off last month when the Israelis announced the approval of a new construction project in Arab East Jerusalem during the visit of Vice President Joseph Biden.
    In unusually harsh language, Biden publicly “condemned” the Israeli action. His remarks were then followed by a call to Netanyahu by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who reportedly demanded not only that Israel freeze Jewish construction in East Jerusalem, but also that it immediately agree to discuss with the Palestinians so-called “final status” issues, including final borders and the fate of Palestinian refugees and East Jerusalem.
    Netanyahu, who visited Washington for the annual meeting of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) the following week, remained publicly defiant, although, during subsequent meetings with Obama himself and Clinton, he reportedly tried to appease the administration’s concerns.
    His efforts, however, have failed to satisfy the White House, which indicated this week that Netanyahu, one of 46 foreign heads of state scheduled to attend a summit on safeguarding nuclear materials here next week, had not yet been cleared for a much-sought-after bilateral meeting with Obama.
    The harder line taken by the administration is attributed by analysts here not only to the anger provoked by Israel’s actions in East Jerusalem, but also by the growing conviction, particularly in the Pentagon, that the failure to make tangible progress in resolving the Palestinian-Israeli conflict was jeopardising U.S. security interests – and the lives of U.S. servicemen and women – throughout the region, including in Iraq and Afghanistan.
    According to Israeli media reports, Biden made precisely that point with Netanyahu and other senior Israeli officials behind closed doors during his visit.
    In Congressional testimony a week later, the chief of the U.S. Central Command (Centcom), Gen. David Petraeus, echoed that message, noting that “The (Israeli-Palestinian) conflict foments anti-American sentiment, due to a perception of U.S. favouritism for Israel.”
    He added that the Arab-Israeli conflict had an “enormous effect” on “the strategic context in which we operate,” and that “(a) credible U.S. effort on Arab-Israeli issues that provides regional governments and populations a way to achieve a comprehensive settlement of the disputes would undercut Iran’s policy of militant ‘resistance,’ which the Iranian regime and insurgent groups have been free to exploit.”
    A similar message was conveyed as well during Obama’s Mar. 24 meeting with the former national security advisers, who agreed that the “incremental” approach taken by Special Mideast Envoy George Mitchell was unlikely to bear fruit, according to the Times and Post accounts.
    Brent Scowcroft, who served under presidents Gerald Ford and George H.W. Bush, was the first to urge Obama to launch a peace initiative. He was followed by Jimmy Carter’s national security adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski.
    Both men have long called publicly for Washington to put forward its own plan for a comprehensive peace based largely on the Camp David and Taba parameters.
    According to the Post account, which was written by columnist David Ignatius, they were joined by Bill Clinton’s national security adviser, Sandy Berger, and by Colin Powell, who served in the same position under Ronald Reagan and as secretary of state under George W. Bush. Frank Carlucci and Robert McFarlane, who also served under Reagan, reportedly went along with the consensus view.
    The Times account, written by White House correspondent Helene Cooper, quoted a senior administration official as saying that a U.S. plan was “absolutely not on the table right now”, and that Washington remained committed for now to the “proximity talks” that are to be mediated by Mitchell. But, he said, when those bogged down, “then you can expect that we would go in with something”.
    Ignatius, who wrote a book with Brzezinski and Scowcroft, quoted one official as saying the White House is considering an inter-agency review process similar to the one carried out last year on Afghanistan and Pakistan, to “frame the strategy and form a political consensus for it.” The same official said it could be launched in the fall.
    “It means they’re questioning some of the assumptions they inherited,” said Daniel Levy, a former Israeli peace negotiator and co-director of the Middle East Task Force of the New America Foundation.
    “It seems they’ve realised that some of those assumptions – that the Israelis and Palestinians could do this on their own; that they could gradually, incrementally build confidence between the parties without addressing the big questions – may have been wrong,” he said.
    “What’s remarkable is that it was what the neo-conservatives did to the U.S. under Bush and what Bibi Netanyahu did for Israel in the last year that has produced this moment of clarity,” Levy noted.
    “The neo-cons helped clarify what so much of the national-security establishment, including Centcom and the former national security advisers, has been saying – that resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is central to U.S. security interests throughout the region, while Netanyahu helped clarify how entrenched Israel’s addiction to settlements and occupation is and that incrementalism has no chance in the face of that addiction. You therefore need an assertive intervention.”
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>
    Lobe also ‘gets it’..take it to the public Obama on what is best for US security, flank yourself with military, and watch how fast the public lines up behind you. That’s all Obama needs to do…use his bully pulpit in the name of US security..then watch congress start sweating blood.

    Reply

  145. Carroll says:

    The most important question in Levy’s article per Powell previously:
    “Moving forward with any of the above may ultimately depend on whether a compelling case can be made that any of this can succeed.
    As General Powell is quoted in the Times piece as saying, what do we do in “acts two, three and four” if someone says no?”
    Obama needs a plan for no. The farther Netanyahu walks down that tunnel the farther Obama walks down the tunnel….to where it becomes a win-lose instead of a win-win. Netanyahu being a bar room type brawler will most likely push it to win – lose.

    Reply

  146. Carroll says:

    I hope Obama is seriously considering “enforcing a peace plan”…as I (and others) have argued for years and years, is the only way to end I/P.
    I am also encourged to see (if true) that Obama is listening to Jones. It was Jones who suggested long ago a peacekeeping force for I/P.
    And I noted this in Levey’s article:
    “”Establish a border based on the 1967 lines with an agreed, minimal and equal one-to-one land swap taking into account new realities on the ground (settlements close to the Green Line), whereby the Palestinian state is on 100 percent of the ’67 territory and is demilitarized with security arrangements overseen by a multinational deployment.””
    ‘If’ the security arrangement were overseen by a multinational force it would put Israel in their sights if they tried their usual provoke,attack, seize, security ploys.
    I’am just going to say it again, for the thousandth time…. Israel will always, always stall…a settlement has to be Enforced if this is to end.

    Reply

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *