MEDIA NOTICE: Steve Clemons on Al Jazeera English at 7 pm

-

aljazeera.jpgThe big news today is of course the announcement from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas have been invited to Washington at the beginning of September to engage in the first direct talks between the two sides in two years.
The stakes are high on a regional and international level, but Clinton’s announcement left many things up in the air, by refusing to endorse the pre-1967 boundary as the starting point for negotiations on borders, and leaving so-called “final status” issues, like the fate of Jerusalem, land swaps, and settlements, to be brought up when Netanyahu and Abbas decide to do so.
Still, the onus is on the United States to bring the two sides together, as President Obama will have to deal with the backlash if talks fail. As Daniel Levy, the co-director of the New America Foundation/Middle East Task Force said today:

[Clinton’s] announcement covered very familiar ground, following a playbook that has been tried many times and found wanting. Instead of terms of reference to guide negotiations we received today a guest list for a September 1 White House dinner – even the chaperons for that dinner have a decidedly retro ring to them – Jordanian King Abdullah and Egyptian President Mubarak. Today’s announcement could have been an opportunity to introduce some clarity to proceedings and to jumpstart real decision-making (by for instance, defining border talks as being based on ’67 lines with one-to-one land swaps). Rather we were served ambiguity, and not it seems of the constructive variety…
…What today’s announcement has done is to raise expectations given the one-year deadline placed on the resumed talks. Yes, deadlines have been missed before, but this time the US national interest in resolving the conflict has been placed front and center and there is now broad consensus that the two-state option is passing its sell-by date. It was the Obama administration that insisted on the direct talks format as the way forward, and the ball will now be in their court to produce results.

TWN Publisher Steve Clemons will writing quite a bit about the upcoming talks as August rolls on, and he will be on Al Jazeera English at 7:00 pm tonight to discuss the prospects for Middle East peace and more.
— Andrew Lebovich

Comments

74 comments on “MEDIA NOTICE: Steve Clemons on Al Jazeera English at 7 pm

  1. nadine says:

    Noteworthy conversation between Michael Totten and Israeli political analyst Jon Spyer:
    The Perfect Iranian Storm on the Horizon
    http://pajamasmedia.com/michaeltotten/2010/08/25/the-perfect-iranian-storm-on-the-horizon/
    Core quote:
    “MJT: What is it that U.S. policy-makers don

    Reply

  2. Cee says:

    With these kinds of rewards for bad behavior, you can expect Israel to continue its brutal occupation forever
    Another reason they keep being rewarded
    FBI sources indicate that the increase in Mossad activity is a major problem, particularly when Israelis are posing as U.S. government officials, but they also note that there is little they can do to stop it as the Justice Department refuses to initiate any punitive action or prosecutions of the Mossad officers who have been identified as involved in the illegal activity.
    http://www.amconmag.com/blog/mossad-in-america/

    Reply

  3. Sand says:

    — MP3 INTERVIEW: Ray McGovern [via Boiling Frogs]
    “…Ray McGovern shares with us his analysis of the recent article published in the Atlantic written by the infamous American-Israeli writer Jeffrey Goldberg on Israel

    Reply

  4. Sand says:

    Dan, maybe you should consider getting a ‘Twitter’ account — far easier to maintain.

    Reply

  5. Sand says:

    Dan, maybe you should consider getting a ‘Twitter’ account — far easier to maintain.

    Reply

  6. Carroll says:

    “Then I think it was George Will who said that Netanyahu now wanted Abbas so say that Israel was a Jewish state for Jews.”
    “Say uncle said the bully, call me a Jew or else”…gawd, the mentality of six year olds. These people are too stupid to have a country.
    Just move their wall back to their own border and let them spread their crap in their own playground and not everyone elses.

    Reply

  7. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “Could not believe that Amanpour tried to claim that there had been a freeze on illegal settlement activities and expansion”
    Well, whats worse is this sack of shit Secretary of State perpetuating the same myth.
    Of course, the habarist scum posting here in this comment section won’t touch the matter, because they KNOW everytime one of us posts the actual indisputable proof that there IS NO SETTLEMENT FREEZE, odds are, at the very least, one more lurking reader or casual passerby becomes aware of the truth.

    Reply

  8. Kathleen says:

    On “This Week” this past Sunday Christine Amanpour attempted to pull off a totally false image that there had ever been an actual “freeze” of illegal settlements. She asked about what would happen after the Freeze agreement expires. Acting as if there had really ever been a freeze. What hooey.
    then one of the guest on the round table mentioned how these new upcoming talks were all ready stuck because Abbas would not accept that Israel has the right to exist. I think it was Robert Reich who said that Abbas had stated that clearly. Then I think it was George Will who said that Netanyahu now wanted Abbas so say that Israel was a Jewish state for Jews. Or something like that. Netanyahu keeps moving the line in the sand. How long?
    Could not believe that Amanpour tried to claim that there had been a freeze on illegal settlement activities and expansion. NOT

    Reply

  9. Carroll says:

    POA and MarkL are right and Steve is right to not overly censor remarks here except for the truly profane or disgusting.
    If you notice,and you should have by now, the people calling for censorship are the very ones POA described so well above. And we all know why they want this blog censored. But in addition to those we also have the pretentious, who think passionate expressions of principle get all the attention and detract from their own endless amateur and immaterial pseudo policy nattering.
    I think POA and I have been on here about the same length of time which is years and years, and I can attest to the fact that the first personal attacks beside the usual anti semite slur came from the zionist activist and usually took the form of some nasty sexual insult…as in ‘cunt’, anal sex and all the other things POA mentioned above. I don’t know why the Israeli activist dwell so much on repulsive sexual images but they do.
    Any war of words about zionist and Israel is going to include bigot, ass hole, nazi, anti semite, Jew haters, psychos and etc.. Character assassination is the tactic of the zionist as we have all seen in the attacks on public figures like Carter,Tutu, Freeman and a host of others. You have to be a really slow learner to think you can truthfully or rationally ‘discuss’ Israel with it’s cult members…so most of us simply lob their stink bombs back at them to ridicule their mind boggling hypocrisy.
    Steve isn’t going to turn this comment section into a clone of the endless phony “I/P peace talks” so forget about it. Those who don’t like it or want to be stars in their own show should start their own blog.

    Reply

  10. MarkL says:

    I think the idea behind the very light moderation in the comments section is that when people are talking about the life and well-being of millions of people as affected by US foreign policy, a few bad words are nothing compared to blood spilled.
    I think if some of the people here met face to face, fists would fly—at a minimum.
    All that happens here is that people pound their keyboards.
    “Jaw-Jaw” is better than “war-war”.

    Reply

  11. nadine says:

    And that’s another Q.E.D. for drew’s argument.

    Reply

  12. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Its really quite comical seeing people that have routinely, for years, accused people of being “anti-semites”, “terrorist sympathizers”, “anti-american”, “against the troops”, etc, opining about blog moderation.
    Sorry folks, but there REALLY ARE assholes on this planet. There are also anti-semites, islamaphobes, pieces of shit, jackasses, buffoons and wishy washy mealy mouthed gumbis. We seem to have ALL of these here on occassion.
    You see, the true art of ad hominem is being able to properly register the participants in their appropriate niches. I’m a master, with a Ph.d. in Ad Hominology. So I assure you, if I place you in the asshole file, you belong there.
    So, when some “asshole” is properly labeled because they improperly labeled someone a “terrorist sympathizer” or an “anti-semite”, which one are you going to censor or ban? It could be argued that calling someone a “terrorist sympathizer” is a political statement. Yet, to many, it is no less offensive than being called an “asshole”.
    Frankly, whenever I see this debate arise, as it occassionally does here, it escapes me why the assholes seem to be extremely tolerant of the posting of other assholes, yet they feel they have some sort of moral license to comment about blog moderation. Anyone see the bigot Nadine take the asshole Marcus to task when he was accusing me of sucking Arafat’s dick, or when he was accusing Carroll of having “anal sex” with “arab men”. Or what about when Sweetness was calling Carroll a “cunt”?? Anyone see any hew and cry from the Asshole Gallery??? And is Drew incensed when Nadine accuses Steve Clemons of anti-semitism??? Isn’t that every bit as insulting as being called an asshole? And never mind Wig-Wag’s obsession with penis size, eh?
    Give it a rest. We are all humans here, warts and all. The comment section has personality, and good or bad, I suspect that that “personality” is a strong reason that Steve doesn’t moderate anymore than he does.
    “I submit that the predominance of anti-Semites, Israel-bashers and vile invective-spewers, who find this blog uniquely welcoming, is not a recommendation for self-regulation — unless Steve welcomes the result”
    See??? Now THATS the comment of a REAL ASSHOLE. Trust me, I know one when I see one.

    Reply

  13. Dan Kervick says:

    Personally, if I had a blog I would moderate the comments section.
    The idea would be to permit people to say anything they want about any political or social issue that is, broadly speaking, on topic, but to refrain completely from either positive or negative personal characterizations of the other commentators. The assertions people make about issues are on topic; the nature and characteristics of the people making the assertions are off-topic.
    But I don’t have the time to do a blog and run it that way. So I don’t have one.

    Reply

  14. nadine says:

    Has anybody noticed here that the MSM has given up on the “poor Gazans are starving” line? What was previously a “severe humanitarian crisis” has been reframed as a “crisis of dignity”.
    Time reports “Gaza’s residents will concede that there is no hunger crisis in the Strip. Residents do love the beach, and the store shelves are stocked. But if you’re focused on starvation, they say, you’re probably missing the point. To them, the word prison speaks more to the effect that years of conflict and political and economic isolation have had on the Gaza psyche. “We are talking about continuous stress and ongoing trauma,” says Hasan Zeyada, a psychologist at the Gaza Community Mental Health Program (GCMHP)” http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2010064,00.html
    Now it’s “Not Deprivation but Desperation”. And what has changed? Nothing really. The Israelis are letting in coriander, big whoop. 15 tons of aid per week are rolling in, just as before. The Israeli naval blockade still exists, because Hamas is still trying to import long range Iranian rockets. So how come no “starvation” all of a sudden? Ans: there never was any starvation, and the lie has become too obvious to maintain. But since Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia, nobody in the MSM will admit it.
    Now if Hamas agreed to join the talks instead of refusing and condemning Abbas as a traitor, they might be able to get the whole blockade lifted. But nobody in the MSM ever treats Hamas as an independent actor responsible for what happens in the territory they rule.
    A reminder of what Time itself claimed in 2008: “As you sit down to a Thanksgiving feast, please spare a thought for the starving Palestinians of Gaza. There are 1.5 million of them, most of them living hand to mouth, or on UN handouts, because Israel has them under siege.”http://mideast.blogs.time.com/2008/11/26/on-thanksgiving-not-much-to-give-thanks-for-in-gaza/

    Reply

  15. Paul Norheim says:

    “In general, while I know that you consider the USA a
    sovereign war-crime juggernaut, and I suspect that nothing
    will change your mind…”
    You seem to know more about my views than I do myself,
    Drew.
    Actually, I have a far more complex view of the USA than
    what you described above. And no, I do not blame America
    for everything that is happening on the planet.

    Reply

  16. nadine says:

    Paul, you don’t need real anything to make propaganda.
    Take one of the most famous films of all, the al Dura film of a boy tragically dying in his father’s arms, supposedly during the early days of the second intifada. It came out quickly that the boy and father could not possibly have been shot by Israelis; later it came out that the whole thing had been staged (when a French court finally demanded the raw footage, the “dead” boy peeped out from under his arm after he was supposed to be dead). That didn’t stop the Arab world from running a loop of Israeli soldiers shooting, and the boy dying, shooting and dying, over and over a million times.
    I don’t know why you think Newt Gingrich would even be useful to Islamist propaganda. You think they will play his statement demanding that somebody be allowed to build a church in Saudi Arabia, as an example of the audacity of infidels in attacking Islam?

    Reply

  17. drew says:

    Dan, I suspect you’re right, although I think there are more than
    a few smart people in the world who might even inform SC,
    given a lighter dose of the f-bombs and auto-spleen-rants.
    Also, I have noticed on my own web sites that it takes, oh, 15
    seconds to ban somebody.
    Paul, you are also right, as far as you go. And very wrong about
    your understanding of what happens in war — and peace, if you
    would care to extend your comments to such delights of modern
    civilization as stoning civilians to death for committing
    fornication, or the meter-by-meter leveling of Grozny.
    In general, while I know that you consider the USA a sovereign
    war-crime juggernaut, and I suspect that nothing will change
    your mind, the only solution is to outlaw war. (Wait, Woodrow
    Wilson already did, right? Funny how Tojo and Hitler didn’t
    listen.) Please send the memo to the USA, Israel; the Taliban and
    Iran; cc: the Russians, and send a dragnet to Lebanon and the
    West Bank to collect the 55,000 rockets installed there, while
    scaring the bejeezus out of the Chinese for their actions in Tibet.
    See? A simple thing, simply achieved.

    Reply

  18. Paul Norheim says:

    Perhaps I should spell it out to you?
    Take the material from Fox, statements by Limbaugh, Beck,
    Gingrich, several republican congressmen and senators
    etc.etc – and juxtapose this superb propagandistic raw
    material with video material of civilians in Afghanistan and
    elsewhere maimed and killed by US bombs at weddings and
    other joyful celebrations. How do you think illiterate and
    ignorant Muslims in a lot of countries will interpret the
    message? It will of course reinforce the claim that this whole
    conflict is a war waged by the Crusaders against Islam and
    ordinary Muslims.

    Reply

  19. Dan Kervick says:

    I believe Steve declines to regulate and moderate the comments section because doing so would take up a lot of extra time that Steve doesn’t have.
    People who find TWN a must-read site do so mainly because of what Steve writes and reports. I doubt that many of those people are coming here to read the words from the peanut gallery.

    Reply

  20. Paul Norheim says:

    “And having a new trophy mosque at Ground Zero to take
    over would not be a gift to them?” (Nadine)
    Where to start?
    1) It is not “at” Ground Zero.
    2) It is not even a “mosque”.
    3) And it is not a “trophy”.
    YouTube videos of Newt Gingrish and other influential
    Americans expressing anti-Islamic sentiments are the real
    trophies here, because they support the basic worldview of
    the Jihadists that “Islam is under attack”. Add the
    announced burning of the Quran at 9.11, and you guys
    have provided them with some wonderful material for
    propaganda videos.
    Is that so difficult to understand?

    Reply

  21. nadine says:

    “drew, Steve lets the comment section pretty much self-regulate” (questions)
    I submit that the predominance of anti-Semites, Israel-bashers and vile invective-spewers, who find this blog uniquely welcoming, is not a recommendation for self-regulation — unless Steve welcomes the result.
    drew’s recommendations make good sense. Bad money drives out good in nearly all situations, esp. on Internet threads.

    Reply

  22. nadine says:

    “On the other hand, it looks like the anti-Muslim rhetorics of
    Pearlman, Nadine & friends is a gift to the Jihadists (surprise
    surprise…).” (Paul Norheim)
    And having a new trophy mosque at Ground Zero to take over would not be a gift to them?
    Really, it seems to come as news to you that Islamists jihadis are politicians of their kind, and will spin to take advantage of whatever situation there is. Since their basic worldview is that “Islam is under attack” — basically because Islam doesn’t rule the world, it doesn’t rule even as much as did 1000 years ago — they routinely use protests their own behavior engenders as fuel for the fire.

    Reply

  23. nadine says:

    “What about someone victimized directly by the 9-11 attacks who
    is offended by the placement of the community center? I don’t think
    we should accept sincere feelings resulting from genuine suffering
    that channel bigotry.” (Paul Norheim)
    That’s very funny, though quite unintentionally. Just another way of saying all offended feelings are equal, but some are more equal than others.
    If you’re an approved minority, then YOUR offended feelings are golden and should be universally respected. But if you’re not, then YOUR offended feelings — even if they concern family members murdered less than 10 years ago! — “channel bigotry” and are worth less than nothing.
    As drew has mentioned, the race and bigotry cards are both overdrawn at the bank.

    Reply

  24. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “On the other hand, it looks like the anti-Muslim rhetorics of Pearlman, Nadine & friends is a gift to the Jihadists (surprise surprise…)”
    Perhaps. But even more, it is an embarrassment to the Jews.
    “POA has discovered a non-rectal-insult-generation-ability, by the way”
    Not really. Its always been there. But I never have believed in calling an asshole a spade. A spade is a spade, and an asshole is an asshole. So no worries, questions, when I call you an asshole, its not because I’m locked in to any one manner of insult, but more because the term is perfectly, and quite often, apropos.
    BTW, your students don’t bring you many apples, do they?

    Reply

  25. Paul Norheim says:

    Quote of the day – related both to the I/P issue and the cultural
    center at Manhattan:
    “What about someone victimized directly by the 9-11 attacks who
    is offended by the placement of the community center? I don’t think
    we should accept sincere feelings resulting from genuine suffering
    that channel bigotry. If a black dude mugs your grandmother, are
    you justified in opposing MLK’s birthday holiday? Suffering can
    generate injustice. It’s still injustice. “Those to whom evil is done do
    evil in return” is the epigraph to the epic history of Zionist
    aggression against Palestinians, Righteous Victims, by the Israeli
    historian Benny Morris.” (Rotwang at TPM)
    http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/08/22/we_are_a_nat
    ion_of_pinheads/#more

    Reply

  26. Paul Norheim says:

    “Steve lets the comment section pretty much self-regulate.”
    (Questions)
    Exactly. And that’s why Nadine’s repeated claim that Steve
    encourages anti-Semitism is pure BS.
    On the other hand, it looks like the anti-Muslim rhetorics of
    Pearlman, Nadine & friends is a gift to the Jihadists (surprise
    surprise…).
    Here is an excerpt from the Wall Street Journal:
    “Protests, Rhetoric Feed Jihadists’ Fire
    By JONATHAN WEISMAN
    Islamic radicals are seizing on protests against a planned
    Islamic community center near Manhattan’s Ground Zero and
    anti-Muslim rhetoric elsewhere as a propaganda opportunity
    and are stepping up anti-U.S. chatter and threats on their
    websites.
    One jihadist site vowed to conduct suicide bombings in Florida
    to avenge a threatened Koran burning, while others predicted
    an increase in terrorist recruits as a result of such actions.
    “By Allah, the wars are heated and you Americans are the ones
    who

    Reply

  27. questions says:

    nadine, glad to hear. It’s not quite your position, and not quite my position — which makes it a really good site to look at. And it’s really worth reading his book. Again, not quite where I am, not quite where you are, so a nice challenge.
    drew, Steve lets the comment section pretty much self-regulate. It’s not a bad idea, though some nasty invective does indeed fly. It settles after a time as people tire of thinking up new (or regurgitating old) insults. POA has discovered a non-rectal-insult-generation-ability, by the way. So this is a decided improvement, and it would be possible only in a self-correcting web environment such as the one Steve quite generously provides.

    Reply

  28. drew says:

    I mean, who goes to dinner parties where, upon disagreement, the
    air is filled with the vile characterizations, marine barracks name-
    calling, and personal denunciations that are virtually automatic with
    half-a-dozen posters here?
    If there is any desire to be a destination site and a must-read for
    thoughtful people, this stuff needs to end.

    Reply

  29. drew says:

    This site would benefit from two things:
    1) rules for posting: no profanity, no name-calling, no personal
    denunciations;
    2) selective banning for those who enjoy ignoring #1.
    I can’t believe that there aren’t a lot of thoughtful people out here
    who would participate without the verbal mob actions. Even the
    sports blogs I frequent have zero-tolerance rules for this stuff. I
    am not sure what the point of facilitating strident garbage-mouths
    is.

    Reply

  30. Carroll says:

    Posted by downtown, Aug 22 2010, 8:34PM – Link
    My question to the TWN community is this: Why would anyone engage dishonest people in sincere, serious dialogue?
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    Speaking for myself, I quit engaging in sincere debate with the zios long ago.
    It’s pointless, they’re a cult, you can’t reason with a cult mentality.
    I just pop in to ridicule and expose their hypocrisy.
    But we have some here who never got the message and think it’s “intellectual” to “debate the undebatable”.
    “Nothing in my view is more reprehensible than those habits of mind in the intellectual that induce avoidance, that characteristic turning away from a difficult and principled position which you know to be the right one, but which you decide not to take. You do not want to appear too political; you are afraid of seeming controversial; you want to keep a reputation for being balanced, objective, moderate; your hope is to be asked back, to consult, to be on a board or prestigious committee, and so to remain within the responsible mainstream; someday you hope to get an honorary degree, a big prize, perhaps even an ambassadorship.
    For an intellectual these habits of mind are corrupting par excellence. If anything can denature, neutralize, and finally kill a passionate intellectual life it is the internalization of such habits.”…Edward Said.
    Yea, we have some of these types on here.

    Reply

  31. Carroll says:

    Posted by Bill Pearlman, Aug 22 2010, 5:25PM – Link
    I guess asking Carol what she would do entails the destruction of
    Israel and the deaths of the Jews there. So, let me ask her this. Why
    should the average Israeli agree to that. What’s the selling point?
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    The selling point is Israelis would get to live and not have their little fifedom bombed to hell.
    Or they can choose to continue their criminality and insanity and eventually get taken down…by the good guys or by an even bigger bully.
    Like I said if it were up to me you would get the same treatment nazi Germany got.

    Reply

  32. nadine says:

    I’ll have a look at realisticdove.org, questions.

    Reply

  33. nadine says:

    “There are 5.5 million Palestinian in the Occupied Territories”
    That’s nearly double the number that the Palestinian Authority claims (about 3 million +), just for starters — and everybody knows their number is padded because the UN stipend system is gamed six ways from Sunday.
    The rest of the your so-called “facts” are even less accurate.

    Reply

  34. JohnH says:

    Why engage with dishonest people? To correct the record.
    Israel is a myth created by public relations. Ever since 1948, they have been lying about the facts. The first big lie was that Palestinians just up and fled, gladly surrendering their land to the Zionists. Now we know for certain from Yitzhak Rabin’s memoir that many were ethnically cleansed.
    The Israeli propaganda machine has never been effectively contested, and much of the US population still believes whatever they say.
    Part of the reason for their success is that AIPAC and its fellow travellers contest every slight detail about anything and everything. I’ve seen them do it.
    Now people are starting to return the favor, which is why minders like Nadine have been assigned to sites like TWN.

    Reply

  35. downtown says:

    My question to the TWN community is this: Why would anyone engage dishonest people in sincere, serious dialogue? Agenda driven proselytizers have made it their mission to obfuscate, deceive and lie about any of the topics being presented here. Their only mission is to subvert the honorable intentions of the blog owner, either by using slanderous accusations of anti-semitism or by willfully hijacking unpleasant topics. They want to silence adversaries with platitudes seemingly hatched in Likud headquarters in Tel Aviv. False flag attacks abound.I suggest to let them continue using the rope given to them to hang themselves, but let’s not give these people the satisfaction of engaging them in dialog!! Why would sane people respond to any of these emissaries of a foreign nation with sincerity and goodwill?? They consider Palestinians as “Untermenschen”, mirroring some of the same rhetoric once applied toward them. It’s mind boggling how within a few decades the former victims have employed the language of their once oppressors. Read any of the postings put forth by a so-called Mr. Pearlman and others and you’ll immediately recognize the ultimate dishonesty of their arguments. Witnessing some of their vitriolic posts, one can not help but come to the conclusion that these “gentle people” are not interested in any fair and equitable solution to the conflict, but only use this forum to spew propaganda. To some of us, their agenda has now become blatantly transparent. We’ve been awakened!
    “We be many and they be few”. Arundhati Roy.

    Reply

  36. JohnH says:

    According the Nadine, Palestinians’ problems are all the ARABS’ fault!!! “If I were a Palestinian leader I would start demanding that the Arab countries stop treating my people like shit.”
    But let’s look at the numbers. There are 5.5 million Palestinian in the Occupied Territories (the ARABS fault obviously). Israel ethnically cleanses Palestinians, steals most of their land, and then takes control of water, and any other resource of value (the ARABS fault obviously). They have no freedom to import, export or move about (the ARABS fault obviously). Palestinians have been herded into refugee camps, ghettos or open air prisons (the ARABS fault obviously). Periodically, the IDF conducts a pogrom, bombing any prominent institution and many apartment blocks, stopping only after they’ve killed a thousand or more, mostly women, children and elderly (the ARABS fault obviously).
    Blaming ARABS for treating Palestinians like sh*t, while absolving Israel totally, is either unabashedly disingenuous or just plain stupid–like many of Nadine’s lame arguments.

    Reply

  37. questions says:

    Check out realisticdove.org for relatively mellow debate (save for our newly arrived Bill Pearlman, whose language is a leetle beet on the extreeeem side of things…..)
    Realistic Dove is Dan Fleshler’s site, and he’s actually a rational guy who would like things better for all people, who doesn’t exaggerate the LOBBY thing, (but doesn’t deny it either, so he’s not my BFF!)
    He takes on mr mondo, which is always a good idea, but does it in a reasonable way without the automatic disdain I automatically feel when mr mondo comes up…..
    Totally recommend it for a balanced, reasonable discourse, for a group of posters who seem to know something, for fun.

    Reply

  38. Neo Controll says:

    “Ok, I can see that things like irony and thoughts on more of a higher level is a little lost here”
    You might try hanging around a while before you start spouting off “ironies” like the regular necons and Israel Firsters here. It ain’t a game. And we are sick to death of Zionist propagandists; you wont be respected if you peddle the same.
    — NCHQ

    Reply

  39. Maw of America says:

    bill Pearlman, when I read statements like this:
    “I guess asking Carol what she would do entails the destruction of Israel and the deaths of the Jews there. So, let me ask her this. Why should the average Israeli agree to that. What’s the selling point?”
    I feel compelled to ask, “When did you stop beating your wife?”

    Reply

  40. Carroll says:

    POA
    “I wish I shared your optimism. But history has never placed us this close to actually allowing Israel to drag us into the abyss. That racist little theocratic monstrosity of a state may well be ready to jump off the edge, hand in hand with these whores in DC”
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    I’am not optimist either that we will get an Eisenhower ‘before’ Israel drags us into that abyss but I think we will ‘afterward.’
    The reason I could care less about elections any longer is it that it really doesn’t matter whether the Jewish Dems or the Neo Repub are in control, they are both, together or seperately, going to cause,have already caused actually, the US demise for all practical purposes.
    I’am just waiting around to join the clean up crew after the house collapses.

    Reply

  41. nadine says:

    JohnH, you didn’t mean the question seriously, but I’ll answer you seriously: if I were a Palestinian leader I would start demanding that the Arab countries stop treating my people like shit, with the excuse that if the Palestinians must get treated like shit forever so that the Jews will be forced to pay for everything someday.
    I would demand that Arab governments let Palestinians out of the ghettos of the UN “camps” (which became cities over 60 years ago). I would demand that the Arab governments give the Palestinians the right to work, the right to own and inherit property, the rights of citizenship. I would demand that the the Arabs give the Palestinians some of the land and property that THEY stole from the Jews whom they forced out, whose numbers exceeded those of the Palestinian refugees. I would demand human rights for the Palestinians, after 60 years of excuses.
    We are starting to see tiny steps in that direction, which the world ignores. Did you know that the Palestinians in the Lebanese camps are not citizens, have no right to work except at the most menial jobs, have no right to own or inherit property? The Lebanese parliament just passed a law letting them work at better jobs — now you can be an engineer if you’re Palestinians — until now only Lebanese citizens could be engineers in Lebanon. But they still can’t own property.
    After sixty years. Such is the Arab love for their “brothers”.
    So tell me JohnH, do you really care about the Palestinians as much as you claim? Or do you too, just make excuses?

    Reply

  42. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Oh, so now its anti-semitic to even mention the Israel lobbying bloc or zionism, eh?
    Keep talking. You are far more insulting to yourself than I could ever hope to be.

    Reply

  43. nadine says:

    POS, you might actually be stupid enough to believe that just because you substitute the words “Israel”, “Zionist”, “Israel Lobby” “Zionazi”, etc as you repeat every hoary trope from the Protocols of the Elders of Zion about Jews controlling the world, you are actually fooling people. To give the devil her due, I don’t think Carroll is that stupid. She knows what she is doing when she posts Nazi forgeries.

    Reply

  44. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “What do they hope to accomplish with this? I never see any non Jewish or Israeli critics use terms like the Jooooos or greasy kikes, only the jewish Israeli activist themselves do that. Are they trying to bait other people into calling them names or is it an expression of their own severe inferiority complex and paranoia?”
    Its projection, Carroll. They think that by using the terms in a outwardly focused manner, they can convince the reader, (or listener), that all they need do is point a finger, and whoever they are pointing at is actually thinking in these derogatory and insulting terms.
    I haven’t heard or seen the word “kike” since junior hi-school. It interesting seeing a rabid RW Jew resurrect the term in an attempt to spit the ‘ol “anti-semite” mantra. Far from thinking the word “kike” when I read Pearlman’s inane bullshit, I find myself thinking words like “A-hole” or “jackass”. But I have to admit, it seems a bit ironic that when these two words seem to pop to mind here at TWN, it is usually a self professed Jew that triggered the synapse. Its a real shame that more sane Jews like Jdelldle aren’t here attempting to temper the self-degrading spew of those such as Nadine and Pearlman. Its a crying shame, but with mouthpieces like those two the Jews will see an increasing use of old derogatory terms like “kike”. They nurture anti-semitism with their rhetoric and demeanor. They certainly aren’t doing the Jews, or Israel, any favors.
    Which reminds me. Over at Taylor Marsh’s site, when I first posted there, one of the Marshmellows, (some jackass that calls himself Secularhumanizer), took exception to my criticism of Israel in regards to the Tristan Anderson affair. He, from that day forward accused me of “anti-semitism”, often using the term “joooos” in the accusatory manner that Pearlman used “kike”. I don’t know, when was that??? A year? A year and a half ago??? Well, if one visits that site now, which I do on occassion if only for a good laugh, the same jackass is now every bit as vocal in his criticism of Israel as I was, voicing the exact same opinions I voiced that caused him to accuse me of anti-semitism. Why has this happened??? Well, the answer is obvious; I-N-F-O-R-M-A-T-I-O-N
    More and more people are becoming armed with the FACTS about Israel. The narrative is slowly changing, and so too, as a result, is public sentiment. It used to be a successful and useful tactic to take the low road in Israel’s defense, such as we see this jackass Pearlman doing. Merely pointing a finger and spitting out “anti-semite” worked, because our media had so lionized the state of Israel that most Americans thought “How can anyone criticize these poor Jews, who have been so horribly and recently victimized, and only want a state of their own where they can at last be free???? One surely must be anti-semitic to criticize a people that have suffered so horribly”.
    No more. The charade is over. Pearlman is a dinosuar. There is simply too much information available to any interested party. The cat is out of the bag. So now, the once useful tactics such as we see Pearlman so ineptly attempting to employ only make him look foolish, boffish. The ranting of a bigoted buffoon, trying to hide his own bigotry behind a curtain of accusation. As I’ve said many times here, Jews in general would be well served by working to shut people like Pearlman up.
    “……but eventually we will have a Prez in the future like we had in Eisenhower in the past who won’t put up with a criminal client state like Israel”
    I wish I shared your optimism. But history has never placed us this close to actually allowing Israel to drag us into the abyss. That racist little theocratic monstrosity of a state may well be ready to jump off the edge, hand in hand with these whores in DC.

    Reply

  45. Carroll says:

    Posted by Bill Pearlman, Aug 21 2010, 11:03PM – Link
    Again, I put the question to “pissed off”. Hell any of you. If you
    were PM of Israel. And since everything is Israel’s fault. Ergo, this
    whole thing should be wound up by Tuesday. Keep in mind that
    the second holocaust WOULD NOT be an option, what’s the plan?
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    Frankly me dear, if I were Prez of the USA I would give Netanyahu two options:
    1)Get off ALL the Palestine land they have confiscated forthwith
    or
    2)Get ‘another holocaust’ from the USAF and USMC.
    Israel has had 60 years worth of chances, and all they’ve done is prove they are just like the original nazis.
    Lucky for them I am not in the WH but eventually we will have a Prez in the future like we had in Eisenhower in the past who won’t put up with a criminal client state like Israel.

    Reply

  46. Carroll says:

    It’s interesting how nadine and Pearlman are always describing the Jews as the “Joooooos” or ‘greasy kikes”. I see that a lot from Israeli activist. What do they hope to accomplish with this? I never see any non Jewish or Israeli critics use terms like the Jooooos or greasy kikes, only the jewish Israeli activist themselves do that. Are they trying to bait other people into calling them names or is it an expression of their own severe inferiority complex and paranoia?

    Reply

  47. PissedOffAmerican says:

    You need to look beyond the rhetoric, and the over-analyzed asinine horseshit that these too deep of thinkers like questions is fond of slobbering forth with.
    When it was announced that Fatah was ready to agree to direct talks, how did NaziYahoo respond??? By approving construction for 23 additional units in the settlements. Use your common sense, and cut through the bullshit.Is this the action of a man that intends to offer concessions, or even negotiate?
    And look backwards. Isn’t it amazing that the so called “settlement freeze” is still discussed as if it actually existed? Even NaziYahoo’s media touted “concessions” are, in reality, fantasies. Nothing more than PR concoctions designed primarily for the rubes here in the United States, who, if they knew the TRUTH, would begin to wonder why we continue to drain the coffers to support this racist little theocratic pseudo democracy known as “Israel”.
    This is grandstanding by Obama and his pathetically biased and greasy Secretary Of State. As I stated above, this script has played out far too often. NaziYahoo will offer up some bullshit flexibility that doesn’t really exist, Clinton will enthusiastically slobber all over herself in praise, the narcissistic dickwad Obama will wax eloquent about a new dawn in the Middle East, and the Palestinians will get utterly and completely fucked over with no actual change in the status quo.

    Reply

  48. downtown says:

    “…than our president Hussein Obama, may the peace of the prophet be upon him inshallah…”
    Statements like this outs you as a participant unworthy of response. Why any sane person would dignify this with a response eludes me.

    Reply

  49. JohnH says:

    So pearlman, what would you do if you were a Palestinian leader? You represent 5 million people not including the diaspora. But Israel has stolen most of your land, water, and any other resource of value. You have no freedom to import, export or move about. Your people have been herded into refugee camps, AKA ghettos or open air prisons. Periodically, the IDF conducts a pogrom, bombing any prominent institution and many apartment blocks, stopping only after they’ve killed a thousand or more, mostly women, children and elderly. Likud has shown a history of total intransigence, not willing to offer anything of consequence in return for peace.
    Come on Pearlman, what would you do?

    Reply

  50. PissedOffAmerican says:

    What I said was….
    “….seeing a Jew bitch and moan…..”
    But whats a detail like that matter to someone that habitually argues to defend the indefensible? When assuming such a position, it is impossible to argue honestly. Just look at the years worth of disingenuous spew we’ve seen from Nadine.

    Reply

  51. nadine says:

    BBC’s Panaroma reports on the Mavi Marmora.
    http://keeptonyblairforpm.wordpress.com/2010/08/21/bbcs-panorama-video-violence-aboard-the-mavi-marmara-gaza-flotilla/
    For once, the Israelis cooperated with them and so got their side of story in. There was plenty of video from both sides, so most unusually for the BBC, they told the story straight and got the facts out. There wasn’t even that much of a disagreement over what happened from the eye witnesses.
    This meant that the usual anti-Israel lies didn’t have a chance to take hold, the BBC’s usual fans were mighty pissed off at the BBC’s sudden “pro-Israel” bias. Straight reporting looks like unrecognizable bias, it’s become so rare.

    Reply

  52. nadine says:

    downtown, why should atheism make it incomprehensible? Under Israeli sovereignty, the worshipers of any faith can get to their holy sites. Under Arab sovereignty, Muslim worshipers can get to Muslim sites, Christians maybe (just look at the PA stewardship of the Church of the Nativity), and Jews just about never.
    This is a matter of what happened during the last 60 years. No faith is required, just information.

    Reply

  53. downtown says:

    “Only Israeli sovereignty preserves access to the holy sites for all three religions.”
    This phrase is completely incomprehensible to an atheist. …evidently that’s exactly where the problems lie. A pox on all their houses.

    Reply

  54. nadine says:

    “The Palestinians will not become the Judas of Islam and agree to relinquishing Muslim sovereignity over that site.
    I hope that Jews are willing to concede this.
    Without that, there can be no peace, only “hudna” – a cease-fire” (observer)
    So, what’s the difference between the Haram and the rest of Palestine, all of which, as the Hamas charter informs us, is a Muslim waqf? Not one inch of which can be yielded, except for a temporary hudna?
    This is distinction without a difference.
    And the Jews know that what Arabs have sovereignty over, Jews are forbidden to enter. Just the other day, Abbas assured an Egyptian paper that not ONE Jew would ever be allowed to live in Palestine. Naturally, the million Arab Israeli citizens must remain in Israel, but not ONE Jew can live in Palestine. And the world wonders how come the Palestinians don’t have a state yet. It’s because the necessary act-getting-together never happens.
    No Israeli Prime Minister will ever give the Kotel away to Arab sovereignty. Only Israeli sovereignty preserves access to the holy sites for all three religions.

    Reply

  55. downtown says:

    “I know to you he is a greasy hook nosed kike. ”
    You effectively disqualified yourself from any future dialectic discourse on this website. I wish you a long and prosperous life…Please stay away from TWN. Thank you very much.

    Reply

  56. The Pessimist says:

    Put me in the ‘nothing new here’ column. Just another rehash of a tired old script.
    …and of course another opportunity for nadine the neo-con to spout off her 3rd grade intellect.

    Reply

  57. DonS says:

    If this were a really plausible gambit, why not meet in Switzerland, not the US, home of the compromised? Seems like Obama has raised the stakes with the expectation that being in ‘his’ court, he will be directly involved. Too high a risk for any but the obvious kabuki.
    We already know there are never any consequences for Israel, and the Palestinians are always the bad guys in the US press. So it’s just a matter of which road to nothing new.

    Reply

  58. observer says:

    Steve Clemens:
    There is an article by Dov S. Zakheim (http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/opportunity-3922) on this topic.
    His article, as far as I can tell, leaves the Al Haram Al Sharif in the hands of the Jews.
    This is a crucial point.
    The Palestinians will not become the Judas of Islam and agree to relinquishing Muslim sovereignity over that site.
    I hope that Jews are willing to concede this.
    Without that, there can be no peace, only “hudna” – a cease-fire.
    I hope you can convey the significance of this to non-Muslims.

    Reply

  59. questions says:

    JohnH,
    Make it an antibiotic-treated bandaid!
    I think that there will be a vector, a direction coming out of this.
    I think the WB will come out in a slightly different position, one that will encourage continued movement.
    It’s not going to be earth-shattering, but not nothin’ either.
    The conflicts are structural, and so aren’t going to go away any time soon, but I think that there’s some room for pre-positioning — that is, movement to start to think about getting into a place where movement can be thought.
    Kinda provisional, fer sure. But you have to take that first step regardless of the length of the journey.
    So a little x-icillin will help a little bit.
    And believe me, credit-claiming is crucial for all parties involved. They really all need something from each other, and this is the moment to make that three-way exchange. They all see it or Israel wouldn’t have been calmed by the one-year promise, and the US wouldn’t have offered the one-year cooling period, and Fayyad would have been shot by now.
    There’s some room, even if it’s not big enough to fit an entirely new nation through.

    Reply

  60. nadine says:

    Warren Metzler, if the Palestinians had ever gotten their act together that way, they could have had a state as early as 1937, certainly in 1948.
    But the first people they would have had to defeat were not the Jews, but their own iridentists, who demand total victory, all the Jews dead, and Palestine as an Arab waqf. In th 1930s the Nashishibis lost to the Mufti. More recently, the secularists have been losing steadily to the iridentists, who now hold Gaza, South Lebanon, and would probably hold all the WB too if the IDF didn’t prop up Fatah.
    So no acts will be gotten together anytime soon — one obvious reason that Netanyahu has been calling for talks for 16 months, while Abbas has been resisting them. Watch for Abbas to blow up the talks somehow before they get started.

    Reply

  61. Carroll says:

    I expect nothing to come of this.
    Israel’s so called freeze on settlement building expires I think in September, they will put their colonization of Palestine into even higher gear then.
    Hillary, Obama and the dems will do nothing….it’s all about money folks, always has been. If the WP can be believed and they probably can on this, the dems get 60% of their campaign money from Jewish groups with of course the Israel string attached. So anything that touches on the Jews or Israel vr the Arabs, like the Muslim community building flap, is why the dems leaders like Reid, Peliso and Dean will always follow AIPAC orders.

    Reply

  62. JohnH says:

    I agree with questions that Obama’s “peace process” will be nothing more than a band-aid, allowing everyone a few moments to wallow in their narcissism–if Bibi even lets it get that far.
    But I disagree that Israel will “get sick and tired of conflict after a time.” For them the Palestinians are a manageable problem that has enormous benefits–massive US aid, lots of diaspora aid, and a huge security industry that is driving economic growth.
    With these kinds of rewards for bad behavior, you can expect Israel to continue its brutal occupation forever. In fact, the rewards are so great that the Israeli government should get down on its hands and knees and thank the Palestinians profusely for their occasional annoyances.

    Reply

  63. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “The only thing that people like “pissed off american” will be happy with is the destruction of Israel and the death and dispersion of the jews therein”
    Oh go fuck yourself. This shit is getting old. There are far more Palestians, Muslims, and Arabs dying everyday from the agression of Israel and the United States than there are Jews dying from a few self-propelled firecrackers launched from an Israeli controlled ghetto.
    Assholes like you only have a very few mantras to chant everytime Israel is challenged or criticized. You need a new scriptbook Pearlman, the world is getting sick and tired of you RW Jews running the same tired old reruns decade after decade after decade.
    And here we are getting ready to watch yet one more Israeli scripted rerun, with jackasses like you and Nadine supplying us with the same old tired previews.

    Reply

  64. questions says:

    Goin’ out on a limb here, a very very thin branch and there’s someone climbing the tree with a saw to cut the connection and down I’ll go, boom.
    Status change for WB will come out of this round, before the elections here.
    It will be an “incompletely theorized agreement” (Sunstein’s language) and it will give some new diplo-speak name to the status of the WB. Something like “city-state in the making” and the WB will get some kind of provisional name like “The Democratic Polity of Palestine” or whatever.
    They’ll sew a flag, hoist it. They’ll have a budget of some sort, limited trade relations, eased crossings, check points will come down, prisoners will be released.
    A range of feel good concessions on both sides — enough to give the WB a shot at continued political development.
    It’ll be in everyone’s interests — Obama the peacemaker, clearly. Netanyahu will get a chance to a)look strong by making DEMANDS that are met, b)seal up some kind of historic legacy c)get some US concessions on Iran even as he has conceded to the US on Iran for the next 12 months. WB and who ever it is who goes to the table will look good for having held out for some range of feel good concessions (release of prisoners, knock down of checkpoints, some trade and easing of crossings, probable dismantling of some settlements).
    And slowly over the years, such things will build on themselves. People really do get sick and tired of conflict after a time. And I’m guessing no one feels really great about daily life.
    But, as I said, I’m on a thin limb far from the main trunk, and I got my rose-colored glasses on for now. Sisyphus?!

    Reply

  65. Warren Metzler says:

    I appreciate the posters who recognize this is an Obama public consumption exercise. But no one suggests why, so I propose the following. The only time there will be peace in Palestine, is after the Palestinians get their act together; form a secular government (Abbas’s presidential term was over this past January, he is no longer the legal president); have the government function in both the West Bank and Gaza, they can do so without Israel’s or the US’s permission; and begin to use massive civil disobedience means to force Israel to give in as result of international pressure. Until the Palestinians get their act together, they lack the moral character to form a viable state that will survive. Once that happens, it won’t make any difference what Israel’s “facts on the ground” are; reality will win, as it always does in the long run.

    Reply

  66. nadine says:

    Lively bloggingheads.tv debate between Flynt Leverett and Reuel Marc Gerecht on Iran:
    http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/30306?in=00:00&out=58:41

    Reply

  67. JohnH says:

    Once again Nadine falsely cast the blame on the Palestinians. In fact, resisting meaningful negotiations has been a canon of Likud ideology.
    Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir provided the smoking gun, revealing stonewalling as the essence of Likud policy in his 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.”
    Then Bibi boasted that he destroyed the Oslo Accords, the only successful negotiations ever undertaken with the Palestinians.
    http://www.redress.cc/palestine/jcook20100724#trans
    Netanyahu goes on to say that THE ONLY WAY TO DEAL with the Palestinians is to “beat them up, not once but repeatedly, beat them up so it hurts so badly, until it

    Reply

  68. nadine says:

    frenchconnection, you never explain why it requires twisting Abbas’ arms to merely get him to reenter direct talks. If it’s Israel standing in the way of a deal, why not enter and boldly make his demands, and let everybody see who the obstructionist is?
    By the way, there is plenty of evidence on the ground that Ramallah is becoming the de facto capital of Palestine. Three room apartments in Ramallah cost $150K now. Quite the boom town…while quiet lasts.

    Reply

  69. frenchconnection says:

    1. There is no sign that the Palestinians are willing to accept less than a viable, territorially contiguous state in the West Bank (and eventually, Gaza), including a capital in East Jerusalem and some sort of political formula (i.e., fig-leaf) on the refugee issue. By the way, this outcome supposedly what the Clinton and Bush adminstrations favored, and what Obama supposedly supports as well.
    2. There is no sign that Israel’s government is willing to accept anything more than a symbolic Palestinian “state” consisting of a set of disconnected Bantustans, with Israel in full control of the borders, air space, water supplies, electromagnetic spectrum. etc. Prime Minister Netanyahu has made it clear that this is what he means by a “two-state solution,” and he has repeatedly declared that Israel intends to keep all of Jerusalem and maybe a long-term military presence in the Jordan River valley. There are now roughly 500,000 Israeli Jews living outside the 1967 borders, and it is hard to imagine any Israeli government evacuating a significant fraction of them. Even if Netanyahu wanted to be more forthcoming, his coalition wouldn’t let him make any meaningful concessions. And while the talks drag on, the illegal settlements will continue to expand.
    3. There is no sign that the U.S. government is willing to put meaningful pressure on Israel. We’re clearly willing to twist Mahmoud Abbas’ arm to the breaking point (which is why he’s agreed to talks, even as Israel continues to nibble away at the territory of the future Palestinian state), but Obama and his Middle East team have long since abandoned any pretense of bringing even modest pressure to bear on Netanyahu. Absent that, why should anyone expect Bibi to change his position?
    http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/08/20/don_t_fall_for_the_hype_the_peace_process_is_still_going_nowhere
    there is no solution, either one or the other side will prevail. On the long run, Israel will lose, probably due to internal failure.

    Reply

  70. PissedOffAmerican says:

    This will go nowhere. We’ve already witnessed how spineless and openly biased Hillary and Obama are. From the Goldstone Report, to the so called “freeze on settlements”, to the flotilla high seas piracy and murders, Obama and Hillary have shown themselves to be mere vassals to the racist murderous sack of shit NaziYahoo.
    The Palestinians are at an unsurmountable disadvantage as long as these “talks” are arranged, organized, or mediated by Israel’s symbolic factotum; the USA. NaziYahoo can make any demand, or offer any insincere and laughingly insufficient false “concession”, and this emabarrasment we have for an SOS will be slobbering praise on the Israelis like a junkyard dog eyeing a T-Bone. Besides, who ACTUALLY represents the Gazan Palestinians? Abbas??? Thats a joke, isn’t it???
    Of course, the talks will fall apart, the Palestinians will be blamed, and Israel, in the near future, will fabricate an excuse to murder a few thousand more Palestinians, while using the smoke of battle to conceal a massive theft of more land.
    Someday, they’ll have all the land, and there won’t be a Palestinian problem, because there won’t be any Palestinians outside of carefully managed reservations, designed to accelerate and nurture death by “natural causes”. Amazing what a well placed germ can do.
    Well, WHY NOT? Has Israel shown the world they are beyond such a scenario? Is not Israel’s past replete with documented attrocities, false flag attacks, espionage, war crimes, and a myriad of other no less slimey and murderous policies, practices, and actions? What, all the sudden the Israeli leadership, in these “direct talks”, are going to discover integrity, morality, honesty, human compassion??? Bullshit. The Palestinians might just as well attempt to reconcile or negotiate with a rabid dog.
    Hamas will be blamed for derailing these “talks”.(As the hasbarist bigot Nadine foreshadows for us, above). Haven’t we seen this skit before? Even KNOWING that it was ISRAEL that broke the ceasefire that preceded Operation Cast Lead, the media narrative STILL puts the blame on Hamas. What hope do the Gazans have that these “direct talks” will accomplish anything other than give Israel an excuse to create an incident that once again casts the Gazans as the spoilers?? It is Israel’s MO, and observe carefully in the coming months as the script once again plays out as Israel has written it.

    Reply

  71. nadine says:

    So over 18 months after promising to waltz in and solve Mideast peace, the Obama administration has its big announcement: a return to the direct talks which were the norm before it arrived to disrupt them.
    The only thing which will actually be negotiated at these talks is which side will be more effective at getting the other side blamed for their failure. And how many Israelis will die as the Palestinians work to leverage their position in the their traditional manner, with a side of suicide bombings. Alas, so much for the quiet and prosperity of the West Bank.
    With Hizbullah in ascendancy in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza, chances of real breakthroughs are nil.

    Reply

Add your comment

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