Roadmap to HELL - One man caught on a barbed wire fence ....

[Diemen]

Here's the difference and I'll quote from a Charles Krauthamer piece as he can expalin it better than I.

So, knowing that the Palestinians have been offered that deal 3 times and turned it down each time, your claim that Obama's position is Pro-Palestinian seems illogical.

 

[INDY500]

So, knowing that the Palestinians have been offered that deal 3 times and turned it down each time, your claim that Obama's position is Pro-Palestinian seems illogical.

Pro-Palestinian, well yes, because it's much like his position on same-sex marriage. We know what he really thinks about gay marriage don't we? and we know what his position would on the law be if he ruled rather than governed the country as an elected official.

President Obama, deep in his heart, I believe wants a two state solution. But his world view is that Israel is the illegal occupier and the major obstacle to peace in the region.

 

[INDY500]

Quote:
Now you'd think....you'd think... it would be the far-Right that would work with religious radicals and be sympathetic to their fights and causes. "Women as chattel, theocracy, kill the gays. Count us in !!" And that the Left... the Left... would shun those parts of the Muslim world that fail to observe gay rights, equality for women, free speech or secular democracy.

But it's just the opposite. It's the far-Left that gives aid to Islamic Totalitarianism. Why is that? Why is it that if a Christian speaks out about the lack of human rights in Muslim countries or if a conservative (Bill O'Reilly) states that "there is a Muslim problem in the world," it's those on the Left that walkout in protest or shout "Islamophobia!!" ?
-Indy 500

except that it's not just the opposite and you've created a situation that's rhetorically beneficial but really not rooted in reality.

Not rooted in reality? The current issue of the Nation magazine has an article entitled "Can Obama Beat the Israel Lobby?" Think you're gonna see an article like that in the Weekly Standard, WSJ or National Review?

Why is it the biggest defenders of Israel for the past 15 years (covering issues including rocket attacks from Lebanon, scandalous U.N. resolutions and reports, the West Bank wall and phoney peace flotillas) on radio and TV are conservatives like Rush, Hannity Levin, Beck, Ingraham, etc? And the Helen Thomases of the world are on the Left?

And which ideology thinks that "Islamophobia" is real and which one thinks it's nothing but political correctness meant to suppress debate?

look at, say, female genital mutilation in Africa. it was women's groups who brought this issue to right, and i didn't see anyone on the Left supporting the right of societies to slice out the genitalia of an 11-year old girl in the name of "multiculturalism."

and there are many gay organizations that seek to help gay refugees from African and Muslim countries get out of these countries and off to London, New York, or wherever. however, the government of the US seems to be not as sympathetic as it could be to these cases.

Good, thanks for pointing that out. This really shouldn't be a Left vs Right deal. I'd like to think we could work together to end hunger, preventable illnesses, barbaric practices and obvious human rights violations around the world.

 

[Irvine511]

Not rooted in reality? The current issue of the Nation magazine has an article entitled "Can Obama Beat the Israel Lobby?" Think you're gonna see an article like that in the Weekly Standard, WSJ or National Review?

right ... the Israel Lobby. not Israel, not the Israeli people, most of whom are to the left of AIPAC. and the Israeli lobby, btw, is hardly filled with Jews. there are lots and lots of fundamentalist Christians.

Why is it the biggest defenders of Israel for the past 15 years (covering issues including rocket attacks from Lebanon, scandalous U.N. resolutions and reports, the West Bank wall and phoney peace flotillas) on radio and TV are conservatives like Rush, Hannity Levin, Beck, Ingraham, etc? And the Helen Thomases of the world are on the Left?

you have a very monolithic view of Israel and what it means to "defend" Israel -- you don't mention or even acknowledge that within Israel itself is a a large peace movement and much internal dissent and debate on Israel's tactics. conservatives love the Israel issue precisely because they know that the big boogeyman out there, now that the Soviets are no more, are Muslims.

the conservatives you mentioned are about one thing: money. and the Israeli issue is a large part of the apocalyptic, clash-of-civilizations paranoia that i mentioned earlier, and they know that the people who spend money on their books are fundamentalist Christians who are quite concerned not just with killing Muslims but also with the Rapture happening in their lifetimes.

and, further, this is precisely the kind of issue where the Right wields political correctness -- ANY criticism of Israel is ANTI-SEMETIC!!! -- in a way that they complain the Left uses racism or sexism.

And which ideology thinks that "Islamophobia" is real and which one thinks it's nothing but political correctness meant to suppress debate?

how is Islamophobia not real? why on earth would people in Okalahoma, of all places, ban Sharia Law if not for some invented boogeyman?

 

[Diemen]

But his world view is that Israel is the illegal occupier and the major obstacle to peace in the region.

I think his world view is decidedly more nuanced than that over-simplification. And if Obama is pro-Palestinian, what does that make former Mossad chief Meir Dagan?

Ex-Mossad Chief Sounds Alarm on Israel's Leaders

Israel government 'reckless and irresponsible' says ex-Mossad chief | World news | The Guardian

 

[BVS]

Pro-Palestinian, well yes, because it's much like his position on same-sex marriage. We know what he really thinks about gay marriage don't we? and we know what his position would on the law be if he ruled rather than governed the country as an elected official.

President Obama, deep in his heart, I believe wants a two state solution. But his world view is that Israel is the illegal occupier and the major obstacle to peace in the region.

How are you so good at reading the hearts of people you don't like, yet can't figure out the hearts of those you love?

 

[AchtungBono]

Hello Everyone,

When Israel first captured the territories in 1967, it was never going to be a permanent situation - at least not in the case of the West Bank, Gaza and Sinai, and it was always known that Israel was going to be negotiating the return of territories in exchange for peace.

Israel has always stated that we have no desire to rule over 1.5 million Palestinians (at that time) and that we are ready to negotiate the return of territories captured in '67 (as clearly stated in UN resolution 242 - it says TERRITORIES and not THE TERRITORIES.....).

Since 1967, the demographics and politics of the region have changed. Israel now has a population of 7 million (compared to 3.5 million in 1967). The security situation has changed as well. The Middle Eastern arms race has produced more sophisticated weapons which negate the need for hand to hand ground combat. Today, nations can sit in their bunkers and fire long-range missiles at each other with almost no need for a ground war.

The latest missile technology acquired by Syria and Lebanon (curteousy of Iran) has created a situation where long-range missiles are now able to cover practically every corner of Israel.

In the past, Israel has negotiated land withdrawls with Egypt and Jordan in exchange for peace (Egypt got the Sinai Peninsula), but Syria and Lebanon have remained stubborn in their positions. Syria is demanding the return of the entire Golan Heights - which is the one of the most strategic points in the country. Israel cannot afford to lose these northern "eyes".

To emphasize these points, and to show you how Israel cannot go back to the pre-'67 borders, I am posting a clip which will show you exactly what Israel's security needs are at the present.

On a side note, we have no problem with the two-state solution - which has been on the table since 1947 when the UN voted for the partition plan. However, this Palestinian state must recognize Israel's existence, must negotiate land for peace and, most importantly, be totally demilitarized. It is madness to think that Israel will accept a Palestinian state armed with rockets and morters and long-range missiles which can target our cities at any time.

So for your convenience and enlightenment, I invite you to watch this clip. Maybe you'll have a better understanding after you've seen it.

Thanks.


YouTube - ‪Israel's Critical Security Needs for a Viable Peace‬‏

 

[anitram]

"Israel's security needs" are a result of Israeli illegal settlement policy. Israel would not have such needs if Israel did not have some 400,000+ settlers ILLEGALLY occupying land and making the West Bank look like Swiss cheese. Let's at least be honest about who created the "reality on the ground" here. And that illegality continues day in and day out.

 

[Earnie Shavers]

Well, to be fair, some Israeli courts and the odd apocalyptic preacher with a Fox News show think they're legal, therefore, the other 99.99999% of the world are wrong.

 

[INDY500]

The only instance in which you'll hear liberals decrying "illegal" immigration by the way.

 

[Diemen]

The only instance in which you'll hear liberals decrying "illegal" immigration by the way.

And of course the flipside to that - the only instance in which conservatives are all for illegal immigration. Isn't reducing complex arguments to deceptive over-simplifications fun?

Out of curiousity, would you be okay with immigrants coming in and bulldozing your home to build their own?

 

[INDY500]

And of course the flipside to that - the only instance in which conservatives are all for illegal immigration.

Which would only proves the point I've been making all weekend. That the American Left & Right have reversed their poles when it comes to their Middle East arguments.

Isn't reducing complex arguments to deceptive over-simplifications fun?

Hey, let's invent a phrase for that. I propose "sound bite."

Out of curiousity, would you be okay with immigrants coming in and bulldozing your home to build their own?

Hey, you're catching on quick. Nice sound bite.

My turn. Would I previously been launching rockets out of those homes?

 

[Earnie Shavers]

So I take it your position is either that settlements are perfectly legal, or "well, fuck 'em all, they all deserve it" (or a bit of both)?

 

[deep]

PM would accept pre-’67 lines as baseline for talks
By HERB KEINON,
08/03/2011 06:32

Israel to negotiate using 1967 lines, with mutually agreed swaps, if Palestinians accept two states, one Palestinian and one Jewish.

With the Palestinians set to seek recognition of statehood at the UN in just a number of weeks, Israel said Tuesday it would be willing to accept the 1967 lines as a framework for talks as part of a package in which the Palestinians would recognize Jewish state.

Israeli officials said this framework would be a package deal whereby Israel would agree to entering negotiations using the 1967 lines, with mutually agreed upon swaps, as the baseline of talks; and the Palestinians would agree that the final goal of negotiations would be two states, a Palestinian one and Jewish one.

PM would accept pre-’67 lines as ... JPost - Diplomacy & Politics

 

[AchtungBono]

Hi everyone,

After several months of relative quiet, the missiles have returned to the southern part of Israel and my hometown of Ashdod in particular.

Two days ago I was woken at 5:30am by the sounds of the siren. Since our bedrooms are upstairs and we had 45 seconds to get to a safe area in our house (which is downstairs), I flew out of bed and tripped on the stairs - resulting in a black eye and some pain when I fell on my shoulder.

The missiles started falling after Israel retaliated against the terrorists who carried out a combined attack two days ago which killed 8 Israelis along the wide-open border between Israel and Egypt.

Since then, we (my sister, mother and I) have been sleeping downstairs on our couches and steeling ourselves in anticipation of the next sirens and missiles -which have already fallen this morning and injured 3 people (see below article).

So thank goodness me and my family and loved ones are safe and I have every confidence that the army will take care of this situation.

Just thought I'd let you all know.

Rockets hit Ashdod in southern Israel, three Palestinian workers wounded - Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News

 

[maycocksean]

Hi everyone,

After several months of relative quiet, the missiles have returned to the southern part of Israel and my hometown of Ashdod in particular.

Two days ago I was woken at 5:30am by the sounds of the siren. Since our bedrooms are upstairs and we had 45 seconds to get to a safe area in our house (which is downstairs), I flew out of bed and tripped on the stairs - resulting in a black eye and some pain when I fell on my shoulder.

The missiles started falling after Israel retaliated against the terrorists who carried out a combined attack two days ago which killed 8 Israelis along the wide-open border between Israel and Egypt.

Since then, we (my sister, mother and I) have been sleeping downstairs on our couches and steeling ourselves in anticipation of the next sirens and missiles -which have already fallen this morning and injured 3 people (see below article).

So thank goodness me and my family and loved ones are safe and I have every confidence that the army will take care of this situation.

Just thought I'd let you all know.

Rockets hit Ashdod in southern Israel, three Palestinian workers wounded - Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News

Stay safe, AB

 

[AchtungBono]

Stay safe, AB

Thank you so much May....for the wishes AND for the hug.,....

 

[BVS]

Egypt says Israel apology of troop deaths is insufficient - CNN.com

 

[INDY500]

Palestinian Statehood: US Will Veto Palestinian Bid For Statehood At U.N. Security Council

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration says it will veto any bid by the Palestinians to seek statehood recognition at the U.N. Security Council.

Until now, Washington had not explicitly said it would use its veto to prevent passage. On Thursday, State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said that if the issue comes to a vote in the Security Council, the U.S. will veto it.

Israel opposes the statehood push as well.

Nuland says the U.S. view is that the Palestinian effort is misguided and that statehood should come only as a result of negotiations with Israel.

I'll gladly applaud the White House when their actions best serve the interests of the nation and her allies.

 

[Earnie Shavers]

The 'process' needs a firm kick up the arse, but it doesn't need anything that forces anyone to make fast/rash decisions, or gives anyone an excuse to do so. The vote is okay, but how the post-vote is handled is pretty touchy.

But yeah, whole thing needs a shot in the arm. It's pretty standard for it to be a 2nd term thing for US Presidents, so hoping that will be the case with Obama, and he finds a pair of big brassy ones for it.

 

[deep]

The needs to happen.

There will be a lot of complaining and blaming.

The blame rests 100 per cent with Israel.

But, of course scapegoating Obama, will be the way to go.

 

[deep]

Israel does not want a Palestinian state. Period. - Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News

 

[Earnie Shavers]

But, of course scapegoating Obama, will be the way to go.

If he's copping it for absolutely nothing, he might as well do something. It's one of those things - the 'Restoring Courage'/'Obama threw Israel under the bus' crowd are never going to vote for him anyway, so why care?

- Threaten to cut funding - and hey, he won't be the first President to do that, just the first Democrat President to do it.

- Make it illegal for US money to fund settlements, from small time individual donations up. It can be classified as a War Crime after all, so the Supreme Court should find that a pretty easy thing to do.

Start there.

 

[Pearl]

A subway station billboard war is the latest flareup in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
The dispute began with posters urging an end to U.S. military aid for Israel, prompting a City Council member to demand an end to the ads - and spawning an upcoming series of counter-ads.
"This is a highly political campaign with a controversial underlying anti-Israel message," Councilman Lewis Fidler (D-Brooklyn) wrote MTA President Thomas Prendergast.
"I would urge you to disallow and/or remove these advertisements."
The group behind the ads, the Westchester County-based WESPAC Foundation, said the subway spots are intended to encourage dialogue and not dissension.
"If the councilman thinks they'e anti-Israeli, he should say why," said Felice Gelman, a member of the group. "I have family in Israel. They deserve peace. And U.S. policies are not helping."
Israel was slated to receive roughly $3 billion in military aid this year from the U.S. The ads - with the tagline "End U.S. military aid to Israel" - appeared in 18 stations beginning Sept. 5.

Read more: Subway station billboard battle is latest flareup in Israeli-Palestinian conflict

Its not good that many Palestinians are taught from an early age to hate the Israelis. However, if Israel weren't illegally settling in their territories, the Palestinian people wouldn't resort to radicalism.

 

[deep]

Holy Land clerics bless Palestinian UN bid
Sep 18 10:08 AM US/Eastern

Priests in the Holy Land used their sermons on Sunday to give their blessing to the Palestinians' bid for United Nations membership.

The retired Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem, Michel Sabbah, the first Palestinian to hold the post since the Crusades, was to preach in the Roman Catholic church in the northern West Bank city of Nablus.

A joint statement by Catholic, Orthodox, Anglican and Lutheran priests pledged their "support for the diplomatic efforts being deployed to win international recognition for the State of Palestine... on the June 1967 borders with Jerusalem as our capital."

The priests went further than their bishops, who in a statement this week confined themselves to a call for intensified prayer and diplomatic efforts ahead of the Palestinian membership request, to be sent to the UN Security Council on Friday.

"Palestinians and Israelis should exercise restraint, whatever the outcome of the vote at the United Nations," the bishops said.

"We call upon decision-makers and people of good will to do their utmost to achieve the long-awaited justice, peace and reconciliation between Israelis and Palestinians."

Holy Land clerics bless Palestinian UN bid

 

[Earnie Shavers]

U.S. Republicans submit resolution supporting Israel's right to annex West Bank - Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News

U.S. Representative Joe Walsh (R-IL), introduced on Monday a resolution (with 30 co-sponsors) to support Israel’s right to annex the West Bank in the event that the Palestinian Authority continues to push for vote at the United Nations.

“We’ve got what I consider to be a potential slap in the face coming up with the vote in the UN, which is absolutely outrageous,” Walsh told Politico website last July.

He was quoted as saying that "it’s clear that the United States needs to make a very strong statement. I would argue that the president should make this statement, but he’s not capable of making it. So, the House needs to make this statement, if the [Palestinian Authority] continues down this road of trying to get recognition of statehood, the U.S. will not stand for it. And we will respect Israel’s right to annex Judea and Samaria.”

Judea and Samaria. That's all you need to know.

 

[deep]

Israel does not need a U S Resolution to do this, they should just go ahead and do it. They control those areas now.
They got that territory in a war they did not start. They won the war!
Should the U S give Texas and California back to Mexico?

 

[yolland]

U.S. Representative Joe Walsh (R-IL)

This is the guy who went on a rant a few months back about how most American Jews are kneejerk libruls who value woozy-lefty "peace" talk over Israel's safety and what a crying shame it is (he's not Jewish). His bill, H.Res.394, is modeled on a Knesset bill proposing annexation of the portions of the West Bank comprising major Jewish settlements plus the uninhabited lands (i.e. "Area C," 60% of the West Bank) in the event of a PA statehood declaration. That initiative is being led by Likud MP Danny Danon (who openly opposes a two-state solution--period--and was also an architect of Israel's recently passed anti-boycott law) together with a group of MPs from the ultranationalist Yisrael Beiteinu party.

Here's a list of the cosponsors (select Representative Walsh-->H.Res.394-->Cosponsors), should anyone wish to contact theirs if his/her name's on the list.

 

[deep]

Netanyahu offers talks with Palestinians over UN bid

what more do they want?????

oh yeah, to butcher babies in their beds.

 

[deep]

Bill Clinton: Netanyahu killed the peace process
By Josh Rogin Thursday, September 22, 2011 - 2:22 PM

Who's to blame for the continued failure of the Middle East peace process? Former President Bill Clinton said today that it is Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu -- whose government moved the goalposts upon taking power, and whose rise represents a key reason there has been no Israeli-Palestinian peace deal.

Clinton, in a roundtable with bloggers today on the sidelines of the Clinton Global Initiative in New York, gave an extensive recounting of the deterioration in the Middle East peace process since he pressed both parties to agree to a final settlement at Camp David in 2000. He said there are two main reasons for the lack of a comprehensive peace today: the reluctance of the Netanyahu administration to accept the terms of the Camp David deal and a demographic shift in Israel that is making the Israeli public less amenable to peace.

"The two great tragedies in modern Middle Eastern politics, which make you wonder if God wants Middle East peace or not, were [Yitzhak] Rabin's assassination and [Ariel] Sharon's stroke," Clinton said.

Sharon had decided he needed to build a new centrist coalition, so he created the Kadima party and gained the support of leaders like Tzipi Livni and Ehud Olmert. He was working toward a consensus for a peace deal before he fell ill, Clinton said. But that effort was scuttled when the Likud party returned to power.

"The Israelis always wanted two things that once it turned out they had, it didn't seem so appealing to Mr. Netanyahu. They wanted to believe they had a partner for peace in a Palestinian government, and there's no question -- and the Netanyahu government has said -- that this is the finest Palestinian government they've ever had in the West Bank," Clinton said.

"[Palestinian leaders] have explicitly said on more than one occasion that if [Netanyahu] put up the deal that was offered to them before -- my deal -- that they would take it," Clinton said, referring to the 2000 Camp David deal that Yasser Arafat rejected.

But the Israeli government has drifted a long way from the Ehud Barak-led government that came so close to peace in 2000, Clinton said, and any new negotiations with the Netanyahu government are now on starkly different terms -- terms that the Palestinians are unlikely to accept.

"For reasons that even after all these years I still don't know for sure, Arafat turned down the deal I put together that Barak accepted," he said. "But they also had an Israeli government that was willing to give them East Jerusalem as the capital of the new state of Palestine."

Israel also wants a normalization of relations with its Arab neighbors to accompany a peace deal. Clinton said that the Saudi-inspired Arab Peace Initiative put forth in 2002 represented an answer to that Israeli demand.

"The King of Saudi Arabia started lining up all the Arab countries to say to the Israelis, ‘if you work it out with the Palestinians ... we will give you immediately not only recognition but a political, economic, and security partnership,'" Clinton said. "This is huge.... It's a heck of a deal."

The Netanyahu government has received all of the assurances previous Israeli governments said they wanted but now won't accept those terms to make peace, Clinton said.

"Now that they have those things, they don't seem so important to this current Israeli government, partly because it's a different country," said Clinton. "In the interim, you've had all these immigrants coming in from the former Soviet Union, and they have no history in Israel proper, so the traditional claims of the Palestinians have less weight with them."

Clinton then repeated his assertions made at last year's conference that Israeli society can be divided into demographic groups that have various levels of enthusiasm for making peace.

"The most pro-peace Israelis are the Arabs; second the Sabras, the Jewish Israelis that were born there; third, the Ashkenazi of long-standing, the European Jews who came there around the time of Israel's founding," Clinton said. "The most anti-peace are the ultra-religious, who believe they're supposed to keep Judea and Samaria, and the settler groups, and what you might call the territorialists, the people who just showed up lately and they're not encumbered by the historical record."

Clinton affirmed that the United States should veto the Palestinian resolution at the U.N. Security Council for member-state status, because the Israelis need security guarantees before agreeing to the creation of a Palestinian state. But the Netanyahu government has moved away from the consensus for peace, making a final status agreement more difficult, Clinton said.

"That's what happened. Every American needs to know this. That's how we got to where we are," Clinton said. "The real cynics believe that the Netanyahu's government's continued call for negotiations over borders and such means that he's just not going to give up the West Bank."

.