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

[deep]

the average American is quite a bit to the left of Netanyahu.

 

[yolland]

ביבי פרו אמריקנו (parody)

 

[AchtungBono]

^

HAHAHAHAHAHA!

Frigging AWESOME!!!!.....thanks for that Yolland!

 

[AchtungBono]

Hi everyone,

There have been many references over the past week to the foreign policy statements made by President Obama and PM Netanyahu.

So for your convenience, I'm posting all three key speeches on the middle east that have taken place over the past week.

1.
Pres. Obama at State department

YouTube - ‪Watch President Obama's Full Speech on Mideast Policy‬‏

2. Pres. Obama at AIPAC

YouTube - ‪President Obama at 2011 AIPAC Policy Conference‬‏

3. Benjamin Netanyahu at AIPAC

YouTube - ‪Israel Prime Minister Netanyahu Addresses AIPAC 2011‬‏

4. Benjamin Netanyahu at Congress

YouTube - ‪Prime Minister of Israel Benjamin Netanyahu Speech at the Joint Session of Congress - May 24, 2011‬‏

 

[deep]

Americans Are Joining Flotilla to Protest Israeli Blockade
By LAURIE GOODSTEIN

When an international flotilla sails for Gaza this month to challenge Israel’s naval blockade of the Palestinian territory, among the boats will be an American ship with 34 passengers, including the writer Alice Walker and an 86-year-old whose parents died in the Holocaust.

A year ago, nine people in a flotilla of six boats were killed when Israeli commandos boarded a Turkish boat in international waters off the coast of Gaza. The Israelis said their commandos were attacked and struck back in self-defense, but the Turks blamed the Israelis for using live ammunition. The raid soured relations between Israel and Turkey and intensified pressure on Israel to end the naval blockade.

Organizers said the new flotilla, scheduled to leave in late June from a port they would not identify, had at least 1,000 passengers on about 10 boats. One boat will carry Spaniards, another Canadians, another Swiss and another Irish.

The Americans have named their boat “The Audacity of Hope,” lifting the title of a book by President Obama to make a point, said Leslie Cagan, a political organizer who is the coordinator of the American boat.

“We’re sending a message to our own government that we think it could play a much more positive role in not only ending the siege of Gaza, but also ending the whole occupation” of Palestinian land, she said. “The phrase does capture what we believe, which is that it is possible to make change in a positive way, and that’s a very hopeful stance.”

The American passengers say they support the Palestinian people, not Hamas. They liken their strategy to that of the Freedom Riders, who 50 years ago rode buses to the American South to challenge segregation.

Gabriel Schivone, a student at the University of Arizona who is joining the flotilla, said, “It’s in the tradition of Dr. King’s direct-action principles, to create a situation so tension-packed that it forces the world to look and see what’s happening to the Palestinians.”

To explain why she was joining the flotilla, Hedy Epstein, the 86-year-old, said, “The American Jewish community and Israel both say that they speak for all Jews. They don’t speak for me. They don’t speak for the Jews in this country who are going to be on the U.S. boat, and the many others standing behind us.”

The American boat is owned by a Greek company and registered in Delaware, Ms. Cagan said. It will carry letters from Americans to Palestinians, not aid. About a quarter of the passengers are Jewish. Among the crew is a former captain in the Israeli Air Force who refused to fly missions in Gaza.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/02/world/middleeast/02flotilla.html?_r=1&ref=global-home

 

[AchtungBono]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/02/world/middleeast/02flotilla.html?_r=1&ref=global-home

Good morning Deep,

Did you ever get the feeling that every day was like the movie
"Groundhog day" and that you have to relive the events of the day over and over and over and over and over and over again and again and again and again? That's how I feel about this flotilla business and about the Israel-Palestinian conflict in general......

I've already explained why the Israeli naval blockade of Gaza is essential to our safety and TOTALLY LEGAL by international law. I've already shown in previous posts that ships carrying so-called humanitarian aid have been stopped by the Israeli navy, searched, and found to be carrying Iranian-made weapons intended for Hamas (see my reply on the "Victoria" incident).

Make no mistake, not all the people on the Marmara last year were innocent. The fact that they came armed with knives and guns showed that they were preparing in advance to use force against the Israeli navy. The entire flotilla was planned as a provocation against Israel and humanitarism(sp?) had nothing to do with it. The five other boats in the flotilla were stopped without incident when told to do so - only the Marmara defied our legitimate demand to turn around and not enter our waters. We have no problem with ships wanting to bring aid to the Palestinians but we MUST be sure that these same ships are not being used by terrorists to smuggle weapons by sea. I'm speculating now but I believe that if the Marmara had agreed to be thoroughly searched, and if we had found no weapons, then we would have probably allowed them to continue unharmed to Gaza, despite our legal blockade - but we'll never know, because the terrorists on board the ship caught our soldiers by surprise with the viciousness of their attack, forcing the soldiers to open fire in self-defense.

Now the IHH organization is planning another provocative flotilla in June, with the Marmara joining another 15 ships in another attempt to violate our justified blockade. Again, this has nothing to do with helping the Palestinians and everything to do with humiliating and picking a fight with us. We have asked the owners to reconsider and avoid violating our justified blockade. We are more than willing to allow them to sail to Israel, dock in Ashdod or Haifa, and transfer any humanitarian aid (assuming they're carrying any......) to Gaza by road, like we did with the other ships and with the "Rachel Cory" as well (which did the right thing and didn't defy us), but of course they said NO - which only proves that they couldn't care less about the Palestinians and they only care about making us look bad.

Whatever happens, I assure you that we will be better prepared this time. The events of last year will NOT be repeated and if they are it will NOT be because of us.

 

[INDY500]

Ayers, Dohrn helped organize flotilla group | Michael Daboll | Beltway Confidential | Washington Examiner

Ayers, Dohrn helped organize flotilla group
By: Barbara Hollingsworth 06/01/10

Former Weather Underground leaders William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, as well as Code Pink founder Jodie Evans, helped organize the Free Gaza Movement, which launched the six-ship flotilla from Turkey to Israel that ended in a violent clash with Israeli Defense Forces, BigGovernment.com reported.

In January, the trio were spotted in Egypt attempting to stir up crowds on the streets with 1,400 other left-wing activists after the Egyptian government refused to allow Free Gaza Movement members to enter the Gaza Strip. About 100 marchers were eventually allowed to cross the border, where they were met by former Hamas prime minister Ismail Haniyeh.

BigGovernment quotes author Philip Weiss, who wrote that he witnessed Ayers and Dohrn arguing with fellow activists over whether to accept Egypt’s offer to allow a small number of them into Gaza:

“Dohrn said that the principle of ‘All or none’ was a miserable one for activist politics. You always took what you could get and kept fighting for more. A European man in a red keffiyeh screamed at her that she was serving the fascisti. Her partner Bill Ayers gently confronted him and asked him why he was so out of control. Between getting on and off the bus, Dohrn, who wore a flower in her hair, said that she didn’t like the absolutist certainty of the people on the other side of the police barricades, and having been in the Weather Underground, she knew something about absolutist feeling.”

As political theater, an argument between the aging flower child/domestic terrorist and a fellow traveler over who knew more about “absolutist feelings” would be hard to top.

This wasn’t the first time that the Free Gaza Movement, whose board of directors include well-known leftists Noam Chomsky and Naomi Klein, sent vessels to Gaza to deliberately provoke a reaction from Israel.

“On August 23, 2008, two FG boats – one of them a 66-foot yacht named The Dignity – sailed from Cyprus to Gaza, where they docked and symbolically ‘broke’ the Israeli ‘siege’ when their passengers disembarked. The Israeli navy, seeking not to ignite international disapproval by intercepting the boats, made no attempt to stop them. The passengers, who were greeted by crowds of thousands in Gaza, claimed to be the first people to freely enter Gaza in 41 years,” according to David Horowitz.

“Two months later The Dignity made its second trip from Cyprus to Gaza, this time carrying 26 FG activists and some medical supplies. The yacht arrived at a Gaza port on October 29, 2008 – again with no resistance from the Israeli navy… FG made another voyage to Gaza in November 2008, when its members accused Israel of conducting ‘chemical warfare on Palestinian fishermen.’”

“On December 29, 2008, The Dignity, bound for Gaza, was loaded with 3.5 tons of Cypriot-donated medical supplies and 16 radical activists, including former Green Party presidential candidate Cynthia McKinney. At the time, a major Israeli military offensive was taking place in Gaza, in retaliation for Hamas’ relentless rocket attacks against southern Israeli cities….Because of the tense situation, on this occasion the Israelis diverted The Dignity before it could arrive in Gaza.”

And if there’s any doubt that this was a political set-up instead of a humanitarian mission, the fact that Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez promised to join a future convoy should dispel any doubts.

ActungBono, know that most Americans realize what this is about. You're not alone and the overwhelming support Netanyahu received, from both sides of the aisle, during his speech to the U.S. joint session of Congress reflects that.

President Obama's pro-Palestinian position is not, NOT, widely held in this country.

 

[Irvine511]

President Obama's pro-Palestinian position is non, NOT, widely held in this country.

well, now there's a distortion.

 

[INDY500]

well, now there's a distortion.

Don't you consider Dubya a "war criminal"?

Anyway, I believe only a looming election moderates Obama's policies.

 

[Irvine511]

Don't you consider Dubya a war criminal?

well, yes. but that's an easy one. we know what torture is, and we know the invasion of Iraq was illegal.

Anyway, I believe only a looming election moderates his policies.

do you know what philosemitism is?

 

[INDY500]

do you know what philosemitism is?

No, had to look that one up.

I don't see Israel or Jews as perfect or without blame. I do see the Jews as God's chosen people. I do see Israel as the sole pro-American, openly democratic, human rights observing, country in the Middle East. A country surrounded by regimes, organizations and a great number of people who wish Israel driven into the sea and openly celebrate the death of Jews.

From Truman to GWB this has not been a Republican or Democratic view but the American view.

 

[Irvine511]

I don't see Israel or Jews as perfect or without blame. I do see the Jews as God's chosen people. I do see Israel as the sole pro-American, openly democratic, human rights observing, country in the Middle East. A country surrounded by regimes, organizations and a great number of people who wish Israel driven into the sea and openly celebrate the death of Jews.

From Truman to GWB this has not been a Republican or Democratic view but the American view.

yes, i'd agree in a way that many American politicians see the Jews in Israel as particularly useful so long as they continue to be a part of various Christian projects.

also, calling something the "american" view does not in any way legitimize the view or make it right or good or accurate. we've been wrong about lots of things.

 

[Diemen]

President Obama's pro-Palestinian position is not, NOT, widely held in this country.

Actually, if you're referring to the "pre-1967 borders with agreed land swaps" that right-wing media has equated to treason and Netanyahu has manufactured into a scandal, that position was held by the past 3 US Presidents (at least), as well as three past Israeli prime ministers (Barak, Olmert and Sharon).

 

[BVS]

we've been wrong about lots of things.

Take that back!

 

[Earnie Shavers]

Actually, if you're referring to the "pre-1967 borders with agreed land swaps" that right-wing media has equated to treason and Netanyahu has manufactured into a scandal, that position was held by the past 3 US Presidents (at least), as well as three past Israeli prime ministers (Barak, Olmert and Sharon).

The "Obama threw Israel under the bus" thing and the ensuing orgy around Netanyahu just goes to show how truly full-on ignorant so many US conservatives are, how easily they are played, and how obvious their real issue is.

 

[Irvine511]

how easily they are played, and how obvious their real issue is.

yup.

they love it when Jews kill Muslims for them. this whole Israel-as-the-front-line-in-the-inevitable-clash-of-civilizations-with-an-apocalyptic-angle really gets their genitals tingling.

all that said, there are some who stand firmly behind Israel's right to exist, and know that a two-state solution based upon the 1967 borders is actually the best way to ensure Israel's future.

 

[INDY500]

Actually, if you're referring to the "pre-1967 borders with agreed land swaps" that right-wing media has equated to treason and Netanyahu has manufactured into a scandal, that position was held by the past 3 US Presidents (at least), as well as three past Israeli prime ministers (Barak, Olmert and Sharon).

In diplomatic negotiations yes. But no public speeches that I remember.

 

[INDY500]

yup.

they love it when Jews kill Muslims for them. this whole Israel-as-the-front-line-in-the-inevitable-clash-of-civilizations-with-an-apocalyptic-angle really gets their genitals tingling.

Classy

all that said, there are some who stand firmly behind Israel's right to exist, and know that a two-state solution based upon the 1967 borders is actually the best way to ensure Israel's future.

Unfortunately Hamas believes in neither Israel's right to exist or a two-state solution.

 

[INDY500]

The "Obama threw Israel under the bus" thing and the ensuing orgy around Netanyahu just goes to show how truly full-on ignorant so many US conservatives are, how easily they are played, and how obvious their real issue is.

May 31, 2011
The reason there is no peace in the Middle East is very simple. It’s because the majority of Palestinians and the majority of Arabs don’t believe there should be an Israel. It’s that simple. Anyone who tries to figure out a way to solve this conflict without realizing that truth will never get anywhere.
-- noted "full-on ignorant U.S. conservative" Senator Charles Schumer (D) of NY.

And the Pro-Palestinian Left in this country is not happy with him.

Schumer Falsely Claims Most Arabs, Palestinians Don’t Accept Israel’s Existence | ThinkProgress

 

[Irvine511]

Classy

then you tell me why Palin wears her Israeli flag pin and talks about having an Israeli flag in her office while governor of Alaska. have you heard Huckabee's Rapture-focused comments or Beck's recent visit. it is absolutely fundamentalist bonkers stuff, and it is absolutely of the philo-Semitism i spoke of earlier -- love for the Jews so long as they are "useful" for various Christian projects.

Unfortunately Hamas believes in neither Israel's right to exist or a two-state solution.

and i agree that this is one of the preconditions for peace. while Hamas is a much more complex organization than most people in the US understand it to be, Israel absolutely has a basic right to exist.

this is Obama's position too.

 

[Earnie Shavers]

"He is one of the most rightwing militant people ever born here ... who ate Arabs for breakfast, lunch and dinner. When this man says that the leadership has no vision and is irresponsible, we should stop sleeping soundly at night."

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

 

[Earnie Shavers]

In diplomatic negotiations yes. But no public speeches that I remember.

I don't know if that's true or not, but if it is (and I'm guessing it is at least less a case of it not being mentioned at all, and more a case of it usually being crowded in diplo-speak, i.e. Obama was just more blunt) I'm not sure why that would matter?

 

[Diemen]

In diplomatic negotiations yes. But no public speeches that I remember.

I'm confused: why does publicly stating something that has been a diplomatic standard for decades amount to betraying Israel?

Care to explain?

 

[INDY500]

I'm confused: why does publicly stating something that has been a diplomatic standard for decades amount to betraying Israel?

Care to explain?

I should imagine it's same reason the #1 drafted quarterback doesn't say in the papers or on TV what $ amount he'll accept to sign. It's a bargaining chip. Not that I'm a diplomat.

Anyway, here's a few public quotes from Obama's and Netanyahu's predecessors.

“The border of the State of Israel … will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War.” We will not return to the June 1967 lines.”
--Yitzhak Rabin

A 2004 letter from GW Bush and the U.S. Congress to Ariel Sharon stated “It is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949.”

 

[INDY500]

and i agree that this is one of the preconditions for peace. while Hamas is a much more complex organization than most people in the US understand it to be, Israel absolutely has a basic right to exist.

this is Obama's position too.

When you can find

bumper stickers in the Gaza strip then I'd say it's time for Israel to start talking '67 borders.

 

[BVS]

You've done a smash up job answering Diemen's and Irvine's very straight forward questions

INDY, are you even capable of discussing this issue? You seem at a lost, you seem to really only know what Hannity tells you about the subject.

 

[Earnie Shavers]

I should imagine it's same reason the #1 drafted quarterback doesn't say in the papers or on TV what $ amount he'll accept to sign. It's a bargaining chip. Not that I'm a diplomat.

But it's very well publicly known. It's not a secret, private, hush-hush bargaining chip. It's been the basis of US policy for decades. Everyone knows that. Or at least everyone who pays attention to news beyond screaming Drudge headlines, squawking Palin quotes, whining Hannity rants and illogical Beck freakouts. And it's widely and well known to anyone who actually is either interested or invested in the peace process, and so pays attention to the ongoing negotiations. '1967 + Land Swaps' is absolutely public, widely known, widely published, and widely, publicly pushed, and has been for a long, long time. When Obama said that, I didn't bat an eyelid. It was absolutely nothing new, to anyone. The *only* interesting/new component to his speech was the Jordan/Palestine border. That's something that it would be fair to say that the US has from time to time wanted, to some degree (President depending), but never publicly declared or pushed for in such a way. THAT was new. 1967+Land Swaps? Not in the slightest.

“The border of the State of Israel … will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War.” We will not return to the June 1967 lines.”
--Yitzhak Rabin

And no-one has ever said they have to. 1967 basis + land swaps beyond.

A 2004 letter from GW Bush and the U.S. Congress to Ariel Sharon stated “It is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949.”

1949. Again, that's never, ever been anywhere near the table.

 

[INDY500]

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

He (President Obama) declared that the Arab-Israeli conflict should indeed be resolved along “the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps.”

Nothing new here, said Obama three days later. “By definition, it means that the parties themselves — Israelis and Palestinians — will negotiate a border that is different” from 1967.

It means nothing of the sort. “Mutually” means both parties have to agree. And if one side doesn’t? Then, by definition, you’re back to the 1967 lines.

Nor is this merely a theoretical proposition. Three times the Palestinians have been offered exactly that formula, 1967 plus swaps — at Camp David 2000, Taba 2001, and the 2008 Olmert-Abbas negotiations. Every time, the Palestinians said no and walked away.

And that remains their position today: The 1967 lines. Period. Indeed, in September the Palestinians are going to the U.N. to get the world to ratify precisely that: a Palestinian state on the ’67 lines. No swaps.

Thanks for your response but now I'm going to spend the rest of this beautiful weekend not thinking about this 3000+ year conflict.

 

[Earnie Shavers]

Yep. Well, we weren't debating whether or not it is a hotly contested and/or widely accepted good idea or basis, or it's realistic chances of working - just whether or not Obamas mention of it in that speech was him "throwing Israel under the bus", and given exactly that has been the foundation/starting point of US policy for decades, the answer is 'no'. The Krauthamer points aren't wrong (although he's being very, very cheeky with his wording there in regards to the reasons why the Palestinians rejected some of those deals) they're just points for a different debate.

 

[INDY500]

Yep. Well, we weren't debating whether or not it is a hotly contested and/or widely accepted good idea or basis, or it's realistic chances of working - just whether or not Obamas mention of it in that speech was him "throwing Israel under the bus", and given exactly that has been the foundation/starting point of US policy for decades, the answer is 'no'. The Krauthamer points aren't wrong (although he's being very, very cheeky with his wording there in regards to the reasons why the Palestinians rejected some of those deals) they're just points for a different debate.

All I know is Obama's speech had not only the GOP, Charles Krauthamer, Hannity and Glenn Beck "freaking out," but prominent Jewish groups and high-ranking Democrats such as Steny Hoyer, Joe Lieberman and Harry Reid publicly distancing themselves from the president's comments.