Politics | Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch


Previous 10 | Next 10 
To: PartyTime who wrote (78765)1/7/2009 12:59:52 PM
From: longnshort   of 89445
 
The Dems don't care about anybody but themselves and power. Are you really that naive ?

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: t2 who wrote (78767)1/7/2009 1:00:44 PM
From: longnshort   of 89445
 
you are 12 years old right ?

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: PartyTime who wrote (78765)1/7/2009 1:02:20 PM
From: longnshort   of 89445
 
And the party has not even started yet!

By David Kahane
National Review Online

Can you believe it? Barack Hussein Obama II hasn’t even been inaugurated yet and he’s already been interviewed by federal prosecutors in the ongoing Blago mess; he’s seen Bill Richardson immolate himself rather than stand the federal grand-jury scrutiny that would have come with his appointment as Commerce Secretary; his boy Rahm Emanuel is both en pointe, having resigned the House seat that was previously warmed by Hot Rod and Dan Rostenkowski, and, apparently, on Patrick Fitzgerald’s tapes too; and he’s facing the prospect of the Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid, standing like a homunculus George Wallace in the schoolhouse door, ready to deny entrance to a black man when Roland “We Are the Senator” Burris tries to take Bambi’s hardly-even-used seat tomorrow.

And here we Democrats thought the Clinton administration could never be topped!

You people had better get used to it, though, because hijinks and shenanigans like these are going to be the order of the day for at least the next four years. After all, we are the Tammany Party — the party of Slavery, Segregation, Sedition, and Surrender — so this sort of thing is not exactly new for us. Just look at our track record: We rightfully opposed the tyrant Lincoln with a loser general running on an antiwar platform, we perfected defensive election theft with Boss Tweed to save us from the plutocrats and goo-goos, and we formed an unholy alliance with gangland to get Franklin D. Roosevelt the Democratic nod over Al Smith at our convention in (where else?) Chicago in 1932.

We are the party of Barack Obama and the Daley Machine; the party of the Clintons and their amazing alchemistic Library, which turns Saudi dross into altruistic gold; the party of Tony Rezko and Norman Hsu; the party of vaporizing fundraisers, absconding bagmen and sitting New Mexico governors (and a recent presidential “candidate”) currently under federal investigation for allegedly steering a state contract in the direction of one of his big backers, David Rubin of CDR Financial Products in Beverly Hills. Now comes word that Hillary Clinton, the secretary of state-designate, Congress and the Emoluments Clause willing, got millions of dollars for a mall in Syracuse shortly after the developer coughed up a hundred grand for the Bill Clinton “Foundation.” That’s what I call commerce!

We are also the party of Charlie Rangel, the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, who’s currently under “investigation” by the House “Ethics” Committee for a myriad of dubious practices, including using campaign contributions to pay his parking tickets.

Best of all, we are the party of the ineffable Christopher Dodd (D., Countrywide), another recent “presidential candidate” who in appearance and demeanor is a throwback to the great days of Tammany mugs. It was Dodd, the chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, who got a sweetheart mortgage deal as a “Friend of Angelo” Mozilo, the disgraced former head of Countrywide Financial; Dodd who steadfastly denied that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were in trouble — perhaps his status as the No. 1 recipient of their campaign largesse had something to do with his unshakeable faith in them; and Dodd who has promised to release the paperwork concerning his hinky mortgages but, of course, hasn’t.

The War Hero will release his Navy service records, which show him racking up medals faster than Audie Murphy in his 16 weeks of “combat,” before the son of disgraced Connecticut senator Thomas J. Dodd releases his paperwork. Yes, that’s right — Chris’s old man was censured by the Senate in 1967 for behavior “contrary to good morals, [that] derogates from the public trust expected of a senator, and tends to bring the Senate into dishonor and disrepute.” And now Chris seems headed down the path to the same fate, although how it’s possible to bring a Senate that includes such stalwart Democrats as John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Harry Reid, Robert Byrd, Barbara Boxer, Jay Rockefeller, Carl Levin, Chuck Schumer, Patty Murray, and Hillary Clinton into disrepute seems hard to fathom.

Still, as the Connecticut Post recently editorialized: “[Dodd] says there was nothing untoward about the mortgage rate he received from Countrywide Financial, a company that was heavily involved in the nationwide mortgage collapse. He feigns indignance each time the issue is raised. But he can make the questions stop easily. All he has to do is release documents on two mortgages from Countrywide, each of which seemingly came in with interest figures below the going rate. As chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, he should have long ago put this issue to rest.”

But what’s the rush? Like one of the patron saints of Tammany Hall, Richard “Boss” Croker, Dodd’s little tin box has bought him a fine getaway estate in the Ould Sod. Dodd’s little manse in County Galway ought to come in handy when the Senate “Ethics” Committee starts closing in.

All of which, believe it or not, makes me proud to be a Democrat. The fact that we can get away with antics like these — the fact that our clown car is being driven at breakneck speed by real clowns under more or less permanent investigation — makes me laugh. Because you dopes never catch on and, like ^%$&BUSH&^%!, insist on treating us as a legitimate political party of high-minded statesmen instead of the lovable scamps and rapscallions we really are.

It doesn’t matter that Tammany and its mini-Tammanys across the country perfected a system of graft and corruption under the guise of helping the “little guy.” It doesn’t matter that, at various times, a coalition of gangsters, criminals, and Democratic politicians has seized, held, and operated whole states as criminal enterprises:


* Louisiana, where from Jean Lafitte to Huey Long to Edwin Edwards, crime has paid handsomely in this formerly one-party state. Laissez les bon temps rouler!

* New Jersey, where the cozy relationship between the Mob and Trenton is well documented, and where former senator Bob Torricelli — the Torch — loudly proclaimed his innocence in a fundraising scandal right up to the moment he flamed out and quit his reelection race.

* Arkansas, whose governors and U.S. senators were for many years on the gangland payroll run out of Hot Springs by transplanted Tammany gangster Owney Madden, acting in concert with Frank Costello and Meyer Lansky.

* Illinois, where, in a fit of affirmative action, we’ve brought both Republicans and the Jake Lingle Memorial Media into the fold, so that they can go to jail just like Democrats on the rare occasions they’re caught and convicted.


None of it matters. We keep on peddling the same shtick and the suckers keep on buying, and the bigger Big Government gets, the more adherents we garner. Pretty soon, if it hasn’t happened already, the Party of Take will be bigger than the Party of Give and then the Party really will be over. I just hope I’m long retired to my Countrywide-financed estate in Bayonne before it happens.

Which is why this Fitzgerald character has me a little worried. We loved him when we thought he was going to take down Darth Cheney, and even though all he threw us was the scalp of Marc Rich’s lawyer, Scooter Libby, we took our Fitzmas where we could find it. But now that he’s knee-deep in Blagojevich, we’re beginning to change our tune, and the deeper he digs, the more he’s starting to resemble Thomas Dewey. There are even rumblings that, having requested a three-month extension to bring an indictment against Hot Rod, Paddy Fitz might be looking at a Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) beef against the whole darn Combine. Mother of Mercy!

But not to worry: BO Jr., can always do what his Democrat predecessor, Bill Clinton, did and fire every single one of the federal prosecutors, P. J. Fitzgerald, Esq., most certainly included. Luckily, folks will still be too busy sleeping off their hangovers and beginning the gestation period of their new babies to notice.

— Although he is a completely fictional character and does not, in fact, exist, David Kahane was born a Democrat, raised a Democrat and will die a Democrat. You can tell him how right he is to be a Democrat at kahanenro@gmail.com.

article.nationalreview.com 

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: t2 who wrote (78767)1/7/2009 1:18:21 PM
From: longnshort   of 89445
 
Would the dems be against 1 billion illegals entering the country? 2 Billion 50 Billion ? no, why? because they just want power and don't give a shit about the country.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: HARRY BAYER who wrote (78775)1/7/2009 5:00:28 PM
From: Crimson Ghost   of 89445
 



A SATANIC GENOCIDAL ISRAEL
Khaled Amayreh


Jan 7, 2009

For years, I have been warning that Israel is psychologically and morally capable of carrying out a holocaust or a genocide against the Palestinian people.

Needless to say, the horrible events of the past two weeks in Gaza seem to have enforced and vindicated my convictions in this regard.

Israel, government and people, seem to possess the psychological propensity that would make her embark on such a monstrosity. Yes, there is a minority of Israeli Jews and non-Israeli Jews who say "No" to all the evils and crimes Israel is doing in the name of their name.

However, let us be honest and realistic. These people are a small minority and have very little influence if any on the Israeli government and army.

Today, what many people had thought would be unthinkable or far-fetched in terms of the extent to which Israel would be willing to go in savaging the Palestinian people seems quite possible in light of the Jewish state’s Nazi-like behavior in the Gaza Strip.

Given the Israeli mindset, Israel may well be hoping the latest genocidal onslaught could have a certain desensitizing and de-mystifying effect on people’s perceptions and attitudes.

The logic is quite simple. If the world can be bullied or cajoled into silence and apathy when Gaza is ravaged and thousands of its inhabitants are slaughtered en mass in full view of humanity, the same world can likewise be manipulated in similar fashion to come to terms with a greater genocide.

On Tuesday, 6 January, one Israeli official, Eli Yeshai, called for the total extermination of Gaza. The leader of the ultra Orthodox Shas party argued that "extermination of the enemy is sanctioned by the Torah."

Other Israeli political and religious leaders have lately spoken enthusiastically of the need for "wiping off Gaza from the face of earth" and "annihilating of every moving thing there."

Interestingly, this is by no means a minority opinion in Israel. Indeed, one could safely argue that the "ideology of annihilation" now represents the mainstream in the Israeli society.

As we all know, Israel heavily employs mendacity, deception and disinformation to conceal, or at least blur, its criminality and barbarianism.

The Israeli hasbara machine’s main job has always been and continues to be to turn the black into white, the white into black and the big lie into a "truth" glorified by millions, especially in the west.

To effect these obscene lies and "virtual realities," the Israeli government counts heavily on the Jewish-controlled or Jewish influenced media in the western world, especially in North America where telling the truth about Israel is the ultimate taboo.

In truth, what has been happening in Gaza is a huge massacre of genocidal proportions as many conscientious Jews have testified.

What else can be said of this wanton, deliberate and indiscriminate blanket bombing of densely-populated neighborhoods and refugee camps?

I believe terms such as "huge massacres" and "genocidal onslaught" used in reference to the Gaza nightmare cannot be dismissed by Israel and her supporters as merely overstatements or rhetorical exaggerations.

This is unless Israel views non-Jewish pain and suffering as disingenuous, probably because non-Jews or "goyem" are actually considered "human animals" by a large and growing class of fanatical rabbis, politicians and military leaders.

So far, more than 4000 Gazans have been mercilessly killed or badly mutilated or incinerated in less than two weeks of intensive indiscriminate aerial and artillery bombing targeting everyone and everything.

Mosques, homes, public buildings, shelters, schools, colleges, dormitories, factories, cultural institutions, businesses, even hospitals and drug stores as well as the entire civilian infrastructure have been bombed and reduced to rubble.

The rabid bombing from high altitudes has exterminated numerous whole families and destroyed entire neighborhoods. This is probably what Israeli leaders had in mind when they spoke earlier about a "shock and awe" campaign against Gaza.

On 6 January, Israeli tanks fired several artillery shells at a school at the Jabalya refugee camp, killing more than 40 civilians, mostly children and women, who had sought shelter at the UNRWA-run facility. Dozens others were injured, many critically.

Israeli army spokespersons, who are actually professional liars, claimed that Palestinian fighters were seen in the vicinity of the building and that some of these actually fired on Israeli troops from the school.

However, UN officials in Gaza strongly denied the Israeli account, with one UN official saying that he was "99.99%" that the Israeli army was lying.

Earlier, the Israeli air forces hit a mourning reception, killing 15 members of the same family.

The pornographic killing of civilians has no explanation other than the ostensible fact that Israel is adopting a no-holds-barred approach toward Gaza, which is still under effective Israeli occupation despite the withdrawal of Israeli troops from the coastal enclave more than three years ago.

Well, if we are to accept this logic, namely that everything is fair in war, then Jews should stop complaining about what the armies of Hitler did to them during World War II.

It is just unacceptable to apply two standards of morality, one for Jews and another for non-Jews. For if what Israel is doing in Gaza is right, as Israel and her supporters maintain, then what the Nazis did in Europe several decades ago must have been right as well. And vice versa.

After all, crime doesn’t become kosher when committed by Jewish hands.

Colossal crime

The enormity of the present holocaustic assault is undoubtedly a colossal crime against humanity.

In proportion to the size of population, the murder and maiming of 4000 Gazans (the number keeps rising) is like the US having at least a million of its citizens killed or badly injured as a result of a foreign aggression.

As to the utter destruction of Gaza, it is equally shocking. Some American expatriates here in occupied Palestine have spoken of a double holocaust in Gaza, one targeting humans, and another targeting civilization.

Facing their crimes, pornographic and outrageous as they are, many Israelis, probably the majority, are simply so gleeful that they think Israel is doing the right think and that God is standing on the side of Israel in this war and every war.

Some religious Israelis have become so euphoric, thanks to the Gaza blitz, that they think the Messiah’s coming imminent.

Other "religious" Israeli Jews, including rabbis, readily justify the wanton slaughter by quoting biblical verses justifying genocide.

One Israeli settler leader recently argued during a conversation with a visiting American peace activist that "if it was right to commit genocide during Biblical time, why can’t it be right to commit genocide now . Has God changed his mind," the settler wondered sarcastically.

As to Israeli leaders and officials, they simply indulge in what they have always been indulging in, namely "denial" and "self-righteousness" or simply playing the role of victim.

Thus behaved Shimon Peres, the Israeli President, when he told al-Jazeera during a live interview on Monday, 5 January.

" We don’t kill and we have not killed any children in Gaza. We are the victim of Hamas aggression," said the pathological liar and certified war criminal rather shamelessly.

Peres’s pornographic lies don’t need any further comment. They speak for themselves.

Zionist Jews may very well think that might is right, and that morality is unneeded and unnecessary as long as they possess overwhelming material strength.

They may think that the rivers of blood the "only democracy in the Middle East" has been shedding will strengthen Israel and terrorize its neighbors.

Well, it may in the short run. However, in the long run, Israeli criminality and evilness will make it sterile from within to the point of death.

Like evil people, evil states shall not prosper.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (3)

To: Crimson Ghost who wrote (78780)1/7/2009 6:08:12 PM
From: longnshort   of 89445
 
Who Are the Real Nazis?

by Jonah Goldberg
Townhall.com

"Go back to the oven! You need a big oven, that's what you need!"

This is what one young woman thought passed for acceptable discourse during an anti-Israel rally last week in, of all places, Fort Lauderdale, Fla. Other chants were similarly unlovely. You can watch it on YouTube if you like.

But why bother? The Fort Lauderdale outburst is just one window on the upside-down world of Israel hatred. Across the Islamic world, and in too many points West, it is still considered a penetrating and poignant insight to call Zionists the "new Nazis." For instance, in Sunday's Gulf News, Mohammad Abdullah al Mutawa, a sociology professor at United Arab Emirates University, penned an essay titled "Zionists are the new Nazis." He began: "Today, the whole world stands as a witness to the fact that the Nazi Holocaust was a mere lie, which was devised by the Zionists to blackmail humanity."

At a Saturday protest in New York against Israel's military assault on Gaza, some carried signs that read: "Israel: The Fourth Reich," "Holocaust by Holocaust Survivors," "Stop Israel's Holocaust," "Holocaust in Gaza" and "Stop the Zionist Genocide in Gaza."

Type "Israel" and "Nazi" into any news search engine and you'll be rewarded, or punished, with a bounty of such statements from just the last week or so. Gaza is the new Auschwitz, the Israeli Defense Forces are SS troops ... I find myself tempted to simply write "et cetera" because it's all so familiar by now. But to do that is to dismiss, and therefore accept, such grotesqueries as trivialities, when in fact such charges are deeply revealing -- just not about Israel.

First, let us note thatif supposedly all-powerful Israel is dedicated to exterminating the Palestinian people, it is doing a bad job. The Palestinian population has only grown since 1948. There are more Arab citizens living in Israel proper today than there were in all of Palestine the year Israel was founded.

Perhaps one reason Israel fails at genocide is that it isn't interested in genocide? That would explain why Israel warned thousands of Gazans by cell phone to leave homes near Hamas rocket stockpiles. It would clarify why, even amid all-out war, it offers aid to enemy civilians. It would even illuminate the otherwise mysterious clamor from Israelis for a viable "peace partner."

But no. For millions of Israel haters, the more plausible explanation is that the "defiant" Palestinians have miraculously survived Israel's determination to wipe them out.

Meanwhile, calls for the complete extermination of Israel are routine. The Hamas charter, invoking the fraudulent "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" as justification, demands the destruction of Israel. Hamas exists solely because it is dedicated to the complete obliteration of the "Zionist entity." Remove that "principle" and Hamas is meaningless.

A sick mixture of Holocaust envy and Holocaust denial is the defining spirit of Hamas. Indeed, Holocaust denial passes for a scholarly pursuit not just in Gaza but throughout much of the Arab and Muslim world.

The head of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, literally earned a doctorate in it. His doctoral thesis became a book, "The Other Side: the Secret Relationship Between Nazism and Zionism," in which he denounces "the Zionist fantasy, the fantastic lie that 6 million Jews were killed." In Hamas' eyes, Abbas is an incorrigible moderate.

It's Palestinian Islamists who have ideological and political ties to Nazism stretching back to the days of "Hitler's Mufti," Haj Amin al-Husseini, a happy warrior for the Nazi cause.

So why the obsession with casting the Israelis as the new Hitlerites? One answer is surely that critics know such charges are painful to a country largely born of the Holocaust and marked by its scars. It also grabs attention, galvanizes radicals, vents legitimate frustrations and anger, and helps demonize the enemy and, hence, justify the murder of "Zionists everywhere," as Hamas often declares in its communiques.

But I think the desire to cast the Israelis as Nazis is fueled, deep down, by the haters' need to see their own hatreds and ambitions mirrored in their enemy's actions. Hamas has an avowedly Hitlerite agenda. The only way to make such an agenda defensible is to convince yourself and others that the Israelis deserve it. Hence, Hamas and its allies insist that when they aim rockets at grade schools and playgrounds, they are resisting the "new Nazis." It brings to mind Huey Long's reported prophecy that if fascism ever came to America, it would be called anti-fascism. Well, with Hamas, Hitlerism comes to the Middle East wearing the mask of anti-Hitlerism.


townhall.com 

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: Crimson Ghost who wrote (78780)1/7/2009 6:15:09 PM
From: longnshort   of 89445
 
By Youssef M. Ibrahim

With Israel entering its fourth week of an incursion into the same Gaza Strip it voluntarily evacuated a few months ago, a sense of reality among Arabs is spreading through commentary by Arab pundits, letters to the editor, and political talk shows on Arabic-language TV networks. The new views are stunning both in their maturity and in their realism. The best way I can think of to convey them is in the form of a letter to the Palestinian Arabs from their Arab friends:

Dear Palestinian Arab brethren:

The war with Israel is over.

You have lost. Surrender and negotiate to secure a future for your children.

We, your Arab brothers, may say until we are blue in the face that we stand by you, but the wise among you and most of us know that we are moving on, away from the tired old idea of the Palestinian Arab cause and the "eternal struggle" with Israel.

Dear friends, you and your leaders have wasted three generations trying to fight for Palestine, but the truth is the Palestine you could have had in 1948 is much bigger than the one you could have had in 1967, which in turn is much bigger than what you may have to settle for now or in another 10 years. Struggle means less land and more misery and utter loneliness.

At the moment, brothers, you would be lucky to secure a semblance of a state in that Gaza Strip into which you have all crowded, and a small part of the West Bank of the Jordan. It isn't going to get better. Time is running out even for this much land, so here are some facts, figures, and sound advice, friends.

You hold keys, which you drag out for television interviews, to houses that do not exist or are inhabited by Israelis who have no intention of leaving Jaffa, Haifa, Tel Aviv, or West Jerusalem. You shoot old guns at modern Israeli tanks and American-made fighter jets, doing virtually no harm to Israel while bringing the wrath of its mighty army down upon you. You fire ridiculously inept Kassam rockets that cause little destruction and delude yourselves into thinking this is a war of liberation. Your government, your social institutions, your schools, and your economy are all in ruins.

Your young people are growing up illiterate, ill, and bent on rites of death and suicide, while you, in effect, are living on the kindness of foreigners, including America and the United Nations. Every day your officials must beg for your daily bread, dependent on relief trucks that carry food and medicine into the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, while your criminal Muslim fundamentalist Hamas government continues to fan the flames of a war it can neither fight nor hope to win.

In other words, brothers, you are down, out, and alone in a burnt-out landscape that is shrinking by the day.

What kind of struggle is this? Is it worth waging at all? More important, what kind of miserable future does it portend for your children, the fourth or fifth generation of the Arab world's have-nots?

We, your Arab brothers, have moved on.

Those of us who have oil money are busy accumulating wealth and building housing, luxury developments, state-of-the-art universities and schools, and new highways and byways. Those of us who share borders with Israel, such as Egypt and Jordan, have signed a peace treaty with it and are not going to war for you any time soon. Those of us who are far away, in places like North Africa and Iraq, frankly could not care less about what happens to you.

Only Syria continues to feed your fantasies that someday it will join you in liberating Palestine, even though a huge chunk of its territory, the entire Golan Heights, was taken by Israel in 1967 and annexed. The Syrians, my friends, will gladly fight down to the last Palestinian Arab.

Before you got stuck with this Hamas crowd, another cheating, conniving, leader of yours, Yasser Arafat, sold you a rotten bill of goods — more pain, greater corruption, and millions stolen by his relatives — while your children played in the sewers of Gaza.

The war is over. Why not let a new future begin?

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: Crimson Ghost who wrote (78780)1/7/2009 6:49:20 PM
From: stockman_scott   of 89445
 
Israel's Gaza Gamble

newsweek.washingtonpost.com 

By Mahmoud Sabit

This has been a particularly brutal two weeks in the tragic saga of the Palestinian-Israeli dispute. It's not very clear as to what precisely all this death and destruction is supposed to accomplish from an Israeli perspective. The utter defeat of Hamas? There's no consensus that this can be accomplished by military means; Hamas is an ideological organization with strong support in Gaza, and their structure is woven into the very fabric of the refugee camps. To cow the civilian population of Gaza into withdrawing their support of Hamas? This is not very likely, especially after the sheer quantity of explosives showered on Gaza like confetti, and their resultant toll on the civilian population. Civilians tend to harden their determination when subjected to a constant diet of explosives, as the Germans learned during the London Blitz in WWII. As an election 'gimmick' to show how 'tough' Israel's leaders can be? Perhaps Israel's leaders have lost all sense of moral and ethical proportion if they believe that bombing an oppressed civilian population and its choice of leadership into a state of total submission following two years of virtual siege is a measure of toughness or lack of 'squeamishness.' To present President-elect Barack Obama with a fait accompli when he is sworn in later this month? A crisis that will force the new administration's hand upon taking office? It would not be the first time an Israeli government has attempted to impose its narrow agenda on an incoming U.S. administration.

Whatever the reason, it is a serious gamble, and a gamble without any likely long-term benefits. On the contrary, the long term implications do not benefit the interests of arriving at a final and just settlement to all parties in this dispute, whether Israeli, or Palestinian or Arab. It's certainly a gamble that may change the perspective of Arab governments in their interests in a rapprochement with Israel. There has been for the past few years an offer of peace to Israel by the Arab countries formulated in the Beirut Declaration of March 2002. This offer has so far been gathering dust, unaddressed by Israel, and it could be withdrawn (though this is not really likely.) The pressure from Arab public opinion as a result of this situation may well force the hand of some Arab governments to withdraw their support of this Declaration. To so dramatically reveal the Arab governments' inability to influence anyone at all on the conduct of Israel in Gaza would strengthen the position of Iran and its allies in the region. These are potentially serious consequences. For Israel to gamble with such possibilities is to engage in a serious disservice to their Israeli constituency as well as to their Arab neighbors.

Any and all civilian deaths and casualties should be deplored, be they Palestinian or Israeli. Firing homemade rockets into Israeli territory and bombing civilians in Gaza with modern ordinance are both acts that do not advance the cause of peace. Neither will tormenting a quite helpless refugee Palestinian population in Gaza with an economic embargo, nor denying its basic right to some sort of compensation through an overall peace settlement, nor attempting to coerce them into an abject capitulation to Israel's demands.

As for Hamas, they exist solely as a result of over 40 years of brutal Israeli occupation over the Palestinians without any recourse to a just settlement that would allow these people to have some sort of choice for their own future. At first the PLO/Fatah represented their interests, but Fatah was not able to deliver, thanks to Israeli intransigence and U.S. complicity. Thanks to a compliant U.S., Israel has an effective Security Council veto on any inconvenient resolution that this international body considers that might in any way restrict actions Israel considers 'appropriate' - which may or may not be abhorrent to the international community.

So when a free and open election took place in 2005, Hamas was elected to lead the Palestinian people, not just in Gaza but also in the West Bank. Hamas was brought into power because they are an element just as intransigent, just as doctrinaire and just as hard headed as past Israeli governments have proven to be. The reaction by Israel, the U.S. and Western Europe to this election was, as expected, vociferous. Even the right of the Palestinian people to choose their own leaders, however odious they may be considered, has been denied them. In a cynical display of moral outrage, Israel and the U.S. conspired with Fatah to topple Hamas, through violent means. The end result was that Gaza remained under Hamas control, whereas the West Bank effectively came under Fatah control. In addition Gaza has been under an economic embargo for several years now, causing immeasurable hardship to the Palestinian civilian population, in effect reinforcing a brutal occupation with a state of siege, actions more reminiscent of the excesses of the Middle Ages rather than the 21st century. If Hamas is considered so unsuitable today, 60 years after these Palestinians became refugees, perhaps Israel and its allies should have entered into a sincere and just settlement with more acceptable Palestinian partners decades ago.

Possibly one of the more sinister aspects of this tragedy is the clumsy attempt through media 'spin' to portray Israeli civilians as victims in this crisis. When we see on our TV screens and computer monitors the effects of Hamas 'rockets' on Israeli communities, compared to the sheer havoc wreaked by Israeli high explosives on the Gaza urban landscape and its civilian population, the educated and informed can safely put this fiction aside. As of a couple of days ago, in an TV interview with the BBC, Dr. Mars Gilbert at Dar el Shifa hospital in Gaza informed us that the overwhelming majority of casualties he had treated were civilians and that of the 900 casualties that they had so far cared for at Dar el Shifa, 25% of the fatalities and fully 45% of the wounded were women and children.

In an article that appeared January 7, 2009 in the UK, Avi Shlaim, a respected Israeli historian and Oxford University scholar, wrote that Israel had become a 'rogue' state, by definition a state that ignores and violates international law at will, has an arsenal of nuclear weapons, and practices terrorism (the use of violence against civilians for political purposes.)

In another BBC World interview with another noted Israeli historian, Tom Segev, when posed the question, "After the fighting is over, what should then happen?" answered, "We shall have to talk to Hamas - they may be a terrorist organization, but they are also a political party, a social welfare movement and the elected representatives of the Palestinian people."

These educated and informed Israelis are well aware of the fundamental truth of this situation, which is that Israel's long term security, its very survival, relies on making a just and equitable peace with the Palestinians, making peace with the rest of the Arab World, and making the Arabs their best friends as quickly as possible.

From an Egyptian perspective, the government is not thrilled that Hamas is in this leadership position with the Palestinian people. They are after all the 'little' brother of Egypt's own Muslim Brotherhood, opponents today of the Egyptian government. Egypt also realizes that Hamas will probably survive this onslaught; their survival will be considered a victory and may well have serious repercussions in the Arab World. In short this Israeli gamble, ill-timed, ill-conceived and ill-advised, may well reinforce and encourage political Islamist ideologues and their extremist elements in the moderate Arab World. If Hamas does not survive, even more extremist elements may replace them in Gaza - elements that have been waiting on the sidelines for just such an opportunity, including al-Qaeda.

Posted by Mahmoud Sabit on January 7, 2009 5:39 PM

______________

*Mahmoud Sabit is a historian and an authority on Egypt’s 19th century political reforms. Sabit also works as a writer and producer of historical documentaries.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: stockman_scott who wrote (78783)1/7/2009 7:29:17 PM
From: longnshort   of 89445
 
Palin's daughter is the only girl in recent MSM history that is referred to as a "Unwed Mother." All others are "single mothers."
Newsbusters
Coulter Castigates MSM's Glorification of Single-Motherhood

By Mark Finkelstein on Today

GMTA. Last night I posted an item on David Shuster's hypocrisy in branding Bristol Palin and Levi Johnston "unwed parents," pointing out that the MSM would never normally use such an un-PC term, preferring to speak reverentially of "single mothers." This morning, Ann Coulter appeared on Today to discuss her new book, Guilty, and by coincidence, an important focus of Ann's remarks was . . . the liberal media's "exaltation of single-motherhood."

I'll leave it to my fellow NewsBusters to recount the entire story of Ann's Today appearance, including the way NBC apparently scurried to have her on this morning's show after Drudge ran a story asserting that the network had imposed a lifetime ban on the conservative firebrand. For present purposes, let's focus here on the similar themes struck here and by Ann on the subject of single-motherhood.

Here's what I had to say last night:

He stopped short of demanding they be branded with a scarlet 'U.' But the suddenly puritanical David Shuster insists that the proper term for Bristol Palin and Levi Johnston is "unwed parents."

Now, it is of course true that Bristol and Levi are parents and unwed. But when's the last time you heard an MSM type refer to an "unwed mother" or "unwed parents"? As we all know, the approved PC terms are "single mother" and simply "parents" or "partners."

Not having yet read Guilty, I was unaware that Coulter, dubbed the "Conservative Queen" in the Today chyron, devoted an entire chapter to the issue.

MATT LAUER: [In the book] you also say that the liberal media and Democrats are out to accomplish the same thing: they want to destroy America. So, I mean, go ahead: why do liberals and the media want to destroy America?

ANN COULTER: Why? Their motives? Well, I'd have to be their confessor of psychologist to understand that. I'm describing the results. And a beautiful example of this--my Chapter Two of the book--is the exaltation of single-motherhood. It's promoted in the New York Times and in glossy women's magazines and in Hollywood movies. And we now know after 30 years of promoting single-motherhood, of the courts destroying the institution of marriage, that children raised without fathers are filling up the prisons. 70% of the teenage runaways, of teenage pregnancies, of rapists --

LAUER: Hasn't the mainstream media also done extensive reporting on the problem of the disintegration of the American family --

COULTER: Not so much --

LAUER: -- about the responsibility that needs to be held by men and fathers; that sort of thing?

COULTER: Not so much, actually. I think I document that pretty well here. Barbara Ehrenreich, who used to be a regular reporter for Time magazine and the New York Times, and she's constantly denouncing the nuclear family. The National Organization for Women has a bumper sticker: 'A Nuclear Family Can Destroy Your Whole Life.'

As can be seen in the video clip, the discussion continued in that vein for some time.

So . . . back to Shuster. Had he perhaps gotten an advance copy of Guilty, was persuaded by Ann's arguments, and has suddenly become a conservative cultural warrior? Was that behind his insistence that Bristol and Levi be branded "unwed parents"? Somehow I doubt it. A cyber-prize to the first reader who notes an example of how Shuster next refers to a mother in the same situation as Bristol.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: t2 who wrote (78766)1/8/2009 12:45:36 PM
From: stockman_scott   of 89445
 
The Myth of Bush As "The Hero of September 11"

By Bob Cesca

huffingtonpost.com 

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read
Previous 10 | Next 10 

Copyright © 1995-2013 Knight Sac Media. All rights reserved.