Obama administration gives in to Israel and the Israeli lobby

[myata]

It's Arab/Muslim land, remember? We stole it from them, apparently. I guess the terrorist supporters ....

Indeed, stealing, burning, kicking out, etc is fully justified, if the other is "terrorist" (savage; worthless pygmy; alien; infidel); evil conspirators financing my country's demise. As long as my justification works for me, these acts are fully understandable, acceptable and even commendable.

[myata]

No, the freeze is nowhere near in sight: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8364815.stm - Isreal approves construction of 900 homes in the occupied East Jerusalem.

Let's recall that there hasn't been a significant escalation of militant violence for at least several months now, while build up of settlements is puffing along unobstructed, Obama or not. Which should finally give us (anybody with an unbiased, objective view of the situation) a clear answer as to whether there really are any innocent peaceful poor and abused lambs in this conflict that deserve, no, require friendly support as well as multibillion financial and military assistance.

[naomiglover]

So you left in order to avoid serving the country, obviously. Typical behaviour of a terrorist supporter. That being said, I'm not sure I even believe you (about 99% of what you say is a lie). It is a deliberate misrepresentation to describe Israeli-Arabs as fully accepting the State of Israel, as it completely overlooks major integration and loyalty issues that are known to affect them. Like you, the avoid serving their country, are disloyal, and support the enemy. Did you convert to Islam, as well?

As for me, I've been to Israel several times, and am in regular contact with friends and family there. I know a thing or two about the internal issues in the country.

I also find it interesting how quickly and easily you are able to generalize Israeli settlers (not that I disagree with your assessment), yet will never levy the same generalizations to segments of the Arab/Muslim/Palestinian population. Anyone who is honest and partially knowledgeable recognizes that anti-semitic/anti-Israeli/pro-terrorism opinions are common and strong among thee Palestinian population (and indeed, among the Israeli-Arab population). Of course you'll never acknowledge these facts, however, as these facts can't be reconciled with your beloved "innocent" civilians.

"You either support Israel's agenda or you're a terrorist supporter" is an extremist's point of view. If you want to lower yourself and call me a terrorist supporter, then I will not respond to you anymore.

[DogOnPorch]

"You either support Israel's agenda or you're a terrorist supporter" is an extremist's point of view. If you want to lower yourself and call me a terrorist supporter, then I will not respond to you anymore.

If you support Hamas and Hezbollah you're a terrorist supporter. If the coat fits...

[DogOnPorch]

No, the freeze is nowhere near in sight: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8364815.stm - Isreal approves construction of 900 homes in the occupied East Jerusalem.

Let's recall that there hasn't been a significant escalation of militant violence for at least several months now, while build up of settlements is puffing along unobstructed, Obama or not. Which should finally give us (anybody with an unbiased, objective view of the situation) a clear answer as to whether there really are any innocent peaceful poor and abused lambs in this conflict that deserve, no, require friendly support as well as multibillion financial and military assistance.

Billions to the Palestinian Arabs = Welfare.

Billions to Israel = Sound investment in an ally with high returns in numerous fields.

[myata]

Billions to the Palestinian Arabs = Welfare.

Billions to Israel = Sound investment in an ally with high returns in numerous fields.

True. One can no longer deny that massive assistence to Israel makes it extremely unlikely that its government would feel any real need to budge on the settlements issue, which is a major factor in the escalation of the conflict, just as militancy by extreme Palestinian groups.

There's now a very clear choice, between making any material assistence to Israel strictly conditional on its stopping all settlement activity, or becoming complicit in that activity and consequently, escalation of conflict. Rhetorics will not change anything, and we'll see very soon (in political terms) which practical choice it is going to be.

[DogOnPorch]

True. One can no longer deny that massive assistence to Israel makes it extremely unlikely that its government would feel any real need to budge on the settlements issue, which is a major factor in the escalation of the conflict, just as militancy by extreme Palestinian groups.

There's now a very clear choice, between making any material assistence to Israel strictly conditional on its stopping all settlement activity, or becoming complicit in that activity and consequently, escalation of conflict. Rhetorics will not change anything, and we'll see very soon (in political terms) which practical choice it is going to be.

Serious medical problem? Who yah gonna call? Not Syria.

[myata]

Indeed, only somebody with serious issues in the medical, more precisely, mental department would fail to see the direct link between massive material aid given to one side in the conflict, and its blatant disrespect to internationally recognised principles of resolution.

The words, rhethorics won't cut it anymore, as they failed to do for a while now. It is 1) practical, strong measures to stop settlement activity now, or 2) direct and clear complicity in Israel's aggressive policies that without any doubt stand in the way of resolution, and very likely would result in yet another escalaton of conflict.

[DogOnPorch]

Indeed, only somebody with serious issues in the medical, more precisely, mental department would fail to see the direct link between massive material aid given to one side in the conflict, and its blatant disrespect to internationally recognised principles of resolution.

The words, rhethorics won't cut it anymore, as they failed to do for a while now. It is 1) practical, strong measures to stop settlement activity now, or 2) direct and clear complicity in Israel's aggressive policies that without any doubt stand in the way of resolution, and very likely would result in yet another escalaton of conflict.

Escalation of conflict? The conflict has been dying down over the years rather than escallating.

[bush_cheney2004]

....There's now a very clear choice, between making any material assistence to Israel strictly conditional on its stopping all settlement activity, or becoming complicit in that activity and consequently, escalation of conflict. Rhetorics will not change anything, and we'll see very soon (in political terms) which practical choice it is going to be.

This is a non-starter, as the lasting peace between Israel, Egypt, and Jordan is predicated on "massive assistence" in the way of military, economic, and humanitarian aid. Arafat and company never figured that out....and Palestinians continue to suffer because of corrupt leadership, poor choices, and a failed strategy.

[Oleg Bach]

Today is history. Today will be remembered. Years from now the young will ask with wonder about this day. Today is history and you are part of it. Six hundred years ago when elsewhere they were footing the blame for the Black Death, Casimir the Great - so called - told the Jews they could come to Krakow. They came. They trundled their belongings into the city. They settled. They took hold. They prospered in business, science, education, the arts. With nothing they came and with nothing they flourished. For six centuries there has been a Jewish Krakow. By this evening those six centuries will be a rumor. They never happened. Today is history.

Beautiful post. Poetic and dynamic and true. Today young people do not even know what clean free well water is. They assume that a lone high bred tree in the park is nature and that a high resolution TV screen is the environment. I had first hand reports from both my mother and father on death destruction and the total collapse of society. Once I am gone it will all fade into a rumor - then a myth and then it will repeat itself.

[myata]

This is a non-starter, as the lasting peace between Israel, Egypt, and Jordan is predicated on "massive assistence" in the way of military, economic, and humanitarian aid. Arafat and company never figured that out....and Palestinians continue to suffer because of corrupt leadership, poor choices, and a failed strategy.

It still comes down to one of the two options though. If Israel's government knows that moneys and arms will keep coming no matter what, they'll keep building those settlements talk or no talk. Which would make it quite hard to keep avoiding the question, whether as sponsors of perpetrator of this illegal activity, we should be deemed complicit in it too? As well as which part of our mouth (settlement are bad) or (massive aid to Isreal is good) is speaking the truth of our heart.

As said, we won't have to wait long now to find out.

[Oleg Bach]

It still comes down to one of the two options though. If Israel's government knows that moneys and arms will keep coming no matter what, they'll keep building those settlements talk or no talk. Which would make it quite hard to keep avoiding the question, whether as sponsors of perpetrator of this illegal activity, we should be deemed complicit in it too? As well as which part of our mouth (settlement are bad) or (massive aid to Isreal is good) is speaking the truth of our heart.

As said, we won't have to wait long now to find out.

When you have a charity like United Way that sends millions to Jewish groups that are really not jewish in the religious sense - who exploit society through false human benevolence..hidding behind the guise of religion....and when you have huge campaigns within the so-called Jewish community that send off millions to the "homeland" - not realizing that it is a mafia run state - things will remain the same...people are gulable and naive. All Israel really is, is an extention of American power - a base of operations that destablizes the east. It has little to do with Jewishness or the holocaust at this point. Israel is a buisness.

[bush_cheney2004]

It still comes down to one of the two options though. If Israel's government knows that moneys and arms will keep coming no matter what, they'll keep building those settlements talk or no talk.

No...it is not an option. Reduction or elimination of the US foreign aid would be more destabilizing for the region. It's not just about Palestine.

Which would make it quite hard to keep avoiding the question, whether as sponsors of perpetrator of this illegal activity, we should be deemed complicit in it too? As well as which part of our mouth (settlement are bad) or (massive aid to Isreal is good) is speaking the truth of our heart.

Settlements in and of themselves are not violent, reversible, and readily understood as bargaining chips. Have been for years. Tell me when Ontario settles things amicably for Caledonia.

As said, we won't have to wait long now to find out.

What's the hurry?

Edited November 19, 2009 by bush_cheney2004

[Oleg Bach]

No...it is not an option. Reduction or elimination of the US foreign aid would be more destabilizing for the region. It's not just about Palestine.

Settlements in and of themselves are not violent, reversible, and readily understood as bargaining chips. Have been for years. Tell me when Ontario settles things amicably for Caledonia.

What's the hurry?

Got that right..don't these Canadians know how to do buisness - If something is lucrative, why hurry it up? I have never seen a high paid lawyer say - hurry up!

[naomiglover]

....and Palestinians continue to suffer because of corrupt leadership, poor choices, and a failed strategy.

This is exactly why the Palestinians continue to suffer. Right.

[myata]

No...it is not an option. Reduction or elimination of the US foreign aid would be more destabilizing for the region.

Has anybody said "elimination"? We get so easily obtuse, or hard of hearing on occasion.

Hint: make it (massive financial and military aid) conditional on the recipient abiding the conditions of deescalation of their conflict, primarily ceasing clear and ongoing acts of aggression.

No? When one becomes complicit in these acts of aggression themselves, there can't be two ways about it.

Settlements in and of themselves are not violent, reversible, and readily understood as bargaining chips.

OK, so then somebody attempts to "settle" your house, you'll accept their act as such? I trust you. That imagination will without doubt take you far. As far as that other poster claiming clear "progress" in this desperate situation.

Also, "non violent" indeed. All those military units in the occupied territories, settlers not leaving homes without their guns are just peaceful decorations. Yeah, right, and you're by far not the first one to entertain this approach, and we can see very clearly where it's taken the situation so far.

What's the hurry?

It's always good to know how what one says relate to what they do. Adds a lot to understanding of the individual.

Edited November 19, 2009 by myata

[DogOnPorch]

Beautiful post. Poetic and dynamic and true.

Amon Goeth is quite the poet.

[bush_cheney2004]

Has anybody said "elimination"? We get so easily obtuse, or hard of hearing on occasion.

Reduction by any other name is elimination. No audio was used in this post.

Hint: make it (massive financial and military aid) conditional on the recipient abiding the conditions of deescalation of their conflict, primarily ceasing clear and ongoing acts of aggression.

Why? It is conditional on maintaining the original Camp David agreements, not those who refused to participate.

No? When one becomes complicit in these acts of aggression themselves, there can't be two ways about it.

There isn't two ways.....there is one way....foreign aid for Israel, Egypt, and Jordan. Any questions?

OK, so then somebody attempts to "settle" your house, you'll accept their act as such? I trust you. That imagination will without doubt take you far. As far as that other poster claiming clear "progress" in this desperate situation.

Perfectly legal in my town....no violence required or necessary.

Also, "non violent" indeed. All those military units in the occupied territories, settlers not leaving homes without their guns are just peaceful decorations. Yeah, right, and you're by far not the first one to entertain this approach, and we can see very clearly where it's taken the situation so far.

I guess you have never been to Texas or many other right-to-carry states.

It's always good to know how what one says relate to what they do. Adds a lot to understanding of the individual.

I agree......how is that Caledonia thing going?

[myata]

Reduction by any other name is elimination. No audio was used in this post.

A sudden onset of premature obtusion, a condition quite common here, especially if/whet at a lack of meaningful argument? Obviously, reduction is not elimination, and no reduction will be needed if the party in question complied with the international law.

Why? It is conditional on maintaining the original Camp David agreements, not those who refused to participate.

Because giving massive amounts of moneys and arms to somebody who's bent on perpetrating persistent acts of aggression (now there's no question that this is indeed a long standing policy that has nothing to do with "retaliation", or "security" or "defense" or anything else of the kind), in full knowledge of perpetrator's act and intent, makes one complicit in those acts of aggression. IOW, US government is sponsoring Israel's occupation and creeping annexation via expansion of settlements (and Canada under Harper is condoning and morally encouraging it, through lack of any meaningful act against it). I don't think it can be put any simpler than that.

There isn't two ways.....there is one way....foreign aid for Israel, Egypt, and Jordan. Any questions?

That condition should really be looked into, or it could set in permanently, or even deteriorate. Only one of the three is bent on ongoing massive acts of agression in the form of illegal settlement of occupied lands. Guess which one? (tough question, I know, but do try your best).

Perfectly legal in my town....no violence required or necessary.

I guess you have never been to Texas or many other right-to-carry states.

Cool. If there in Texas you "settle" each other's homes at will, it's very interesting and educating. Stange people do such strange things! Not unlike those strange rituals performed by mumbo-jumbo in the jungles in Amazon. Now it's only a matter of speading the word around. And in some places, not without dedicated help of close allies and friends, the practice seems to be gaining acceptance (actually it can be argued who and where has invented the idea, but between good friends should it matter, really?)

I agree......how is that Caledonia thing going?

Caledonia's doing nothing at all with that massive sponsorhip of open agression that's being perpetrated for decades, now.

Edited November 20, 2009 by myata

[bush_cheney2004]

A sudden onset of premature obtusion, a condition quite common here, especially if/whet at a lack of meaningful argument? Obviously, reduction is not elimination, and no reduction will be needed if the party in question complied with the international law.

You have obviously never studied limit theory...but no matter...as "international law" was very pleased with the Camp David peace process and resulting support. Guess who wasn't?

Because giving massive amounts of moneys and arms to somebody who's bent on perpetrating persistent acts of aggression (now there's no question that this is indeed a long standing policy that has nothing to do with "retaliation", or "security" or "defense" or anything else of the kind), in full knowledge of perpetrator's act and intent, makes one complicit in those acts of aggression.

So what? The United States gives and sells arms to many nations for that express purpose...including Canada!

IOW, US government is sponsoring Israel's occupation and creeping annexation via expansion of settlements (and Canada under Harper is condoning and morally encouraging it, through lack of any meaningful act against it). I don't think it can be put any simpler than that.

I agree....it is a very simple idea....kinda like Canada condoning the the use of depleted uranium rounds by providing the depleted uranium! Duh!

That condition should really be looked into, or it could set in permanently, or even deteriorate. Only one of the three is bent on ongoing massive acts of agression in the form of illegal settlement of occupied lands. Guess which one? (tough question, I know, but do try your best).

Upon further review, the call on the field stands. First down....Israel.

Cool. If there in Texas you "settle" each other's homes at will, it's very interesting and educating. Stange people do such strange things! Not unlike those strange rituals performed by mumbo-jumbo in the jungles in Amazon.

Well, racist characterizations aside, emminent domain powers take property all the time in Texas and elsewhere, after a court battle. Would that make you happy?

Caledonia's doing nothing at all with that massive sponsorhip of open agression that's being perpetrated for decades, now.

Of course, because like the USA, Canada subjugated its "PalestIndians" and their land a long time ago.

[naomiglover]

Once again, Tel Aviv puts itself above the law.

The US and UN have criticised Israel's approval of 900 extra housing units at a Jewish settlement in East Jerusalem.

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs and UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said the move would hamper Israeli-Palestinian peace talks.

Their remarks came after Israel's interior ministry approved planning applications for the new units.

The planning and construction committee authorised the expansion of Gilo, which is built on land captured in 1967.

The land was later annexed to the Jerusalem municipality.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8364815.stm

Not only are they building these internationally recognized illegal settlements, but they are doing their best to ethnically cleanse East Jerusalem by demolishing their homes and making it virtually impossible for Muslims and Arabs to receive building permits there.

Meanwhile, Israeli bulldozers have demolished two homes in East Jerusalem, a further cause of Palestinian anger.

Thirty people were displaced when the first home was knocked down in the Beit Hanina area of East Jerusalem on Tuesday evening, rights groups said.

On Wednesday morning, an empty building set to house 14 people was bulldozed in the Izzawiya area of the city.

Israel says the homes were built without permits and it is simply enforcing the law, but Palestinians say it is extremely difficult for them to get construction permits.

Obama is publicly speaking out against the settlements, but we will see how much he can really do in the face of Israel's powerful lobby.

[myata]

I agree....it is a very simple idea....kinda like Canada condoning the the use of depleted uranium rounds by providing the depleted uranium! Duh!

If you'll name the case where Canada finances shipments of arms to a current perpetrator of acts of aggression, I'll be the first to condemn that policy.

Upon further review, the call on the field stands. First down....Israel.

Wow! Way to go.

Well, racist characterizations aside, emminent domain powers take property all the time in Texas and elsewhere, after a court battle. Would that make you happy?

Yes we all know the r-word is another easy out of an otherwise tight position in a dispute. Of course it only exists in one's imagination, because while I can and have full right to view certain ritual as strange and unusual (like "settling" another's home without owner's consent), it in no way reflects negatively on those who entertain it, only on my position toward the ritual in question.

And no, actually, it does not. Issues between countries, in the occupied lands, cannot be solved by application of laws of one of them. Settlement of occupied lands is illegal and prohibited under international law and Israel government's pseudo legal passes will do nothing to hide the illegal nature of their aggressive policies.

Of course, because like the USA, Canada subjugated its "PalestIndians" and their land a long time ago.

Was that suppose to mean that we should be feeling parently affection, maybe even combined with a sense of pride, when somebody else attempts to achieve the same result couple of hundreds years later, when we (in different situations and venues) are firmly given to professing human rights, rule of law, peace and non-violence?

Edited November 20, 2009 by myata

[myata]

Obama is publicly speaking out against the settlements, but we will see how much he can really do in the face of Israel's powerful lobby.

Publicly speaking, while moneys (including money to buy arms) continue to flow? I wonder which message is stronger? And who's being fooled?

[bush_cheney2004]

If you'll name the case where Canada finances shipments of arms to a current perpetrator of acts of aggression, I'll be the first to condemn that policy.

You can be the first or last....it doesn't really matter either way. Canada is a valued supplier to Israel don'tcha know:

http://coat.ncf.ca/ARMX/cansec/Tables.htm

Yes we all know the r-word is another easy out of an otherwise tight position in a dispute. Of course it only exists in one's imagination, because while I can and have full right to view certain ritual as strange and unusual (like "settling" another's home without owner's consent), it in no way reflects negatively on those who entertain it, only on my position toward the ritual in question.

You typed it in a moment of honest outrage...the best kind. "Mumbo jumbo" indeed!

And no, actually, it does not. Issues between countries, in the occupied lands, cannot be solved by application of laws of one of them. Settlement of occupied lands is illegal and prohibited under international law and Israel government's pseudo legal passes will do nothing to hide the illegal nature of their aggressive policies.

That would nix the Balfour Declaration and Palestine Mandate as well....and probably all of Canada too. God Save the Queen!

Was that suppose to mean that we should be feeling parently affection, maybe even combined with a sense of pride, when somebody else attempts to achieve the same result couple of hundreds years later, when we (in different situations and venues) are firmly given to professing human rights, rule of law, peace and non-violence?

LOL!...all while not settling First Nations land claims. Are you serious?