Sharon adopts radical tactics…

A SIGNIFICANT turning point seems to have been reached in Israel, as premier Ariel Sharon takes the political gamble of his life by resigning from Likud to form his own party. Will Sharon’s shift from hardliner to (relative) moderate result in a centrist coalition in the Knesset? Will he be in any position to offer potential partners anything? The run-up to the March election will be fascinating stuff, with implications for the direction of the Middle East peace process. We’ve a bit of experience with hardliners softening their stance here, and while it has worked for some, the reverse has also been true.

  • Alan

    And will the Israeli Flags that fly in some loyalist areas remain where they are?

  • Henry94

    I bet Peter Robinson is watching with interest.

  • Boynamedsue

    Good work Alan. You’ve seen the vitally important implications of this story straight away.

  • First two comments, how very parochial! (disappointed with you Henry94 in particular!)

    Sharon has not over-night transformed into a moderate.

    He saw that the long-term security of Israel will be put in jeopardy, by holding onto Gaza and made the decison on purely pragmatic grounds. He’s not any more a peace maker today than he was in the 80s, just a bit more realistic.

  • Jo

    Pragmatism, yes, but he has already been denounced as a “traitor”.

    Mind you, any appreciation of the nature of politics would show that compromise might JUST be the way forward, but then again there will always be those who will curse the darkness.

    I wish I could see this move or his recent history as some sense reparation for his action (or inaction) at Shatilah, but its purely coincidence. Pity such pragmatic thinking did not materialise in the past as, like here, many many lives might have been saved.

  • Brian Boru

    Maybe if Trimble had done this after the GFA he could have shaken off the wreckers in his party and kept the Executive alive.

  • Mickhall

    Ah, but for the first time in years the next Israeli election may be fought on bread and butter issues. At least this is the plan of the new leader of the Labour Party in Israel. Of course if there are to be real improvements in the health care, education, pensions etc for the average Israeli then the State cannot continue to pour millions of shekel’s into building illegal settlements on the west bank plus the enormous sum it costs for the IDF to protect them.

    Thus security, continuous occupation of Palestinian lands against international law and the well-being of the average citizen are linked. A two State solution is there for the taking, it just needs an Israeli leader brave enough to be willing to accept it.

    Regards

  • felix quigley

    Thank you Bill. And what is your name? At least Mick Hall places his full name on view. That doesn’t stop you trying to act like a smartass.

    The last time I replied to Mick Hall over the Gaza issue and his detestation of Israel he ran for cover and did not answer.

    So another question for Mick. I believe you write for the magazine called the Blanket run by Anthony McIntyre and wife.

    You have an article there which is pretty supportive of Iran with all that that entails.

    Now Mick it is not every day in the year that a sovereign nation’s president comes out in a public speech and threatens to wipe a country (Israel) off the map. As it continues to build the nuclear bomb.

    Can you explain why you or the Blanket have treated this with…silence?

    And “Bill” I do not know you except by “Bill” so what have YOU to say on why Israel was set up in 1948. Or about antisemitism in the Arab world. Anything?

    I write under my full and correct name and I really do not appreciate smartasses like you trying to be funny at my expense.

  • felix quigley

    Bill

    So the guy who tries to act the smartass at my expense hasn’t yet mastered the English language.

    “Plus the fact that a more moderate Israel will have less damage of the perception of its main backer, the US in the middle east in general, and I’m sure the Bush administration would be glad with that outcome”.

    “Less damage of the perception”…

    “Bill” Instead of trying to unravel that mess maybe while we wait for Mick Hall to repy you could answer my question:

    “what have YOU to say on why Israel was set up in 1948. Or about antisemitism in the Arab world. Anything?”

    Perhaps a little additional question for you.

    You suggest above that Israel should take the road of moderation.

    Now one of the first clauses in Bush’s Saudi Roach Plan was that the PA should deal with the Hamas terrorists, ie disarm the terrorists of Hamas, Al Aqsa and Islamid Jihad.

    Not done. No intention of so doing.

    What say you about that Bill

  • felix quigley

    Bill and Mick

    Just a thought to end with as I leave for a few hours.

    Bill talks about moderation on the part of Israel. I wonder could he tell us what kind of movement is this Palestinian Arab movement which has at its head a man who gained his doctorate by denying the Holocaust. Abbas is a Holocaust denier.

    But specifically for Mick who begins his piece which is full as is the Blanket of hatred for Israel and support for Islamofascism.

    He writes:

    “Ah, but for the first time in years the next Israeli election may be fought on bread and butter issues.”

    Now how likely is that, a bread and butter election when their small country has just been threatened by Iran representing the Islamist world with being wiped off the map, as the Mullahs build their bomb.

    And while the founding documents of Hamas and the PLO which are still in operation also call for the liquidation of Israel.

    Israel is a small country the size of Wales or indeed say Munster.

    How many times has Israel been attacked by the Arabs, who are organised in..is it 22 states, with Palestine the 23rd…since 1948

    1948

    1956

    1967

    1973

    2000….

    And now the threat of being wiped off the map about which Mick and his Blanket associates are silent!

  • Mickhall

    Felix,

    As you have been a strong supporter of Mr Sharon and Likud down the years one would have thought you might have strong opinions on the Generals decision to split his party and make a move to the political centre. Yet you totally ignore this preferring to move off thread, making me wonder if your were not an ex Trotskyist, as you remind me of the late Gerry Healy with your personal abuse. To suggest I detest the State of Israel is absurd as anyone who knows me well would understand. What I do detest is the way the IDF under the political instructions of the likes of Sharon have behaved in the West Bank and Gaza.

    As to the President of Iran, it seems to me he is just replicating your own behavior, the only difference is he refuses to accept the right of Jews to their own state whereas you deny that right to Palestinians. In my opinion you are both wrong as any impartial reader of my post to this thread would have concluded. I support a two state solution to the Palestine-Israeli conflict.
    i e, An Israeli State in their pre 67 borders and a Palestinian state on the West Bank and Gaza. It is not a perfect solution but at this time it is the best one can hope for.

    Under international law it is up to the occupying power to provide security for those suffering occupation. This being so whilst Israel remains in occupation and the main military authority in the West Bank you can hardly blame the PLA for hamas etc.

    As to the content of the Blanket, like any magazine it is up to the editor as to its contents, thus I have no say in it.

  • Jo

    Felix

    In 1967, threatening remarks by Egypt led to the precipitation by Israel of the 7 day war.

    In 2005, threatening remarks by an Irnaian Prsident have led to calls for Iran to be attacked with nuclear weapons. These 2 scenarios show how the threat of military escalation between the 2 events has tipped the balance closer to an all-out war on a scale unknown in human history.

    Threats by Iran at the present time are empty gestures. It may be argued that rhetoric, while reprehensible, doesnt actually phhysically kill people. Nonthless despite the emptiness of these remarks and the lack of any physical capability to act on them, can lead to pre-emptive action called for by those who do indeed have the military capability and thence find themselves with the problem of how often and where to deploy it.

    I think that any sensible US administration( and I believe that to be a moot point) would not in fact precipitate an invasion of Iran at the present time. There is no doubt that there is the wish to do so. But to respond in a reflex fashion to rhetorical flourishes is not recommended nor is it politically mature. Sharon’s decisionm is indicative of some such maturity and is to be welcomed. I recognise that not being bloodthirsty probabbly puts me in a minority when it comes to discussion of ME politics. Thats just, if you excuse the phraseology, a cross I have to bear.

  • The Thinker

    This dual term Holocaust denier really is annoying and is used regularly against anyone who raises any criticism of Israel.
    Imagine if we used terms similar here: Mary denier to describe Protestants and Jesus denier to label Catholics!!

    The mind boggles.

  • Dread Cthulhu

    Jo: “Threats by Iran at the present time are empty gestures. It may be argued that rhetoric, while reprehensible, doesnt actually phhysically (sic) kill people.”

    Really? Funny, I thought that was usually referred to “as incitement to riot” when done on a local level and has, over the decades, done a pretty good job of killing folks. Big Ian is a past master, before getting into politics.

    Jo: “I recognise that not being bloodthirsty probabbly (sic) puts me in a minority when it comes to discussion of ME politics. Thats just, if you excuse the phraseology, a cross I have to bear. ”

    Well, come down off the cross, we need timber elsewhere. Do you really think that a nuclear-armed Iran is a good thing, Jo? The new president they’ve elected is a through and through maniac with ties to a society/sect/cult that believes if there is sufficient chaos in the world, they will hasten the return of the Mahdi. Do you really want this man with a finger on the proverbial button?

    Mickhall: “I support a two state solution to the Palestine-Israeli conflict. (sic) i e (sic), An Israeli State in their pre 67 borders and a Palestinian state on the West Bank and Gaza. It is not a perfect solution but at this time it is the best one can hope for. ”

    Never work, Mick… personally, I suspect that Sharon withdrew from Gaza just to let the world see what a “Palestinian State” would look like, a show which the locals have provided, from the looting of the greenhouses hastily purchased by Jewish philanthropists to give the Gaza some industry to the continued flying of missiles over the wall.

  • Ringo

    What an outrageous political manouvre, and a great sign of a vibrant democracy. Fair play to him for having the political courage to do it – whatever is said about him regarding Lebanon and the like, he’s a man with the backbone required for the big moves.

  • Jo

    DC
    You missed my point.

    On 2 occasions we have verbal threats, rhetoric.

    On the first occasion, Israel reacted violently and the resolution of that war (withdrawl to pre67 territory) is the way clear to a peace settlement – only after almost 40 years and thousands of deaths.

    Now we have another rhetorical threat – wil we have another 40 years and thousands of deaths to get abck to where we are now?

  • felix quigley

    Mick
    On the issue of Trotskyism I did admire the writings of Trotsky especially in relation to China and to the rise of fascism in Germany and I still indeed do.

    The point is I broke with the WHOLE of the Left on their support for the PLO and for Palestinianism. I believe they the Left have been corrupted by this issue and is why I always now use the term neoleft.

    I have explained some of this in articles I wrote about 9 months ago. Try these

    http://www.irelandsupportsisrael.com/defence.html

    and also

    http://www.irelandsupportsisrael.com/rosa.html

    How corrupt is the neoleft today is shown by your action Mick in not writing a single word about the Iranian Islamofascist threat. Spin it as you want you and your friends answered this Islamofascist with silence. You cannot explain that silence away.

    Jo should grow up politically. She must be the only person on the planet who thinks Israel precipitated the 67 War.

    If I am surrounded by a crowd of bullies in the playground intent on doing me harm who would blame me if I struck first to try to lessen the odds.

    But also if that analogy were not enough how to explain 48 and 73.Jo’s position is hard to grasp. She thinks Irans is an empty threat. Well not if you happen to live in Israel. Just like the threat of Saddam to land Scud missiles on Israel in the first Gulf War.

  • ch in texas

    felix quigley, It’s refreshing to see someone on the left shake off political blinders. You and I probably don’t agree on many things political, but certainly opposing fascism in the defence of liberty isn’t one of them.

    It’s always (sickly) amusing to me to see liberals or those on the far left kowtow to dictatorial regimes that supress free speech, kill homosexuals, and strap bombs to children just to somehow oppose the US. Am I wrong?

  • felix quigley

    Bill

    The Stern “Gang” a word invented by British Psyops, Irish should understand

    Much misunderstanding about the role of Britain in Palestine during the Mandate especially its siding with the Arabs as Hitler tightened the noose in Europe.

    Britain was given a MANDATE in 1921 to create a Jewish Home. It betrayed that Mandate.

    I quote from JewishVirtualLibrary.org re King David.

    “The King David Hotel was the site of the British military command and the British Criminal Investigation Division. The Irgun chose it as a target after British troops invaded the Jewish Agency June 29, 1946, and confiscated large quantities of documents. At about the same time, more than 2,500 Jews from all over Palestine were placed under arrest. The information about Jewish Agency operations, including intelligence activities in Arab countries, was taken to the King David Hotel.

    A week later, news of a massacre of 40 Jews in a pogrom in Poland reminded the Jews of Palestine how Britain’s restrictive immigration policy had condemned thousands to death.

    Irgun leader Menachem Begin stressed his desire to avoid civilian casualties and said three telephone calls were placed, one to the hotel, another to the French Consulate, and a third to the Palestine Post, warning that explosives in the King David Hotel would soon be detonated.

    On July 22, 1946, the calls were made. The call into the hotel was apparently received and ignored. Begin quotes one British official who supposedly refused to evacuate the building, saying: “We don’t take orders from the Jews.”1 As a result, when the bombs exploded, the casualty toll was high: a total of 91 killed and 45 injured. Among the casualties were 15 Jews. Few people in the hotel proper were injured by the blast.2

    In contrast to Arab attacks against Jews, which were widely hailed as heroic actions, the Jewish National Council denounced the bombing of the King David.3

    For decades the British denied they had been warned. In 1979, however, a member of the British Parliament introduced evidence that the Irgun had indeed issued the warning. He offered the testimony of a British officer who heard other officers in the King David Hotel bar joking about a Zionist threat to the headquarters. The officer who overheard the conversation immediately left the hotel and survived.4”

    Just one point on above. The Jewish National Council WAS the Jewish establishment and was seeking to discredit the Jewish freedom fighters.

    For information on how the British encouraged and built up the Nazi criminal Hajj Amin el Husseini see http://www.tenc.net

    I also wrote something about the links between the Palestinian Arabs, the Arabs in general and Islamofascism in

    http://www.irelandsupportsisrael.com/arab.html

    The other points about Abraham Stern et al have the same content.

    Bill you need to do some serious and independent research and see what you can unearth using different sources.

    All I can tell you is that the Jews never forgot the betrayal by Britain in those years. It always amazed me that Irish republicans have never dealt with that especially considering Ben Briscoe’s role

  • felix quigley

    CH in Texas

    No idea how good it is to hear from you. I have taken lots of abuse on Slugger but your comment is worth it all.

    The neoleft is finished. You cannot support Islamofascism under cover of antiAmericanism and hope to have a future. A stinking corpse.

    Mick’s excuses on his silence on the Iranian threat and Jo’s meanderings in fantasy land are a case in point.

  • Jo

    I am happier *meandering* than hankering after mass murder. You should stick to atw, Felix, they gloat over murder and scorn raped children better over there.

  • Dread Cthulhu

    Jo: “On the first occasion, Israel reacted violently and the resolution of that war (withdrawl to pre67 territory) is the way clear to a peace settlement – only after almost 40 years and thousands of deaths.

    Now we have another rhetorical threat – wil we have another 40 years and thousands of deaths to get abck to where we are now? ”

    First of all, if you believe Israel withdrawing to the pre-67 borders would end the terrorism against ISrael, you’ll believe any old thing. Try reading the PLO charter and the Arab produced maps of the region, if you want the local opinion of what the “final solution” to the border should be.

    Secondly, given that Iran is supply Hizbollah and the other local murderers with arms and money, by what logical measure *shouldn’t* Israel respond in kind?

  • Dread Cthulhu

    Jo: “Now we have another rhetorical threat – wil we have another 40 years and thousands of deaths to get abck (sic) to where we are now? ”

    Nope… shouldn’t take more than 40 minutes. As for the source of the war being solely Egyptian rhetoric, I think you would have to take a serious look at such diverse matters as Egyptian efforts to obtain tactical and low-grade strategic missiles, using German / Nazi expatriates, the Egyptian troop movements prior to the war and, frankly, the Arab tendency to invade Israel every couple of years. It tends to create a lower bar for response / pre-emption.

  • David

    In 1967 Egypt closed the Straits of Tiran to ships bound for Israel. This is a lot more than the “rhetoric” claimed by Jo.

  • Neal

    seeking to discredit the Jewish freedom fighters.

    One man’s terrorist, eh Felix? Whether the Irgun issued a warning or not, they bombed the hotel and killed 91 people.

    A piece of advice for you as well – perhaps you should try to find some independent sources to cite. tenc.net and the Jewish Virtualy Library are about as unbiased as your own site.

  • Robert Keogh

    Sharon is shitting himself at the prospect of 20k+ veteran insurgents heading west once the uSUK forces retreat from Iraq. If 150k+ US troops and chemical weapons couldn’t contain these guys there’s no chance the IDF will.

    Say thankyou Mr. Bush.

  • ch in texas

    Copperfacedjack, Your comments are vile and wicked, and unbecoming of Slugger discourse.

  • Jo

    CFJ: Thats unacceptable.
    DC: Thats equally unacceptable – I take that to be another gloat at mass murder – but hey as long as they’re Iranian Muslims, right? Thatd be proportionate to the historical Israel killing of more than 3 times as many Palestinians as the number of casualties it itself suffers.

  • felix quigley

    I want to try to get from Jo some kind of response/honesty. If not to me then to a query from another. This Iranian threat is at the centre of the Sharon issue. Dread C wrote

    “Jo: “Threats by Iran at the present time are empty gestures. It may be argued that rhetoric, while reprehensible, doesnt actually phhysically (sic) kill people.”

    Really? Funny, I thought that was usually referred to “as incitement to riot” when done on a local level and has, over the decades, done a pretty good job of killing folks.”

    This is referring of course to the threat by the Iranioan President to wipe Israel off the map.

    Jo does not answer. She evades.

    “DC
    You missed my point.

    On 2 occasions we have verbal threats, rhetoric.

    On the first occasion, Israel reacted violently and the resolution of that war (withdrawl to pre67 territory) is the way clear to a peace settlement – only after almost 40 years and thousands of deaths.

    Now we have another rhetorical threat – wil we have another 40 years and thousands of deaths to get abck to where we are now?

    Posted by Jo on Nov 22, 2005 @ 07:17 PM

    Is this debating. You miss the point. He asked you was or how was it an empty threat.

    Not answered.

    I am still confused on how you make it out to be an empty threat given that all the fuss is about Iran having a nuclear bomb and that a leading Iranian cleric had earlier said that Israel was so small (size of Wales) one strike or just on bomb to get through would be sufficient to end Israel, while ISRAEL WOULD NEED MANY. Showing they are deadly serious and giving it thought.

    As I said, Not answered

    Perhaps never answered.

    To quote your position on Iran in full tells me that you are for the idea of allowing Iran to continue to develop its nuclear bomb.

    “In 1967, threatening remarks by Egypt led to the precipitation by Israel of the 7 day war.

    In 2005, threatening remarks by an Irnaian Prsident have led to calls for Iran to be attacked with nuclear weapons. These 2 scenarios show how the threat of military escalation between the 2 events has tipped the balance closer to an all-out war on a scale unknown in human history.

    Threats by Iran at the present time are empty gestures. It may be argued that rhetoric, while reprehensible, doesnt actually phhysically kill people. Nonthless despite the emptiness of these remarks and the lack of any physical capability to act on them, can lead to pre-emptive action called for by those who do indeed have the military capability and thence find themselves with the problem of how often and where to deploy it.

    I think that any sensible US administration( and I believe that to be a moot point) would not in fact precipitate an invasion of Iran at the present time. There is no doubt that there is the wish to do so. But to respond in a reflex fashion to rhetorical flourishes is not recommended nor is it politically mature. Sharon’s decisionm is indicative of some such maturity and is to be welcomed. I recognise that not being bloodthirsty probabbly puts me in a minority when it comes to discussion of ME politics. Thats just, if you excuse the phraseology, a cross I have to bear. ”

    Why is it mature to decide not to act physically against Iran to stop it gaining nuclear bomb?

    Why is it mature to allow Iran to have the bomb?

    Was it also immature for Israel to attack Saddams nuclear bomb making facility back in the 80s?

    Is it your idea that WAITING and talking will be effective against zealots like these.

    As regards 67 that Egypt et al were engaged in empty rhetoric. Empty rhetoric. Blocking Israels access to the sea, kicking the UN out of Sinai, part of the previous treaty, moving troops into Sinai along Israeli border…just empty rhetoric.

    Explain?

    As regards Mick Hall he again has disappeared… and decided not to deal with issue of intent to wipe out Israel. Israel the size of Wales. Arab countries covering an area twice the size of the US. Some fairness!

  • Brian Boru

    “As regards Mick Hall he again has disappeared… and decided not to deal with issue of intent to wipe out Israel. Israel the size of Wales. Arab countries covering an area twice the size of the US. Some fairness! ”

    Well what do they expect Arabs to feel seeing their kin’s homes bulldozed and replaced with Jewish settlements?

  • Jo

    Some Iranian nutcases may well wish to wipe out Israel. They havent the capability to do and wont have it for years. This rhetoric is being used to justify mass murder in the type of rpe-emtive strike which places moral liability on Israel or the US, or both. I find pre emptive attack bloodthirsty and in terms of the wider consequences, horrifying When are poeple going to learn…that if you decide to act, as with Iraq, there are consequences, which in the case of Iraq were either not planned for or simply not cared about…

    Some nutcases equally talked about driving the Prods into the sea a while back…are my feet wet? Would I be justified in shooting the man who said that?

  • Dread Cthulhu

    Jo: “DC: Thats equally unacceptable – I take that to be another gloat at mass murder – but hey as long as they’re Iranian Muslims, right? Thatd be proportionate to the historical Israel killing of more than 3 times as many Palestinians as the number of casualties it itself suffers”

    I think you might need to work on your reading comprehension and vocabulary — words actually have reasonably fixed meanings and just because you don’t like or don’t agree with what I say doesn’t mean you have the moral imperative to chastise me and accuse me of “gloating.” How long, pray tell, do you think it would take Israel to respond in kind to an Iranian assault?

    As for the Palestinians, try reading some history. This is the struggle they chose, following the British division of the Palestinian mandate and the Israeli declaration of statehood. That they aren’t winning after being alternately encouraged, ignored and abused by their Arab patrons is hardly Israel’s fault or problem. The Palestinian “leaders” chose terrorism — to complain that the Israelis are ruthless in the face of ruthless opponents who care little for the well-being of their own people is a little weak out of the chute.

    Jo: “Some Iranian nutcases may well wish to wipe out Israel.”

    Of course, you neglect to adress the issue that the “nutcases” are the duly “selected” leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

    Jo: “They havent the capability to do and wont have it for years.”

    Do you know this for a fact, or is this just an assumption / wishful-thinking on your part? They have the uranium, the processing equipment and, if recent news reports can be believed, the design of a nuclear warhead. They have already alluded to the desire, albeit with the appropriate public denials. All they need now is the time. It does not require a great deal of expertise — a BA in Physics probably could manage one. Likewise, you neglect to consider that even an imperfect bomb, one that achieves only partial fission or simply scatters its nuclear core over a wide area, is a major threat as well.

    Jo: “This rhetoric is being used to justify mass murder in the type of rpe-emtive strike which places moral liability on Israel or the US, or both.”

    Would the US or Israel be better served by waiting and making it retaliation? Would that kill any fewer people? Ah, but at least you would find some moral validation in the mass casualties suffered prior to the response in kind. A kind of expensive ticket to punch, all things considered, don’t you think?

    Jo: “I find pre emptive (sic) attack bloodthirsty and in terms of the wider consequences, horrifying When are poeple (sic) going to learn…that if you decide to act, as with Iraq, there are consequences, which in the case of Iraq were either not planned for or simply not cared about… ”

    I find that waiting to be attacked foolish and, in terms of the wider consequences, horrifingly stupid. When are people going to realize that there are consequences to playing the dhimmi, allowing Islamic fanatics, particularly those with associations with a messianic Mahdi cult, should not be trusted with nuclear weapons which, in the case of Iran, no one outside of Israel and the United States seems to have the stomach to deal with.

  • ch in texas

    Felix Quigley, I now see what you meant yesterday about my comments to you being a breath of fresh air. You have your work cut out for you with this bunch. As someone from the right, I respect your attempts to bring sanity into the dicussion from a liberal point of view. But these leftists will keep spouting their anti-Israel and anti-US bile until they too are wearing orange jumpsuits.

    Felix, Why not take up a Slugger collection to buy you a one way ticket to Texas? Europe’s done for. We can have a beer and watch Chrisopther Hitchens take apart George Galloway in debate.

    Allah Akbar, y’all.

  • Jo

    DC:

    You casually tossed off (sic) the phrase “40 minutes” to my comparison with the 1967 situation. A somewhat casual reference to an attack on a sovereign nation, dont you think? To an attack which would probably directly kill many people and irradiate thousands of others, as well as instantly creating legions of jihadists.

    Don’t you know that thats what the result would be? Perhaps the distinction between the morality of an attack like that and the power to carry it out is lost on you?

    To attack Iran now or at any time in the future could well trigger a full scale conflict. Is that what you want? If so you are on a par with the wild eyed Christian Fundamentalists who lust after Armageddon. I’m not prepared to let that happen in my name. Right now, Armageddon out of here becase I see Felix has been described as a liberal…oh dear God the walls are closing in again…do-do do-do…do-do do-do

  • ch in texas

    Jo, Just take your medicine and have a good lie down. All the American bombers and flying monkeys will turn into pretty butterflys, I promise.

  • Jo

    Ch: Ah, a Joni Mitchell fan. 🙂

  • felix quigley

    I appreciate my two friends assistance, actually they are ahead of me in many respects

    I will respect the moderator of Slugger and try to pull this back a little to Sharon which raises very big issues as to what exactly Israel is about, or for, and why it was created.

    The Jews have been a wandering race enduring horrible repression ever since the Roman expulsions in the First and Second centuries.

    But more than that. The Jews were held together by their faith, Judaism. I of course am an atheist but I have learned to respect this religion because it had to transform itself into a political philosophy. Every atonement day very poor Jews indeed from every corner of the globe would turn to Jerusalem and say “Next year in Zion”.

    I will not go into the history of Sharon here but this man has shown great disrespect for this tradition.

    There is also in Israel especially in academia great self hatred of Judaism. We find these self-hating Jews being paraded around Ireland and European cities by members of the ISM, in Ireland by the Palestinian Solidarity Group (an offshoot) of which Mr McIntyres Blanket is part and to which Mick Hall is connected.

    The Sharon issue post Gaza.

    I have just written on this on ATW asking a person there to do some research before calling for this “Palestinian” state to be set up. First a small note to Jo. I think she is aware of the history. War was made inevitable in 1967. Forced on Israel as in 1948. I do believe in historical truth and am not a relativist and all historians serious that I know of accept out position. My analogy of the schoolyard bullies is fair. Israel launched its plane strike after war had been declared by the Arabs. The Egyptian move into Sinai, never mind Nassers clear statements, was war.Who struck first was really not the issue. The Arabs were heavily armed with the latest from the Soviets. Israel had to or else go under. Jo should look also at 1973 War when it was the Arabs who struck first. At that time the Americans were insistent that Israel should hold fire. Israel gave the Arabs the advantage, almost lost the war, and did lose many thousands of young Jewish men and women as a result. This question of numbers Jo. I am not sure of your facts but remeber Israel is outnumbered versus Arabs by 1 to 50. That is only Arab. Count in Iran and Islam it is much more. Sometimes I feel that people forget that Israel is so tiny…Back to Sharon and Gaza.

    (Jo I feel that Israel is the Homeland of the Jews. After the Holocaust, after Hajj Amin el Husseini, if anybody lifts a stone to strike a Jew I think they should have no mercy. This antisemitism, this Jew hatred has got to end. The whole of Arab life is filled with it, from the Protocols through to sermons on PA television and the glorifying of suicide murderers.)

    Basically the situation is that in elections in January Hamas will win about 40% it is thought.

    Hamas leader in Gaza Zahar has promised all out war and will cut all ties with Israel. He boasts that Abbas no longer talks to Hamas about disarming. Zahar sees Sharopn pulling out of Gaza as a big victory. Hamas sees Israel basically as a busted flush. THE MAJORITY OF PALESTINIAN ARABS AGREE.

    If it was only, ever was, a Palestinian state to live in peace…

    People on Slugger must start to factor in Hamas…They MUST factor in Jew hatred. Irish nationalists must start to examine the British role, especially the British Bevinite Labour Party (Remember Roy mason in the north) towards Jews in the Mandate period.

  • Dread Cthulhu

    Jo: “You casually tossed off (sic) the phrase “40 minutes” to my comparison with the 1967 situation. A somewhat casual reference to an attack on a sovereign nation, dont you think? To an attack which would probably directly kill many people and irradiate thousands of others, as well as instantly creating legions of jihadists. ”

    Gloating: To revel, take pride in, glory, triumph, wallow, rejoice (the thesaurus in MS Word)

    Words mean things, Jo, and, as this medium is almost exclusively words, they should be used correctly. Now, I may be being a trifile cavalier in your estimation, but I was certainly not “gloating.”

    With that out of the way, let me ask you — just how long do you think it takes for a ballistic missile or hypersonic military aircraft to travel from Israel to Iran? If anything, I was exaggerating the time it would take.

    *sigh* Between your free-form re-definition of common vocabulary and your refusal (or inability) to provide a rational rebuttal on the points made, this conversation doesn’t seem to be accomplishing much. However, to address your points, do you not think that a nuclear weapon dropped on Israel by the Iranians would have the same effect on Israel?? I mean, without the jihadis, of course, as they would be dancing in the streets, celebrating the death of the “little Satan,” much as they celebrated the WTC attack in Palestinian territories, handing out candy to children and singing.

    Additionally, by what rational measure would you require Israel to stay their hand and wait for the mushroom cloud before lifting a finger in their own defense? Should they simply roll over and die so that your sensibilities wouldn’t be offended? As for radiation, the putative Israeli arsenal includes neutron weapons, so, if radiation is really your concern, be assured, the matter can be addressed to cause a minimum of fallout.

    Jo: “Don’t you know that thats what the result would be? Perhaps the distinction between the morality of an attack like that and the power to carry it out is lost on you? ”

    Quit wringing your hands and go have a spot of tea, Jo. There, feeling better? Good.

    That out of the way, what do you think the Israelis should do, when faced with nuclear terror from the folks who have been bringing them conventional terror since the mid-seventies? Iran has the power and the will to make such an attack and cares not one whit of the morality or your apparently fragile sensibilities. In this whole scenario, by what logic do you believe that Israel *shouldn’t* be concerned and drawing up contingencies, up to and including the use of their own putative nuclear arsenal?

    Jo: “To attack Iran now or at any time in the future could well trigger a full scale conflict”

    Likewise, to not attack Iran now or at any time in the future could well trigger a full scale nuclear conflict.

    Once Iran has “the bomb,” would it be rational to simply trust in the goodwill of a collection of Mahdist theocrats who believe that increases in world-wide chaos increases the chances of the arrival of their “final prophet? Especially Mahdist theocrats who have pledged to destroy your people?

    Jo: “Is that what you want? If so you are on a par with the wild eyed Christian Fundamentalists who lust after Armageddon.”

    Ah, the ad hominem attacks and effort at guilt by association — the last refuge of the incompetent and the factually lost. I have provided you with a thesis, based on fact and rhetoric, to which you riposte by attempting to slur and insult me. The only one who sounds wild-eyed here, Jo, is you.

    For the record, Jo, I am a cynic/realist who has lived an entire life within 20 minutes drive of a primary or secondary missile target for a “healthy” part of the Cold War. The topics that you so hysterically go on about were a near daily consideration of my life since the day I could wrap my head around the concept of nuclear weapons and “Mutually Assured Destruction.”

    Jo: “Right now, Armageddon out of here becase I see Felix has been described as a liberal…”

    No, its not, once you adjust for local mileage and the funny foreign wall-sockets some plug their computers into. Its also the exception to the “words mean things” rule expounded above — they don’t always mean the same thing in different places allegedly speaking the same language.

    In some parts of the world, Jo, to be politically “liberal” is to be a free-marketeer, a person who focuses on individual liberties, etc., as opposed to an US liberal, who believes in high taxes, soft socialism as government policy and appeasement as a form of foreign policy.

  • Jo

    slur? I didnt even START to slur, just pointing out that a pre-emptive attack such as you appear to favour would be catastrophic in terms of Western-ME relations. As i started out as sayin some Iarnians have the will, but the country will not have the capacity for several years. In the meantime, there is talking going on and no dead Muslims litter the streets, as you would appear to favour.
    We require diplomats, jaw jaw, not war war. Comprenez? To think othewise demonstrates the arrogance of a Power which regards the ME and the Muslims as a people beyond the Pale.

    I think other may judge where the slurs (*incompetent* *hysteria* come from in this exchange) *smiles*

    As usual with the Right, if I dont respond with unthinking advocacy of violence, its beyond your comprehension….pedantry for my sins, is something I have to tolerate in my working life. It is the last resort of those who can’t deal with concepts. 🙂 Now before you lambast me with your trans-Atlantic sophistry and try to have me quivering in my knee highs, might I highlight my belief in a 2 state solution for the Palestinians and Israelis…?

    Sharon is taking a brave step, I dont believe he is a traitor to Israel, nor do I want Iran to annihilate that country. That conflict needs resolved and he at least is taking steps to progress that that his military background has equipped him with the credibility to provide…now, what bearded man does he remind me of, closer to home….

  • ch in texas

    Jo, Oui, je comprends, mais je ne consens pas avec vous. (By the way, I do like Joni Mitchell, and God help me, Joan Baez.)

    I too think Sharon is taking a brave step, and he has the bona fides to do so. He would win the election today if held.

    I’m glad to see you agree with the 2 state solution, as does Pres. Bush. (Jo and Bush agree, Jo and Bush agree, Jo and Bush agree..sorry!)

    Where you and I might disagree is that European diplomacy, not backed up with the credible threat of force, is IMHO, likely to fail. But what else can Europe do, they have no army. M. de Villepan can’t even keep his own maison in order, much less Terahan.

    Unfortunately, my country is engaged in a little soiree right now. The real politik side of my brain whispers maybe Sadam had his uses, keeping the mullahs bottled up. What’s a few dead babies in Hallabja? But no, let freedom ring, and maybe jack Straw can handle Iran.

    As to liberal Felix, I was using the classical sense of the word as DC pointed out. A John Kennedy liberal, who had low taxes, but tough on defense, and looking out for the individual.

    So rest assured, American won’t be bombing Iran anytime soon. Keep talking to them, and maybe the poor Iranian people will get sick of the thugs and help us all out. Peace through Strength!

  • Jo

    ch: agreed..Jo and Tex agree..etc etc 😀

  • ch in texas

    This deserves Champagne!! Now how abouta cuddle?

  • Jo

    Tex: see you at Joblog 😉

  • ch in texas

    See Felix and Dread, that’s how ya do it Texas Style! Get yer point over, then get a date!

  • Jo

    ..but with me, CH, No means NO!!! (You can check out my posts on that subject too)!

  • ch in texas

    Oh but Jo, that wouldn’t happen. Here in Texas, we treat ladies like ladies. We’re southern gentlemen, not like those Irish BOYS, whiskeyed up and fumbling about atrying to get in a gal’s knickers. But you would leave here saying “Everything IS bigger in Texas!” LOL

  • Dread Cthulhu

    Jo: “slur? I didnt (sic) even START to slur, just pointing out that a pre-emptive attack such as you appear to favour (sic) would be catastrophic in terms of Western-ME relations.”

    Jo, previously: “If so you are on a par with the wild eyed Christian Fundamentalists who lust after Armageddon.”

    So, we have an ugly stereotyping and a “guilt-by-association” attack. You can’t rebut on the points and use insult to undercut my arguments.

    Jo: “As i (sic) started out as sayin (sic) some Iarnians (sic) have the will, but the country will not have the capacity for several years.”

    And I repeat: those “Iarnians” include the current head of the country, many of his cabinet and no few of the “guiding committee’ of clerics who have the real power in “Iarn.” As for their capacity is that a matter of fact or assumption? Does the equation include only local “Iarnian” uranium, or does it consider uranium from black-market sources?

    Jo: “In the meantime, there is talking going on and no dead Muslims litter the streets, as you would appear to favour (sic). ”

    Another assumption — an acceptance of certain facts and possibilities does not indicate a preference.

    Jo: “We require diplomats, jaw jaw, not war war. Comprenez?”

    What we require is the will to back words with deeds. Now, what form those deeds take — attack, embargo or some lesser sanction, is open to debate.

    Jo: “To think othewise (sic) demonstrates the arrogance of a Power which regards the ME and the Muslims as a people beyond the Pale.”

    No, it recognizes that without the will to take action to back up the words spoken, the words are bereft of meaning. Neville Chamberlain’s words made in Munich, 1938, ultimately had no meaning, since they lacked the concordant will to check Hitler.

    Jo: “I think other may judge where the slurs (*incompetent* *hysteria* come from in this exchange) *smiles* ”

    You made ripostes based on personal attack, have yet to rebut a point I have made and have relied on emotionalism… if that is not “hysterical” and “incompetent,” then what is?

    Jo: “As usual with the Right, if I dont (sic) respond with unthinking advocacy of violence, its beyond your comprehension….pedantry (sic) for my sins, is something I have to tolerate in my working life.”

    One does not expect you to salivate like Pavlov’s dog, Jo. One would prefer something that goes beyond your feelings and has some factual root.

    Jo: ” It is the last resort of those who can’t deal with concepts. 🙂 ”

    You haven’t put forth a thesis to deal with. All you have done is to spew your outrage that Israel defended itself against Arab aggression and spew additional outrage that they might do so again.

    Jo: “Now before you lambast (sic) me with your trans-Atlantic sophistry and try to have me quivering in my knee highs, might I highlight my belief in a 2 state solution for the Palestinians and Israelis…?

    Sharon is taking a brave step, I dont (sic) believe he is a traitor to Israel, nor do I want Iran to annihilate that country. That conflict needs resolved and he at least is taking steps to progress that that his military background has equipped him with the credibility to provide…now, what bearded man does he remind me of, closer to home…. ”

    Short declarative sentences, expounding a thesis — a good start.

    Sharon is no a traitor to Israel — he is a hostage to a poor political system — the Knesset is too fluid. The “dominant” party is held victim to many “narrow interest” parties. Personally, I suspect that Sharon’s support is for disengagement, not a “two state” solution. He has been reducing Israel to defendable borders where the Israel may ignore the Palestinians until they are serious about making peace. In the process, he has given the world a look at what such a state would look like. The looting of the greenhouses purchased for Gaza by Jewish philanthropists, the development of a Fatah/Hamas power-struggle over who gets to head the Gaza “thugocracy” are two examples of what the region has in store. The proven corruption of the Palestinian leadership & their two-faced approach to Israel — “nice nice” in English and “war war” in Arabic — leaves little doubt as to the moral vigor of such a state

    Now, as for Iran, they have stated their position, unwavering since the establishment of the Islamic Republic, proved by their support of such groups and Palestinian Jihad and Hezbollah. It is reasonable that, as they have collected the material and the means to build nuclear weapons, including a warhead design compatible with Iranian missiles, Iran wants nuclear weapons. Given that diplomacy that is all “talk talk” and no “will will” is useless, what actions are you willing to countenance to prevent Iran from gaining nuclear weapons?

  • Jo

    DC

    Given my poor spelling and grammar, I feel I am a totally inadequate foil for your vastle superior intellect, not to mention pendantry and any fruitful enegagement with you would appear to be waste of my time.

    While I’m flattered to be the subject of your dissection, your mocking approach is not, I would sugges, a respectful way of engaging in debate. The answers to all of your questions can I am sure be addressed through a quick Google – if you were genuinely interested in views other than your own, which I am afraid, I don’t believe you are. Ciao..time will tell who is right and who is wrong.

  • felix quigley

    Jo

    DC asks a serious question.

    it came up before on tangled Web. Iran is serious about developing a nuclear bomb and it is serious about wiping Israel off the map.

    This is why the disappearance of Mick hall of the Blanket writing team is interesting to me. That political website sympathetic to the Palestinians has used a technique of SILENCE on the issue.

    Why?

    Jo, you have not answered and I suspect will not.

    More talk you say. As the BT said Talking is Good. Not always though. Talking and not action can lead to disaster.

    Nobody wants war. But these issues are being foisted onto us.

    The people in the Twin Towers did not ask for that kind of end.

    Is the problem really in answering DC that you are a pacifist, a Betty and Mairead. If so say so!

  • felix quigley

    I think there is a change on Slugger on this issue. Two years ago when I raised the issue of why the neoleft had hidden the history and role of the Palestinian Arab Nazi Hajj Amin el Husseini I was met with rejection and blocking mechanisms by about 30 contributors (but not Mick and his organisers)

    Now I see historical issues being addressed and while I do not agree with some I applaud that.

    I feel that the neoleft like Hall have become part and parcel of the Islamofascist movement all springing from a phony antiAmericanism.

    Be that as it may I would once again draw back to politics inside Israel and especially the growth of Hamas, which IS an Islamofascist movement, a fact which is hidden by the neoleft.

    I made these points in answer to a contributor on ATW concerning the aftermath of Gaza withdrawl/surrender

    ” 1. Jew was used to pull Jew out of their homes. To that end a special brutal and secular police force was geared up to do the deed. The media focussed on a few emotive scenes of soldiers emoting with settlers. The end result was still the handing of power to the barbarians and the creation of another part of Israel which is Judenfrei.

    2. This action created huge divisions inside Israeli society and diverted away from the preparation by Iran of the nuclear bomb.

    3. The action has emboldened the barbarians. So the Islamist leader of Iran threatened to wipe Israel off the map with a nuclear strike

    4. The area is now in the hands of the Islamofascists and is a conduit for heavy arms and rockets into Judea and Samaria to strike at settlements and at Israel itself. Rockets in place with the capability of taking down civilian airoplanes in and out of Ben Gurion airport. Al Qaida is on the scene as you would expect.

    5. Zahar leader of Hamas because of the Sharon action believes that Israel is now a busted flush. He has reason to gloat.

    6. The majority of Palestinian Arabs according to numerous polls agree with this assessment

    7. The first step in the Quartet Road Map was that the Palestinian factions should disarm. Zahar says that as far as Abbas is concerned this is off the table. “We no longer discuss it” he has said.

    8. Zahar has found a new ally in secretary of State Rice who agrees with Abbas that disarming should not even be discussed until after the January election. This is also Bush’s view. How did he put it…people who vote do not throw stones..or something close to that

    9. It is thought that Hamas may win 40%of the Palestinian Arab vote in the January election. This will give them a big say in the future. Let us look at how Hamas as one component see the future (and there is also Al Aqsa and Islamic Jihad as well. In other words a total barbarian state)

    10. and finally this “future” under the barbarians

    Hamas views Israel as a vanquished foe, and “the defeated [party] does not dictate conditions,” Zahar said.
    Public opinion polls as I have said have consistently shown a majority of Palestinian Arabs agree with that view. And as for disarming, Zahar said everyone concerned can forget about it.

    “We will join the Legislative Council and serve the Palestinian street with our weapons in hand,” he insisted. “We want to turn into the weapon of resistance in all the land.”
    Zahar has actually noted that Hamas has already joined municipal councils throughout PA-controlled areas, and no one has demanded the group disarm as a result of those election successes.
    The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) recently published a translation of an October interview in which Gaza-based Hamas chief Mahmoud al-Zahar laid out his group’s post-election agenda. “Hamas’ mission upon joining the [Palestinian Authority] Legislative Council will be to eliminate the last remnants” of the so-called “Oslo” peace process, Zahar told a website elaph.com.

    Should Hamas one day control a majority of seats in the parliament and be asked to form the government, it will go one step further and end all relations with the Jewish state.

    “The national interest demands that we not cooperate with Israel in the security, political, or economic spheres,” Zahar explained. “The facts should lead us to cut off our relations with the Israeli enemy by all means.”

    To my friends in Slugger. Rub that sleep off your eyes and wake up to what is happening. Try to keep up!

  • felix quigley

    Yes I do know.

    I use the word barbarians advisedly. This came to me when I learned the ins and outs of the Jewish synagogues left standing in Gaza.

    First of all the Palestinian mob ransacked and then set them on fire.

    But these were structures built strongly of concrete and the fire only did superficial damage.

    The next step told it all for me. These were structures with many uses for a nascent state. The list is endless but myself being interested in sport and recreation the possibility of gymnasia springs to my mind.

    Not so. Abbas, who is a Holocaust denier, ordered that they be completely demolished.

    I tell you that Jew hatred in the Arab world has got deep roots.

    Yet it is the Jews who are accused by McIntyre and Hall’s site as being racist and “Nazi”. Yes I can back that up to the skies with sources.

  • felix quigley

    To Jo on the issue of 67 war and who started it:

    “Israel is in possession of Judea, Samaria and Gaza (Yesha) as a consequence of the 1967
    defensive war that Israel was forced into. The areas of Judea/Samaria and Gaza were occupied
    from 1948 to 1967 by Jordan and Egypt, respectively, but no calls for “Palestinian sovereignty”
    were heard during that period. Since Jordan and Egypt have renounced their claims to these
    territories, Israel has the strongest claim to Yesha.

    The 1967 War is discussed and documented so extensively that only a brief summary is needed to
    establish the foregoing argument.
    Israel’s war against Jordan as a defensive war may be established by recalling that on the day the
    Israeli war against Egypt started, Israel warned King Hussein explicitly not to intervene on the side of
    Israel’s enemies. This statement is substantiated by an official Israeli document sent to King Hussein
    on June 5, 1967, via a UN official, General Odd Bull. The document is available from the site of the
    Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, MFA:
    On the morning of 5 June 1967, Prime Minister Eshkol transmitted through
    the Chief of Staff of UNTSO a message to King Hussein asking Jordan to
    refrain from hostilities. Text:
    We are engaged in defensive fighting on the Egyptian sector, and we shall
    not engage ourselves in any action against Jordan, unless Jordan attacks
    us. Should Jordan attack Israel, we shall go against her with all our
    might.
    According to Gilbert, p. 385, This message was also conveyed by two other channels: the
    Israeli/Jordanian Mixed Armistice Commission and the US Embassy in Tel Aviv. The fact that
    Jordanian forces opened fire, shelling Jerusalem, and then began to advance, proves the defensive
    nature of Israel’s war on Jordan beyond any doubt

    (Joseph Alexander Norland, Israpundit, 23 Reasons)

  • felix quigley

    And on Egypt, for Jo to consider, when she says Israel caused the 67 War.

    “The case against Egypt is based, first, on the casus belli created by Nasser when he closed the
    straights of Tiran to Israeli shipping on May 22, 1967. This is confirmed by
    Nasser’s speech :
    On 23 May 1967, Egypt announced that the Straits of Tiran had been closed
    and warned Israeli shipping that it would be fired upon if it attempted to
    break the blockade. The next day, Egypt announced that the Straits had
    been mined. Text of speech by President Nasser announcing the closure of
    the Gulf of Aqaba to Israeli shipping, 23 May 1967:
    Yesterday the armed forces occupied Sharin ash-Shaykh. What does this
    mean? It is an affirmation of our rights, of our sovereignty over the Gulf
    of Aqaba, which constitutes Egyptian territorial waters. Under no
    circumstances can we permit the Israeli flag to pass through the Gulf of
    Aqaba.
    On May 23, the closure of the straits of Tiran was condemned by President Johnson in these words:
    The United States considers the gulf to be an international waterway and
    feels that a blockade of Israeli shipping is illegal and potentially
    disastrous to the cause of peace. The right of free and innocent passage
    of the international waterway is a vital interest of the entire
    international community.
    Even had the closing of the Straits of Tiran been the only cause of Israel’s war on Egypt, it would
    have been enough to justify the war as one of self-defense. In fact, this closure was accompanied by a
    15 of 98 http://israpundit.blogspot.comhttp://4arrow.com
    long series of other belligerent steps. On May 17, 1967, Nasser ordered the withdrawal of the UN
    buffer presence (UNEF, or United Nations Emergency Force) which was placed in the Sinai after the
    1956 War. This was preceded by deploying Egyptian troops in the Sinai starting May 13, 1967, and
    by threats of annihilation against Israel. For Israel, the military pact among Egypt, Syria, Jordan and
    Iraq, with the explicit objective of annihilating Israel, amounted to a noose, especially when the pact
    members started moving troops towards Israel’s borders. Finally, Nasser resumed the murderous
    infiltration of the terrorist Fidayin, an act that was among the prime causes of the 1956 War. During
    the week of April 24, 1967, for example, Egyptian-controlled terrorists sabotaged a main road leading
    to Beersheba.
    The following chronology is culled from Gilbert, Ch 21-22, and demonstrates the foregoing narrative.
    May 13, 1967 – Nasser moves large numbers of troops into the Sinai.
    May 16, 1967 – Nasser demands the withdrawal of UNEF; UN’s Secretary General, U Thant agrees
    immediately. Withdrawal completed by May 19, 1967.
    May 22, 1967 – Nasser closes the Straits of Tiran, generating an unambiguous casus belli. (On March
    1, 1957, Israel announced that closing the straits would be considered casus belli.)
    May 25, 1967 – Egyptian armoured units moved to Sinai.
    May 26, 1967 – Nasser declares, “our basic objective will be to destroy Israel”.
    May 30, 1967 – During his visit to Cairo, King Hussein joins the Syrian-Egyption pact against Israel.
    Israel was now surrounded on three sides.
    May 31, 1967 – Iraqi troops move to Egypt to support a possible war. (On June 4, Iraq joined the pact
    of Egypt/Syria/Jordan.) ”

    I will not deal with Syria but there is enough here.

  • felix quigley

    Finally on the “Occupation”.

    It was forced on Israel because the attack of the Arabs came from there.

    Why was it that from 1949 to 1967 when Jordan controlled Judea and Samaria there was never any call or initiative to create a Palestinian state?

    The nature of the Occupation. The first idea of the Israelis after 67 was to hand it all back to the Arabs in return for peace and a recognition of Israeli right to exist.

    The Arabs turned the offer down flat.

    That led to the emergence of the PLO and to all the bloodshed we have seen, and to the craven support for this anti Jewish terrorism by the neoleft.

    The next option of the social democrats of Israel was to throw massive money into the West Bank infrastucture, creating business, university and higher education.

    Be nice to the terrorists, they will be nice to us was the idea here!

    Arafat and co laughed in their face. But that money led to a huge influx of Arabs from surrounding states, especially from Jordan.

    These are facts not much mentioned by the neo left

    Facts for you lot on Slugger to consider!

  • Jo

    Thank you, Felix.

    I do not believe in jumping to dramatic action on the basis or either pontification sabre rattling or rhetoric. If I was a political leader, I would have my intelligence sources assess the genuine capabilities of another leader to do what he or she tyhreatens. In the absence of genuine information to back up the threats to kick ass, I would just smile and wave.

  • felix quigley

    And thank you for your polite reply Jo

    But it is obviously not adequate. I do not place you by a long stretch in the same camp as the neoleft. By and large with you there is no hatred of Israel.

    I would characterise my political differences with you under two headings

    1. I think you may be a pacifist. Unfortunately that is not the kind of world in which we live.

    On this sole issue I am motivated by the issue of antisemitism. As an Irishman, not a Jew, I have been motivated by reading and learning of the Holocaust.

    Then further I learned that a leading role was played by a Palestinian Arab, Hajj Amin el Husseini, but Hajj Amin was not any ordinary Arab. He was the leading Palestinian from 1920 up to 1948. The PLO grew out of the Arab Higher Committee which he formed and led.

    Reading about this in http://www.tenc.net made me make some connections.

    Then I learned that his role had been hidden by the neoleft over many decades and since I was part of the Left that really started to make connections in my knowledge.

    As a small test on this. Go to the Blanket (Mick Hall has again disappeared) and key in Hajj Amin in their search and see what comes up. Nothing of course. The leading Palestinian ever not mentioned ever by the leading advocate of the Palestinian movement in Ireland.

    Little things like that makes me feel that something smells in the land of the neoleft.

    I broke with this neoleft over this Palestine issue.

    2. The second difference is that while you may be a friend of Israel in some ways you do overestimate its power and strength.

    Paul Johnson in his marvellous book History of the Jews has an amazing paragraph which basically points out that Israel came into being because of a very small window of opportunity, really of a few months duration. Reading that maybe can explain its vulnerability today.

    Basically Johnson points out that in 1948 early in that year Stalin had executed a leading Jew and internally his antisemitic period had begun.

    Johnson contends that this did not reach internationally for about a year.

    This is vital. First to accept Israel legally was Russia.

    The war launched in June 48 by the Arab states on the nascent Israel was nearly disaster for Israel.

    The might of Arabia was thrown at the Jews. Young lads and men from the death camps were kitted out poorly and sent into battle.

    The significant turning point was arms from Czechoslovakia under the direction of Stalin in late 1948. That was the turning point and a very lucky one.

    By 1949 Stalin had turned completely against Israel and antisemitism ran deep in the Soviets from then on.

    The other point about this window that Johnson brings out concerns America. Rossevelt had after the war turned from an ally of the Jews into something of an antisemite. He had come more and more under the control of the pro Arab pro oil lobby of the State Department. This is well documented.

    If he had not died and Truman taken over once again no successful vote in the UN to create the two states and thus no Israel.

    The Arab Palestinians never did want a state, they wanted the Jewish presence ended. That is why they rejected that UN resolution and went to war.

    I hope this material Jo has not bored you. To me it is another factor in understanding how vulnerable Israel actually is.

    Finally on this I am amazed at the number of people in Ireland who are not aware of simple things like the geographical realities of the situation. When told Israel is the size of Wales they are genuinely surprised.

    You see Jo there has been a lot of propaganda in Ireland, and all from one side, the Palestinian side.

    How that works readers could do worse than consult the Muhammad el Dura France 2 issue. More of that at another time.

    The Arabs and Islamists are no slouches on propaganda. The Israelis I find absolutely hopeless, but that is my personal opinion. The main feature about Israelis and Jews that I have noted is their divided and diverse views of every issue. No propaganda is NOT their forte.

    Finally I must reply to Bill re http://www.tenc.net. If you think of the definition of “conspiracy” then nothing could be further from it that tenc. There is NO site more heavily sourced than it. It does not ask you to take anything on trust. It says check it for yourself and here are the sources. Bill Bosnia for another day but that METHOD is the opposite of conspiracy.

  • Mickhall

    The real politik side of my brain whispers maybe Sadam had his uses, keeping the mullahs bottled up.

    Posted by ch in texas.

    Wake up and smell the coffee ah? instead of blundering in as your President did, with patience there was every chance of a [more] orderly transfer of power from Saddam’s regime. But no, the fool in the White House went in, with the neo-cons whispering in his ear ,telling him the Iraqi people will line the streets of Baghdad waving US flags in welcome of their new masters. Whilst not a direct historical comparison, Bush only had to ask his dad about the dangers of occupying a country by force of arms, as Bush senior had had direct historical experience of Germany. Japan, Vietnam and gulf war one..

    As to Iran? It is doubtful if the current Iranian president would even be in power if Pres Bush had not invaded Iraq and made such a mess of the occupation. Pres Mahmoud Ahmadinejad came from nowhere and his candidature was clearly a bit of saber rattling by the Mullah’s in Tehran, a message to their enemies that if you fail to deal with us there are other more militant people in the wings. I doubt for a minute they thought he would defeat former President Mr Rafsanjani in the actual election. That he did goes to show the amount of discontent within the country with the religious establishment. The fact that Ahmadinejad has failed three times to get his nomination for Minister of oil through Parliament proves this point. You folk in the USA have got to get your heads around the fact Iran is not an Arab country and like Turkey its people are not over keen on the Arabs, the more so after the Iraq-Iran war. What is needed today with Iran is diplomacy and honey not the threat of nuclear annihilation.

    That a number of posters to this thread seem to believe using US armed force is the only way these problems [Iraq, Israel, Iran] can be solved, highlights the major damage to international relations the neo-cons have achieved in placing State violence to the fore of international relations, especially in the middle east. This has been a disaster for the region as it was always going to end in tears as these people had simply not done their home work. An example of this failure is demonstrated by the fact that at the end of WW2, the allies had over one million troops plus what became the Marshal plan to occupy Germany. In comparison the US army in Iraq has averaged 138,0000 at any one time. With this low number of troops it is an impossibility to get on top of the insurgents. Yet still it seems rational US citizens are prepared to give these neo-cons the time of day.

    Finally, I would love to have a proper debate with Felix, as he is knowledgeable and passionate on the subject of Israel, which is a subject I too have an interest in. But it is impossible for these reasons. Firstly when one differs from his way of thinking, he simply reverts to name calling, if one criticizes the Israeli government one according to him detests the State of Israel, or is a Jew hater, if one happens to be Jewish, that is no problem for Felix as one suddenly becomes a self hater, whatever that may be. One has to have a level of respect for ones opponent if one is to engage in public debate, otherwise it simply sinks to the gutter.

    Regards to all.

  • Jo

    Well he was polite to me there above, Mick.

    My smiley face hath charms to sooth the passionate Felix 🙂 Felix I am less a pacifist than I am pacific – acquaintance with and stufy of conflict has aways led to me back to the fundamental question “why?”

    And the answer is, unfortunately, too often because MEN preferred to exercise power and force rather than fully explore the alternatives.

  • Dread Cthulhu

    Mickhall: “As to Iran? It is doubtful if the current Iranian president would even be in power if Pres Bush had not invaded Iraq and made such a mess of the occupation. Pres Mahmoud Ahmadinejad came from nowhere and his candidature was clearly a bit of saber rattling by the Mullah’s in Tehran, a message to their enemies that if you fail to deal with us there are other more militant people in the wings. I doubt for a minute they thought he would defeat former President Mr Rafsanjani in the actual election.”

    Actually, the Iranians have been trending more and more anti-reform for two decades now. Throw in the fact that Ahmadinejad did what every promising underdog politican does to get elected — promised largesse from the public purse — and had the support of the council of clerics that “guide” Iran and maintain its ideological purity, its not that great a suprise.

    Mickhall: “That a number of posters to this thread seem to believe using US armed force is the only way these problems [Iraq, Israel, Iran] can be solved, highlights the major damage to international relations the neo-cons have achieved in placing State violence to the fore of international relations, especially in the middle east.”

    Not at all — there does, however, need to be a willingness to go beyond words, should matters come to a head. As a counter example, the European ideal of “all talk, no action,” epitomized by Munich in 1938, has its own flaws as far as being a method of dealing with international relations. As for the use of force as a tool on internation relations, I would suggest that it always has to be in the toolbox, or else we will end up with more North Koreas — nations that will smile and nod at whatever “talk talk” the rest of the world directs at them and, while jaw-jacking, continue doing whatever they’d care to, secure in the knowledge that there is a lack of will to back those words with *any* sort of deeds.

  • Dread Cthulhu

    Jo: “Given my poor spelling and grammar, I feel I am a totally inadequate foil for your vastle (sic) superior intellect, not to mention pendantry (sic) and any fruitful enegagement (sic) with you would appear to be waste of my time.

    In other words, you have no answers to the questions posited.

    Jo: “While I’m flattered to be the subject of your dissection, your mocking approach is not, I would sugges (sic), a respectful way of engaging in debate. The answers to all of your questions can I am sure be addressed through a quick Google – if you were genuinely interested in views other than your own, which I am afraid, I don’t believe you are. Ciao..time will tell who is right and who is wrong.”

    Neither are drive-by slurs and talking to someone down to someone in pidgen English, Jo. You have clearly taken the tack that facts that you don’t like and questions that challenge your beliefs could only possibly come from “wild eyed Christian Fundamentalists who lust after Armageddon.” As in many areas of life, you get what you give. Physician, heal thyself.

  • ch in texas

    Mickhall, You selectively quote me out of context. I said:”The real politik side of my brain whispers maybe Sadam had his uses, keeping the mullahs bottled up. What’s a few dead babies in Hallabja? But no, let freedom ring, and maybe jack Straw can handle Iran.”

    HERR One Ball Paperhanger had his uses too, I suppose, keeping Stalin occupied, but there comes a point where enough’s enough. We really don’t want to get into the back and forth of why we’re there I presume, but let’s talk about this Texan waking up and smelling the coffee.

    America never goes to war lightly. We debate the shit outa it. My family is all over the board with opinions. I fly the flag on the house, and my wife has a peace sign in the yard. I want peace too, but a peace where Kurdish babies aren’t gassed in their mothers arms. A peace where we’re safe in our cities and getting on a plane. A peace where I can vacation in Bali or get on a double-decker in London. But that peace doesn’t exist, and didn’t exist before the war.

    I’m sure all of us do want peace, but how to get it. Two camps here. Beg for it or fight for it. Daniel Pearl begged for it. Did he get it? Oh, he got it all right. I only wish he still had his head to smell the coffee with.

    As to Iran. Bad sitch there. America can’t keep the bomb away from them b/c we have no street cred left to do it with. Y’all won’t help us militarily (like you could) so go ahead and talk. Maybe you can do something. I’m not within their range like you. However, if the Iranian street doesn’t overthrow the mullas in time and the do go nuke, I’d get myself some strong sun glasses.

    Happy Thanksgiving, Y’all!

  • Mickhall

    texas,

    A happy thanks giving to you, what I do not understand is why you feel invading other peoples countries can in any way play a constructive role in fighting terrorism. It is as if you have not learn’t a dam thing from the fact that all it took to bring the twin towers down was nineteen determined men armed with stanley-knifes [box-cutters] With all the military resources of the USA and after invading Afghanistan you are still no nearer to capturing bin Laden. Talk about all fur coats and no draws.

    You may scoff about Europeans and talk, but you in the USA have not had the direct experience of war and occupation that most European nations have, especially in the 20th Century. If you had you would not have flapped and struck out all over the place as you did after 9/11. Most Europeans tend to believe when Churchill said jaw jaw is better than war war, the man had a point. We are well aware that modern war fare is not a precise science and its main victims are non combatants. If you wish to encourage and thus increase the number of islamic terrorists, carry on as you are, but if your serious about combatting it, then look at its root cause. Forget the cod philosophy of a CALIPHATE that the likes of bin Laden spout and address the Arab street, not with bombs but hope for their future and also stop propping up Arab satraps.

    By the way, one of the reasons Saddam gassed the Kurds was because he felt he had a green light from the US to do so, the same was true over Kuwait. [im not saying he actually did have a green light, just he thought he did due to past talks he had had with US officials]

    On ‘rogue’ States like north Korea, Syria, and even Iran, in reality these states are not a real threat to any other state, There leaderships are either so inadequate or corrupt that its only real victims are those poor souls they governs or I should say misgovern as the economies of all of these nations are in a dire state, which is another reason why they pose no real threat. Human nature being what it is, the only thing which will continue to prop us these satraps is for the USA to carry on saber rattling or worse invade.

    Saddam was a past master in provoking foreigners and thus creating a common enemy for his people to hate. It seems the current Iranian President has learnt this lesson as too have George W Bush and Tony Blair, who are his willing students on this matter.

    On Anti Americanism, I feel this is totally misunderstood by most US citizens, in my experience few European, whether of the left or right hate Americans[from the USA] this is certainly true of my self, indeed the reverse is the case. What we do despise is the current US administration. Which in truth I find absolutely contemptible and I find it difficult to understand how a generous and welcoming people could elect such a bunch of charlatans, cheats and war mongers. Still, I suppose that is democracy so if it is the will of the people so be it. I only hope when Egypt for example finally gets democracy you will be as generous when they elect the muslim brotherhood.

    happy days 😉

    PS say hello to the wife, she seems quite a gal.

  • ch in texas

    Mickhall, You give me a lot to contemplate, and I feel my poor powers to persuade are not up to the task.

    “what I do not understand is why you feel invading other peoples countries can in any way play a constructive role in fighting terrorism.”

    Does June 6, 1944 ring a bell? Your welcome. Let’s stick with WWII for a moment. Rightly or wrongly, Americans can’t understand for the life of us how we can lose a quarter million men defending Europe, then in our time of need, perfidious France stabs us in the back in the Security Council. We understand a lot of you don’t like our gov., Hell, 1/2 of my house and 1/2 of the country doesn’t either. But you have no idea what 9/11 did to the psyche of America. I guess you’re right. We have no experiance with the Hun coming over the border once a generation.
    They got the god-damned Pentagon for Christ sake! The Statue of Liberty was shrouded in smoke containing human debris. We could have bombed the M.E. out of existance if we were the SOB’s some make us out to be.

    Whew….!!!! I feel a little better now. What were you saying? Invading other people’s countries. If you think Iraq belonged to Saddam and 20 % sunni pop. you’re right. Let’s give it back. If you think, as I do it belongs to all, then we’re liberating the other 80%. In a war against facists, one’s as good as another.

    Iran: It’s Europes turn. Best of luck.

    “I only hope when Egypt for example finally gets democracy you will be as generous when they elect the muslim brotherhood.”

    This is very interesting, Mickhall. I hope the brotherhood gets elected. I pray they do. Because then they will have to stand and deliver for their people, and when thy don’t, they’ll have to answer to their own for it.

    I appreciate your good wishes.

    Jo: Be nice to felix, his post was short. That talk about me havin’ a wife, well don’t believe that luv. 🙂

  • felix quigley

    CH in IexaS. thanks for your support but quite definitely I did not make the posting on number 20 above to which Jo replied in such a strange manner. Those words were part of a long post made ages ago. Some mysterious being has went to the trouble of cutting and pasting and using my email address etc to post no 20. Quite amazing.

    But please Jo we are talking about really serious issues. Your response was absolutely peculiar. Did YOU write it. Lets move on anyhow as I have no time for that sort of thing and I want to develop my own and others political positions…

    I find Mick Hall’s position confused and confusing.

    I will not answer point by point but

    1. Mick says he would like to debate with me but then cops out of that. He is afraid I might call him a Jew hater. So he refuses to debate.

    Accusations are easy. State where I did that ie call you a Jew hater..Yet there is plenty of Jew hatred in this world. Antisemitism did not end when the Alñlied soldiers walked though the gates of the camps in 1945. I have referred to Paul Johnson who referred to the hateful antisemitism churned out of the Soviet Union and directed against Israel in the sixties especially.

    However Mick does cover clearly for the antisemitism and Jew hatred which is found inside the Arab and Muslim masses and especially political leaders. Can Mick tell us where he has written about this, a rather simple question I would think.

    On the same tack Mick does not answer to my charge that the neoLeft and Mick have never written a word about the most important Palestinian leader ever, the Nazi criminal Hajj Amin el Husseini. Out of his work grew the PLO quite directly (see http://www.tenc.net)

    I made about 20 oter points. Mick refuses to answer.

    2. Micks position is exemplified when he says that Saddam got the green light from Bush to bomb the Kurds. Unlikely. Except that Bush made promises to the Kurds and Shia in the south that if they rose up against the dictator they would not be alone. He reneged.

    Yet it was still Saddam who did gas the Kurds. Each individual is responsible and Saddam is so.

    3. Mick is not real about Iraq in this sense. I do not think that the majority of Iraqi people want a return to Saddam. I am sure they are very glad he is gone. The danger to the Iraqi people as I see it is that a Sharia form of rule will be imposed eventually on a large part of the country.

    4. Mick says nothing about Islamofascism. He does not use the word and he seems to at any rate dismiss the Iranian leader’s call to wipe Israel off the map. He says nothing about Islamofascism having the nuclear bomb.

    The Blanket is silent, so is Mick.

    This is not surprising because the neoleft has actually lined up alongside Islamofascism, note the alliances between Ken Livingstone and Islamofascist spokemen.

    Let me take this sentence above from Mick and look at it:

    “You folk in the USA have got to get your heads around the fact Iran is not an Arab country and like Turkey its people are not over keen on the Arabs, the more so after the Iraq-Iran war. What is needed today with Iran is diplomacy and honey not the threat of nuclear annihilation.”

    It seems reasonable to assume

    1. US people probably know Iran is not Arab

    2. They probably are aware of the Iran Iraq war and that there are also wars, many and often, between Arabs as well

    The problem though is that Iran is really an Islamofascist state which supports Islamofascism throughout the world. Part of this is Jew Hatred.

    It may not be Arab but it does support in money and arms Islamofascist Arab terrorist groups, I only have to mention Hisbullah and Hamas.

    No what is needed in opposition to Mick is not “honey” to Iran but a war to expose its role as a leader of Islamofascism. Similarly the Islamofascism of the state of Saudi Arabia, to which Bush and the James Baker Institute maintains so many ties.

    Finally on the site which he writes for, The Blanket, Mick could explain why he or its writers have hidden the fascist history of the Arab Palestinian leadership (especially Hajj Amin). Abbas the Holocaust denier is feted by Bush and Rice but for his Holocaust denial in Germany today he would be in jail.

  • Jo

    Felix

    I did not make that no 21 post. I am surprised that it has survived moderation. There are clearly people who are out to get me here.

  • ch in texas

    Jo, I knew my sweet JoJo didn’t talk like that! Seems to be skullduggery about. I’m suprised CFJ’s post about you survived. See, they’re just not gentlemen.

  • Jo

    ch:

    Indeed, how true. Unlike you, of course. 😉

  • felix quigley

    After that little hiccup from the phantom poster let me return to the fray.

    Mick is afraid that I will label him as an antisemite or Jew hater and on that basis refuses to join in the debate.

    Let me put it like this. Israel is approximately the size of Wales. As a sovereign state it is very tiny.

    Israel is outnumbered by Arabs by about 50 to 1 but this is not counting Muslim states who are if not all at least many very hostile to Israel’s existence.

    I could go on in this vein pointing out the wars that Israel was forced to fight. I have dealt with the first, the 1947-9 war, also called by Jews the War of Independence, I think by Arabs the Disaster.

    In that war young boys from the death camps poorly equipped were sent into battle.

    Inside Israel a large population of Israeli Arabs over a million strong and all hostile to the state of Israel. Faced on the outside by an enemy which is determined to end Israel.

    A large portion of Israelis who believe firmly that the problems that Israel faces is caused by an adherence to Judaism. Who believe Israelis should become modern and secular. This same constituency think that an offer of sovereignty to the Palestinian Arabs will mean that they will begin to be nice to Israel.

    The latter views are held very strongly by the Republican and Democratic governments of the US. Also by the EU but even more sympathetic to the Palestinians.

    Israel is not only very small it is also stretched out in a very long stripe, its waist about 10 miles.

    Sharon has handed Gaza across for nothing. Just one result of this will be the bisecting of this stripe by a Palestinian highway.

    Al Qaeda is in the Sinai in some force. The Gaza Egypt crossing is supervised only by Palestinian soldiers. Abbas has not disarmed Hamas or Al Aqsa but inducted them into the PA army. So the Gaza crossing will be patrolled by THEM to all intents and purposes.

    I just wonder when the issue of Israel Palestine is raised on our news media is it raised inside that kind of context.

    Now just suppose for a moment that it is the intention of the Palestinians as a front for the Arabs to destroy Israel, this little satan in their midst. That the Palestinian state will NOT lessen that desire but fuel it. What then. And what then for our modern Left who have been so totally anti-Israel!!!

  • ch in texas

    FQ, Hello from the heart of the Great Satan! I think you underestimate the support for the State of Israel in Congress and the country at large. Unlike Europe, we have not forgotten the Holocost, the Shoah. We have a large holocost museum on the National Mall in Washington D.C.

    And it has nothing to do with the crap about Jesus returning to Jerusleum. We just don’t like big guys picking on little guys.

    We support the 2 state solution, with Israel having defensible borders.

    That being said, Jewish settlements in Gaza was insane. Small outposts guarded by the IDF in the midst of 1 million palestians. It was given to them and they tore it up. Fine. Live there in the rubble. Doesn’t bode well for the west bank.

    Abbas can’t contain Hamas, Hezbollah, or anyone else. They dance to the tune of their masters in Iran, the terrorist country par excellance. Europe wants to talk them outa nukes. Fine. They’re all yours. Na gonna happen, though. The IAEA won’t even refer them to the Security Council, (not that that would do anything.)

    Cheers!

  • Fwelix quigley

    CH in Texas

    There is terrific support for Israel in America especially from evangelical Christians who now face an Islamicised Bethlehem but do you not see any dangers to Israel from say Rice forcing through the opening of borders into Gaza through which terrorists including Al Qaeda will/have poured.

    I sense your heart is with Israel. But how are American interests and oil tied together with say the Saudis.

    Furthermore…Where is the real insanity. Is it not in the neoleft like Mick Hall who takes the side of the Palestinians who would not allow a Jewish presence to exist in Gaza.

    These Jews took over sand dunes and turned their area into a productive place. They also created employment for many Arabs. They developed a revolutionary way of growing bug free lettuce. They had hopes of living alongside Arabs. Not insane. But perhaps not fully aware of the level of Jew hatred against them.

    Why do you think these borders are defensible.

    You have seen the crossing between Egypt and gaza. I saw it on last nights news. I saw Palestinian personnel searching some bags. But these personnel are now out of the ranks of Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Al Aqsa. A strange form of defence that Ms Rice is foisting onto Israel.

    A simple question for Americans. After 9-11, and I share your horror and hatred for the Islamofascists, why did America not deal with Saudi Arabia, from where the hijackers all came.

    Can you in this regard look into the James Baker Institute and its links to both Bush and Rice. That is the James Baker of F… the Jews notoriety.

    On a slightly separate tack I think many Jews and Israelis are a little inward looking. They should examine the record of Arab toleration of minorites, especially the following:

    The Copts of Egypt

    The Berbers of Algeria who had played a full and proud role in opposing the French

    The Christians in Iraq

    The Kurds whom Saddam gassed

    But above all Jews should cast their eyes down to Sudan, ref the Black Christians of the south and the Muslims (but black) of Darfur.

    The Arabs of Sudan have created a genocide there, estimated 2 million souls lost.

    So why should any Jew or Israeli think the Arabs will tolerate a sovereign state (Jewish) right slap bang in the middle of them.

    But THAT is the illusion that your leaders along with the EU are promoting.

    I am sorry to disagree with you, the second Palestinian state (the first being Jordan) and the 23rd Arab state will not solve a single thing. The Arabs do see it as a STEP towards the destruction of Israel.

    Disagreement among friends is however never a problem. Difference is good.

  • ch in texas

    Felix Quigley, Your are right, my friend, when you say my heart is with Israel. I get a little balled up in the practicalities of trying to find a solution to this unholy mess.

    I wish the palist. would work with Israel to better their own lives, ie veg farming. Instead, they are given millions of dollars worth of farming infastructure, which they then destroy.

    I wish the terrorist, oh i’m sorry, nobel peace price winner arafat, would have accepted peace with olso, instead of starting intifada.

    You’re right that Rice gave a bit too much with the unsupervised gaza border crossing. PA searching bags is a joke.

    When our soldiers went to fight and die protecting Saudia, they had to leave Bibles at home. We have no illusions about the Saudis, but they have the oil consuming western world by the nuts. But we sure don’t like’em.

    Maybe the Eu has worn the US down on the issue. We do all that we can to protect the tiny state of Israel, just as the EU runs around trying to UNprotect them. It’s some wierd attempt to stick it to American hegemony.

    Quick story. A jewish customer came into my pharmacy with a young Israeli right off the plane. Had itchy eyes or something. I fixed’em up, and asked them to translate for me. I told the young man not to worry, he was amongst friends here. We here support the Jewish people and the state of Israel. They were very thankful that a Christian would take the time and have that feeling.

    I have lots of wishes for Israel, but if wishes were horses then dreamers could ride. Keep up the the good fight, Felix.

  • 6countyprod

    I’ve enjoyed reading the many thoughtful comments on this thread, especially Felix’s.

    Today’s Telegraph has a great piece on Sharon and Israel by Charles Moore. Recommended reading.

  • ch in texas

    6countyprod, Thanks for the link to the excellent piece. Part of the last paragraph speaks directly to the European reader:

    “All I want to ask my fellow Europeans is this: are you happy to help direct the world’s fury at the only country in the Middle East whose civilisation even remotely resembles yours? And are you sure that the fate of Israel has no bearing on your own? In Iran, the new President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad makes the link. The battle over Palestine, he says, is “the prelude of the battle of Islam with the world of arrogance”, the world of the West. He is busy building his country’s nuclear bomb.”

    He hits the nail on the head. However many Westerners, some Americans included, hate their own countries as much as they hate Israel. The Islamists have no such problems. Their worldview, so they think, comes straight from the mind of Allah, via His Prophet, through the Holy Qu’ran. To oppose them is to oppose God Himself.

  • felix quigley

    Thanks

    Gaza has been a total disaster. As I speak terrorists are importing into Gaza and then into Judea and Samaria huge and powerful rocket launchers and rockets, capable of bringing down airliners using Ben Gurion airport. Is that feasible… Anything is feasible after 9-11.

    Abu Omri and his people promised Gaza would bring peace. Now liars that they are they deny that. Lucky then we have found out their lies.

    The following is a piece of propaganda which emanates from the e-mail facility of the Israeli Embassy in Dublin. To use the metaphor of Nevil Chamberlain waving his useless piece of paper after returning from negotiations with Hitler the Israeli Embassy, mouthpiece of Abu Omri Sharon, also promises peace in our time. The E-mail (of August 5, 2005) reads as follows:

    “Disengagement – the Price For Peace
    Introduction
    Establishing peace is a fundamental goal of Jewish tradition and the declared policy of the State of Israel. Israel has long sought peace with its Arab neighbors and particularly with the Palestinians. The great challenge in making peace is that it is a process that hopefully does not end just with the cessation of hostilities between former enemies, but with the beginning of a new relationship of coexistence. Israel’s ultimate goal is to establish good neighborly relations with a Palestinian state.
    Against the background of more than four years of terrorist bloodshed, Israel has initiated its Disengagement Plan in the Gaza Strip and northern Samaria, both to enhance its security and to put the peace process with the Palestinians back in motion. For it to have a chance to work, the plan requires a considerable sacrifice on the part of some 1,700 settlers and their families, or about 8,000 people who must leave the homes and livelihoods they have built over the course of several decades. “

    So, and well, we shall see!

    And that is the real problem. It is the GOI itself here through its Dublin mouthpiece which was spreading in August illusions that peace with the Palerstinian terrorists, of whom Abbas NOT HAMAS is the no 1 terrorist. Arafat in Seville Row!

    We shall see what sort of peace issues from this Palestinian movement and second Palestinian state (the first one being of course Jordan) and 23rd Arab state. I hope at least some Slugger readers will be watching too.

    I will watch with interest whether the Israeli public will kick into oblivion Abu Omri Sharon where he will exist in a very special location reserved for the very worst of Jewish traitors. If they do that some kind of runt Israeli state may survive but not much more than that. I am afraid that I have learned that one cannot be too pessimistic in these cases concerning antisemitism in its modern form.

    As the Palestinians step up their terror against Israel on all fronts I will watch with interest the support given them by the Irish neoleft and of course our very own Mick Hall. It must be remembered (heavy irony here) Mick is not anti-Israel in any way.

    I will also be watching the fumbling Europeans with their hocus pocus Mediterranean meetings as they disarm Iran of the Nuclear bomb, by talking…and talking…and talking. If you still continue to believe that I am told that some turkeys still think about longevity.

    And I will watch if our isolationist American friend from Texas is right when he warned the Europeans to buy strong sunglasses. The Jews usually get it in the neck first, but he should remember that if we in Europe fry then it follows that the Atlantic will be no barrier to radioactivity and other nasties. He should also have a better look at growth of Islamofascism in the Land of the Brave as well. Counterpunch you know where Mick and folks get their quotes from.

    So all of you who line uip to support the Palestinian state, make sure you all make it to Dublin for the wake, run by who else the Israeli Embassy there. Abu Omri’s friends at the Embassy will give you a big feast to remember the going down of Israel. Enjoy the wake because it will be your funeral too. Islamofascism will not stop at Israel. The Jews have always been the first to suffer but it never stopped at them.

    The end will have come for that little experiment started in 1948. The Irish neoleft will be so proud for the part they played. It will be free drinks all round in Mike, Carrie and Anthony’s local. Our old mate Danny Morrison will drop by. A great time will be had.

    Have a peaceful Christmas folks.

  • ch in texas

    Felix Quigley, You don’t sound ourself my friend. The phantom again? Never mind.

    The comments that I made about Iran were not about isolationism as much as about dispair. After seeing the turmoil that the left caused about freeing the Iraqi people from a blood thristy tyrant, I dispair that anything of substance can be achieved with Iran. I only await the ghost of chaimberlain to appear with his “peace in our time” paper.

    America has always stood with our allies on the continent and in your islands in defending freedom. But i am reminded of Patton’s quip that he’d rather have a German division in front of him than a French division behind him. So do your European “jaw jaw” with the mullahs if you must.
    (That was obviously not directed at you Felix).

    In conclusion Felix, let not your heart be troubled. America is always here to join the battles that are to come with all freedom loving peoples.