Apropos Mike's last post on Libyan leader Muammar Qadhafi I was wondering...could the ever weird and spooky Qadhafi have used a Jedi Mind trick on the Americans?
|
| Obi-Wan Kenobi using the Jedi mind trick to convince Stormtroopers that "These aren't the droids you're looking for." | Col Muammar al Qadhafi using the Jedi mind trick to convince the Americans that "We are no longer on the dark side." |
"You will not notice our nuclear reactors. You will believe that they have disappeared"
Haha...hillarious.
Used to be a Star Wars fan :)
Posted by: Anti-UN | May 21, 2006 at 19:05
Ha ha ha! Actually, not funny. The world should realize that just because something is in Holywood doesn't mean that it does not have some truth to it. -Zoe
Posted by: Zoe Strickman | May 22, 2006 at 07:49
Interestingly I just watched the news at 10 on SABC 3, where they were discussing the Palestinian crisis/'civil war.' A few points:
The expert (Virginia Tilley) said she was worried about the future of democracy in 'Palestine'. What democracy may I ask? And what is 'Palestine'? No area has been declared 'Palestine" and as a viable news agency it is factually incorrect.
Mz Tilley also spoke about the 'pressure cooker' of Gaza and how people are coming upon desperate times - mainly the fault of the Israelis who shut them in. She neglected to mention that the reason the crossings are clossed is for security reasons - to stop terrorists entering Israel. How many times have we heard about Palestinians trying to cross to detonate bombs or set up terrorist cells? She also didn't mention how the Palestinians reeive the most aid per capita in the world (thanks Steve) and have wasted many an opportunity to put in place a economic infrostructure. The fact that they rely on Israel for employment and finance just goes to show that they are incapable of self-sufficiency, yet they insist on independance. What kind of independance is this?
Though she did make some good points - such as the corruption and underhandedness of Abbas. The man is basically trying to steal power and money for himself and Fatah and constantly undermining Hamas. Its ridiculous that he is regarded as one of the 'honest' Palestinian politicians. Is there such a thing? She also spoke well on the faction fighting and the desperation of the people in general. You have to feel sorry for them - no leadership, no financial stability, corruption galore and poverty.
Its a sad situation but at least they can't blame Israel for it (though I'm sure they will and have tried to)!
Posted by: Nili Scham | May 22, 2006 at 22:41
Nili, I think you very brave to subject yourself to SABC 3 news. Virginia Tilley is far from a neutral Middle East observer. Steve, once accurately referred to her as arch enemy of Israel. She is one of the greatest advocates in South Africa of a 1 state solution.
The situation in the PA is terrible. It is a real conundrum for everyone who cares about a genuine peace for both peoples. On the one hand can not fund Hamas on the other cant let the Palestinians starve. That would imply that the only alternative would be that Israel resumes full civil administration of the territories as was the case before Oslo. I can not support this either. Don’t believe it is in Israel’s or the Palestinian national interest for this to be the situation. So what to do?
Well I have been mulling over the idea of an international mandate for the PA similar to what happened in East Timor before independence. What you think?
Posted by: mike | May 23, 2006 at 11:46
One fundamental thing that has been bothering me is why Abbas is still in such a position of power when Hamas democratically won the elections. Why are Abbas's officials still trying to run the Palestinians? I think that this is why there is this faction fighting. Neither the international community or, especially, the Fatah group have allowed Hamas to take control. My short term solution would be to let Hamas run the story for a while, give them a chance. Give them what the people voted for - and the only people that can give that to them is themselves (Abbas). The unfortunate fact that they don't recognise Israel or condemn violence, doesn't mean that they can't control their internal politics. True, they wouldn't be able to deal with Israel - but that is not happening anyway at this time.
Bringing in international mandate, I feel, will only allow further excuses. The Palestinians need to start taking care of themselves and governing themselves (it started with democratic elections and pretty much stalled after that). Yet then again they are constantly replying on international aid and so a mandate would be understandable - its tricky because nobody is stepping up to lead the Palestinians and to be responsible for their decisions.
Posted by: Nili Scham | May 23, 2006 at 15:04
As Mike has pointed out, Tilley is on the irrational and radical fringe. She is so narcissistic, always ensuring that she gets onto various talk panels and tv shows etc.
Here's an IAS search for her.
I dont think that they are really insisting on independence. They are running away from the idea of statehood (though it is still their battlecry.)
I think growing numbers today realise what they can achieve via the single state solution as described so regularly by Mz Tilley. That is the danger. And so I also support the idea of them gaining independence.
As for your points on Abbas - I agree. It irritates me to constantly read in our papers about how Israel and the US are not accepting their election results when the truth is that it is Fatah who are really not accepting the results.
Mike, elaborate on the intl mandate idea...
Posted by: Steve | May 23, 2006 at 15:33
Good point Steve! I think that nowadays every realist (no offense to anyone) sees that only a 2 state solutions can work and I think that both the Israelis and Palstinians are trying to achieve this. Both know it is their best interest! Though off course Islamist terrorists will continue trying to wipe Israel off the face of the map. The Palestinians have in a sense been given 'independence' in Gaza and just look at what is going on! Can you elaborate on what you mean in terms on them not insisting on independance and moving away from statehood?
Posted by: Nili Scham | May 23, 2006 at 15:58
Today there is a real threat that the Palestinian political body is withdrawing from the goal of establishing a Palestinian state.
Apart from its effectiveness as a battlecry there is little enthusiasm for this idea. The concessions that they will have to make are valued more than the establishment of a state.
The Palestinians will accept de facto independence and territory – but they will not claim sovereignty because they dont want to end the conflict. They will always claim that they are occupied.
The intellectual haters like Tilley tealise that they can achieve by law and demographics what Hamas has tried to achieve by terror. The complete destruction of the Jewish state (by demographic submersion).
Many want to be included in Israel. Many want Israel to expand its borders to incorporate the west bank. They want to be treated like the Israeli Arabs - i.e. citizenship, ability to form a political party and to vote.
The numbers of Muslims will then almost equal the number of Jews. A Palestinian could then become PM of Israel through a legal democratic process.
Israel has no negotiating partner.
Of course, there are many Palestinians who do want statehood and do not wish for the destruction of Israel.
But Hamas and Fatah (IMO) both want a single state solution. (They dont openly admit this. But if the PA under Fatah really wanted a state then they would be close to celebrating their 6th year of independence.)
Posted by: Steve | May 23, 2006 at 16:24
I assume that you are then a fan of Olmert's desengagement plan:) You make a good point but do you really think that such a reality will come into existance - Its a very extreme case?
Posted by: Nili Scham | May 23, 2006 at 17:12
Guilty as charged :)
...
You mean the one state solution is an extreme case?
I dont think its that extreme a scenario when you consider the increasing support the idea is getting. However, Israel will never allow it so it is pointless debating it.
So what does Israel do?
Keep the territories and once and for all annex them?
Today the fear is not of a failure to incorporate the territories into Israel proper, the fear is of the demographic consequences of its success.
We need to be democratic, safe, Jewish, and have a high moral stance guaranteeing the human rights of all. I will support the ideas that can guarantee all 4 of those pillars.
Supporting disengagement (the Gaza model or Olmert's convergence plan which will be different to Gaza in that it will be a civillian and not a military withdrawal) is not an easy decision. It involves giving up dreams and claims.
Both Israelis and Palestinians need to make tough decisions, giving up on some dreams and claims.
Posted by: Steve | May 23, 2006 at 20:28
The issue is that there is no agreement on peace in exchange for the convergene plan. The Palestinians haven't said that they will co-operate in the least because of Israel converging the territories - it only proves that their terrorism has to same degree succeeded. So giving them up is a huge chance - giving away parts of Israel! Yet at the same time the Palestinians need a state (and as you said the demographic challenges to join Gaza and the West Bank will be immense.) If not for them, for our security! And yet at the same time the Kassam rocket have not stopped firing from Gaza since the withdrawal. This is the constant debate that has been raging and I'm sure that you are close to exhausting the topic so I won't bring out the rest of the arson :)
Posted by: Nili Scham | May 23, 2006 at 21:38
Oh and I was saying that the one state solution is the extreme case but as you said there is no point discussing it - we need to stay democratic and Jewish (firm pillars :) )
Posted by: Nili Scham | May 23, 2006 at 21:40
Nili, I agree with everything Steve has said. I also am a big Kadima fan. I would just like to add one point.
We need to change our mindset about Judea and Samaria’s political value. It is no longer an asset that can be traded for peace. Unfortunately for all the reasons Steve explained it is a political liability that we need to relinquish as soon as possible. We can not hold out indefinitely. If there is no Palestinian partner an alternative way of shedding the territories must be found.
Posted by: Mike | May 24, 2006 at 09:17
Olmert is destroying the two state solution anyway. By joining Maaleh Adumim to Jerusalem they are cutting off the capital of the Palestinian people from what would be their state. Not to mention all the land they are formally going to annex.
You all speak of Israel giving up "part of the land of Israel" but in fact Israel are formally annexing most of their settlements. They have already annexed east jerusalem. You all talk about an undivided Jerusalem when it fact it is very divided. I have been there. it is clear that there are two divided jerusalems. one jewish and one Palestinian. One that gets funding for development and one that doesnt. Most Jews don't step into the heart of East Jerusalem.
There can be no 2 state solution if east jerusalem is cut off from the Palestinian state. Not to mention all the water resources which Israel will unilaterally keep.
you steal 50% of the Palestinians land and then you talk about this unbelievable difficult concession that you giving up most of the West Bank (Judea and Samaria Bah!).
The Palestinians are the ones losing land and you say that they are not willing to make concessions?
As for those of you that think you can still have all of the West Bank - as if there arent any Palestinians there.
But given the open comfort with which most SA Jews had with Apartheid it isnt surprising that most of you dont even bat an eyelid when it comes to Greater Israel.
Posted by: AnniBus | May 24, 2006 at 09:37
Some books you should all read:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0520245989/counterpunchmaga/104-8042868-5108717
http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/
Posted by: AnniBus | May 24, 2006 at 10:23
Annib,
Joining Maaleh Adumim to Jerusalem does not prevent a 2 state solution. Many ppl cite it as an example of creating Bantustans. That is inaccurate. It would mean that you cant get from Ramallah to Bethlehem in a straight line, you would have to travel around maaleh. But that doesnt divide the WB. Its often the place that the straight line route cant be used to get from A to B.
Likewise, entry to EJerusalem will still be available. Jerusalem will not be cut off. Its eastern side will be, but it will still be accessible from the north and south.
No-one is taking 50% of the land. The current route takes up at most 8% and the final figure will be around 6%.
Most of your points seem a little bit hysterical and devoid of any supporting factual evidence. But thats symptomatic of reading Finkelstein.
Posted by: Steve | May 24, 2006 at 11:43
This ‘joining Maaleh Adumim to Jerusalem will prevent a 2 state solution’ is the latest Palestinian propaganda. Well done to Steve for so concisely debunking it. I myself have been to Maaleh Adumim and am happy to testify that it does not divide the West bank in 2. AnniBus have you ever bothered to check a map.
Also Israel maybe willing in a final status deal to land swaps for the 6-8% of land that the major population centres in the West Bank occupies.
Annibus, you make a good point about Jerusalem. There is a distinctive difference between east and west. Some compromise will have to be found in a final status negotiation on this issue. At Camp David Israel accepted Palestinian sovereignty over Arab parts of Jerusalem.
Finally I take great offence to your smear against SA Jews. Many Jews were at the forefront of the liberation struggle. Desmond Tutu has publicly acknowledged that of all white groups Jews played a disproportionate rule in fighting Apartheid. In the new South Africa Jews continue to punch above their weight in helping economic development and social upliftment.
Posted by: Mike | May 24, 2006 at 12:33
What can you expect from someone who links to electronic Intifada , a site supporting mass murder of Israeli women and children , and who reccomends books by Stalist terror-supporter Finkelstein
Posted by: Gary | May 24, 2006 at 18:27
Oh yes , and he/she/it links to the terror-supporting piece of trash counterpunch
A real piece of work , this one.
Posted by: Gary | May 24, 2006 at 18:28