We have been seeing a surge of activity from pro-Zionist elements recently - and again. The usual routine, ie., demonise a certain person and state with misrepresentations, distortions and outright lies. The same tactics are used to defend against charges of Israel's crimes.
A retiring Israeli prime minister has fired some shots at much those described in the preceding paragraph promote and defend. From an interview in the New York Times:
JERUSALEM — Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said in an interview published on Monday that Israel must withdraw from nearly all of the West Bank as well as East Jerusalem to attain peace with the Palestinians and that any occupied land it held onto would have to be exchanged for the same quantity of Israeli territory.
And:
He also dismissed as “megalomania” any thought that Israel would or should attack Iran on its own to stop it from developing nuclear weapons, saying the international community and not Israel alone was charged with handling the issue.
Try this:
He said that maintaining sovereignty over an undivided Jerusalem, Israel’s official policy, would involve bringing 270,000 Palestinians inside Israel’s security barrier. It would mean a continuing risk of terrorist attacks against civilians like those carried out this year by Jerusalem Palestinian residents with front-end loaders.
“A decision has to be made,” he said. “This decision is difficult, terrible, a decision that contradicts our natural instincts, our innermost desires, our collective memories, the prayers of the Jewish people for 2,000 years.”
The government’s public stand on Jerusalem until now has been to assert that the status of the city was not under discussion. But Mr. Olmert made clear that the eastern, predominantly Arab, sector had to be yielded “with special solutions” for the holy sites.
Fair's fair:
On peace with the Palestinians, Mr. Olmert said in the interview: “We face the need to decide but are not willing to tell ourselves, yes, this is what we have to do. We have to reach an agreement with the Palestinians, the meaning of which is that in practice we will withdraw from almost all the territories, if not all the territories. We will leave a percentage of these territories in our hands, but will have to give the Palestinians a similar percentage, because without that there will be no peace.”
The reaction has already started. Expect outrage and outrageous comments and not a little hysteria and histrionics. I caution some to be careful lest they hurt themselves in their excesses. It might even be entertaining to watch them in action.
Whether it has any larger impact is yet to be seen.
5 comments:
G'day Janders,
.. nice!
Imagine Olmert saying that sort'a stuff. You'd wonder why we didn't see some appropriate action from him while he could've been effective.
Before I doze off, and moving slightly off the Olmert track, a quick collection on what's up vis-à-vis Ahmadinejad over at ICH (haven't read it all, but it does give a bit of the drift):
[ICH] Ahmadinejad Accepts Israel's Right to Exist
By Peter Tatchell
The Iranian president has said he would accept a two-state solution if the Palestinians agree. So where are the headlines?
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20898.htm
[ICH] America Should Listen To Ahmadinejad
By Paul Craig Roberts
The hubris of Americans and their belief in U.S. “exceptionalism” would cause them to reject Ahmadinejad’s holding the US, its NATO puppets, and Israel accountable before the UN General Assembly. So successfully has Ahmadinejad been demonized by the propagandistic US media that his speech would be dismissed out of hand by the arrogance of those who regard themselves as the salt of the earth.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20897.htm
[ICH] Iran Resolution Shelved in Rare Defeat for 'Israel Lobby'
By Jim Lobe
In a significant and highly unusual defeat for the so-called 'Israel Lobby', the Democratic leadership of the House of Representatives has decided to shelve a long-pending, albeit non-binding, resolution that called for President George W. Bush to launch what critics called a blockade against Iran
[ICH] Statement of Senator Obama on President Ahmadinejad's Remarks
By Amanda Scott
I strongly condemn President Ahmadinejad's outrageous remarks at the United Nations, and am disappointed that he had a platform to air his hateful and anti-Semitic views.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20879.htm
[ICH] Full Text of Ahmadinejad's Speech to the UN General Assembly
By Haaretz Service
The thoughts and deeds of those who think they are superior to others and consider others as second-class and inferior; who intend to remain out of the divine circle, to be the absolute slaves of their materialistic and selfish desires, who intend to expand their aggressive and domineering natures, constitute the roots of today's problems in human societies.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20872.htm
[ICH] Condoleezza Rice Urges U.N. To Address Iran Threat To Israel: Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said on Friday she would ask the U.N. Security Council to take up the matter of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's "threats" against Israel.
http://www.postchronicle.com/news/breakingnews/article_212174933.shtml
[ICH] US stonewalls justice for Palestinians: The US steers clear of the issue of illegal Israeli settlements by putting Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the spotlight.
http://www.presstv.com/detail.aspx?id=70630§ionid=351020101
-=*=-
A bit of contrast, from Germany:
09/30/2008 06:27 PM
THE END OF ARROGANCE
America Loses Its Dominant Economic Role
By SPIEGEL Staff
[a lot'a stuff, worth the read]
...
Iran has also been unimpressed by Washington's approach to force it to terminate its uranium-enrichment process by threatening to use military force. The expansion of the nuclear facility at Natanz is progressing at a brisk pace, as expected, and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad now considers his adversary, Bush, to be finished. "The American empire in the world is reaching the end of its road," he said in his speech to the UN General Assembly, "and its next rulers must limit their interference to their own borders."
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,druck-581502,00.html
Lots to read, some to enjoy. But a word of warning:
"The words of Brecht find chilling resonance considering the victory of Roosevelt in overcoming parasitoid:
‘Do not rejoice in his defeat you men, for though the bastard is dead, the bitch that bore him is again in heat’"
http://www.counterpunch.org/martin09302008.html"
Not directly applicable; although one 'B' and the 'H' are gone, the 'big-B' ain't dead yet.
Fancy that! A disgraced, deposed Israeli telling the truth. Didn't think I'd live to see it.
Is the tide turning? Are the fanatics losing their grip? Will the lions lay down with the lambs? Will Sharon wake up?
Don't hold your breath!
Cheers.
Thanks for the links, Phil. Given the comments by Olmert about Israel's attitude to Iran, quite relevant.
G'day David, good advice about not holding one's breath. But it will be interesting to see the reactions and you ever know ... On reactions, see Truthdig which covered the story for comments.
Credit must be given to Olmert for speaking out given the attitudes of some, as can be seen in this by Uri Avnery and this by Jonathan Cook.
Will someone accuse Olmert of being disrespectful of the Jewish people?
Or the biggy - "Israel's PM is a self-hating Jew." Will watch the mental gymnastics with interest. And perhaps a little encouragement for the frenetic typists - "Use both hands!"
G'day David G (long time no 'see'), g'day Bob,
.. y'have t'wonder why our (Anglo/Judaic) world is dominated by vicious crimes, where are the moral people, where are the adults?
In every 'peer group' there is a consensus; if we look at the US, UK, Aus & Israeli regimes we see a fairly consistent, bipartisan set of policies; mutual support for (a) US attempted world hegemony (including ripping off the world's resources and ruthless, often murdering attacks on any resistance) and (b) the genocide accompanying the invasion and brutal occupation of sadly now mostly ex-Palestine (60+ years long and no end anywhere in sight).
The truth of the previous para is easily demonstrated by inspection, i.e. who's got all the guns, where are the dead bodies accumulating, from which 'side' etc., who's occupying which land - but that self-evident truth is 'hidden' behind a barrage of deliberately deployed propaganda; the US claiming (say) only to be democratizing the world (by murdering force!) - and the Israelis claiming only to be trying to protect their people (again, by murdering force) - as they steal ever more Lebensraum.
This pushed-paradigm propaganda is mostly lies, in turn lies are false statements intended to deceive; Q: What's to hide, other than filthy, nefarious criminal acts?
(Note that in a 2-party system, any bipartisan policy leaves the voters with zero choice and so is deeply undemocratic.)
Any 'peace dividend' the world might'a (reasonably!) expected has been denied us, we the sheople® everywhere, the tombstones on the way are many; the A-bombings, King David Hotel Irgun atrocity and Deir Yassin massacre from old, and then lately the aggressive, Nuremberg-class invasions of Iraq (2003) and Lebanon (2006), the list is looong, consistent and is as grisly as it is criminal.
When some party says one thing ("Truth, Justice and the 'Merkin Way!") but does another, i.e. the illegal invasion of Iraq now morphed into a brutal occupation - murder for oil, ditto for the genocidal party vis-à-vis the pillaging of Palestine - murder for land & water, it's called hypocrisy, in these cases murdering hypocrisy.
When some party operates behind a screen of deliberate and premeditated lies, perpetrating the most heinously atrocious crimes, well, that's called a conspiracy.
I think we ort'a congratulate Olmert for his candid honesty, for pointing out some of the truth, which sooo many erring ideologues futilely try to deny. Murdering thieves are, what murdering thieves do.
PS I forgot the Lobe link:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20880.htm
G'day Phil, Uri Avnery on Olmert's interview.
Pertinent comments:
Olmert has already said in the past that the State of Israel is "finished" if it does not agree to partition, because of the "demographic danger". This time he does not invoke that demon. Now he speaks as an Israeli who is thinking about the future of Israel as a progressive, constructive, peaceful state.
All this is put forward not as a vision for the remote future, but as a plan for the present. He demands that a decision be taken now. It almost sounds like: Let me continue for another few months, and I shall do it. The unstated assumption is that the Palestinians are ready for this historic turning point.
And he has fixed an Israeli position from which there can be no going back in any future negotiations.
This is the testament of the Prime Minister, and it is obviously intended for the next Prime Minister.
So, will the opportunity be taken?
Daniel Levy on Livni.
Meanwhile, there's strains between the military and the settlers.
To Iran ... and a matter of a laptop ...
Bush's final Iran Blunder?
Post a Comment