The Joe Blow Report 2

Everything Is About Something Different

Archive for the ‘Genocide’ Category

U.S. Uses Chemical Weapons in Iraq?

leave a comment »

Chris Floyd posted this report January 4, 2011, and must be repeated. Mondo Inferno: The Endless Echoes of America’s WMD Atrocity

The article begins:

For years, I have been writing about the American use of chemical weapons in the savage assault on the Iraqi city of Fallujah in late 2004. The results of this deployment of WMD began emerging a few months later. The clear evidence of chemical weapons damage among the civilians of the city — uncovered by Iraqi doctors working for the American-backed government — was scorned and dismissed at that time, including by many stalwart anti-war voices, apparently frightened that such “extremist” charges would somehow detract from their own “reasonable” opposition — perhaps even cost them their perches in the mainstream media.

(Oddly enough, my own pieces on the matter were also appearing in the mainstream media — the pages of The Moscow Times, the decidedly centrist, pro-business, English-language newspaper in the Russian capital, which supported my column from all attacks, including heavy hints from the American embassy that it should be dropped.)

In any case, the evidence of American WMD in Fallujah kept mounting, year after year, until finally, in mid–2010, even the BBC’s most respected voices were reporting on the effects of the chemical weaponry — primarily on the children of Fallujah, some of whom were not yet born when the attack was launched.

Even without the WMD, the attack itself was one of the most horrific events of the still-unfolding act of aggression in Iraq. Presented in the U.S. press as an old-fashioned, gung-ho, WWII-style “battle,” it was in fact a mass slaughter, largely of trapped civilians; almost all of the “terrorists” and “insurgents” in the city had long escaped during the months-long, oddly public build-up to the assault. It seemed clear that the intent was not to quash an insurgent nest, as stated, but to perpetrate an act of condign, collective punishment — primarily against civilians — in order to terrorize the rest of Iraq into submission.

Click this link to read the complete article. All American’s are responsible for what their military does and here is a good example laid out in spades for everyone to see.

Mondo Inferno: The Endless Echoes of America’s WMD Atrocity

The question I ask is, “Who were and where are the embedded reporters of this battle?

[Picture]

–Joe

Dark Age Barbarism

leave a comment »

… and Freedom of Religion.

What freedom of religion means to most Americans is the right to judge their neighbor. Did you ever think about what the Mormons or Jehovah’s Witnesses are really saying to you when they come, uninvited to your door offering to reeducate you about the Bible, Jesus Christ and Almighty God so you can worship God in truth like they do? What about the other Missionary Ministries that tell you to be accepted as a Christian you first must be saved of your sins. To do that you must to be redeemed by Jesus Christ.  This Gospel of Jesus Christ has been spread to every nation on this Earth by these two religious peoples. They join an illustrious group of Evangelicals and other missionary minded religions that believe they are doing Christ’s work. Christian people have expanded great energies in their fervent beliefs that these words of Jesus are their mandate: “And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.” -KJV

Why do they think you need their information? What do they expect you to do when you get it? What makes any of them think that what Jesus’ preached is the Gospel they preach? Why would one Christian religion enforce their freedom to try to convert another Christian religion? Is this presumed freedom not the root cause of intolerance in direct defiance of Jesus explicit teachings?

Unfortunately, the record for religious tolerance for all people to practice their religious beliefs throughout the history of America is exceedingly abysmal. The Christian Post September 13, 2010 article: Koran Burning: How Dare the Muslim World Lecture America on Religious Tolerance is a good example of the attitude that drives this intolerance. What motivates these people to foist their beliefs upon their fellow neighbors is exactly why they discriminate against all other non-Christian religions and religious peoples. As a “saved” people, recognized by the Hand of God through Jesus Christ these Christians take on the mantle of an exceptional people directly blessed and protected by God. Enclaves of Christians throughout the World take on the trappings of what America does to other religions and religious peoples. The common belief is that“Islamic Terrorists” are the spawn of an Islamic aberration therefore Islam and all that are Islamic are responsible for the war. For decades in Iraq, the Shiite religious majority people were able to live together with their ruling minority Sunni brothers. No thanks to America’s intervention to save all the people from despotic rule and enforced majority governance, as soon as the Shiites got control they cleansed the country of the Sunni. What you never hear much about is that they also cleared out almost all the Christians too.

These are the consequences of what happens where Christians are a minority. This is a real concern among Christian religions throughout the world when the Muslim (Islam) minority are attacked in America. The Wall Street Journal had an article back in January of this years: “Islamic Christianophobia” – The world ignores the persecution of Christians in the Muslim world. On Friday, September 10, 2010, The Independent had Patrick Cockburn: The fires of religious fury are easily lit but hard to put out – Christian communities in the Muslim world that date back 2,000 years are finally being extinguished. Then there is: NYC Mosque Rhetoric May Harm Persecuted Christians in The Christian Post September 2, 2010. They point out that there are millions of Christians in the Middle East and “hateful rhetoric being used by opponents of the proposed mosque near ground zero can result in violence against Christians living in Muslim-dominated countries.”

It would seem that this war on Islamic Terrorist has boxed these warmongering heretics into a corner. Perhaps Michael Moore has the solution: If the ‘Mosque’ Isn’t Built, This Is No Longer America – It’s time to move on beyond all the bigotry, lies and emotional claptrap of hurt feelings and sensitivity and deal with what’s really in jeopardy.
[Source]

–Joe

When the Right To Self-Defense is a License to Be Murdered

leave a comment »

[Update below]

Beware the rampant propaganda defending the indefensible!

This is the latest developments from Reuters: “Turkey calls for punishment of Israel for killings

For over 60 years the Jews have murdered the Palestinian people with impunity. Why? Because sick American religious fundamentalist are their primary complicit backers and supporters. The United States government decided the Jews had a legal right to grab and take by force of arms land that did not belong to them and justify their actions, supported and protected by America and other complicit state governments, by trying to get everyone to agree that they had the legitimate right. Their conduct within these past decades proves that the nation of Israel is nothing more than a mob of thugs and wanton, butchering bullies; a rogue illegitimate people.

By their own words they are condemned as reported in The Christian Science Monitor: “Condemnation across Europe after Israel raid on Freedom Flotilla

Mr. Moisi says the attacks play into a campaign to delegitimize Israel, but adds that “the main actor in the campaign is the Israeli government itself …. Israelis need to rethink dramatically what they are doing, but the problem is that what they are doing is very much who they are. The killings yesterday at sea didn’t make sense in international terms. But in Israel, in political terms, it did make sense.” [Emphasis added]

Why does it make sense to murder unarmed civilian people? Because that is exactly the kind of sick animals these people admittedly demonstrate themselves to be.

It’s time to stop supporting all illegitimate thug bully governments. When you cooperate with their existence you become responsible for their actions. I, personally, may not be able to directly do anything Israel’s criminal actions, but I certainly can do something about those that I know support and enable them. They define themselves as illegitimate without any right to enforce their criminal behavior on others and must be treated accordingly. It starts with enforcing your own personal boycott.

America’s sickness: “We’re the only one’s that believe them” – Probably because Obama and his thug government were complicit.

Rep. Anthony Weiner: “No matter what, “the U.S. should stand up for Israel” – Maybe Weiner and the U.S. should stand up for the truth and enforce the law.

More examples of the poison and sickness: “Navy raid clear act of self-defense

US declines to apportion blame after Israeli raid

When all else fails, point the finger, call someone a terrorist and then murder him or her. The latest from the Jerusalem Post: IDF: Global Jihad on flotilla :: Israel concerned next flotilla will be accompanied by Turkish Navy

I watched this exchange on MSNBC with Eliot Spitzer: “Talking about Israel with Eliot Spitzer on MSNBC” – Spitzer and his guests were spewing pure Israeli propaganda uninterrupted and unchallenged. It’s time to STOP cooperating with these liars. Note who their advertisers are and send them an email. Time to give these thug bums a dose of their own medicine.
Picture

[UPDATE :: Wednesday, June 2, 2010]

Israel has put all the Palestinians into a prison – in modern times it’s called a concentration camp. Take a look for yourself: Line of Separation

In 2002, Israel began constructing a 456-mile barrier to separate it from nearly all the Palestinian population of the West Bank. Click on the map below for a detailed look at the barrier system.

–Joe

Jew’s Finally Tell the TRUTH

with one comment

Mitchell pushes Middle East talks — Is this a joke?

In the face of Avigdor Lieberman, Israel’s foreign minister’s latest statement (below) this is just another one of President Abama’s pretty facades. Considering his recent Nobel Peace Prize Award, the world continues to hope against hope in this world-class betrayer. What’s he betrayed? Why, all that hope . . .

The Jews objective from day one was to justify taking Palestinian land by discrediting and rejecting the Palestinian people as anyone equal to them. By so doing and with a lot of help from their friends they managed to get most of the world to buy into their lie — that that land, somehow by divine right belongs to them. If the past 60 years of occupation has shown the world anything, it proven that the Jews never wanted peace. Now that they have proven, unabashed and undisputed champions in both Republican and Democratic Administrations they feel no qualms about speaking the truth. How can they not, when they’ve declared war on the Palestinian people?

Israeli official: No peace deal for many years

Foreign minister’s comments cast a pall over the U.S. envoy’s latest efforts

ALiebermanmsnbc.com news services
updated 5:00 a.m. PT, Thurs., Oct . 8, 2009

JERUSALEM – Israel’s powerful foreign minister Thursday said he would tell a visiting U.S. Middle East envoy that there was no chance of reaching a comprehensive peace deal with the Palestinians for many years.

Peacemaking policy in Israel is decided by the prime minister’s office, and not the foreign ministry. But Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman carries significant weight in Israeli decision-making, and his is a sentiment common among confidants of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

[Lieberman is due to meet President Barack Obama’s Middle
East envoy, George Mitchell, in Jerusalem on Thursday
to discuss, among other issues, the stalled peace process.]

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Joe Blow

October 9, 2009 at 4:30 pm

War Criminal Dies a Peaceful Death

leave a comment »

 

mcnamara_oldVietnam War Architect Robert McNamara Dies at 93 

Some argue he was just a technocrat put in charge of  political architecture that was initially setup by Presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson. Either way, he was responsible for the wanton butchery of millions of innocent civilian people, mostly all Asian. He, later in life, admitted that some of what he was responsible for doing , even during World War Two, were war crimes for which he and other Americans could have been prosecuted. Yet, he was allowed to die a peaceful death.

The question remains today, how could these so-called American patriots right after prosecuting and executing German and Japanese for the very same war crimes, turn right around and do the same things? Specially in his case, where he was just as dirty and knew what he had done to the Japanese! Were they stupid? Actually, historians tell us these men, Robert MacNamara in particular, were very bright, intelligent and well educated. History also tells us that he was at the same time, as were the majority of his compatriots, morally bankrupt. To be specific, his whole generation, the so-called “Greatest Generation” was morally bankrupt. That’s the generation that grew up during the Great Depression that learned to survive by doing whatever it took no matter how degenerate and self-debasing — to them the end always justified the means.

The Guardian newspaper of England reports on his World War Two exploits:

A graduate of Harvard Business School, McNamara applied statistical methods to the US bombing campaign over Japan in the second world war, as an officer in the US air force. He greatly increased the efficiency of US air attacks, devastating the civilian populations of Japanese cities

 What they’re talking about here was his use of fire-bombing on civilian targets that murdered 100,000 people in a single night, the same as was used on German cities — the effect was the same as the atom bomb.

He then moves on after quiting his job as Secretary of Defense because he could see, but was too gutless to tell anyone at the time, that the US would lose that war, to run the World Bank. The World Bank along with the IMF has totally devestated the majority of Third World Nations ability to feed themselves. The World is on the brink of a food crisis of unimaginable consequences. MacNamara orchestrated the mass starvation of untold numbers of the Earth’s poplulation the likes of which, makes his mass murder of Asian people insignificant.

What lessons were learned? According to historian Howard Zinn – NONE! This is what he says about the current President Obama:

Unfortunately, you know, the present administration is still stuck in that kind of thinking. You know, I hear them talking in the White House and around the White House, Obama and the others, about winning in Afghanistan, and not asking, “Is it right that we are in Afghanistan?” To me, that’s one of the important things to think about when we try to learn something from the life of this figure McNamara.

What kind of thinking is Zinn talking about?

It seems to me one things which we should be thinking about, is that McNamara represented all of those superficial qualities of brightness and intelligence and education that are so revered in our culture. This whole idea that you judge young kids today on the basis of what their test scores are, how smart they are, how much information they can digest, how much they can give back to you and remember. That’s what MacNamara was good at. He was bright and he was smart, but he had no moral intelligence. What strikes me as one of the many things we can learn from this McNamara experience is that we’ve got to stop revering these superficial qualities of brightness and smartness, and bring up a generation which thinks in moral terms, which has moral intelligence, and which asks questions not, “Do we win or do we lose?” Asks questions, ” Is this right? Is it wrong?” And McNamara never asked that question. Even when he was leaving, even when he decided he had to leave the post of Secretary of Defense, even when he left, his leaving was not based on the fact that the war was wrong. His leaving was based on the fact, well, we weren’t going to win.

That’s the Robert MacNamara Legacy . . .

For more on lessons not learned you can read some revealing commentary by Howard Zinn, Marilyn Young and Jonathan Schell.

More from the Guardian here.

[Picture Source – STAN WAYMAN / Time Life Pictures / Getty]

–Joe

Peace, Peace and NO PEACE PARTNER

leave a comment »

President’s first interview since taking office
Obama tells Al Arabiya peace talks should resume
Tuesday, 27 January 2009

Is this the voice of real change?alarabia_obama

Q: President Bush framed the war on terror conceptually in a way that was very broad, “war on terror,” and used sometimes certain terminology that the many people — Islamic fascism. You’ve always framed it in a different way, specifically against one group called al Qaeda and their collaborators. And is this one way of —

THE PRESIDENT: I think that you’re making a very important point. And that is that the language we use matters. And what we need to understand is, is that there are extremist organizations — whether Muslim or any other faith in the past — that will use faith as a justification for violence. We cannot paint with a broad brush a faith as a consequence of the violence that is done in that faith’s name.

And so you will I think see our administration be very clear in
distinguishing between organizations like al Qaeda — that espouse violence, espouse terror and act on it — and people who may disagree with my administration and certain actions, or may have a particular viewpoint in terms of how their countries should develop. We can have legitimate disagreements but still be respectful. I cannot respect terrorist organizations that would kill innocent civilians and we will hunt them down.

But to the broader Muslim world what we are going to be offering is a hand of friendship.

hamasThese are President Barack Obama’s words recorded in his interview with Al Arabbiya News Channel.

Previously, on Friday, 23 January 2009 he said:

Obama warned Hamas fighters, who seized control of Gaza in 2007, that they must halt rocket fire on southern Israel and that Washington would continue to support Israel’s right to defend itself.

“For years Hamas has launched thousands of rockets at innocent Israeli citizens. No democracy can tolerate such danger to its people,” Obama said.

“To be a genuine party to peace … Hamas must meet clear conditions, recognize Israel’s right to exist, renounce violence and abide by past agreements.”

“To be a genuine party to peace …”or the prerequisite conditions laid down by the aggressor requires the victim to “recognize the legitimate right to exist, renounce violence and abide by past agreements.”

Failure to meet these standards or prerequisites by either side would mean that side is NOT a “genuine party to peace.” Barack Obama says he “cannot respect terrorist organizations that would kill innocent civilians and we will hunt them down.”

Who is killing innocent civilians, mostly children? Anyone see the rank hypocrisy here? The Zionist Jews for 60 years refuse to recognize the Palestinian peoples legitimate right to exist, to renounce violence against the civilian population or keep any agreement. Yet that is what Barack Obama demands. That isn’t making peace. That is forced SURRENDER AND RAPE!

It should be noted that what Israel did to the Palestinians in this latest assault shoves Gaza right up America’s derriere.


Addendum :: Wednesday, Jan. 28  2009

The United States and Israel conspire with their Palestine collaborators to justify more assaults on Gaza. Reuters’ latest, Israel strikes in Gaza as Obama envoy holds talks says in part:

Moments earlier, a militant group with links to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas’s Fatah movement claimed responsibility for firing a rocket at southern Israel late on Wednesday.

Israel has said it will hold Gaza’s Hamas rulers responsible for all attacks launched from the coastal territory, and had warned of a stronger response to the killing of a soldier on Tuesday in an explosion by a Gaza border fence.

Mitchell met Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Defense Minister Ehud Barak on Wednesday and will meet Abbas on Thursday.

Western diplomats said Mitchell would not meet Hamas, a group shunned by the U.S. and Europe for it refusal to recognize Israel.

Refusing to recognize the duly and legally elected Hamas government is a refusal to recognize the Palestinian people. Obama is no peace partner.

 


Update:
This is what it all leads to and why: Breaking News: SE Asia Groups Claim to Plan Retaliation for Gaza Killings. Said to Target Israeli Government, Intel in Bangkok, Manila, Singapore. By Allan Nairn

The sources for this report, themselves religious Muslims, say they condemn the groups’ tactics but share their anger at Israeli forces’ repeated killings of civilians.

It is not clear if the planning talk is just bravado, or if it’s true they’ll just target combatants, since — like their Israeli and US counterparts — these groups have repeatedly shown their willingness to kill many civilians to make a point. (Islamist terror leaders like Bin Laden and Abu Bakar Baasyir frequently state this openly; for a rare, frank statement of near-identical Western pro-terror thinking see Thomas L. Friedman, who writes approvingly that in Gaza, Israel was “trying to ‘educate’ Hamas” by attacking not just Hamas combatants but also by “inflicting” “heavy pain on the Gaza population,” just as in Israel’s attack on Lebanon ‘06 “the only long-term source of deterrence was to exact enough pain on the civilians…” Thomas L. Friedman, “Israel’s Goals in Gaza?,” New York Times, January 13, 2009. Also see News and Comment posting of Nov. 28, 2007, “Thomas L. Friedman and the Bali Bombers. Cold-Blooded Celebrity”).

Those that moralize the justification for “inflicting” “heavy pain on the Gaza population Friedman says regarding Lebanon’s Hezbolla:

Israel’s counter strategy was to use its Air Force to pummel Hezbollah and, while not directly targeting the Lebanese civilians with whom Hezbollah was intertwined, to inflict substantial property damage and collateral casualties on Lebanon at large. It was not pretty, but it was logical. Israel basically said that when dealing with a nonstate actor, Hezbollah, nested among civilians, the only long-term source of deterrence was to exact enough pain on the civilians — the families and employers of the militants — to restrain Hezbollah in the future.

need to be taken out and stood against a wall. It is as simple as that.

–Joe

HOPE is a JOKE

leave a comment »

The REAL Mr. Obama begins to show his true colors.

Hope in Hell

Hope in Hell

Is he the Princely Savior most everyone thinks he is? Will he free us forevermore of these evil terrorists and corrupt religious extremist that want to rule the world? Is he the champion of all the bottom-feeders and rock-crawlers of this country and the World?  Is he the promised Messiah for the poor, the downtrodden and all of us no-named refugees cohabiting on borrowed lands? Will he bring peace and justice to an amoral and corrupt society with all the trappings of self-sacrificing harmony and prosperity?  Will he finally give America and Americans that sense of identity and personal worth that defines and establishes our legitimate right to recognize and be recognized as humans with some vague measure of value. Or is he, in fact, the Anti-Christ?

Why would Mr. Obama adopt the same attitude towards the Palestinian peoples that the previous administrations had? Why does it take a couragouse Jew to get out the truth about Zionist Israel’s criminal assaults on innocent civilian people? Here is some of what Noam Chomsky had to say about Mr. Obama and Israel’s burgeoning crimes.

Obama’s Stance on Gaza Crisis “Approximately the Bush Position”

NOAM CHOMSKY: It’s approximately the Bush position. He began by saying that Israel, like any democracy, has a right to defend itself. That’s true, but there’s a gap in the reasoning. It has a right to defend itself. It doesn’t follow that it has a right to defend itself by force. So we might agree, say, that, you know, the British army in the United States in the colonies in 1776 had a right to defend itself from the terror of George Washington’s armies, which was quite real, but it didn’t follow they had a right to defend themselves by force, because they had no right to be here. So, yes, they had a right to defend themselves, and they had a way to do it—namely, leave. Same with the Nazis defending themselves against the terror of the partisans. They have no right to do it by force. In the case of Israel, it’s exactly the same. They have a right to defend themselves, and they can easily do it. One, in a narrow sense, they could have done it by accepting the ceasefire that Hamas proposed right before the invasion—I won’t go through the details—a ceasefire that had been in place and that Israel violated and broke.

But in a broader sense—and this is a crucial omission in everything Obama said, and if you know who his advisers are, you understand why—Israel can defend itself by stopping its crimes. Gaza and the West Bank are a unit. Israel, with US backing, is carrying out constant crimes, not only in Gaza, but also in the West Bank, where it is moving systematically with US support to take over the parts of the West Bank that it wants and to leave Palestinians isolated in unviable cantons, Bantustans, as Sharon called them. Well, stop those crimes, and resistance to them will stop.

Now, Israel has been able pretty much to stop resistance in the Occupied Territories, thanks in large part to the training that Obama praised by Jordan, of course with US funding and monitoring control. So, yes, they’ve managed to. They, in fact, have been suppressing demonstrations, even demonstrations, peaceful demonstrations, that called for support for the people of Gaza. They have carried out lots of arrests. In fact, they’re a collaborationist force, which supports the US and Israel in their effort to take over the West Bank.

Now, that’s what Obama—if Israel—there’s no question that all of these acts are in total violation of the foundations of international humanitarian law. Israel knows it. Their own advisers have told each other—legal advisers have explained that to them back in ’67. The World Court ruled on it. So it’s all total criminality. But they want to be able to persist without any objection. And that’s the thrust of Obama’s remarks. Not a single word about US-backed Israeli crimes, settlement development, cantonization, a takeover in the West Bank. Rather, everyone should be quiet and let the United States and Israel continue with it.

He spoke about the constructive steps of the peace—of the Arab peace agreement very selectively. He said they should move forward towards normalization of relations with Israel. But that wasn’t the main theme of the Arab League peace proposal. It was that there should be a two-state settlement, which the US blocks. I mean, he said some words about a two-state settlement, but not where or when or how or anything else. He said nothing about the core of the problem: the US-backed criminal activities both in Gaza, which they attacked at will, and crucially in the West Bank. That’s the core of the problem.

And you can understand it when you look at his advisers. So, say, Dennis Ross wrote an 800-page book about—in which he blamed Arafat for everything that’s happening—barely mentions the word “settlement” over—which was increasing steadily during the period when he was Clinton’s adviser, in fact peaked, a sharp increase in Clinton’s last year, not a word about it.

So the thrust of his remarks, Obama’s remarks, is that Israel has a right to defend itself by force, even though it has peaceful means to defend itself, that the Arabs must—states must move constructively to normalize relations with Israel, but very carefully omitting the main part of their proposal was that Israel, which is Israel and the United States, should join the overwhelming international consensus for a two-state settlement. That’s missing.

Gaza Burning

Gaza Burning

Noam Chomsky continues to hope for a “two-state settlement,” but the religious bigots in American and their counterpart Zionist Jews foreclosed on the reality when they declared war on innocent women and children with the stated goal of forcing their men to capitulate to the unique superiority of the Jew and their rights to take whatever land they want. In other words they need the Palestinian people to justify their right to exist as a nation or as a legitimate entity. This is why the so-called war an Hamas; they refuse to surrender their manhood and womanhood to the Jew.

JUAN GONZALEZ: Noam Chomsky, I’d like to ask you about the enormous civilian casualties that have shocked the entire world in this last Israeli offensive. The Israelis claim, on the one hand, that it’s the unfortunate result of Hamas hiding among the civilian population, but you’ve said in a recent analysis that this has been Israeli policy almost from the founding of the state, the attack on civilian populations. Could you explain?

NOAM CHOMSKY: They say so. I was just quoting the chief of staff—this is thirty years ago, virtually no Palestinian terrorism in Israel, virtually. He said, “Our policy has been to attack civilians.” And the reason was explained—you know, villages, towns, so on. And it was explained by Abba Eban, the distinguished statesman, who said, “Yes, that’s what we’ve done, and we did it for a good reason. There was a rational prospect that if we attack the civilian population and cause it enough pain, they will press for a,” what he called, “a cessation of hostilities.” That’s a euphemism meaning cessation of resistance against Israel’s takeover of the—moves which were going on at the time to take over the Occupied Territories. So, sure, if they—“We’ll kill enough of them, so that they’ll press for quiet to permit us to continue what we’re doing.”
Actually, you know, Obama today didn’t put it in those words, but the meaning is approximately the same. That’s the meaning of his silence over the core issue of settling and takeover of the Occupied Territories and eliminating the possibility for any Palestinian meaningful independence, omission of this. But Eban [inaudible], who I was quoting, chief of staff, would have also said, you know, “And my heart bleeds for the civilians who are suffering. But what can we do? We have to pursue the rational prospect that if we cause them enough pain, they’ll call off any opposition to our takeover of their lands and resources.” But it was—I mean, I was just quoting it. They said it very frankly. That was thirty years ago, and there’s plenty more beside that.

Read the rest of this entry »

%d bloggers like this: