Mitchell Hoping for a Quick-fix Fake Peace?

For Real Peace He Must Bang Heads together at the United Nations to Finish Their Unfinished Business

On the eve of the silliest peace talks in history, the big question is this. What makes Obama’s envoy George Mitchell, a negotiator of high repute, say there is “no role” for Hamas?

The talks are silly because they seek to overturn what the United Nations has already decided for resolving the Israel-Palestine conflict and drive a bulldozer through the building blocks of justice.

It might be music to Zionist ears, but to people of good will it’s a cruel, futile and immensely damaging ploy.

The talks are also silly because they bring together two people who by no stretch of the imagination could qualify as partners for peace. And they sit down under the auspices of a third party with an appalling track record in the Middle East and whom no-one trusts to act fairly.

So Mitchell has been dealt a crap hand. The former US senator, we’re told, has had an illustrious career in politics. Honours have been heaped upon him for his part in the Northern Ireland ‘Good Friday’ agreement.

Accepting one of those awards – the Liberty Medal in 1998 – Mitchell said: “I believe there’s no such thing as a conflict that can’t be ended… No matter how ancient the conflict, no matter how hateful, no matter how hurtful, peace can prevail. But only if those who stand for peace and justice are supported and encouraged, while those who do not are opposed and condemned. Seeking an end to conflict is not for the timid or the tentative. There must be a clear and determined policy not to yield to the men of violence…”

How about that? Conflict can be ended only by supporting those who stand for peace and condemning those who don’t. But does he know – has he really taken the trouble to find out – who actually stands for peace and justice in the ever-escalating obscenity of the Israeli occupation of Palestine? And is he absolutely clear who “the men of violence” are? Get it wrong and matters are made worse.

Mitchell is such an awesome peace-monger that he has become a visiting Professor at Britain’s Leeds Metropolitan University’s School of Applied Global Ethics, and the University is developing a new Centre for Peace and Conflict Resolution bearing his name.

If Mitchell is so clued up you have to wonder why he took the job – a veritable poisoned chalice. And you’d think a person with his vast experience would stick to accepted rules of engagement for conflict resolution and peace-making. I’ll mention just three…

• Talk directly with the people who are concerned or with whom there are concerns.
• Attack the issues, not the people with whom there is disagreement.
• No issue can be ‘off limits’.

There is no-one more concerned than Hamas. As the democratically elected authority they are the principle stakeholder on the Palestinian side. Obviously they must be allowed to represent the Palestinian case. It matters not one jot or tittle that the White House has “identified” Hamas as a terrorist organization. They have legitimacy. Besides, millions outside the White House can point to Israel’s much worse terror crimes.

Mitchell, besides barring Hamas, bends even further to Israeli prime minister Netanyahu’s demands and has ruled there must be no pre-conditions. Which means that Israel’s criminal conduct such as settlement construction, dispossession, ethnic cleansing, the land and sea blockade of Gaza, the occupation, the strangulation of the economy and their taste for piracy and extra-judicial killing, and their trampling of human rights including those of self-determination, are allowed to continue while the hapless Palestinians face them across the table.

And never mind that Netanyahu is permitted to enter these talks with his own pre-conditions, saying that the return of Palestinian refugees to the homes they were forced to flee, and the continuing occupation of East Jerusalem including the Old City, are not for discussion, and threatening to resume the (temporarily suspended) illegal settlement building.

If Mitchell is truly a person of integrity and a champion of “global ethics” how could he show such favour to one side?

What, I wonder, will he be saying to the Israeli team about UN Resolution 181 of 1947, which deals declares that “the City of Jerusalem shall be established as a corpus separatum“ administered by the United Nations?

What will he say to them about Resolution 242 (1967) by the Security Council and therefore fully binding? This insists on:
(i) withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;
(ii) termination of all claims or states of belligerency, and respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force.

242 also emphasizes the need for
(a) guaranteeing freedom of navigation through international waterways in the area;
(b) achieving a just settlement of the refugee problem;
(c) guaranteeing the territorial inviolability and political independence of every State in the area, through measures including the establishment of demilitarized zones.

Will Mitchell bang the table to demand long overdue action on Security Council Resolution 338 (1973), which called on the parties concerned to start immediate implementation of Security Council Resolution 242?

Security Council Resolution 446 (1979) leaves absolutely no wriggle room. It “determines that the policy and practices of Israel in establishing settlements in the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967 have no legal validity and constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace… Calls once more upon Israel, as the occupying Power, to abide scrupulously by the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention, to rescind its previous measures and to desist from taking any action which would result in changing the legal status and geographical nature and materially affecting the demographic composition of the Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, and, in particular, not to transfer parts of its own civilian population into the occupied Arab territories.”

It’s all there, Mr Mitchell, in black and white. The UN has set it out. The world is waiting for the UN to implement it.

Stand up, any suitable partners for peace and any genuine peace-brokers

Israeli foreign policy is driven by manifesto promises like…
• “The Palestinians can run their lives freely in the framework of self-rule, but not as an independent and sovereign state.”
• “Jerusalem is the eternal, united capital of the State of Israel and only of Israel.”
• The claim to a national and historic right to the Land of Israel “in its entirety” and the pledge to keep Jerusalem and the settlements.

Netanyahu’s belligerent coalition government probably won’t survive unless he uses all means to achieve these unlawful and hugely provocative aims and resists demands to give back Israel’s ill-gotten gains. A thief is clearly no partner for peace.

Neither is the PLO’s Mahmoud Abbas, who dances to America’s tune and whose authority is in question. Any agreement he makes will be open to challenge by his own people.

Obama is US president courtesy of the pro-Israel lobby. He is like putty in their hands. And he’s so ill-informed that he told AIPAC it’s OK for Israel to grab the hallowed City of Jerusalem and turn it into the permanent headquarters of the Zionist regime. Jerusalem “will remain the capital of Israel and it must remain undivided,” he blurted. When it dawned on him that he’d made a monumental blunder he tried to wriggle out: “Well, obviously, it’s going to be up to the parties to negotiate a range of these issues. And Jerusalem will be part of those negotiations… And I think that it is smart for us to work through a system in which everybody has access to the extraordinary religious sites in Old Jerusalem, but that Israel has a legitimate claim on that city.”

A legitimate claim? Who says? And negotiate what? Has the President forgotten that the UN decided long ago that Jerusalem, along with Bethlehem, was to become an international zone?

And how can it be right for weak, unarmed and impoverished Palestinians to have to negotiate with a brutal, lawless military regime for their universal rights and freedoms, which are supposed to be guaranteed by the international community but have been denied them for decades?

Obama is clearly no genuine peace-broker.

And George Mitchell, despite his awesome reputation elsewhere, has so far failed in the Holy Land. He and his boss are getting desperate. Staging farcical, lopsided talks in order to achieve a fake, temporary peace will no doubt save a few worthless political skins for the timebeing. But they benefit no-one else. And they don’t do an envoy of Mitchell’s calibre any credit. He would be better employed banging heads together at the United Nations, to finish the unfinished business there and ensure all the resolutions they have passed and all the other solemn declarations they have endorsed are implemented. No need for conflict resolution, judgment has already been handed down.

Then peace talks can begin, if genuine partners and an honest broker can be found.

It’s called justice, Mr Mitchell. There’ll be no real peace until justice is delivered.

Stuart Littlewood’s book Radio Free Palestine, with Foreword by Jeff Halper, can now be read on the internet by visiting radiofreepalestine.org.uk. Read other articles by Stuart.

30 comments on this article so far ...

Comments RSS feed

  1. MichaelKenny said on September 2nd, 2010 at 8:00am #

    The point of “silly” talks is that everybody now knows they are silly! Everybody knows Israel is going to stall until they find a pretext to break off the talks and blame it on the Palestinians. When they do that they will further discredit both themselves and their American bully (if that is possible). I don’t really think that such a lengthy discourse was necessary.

  2. David Silver said on September 2nd, 2010 at 8:22am #

    Stuart tells us the obvious but a Lenin said What is to be Done by us.

  3. Rehmat said on September 2nd, 2010 at 10:28am #

    George Mitchell is a Zionist con-man. He believes that the only way to solve the Islamist resistance to the zionist entity is through pitting Hamas against Fatah and Hizbullah against the Sunni block.

    His ‘Irish success’ is just like Bush saying “Mission accomplished” in 2002.

    George Mitchell has recommended to Ben Obama that the United States should no longer pursue a direct confrontation strategy with the Hezbollah, which enjoys majority support among the population, but should seek to isolate it instead. In other words, Washington should pretend to interpret an Israeli war against Lebanon as a police operation against the Hezbollah and refrain from intervening openly. Washington’s new ambassador to Lebanon, Maura Connelly, has been assigned with that job. Saudi King Abdullah has set-aside US$500 million to run a covert operation against Hizbullah. ……

    http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2010/08/31/israel-in-2006-we-played-nice-guys/

  4. bozh said on September 2nd, 2010 at 11:47am #

    ‘Jews’ [means mosheic cultists] do not ever want to talk [or ‘talk’] from since arafat’s days with any representatives of the palestinians.
    The land they conquered or stolen in ’67 can be recovered only via warfare. These two facts end for me forever any further thinking about the conflict! tnx

  5. teafoe2 said on September 2nd, 2010 at 2:30pm #

    Subject: counterpnch 9 2 10

    unsnip: CP: HOW SHOULD the newly emerging movement for boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) respond to the talks taking place?

    interviewee: I THINK this movement would be inclined to oppose the negotiations. They know that these negotiations are at variance with their goals and objectives. The negotiations are designed to establish a Palestinian Bantustan while the BDS movement’s goals are the liberation of the Palestinian people based on increasingly isolating Israel and forcing it to concede to Palestinian rights to self-determination.

    So the BDS movement should grow and prosper because it is going to have more and more support from what seems an opposition that is reforming and trying to reestablish itself inside Palestine. The international BDS movement hopefully will be able to link up with the new opposition expressed in the demonstrations in Ramallah against the talks. We need to cultivate solidarity between the international BDS movement with any emergent Palestinian opposition to Abbas and these talks.

    Ashley Smith writes for the Socialist Worker, where this interview originally appeared.

  6. Jonas Rand said on September 3rd, 2010 at 12:13am #

    Hamas should indeed be granted participation in these talks if they really are to be legitimate. They are integral in creating peace; if democracy is to prevail, no one should be excluded from peace talks! Peace is a very special act of creation and healing takes a lot of effort; talks are not democratic nor are they peaceful if major parties are barred from participating in that act of creation. I expect the ‘talks’ will end nowhere as neither Israel nor Abbas represents the people’s demands for justice and social participation. He is as much an authoritarian as Netanyahu and wants to have control just like Abbas, enforcing the same “leadership” type of society where there are ones who rule and ones who are ruled.

    A class of the powerful always get to come out on top with the populace relegated to dwelling in the unified experience of oppression. the system is designed to hurt people mentally and physically through oppression, violence, hatred, and intolerance. Dehumanization is what the system engenders amongst both ‘leaders’ and ‘followers’, rather than having equality and social justice, they have a system of ruler and ruled. I feel that once the authoritarian humans among us are entrenched as powerful people, that system takes hold of their conscience and heart, and a system of rigidly-adhered-to rules, laws, and violence to enforce them is unjust. When self-expression and control-of-myself is controlled by a system of heartless rules, barring the direct participation by people, you have an unjust system. This is what I feel those ‘leaders’ adhere to, both Abbas and Netanyahu.

    Bozh: I have a question for you. How are Jews any more a cult than, say, Christianity, Hinduism, or Islam? Do you think all Jews, or people who revere Moses [Moshe] as a prophet, are cultists, or simply the ones who have formed a kind of cult around Israel or other Jewish ‘leaders(-hip)’ and authoritarian/totalitarian and hierarchical systems that hurt democracy, peace, justice, and interdependence?

  7. shabnam said on September 3rd, 2010 at 1:11am #

    The ‘direct negotiation’ is a hoax. This is a set up for the start of the next war by Israel. American people must pour into the street and demand the war criminals to be arrested, starting from Obama, Hillary Clinton, and self claimed Zionist, Joseph Biden.

    These people are fulfilling their own interests. Then, why don’t you go after your interest? Hillary is embedded into Zionist camp where after Chelsea’s weeding became deeper.
    Now, she must think about the future of her grand children more than your unemployment.

    http://www.tmz.com/2010/08/01/chelsea-clinton-bill-hillary-wedding-photos/

  8. kalidas said on September 3rd, 2010 at 6:04am #

    The entire world, every nation without exception, is nothing less than societies of cheaters and the cheated.

  9. mary said on September 3rd, 2010 at 6:20am #

    ‘The door has been slammed on Hamas’

    The militant Palestinian group Hamas has responded to the Middle East peace talks in Washington by saying it will step up attacks on Israel.

    Palestinian journalist Ali Abuninah (his website: Electronic Intifada) explains how he believes Middle East negotiations should draw on the experience of Northern Ireland.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_8965000/8965845.stm

  10. bozh said on September 3rd, 2010 at 7:15am #

    Jonas Rand,
    To me, all three major religions’ leaderships appear as a mafioso organizations.
    Ulema, priesthood, and rabbinate appears as the greatest criminal minds we had to face to date.
    The label ‘jew’, in my usage denotes a cult or connection to that cult via relatives, upbringing, etc.
    These cultists comprise not only differnt shade of skin but also hundreds of ethnicities.
    A pole may be catholic or not. A ‘jew’ maybe a pole, lithuanian, romanian, ethiopean but discards his/her heritage and accepts to whatever degree her-his essence called “jewishness”.
    But even a catholic austrian is first of all austrian and then a husband, father, friend, countryman, and last and least a catholic.
    So, i suggest to ‘jews': first divulge your biological connection then act like a human and only then act like a mosheist or talmudnik.
    One day a person would say: i am partly let, pole german but of a faith! One does often hear people saying i am part indigenous, german, irish.tnx

  11. bozh said on September 3rd, 2010 at 7:31am #

    Jonas,
    Abbas is not a leader or ‘leader’, netanyahu is a leader because he had been elected to that position. Abbas, to me, is a puppet. And without tanks, artillery, army, country, police.
    So, how can you equate the two people or blame them equally? Were you trying to slip one past us? Blame both sides equally? tnx

  12. bozh said on September 3rd, 2010 at 7:43am #

    I know [with absolute certainty] that moshe had not predicted anything nor any one can. So all minor and and major torahic prophets [‘prophets’] were criminals.
    No they were not lunatics, but far seeing: seeing how easy it is to hoodwink people, win their hearts-minds; make them pay tithes for rabbinate’s soft living.
    You want the best job ever? Become a priest or rabbi!
    You’ll never do dirty or dangerous work; you cannot get laid off or fired as long as you do your assinged work.
    Oh, what a mistake i made?By not studying how to be dishonest, devious, etc!
    Why, by now i could have been an archbishop! And all i would need would be just a bit of memory! tnx

  13. Mulga Mumblebrain said on September 3rd, 2010 at 9:43am #

    The essence of the ‘peace process’ was plain from the reaction to the murder of four Israeli Taliban aka ‘settlers’. These killings,undoubtedly a tragedy and a crime,if an understandable one, were blown up into a typical cause celebre, with massive coverage, weeping relatives etc-all understandable,if typically over the top when Jews are the victims.
    On the other hand, the continued casualties in Gaza, those murdered or maimed by Israeli violence,or those whose premature deaths were caused by Israeli malevolence, are almost totally ignored. The Western media, controlled as it is by Zionists, has adopted the Zionazi racist calculus, where an Israeli life is far more valuable than that of a Palestinian, and Israeli suffering played up and Palestinian suffering denigrated. If you arrived from outer space you would imagine, from the despicably biased and racist media coverage, that it was Israelis dying in ten times the number of Palestinians, not the other way around, and the Israelis the imprisoned, barbarised and tortured victims of Palestinian state terror and merciless racism, not the other way about.
    What makes this vicious hypocrisy and duplicity even more vile, is that the propagandists who promulgate this vile racist narrative, also have the psychopath’s true audacity and parade as ‘moral’ paragons, exemplars of a ‘Western Civilization’ of unspeakable and unending superiority to all others. When you consider coldly and dispassionately,just how evil, deranged and ruthlessly determined these religious bigots and fascists are, and how utter is their contempt for their victims, then the probability of a looming global religious war becomes an absolute certainty.

  14. Jonas Rand said on September 4th, 2010 at 1:31am #

    bozh,

    I believe that I had stated previously that I believe Abbas is a puppet. When I said a ‘leader’ I meant he was an authoritarian, just as Netanyahu is and that his ideology is based in top-down, hierarchical control. But Abbas doesn’t represent all Palestinians or even most and does not lead them. He seems to agree with the US and Israel on many things such as economy.

    You said:
    “To me, all three major religions’ leaderships appear as a mafioso organizations.
    Ulema, priesthood, and rabbinate appears as the greatest criminal minds we had to face to date.”

    Religious leaders are corrupt and do act like syndicates, I agree. They use belief in god to exercise power and control over others. ‘Faith’ is used to lead people in to support wars, violence, etc. all in the name of a set of ‘unquestionable’ beliefs, which is how a cult works (through coercion).

    You continued by saying:
    “The label ‘jew’, in my usage denotes a cult or connection to that cult via relatives, upbringing, etc. These cultists comprise not only differnt shade of skin but also hundreds of ethnicities. A pole may be catholic or not. A ‘jew’ maybe a pole, lithuanian, romanian, ethiopean but discards his/her heritage and accepts to whatever degree her-his essence called “jewishness”. But even a catholic austrian is first of all austrian and then a husband, father, friend, countryman, and last and least a catholic. So, i suggest to ‘jews’: first divulge your biological connection then act like a human and only then act like a mosheist or talmudnik. One day a person would say: i am partly let, pole german but of a faith! One does often hear people saying i am part indigenous, german, irish.tnx”

    I understand your point, that people should be humans first and that their religions/faiths/beliefs should be of lower priority. But Judaism also has a rule that if one’s mother was Jewish, then you are as well. Also, I’m not sure about genetics etc. but I think that Jews share common genetic patterns. Members of coercive/religious institutions who follow priests, rabbis, mullahs, etc., while they may not have the same seemingly superior attitude of being a “Jew” over a human being, are rigid in the way that they cling to beliefs and do not open their minds to other suggestions. So I don’t think this cult-like quality is unique amongst Jews. On the other hand, this essence of “Jewishness” is very prominent amongst those Jews who are ultra-Orthodox, and Orthodox Jews accept some political and religious beliefs that are rather supremacist.

  15. bozh said on September 4th, 2010 at 7:45am #

    Jonas
    In some aspects a ‘jew’ appears different. Certainly in one’s respect and love of the territory s/he was born and raised on and territorial lore, culture, etc.
    This appears rejected by many ‘jews'; while many goyim suspect most ‘jews’ as being ‘jewish’ frst– whatever the facts!
    This observation maybe not be true to a significant degree for some ‘jews’. We really don’t know. Media avoids research of this topic.

    ‘Jews’ of my experience appear belligerent and much separatistic. Another difference between ‘jews’ and goyim is that no ‘jew’ can be muslim or christian while a bosnian can be catholic, orthodox, muslim, or totally impious.

    One question, had ever any ‘jew’ [?aside from r.novak]publicly renounced yahweh, torah, talmud, rabbinate?
    Or condemned nakbah and robbery of palestina via terror and othe crimes?
    There may be more differences between people of mosheic cult and other cults. tnx

  16. teafoe2 said on September 5th, 2010 at 10:15am #

    Bozh writes: >The land they (i.e., the izrealis) conquered or stolen in ‘67 can be recovered only via warfare. These two facts end for me forever any further thinking about the conflict! tnx”…murder of four Israeli Taliban aka ’settlers’. These killings, undoubtedly a tragedy and a crime…”<

    First, no matter what the shortcomings of the Taliban, I see no reason to smear them by comparing them to Zionist "settlers". The Taliban are fighting against a foreign army which has invaded their country; these "settlers" on the other hand ARE a foreign army which has invaded somebody else's country, and deserve anything they get.
    The Palestinians have the right to defend themselves from aggression under International Law, by armed force or any other method they choose.

    There is no such thing as an "innocent civiian settler", except a child too young to carry an UZI.

  17. teafoe2 said on September 5th, 2010 at 10:24am #

    Oh, oh, oh. The above got completely scrambled, parts of it deleted, & as it appears makes little sense. OK, redo it?
    Well, the first part addressing Bozh’s post was truncated, a couple sentences deleted which originally followed his “tnx”. I’ll try to remember what I said and post it later.

    All following the “tnx” is a comment on a couple lines of Mulga’s otherwise excellent post; I began by expressing astonishment, then posted as above.

    Sorry, my bad:(

  18. teafoe2 said on September 5th, 2010 at 11:25am #

    I meant to say in response to Bozh that I largely agreed with his first sentence, but that even if true it didn’t provide a reason to stop thinking or to stop doing whatever we can do now, pending a shift in the balance of power. And since Bozh has continued to post on the topic, I think we can assume he wasn’t completely serious about that initial sentence:)

  19. bozh said on September 5th, 2010 at 12:49pm #

    I do not know of a conqueror who returned a conquest unless there had been a swap or a pro quid quo.
    It is true than on an occasion war would end in more or less a stalemate; so no land wa lost; peace achieved by some kind of pakt with attacker having to pay some kind of penalty.
    In case of germany of ’19, it lost lots of land even tho it wasn’t utterly defeated; like pal’ns; Germany recovered all of the lands they lost in ’19, but being defeated in WW2, lost permamently alsace-lorraine, sudeten land, and lands in poland.
    In view of the fact [yes,fact] that all wars are waged solely for land; its people wanted or not, no one then returns what they wanted so badly and have lost many young people to obtain it.

    It is true that an endless number of reasons are given for an aggression; however, causative factors are always omitted.
    Or as i say, aggressors proffer us only sensation, but always without causation.

    When you’re utterly defeated, behave like czechs have in WW2: offer only massive passive resistance and wait for better times.
    Presenlty, pal’ns have zero chance to win or defend an inch of land; so, why continue military resistance when it fails so badly?
    Anything else i better!

    Of course, i have numerous times stated that pal’ns are legally and morally obligated to resist further loss of land and occupation.
    Resistance in norway, first yugoslavia, albania, and greece worked, but only because mighty empires were also fighting germans and not just partisans.
    And partisans of yugoslavia were helped militarilly by UK.

    Had the axis powers beaten allies or war ended stalemated, partisans would have met the fate of the pal’ns. And not just because italo-german power but because extremely violent fascists of slovenia, croatia, bosnia, serbia, monte negro, macedonia, albania, and greece.

    What pal’n leadership should do is work on own people. Make them more egalitarian, respectfull of one another; provide education; feeed them well, etc.
    And then see what develops.
    One thing i would expect is that israelis would never be able to set up a puppet from an ideally-structured society. Nor would they be able to split them asunder.
    More could be said. tnx

  20. Don Hawkins said on September 5th, 2010 at 1:14pm #

    split them asunder what a strange way to put it and it was good.

  21. teafoe2 said on September 5th, 2010 at 1:54pm #

    Bozh now returns to form. What a crok. “What the Palestinian’s should do”.

    “all wars are waged solely for land;”: right out of the Henry George playbook.

    “Presenlty, pal’ns have zero chance to win or defend an inch of land; so, why continue military resistance when it fails so badly?”

    So Hamas should hand Gaza back to Izzy & apologize?

  22. teafoe2 said on September 5th, 2010 at 2:19pm #

    More Bozhit: “What pal’n leadership should do is work on own people. Make them more egalitarian, respectfull of one another; provide education; feeed them well, etc.”

    How rudyard kipling arrogant can you get?

    what “pal’n leadership” are you talking about, bozhman? Abbas & the Fatah Thieves? How are “pal’n leaders” supposed to “feed them well”, while Izzy controls the borders & limits even the measly “aid” donated by EU, Arab “regimes” etc? How is Hamas supposed to “feed (Gazans) well” under the fucking blockade? You have heard about the blockade, I assume?

    Sheesh & double sheesh.

  23. bozh said on September 5th, 2010 at 3:17pm #

    What i meant by pal’n “leadership”? Well, the term i used is overgeneralized. So, it is legit to ask for a clarification. Abbas, as i have already said more than twice, acts as a puppet or as public would say, IS a puppet ; thus cannot be included in leading pal’ns.
    Presently-elect leadership should at least participate and better yet lead. Probably pal’n intelligenzia should be included in the leadership. It’s of great import that the leadership rule or guide timocraticly.
    This would’t be bad for US also. Fat chance US leadership would ever do that if left unmolested.

    As for gaza, UEI wants as a prison. So, if hamas would say, Take us, UEI would say, Are we that stupid? It is already ours and and best for us as things are.

    In any case, as i have already noted, US-Europe-Israel [uei] will never talk to legal representatives of the pal’ns.
    But pal’ns could have each other and in peace with each other. It’s a possibility! But whatever happens, palestine cannot ever rise without permit from UEI.

    It’s all over for Iraq, afgh’n, and palestina! Unless there is a massive revolt in US involving at least 50 mn americans. tnx

  24. Deadbeat said on September 5th, 2010 at 3:26pm #

    bozh writes …

    When you’re utterly defeated, behave like czechs have in WW2: offer only massive passive resistance and wait for better times. Presenlty, pal’ns have zero chance to win or defend an inch of land; so, why continue military resistance when it fails so badly?

    I agree with T42. It’s as if Max Shields has returned.

    What pal’n leadership should do is work on own people. Make them more egalitarian, respectfull of one another; provide education; feeed them well, etc. And then see what develops.

    More fantasy and callousness.

    First. The Zionists are strangling the Palestinians access to resources.

    Second. The racist Zionists will do everything to disrupt any sort of egalitarian society. Racism is a sickness and racists will start wars in order to disrupt and destroy whole societies (take a look at Iraq) in order to maintain their superiority. This is why Zionism is WORST than Capitalism. This is an understanding that has been suppressed on the American Left by chomskyism.

    Sorry bozh but you really need to analyze your remarks. The obtuseness in your thinking has clouded your judgments.

  25. bozh said on September 5th, 2010 at 4:10pm #

    DB, U do some condemning. It means that US teachers taught u well!
    What i am proposing, u call “callousness”. Well, gaza is a prison. The raid killed some1400 gazans.
    Now if we could rerun history, and gazans being very loving and respecting of one another, having an honest leadership and because of that israel killed 2400 civilians, one could call what i propose “callousness”.

    Similarly if UEI would increase its terror against a pal’n egalitarian society, then again my proposal would be wrong one.
    But one cannot prove anything unless we first have a society in palestina like or even better than, say, the one in switzerland.

    It seems to me quite wrong to imagine a future event; evaluate as factual and on basis of that call my propostition “callousness” and yet nothing happened.

    As for pal’n resources such as water, how can it be worse than it is? OK! maybe it can get worse. I am not prophecying anything. I am not a hebrew nor a deabeat that can predict events to happen and on basis of that ‘fact’ do a lot of condemnation of other thinkers.
    There is at least three thinkers who arrogate themselves the right to think. I do not want to read DB’s mind. But a question arises, do u hate ‘jews’ that much that u promote violence agaisnt them by a weak people.
    And u watching the carnage of a imprisoned people. tnx

  26. bozh said on September 5th, 2010 at 4:35pm #

    Yes, look at iraq. But look at all salient facts tha pertain to iraq. One has to look at its mistake of attacking kuwait. Iraqi leadership was responsible for it and iraqi people, if they’d have been egalitarian and loving of their country, should have tried in court saddam and his people.
    Alas, kurds have been fighting arabs for at least a century. Saddam was also attacking shias in the south.
    The hatred of the three iraqi peoples was enormous. It shld be noted that iraq also gassed kurds in ?79.

    In short, the country was much dysfunctional as US cake walk into it proves. It was ripe for the taking. Now, US sits back and looks on the carnage among the three imprisoned peoples that US keeps forcibly together for easier rulling over them.
    Iraq also waged a war against iran for about nine yrs. And west was encouraging [abusing] iraqis to kill more iranians.
    True baathists behave like socialists i some ways. Syria was ruled by baathists also, yet atacked baathists in iraq ’91.
    Surely, iraqi leadership cannot put blame on US for it. Yes, US aggression was a criminal act. But why pave the road into iraq for them; especially, knowing how criminally minded ‘jews’ and americans are? More could be said. tnx

  27. teafoe2 said on September 5th, 2010 at 4:47pm #

    bozh you’re presumption in calling yourself a “thinker” is the height of self-deception. stop kidding yourself, the only one you’re kidding is bozh hisself.

    to begin with, you have proved over the last two/three years that you are incapable of composing a coherent English sentence. Which I suspect is a tactic via which you hope to disarm criticism, since if nobody knows exactly what you meant to say, it becomes difficult to refute it.

    Do you or do you not assert that the Hamas leadership in Gaza is dishonest-? If such is your meaning, then I submit that you don’t even qualify as a Troll: you ain’t nothing but a hasbarat, bozhing all th time…

    Are you trying to tell DV readers that the reason the Izzies trashed Gaza is because the Gazans didn’t love each other enough? No shit? Sounds pretty callous to ME…

    & watt thuff’ ukiz this “UEI”? translation please, anybody here speak Bozheze?

    So you think the Suisse have created a model society? So all the Palestinians need to do is open a bunch of banks empowered to launder drug profits and other ill-gotten gains of the international capitalist class?

    but finally you expose yourself: >”do u hate ‘jews’ that much that u promote violence agaisnt them by a weak people.”<
    That sentence is nothing but pure Zionist propaganda bullshit. Pure hasbara.

    Go wash your brain out with liquid plumber.

  28. Deadbeat said on September 5th, 2010 at 10:52pm #

    bozh writes …

    There is at least three thinkers who arrogate themselves the right to think. I do not want to read DB’s mind. But a question arises, do u hate ‘jews’ that much that u promote violence agaisnt them by a weak people.

    Violence against “jews” by a weak people?! Are you that daft!

    I’m being quite polite and respectful to you bozh. But your writing is so obtuse that effectively no one can understand what the hell you’re saying. And when you do say something coherent it’s incoherent. And when criticized you then accuse me of shutting you down.

    As I said recently, this is a discussion board and you have a keyboard and no one is stopping you (actually in your case bozh I wish someone was) from typing your thoughts. The problem bozh is that most of the time I don’t understand what the hell you’re trying to say. Ironically however I don’t you do either.

  29. Deadbeat said on September 5th, 2010 at 10:58pm #

    That should be … Ironically however I don’t [think] you do either.

  30. Deadbeat said on September 5th, 2010 at 11:07pm #

    The position that I’ve seen bozh arguments take goes something like this …

    What’s going on today in Palestine and throughout the world is a “continuum” of human atrocities and Zionism really should not be singled out as some other “ism” (or fill in the blank). That this behavior is consistent of the ruling plutocrats for the past 10,000 years.

    While this argument may be “empirically” true the struggle of 2010 ain’t the same struggle of 8000 BC.