Salam Fayyad at New America Foundation: Building Palestine Under Occupation

-

salam_fayyad_0.jpgI just want to give early word that the New America Foundation’s American Strategy Program and Middle East Task Force along with the Palestine Note will be hosting Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salam Fayyad for a talk titled “Building Palestine Under Occupation.”
This session will be an open, on the record discussion with Prime Minister Fayyad, touching on the future of a Palestinian state, the challenges of building state institutions under occupation, and the state of Palestinian politics.
We expect that Fayyad’s comments will reflect on the high stakes Palestine-Israel negotiations underway now.
The event will definitely be oversubscribed and crowded — so feel free to watch it live here at The Washington Note or the Palestine Note from 2:00 – 4:00 pm on Thursday, 23 September.
– Steve Clemons

Comments

94 comments on “Salam Fayyad at New America Foundation: Building Palestine Under Occupation

  1. MarkL says:

    Touch a nerve, Nadine?
    Nobody believes your cliched drivel, fool.

    Reply

  2. nadine says:

    You’re a complete historical ignoramus about the 30s, MarkL. Even if you were right, what are you arguing for, except for the Left to be even more stupid now than the Right was then? Hitler at least hid his plans. Today’s “resistance bloc” of Iran, Syria, Hizbullah and Hamas (& now Turkey) don’t even bother.

    Reply

  3. markL says:

    Nadine,
    Right wing US republicans similar to you were enthusiastic supporters of Hitler in the 1930′s. If it hadn’t been for the financial support Hitler received from Republicans in the US, perhaps he wouldn’t have been such a threat.
    Get your silly analogies right.
    Even Shamir was tentatively in favor of Hitler’s Jewish policy for a short time, for tactical reasons (forcing Jews to Palestine)

    Reply

  4. nadine says:

    Kathleen, you’re exactly the type who called Winston Churchill a crazy warmonger all during the 1930s, and would have been dead set against making him prime minister or attacking Nazi Germany in response to its 1930s aggression.
    In short, you would have been dead set against moves that would have killed thousands — and saved the lives of 50 million people.
    Don’t be so sure of your ability to see the future.

    Reply

  5. Kathleen says:

    Hope folks read this warmongering madman Israeli Ambassador Micheal Oren. Read what he had to say on Monday
    The Washington Jewish Week
    A warning from Israeli ambassador?
    Debra Rubin
    Was Israel

    Reply

  6. Cee says:

    http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10263/1088910-454.stm
    In a memo obtained by The Associated Press, Michael Perelman of the Philadelphia-based Institute of Terrorism Research and Response expresses concern that the state’s release of the bulletins last week “has increased the threat to Pennsylvania’s infrastructure — including its most vulnerable component, students studying abroad.”
    The bulletins were posted Friday night on the state Homeland Security website after requests for copies of them were filed by various news organizations, including the AP.
    Mr. Perelman’s memo, sent to Pennsylvania Homeland Security Director James Powers Jr., urges Mr. Powers to pull the PA Intelligence Bulletin issues off the Internet “until they can be carefully reviewed and redacted of all information that provides intelligence to those who would do harm to American citizens, the Commonwealth, and its people.”
    Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10263/1088910-454.stm#ixzz10AlIjfCP

    Reply

  7. questions says:

    “I will politely post “ok, that’s what you were getting at.”"

    Reply

  8. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Note to self: read up on theories of humor, especially “On the Essence of Laughter” by Charles Baudelaire; and “Laughter: An Essay On The Meaning Of The Comic” by Henri Bergson.

    Reply

  9. Kathleen says:

    Glenn Greenwald sure ripped it up today on Dylan Ratigan

    Reply

  10. nadine says:

    Paul, I will if you’ll tell me if you are a reincarnation of Dr. Pangloss.

    Reply

  11. Paul Norheim says:

    Nadine, do you mind me asking, strictly on topic, if you are a
    reincarnation of Manichaeus?

    Reply

  12. nadine says:

    Barry Rubin runs down the likely scenarios following the declaration of a Palestinian State:
    “The following article isn

    Reply

  13. nadine says:

    “Palestinians do want their garbage collected on time, no doubt. They surely want well-run schools and well-stocked supermarkets. But they also want dignity, independence and a state.”
    Projection, projection, projection. YOU would want independence, dignity and a state — and YOU would sign a deal with Israel to get it. But the Palestinians’ dream of ‘No More Israel, No More Jews’ is too dear to give up. Even if most would be willing, the minority will kill their own as well as the Jews to wage jihad forever.

    Reply

  14. Paul Norheim says:

    Or Jan Morris (born James), the travel writer and historian.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Morris
    Perhaps even Wendy Carlos (born Walter), who made the
    music for Clockwork Orange and The Shining.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wendy_Carlos

    Reply

  15. Paul Norheim says:

    WigWag =Will Bower?
    I doubt it:
    http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/2008/08/obama_c
    ultivate/
    My bet is that WigWag is a reincarnation of Rudolf Steiner.

    Reply

  16. Dan Kervick says:

    Sorry about the spelling. That’s “Schulman”.

    Reply

  17. Dan Kervick says:

    “wigwag is a man. i think he is will bower.”
    This doesn’t ring right to me.
    My bet is that WigWag is Sam Schulmen.

    Reply

  18. Dan Kervick says:

    There are many different kinds and levels of political legitimacy. If legitimacy is a matter of trust and deference, then it is easy to imagine situations in which Palestinians trust Fayyad with some matters, but not with others; defer to him on some decisions, but not others.
    It’s one thing to trust Fayyad to function in a trusted as a kind of county supervisor for Greater Ramallah, and to get the garbage collected on time. It’s another thing for Palestinians to trust him and defer to him as the leader of a national movement charged with establishing and building a genuine state. If Palestinians begin to see Fayyad as a smaller-time Marshal Petain, administering the social services and commerce board of a conquered remnant of Palestine, at the pleasure of Israeli and US masters, then his long-term political prospects will be ruined. His close cooperation with the Israeli and US governments carries great risks for him, and if he wants to maintain a durable legitimacy he will have to look for ways of asserting his independence.
    He should also make sure to diversify his portfolio of international supporters, because, sad to say, any trust placed in the US government on Israeli-Palestinian affairs is almost certain to eventuate in disappointment and betrayal. If he plans to try to create a genuine Palestinian state, then he will need to have others to rely on for that day when Washington pulls the rug out from under him.
    Palestinians do want their garbage collected on time, no doubt. They surely want well-run schools and well-stocked supermarkets. But they also want dignity, independence and a state. If the US government thinks they can get the Palestinians to accept some sort of Arab Darkytown reservation, a mere municipality run by a Washington-approved mayor under de facto Israeli sovereignty, then I’m afraid this latest effort is going to end very tragically.
    I’m not real happy with the idea that the US is now engaged in more nation-building in the Middle East, this time in Palestine. The other efforts along these lines haven’t gone so well.

    Reply

  19. questions says:

    Gleaned from TPM comments section, Noman Banotman’s open letter to Bin Laden:
    http://afpak.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/09/10/an_open_letter_to_osama_bin_laden
    And he was interviewed by Fareed Zarkaria, transcript link, scroll to the section where Zakaria and Benotman are talking:
    http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1009/19/fzgps.01.html
    It’s pretty interesting, his response.
    Of course, most likely he was paid by Israel cuz he claims that bin Laden fessed up to the 9/11 bombings…. But there you go!
    He appreciates stopping the burning of the Qu’ran, which suggests to me all the more that the non-mosque not at Ground Zero ought to be built, but that’s just me.
    And he thinks maybe it’s time to give up the terror thing as it didn’t really work.
    And, funny thing, he would like to avoid a clash of civilizations!
    Worth a read.

    Reply

  20. questions says:

    From the very interesting Carnegie piece linked to above by nadine:
    “My earlier paper was long on diagnosis and short on cure. And there is no easy alternative to the current policy. Indeed, I would not present any policy suggestions as an alternative in a literal sense: there is no reason to abandon current policies. But there is a desperate need to supplement them and stop the unpersuasive charade that they are sufficient in themselves to move toward a solution.
    More specifically, I do not suggest that Fayyadism be abandoned (though the most obvious authoritarian practices such as illegal arrests and political purges pursued in the West Bank should probably be rethought immediately because of their high political costs). Nor do I suggest that Western support for Palestinian institution building be abandoned. Indeed, the sudden high-level U.S. attention to the details of Palestinian institutional development is a welcome departure from the Clinton years (when there was a marked indifference at top levels) and the Bush years (when senior leaders gave strong verbal but virtually no practical support outside of the security sector). ”
    ******
    Note that Fayyadism is given a provisional thumbs up — insufficient, but not without use.
    I’d toss in some RANDOM thoughts (this is going to be stream of consciousness rambling, so be prepared to skip or glean what you can….)
    The US Constitution is a couple hundred years old and it provides pretty significant legitimacy to the US gov’t at this point.
    Despite that deep legitimacy, Joe Miller is claiming that major practices of the US gov’t, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and I’m guessing all the other transfer payment setups we have, are unconstitutional. Scalia just came out with some statement at a law school I think it was that there’s no constitutional protection for privacy. The Supreme Court seems to have a preference for large finance over small people at this point, so the ability to assemble has been given priority over the individual.
    These are profound challenges to governmental legitimacy, so when the Carnegie author argues that legitimacy has to come long before institutions, I’m not sure he has it right. We don’t really have full legitimacy right now, and the Tea Party, for all its Koch bros funding and all its astroturfing, does seem to have the hold of the imaginations of some 20% of us or so. If one fifth of the population finds the current order illegitimate, that’s really something to think about.
    I don’t know the percentages in the W/B, but I get the feeling we have to think far more in terms of circles than lines because lineality doesn’t seem to capture what happens with feelings of legitimacy the way that circles do.
    I’m back, full circle I guess, to the idea that Fayyadism will create legitimacy by getting the trash out Monday at 8. If people can live their daily lives under any regime, the regime is legit. Right now, with the current Great Recession or near depression or whatever it will turn out to be, people in the US actually cannot live their daily lives.
    When bombs were raining down on Sderot or cafes were exploding, Israelis couldn’t live their daily lives. Right now Gazans aren’t really living daily life.
    There’s a deep preference for establishing order that allows daily life to move forward. If Fayyad can make the trip through the day be fairly smooth for most people, he will pretty automatically create legitimacy. There’s some alchemy in this, some funny circular thinking, and a certain amount of weird temporality in trying to figure out what causes what. I think there’s some room for reverse causation, actually. Fayyad’s attempts will have been legit if in the future they have become legit.
    Historical causation and memory and a series of daily successes will come together in some funky way.
    I get the feeling the Carnegie author is caught up in historical specificities, and though that point of view is really important to have, it is also a limiting one in that it’s pretty easy to have the wrong pattern in mind, to pick the wrong paradigm, to have the wrong metaphors.
    Historical thinking doesn’t generally get into the magical, and yet at some level, legitimacy is a magical concept.
    I will now wave my magic wand and….

    Reply

  21. questions says:

    Wait a minute….
    There’s a rule here that no one can intervene in a “conversation” between two posters. So, since POA and I were the posters involved, ONLY POA may tell me if it was a joke or not.
    If s/he agrees that it was a joke, I will politely post “ok, that’s what you were getting at.”
    No one else’s word is acceptable!!!!!
    *********
    Fayyad is cutting into the circle. It has to start somewhere. Social contract theory is funny stuff, when you think about it. It’s all this weird a/temporal “I’ll sign if and only if you sign too” and the theorists leave out the fact that this is asynchronous. The temporality issue is loud and clear when there’s a real contract rather than a historical fiction/though experiment version that is designed merely to illustrate political obligation.
    It’s actually really interesting to work through real social contracts and see where the pitfalls are. Clearly trust, temporality, and assurance are huge issues to contend with.
    What does it mean to sign only conditionally, and when all the parties are done with the conditional round, must they go again and re-sign, or is the conditionality met with the first signature? Going first in such a situation is really fraught with risk, hence the need to bring in an element of simultaneity somehow.
    Fayyad may actually be doing the only thing possible aside from allowing complete nutcase theocracy the freedom to be nutcase-y and theocratic in its political ambitions.
    I still hold out hope for the two sides to rope together simultaneous action such that each can claim an upper hand for the home audience.
    ****
    Obama is on the warpath domestically, by the way. Poll numbers in mid-Oct. could swing noticeably. It’s my offhand dope-fiend look at the world. Or as I prefer, “hope-fiend”!!
    The ocean floor has thus far not collapsed and the Macondo well is mostly sealed up at this point. There’s a fair amount of debate about the gooey stuff that’s been found on the ocean floor. I would guess the marine bio-chemists will be analyzing things for quite some time before we really know what happened.
    And Mussorgsky is running for Senate in Alaska! Cue up Pictures at an Exhibition!!!!
    OOPS! Does spelling count?!

    Reply

  22. Paul Norheim says:

    Note to self: read up on theories of humor, especially “On the
    Essence of Laughter” by Charles Baudelaire; and “Laughter: An
    Essay On The Meaning Of The Comic” by Henri Bergson.

    Reply

  23. nadine says:

    Dan Kervick,
    How do you tell when a conspiracy nut is suggesting conspiracies as a joke?
    p.s. the TWN site is malfunctioning. I also see a delay between posting and display.

    Reply

  24. Paul Norheim says:

    Note to self: read up on theories of humor, especially “On the
    Essence of Laughter” by Charles Baudelaire; and “Laughter: An
    Essay On The Meaning Of The Comic” by Henri Bergson.

    Reply

  25. nadine says:

    “Political institutions need the following things and more to work: legitimacy, stability, predictability, evenhandedness.” (questions)
    questions, go read the Carnegie piece, and you will see how all these things are out of Fayyad’s hands. Whenever the the radicals holding the whip hand chose to exercise their veto over affairs, they can do so. Fatah can’t even gets its act together to have elections on the WB, so Fayyad can’t gain any legitimacy through elections.
    Basically Fayyad can move from ‘no legitimacy’ to ‘a little legitimacy’ based on delivering services – at the price of Fatah being considered an order-taker for the Israelis (i.e the same Israelis who are preventing a Hamas takeover and bloodbath). How could it be otherwise, in a political culture where you get your ‘street cred’ from killing Jews, not delivering services?

    Reply

  26. Paul Norheim says:

    Note to self: read up on theories of humor, especially “On the
    Essence of Laughter” by Charles Baudelaire; and “Laughter: An
    Essay On The Meaning Of The Comic” by Henri Bergson.

    Reply

  27. Dan Kervick says:

    I think it was a joke.

    Reply

  28. questions says:

    I gotta say, POA, that post of yours makes no sense at all. I was describing reality, not suggesting a conspiracy. The reality is simply that when I get an error message after a posting I open a new tab of my browser, go to a second version of TWN. If the post is there, then it has posted. This morning, the posts weren’t there. Techno goof, not conspiracy. I was merely explaining and apologizing for the multiple posts. I certainly didn’t intend to post multiple times.
    Where you get conspiracy out of this, I have no idea.
    I was mostly hoping the administrator would remove the extra posts as they take up space.

    Reply

  29. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “When it fails, I open up a new window. When the post doesn’t show there, I repost. And then I refresh the new window to check, and it doesn’t show AGAIN….”
    Yeah right, questions. When are you gonna stop with these friggin’ conspiracy theories???

    Reply

  30. questions says:

    Weirdest multiple posting ever….
    When it fails, I open up a new window. When the post doesn’t show there, I repost. And then I refresh the new window to check, and it doesn’t show AGAIN….
    Weird morning.
    Feel free to remove the extra posts, and sorry for the multiplicity at this hour of the morning.
    Yikes.

    Reply

  31. questions says:

    nadine,
    Political institutions need the following things and more to work: legitimacy, stability, predictability, evenhandedness.
    Without these basic characteristics which come down to allowing people to live daily lives in relatively predictable fashion, governments risk failing. Jealousy, anger, feelings of injustice, differential treatment — all of these will undermine institutions.
    The question for Fayyadism is whether or not what he builds conforms to all of these, manages to keep a sense of legitimacy, and shows growth in efficiency over time.
    I’m half-betting on his getting the trash picked up every Monday by 8 a.m., making it easy to get licenses and the like, and regularizing a police force that enforces the law in something like an evenhanded way.
    Because governance and legitimacy and acceptance and general functioning are all in a circle together, one simply has to break into the circle and start marching, hoping that others will join in.
    There is no other way to get a gov’t going. Strong-arming people is not particularly stable for long, institution-building isn’t a guarantee either. Strong-arming for a while and then backing off isn’t so great either.
    Given how difficult a proposition it is to build the stuff of states, Fayyad is as good a bet as any.
    If the international community legitimates him AND he can get the trash picked up by 8 a.m. on Mondays…I think it’s a reasonable risk for Israel to sign an tentative agreement that ties Israeli behavior to some easy West Bank goals.
    I think a W/B-Gaza split isn’t a bad idea for now. I would hope that Gazans would see that life in the W/B has gotten easier, check points have been pulled, transit to schools and farms is aided rather than impeded, the wall is covered with ivy or flowers or whatever, and is maybe slowly taken down over time…. The societies need both integration and separation, financial development of internal markets needs to continue apace. As the W/B improves, Gazans may well have a change of heart and reunification would be the end goal.
    Pipe dream? Crack smoking? What choice do we have?
    Disappointment is part of life, as is failure in nation building. But if we give up before we give it a try, we have always already failed. No percentage in that.

    Reply

  32. nadine says:

    Nathan Brown of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace warns against the game of “let’s pretend” that the New America Foundation is inclined to play:
    Fayyad Is Not the Problem, but Fayyadism Is Not the Solution to Palestine

    Reply

  33. nadine says:

    If anyone wants to leave POA’s rants about Wigwag’s gender and return to the subject of Salam Fayyad, there is an interesting article about him and Gen. Dayton in The New York Review of Books:
    Our Man in Palestine
    October 14, 2010
    Nathan Thrall
    On August 31, the night before President Obama

    Reply

  34. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “But I would be miffed if it turned out that WigWag is not a retiree living in Florida”
    Odds are, you’ll never know.

    Reply

  35. Dan Kervick says:

    Oh never mind. I see … it’s the start of the Clinton Global Initiative get-together.

    Reply

  36. Dan Kervick says:

    I don’t really care whether WigWag is a man or a woman.
    But I would be miffed if it turned out that WigWag is not a retiree living in Florida.
    By the way, speaking of Hillary Clinton, does anyone know why Bill Clinton appears to be on some kind of publicity tour lately?

    Reply

  37. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Well, by golly, its about time we delved into issues of major importance!!!!
    Kinda fun, isn’t it?
    (Despicable, really, my vicarious amusement at Wiggie’s expense.)
    But, um, does a man really say….. “Women in the West have OUR rights because those rights were fought for”?
    And does a woman say…. “If I had a dime for every comment that you began with “As a Jew…” or “As a fellow Jew…” or “As a Jew with meshugana settler relatives…” I would be a wealthy MAN”????
    Weird, huh? So, eeny meeny, miney moe…..
    Reading the above two quotes, it seems that it is WIGGIE that is “gender confused”, eh?
    On a general level, it seems that the zionist faction here in the comment section of TWN actually CELEBRATE deception. Note Nadine’s recent lauding of Netanyahu’s insincere and devious treatment of these “peace talks”. And who can ignore the veil of left wing moderation this rabid zionist Wigwag wore when he/she first slithered onto the scene. Then of course, there is the asshole Marcus, and the myriad of other identities that particular troll has used to soil the discourse here. Remember how he claimed to have hacked into my computer? On a far larger scale, we have Israel’s prolific usage of false flag attacks, espionage, and organized and well financed propaganda programs such as Hasbara and Megaphone. And who can fail to note the absolute SHIT that is the regular fare at the AIPAC website?
    It seems Wiggie is just employing the acceptable strategies and techniques the right wing Israeli Jews use to justify the unjustifiable. As I’ve pointed out here a thousand times, if an argument must be defended with lies, than that argument doesn’t deserve, and hasn’t earned, a defense.
    Honestly, I WANT to know the TRUE circumstance and situation of the various posters here. And, in many ways it IS important to know, if only to draw conclusions about the motives behind someone’s participation. Many of Paul’s posts would be inexplicable if one did not know his place of residence. And my own crude and rudimentary knowledge of political workings and world affairs might seem odd, out of place, if I had not opened up to the commenting community here and exposed myself as a tradesman with very little interest in world affairs and politics prior to 9/11/01.
    Admit it. Aren’t you intrigued by Nadine’s seeming ability to post here 24/7, at all hours, in such a prolific manner? And what about some maggot like Marcus? Aren’t you just a bit curious what motivates someone to so candidly portray themselves as pure scum while revealing very little about themselves other than their own scumminess? Well, Wig-wag has intrigued me with his (?) schizophrenic bounces from moderate to radical, from sweet to raging bitch, from polite to castrating viciousness. And what of questions, who has revealed NOTHING about himself (herself?), leaving us to conjecture, while never offering comments in rebuttal to the conjecture. I would love to know if I have pegged the little weasel correctly, as an academic Gumbi that wouldn’t last ten minutes on the streets of the real world.
    But I am sure we haven’t seen the last of Wiggie, whether it decides to clear the air or not. Judging from Netyanyahu’s stance on the settlements, and the bitch/witch Hillary’s “diplomacy” towards Iran, things are gonna get mighty interesting in the Middle East, sooner rather than later. And there is NO way Wiggie will be able to resist spinning events to Israel’s behalf, whether he’s wearing panty hose, or boxers.

    Reply

  38. JohnH says:

    PN–You expect an honest answer from Wig? Keep dreaming.

    Reply

  39. Paul Norheim says:

    Ok, WigWag —although I don’t regard this as a very important
    issue, let’s just say that it would be more convenient, from a
    grammatical perspective, to know your gender.
    So I hope you don’t mind – after all these years discussing
    everything from nationalism to James Joyce – if I ask you directly:
    Are you a woman, WigWag, or a man?

    Reply

  40. JohnH says:

    I, too, distinctly recall Wig claiming to be a woman living in South Florida.
    I also think that Wig’s identity is well known at NAF. I have seen occasions when NAF bloggers have departed from their usual aloofness and have reacted with alarm to Wig’s comments. This happens particularly when Wig is on a course that might plausibly undermine their credibility.
    Apart from attempting to undermine people and positions not sufficiently Zionist or anti-Muslim, I think Wig uses the comment section to float arguments, see what the response is, and whether they might gain traction in a broader audience.

    Reply

  41. Paul Norheim says:

    Of course, the “extremely important gender issue” was intended as irony…
    Here is, hopefully, a proper link to what he/she/it said back in February
    http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/2010/02/leading_israeli/

    Reply

  42. Paul Norheim says:

    Been busy this weekend, but noticed that the debate about
    WigWag’s gender continues. Have not read the posts here yet,
    but found one of my own comments from Mars this year that
    may be relevant:
    “Posted by Paul Norheim, Mar 07 2010, 5:00PM – Link
    re. the extremely important gender issue, here is the document
    suggesting that Wig is a female – a quote from a thread about
    the two state solution from 1. February this year:
    WigWag said:
    “As a good leftist, JohnH, you know that power is never given,
    it’s always taken. That’s as true in the world of gender politics
    as in every other aspect of human affairs. Women in the West
    have our rights because those rights were fought for.”
    “Our rights”?
    She wouldn’t say that if she were a male, would she?
    (…) Here is the link:
    http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/2010/02/leading
    _israeli/
    ————————————–

    Reply

  43. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Funny, I’ve never seen a woman use that expression, Questions. But hey, what do I know? Just another “conspiracy theory”, I suppose.
    Hmm, I have seen women use the expression “If….yadayada……I counted…..yadayada…..I’d be a rich WOMAN today”.
    But I forgot, common sense and basic logic have no place in a debate with a half-melted Gumbi.
    I wonder, do you go through life exclaiming “OH NO, MISTER BILL” every time reality slaps you in your pixilated and under-focused world view?

    Reply

  44. questions says:

    By the way, “I’d be a rich man” is an expression and not at all an indicator of reproductive status.

    Reply

  45. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Well, Dan, of course I may be mistaken, and it could in fact be that Wiggie has never positively identified himself in regards to gender, although my recollection serves me differently than yours.
    However, certainly, “she” has been used quite often here in posts addressed to and about Wiggie, and the natural reaction, one would think, would be to correct false assumptions about gender. Call me old fashioned, but I really do think that opinions, and presentation of purported “facts”, must be weighed taking into account the circumstances of their origin.
    Questions rejects the notion that Wig-wag’s purported ideologies have changed. Such a rejection is ridiculous on its face. Anyone that has followed Wiggie’s contributions here since his arrival cannot help but notice the rabidly virulent onset of radical zionist views, (Especially since Nadine’s arrival. Interesting, that.) that bear very little resemblence to the self-proclaimed left wing moderate Jew that originally sidled into the conversation here.
    It would be interesting to search past comments to see what semantics Steve uses when addressing comments to or about Wig-wag. Does he get gender specific? They have obviously corresponded closely off this forum, and I am quite sure that Wiggie has given Steve a more complete “picture”, be it real or contrived.
    Whatever. As I stated above, it really doesn’t matter, and perhaps my attention to this issue is just vicariously amusing to me. But we do present arguments here that use components presented as “facts”. It is useful to know whether or not someone peddling “facts” is in fact a shameless liar. With Nadine, its water under the bridge, because she has been caught so many times in blatant lies that she has rendered herself utterly and completely untrustworthy. But Wiggie has used a much more insidious and careful insertion of the zionist narrative into the debate, and her truths and untruths are far less black and white than Nadine’s. If in fact Wiggie’s self-described personal situation and ideologies have been shown to be a deception, which I believe they have, than she has shown herself to be on the same level as Nadine, and utterly undeserving of this blog’s trust when presenting arguments that use “facts” for reinforcement.
    And, to be fair, I might just be treading onto a path that is none of my business. Wiggie’s recent attacks on Steve, using Steve’s homosexuality to attack Steve’s positions on Middle Eastern affairs telegraphs an anger that is inexplicable unless Wiggie is feeling a certain amount of betrayal. Perhaps Wiggie prefers “she” in posts that are addressed to or about him. After all, wishful thinking is an affliction we all share to one degree or another.

    Reply

  46. Dan Kervick says:

    Thanks POA. I might be wrong about this, but while I do recall that WigWag has definitely claimed to be a retiree living in Florida, I don’t recall WigWag ever making any claims to be one gender or another.
    I have sometimes tended to assume WigWag was a women. But that was an inferential leap on my part based on the intensity of WigWag’s PUMA leanings and apparent women’s rights concerns. I have gone back and forth with the personal pronouns “he” and “she” when discussing WigWag’s posts, but have often engaged in awkward constructions using the proper name “WigWag” over and over, instead of a noun.

    Reply

  47. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Geez, questions, I have no idea what you are, (not entirely true, I DO assume you are some worthless academic asshole that has never had to survive in anything other than a campus setting), but I can say with certainty that your panties seem to be in a huge wad over this.
    Thou dost protest too much.

    Reply

  48. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Wiggie, in responding to a post from Paul Norhiem, said….
    “If I had….(yaddadadada)…for everytime you said…..(yadayadayada)…..I’d be a very rich man.”
    Questions, in his usual disingenuous manner, wants to place Wig-wag’s gender in the realm of my “assumptions”. Untrue. Wig-wag presented himself as a woman, on in years, living in Florida. Correct? He also claimed, initially when he began posting here, to be left wing. Well, women don’t say … “Yaddadayadyada….if….yadayada…everytime…yadayada…I’d be a very rich man.” Nor can anyone read Wiggie’s posting of late, and reach any sort of realistic cionclusion that he comes from a left wing position.
    It is now obvious through the actual evidence that “Wig-wag” is a construct with no foundation in reality. The question is why. Although I have always maintained that Wiggie was a fraud, the logic behind such a charade is hard to fathom. I can only assume he cultivated a certain personna in the belief that such a personna would make his positions and opinions carry more wieght or credibility.
    One wonders if Clemons has a true picture of who or what Wig-wag is. By Steve’s comments, its obvious they have corresponded privately, as have many of us. Has Wiggie lied to Steve as well, or has Steve nurtured this charade?
    I suppose it really doesn’t matter. But being less the academic than the wishy washy mush brain “questions”, I place a bit of stock in honesty, and have the belief that the circumstance and station of a commenter contribute to the attention and wieght I place on their opinions and contributions here.
    “Questions” seems to be unduly derailed by my fascination with Wiggie’s deception. Perhaps my gut feelings about “Questions” is as perceptive as those I have held about Wiggie.
    Besides, its just kinda fun conjecturing about this stuff. Wiggie’s scarcity of comment since his “I’d be a rich man” comment must certainly raise some eyebrows, eh? Does that strike anyone as a slip in semantics that an actual woman would make?
    Now, if I REALLY want to jump on the “conspiracy” wagon in regards to the commenters here on TWN, I would get into absences and reappearences, and how some of the like minded trolls here seem to share timelines in a manner consistent enough to raise suspicion. But not wanting to wade through question’s neck deep deposits of fluff stuffed essays, I’ll save that bit of amusing conjecture for another time.

    Reply

  49. questions says:

    “Claimed”??????
    Linky?
    “Trying to undermine”???? Umm, a comment section on a small blog in the middle of the blogiverse isn’t exactly “undermining” anything….
    And besides, didn’t you read Dan’s post? He and MarkL were talkin’ to Brave POA, not to anyone else, so you apparently also have no right to intervene in the discourse!

    Reply

  50. JohnH says:

    Yes, Wig does seem to be a poseur. First, “she” claimed to be a women so that “she” could champion women’s rights–but only rights for women in unfriendly Muslim countries. But “she” dropped that pose when “her” hypocrisy got to be too blatant.
    Before that she claimed to be a “liberal” and mucked around in the Democratic presidential race, trying to undermine Obama in favor of Clinton, who Republiscum believed to be the easier target. But otherwise “she” always took bizarre positions for someone identifying as a liberal.
    So it would not surprise me if Wig is not a woman at all. The Wig could be a poseur, which is what wearing a wig is all about.

    Reply

  51. questions says:

    That might be true, Dan, so don’t respond and wait for him instead.
    Or is this now a private party?

    Reply

  52. Dan Kervick says:

    That might be true, questions. But I think that MarkL and I were talking to POA.

    Reply

  53. questions says:

    What’s going on is that in some post recently, W/W may have indicated a set of genitals other than the one Brave POA had assumed. I’m not actually sure that that’s the case even because I re-read the post and it still seemed ambiguous to me.
    But Brave POA latched onto this declaration of genital status as profoundly significant and as an indication of “fraud.”
    So Brave POA, like any guy who thought he was dating a woman who turned out to be a man, is a little put out.
    But when Brave POA gets a little put out, he flips.
    So Brave POA is flipping out. Gender bending really gets to him, apparently. And he feels deeply betrayed. By a set of anonymous electrons. On the web. In a comment section. Can electrons be gendered, anyway? (It’s masculine in French, at any rate.)

    Reply

  54. Dan Kervick says:

    “POA…what’s the scoop on Wigwag? Obviously I missed something.”
    Same here. What’s going on?

    Reply

  55. questions says:

    By the way, jus’ so ya know, it’s really hard to type when you’re spineless. I’m jes’ a puddle on mush on the floor, and let me tell you, if archy had a hard time hitting the shift key (hope I have the reference correct), I REALLY have a hard time!
    OMG OMG OMG, spineless, indeed, you brave brave brave soul. You who claim an online PERSONA, you who lash out at others for being “frauds”, I am truly confused at this point.
    And to be honest, since each of us merely is a pile of electrons to others, what the hell is “fraud” or fakery or genuineness — what’s this shit got to do with it?
    Evaluate the electrons for what they say. Offer other electrons and leave it at that.

    Reply

  56. questions says:

    Did W/W ever declare a set of genitals? Not that I’m aware of. Perhaps I missed it as I don’t particularly care if W/W pees standing up or sitting down, donates sperm or egg to offspring, check “m” or “f” on forms, has more testosterone or estrogen….. Who gives a damn? Seriously.
    As for fraud — gimme a break.
    Read the electrons and agree or disagree with the electrons.
    I’ve cited evidence for the various claims I make about things, and that’s that. Agree or disagree with: Steve Coll, Dan Fleshler, the new book on lobbying and Ezra Klein who is also making use of it, tons of material on health care reform, the policies the admin has or hasn’t adopted, and what I think are good arguments that are fact-based regarding 9/11 CT nonsense and what’s her name — the FBI translator you’re so taken with…..
    I cite facts, give opinions, and have developed something of a worldview.
    So if it’s “wuss”-like or unbrilliant, so be it.
    You can go on being BRAVE by calling people names. It’s quite brave to do so anonymously and as a pile of electrons. Brave indeed. Brave, brave, brave defender of electrons.
    As for ideology and W/W — not much of a change there so far as I see. Strongly pro-Israel, a reader of history with a specific narrative in mind, disgusted with Obama and now irritated with Clinton over her participating in the admin. Not so far from your positions on some issues, if the truth be told.
    W/W always has arguments regarding historical interpretations; W/W often gets replies from Steve that are fairly complimentary, with a mix of agreement and disagreement. And you scream fraud because you’ve been gender-betrayed by a pile of electrons that made no promise regarding sex organs.
    Wow.

    Reply

  57. MarkL says:

    POA…what’s the scoop on Wigwag? Obviously I missed something.

    Reply

  58. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “Oh, and can you calm down about the gender confusion?”
    Oh, its not “gender confusion”, you asshole. I have ALWAYS maintained that Wig-wag was a fraud. Of course, you have always maintained that such accusations were “paranoia and conspiracy theory”. Frankly, I think YOU are just as fake as Wig-wag. Just chalk it up to my penchant for “conspiracy theories”. Although I can’t imagine why anyone would assume the gutless wishy washy personna you have chosen for yourself. Takes all kinds, I suppose.
    So whats your theory, you pathetic spineless academic wuss? Any brilliant disertations on why Wiggie felt he/she needed to misrepresent his/herself to this blog, both in regards to gender AND political ideology??

    Reply

  59. JohnH says:

    Instead of praying for atonement today, Nadine preferred to comment here.
    Oh well, she can’t find anything to atone for anyway. And those she supports have nothing to atone for either!

    Reply

  60. questions says:

    Oh, and can you calm down about the gender confusion? Are you really feeling that betrayed, as if you had been on a date, or something?
    Wow.

    Reply

  61. questions says:

    Oh, brave POA. Brave, brave arrangement of anonymous electrons on a comment page. Brave, take a stand, brave.
    By the way, just cuz aipackers go to the Hill to lobby don’t mean the rest of the claims about the lobby’s power are accurate. Jus’ sayin’.

    Reply

  62. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “Only in your addle-pated brain could this become an “admission” about Netanyahu’s bad faith………….”
    These are YOUR words, you ignorant bigoted sack of contaminated brain cells….
    “Both Abbas and Netanyahu are playing the same game, which is called, “Placate the moron in the White House and set up the other guy to take the blame when the talks fail.”"
    If you aren’t admitting to Netanyahu’s “bad faith”, than what exactly ARE you admitting to?

    Reply

  63. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “….and both sides are doing it to placate President Obama, and for no other reason…..”
    “Only in your addle-pated brain could this become an “admission” about Netanyahu’s bad faith…”
    Amazing isn’t it? Is she so ignorant she can’t see the idiocy of her rebuttal?
    “……and his alone…….”
    She musta missed my comments about this puppet Abbas. As well as my comments about Obama’s part in this pathetic charade.
    Nadine, besides being batshit crazy, and unforgivably bigoted, must create straw positions for her ideological opponents, because her ridiculous bullshit is unable to counter ACTUAL fact based arguments that criticize Israel.
    If Nadine is an example of what the Israeli propaganda machine is reduced to, then they can consider Megaphone and their Hasbara efforts as an ongoing and impending failure. Who here buys into her crap? Sadly, Nadine’s spew is as damaging to Jews as it is to Israel. She is hardly the kind of person that Jews should choose as a mouthpiece. The fact that her handlers haven’t pulled her off the podium here at TWN doesn’t exactly paint them in a favorable light. Do they really think Nadine’s efforts here are constructive to Israel or the Jews? If so, then Israel and the Jews are in very deep shit. With an army of Nadines speaking for them, the Jews can look forward to a rise in global anti-semitism. Judging by Oren’s recent comments and essays, and the crap AIPAC is now mailing out, Nadine IS NOT an anomaly.
    And what happened to Wiggie??? Has he/she strangled her/himself in her/his own jockstrap??? Did he/she masquerade as a woman for so long he/she forgot which quadrant the undergarment belongs on?

    Reply

  64. nadine says:

    Warren,
    We have quite detailed accounts of what the Palestinians did at Camp David from Clinton and Dennis Ross among others. They made piecemeal demands on this point and that, and when concessions were given, they pocketed them and demanded more. But what the Israelis did, and Clinton did, but Arafat never did, was propose their idea of an overall solution which would lead to the end of the conflict. That is what I mean by presenting their demands. Nor does it exist even now, a two-state proposal from the Palestinian side. There is no such thing.
    POS, your thinking is even more freakish and warped than I had thought possible. What I said about the current negotiations is exactly what Leslie Gelb just said about it — that they diplomatic situation is not ripe for negotiations, and both sides are doing it to placate President Obama, and for no other reason. Only in your addle-pated brain could this become an “admission” about Netanyahu’s bad faith – and his alone.
    DonS, sure I think Arafat should have taken the deal at Taba. He would have absolutely had an independent state of Palestine in short order. But he wouldn’t let go his dream of being Saladin and driving the Jews from Jerusalem.

    Reply

  65. PissedOffAmerican says:

    What Israel wants from the Palestinians, it takes
    By colonizing the West Bank and depriving Palestinians of basic rights, Israel has made a two-state solution impossible.
    By Ahmed Moor
    September 17, 2010
    Israel’s ambassador to the U.S., Michael B. Oren, argues in his Sept. 15 Times Op-Ed article that Israelis want peace, and I believe him. They’ve said so often enough. But the Israelis want lots of other things too.
    For instance, they want the West Bank and East Jerusalem. In addition, they want the Palestinian aquifers situated beneath the West Bank, and they want to preserve their racial privilege in the Jewish state. They also want to shear the Gaza Strip from Palestine.
    Most of all, the Israelis want Palestinian quiescence in the face of Israeli wants. Those wants have made the two-state solution impossible to implement.
    For decades, the Israelis have taken what they want from the Palestinians. Consequently, there are about 500,000 settlers in Jewish-only colonies in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. Today, the Israelis are discovering that what one wants and what one can afford sometimes diverge.
    Some Israelis

    Reply

  66. PissedOffAmerican says:

    This is from just one page on the AIPAC website. But don’t worry about it, the Gumbi academic genius “questions” has repeatedly assured us the power of the Israeli lobby groups is just a figment of our imagination, a “conspiracy theory”…….
    **AIPAC Staff Address Hill Staff on Peace Talks and Iran
    AIPAC provides congressional staff members with up-to-date information pertaining to the U.S.-Israel relationship.
    AIPAC Directors of Policy and Government Affairs Marvin Feuer and Brad Gordon on Monday addressed some 35 congressional staffers in a briefing on Capitol Hill about the latest developments surrounding Israeli-Palestinians talks and Iran’s nuclear program…..continues.
    **Lebanon Expert Briefs Hill Staff
    Tony Badran spoke to congressional staff about the current state of affairs in Lebanon.
    A leading expert on Lebanon and Hizballah addressed some 50 congressional staffers and other members of the policy community about the Lebanese government’s ties to Hizballah and their implications for U.S. policy in the region. Tony Badran, a research fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and the author of the respected blog Across the Bay, highlighted the recent unprovoked attack by the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) against Israeli soldiers as an example of Lebanon’s growing radicalism…..continues.
    **Avi Issacharoff Addresses Hill Staff on Gaza
    Avi Issacharoff, Arab affairs correspondent for Ha’aretz and one of Israel’s leading experts on the Palestinians, addressed some 50 congressional staffers about the recent flotilla incident, the blockade of Gaza, and the future of Hamas, Fatah, Gaza and the West Bank. The briefing discussed Israel’s recent steps to ease the blockade of Gaza, noting that Israel’s move weakens Hamas’ massive underground smuggling business along the Gaza-Egypt border. In this context, Issacharoff noted the enormous improvements in the Palestinians’ quality of life in the West Bank and the contrasting state of Islamist dictatorship and fundamentalism in Gaza. Issacharoff also criticized the international community’s condemnatory response to Israel’s actions in stopping the flotilla……continues.
    http://www.aipac.org/1680.asp#39122
    Isn’t it wonderful that these Israeli “experts” are so willing to brief OUR Representative’s staff on The World According To Israel? And gee, who can doubt that their “briefings” are “fair and balanced” and don’t dissingenuously slant the narrative in Israel’s favor?
    One wonders what the “reward” is for those who appear on the carefully perused rosters of attendance are.

    Reply

  67. JohnH says:

    You have to excuse Nadine. She has never been able to hear Palestinian voices, except for the most extremist bravado.
    In fact, the Palestinians and Arabs have repeatedly stated their demands–borders based on UN Security Council Resolution 242, one of the many UNSC resolutions Israel routinely ignores with eager connivance from the US.
    And, if Nadine ever really gave a hoot about what the Palestinian side wanted, she could look at the Taba negotiations.
    Her charges that the Palestinians side never proposes anything is merely a distraction for the fact that Likud never proposes anything.

    Reply

  68. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “If the Palestinians want what you think they want, how come THEY have never put forth their demands – land swaps, borders, etc?”
    Uh, gee, you mean “preconditions”???
    Nadine, you really should just shut the fuck up, or find somnewhere else to deposit your crap. Who here buys into what you’re selling? The jig is up amongst informed Americans, Nadine. Your shit only sells on Fox News or DEBKA these days, and only because they have found a market for shit.

    Reply

  69. JohnH says:

    If Palestinians recognized Israel as a Jewish state, Israel would welcome that as granting permission to finish the job of ethnic cleansing…
    The ‘recognition of Israel as a Jewish state’ is a gotcha issue–Jewish supremacists present it as a reasonable demand, while in fact it masks their total intransigence and desire for religious apartheid.
    And, in typical projection of their ambitions onto the other side, they read any Palestinian demand for a Palestinian homeland in Israel/Palestine to mean that Palestinians want to expel all Jews. Of course, they forget that Palestinians are traditionally a mix of Muslims, Christians, and Jews. In fact, if you believe the Zionist narrative, a sizable number of Jews were Palestinians long before the creation of Israel.

    Reply

  70. WarrenMetzler says:

    Nadine,
    I haven’t finish Efraim Karsh’s book yet, so I’ve refrained from responding to you for weeks. But this last post of yours is so egregious to bite my tongue would I’m sure result in cutting it in half. Your latest technique is to now claim the Palestinians never presented their demands????
    What do you think they were doing in Oslo? Discussing Tunisia cuisine? What do you think they were doing at Camp David with Clinton, that resulted in Arafat and his crew refusing to accept the crumbs Israel offered from their table of plenty? Discussing rural hideaways for the rich and famous? What do you think they were discussing at Annapolis with Bush? Discussing establishing a Palestinian naval academy? At Taba, etc., etc.
    Maybe you are not working for Israeli intelligence. Maybe you are a screen writer specializing in fantasy movies, and can’t separate your work ideas from your postings on The Washington Note.

    Reply

  71. DonS says:

    “It seems to me that if the Palestinians were serious about a Palestinian State, the demand that they recognize Israel as a Jewish state would not be a show stopper for them — why should it be, if they want Palestine next to Israel?”
    How about it Nadine? IF the Palestinians ‘recognize’ Israel, are you in favor of a viable Palestinian state within roughly the ’67 borders and with all the attributes of statehood? You find excuse for saying the Palestinians don’t want a state. Do you, or are you just happy with the continued encroachment and appropriation of land that would otherwise form a state? And please don’t dazzle me with this business about how the Israelis are really not encroaching yada yada.

    Reply

  72. nadine says:

    It seems to me that if the Palestinians were serious about a Palestinian State, the demand that they recognize Israel as a Jewish state would not be a show stopper for them — why should it be, if they want Palestine next to Israel?
    Yet it is a show-stopper for them.
    If the Palestinians want what you think they want, how come THEY have never put forth their demands – land swaps, borders, etc?

    Reply

  73. WarrenMetzler says:

    It seems to me, that if all reasonable people agree there should be a Palestinian State, and its borders should the 1967 borders, with some equal land exchanges, and any state has the right to determine everything insides it borders, that if Israel was serious about this state; as opposed, as I and many others believe, wanting there to never being a Palestinian State, because ALL past and future Israeli government high officials intend to continue toward all the land in which the 12 tribes lived between 1200 and 500 B.C. is in Israel proper; than the negotiations would be swift and done.
    So why do we continue to act as if Israel has any interest in valid negotiations????!!!!
    Let’s stop the charade and start repeatedly calling a spade a spade. These aren’t peace talks, these are “how can we drag this out until we get our final objective” exercises.

    Reply

  74. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “….cowardly intellectual abode…..”
    Oh damn, thats twice in one night I find myself agreeing with a pyschopath.
    Lord, save me.

    Reply

  75. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “It

    Reply

  76. samuelburke says:

    It is a shame of amazing hypocrisy what is being done to these
    people, the Palestinians.
    in whose name? and what did they do?
    speaking of fucking hypocrisy.

    Reply

  77. JohnH says:

    Another whopper from Nadine–”Palestinians cities and towns (with 95% of the Palestinian population) have not been under occupation since 1994.”
    Of course, if the West Bank isn’t under occupation, then Israel couldn’t unilaterally decide to destroy two “illegal” mosques, one near Nablus and one near Ramallah.
    http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Israel+to+demolish+two+mosques+in+the+west+Bank-a0235820931
    And one would think that the PA would have the authority to punish settlers who torch Palestinian mosques in the WB. But no, it falls under Israeli jurisdiction.

    Reply

  78. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Think about it. Just yesterday those scumbags at AIPAC send out a mailer that warns….
    “SHIN BET: TERROR ATTACKS TO INCREASE AS PEACE TALKS CONTINUE”
    “Terrorist activity directed against Israel will likely increase as Israeli-Palestinian negotiations advance, Shin Bet Chief Yuval Diskin warned the Israeli cabinet Sunday, Ynetnews reported”
    Then, the following day, they do an assassination of a Hamas big-wig. Gee, could their game be anymore obvious?
    Anybody else sick of these bloodsuckin’ vampires?

    Reply

  79. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Now here’s a typical example of Israel’s strategic timing. Peace Talks, MY ASS.
    And how will Hamas respond? Why, EXACTLY as Israel hopes they will, of course. And then, of course, it will be Hamas that is the spoiler. Whats a few sacrificed dead Israeli Jews, if not a huge propaganda bonus?
    This shit is gettin’ reaaaaaallllly old.
    http://palestinenote.com/blogs/topnews/pages/israeli-military-kills-hamas-commander.aspx
    Israeli military kills West Bank Hamas commander
    Hamas strongman Iyad Shilbaya was shot 3 times in the neck and chest when the Israeli military raided his house at 2:30 AM. Hamas swears that “Shilbaya’s blood will be avenged.”

    Reply

  80. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Geez, the schizo bigot Nadine quotes…..
    “They (Netanyahu and Abbas) spoke only of being serious and bargaining in good faith, the usual stuff…”
    …when just two days ago she actually admitted that the racist Netanyahu, and the puppet Abbas, were NOT negotiating in good faith, and were merely gaming Obama.
    Seems her more lucid moments are short lived indeed.
    “Fayyad seems like a well-meaning person doing he best he can in difficult circumstances….”
    The road to hell is paved with good intentions. One can laud his efforts only by ignoring his willingness to participate in a charade, a con-job.

    Reply

  81. Dan Kervick says:

    Fayyad seems like a well-meaning person doing he best he can in difficult circumstances, circumstances in which the Arab-hating and settlement-loving United States has left the Palestinians with few viable options. But someone needs to ask him on the 23rd whether he expects Gaza to be a part of the Palestinian state he is trying to build, or if he instead plans to cut it loose.

    Reply

  82. nadine says:

    For all Steve Clemon’s sympathy about the difficulties of building Palestinian institutions “under occupation”, the Palestinians cities and towns (with 95% of the Palestinian population) have not been under occupation since 1994, and if there had been any will to create institutions (for example, if officials left office when their terms ended) it could have happened long ago.
    Now, these same officials depend on the reviled “occupation” to prevent a Hamas takeover and ensuing bloodbath. Since the “occupation” is keeping them alive, they are not as eager as they sound to have it end any time soon.
    Leslie Gelb at CFR has noticed that the White House foreign policy is being run by amateurs who are about to kill a whole lot of people in the Mideast with their stupid meddling.
    That is my wording of course; Gelb phrases it much more diplomatically, but who can deny that we basically agree on what is going on, i.e. a charade is being promulgated to make President Obama look Presidential somewhere, with never a care for how much worse the situation will become when the talks collapse?
    Gelb:
    “Maybe Hillary Clinton, Washington

    Reply

  83. JohnH says:

    Don Bacon–I think Hillary is just promoting her new “Guantanamo Gear” fashion line.
    http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:j9AUtjx_PbabrM:http://chattahbox.com/images/2009/03/guantanamo_bay.bmp&t=1

    Reply

  84. Don Bacon says:

    On a lighter note, here’s Hill in her CalTrans outfit again, this time in the ME.
    http://tinyurl.com/22nxsmh

    Reply

  85. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “Alas, the end of freedom of expression on The Washington Note”
    Oh, oh, roo the day, Kotzi baby.

    Reply

  86. questions says:

    Kotz,
    What’s the First Amendment got to do with whether or not your insults are deleted?
    This is private property here.
    As great a guy as Steve probably is, he isn’t “Congress” or the several states. He’s not making any laws regarding speech. AND the US Supreme Court has upheld time, place, and manner restrictions anyway…..
    It’s not about lacking strength or being afeared o’ the truth.
    It’s about expressing disagreement in a rational manner or cursing in the accustomed manner. There are cursing styles that are within accepted boundaries here. And there are ways to disagree with the host that are accepted by the host.
    Stick within boundaries, and you have the world before you.
    Also note that Steve isn’t generally the moderator. He gets an intern to do the nasty work for him!

    Reply

  87. kotzabasis says:

    I am hesitating to comment on this issue due to the despicable hypocrisy of the founder of TWN who while vociferously and ardently upholds the First Amendment of the Constitution on freedom of speech on other issues he revokes it under criticism of his own position. He has wantonly deleted larry birnbuam

    Reply

  88. Don Bacon says:

    Salam Fayyad was illegally appointed (not approved by the Hamas-dominated Palestinian Legislative Council) Prime Minister of the Palestinian National Authority by the illegal (his term expired Jan 9, 2009) President of the Authority, Mahmoud Abbas.
    So far, so good. They’re on an expanded American Plan.

    Reply

  89. Matthew says:

    JohnH: He represents the World Bank.

    Reply

  90. JohnH says:

    Who is Salam Fayyad, and who does he represent?
    So far as I can tell, his only source of support comes from the usual suspects–the US and Israel.
    Fayyad has about as much legitimacy as Abbas, whose term in office expired ages ago.

    Reply

  91. Matthew says:

    POA: Mubarek suggested to Netanyahu that he continue the non-existent settlement freeze for 3 months so that the parties could focus on negotiating final borders. Once the borders are decided, then Israel can build wherever it wants…on its side of the border.
    Of course, the Israelis rejected this idea. And the usual Zionist clowns will continue to claim that the GOI is negotiating in good faith.
    Right.

    Reply

  92. PissedOffAmerican says:

    What “high stakes”? You mean the ramifications of being unable to sell this pathetic charade to the global community?
    You mean the growing global perception that Israel is not interested in peace, and that Abbas is a puppet on a string?
    You mean the widely accepted perception that the United States has not, does not, and will not mediate this “conflict” in a fair and unbiased manner?
    This is a fuckin’ joke, Steve. You know it, why not just admit it, and treat the issue with at least a moderate amount of fact based analysis?
    Who represents the Gazan Palestinians in these talks? How can you hold substantive and meaningful talks by excluding Hamas? How can these talks bear fruit while Israel is flaunting their continued building during what has been a FICTITIOUS “settlement freeze”? Why would anyone of even base intelligence think an extended settlement freeze would be any more “actual” than the current fake freeze? What good is a “temporary freeze”? Isn’t that basically the same as saying “We’ll hold off stealing that land as a show of good faith, but eventually, steal it we will”.
    I don’t know whats more pathetic, the participants in this charade, or the mass marketeers attempting to sell the script.
    And now Time Magazine is the target of the “anti-semite” slur because they dared run an article that came close to touching on reality? Oren has become a clown whose routine is tired, overdone, and unfunny. And the AIPAC emailings arriving in my inbox are shrill, fearmongering, and disingenuously defensive.
    Its time the “Think Tanks” started “thinking” about how they are presenting this issue, because the same old timeworn litany of bullshit is no longer selling.

    Reply

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *