8 Years of success has sure raised hell with Bush hasn't it?It's funny but after Bush just failed once again in the middle east as expected where while in Israel He equated Obama's willingness to talk to Hamas to appeasement using the example of appeasing the Nazi's during WW2. Talking Compromise whatever you want to call it is necessary for peace in the middle east. the rest of the world including the middle east and Obama realize it as Bush chooses to ignore it in his quest for war with Iran, total middle east breakdown, and ultimately World War Three! Some around here have mentioned Israel "appeasing" Syria after Bush's departure but with developing events it is time to look at the big picture in this regard!
As you know by now Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said peace talks with Syria will be conducted secretly to limit the chances that leaks to reporters might scuttle the negotiations. Olmert, speaking at the start of his weekly Cabinet meeting, said he hopes to avoid the pitfalls that caused the last round of talks with the Syrians in 2000 to break down. ``We have no intention to conduct these negotiations through the media or through daily statements,'' Olmert said in remarks broadcast on Israel Radio. Israel and Syria disclosed last week that they have been conducting indirect talks through Turkey aimed at restarting peace negotiations. Among the most delicate issues in dispute is Syria's demand that Israel return the Golan Heights, which it captured during the 1967 Six-Day War.
As you know by now Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said peace talks with Syria will be conducted secretly to limit the chances that leaks to reporters might scuttle the negotiations. Olmert, speaking at the start of his weekly Cabinet meeting, said he hopes to avoid the pitfalls that caused the last round of talks with the Syrians in 2000 to break down. ``We have no intention to conduct these negotiations through the media or through daily statements,'' Olmert said in remarks broadcast on Israel Radio. Israel and Syria disclosed last week that they have been conducting indirect talks through Turkey aimed at restarting peace negotiations. Among the most delicate issues in dispute is Syria's demand that Israel return the Golan Heights, which it captured during the 1967 Six-Day War.
Israel, Syria and Turkey have engaged in ``meticulous preparation that will match our expectations from the negotiations to the reality as it is today, and not as it was 10 or two years ago,'' Olmert said. In a survey published last week in Israel's Yediot Ahronot newspaper, 52 percent of Israelis opposed giving away any of the Golan, compared with 29 percent who said at least part of it could be swapped. Nineteen percent supported returning the whole territory, according to the poll by the Dahaf Institute. Olmert told Cabinet members the government will soon make a decision on military action in the Gaza Strip to stop the firing of Palestinian rockets at Israel. He said neither the Gaza decision nor the Syrian talks would damage the ongoing peace talks with the Palestinian Authority, which both sides say they hope to wrap up by the end of the year. Negotiations not Appeasement
Israel realizes the necessity of conversation, negotiations, whatever you want to call it as Bush knows but once again must ignore as war is his only goal. Anyway the middle east realizes the brevity of the situation Bush has put the middle east in thanks to his instigation "Democratization" again against Bush's stupid advice: Lebanon's parliament gathered on Sunday to elect army chief Michel Suleiman as head of state, reviving paralyzed state institutions after an 18-month standoff between a U.S.-backed cabinet and the Hezbollah-led opposition.
The election is part of a deal brokered by Qatar last week to defuse a crisis that had swept Lebanon to the brink of civil war, with Hezbollah briefly seizing parts of Beirut and routing government partisans. At least 81 people were killed. Qatar's Emir Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani was among scores of dignitaries in Beirut for the vote. The many foreign ministers on the guest list included those of Iran and Syria, which support Hezbollah, and their regional rival Saudi Arabia."It is today a great day of hope for Lebanon, starting a new process of consolidation of democratic institutions," Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini said.Lawmakers from the anti-Syrian ruling majority and the opposition assembled for the 5 p.m. (1400 GMT) session to elect Suleiman president and fill a post vacant since November. The vote had been postponed 19 times because of the crisis. The deal struck in Doha met the opposition's main demand for veto power in a new national unity government and secured the choice of a president on good terms with Syria and Hezbollah.
The agreement, which also stipulates a new law for 2009 parliamentary polls, has calmed a conflict that had stoked sectarian tensions, paralyzed government and hurt the economy.Parliament has not met for over 18 months, crippling Prime Minister Fouad Siniora's government. Bouts of violence claimed scores of lives and revived memories of the 1975-90 civil war.The Doha deal was widely seen as a setback for Washington and its allies, which had pressed for Hezbollah to be disarmed. Saudi Arabia, France and Egypt back the Beirut government while Iran and Syria support the opposition. No U.S. administration official was expected at the parliamentary session though a delegation from Congress was due to attend. Iranian Foreign Minister Manoushehr Mottaki visited the grave of Hezbollah leader Imad Moughniyah, who was assassinated in Damascus in February, before the vote -- which coincides with the anniversary of Israel's withdrawal from Lebanon in 2000.
Under Lebanon's complex power-sharing system, the president is always a Maronite Christian, the prime minister a Sunni Muslim and the speaker of parliament a Shi'ite Muslim. Suleiman, who relinquishes his post as army commander, fills a chair vacated in November by Emile Lahoud, an ally of Syria. Appointed army chief in 1998 when Damascus controlled Lebanon, Suleiman is inescapably linked to the Syrian-dominated era. He coordinated closely with Syrian troops before they were forced to withdraw from Lebanon in 2005 by an outcry sparked by the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik al-Hariri. As president, Suleiman will have to grapple with a slew of divisive issues including ties with Syria and a U.N. Security Council resolution that calls for all militias to be disarmed -- a demand supported by Hezbollah's Lebanese opponents. Middle east brokered Helbollah Lebanon compromise
Meanwhile on the home front as we discussed the other day McCain is self destructing
Unbelievably to me President Bush, who has steered clear of the campaign trail this year, will appear at three fundraisers next week for presumptive Republican nominee John McCain. The White House hopeful will join its current occupant for at least one of those events, all of which are closed to the press – although White House spokeswoman Dana Perino did say there was a chance that Bush and McCain might make a public appearance together at some point. "President Bush is fully committed, 100 percent committed, to making sure that John McCain is elected to be the next president of the United States of America," Perino said Friday, adding that he would “do what he can when he can.” Despite the president’s record high disapproval ratings, Perino said he would be an asset on the trail. "President Bush is a formidable campaign fundraiser, as has been reported over the years, and I expect that he'll continue to be," she said. Bush to headline McCain fundraisers next week
I happen to agree with Dana Perino! As the middle east is beginning to realize they must ignore what Bush wants and proceed on their own if there is any chance to make things work after the mess Bush has made of things, and Most Americans realize Bush has made a mess of things you have to realize McCain absolutely is going to finish this mess for Bush if underhanded or not he gets the chance. Bush is a plus? A plus to who? Only the affluent who he has enriched but I guess that is all that matters as he lets average Americans and our America fail so he can create his now society and they and the Religious wrong I mean right are all that matter!
13 comments:
Jim--
I posted this the other day. It gives a good idea of why Israel is in peace talks with Syria.
Stand Clear of the Fan
Happy Memorial Day,
Bro Tim & Wally
Brother
I am not sure I get it? You mean because Olmert was on the take? I heard about the corruption problems. Seems to be a consequence of dealing with the US.
Anyway I just assumed Israel realizes better than Bush the situation there and unless they talk there is no guarrantee but war. Did I miss something at your link
I have to run down the store before Trice revolts. be right back!
I read the Mccain voting record that was listed on the Lydia Cornell website and it is shocking.
A lot of the Israelis think the only reason for the peace talks is to draw attention away from Olmert's treasonous scandal.
Bush will end up using Israel as his excuse to launch World War III before he leaves office.
Olmert is merely a tool in the cesspool called war.
This will pop your cork on Memorial Day Jim:
Bush's Conspiracy to Create an American Police State Part VIII: Atrocities are justified with lies, myths or propaganda
Len Hart
Bush is a rotten, transparent bald-faced liar and anyone still believing him is either stupid or complicit. Bush said: "We do not torture!" And all the while, his administration was working to 'legalize' the capital crimes that Bush himself had clearly ordered. What followed was an organized campaign of lies to justify torture even as the practice of it was made official policy and often called by its Orwellian euphemism: 'enhanced interrogation'.
The practice of torture was carried out at Abu Ghraib, GITMO, and various US gulags and hell-holes throughout Eastern Europe. By any Orwellian name given it by Bush or his minions, it is torture. Torture is a crime which if it results in death, the penalty is death. That law applies to the architects and defenders of the policy of torture. It applies to Bush --its chief architect, defender and practitioner.
The disclosure that the Justice Department advised the White House in 2002 that the torture of al Qaeda terrorist suspects might be legally defensible has focused new attention on the role President Bush played in setting the rules for interrogations in the war on terrorism.... An Aug. 1, 2002, memo from the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, addressed to Gonzales, said that torturing suspected al Qaeda members abroad "may be justified" and that international laws against torture "may be unconstitutional if applied to interrogation" conducted against suspected terrorists.The document provided legal guidance for the CIA, which crafted new, more aggressive techniques for its operatives in the field. McClellan called the memo a historic or scholarly review of laws and conventions concerning torture.
"The memo was not prepared to provide advice on specific methods or techniques," he said. "It was analytical."Attorney General John D. Ashcroft yesterday refused senators' requests to make public the memo, which is not classified, and would not discuss any possible involvement of the president.In the view expressed by the Justice Department memo, which differs from the view of the Army, physical torture "must be equivalent in intensity to the pain accompanying serious physical injury, such as organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death."
For a cruel or inhuman psychological technique to rise to the level of mental torture, the Justice Department argued, the psychological harm must last "months or even years."A former senior administration official involved in discussions about CIA interrogation techniques said Bush's aides knew he wanted them to take an aggressive approach. --Memo on Torture Draws Focus to Bush
Bush himself took center stage to defend practices which he had denied took place.
Bush 'justifies' torture
The Bush administration defended torture as they denied they were doing it!
Although the president adamantly denied that the U.S. government uses torture, the United States has used practices such as waterboarding that can only be called torture.--Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch, Bush Justifies CIA Detainee Abuse; Proposed Military Commissions Deeply Flawed
Like Hitler's minions at Wannsee, Bush partisans Alberto Gonzales and John Yoo were tasked with putting lipstick on the pig, making 'legal' Bush's various capital crimes, crimes for which Nazis hanged following the famous trials at Nuremberg.
• The war against Iraq was begun upon a pack of lies and is, itself, a violation of the Nuremberg Principles, the Geneva Conventions, and numerous treaties; moreover, there is no language in UN Resolution 1441 authorizing the use of force by the United States against Iraq.
• Nothing said by Bush about the reasons for the war on Iraq have been in any way true. See any one of numerous Downing Street Memos which prove that intelligence was cherry picked to support the war —though Bush knew that there was more credible evidence to the contrary. Colin Powell's presentation to the UN, for example, consisted of a plagiarized student paper and ten year old black and white satellite photos. It was fraud from start to finish and Powell has since recognized that and apologized.
• Bush and Blair conspired to begin the war of aggression against Iraq though both men knew —before hand —that Saddam did not have WMD. Later, Bush would puke up a similar lie about Katrina in New Orleans.
Bush does not say, "torture is illegal, but we do not torture, therefore we are working with the law." He flips the whole question around, as Yoo [Bush lawyer, John Yoo] did. He basically states that anything the executive does to fulfill its obligation to protect the American people is--because it is done in the name of protecting the American people--within the law. The rationale for these activities--protecting the American people--and not the nature of the activities themselves, is what makes them legal, according to Bush.
Richard Nixon put it this way: "If the President does it, it is not illegal!" As an alleged victim of torture, GOP Presidential hopeful, John McCain is often presumed to be opposed to the practice. But, according to Glenn Greenwald that is just not the case.
He holds himself out as a principled torture opponent but is, in fact, the single greatest enabler of legalizing torture in this country, from his 2005 bill which exempted the CIA from torture prohibitions to his 2006 leadership in enacting the Military Commissions Act to his opposition this year to the waterboard ban."
US 'torturers' have invented creative rationalizations to justify their crimes after the fact or to make legal the crimes already committed! But, in the end, their every 'rationalization' is either a lie, a fallacy, or a delusion. McCain for example, distinguishes between the US 'torture' of, say, a French citizen vs that of the US 'torture' of an Iraqi.
I've made it very clear, I've made it very clear in my statements and in my support of the Detainee Treatment Act, the Geneva Conventions, etc., that there may be some additional techniques to be used, but none of those would violate the Geneva Conventions, the Detainee Treatment Act… And we cannot ever, in my view, torture any American, that includes waterboarding.
John McCain, quoted by Associated Press
McCain denies that waterboarding is torture --but it is. McCain opposes it when it is used against Americans, but supports its use by Americans upon anyone of any other nationality. The US, we are to suppose, is, like our 'President', above the laws --even those treaties and other obligations that we signed and affirmed. Despite what McCain and other GOP partisans may say, those obligations are just that: obligations. By law, they have become in the 'law of the land'. I had this argument with an aid to my Congressman. He lost!
McCain differs insubstantially from Bush who believes that the US torture of anyone --US or foreign -- is legal 'if the President does it!' I work assiduously to give Bush an opportunity to use that line of defense at a war crimes trial considering the capital charges against him. Let him bet his very life upon his stupid, fallacious and flawed argument. Even if the war against Iraq, and likewise the phony 'war on terrorism', were not frauds, the practice of torture still violates the various treaties to which the US is obliged.
Hence, Bush's Hitlerian efforts to make legal --after the fact --the various and numerous capital crimes that he had already committed in the name of our once great nation. Considering the failed 'wars on terrorism' waged by Ronald Reagan as well as Bush, one should not be surprised to learn that GOP policies are counter-productive. [See: Terrorism is Always Worse Under GOP Regimes].
Administration lawyers argued that since al-Qaeda and its Taliban allies were not a state party to the Geneva Conventions they were not covered by its ban on torture and other maltreatment. True, America had ratified (in 1988) the Convention against Torture, but that applied only to acts carried out on American soil, they said. And though America's own 1994 federal statute against torture did cover acts by Americans abroad, this applied only to full-blown torture, not lesser abuses.In the notorious "torture memos" drawn up by the Department of Justice and the Pentagon in 2002 and 2003, the same lawyers sought to restrict the normal definition of torture—"severe pain or suffering"—to extreme acts equivalent to "serious physical injury, organ failure, or even death".
Furthermore, as a wartime commander in chief whose main duty was to protect the American people, the president had the power to override both domestic and international law, they argued. After being leaked in 2004 most of these memos were "withdrawn", though not the one on the president's wartime powers.Mr Bush and his colleagues have always said that America neither authorises nor condones torture. "We don't do torture," the president famously said. But Mr Bush has been vaguer about the grey area between torture and more moderate pressure.
Soon after suspected terrorists were first sent to Guantánamo in January 2002 he said that America's armed forces would treat the detainees "humanely" in a manner "consistent with the Geneva Conventions"—but only "to the extent appropriate and consistent with military necessity".
Not until the Supreme Court's ruling in Hamdan in 2006 did the administration accept that all detainees, wherever held, were protected by Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, which bans all forms of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment as well as torture. The 2005 Detainee Treatment Act, incorporating an amendment by Senator John McCain, already prohibited such treatment by American soldiers anywhere in the world. But it did not apply to the CIA.--Is torture ever justified?, The Economist
So, why do Republicans adhere to a policy that even a cursory reading of real world stats thoroughly discredits? Reaganites themselves provide a clue: "...Reagan made us feel good about ourselves"! Michael Shermer, who has lately proven himself incapable of practicing what he preaches, posits that false beliefs are based on and drive from prejudice. But that just puts a label on it. It does not explain prejudice itself just as Bush's wild, outlandish, conspiracy theories fail to explain or even address a series of incredible events conveniently labeled: 911!
Lies are not believed randomly. Lies are purposefully disseminated and are likewise believed. Lies thus play a dual role --one for the liar and another for the gullible believer. Hitler, for example, openly boasted of his 'war against the Jew".
"Against the Jews I fought open-eyed and in view of the whole world...I made it plain that they, this parasitic vermin in Europe, will be finally exterminated."
Hitler's lies derived from his flawed psychology for whom 'Jews' became a convenient scapegoat! An individual in Hitler's adoring audience would find in Hitler's lies his/her own 'reason to believe'. Clearly --millions were victimized by punitive reparations following World War I. Economic chaos, wild inflation, the ensuing hardships made fertile soil upon which to sow the seeds of hate and prejudice.
The US was likewise deceived by Ronald Reagan whose campaign made of Jimmy Carter a scapegoat. Carter was conveniently blamed for the siege of the US Embassy in Iran and an 'oil' crisis that inconvenienced Americans and raised the price of gasoline at the pump. It no longer mattered that Carter was among the top two or three Presidents in job creation, productivity, and overall economic performance. He was tagged with a 'label' that stuck! Hitler made it clear that he intended to wipe out the Jewish "race". Goring acted upon his Fuhrer's wishes. Goring's order was, in turn, followed by Heydrich who organized the apparatus of the Final Solution as one would organize a corporate division, a department, a cabinet post. Such is the Banality of Evil.
Millions felt better about themselves, conveniently blaming Jews for their miserable, desperate lives in pre-war Germany. Hitler made them feel good about being bigots just as Reagan later made people feel good about being bigots, self-absorbed materialists, greedy yuppies, and latter day militarists with Nazi leanings and connections.
Bush is a proven liar —caught red handed beyond any reasonable doubt. One is hard pressed to name a single time he's ever told the truth about anything! Does it make sense to acquiesce to his claims of absolute, dictatorial powers? Even as Bush assumes dictatorial powers, a majority of Americans say that they cannot believe Bush. Certainly, that incredulity must reasonably extend to Bush's rationalizations for a dictatorship.Most of those polled say that they find Bush dishonest and untrustworthy —certainly not qualities you want in a dictator.
Can a liar be trusted with absolute powers? Who but a liar and a blackguard would want to be a dictator? Certainly, Bush has summoned upon a team of toadies to rationalize or 'make legal' his various crimes. We know Bush is a liar and his various machinations intended to make legal his crimes are widely known. His entire life is a lie, a facade designed to defraud the world. Beneath the grandiose stage paint and props, is an evil, frightened dwarf. Bush is right to be scared! He can't handle the truth about himself.
"A lie would make no sense, unless the truth were felt to be dangerous."--Carl G. Jung
trevor
Stella sent me that and it was quite shocking. what blows me away is how he has the balls to say he knows what they need and how to treat them when the proof that he doesn't is in his record.
I get you Brother
Anyway you look at it there will be no peace period!
Larry
For a long time now I said coming to Israel's rescue will be Bush's way of getting involved but at this point there is so much in the works we will have to see what gets it started!
larry
It is all going like clock work and will come to a head very quickly as his time is running out unless the right thinks they can guarantee sneaking in McCain!
Have a great Memorial Day. Ya, Bush and mcCain had to move one of their fund raisers to a smaller location cause they couldn't attract enough people. Only the big bucks folks are contributing to his campaign.
Minnesota
I'm glad to hear that. I'm surprised they can get anybody at all to donate unless as you allude to and that is from those Bush is enriching. It isn't the middle class! Went to the festivities today and will have a cook outy later. You know, knowing what today means it doesn't seem right to say Happy Memorial Day, Have a nice day!
Howdy Jim,
you may find this article suitable to the context of this post
The Persian Question
Post a Comment