Lock in your children and hide your mamas! A new threat is upon the Zionists, it’s a terrible, almost centrist, slightly moderate monster called Barack Hussein Obama. Though the Israeli media won’t go as far as Anne Coulter and insist on emphasizing Obama’s middle name, I doubt they don’t have it on their mind. Or possibly it’s the fact that Obama is all-so American that really scares them? Whatever Obama is, he isn’t a Jew, thus he most obviously doesn’t understand what’s good for him.
So all these talks, which have nothing but anthropological value, went on between Obama and Israel’s heads. My knowledge of Netanyahu’s international relations history is limited, but I’m learning fast. It seems that condescension has been the general attitude for a good while, now (we’ll ignore Clinton’s mater-of-fact imperial talk, for now):
"We are told that Obama is serious about peace in the Middle East. He maybe is. But even such assumed seriousness might not be able to change the disturbing pattern that forced Clinton before him, according to former top Middle East Advisor, Aaron David Miller, to utter the following words: "Who the f*** does he think he is? Who’s the f***ing superpower here?""
The pattern hasn’t changed and anyone looking at the painfully contrived conversation, between Obama and Netanyahu, can see how slick Netanyahu believes himself to be:
If that wasn’t bad enough, we had to send our "moderate-leftist" Defense Minister to "soothe" Obama (this does beg the question, why didn’t we send our "not so extreme as he seems" Minister of Foreign Affairs? Isn’t that his job?):
"Israel won’t do anything to stop the American dialogue with Iran, but we do think it needs to be accompanied by a clear schedule and harsh sanctions, and the main thing being that Israel is retaining all the options on the table."
The same man told United Nations secretary general, Ban Ki Moon, "Probe Hamas rockets, not Israel ‘war crimes’… I don’t think Israel has to – or will – cooperate with this interrogation…" and later concluded his general discussion with Ban was "very good".
Obama’s speech in Cairo was highly anticipated by many and I thought I probably should take a peek. After all, the man’s got the world in his hands. I usually choose to look at the world through the Ha’aretz website, as it illuminates the Zionist mindset and leaves no doubt in my mind how truly abused the Israeli mind is:
"Obama believes in interests, and his supreme interest is the rehabilitation of ties between the U.S. and the Arab and Muslim worlds. George W. Bush was perceived to be a pawn in Israel’s hand, and Obama must show he is not like his predecessor. A freeze on settlements is his gift to his Saudi and Egyptian hosts. Enforcing the freeze will be his test of credibility."
A friend asked me what was wrong with these statements, as I see it, so Jeff, this one is for you:
- "Obama believes in interests" – Who doesn’t? Why say it like that? Are you implying maliciousness?
- "his supreme interest is the rehabilitation of ties between the U.S. and the Arab and Muslim worlds." – This is the Zionist fear. As Israel is left with only America by its side, it is dead scared that its one ally and sustainer will cavort with the enemy. And make no mistake- "Arab" and "Muslim" are practically a racial slur, down here.
- "George W. Bush was perceived to be a pawn in Israel’s hand" – Some believe this to be true. I don’t, I believe Bush was on board with Israel out of choice, because of some sick religious belief and capitalistic gains of having a well armed military in the Middle East, serving his interests (yes, malicious ones), but that’s just me. The key word here, however, is "perceived". Our paranoid journalist doesn’t think Bush was an Israeli tool. Like most Israelis, this guy wets the bed at night, worrying if America will still love us tomorrow.
- "Obama must show he is not like his predecessor" – Personally I think Obama isn’t doing a good job at that. That aside, our petrified journalist is correct, but it seems to me that Obama isn’t doing it out of self political indulgence, but of international relations politics. So basically what we have here is another personal slam at Mr. President.
- "A freeze on settlements is his gift to his Saudi and Egyptian hosts. Enforcing the freeze will be his test of credibility." – How low can you go? How cynical can you get? Leave it to the paranoid Zionist.
This heap of crap goes on and on, in all the Israeli coverage of the Obama speech. It’s a twilight zone, in which the settlements are an "enterprise" and Israel’s possession of nuclear weapons is "alleged".
Palestinians and the Obama Speech
"The Holy Koran teaches that whoever kills an innocent, it is as if he has killed all mankind…"
There seems to me, a real hypocrisy when a man speaks like a pacifist and acts like a conquerer. In Obama’s case, I suppose he truly believes he’s a good, honest man. He’s not the first daddy I’ve met, who only wants to protect his little girls, and commits horrific acts in order to do so. Unfortunately, right now, this war criminal may be the single person who can alleviate the endless Palestinian pain (and maybe in the next American presidency we’ll have someone to alleviate Afghan pain).
I’ve been asked, by several people this weekend, if I think Obama is the solution to the Palestinian plight. Frankly, I’m pessimistic, but there are things to note in Obama’s speech, that have never been acknowledged before by an American president and could bring about new public discourse, on the issue:
"…it is also undeniable that the Palestinian people – Muslims and Christians – have suffered in pursuit of a homeland. For more than sixty years they have endured the pain of dislocation. Many wait in refugee camps in the West Bank, Gaza, and neighboring lands for a life of peace and security that they have never been able to lead. They endure the daily humiliations – large and small – that come with occupation. So let there be no doubt: the situation for the Palestinian people is intolerable. America will not turn our backs on the legitimate Palestinian aspiration for dignity, opportunity, and a state of their own."
Though there’s a considerably impressive quantity of statements such as this, throughout the part of Obama’s speech, which was dedicated to the issue, I see the Hasbara at its worst, when Obama dares to equate the Zionist entity with the Palestinian entity, as if they were equally to blame and have wreaked the same scale of destruction on each other:
"For decades, there has been a stalemate: two peoples with legitimate aspirations, each with a painful history that makes compromise elusive. It is easy to point fingers – for Palestinians to point to the displacement brought by Israel’s founding, and for Israelis to point to the constant hostility and attacks throughout its history from within its borders as well as beyond."
And then came the blatant lie:
"But if we see this conflict only from one side or the other, then we will be blind to the truth: the only resolution is for the aspirations of both sides to be met through two states, where Israelis and Palestinians each live in peace and security."
I know the two state solution is popular. Most probably, because under the circumstances, where Israel has twisted so many arms, even some Palestinians agree that it’s the only practical solution. After much thought and discussion on the matter, I’ve reached the conclusion that this plan of action denies the Palestinians the most important right they fight for- the right of return. My friends that for generations lived in Jerusalem (al-Quds), Be’er Sheva (Bi’r as-Sabi), Jaffa (Yafa), Haifa (Hayfa) and the rest of what is now Israel proper, will not be able to come back home.
"Palestinians must abandon violence. Resistance through violence and killing is wrong and does not succeed. For centuries, black people in America suffered the lash of the whip as slaves and the humiliation of segregation. But it was not violence that won full and equal rights…"
Palestinians have not chosen violence as their way- their government did, and even so, the violence that they’ve unleashed pales in comparison to the violence they have endured. If the victim is to abandon violence, the oppressor must to it first. Secondly, correct me if I’m wrong, but a little gun toting from the Black Panther Party of Self Defense, did actually help deter the police occupying their neighborhoods. I’d say that it may not have been the reason for equal rights, but it was part of the process.
"…violence is a dead end. It is a sign of neither courage nor power to shoot rockets at sleeping children, or to blow up old women on a bus. That is not how moral authority is claimed; that is how it is surrendered."
I agree; Violence is a dead end. It is a sign of neither courage nor power to air strike children, returning home from school, or shoot old women as they evacuate their houses with white flags in their hands. That is not how moral authority is claimed; that is how it is surrendered.
"Now is the time for Palestinians to focus on what they can build. The Palestinian Authority must develop its capacity to govern, with institutions that serve the needs of its people. Hamas does have support among some Palestinians, but they also have responsibilities. To play a role in fulfilling Palestinian aspirations, and to unify the Palestinian people, Hamas must put an end to violence, recognize past agreements, and recognize Israel’s right to exist."
Of all the condescending, one-sided *insert angry dirty language here*! Obama has yet (will he ever bother) to see Gaza with his own two eyes. When Israel doesn’t allow construction materials inside the strip, what is Hamas suppose to focus on exactly? And how on earth is a government of occupied territories suppose to "develop its capacity to govern"?! Sure I’d like to see less murderous faction disputes (oh, imaginary international court of law, where art thou?), but I’d like to actually see a free people first. And can we have enough of the " recognize Israel’s right to exist" bollocks?! It’s been recognized three billion times already, and really, how can you not recognize the barrel of the tank in your face?
And of course you can’t do without that famous Obamaism:
"… choose progress over a self-defeating focus on the past."
Whenever Obama decides to excuse criminal action, he says "I’m about looking forward". When I started my journey into the wonderful world of fascism, which is my home, I had a gut instinct that there will be no Nurembergs, this time around. If Obama has it his way, that will be the case.
So what do I think of Obama’s speech? A Palestinian friend once eloquently said:
"… if and when your repentance is genuine it will automatically show in your actions. You will know then what you have to do and how to do it, to be forgiven. And then and only then, you WILL find "peace" that you allegedly seek."