That magic O word again
- Thread starter The Ewok
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Far better that the Americans "profit" the oil resources of Iraq, not the French who have been profiting for 30 years in return for supplying the Iraqi's with technology to build a nuclear bomb, chemical weapons and the planes to deliver them.
If you don't believe me, get a copy of the French documentary "Saddam's Friends"from the ABC shop and watch it.
- Nov 17, 2000
- 12,447
- 23
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Post Count: 125,527
People conveniently forget that USA could have taken the South Iraqi and Kuwaiti oilfields in 1991 without a fight if oil was so important. They didn't do so then and won't now.
I believe that in a few years the Iraqi people will at last be happy and prosperous, as are the other oil rich Arab countries.
I believe that in a few years the Iraqi people will at last be happy and prosperous, as are the other oil rich Arab countries.
bugman5
Senior List
Assuming the different ethnic groups don't kill each other first.
Pretty sure the average Saudi Arabian isn't all that prosperous, although I wouldn't want to talk about their happiness
Fairly sure Dubai has a fairly poor underclass, although that may be made up of itinerant migrant labour.
As for Kuwait, most people - even if born there - are never even eligible for citizenship.
Yes Mooster,
Why don't you tell us all about Mr Indyk. Tell us all why he is the ex-ambassador. This should be good.
And while your at it, why don't you tell us all again about how Israel are not in violation of UN resolution 242 and 383 again.
Seems you disapeared when I pointed out how they were in violation.
Total silence!
The yanks could not have taken the Iraqi/Kuwaiti oil from the last gulf war - the mandate for that war was to liberate Kuwait and get out. Even the oil thirsty yanks would think twice about essentially stealing a sovereign nations resources. Although...
As for those happy oil rich arabs well I if was was a member of the Saudi royal family (all 20,000 of them) then yeah; I would be delirious.
As for the other 95% of the population...
Story and picture in the Courier Mail today about the only Government building in Baghdad not looted or bombed. It also has US special Forces and Hardware guarding it.
Guess which building?????
The Ministry of OIL!!!!!!!!!
(It's not about the OIL though)
Long live "Operation Iraq Liberation" (OIL)
Originally posted by Lestat
Yes Mooster,
Why don't you tell us all about Mr Indyk. Tell us all why he is the ex-ambassador. This should be good.
And while your at it, why don't you tell us all again about how Israel are not in violation of UN resolution 242 and 383 again.
Seems you disapeared when I pointed out how they were in violation.
Total silence!
Without going into his biography, suffice to say that Indyk was sacked and has no credibility with anyone in the world. I thought if Wagstaff knew who Indyk was that his post was incredulous. Once he announced that he had no clue, his post rather imploded, and I didn't see the need to elaborate.
You didn't ask about Resolutin UN-R 383. Near as I can tell UN-R 383 has to do with Cypress. Throw me a bone, and we'll discuss. You asked about 242, 181 & 161. That was back in February. My original post satisfactorily answers those questions. Your subsequent post states.
Yes, I agree that the UN has not found Israel to be in breach, though as you can see they clearly are...
If they haven't been found in breach, then they aren't. Simple.
The issues of Palestine and Jeruselem are under negotiation. The Palestinians are just as responsible as Israel that these issues are still under negotiation. No cause to find any party to be in breach.
But as you and I have both stated, Israel is not currently in material breach of any UN Resolution. That was the original point. You conceded it. Thus my "Total Silence!."
Peace,
No its not simple. Seriously dude. Read Resolution 181, actually, i'll post it if you like, then try and argue that Israel are not in breach.
I can't believe you really believe this...you couldn't possible.
Resolution clearly states that Jerusalem was NOT TO be a Israeli city...it really is that clear.
You totally ignore the fact that every time I resolution is tabled to declare Israel in material breach.....then the US veto the vote.
Besides, if YOU were consistent with your own logic, then Iraq has not been found in material breach of UN resolution 1441. True, after all, if the UN have not found Iraq in breach, then they aren't in breach. Simple hey
hehe, so now your relying on 'technicalities' hey.
And why haven't they been found in breach?? Perhaps you would like to add that. (yes i'm repeating myself, seems like I have to with you)
Because the US has vetoed every vote on the matter.
However, i'm sure even you can see that they are in material breach of these UN resolutions.
The fact that Jerusalem has been annexed is illegal, and a violation of UN resolution 181.
And I'm sure you've read resolution 242. You would know that the occupation (the fact that there are still IDF troops in Westbank and Gaza), makes them...in reality, in breach of resolution 242.
But you already know that don't you.
lol,
Why don't you tell us why he was sacked??
This is good, every one watch while Mooster does all he can to avoid why Indyk was sacked.
Please tell us all. Show us all the even handedness of the US in regards to the Palestine issue.
For those of you who cannot wait for Moosters answer...on why Indyk was sacked. (this is from a pro-Zionist site mind you)
Yes...why don't you tell us all mooster, that the reason that Indyk was sacked was that he was seen as pro-arab. A big no no.
Martin Indyk Investigation
Emanuel A. Winston, a Middle East analyst & commentator
September 29, 2000
American Ambassador to Israel, Martin Indyk, has been charged with mishandling security information by using a laptop computer considered insecure and recalled The following outcry is that all diplomats take their work home and while traveling - just to keep up with the work load. Therefore, it must be concluded that it was not merely the act of putting classified information into the computer but the substance of that information. Many in Israel and America have never trusted Indyk nor his intentions against Israel. Going back in time might prove revealing. In 1996, it was disclosed that Indyk was secretly involved in giving away the Golan Heights to Hafez al Assad of Syria despite Assad's repeated pledges to one day destroy Israel.
Presumably, at that time he would have been working in this direction, with Shimon Peres as well as Yossi Beilin and Dennis Ross pushing hard to force Israel back to a 1967 border line and then to the 1947 borders. Apparently, this would have involved the approval of President Clinton and the State Department under Madame Albright.
I wrote an article February 1, 1996 "Indyk Gives Away the Golan". For almost three weeks we sent advisories to the American Congress, Media and influentials, detailing all the reasons why this foreign policy would be extremely dangerous to Israel and also the America. When the hearings on the issue of the Golan were finally to take place (after the issue had been declared: "Premature for discussion" by all involved, Martin Indyk and former Israeli Ambassador Itamar Rabinovich came into the hearing room. Indyk had some articles and Email messages in his hand and declared that: "Because of Manny Winston and Murray Kahl (who puts out vast quantities of Email information revealing some of these issues) - we cannot have peace with Syria [by giving away the Golan Heights - ed. Note]". Now, what was it that we uncovered in our flooding information into the conduits of the powers-that-be? Don't know - but, so far, we still have the Golan. And some secret or secrets were almost jeopardized. Hearings were the last thing that Indyk, the State Department and the Leftist Government of Rabin, Peres, Beilin wanted. Sen. Jesse had promised full and open hearings on the suitability of Indyk to be Ambassador to Israel in 1995. The subsequent hearings were neither open nor very deep. So, let us go back to those paper- thin hearings.
Let's begin the Indyk investigation from the office of Senator Jesse Helms and his assistant Daniella Pletka. When Indyk was being considered for office though hearings held by Sen. Helms, he was contacted by experts who wished to speak against the confirmation of Martin Indyk. But, Helms insured a soft hearing with a few witnesses. Helms' assistant Pletka, a fellow Australian and close friend of Indyk, ran the show, wrapping a protective screen around Mr. Indyk. Indyk's association with British Intelligence was not brought up and he was easily cleared for the position as Ambassador to Israel. Dennis Ross and Daniella Pletka were known to be close associates on matters concerning the Middle East. Pletka was considered a Left wing Liberal who seemed to be dedicated to blocking access to her boss, Senator Helms by those who objected to Israel's Left Wing government giveaways. Pletka was later caught on a secret trip to visit Yassir Arafat , embarrassing Helms who was considered to be "Mr. Conservative". However, he did not fire Pletka.
When Indyk was elevated to be Ambassador to Israel , another Helms hearing was to take place. This time Helms virtually disappeared, throwing the hearing to Sen. Sam Brownback, head of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee - who was thought to be merely a soft Senator - not known for tough probing questions. Here again Pletka set up the agenda and again only softball questions were asked.
Many Middle East experts who knew that Indyk had a separate agenda were not allowed to testify. In fact, the hearings were called so suddenly that it was only by chance that anyone knew they were taking place. Indyk was to join the leftover James Baker crew (called Bakers' boys) of Dennis Ross, Aaron Miller and Daniel Kurtzer who assembled for the single purpose of assisting in the re-partition of Israel.
Clinton wanted Indyk in as his personal Dove to push through a game plan to re-partition Israel as the point man inside of Israel. Indyk became the most objectionable and provocative Ambassador that any country, let alone Israel, had to put up with. He did not even attend Israel's Independence Day celebration, which was intended as a big insult and polished his image as an Arabist working for the Arab nations. Working with Dennis Ross and the Leftist Labor Party, he undercut the political Right, in effect, becoming a spokesman for the Labor Party of Israel.
That Martin Indyk recently called for Israel to share the Temple Mount with her sworn enemies, the Palestinians under Yassir Arafat was the greatest insult of all. What are his motivations?
Indyk was, indeed, an intelligence agent in Australia (as quoted in the NEW YORK TIMES 9/23/00) as Deputy Director of Australia's Intelligence for the Middle East (1) He may have also been working for British Intelligence and brought here to the U.S., given instant citizenship, made Ambassador to Israel in order to act against Israel - now as a U.S. agent - then, indeed, let it be publicly exposed.
Let us know of his covert connections to the U.S. Government and what his total mission was to be . Let us hear of any connections he had with the CIA and President Clinton. Let us know if Dennis Ross or Daniella Pletka knew and participated in an ongoing intelligence operation against Israel. Clearly, this seems to be a closing circle connected to Arabist individuals in the U.S. Government who are comply with requests made by various Arab countries.
If Indyk and Ross, among others had a pro-Arab agenda, then let us back track this investigation to its true roots and see what exactly they have done and on whose orders. Be assured that whoever is running Indyk, they will jump in to stifle any investigation of how Indyk got his job as Ambassador to Israel - twice. What were his orders? How many controls (bosses) did he work for?
Clearly, his close linkage to Dennis Ross and Daniella Pletka should be looked into. I wonder how Sen. Jesse Helms will explain his role in slipping Indyk into the 2 positions he held inside of Israel - without questioning his unusual background.
The question of why an Australian/British Intelligence Agent was invited to America, given instant citizenship, made Ambassador to Israel in 1995 - despite valid and strenuous objections - must be looked into. His actions as an ally of the Left Wing Israeli Government and his hostility to any Right Wing opposition must also be investigated. (When Bibi Netanyahu was elected, Indyk was called back and appointed as the State Department's Deputy Director on the Near East. When Barak replaced Netanyahu, in 1999 Indyk was again appointed Ambassador to Israel - again with a ‘softball question' hearing.)
Obviously Indyk, using the protective coloring as a Jew, was sent to into Israel as a Jew, but to provoke and disrupt any opposition to the re-partitioning of Israel. This was reaffirmed when he stated last week that "Jerusalem can not be under the sole sovereignty of one country (Israel); it must be shared". How ridiculous! The unified sovereignty of the Holy Jewish City as the Eternal Capital of the Jewish people for 3000+ years was always a consensus issue, even for the Left.
On a September 26th radio interview, Collete Avital, (a dedicated Leftist and former Ambassador to New York City) maintained that Barak has not crossed any ‘red lines'.(3) What a distortion of truth!
As I indicated earlier, perhaps there was a loss of information which compromised President Clinton and/or the State Department in their manipulation of a hostile Foreign Policy towards Israel. It was well known that Indyk was a frequent visitor to the Gulf Nations, including Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Oman plus Egypt and Syria. (Jews aren't allowed into many of the these countries - but the State Department Jews are offered superb hospitality - for some reason.)
We have observed the secret meetings and the results of those shadowy discussions. This includes Oslo - which was kept from the Israeli people and their Knesset (Parliament) for a reason. When Yossi Beilin was asked why he and the Left had not informed the Israeli people that they were negotiating with Arafat's PLO, he simply stated: "We kept it a secret because they would have stopped us." (4) (We can vouch for the truth of this extremely bizarre admission because he said it at a Conference held at Bar Ilan for the Winston Institute for the Study of Prejudice. (He was invited against our strenuous objections but the resulting tape of his speech was priceless in its astounding revelations.) There were other secret meetings and plans as recently as exposed in NEWSWEEK MAGAZINE: "The Lost Peace Plan" by Michael Hirsh, September 28. )This expose was the 1995 Yossi Beilin/Abu Mazen Plan to divide Jerusalem. The secret document was printed in full on the NEWSWEEK web site at Newsweek @msnbc.com. (4)
Here again, enter Martin Indyk, who while receiving an honor at Hebrew Union College, stated: "Jerusalem cannot be under the total sovereignty of one nation; it must be divided." This from an American Ambassador (cum agent; cum provocateur) - and a Jew. I would guess that the Mossad picked up the information from Indyk's computer and dutifully gave it over to PM/DM Ehud Barak. Barak would then have handed it over to Clinton, which may have been the REAL REASON provoking Ambassador Indyk's recall under a security breach cloud as a mere excuse to cover the more serious breach of "secret" American Foreign Policy to divide Jerusalem and put Israel's most Holy Jewish site under control the either the PLO, the Arab nations or the United Nations - all of whom have been hostile to the Jewish State to varying degrees.
While this is, of course, merely speculation based upon our personal knowledge of Indyk's previous insults, violations of proper Ambassadorial behavior, record of Indyk's interference in Israel's policies and conduct of government. And Indyk stands accused of revealing Clinton's true intentions to divest Israel of sovereignty in Jerusalem. The facts that Barak's close linkages with Beilin (now Israel's Justice Minister) and Clinton are all dedicated to following their ‘secret plans' make my speculations highly probably. I cannot help but wonder if James Baker's crew of Jewish penetrators, Ross and now Indyk, will again be retained by the incoming American President. Remember, after Bush and Baker was defeated, Rabin, Peres, Beilin asked an agreeable Clinton to return the Baker's Jewish team of Ross, Miller and Kurtzer.
If ever there was a need to lift the sewer lid that just can't stay closed on Clinton Foreign Policy maneuvers, particularly in the Middle East, now is the time - but don't count on it.
Yes...why don't you tell us all mooster, that the reason that Indyk was sacked was that he was seen as pro-arab. A big no no.
Martin Indyk Investigation
Emanuel A. Winston, a Middle East analyst & commentator
September 29, 2000
American Ambassador to Israel, Martin Indyk, has been charged with mishandling security information by using a laptop computer considered insecure and recalled The following outcry is that all diplomats take their work home and while traveling - just to keep up with the work load. Therefore, it must be concluded that it was not merely the act of putting classified information into the computer but the substance of that information. Many in Israel and America have never trusted Indyk nor his intentions against Israel. Going back in time might prove revealing. In 1996, it was disclosed that Indyk was secretly involved in giving away the Golan Heights to Hafez al Assad of Syria despite Assad's repeated pledges to one day destroy Israel.
Presumably, at that time he would have been working in this direction, with Shimon Peres as well as Yossi Beilin and Dennis Ross pushing hard to force Israel back to a 1967 border line and then to the 1947 borders. Apparently, this would have involved the approval of President Clinton and the State Department under Madame Albright.
I wrote an article February 1, 1996 "Indyk Gives Away the Golan". For almost three weeks we sent advisories to the American Congress, Media and influentials, detailing all the reasons why this foreign policy would be extremely dangerous to Israel and also the America. When the hearings on the issue of the Golan were finally to take place (after the issue had been declared: "Premature for discussion" by all involved, Martin Indyk and former Israeli Ambassador Itamar Rabinovich came into the hearing room. Indyk had some articles and Email messages in his hand and declared that: "Because of Manny Winston and Murray Kahl (who puts out vast quantities of Email information revealing some of these issues) - we cannot have peace with Syria [by giving away the Golan Heights - ed. Note]". Now, what was it that we uncovered in our flooding information into the conduits of the powers-that-be? Don't know - but, so far, we still have the Golan. And some secret or secrets were almost jeopardized. Hearings were the last thing that Indyk, the State Department and the Leftist Government of Rabin, Peres, Beilin wanted. Sen. Jesse had promised full and open hearings on the suitability of Indyk to be Ambassador to Israel in 1995. The subsequent hearings were neither open nor very deep. So, let us go back to those paper- thin hearings.
Let's begin the Indyk investigation from the office of Senator Jesse Helms and his assistant Daniella Pletka. When Indyk was being considered for office though hearings held by Sen. Helms, he was contacted by experts who wished to speak against the confirmation of Martin Indyk. But, Helms insured a soft hearing with a few witnesses. Helms' assistant Pletka, a fellow Australian and close friend of Indyk, ran the show, wrapping a protective screen around Mr. Indyk. Indyk's association with British Intelligence was not brought up and he was easily cleared for the position as Ambassador to Israel. Dennis Ross and Daniella Pletka were known to be close associates on matters concerning the Middle East. Pletka was considered a Left wing Liberal who seemed to be dedicated to blocking access to her boss, Senator Helms by those who objected to Israel's Left Wing government giveaways. Pletka was later caught on a secret trip to visit Yassir Arafat , embarrassing Helms who was considered to be "Mr. Conservative". However, he did not fire Pletka.
When Indyk was elevated to be Ambassador to Israel , another Helms hearing was to take place. This time Helms virtually disappeared, throwing the hearing to Sen. Sam Brownback, head of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee - who was thought to be merely a soft Senator - not known for tough probing questions. Here again Pletka set up the agenda and again only softball questions were asked.
Many Middle East experts who knew that Indyk had a separate agenda were not allowed to testify. In fact, the hearings were called so suddenly that it was only by chance that anyone knew they were taking place. Indyk was to join the leftover James Baker crew (called Bakers' boys) of Dennis Ross, Aaron Miller and Daniel Kurtzer who assembled for the single purpose of assisting in the re-partition of Israel.
Clinton wanted Indyk in as his personal Dove to push through a game plan to re-partition Israel as the point man inside of Israel. Indyk became the most objectionable and provocative Ambassador that any country, let alone Israel, had to put up with. He did not even attend Israel's Independence Day celebration, which was intended as a big insult and polished his image as an Arabist working for the Arab nations. Working with Dennis Ross and the Leftist Labor Party, he undercut the political Right, in effect, becoming a spokesman for the Labor Party of Israel.
That Martin Indyk recently called for Israel to share the Temple Mount with her sworn enemies, the Palestinians under Yassir Arafat was the greatest insult of all. What are his motivations?
Indyk was, indeed, an intelligence agent in Australia (as quoted in the NEW YORK TIMES 9/23/00) as Deputy Director of Australia's Intelligence for the Middle East (1) He may have also been working for British Intelligence and brought here to the U.S., given instant citizenship, made Ambassador to Israel in order to act against Israel - now as a U.S. agent - then, indeed, let it be publicly exposed.
Let us know of his covert connections to the U.S. Government and what his total mission was to be . Let us hear of any connections he had with the CIA and President Clinton. Let us know if Dennis Ross or Daniella Pletka knew and participated in an ongoing intelligence operation against Israel. Clearly, this seems to be a closing circle connected to Arabist individuals in the U.S. Government who are comply with requests made by various Arab countries.
If Indyk and Ross, among others had a pro-Arab agenda, then let us back track this investigation to its true roots and see what exactly they have done and on whose orders. Be assured that whoever is running Indyk, they will jump in to stifle any investigation of how Indyk got his job as Ambassador to Israel - twice. What were his orders? How many controls (bosses) did he work for?
Clearly, his close linkage to Dennis Ross and Daniella Pletka should be looked into. I wonder how Sen. Jesse Helms will explain his role in slipping Indyk into the 2 positions he held inside of Israel - without questioning his unusual background.
The question of why an Australian/British Intelligence Agent was invited to America, given instant citizenship, made Ambassador to Israel in 1995 - despite valid and strenuous objections - must be looked into. His actions as an ally of the Left Wing Israeli Government and his hostility to any Right Wing opposition must also be investigated. (When Bibi Netanyahu was elected, Indyk was called back and appointed as the State Department's Deputy Director on the Near East. When Barak replaced Netanyahu, in 1999 Indyk was again appointed Ambassador to Israel - again with a ‘softball question' hearing.)
Obviously Indyk, using the protective coloring as a Jew, was sent to into Israel as a Jew, but to provoke and disrupt any opposition to the re-partitioning of Israel. This was reaffirmed when he stated last week that "Jerusalem can not be under the sole sovereignty of one country (Israel); it must be shared". How ridiculous! The unified sovereignty of the Holy Jewish City as the Eternal Capital of the Jewish people for 3000+ years was always a consensus issue, even for the Left.
On a September 26th radio interview, Collete Avital, (a dedicated Leftist and former Ambassador to New York City) maintained that Barak has not crossed any ‘red lines'.(3) What a distortion of truth!
As I indicated earlier, perhaps there was a loss of information which compromised President Clinton and/or the State Department in their manipulation of a hostile Foreign Policy towards Israel. It was well known that Indyk was a frequent visitor to the Gulf Nations, including Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Oman plus Egypt and Syria. (Jews aren't allowed into many of the these countries - but the State Department Jews are offered superb hospitality - for some reason.)
We have observed the secret meetings and the results of those shadowy discussions. This includes Oslo - which was kept from the Israeli people and their Knesset (Parliament) for a reason. When Yossi Beilin was asked why he and the Left had not informed the Israeli people that they were negotiating with Arafat's PLO, he simply stated: "We kept it a secret because they would have stopped us." (4) (We can vouch for the truth of this extremely bizarre admission because he said it at a Conference held at Bar Ilan for the Winston Institute for the Study of Prejudice. (He was invited against our strenuous objections but the resulting tape of his speech was priceless in its astounding revelations.) There were other secret meetings and plans as recently as exposed in NEWSWEEK MAGAZINE: "The Lost Peace Plan" by Michael Hirsh, September 28. )This expose was the 1995 Yossi Beilin/Abu Mazen Plan to divide Jerusalem. The secret document was printed in full on the NEWSWEEK web site at Newsweek @msnbc.com. (4)
Here again, enter Martin Indyk, who while receiving an honor at Hebrew Union College, stated: "Jerusalem cannot be under the total sovereignty of one nation; it must be divided." This from an American Ambassador (cum agent; cum provocateur) - and a Jew. I would guess that the Mossad picked up the information from Indyk's computer and dutifully gave it over to PM/DM Ehud Barak. Barak would then have handed it over to Clinton, which may have been the REAL REASON provoking Ambassador Indyk's recall under a security breach cloud as a mere excuse to cover the more serious breach of "secret" American Foreign Policy to divide Jerusalem and put Israel's most Holy Jewish site under control the either the PLO, the Arab nations or the United Nations - all of whom have been hostile to the Jewish State to varying degrees.
While this is, of course, merely speculation based upon our personal knowledge of Indyk's previous insults, violations of proper Ambassadorial behavior, record of Indyk's interference in Israel's policies and conduct of government. And Indyk stands accused of revealing Clinton's true intentions to divest Israel of sovereignty in Jerusalem. The facts that Barak's close linkages with Beilin (now Israel's Justice Minister) and Clinton are all dedicated to following their ‘secret plans' make my speculations highly probably. I cannot help but wonder if James Baker's crew of Jewish penetrators, Ross and now Indyk, will again be retained by the incoming American President. Remember, after Bush and Baker was defeated, Rabin, Peres, Beilin asked an agreeable Clinton to return the Baker's Jewish team of Ross, Miller and Kurtzer.
If ever there was a need to lift the sewer lid that just can't stay closed on Clinton Foreign Policy maneuvers, particularly in the Middle East, now is the time - but don't count on it.
Lestat,
You get the biggest kick out of the supidest things. I wasn't avoiding telling everyone who Indyk was. I just didn't want to take the time to write a bunch of stuff if it wasn't necessary. As a matter of fact, I thank you for providing the link. The source is a bit extreme, but essentially correct.
It wasn't a Clinton bungle, however. It was Jesse Helms ,who was one funny mustache removed from being a full on nazi. He liked to run his own empire within the government. When Chris Carter (creator of the X-Files) wrote story lines concerning the 'government within the government' he was taking symbolic shots at Helms. Helms has been referred to as "Senator No" a moniker taken from the evil "Dr. No" of James Bond fame.
Anyway, it was Helms who got the ball rolling on Indyk, not the Clinton administration. Indyk was sacked to unravel Helms' bizarre foray into foreign policy. Either way, yes it was a United States debacle.
My point was Wagstaff's post. He used comments made by Indyk to prove another unrelated point. I thought this was ludicrous as Indyk is a source for nothing other than why Helms (and himself) should be in jail.
As to your carrying on about UN Resolutions against Israel, it is in fact I who has to continually repeat myself. The Israeli/Palestian resolutions are in negotiation. Half of the time, it's the Palestians who short circuit resolving the differences. Currently there are no motions before the UN to find Israel in breach. Currently, Israel is in breach of no UN Resolution. That's not a technicality, my friend. It is an unfortunate reality - for you.
BTW, it is ridiculous to assert that Iraq hasn't been found in breach of 1441. 1441 finds Iraq to be in breach of other resolutions, so your analogy is very much the exact opposite of what you were trying to state, and supports the point I was making. Thank you again.
BTW 2, if it was I who initially pointed out that Indyk was a shady individual with a completely impeached character, why would I then avoid the topic other than for the reason I stated? Namely, that I 'couldn't be stuffed' taking the time to do it once Wags admitted he didn't know who the hell Indyk was to begin with.
Your thought processes are scrambled. Seek help.
You get the biggest kick out of the supidest things. I wasn't avoiding telling everyone who Indyk was. I just didn't want to take the time to write a bunch of stuff if it wasn't necessary. As a matter of fact, I thank you for providing the link. The source is a bit extreme, but essentially correct.
It wasn't a Clinton bungle, however. It was Jesse Helms ,who was one funny mustache removed from being a full on nazi. He liked to run his own empire within the government. When Chris Carter (creator of the X-Files) wrote story lines concerning the 'government within the government' he was taking symbolic shots at Helms. Helms has been referred to as "Senator No" a moniker taken from the evil "Dr. No" of James Bond fame.
Anyway, it was Helms who got the ball rolling on Indyk, not the Clinton administration. Indyk was sacked to unravel Helms' bizarre foray into foreign policy. Either way, yes it was a United States debacle.
My point was Wagstaff's post. He used comments made by Indyk to prove another unrelated point. I thought this was ludicrous as Indyk is a source for nothing other than why Helms (and himself) should be in jail.
As to your carrying on about UN Resolutions against Israel, it is in fact I who has to continually repeat myself. The Israeli/Palestian resolutions are in negotiation. Half of the time, it's the Palestians who short circuit resolving the differences. Currently there are no motions before the UN to find Israel in breach. Currently, Israel is in breach of no UN Resolution. That's not a technicality, my friend. It is an unfortunate reality - for you.
BTW, it is ridiculous to assert that Iraq hasn't been found in breach of 1441. 1441 finds Iraq to be in breach of other resolutions, so your analogy is very much the exact opposite of what you were trying to state, and supports the point I was making. Thank you again.
BTW 2, if it was I who initially pointed out that Indyk was a shady individual with a completely impeached character, why would I then avoid the topic other than for the reason I stated? Namely, that I 'couldn't be stuffed' taking the time to do it once Wags admitted he didn't know who the hell Indyk was to begin with.
Your thought processes are scrambled. Seek help.
Excuse me??
Did I read correctly?? The Israeli/palestinian resolutioins are in negotiation??
Where the hell did you pluck that from?
Am I reading correctly....no, I couldn't be.
Do you truly believe that Resolution 181, and 242 are still in negotiation?? Now that is such an Israeli apoligist line if i've ever read on.
So resolution 181 is in negotiation is it...since 1948.
Resolution 242...in negotiation since 1967. You couldn't possibly believe this. could you??
Now here the riduculousness of your statement come out.
The palestinians only had representation in the UN in 1993, even know its merely symbolic.
The palestinians have absolutely no say, no power within the UN, so how can they possibly 'short circuit' the resolving of differences.
How can you possibly claim that Israel are not in breach, when Resolution 181 clearly states that Jerusalem is to be an international city. And Resolution 242 clearly states that Israel are to withdraw from the occupied territories. Have you seen the news lately???
Its pretty clear cut.
Yes Lestat, I'm aware of the history of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict in relation to UN-R 242. Thank you for your concern about my education. Yes, I did read your link. It supported the basis of what I'm talking about. Namely (once again) Israel is not in breach of 242.
What I would like you to do is read UN-R 242. It is not a 'demand' resolution. It was intended as a foundation for negotiations on the matter. These negotiations have been on-going for over 30 years. Your link mentions that. For the zillionth time, Israel has not been found in breach of 242 by the UN.
Yes, Israel has confounded the negotiations. So have the PLO. So have 8 US Presidential administrations which have come from 8 varying points on the political spectrum, and from 8 varying points of competence/incompetence. It's not in the nature of the way the United States holds transitions of power to have consistent domestic policies, let alone foreign policy. That's a reality everyone who has business with the US has to deal with.
The Mid-East is a great big freakin' mess. That too is a reality everyone has to understand and deal with. No matter what the US or any other country does, or attempts to do in relation to the problem, a huge demographic is going to be tremendously upset. I have no solution myself, and it is quite apparent that you don't either other than to be one of the criticizing factions. I will say that fracturing Palestine into a strategically indefensible region is just as distasteful as forcing Israel into a similar situation. Afterall, the territories in question were gained by Israel after they were attacked by outside nations, and not a direct result of initiating conquest themselves. That's a big grey area in 242, and yes I am aware that the US deliberately inserted that grey area. For good cause. It allows 242 to be a resolution of negotiation rather than one of demand. For the zillionth + 1 time, Israel is not in breach of 242. Like every other nation on the Earth, they've acted in bad faith at times, and always with self-interest, but are not in breach.
30 years isn't such a long time to those of us not eating ritalin everyday. It may take 30 or more years to resolve the mess that is the Israel/Palestine conflict. Unless you have an idea. I'm open to listen to your ideas of how to resolve the conflict. I am completely uninterested in having continuing conversations with you about how Israel is in breach. Unless of course you provide the link to the specific UN Resolution declaring them as such.
Peace,
Mooster,
I think it's been conclusively showm that Lestat's view on Israel is hopelessly compromised by his personal BIAS.
THe fact that he pretends (or even believes) to care about the Palestinians is a tragedy - cos all he's achieving is their continued suffering.
Oh well... as long as it's not HIS suffering...
I think it's been conclusively showm that Lestat's view on Israel is hopelessly compromised by his personal BIAS.
THe fact that he pretends (or even believes) to care about the Palestinians is a tragedy - cos all he's achieving is their continued suffering.
Oh well... as long as it's not HIS suffering...
Yes, thats really big of you Hawk.
Coming from one who pretends to care about the Kurds.
Still waiting for you to post your support for an invasion of Turkey....to come to the defence of those Kurds who you are so concerned about.
But of course that won't happen, being the US lapdog that you are.
