April 02, 2009
Good Thing We Don't Negotiate With Terrorists
By: John Caruso
Binyamin Netanyahu is now officially Israel's prime minister. And what was he doing three years ago?
The rightwingers, including Binyamin Netanyahu, the former Prime
Minister, are commemorating the bombing of the King David Hotel in
Jerusalem, the headquarters of British rule, that killed 92 people and
helped to drive the British from Palestine.
They have erected a
plaque outside the restored building, and are holding a two-day seminar
with speeches and a tour of the hotel by one of the Jewish resistance
fighters involved in the attack.
So this open glorification of terrorism has disqualified Netanyahu from discussions with U.S. officials, right?
US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (L) and Prime Minister-designate
Benyamin Netanyahu pose before their meeting at the King David Hotel on
March 3, 2009 in Jerusalem, Israel [sic].
I mean, right?
Mr. Obama pulled Mr. Netanyahu aside from their aides to a corner of the room in the King David Hotel.
Hmm, apparently not. How perplexing. And that last article also contains this wonderful nugget:
and I have a lot in common," Mr. Obama said, according to Mr.
Netanyahu’s account. "I started on the left and moved to the center.
You started on the right and moved to the center. We are both
pragmatists who like to get things done."
(The next time someone cites Chicago Obama's positions as proof of Washington Obama's liberalism, don't forget to mention that even the anointed one himself rejects the notion.)
I could spend hours unpacking and properly mocking all the hypocrisy, irony, and no-changery contained in these citations, but my mockumometer is on empty. So instead I'll just offer some questions for Netanyahu, in case some intrepid Israeli reporter runs out and needs a few:
- If Hamas bombed the King David Hotel today, killing 92 people, would it be terrorism?
- If Hamas had phoned in a warning 25 minutes before the bombs went off, would that change your assessment?
- If after the establishment of a Palestinian state the Palestinians erected a plaque commemorating the bombing, would you find anything objectionable about that?
- Can you explain why the Irgun was a "resistance movement" while Hamas is a "terrorist group"?
- More specifically, can you explain the difference between Deir Yassin and the Netanya Passover bombing?
— John Caruso
Posted at April 2, 2009 04:06 PM
I've pretty much given up on trying even to mention Dem hypocrisy/evil to my friends.
Pwogs are the new freepers. Zionism is the new religion. Welcome to the new millennium!
What's a "pwog?" I'm guessing I probably don't want to know.
then again, what does
"We are both pragmatists who like to get things done."
In the case of your typical US politician, and I have no reason to see Obama otherwise, I take it to mean collecting chits from powerful well-connected people and kissing their, um, nice shiny apples. Not entirely clear what it means for a typical Israeli P.M.
You and I have a lot in common," Mr. Obama said, according to Mr. Netanyahu’s account. "I started on the left and moved to the center. You started on the right and moved to the center. We are both pragmatists who like to get things done."
Things like kickin' Ay-rab ass, aight, homey? Israel has yesterday renounced the Annapolis agreement. Was "thePrez" paying attention?
Or was there a bankster who needed his prostate tongue-laved?
Gag me widda fuukin spoon.
I see Obama is as confused about the position of the political centre as the US media is.
Jonathan Versen: EXACTLY!
Good Thing We Don't Negotiate With Terrorists
When I read that, I said to myself "No, I thought we elected them."
As for the President, he is nothing more than a polititian. In other words a hypocrite. In other words a prostitute, but I don't want to confuse him with the good kind of prostitute, you know the kind that earn their pay?
There was a story by Kafka about the panthers coming into the temple. I lost the book at some point in moving from place to place.
There is hypocrisy, and then there is the formalization of hypocrisy into ceremony. I'm not sure if that was what Kafka was saying, but what the hell.
Since "progressive" is a rebranding of "liberal" after movement conservatives in the '90s spoiled that word, most progressives are the "liberals" of earlier times who would support, e.g., the bombing and starvation of anyone Bill Clinton said America needed to teach a lesson, and will only go so far in fighting a Democratic administration as to express pious hopes that won't cannibalize what's left of the welfare state too quickly, and will only fight "good" imperial wars like Afghanistan. Even Hillary Clinton has called herself a progressive. This cannot be reasonably called progress; it can at best be called "pwogwess." These progressives ("pwogs") don't offer anything new in American policy. In my opinion, the word is by now about as useless as "liberal" is.
Obama's campaign energized a whole lot of new "progressives" who presumably don't have a deep understanding of American politics. But whereas it's my hope that, with our help, some of these people can be educated and become real leftists, Alan hears them calling themselves "progressives" and condemns them all immediately and irrevocably to that level of hell that Democrat and imperial apologists ("dembots") eventually go to. There is a bit of conflation going on here in that people like our pal John Caruso, who also preaches death to the Democratic Party, also earnestly call themselves progressives. Alan tends to lump them all together with Obama or Clinton supporters until he hears different.
The sad state of American society is that here, the "radical left" can be described as anything to the left of The Nation. Alan resents that, as do I and I believe most readers here. Where we differ is that I think if we are to build a real American left out of our sadly marginal state we must win as many converts from amenable "progressives" as possible, repeatedly explaining to them where they are wrong in the hopes that even a few will see the light. Alan has despaired of such hopes, so instead he gets his kicks out of mocking anyone who calls themselves progressive.
4. The United States Congress to withhold any further military assistance to Israel until the investigatory findings are reviewed and the Department of State makes a determination as to how to proceed with the sale of defense articles and services to Israel;
5. The United States Congress to establish an independent commission to monitor Israel’s compliance with the AECA and FAA;
6. United States citizens and residents to meet with their Senators and Representatives in Congress to share the NLG’s investigatory findings and to encourage them to call on the Department of State to conduct an Arms Export Control Act investigation.
Onslaught: Israel's Attack on Gaza and the Rule of Law (note: pdf)
National Lawyers Guild Delegation to Gaza, February 2009
What's a Pwog? It's short for "Pwogwessive," "Pwoggie" or "Pwoggie-Bloggie" - essentially it's how Elmer Fudd would pronounce "Progressive" which, as StO has already mentioned, is what do-nothing chickenshit demobot liberals started calling themselves back in '90s 'cause the mean ol' rightwing radio-shriekers were being mean to them and all.
These days, Pwogs run comedy websites like 'DailyKo$' and 'Hullabaloo' and 'My Left Wing' where they crow endlessly about the massive clout they have within the DP even while the DP giggles madly as it pisses on their heads. In other words, the flip side of freepers.
In sum, while the primary function of Pwogs are to unconditionally funnel small amounts of money and votes to rightwing corporate democrats, their secondary (and largely unintentional) function is to provide mockable hilarity via their websites.
Difference: the Jews won. They get to write th history. The Palestinians are still backward, dirty filthy losers. They don't get to write the history.
Anything else need explaining?
You actually do have half a point here, as aooposed to the usual moronic douchiness on this site, but it's a paibfully obvious, and unimportant half-point you make here.
Oh great, nim is back to whip out his itty-bitty teensy-weensy little dick and wiggle it around to show us all what a ruff-tuff brute man he thinks he is. Okay, everyone knows your a pathetic little retarded boy-man, nim. Go back to Little Green Shitballs and tell all your tiny dick retard friends 'Mission Accomplished!'
Third Party, Folks.
Progress comes from HARD WORK, If YOU expected a miracle, Alan, then go to church, pay the preacher. Otherwise WE only got EMPOWERMENT FOR AN OPPRESSED MINORITY and ONE point against racism. That's it!!! BUT that's PROGRESS!
Wall Street bankers and credit card companies are oppressed minorities?
Alan has despaired of such hopes, so instead he gets his kicks out of mocking anyone who calls themselves progressive.
Actually, I doubt Alan ever had any such hopes, other than perhaps the same vague, pie-in-the-sky notions of perfect justice and freedom et. al. that we all had as teenagers. He's just one of those who strokes his own ego by screaming about how stupid everyone else is. Politics per seis irrelevant; he could just as easily be on a sports site screaming about how his team is better than your team. Anything that allows him to feel superior.
And didn't Caruso just say a couple weeks ago that "Jim Dandy" is one of Alan's sockpuppets? Hey AlanJim, why bother changing the name if the vitriol is the same as always? (Or are you actually one of Dennis Perrin's many alter-egos? You can always tell his sockpuppets too, because he never bothers changing up the rhetoric.)
Upside down, I can't figure out what your own point is, other than that you don't like Dennis or Alan.
He's been obsessed with smithee since the 4th of Forever. Just ignore him.
I've actually never noticed Dennis's attempts to converse with liberal bloggers, but I'd be interested to see them, if you could tell me where they are. I wonder what he's done to piss you off so; his blog posts aren't quite Alan's regular outpourings of scorn. When I've occasionally gone to Crooked Timber, though, I've seen people like John Emerson and abb1 arguing their points there getting written off as trolls, even though as far as I can tell they're being reasonable and earnest. (Emerson, incidentally, now has Trollblog.) Is it like that?
Looks like a simple case of transference. Intensely partisan democrats like are regularly kicked in the ass by the the party they venerate. Since they can't kick back (largely because they've neutered themselves) a lot of frustration builds up. When pointless calls to Pelosi don't relieve the pressure, I suppose they go looking for heretics like Dennis who don't share their idiot-blind adherence to the Democratic Party. (It doesn't really even have to be the democrats. It could be the republicans or a baseball team or The Backstreet Boys or whatever.)
That's probably why UDF/SteveB/Whatever regularly shows up to scream "purist!" and "Naderite!" at people who don't take his oh-so-important "online activism" seriously. They can't hit back at mommy, so they go looking elsewhere.
Alan, please just post under one handle. It's less troll-like.
BTW, I'm pretty sure SteveB is a Green/"Naderite" who doesn't vote Democrat. I think he just finds your efforts here to not be useful.
UDF, I don't know yet.