Conspiracy Chronicles series, no. 5
There are plenty of worthy analyses out there of the German soap opera known as Der Spiegelgate. This is all I have to contribute.
Qifa Nabki
News and commentary from the Levant
Der Spiegelgate
Discussion
54 thoughts on “Der Spiegelgate”
Are you just gonna stand there and not respond?
And the people say…
 | Mark Gailard on Slim Gaillard and his Mysterio… |
 | Rami on Aoun and the Future |
 | Sam Berlin on Slim Gaillard and his Mysterio… |
 | Jim Hamra on Slim Gaillard and his Mysterio… |
 | nickbiddlenoe on The Saga Continues: Nicholas N… |
Qifa Nabki 
haha brilliant!
Posted by mxml | May 25, 2009, 11:44 amQN, where is the orange-colored card?
Posted by Honest Patriot | May 25, 2009, 4:50 pmI get so annoyed when I read articles from authors claiming they received vital information from unnamed inside sources. It is very poor journalism to say the least, and reckless as well at times.
It happens in all kind of fields, especially in business. One would think that the editors will put a stop to it. If it can’t be substantiated they shouldn’t publish it. But hey, maybe their overriding factor is selling as many papers as they can, and the heck with accurate reporting.
Posted by Ras Beirut | May 25, 2009, 5:56 pmWas is DAS? Ich habe mich verlaufen.
Posted by mj | May 25, 2009, 7:04 pmHassan Nasrallah speech last night made it clear, that “Israel are the true defenders of the Sunnies in Lebanon” and that Barak asked the international community for Hassan Nasrallah’s arrest!
That just made me laugh for a good 10 seconds. especially, how serious he said it.
Posted by Jester theFool | May 26, 2009, 8:08 amI do not know if Der Spiegel is right or wrong. I do know though that if I had to assign probability to whether they are right or wrong it would not be zero that they are wrong.
So, you would wonder why the Lebanese are not discussing what the correct course of action would be IF Hizballah is indicted in the murder of Hariri. Because putting your heads in the sand and just hoping a civil war does not restart is not a good strategy.
So what does the day after the indictment of Hizballah look like? How can Lebanon stay out of a civil war or prolonged sectarian strife? What should March 14 be saying to their people now?
Posted by AIG | May 26, 2009, 8:55 pmLast comment proves conclusively the DS article source is a zionist card which QN forgot to add to his colors.
Is it still possible to correct that QN? I suggest making it an ace. I would even take all the other cards off at no risk whatsoever of getting proven wrong.
Posted by majid | May 26, 2009, 9:32 pmPsst, we also invented the Easter Bunny so we could steal eggs on Easter.
Hey Majid, Arab extreme shortsightedness as you portray, has gotten the Arabs to where they are. So why do you insist on continuing making the same mistakes you have made for the last 100 years? Is it working for you? Is there no phrase in Arabic for “planning for contingencies”? Do you only plan for the outcomes you would like to happen instead of those that are likely to happen?
Posted by AIG | May 27, 2009, 12:00 amYou know what, let me help you think this one through. Isn’t possible that the tribunal is controlled by Zionists and that they would want the worst possible outcome for Lebanon and therefore they will indict Hizballah in the hope of fostering a civil war? To me, the above is nonsense but I am sure you can appreciate it and find it quite probable. So, why not plan for this case?
In the end, if Hizballah is indicted, it really does not matter why Hizballah is indicted. It could be because they actually did it or because of a great Zionist conspiracy. What is important is to discuss before hand this possibility and make sure that a civil war in Lebanon is averted.
Posted by AIG | May 27, 2009, 12:16 amDon’t play smart. We are not talking about the Tribunal. We are talking about Der Spiegel.
Posted by majid | May 27, 2009, 12:56 amIs there no phrase in Arabic for “planning for contingencies”?
AIG –
Judging from the participants here, and their hope for an Iranian victory, I hope our Zionist entity is planning for contingencies.
Posted by Akbar Palace | May 27, 2009, 3:02 amI love it that Zionians whine about Arab love of conspiracies yet see Iranian conspiracies at every turn.
Posted by mo | May 27, 2009, 3:24 ammo –
Do you think the Zionians committed 9-11? q:op
Posted by Akbar Palace | May 27, 2009, 5:35 amThanks for the sentiments you extress on this board AIG, but how about you go concentrate on fixing the racist ideology that dominates in Isreal, and the ideology that has for 60 yrs driven a politics of dispossession of Palestinians, and leave us ‘inferior’ Arabs to our consipracy theories.
Posted by the Sydneysider | May 27, 2009, 6:00 amThe problem is Sydneysider is that a weak Lebanese state is always a headache for Israel. Militias such as the Palestinians ones in the past and Hizballah now take advantage of the sorry state of your state to cause problems for everyone. The thing is, for Israel these problems are minor headaches, for Lebanon they are stage 4 pancreatic cancer. How many more wars like your civil war, 82 and 2006 can Lebanon take?
And the point I am trying to make is simple, it does not matter why you think Hizballah may be indicted. What matters is that you are prepared to act in a productive way if that indeed happens. And that requires discussion and preparation and also preparing public opinion especially in the Sunni and Shia streets. Is there a Lebanese media outlet or blog where this is being discussed? If so please point me to it.
Posted by AIG | May 27, 2009, 7:43 amHi folks
Sorry I’ve been off the radar. Family obligations beckon.
Will be back to posting again soon.
Posted by Qifa Nabki | May 27, 2009, 9:00 amNo AIG, the problem is not that a weak Lebanese state is a “headache” for Israel, the “headache” the fact that Israel is a racist, undemocratic theocracy, born by ethnically cleansing the native population, and is sustained only by using epic amounts of violence and other forms of atrocity against largely innocent and defenseless Arabs. And for some stupid reason, a bunch of Europeans Jews believe they are a superior race, with the right to colonize other people’s land, and treat other people with similar brutality that Jews (rightly) condemn when it is used against them, but expect that they will be accepted and loved.
No, no, no AIG, Lebanon’s weak institutions are not the problem but fanatic racist-supremicists like yourself are the “headache”.
Posted by Joe M. | May 27, 2009, 9:05 amMAJID!
Habib albi can you please use ONE email address for this blog? Every day I need to take your comments out of moderation because you keep changing up (fake!) email addresses. Please, use a proper address and stick with it.
Thanks. Carry on.
Posted by Qifa Nabki | May 27, 2009, 9:08 amThe problem is Sydneysider is that a weak Lebanese state is always a headache for Israel. Militias such as the Palestinians ones in the past and Hizballah now take advantage of the sorry state of your state to cause problems for everyone.
AIG Israel has done its best to keep Lebanon weak. That is in Israel’s interests, no need to deny it.
Imagine AIG Lebanon packed with modern anti-aircraft weapons, modern fighter aircraft, tanks etc. No more daily “practice” flights and sonic bombings in Lebanese airspace. Or attempts to “liberate” the Litani waters for the use of the chosen people.
Israel has denied the West the creation of a modern defence army in Lebanon. Now the Lebanese army is nothing more than a better than normally armed riot control police. Hizbollah filled the military vacuum the west had created in Lebanon and kicked Israel out of Lebanon.
Of course the Lebanese “fixed” religious/racial system of power sharing is insane and a quick recipe of constant troubles. As insane as the “Jewish and Zionist” system in Israel.
I would see it so that a superior militia like Hizbollah has brought in a way stability to Lebanon. It has created a credible defensive deterrent against Israel, something the national army never was allowed to create, because of internal and external reasons. Other militias know the power of Hizbollah and do not dare to change it.
Of course the best solution for Lebanon, but not for Israel, would be to repair Lebanon’s political system and attach Hizbollah’s military assets to the Lebanese Army. Leaving the political system as it is and forcing Hizbollah to disarm would be an invitation card for future more Israeli invasions.
Posted by SimoHurtta | May 27, 2009, 11:51 amThank you Joe M. for your astute insights. I’m really intrigued how the weak state of Lebanon is causing Isreal such a headache (ever heard of Panadol?) when Lebanon has never invaded and occupied any part of its southern neighbour. In actual fact it is Isreal, with it’s big guns and tanks, that are causing Lebanon to sffer time and again – in 1978, 1982, 1996, 2006.
If you what to site Shia Lebanese as the cause of Isreal’s headaches then you really need to think again. The Lebanese state might be weak, and as a result a party like Hizbullah was able to form, but you need to ask yourself who or what was it, domistically, that motivated the Shia to mobilise politically and militarily.
For years the Shia represented the political left in Lebanon and refused to define themselves only as Shia. Their causes were socialist in nature (and I thnk still are) but when the Christain right denied them that more secular identity by seeing them only through a sectarian lens, and when the system in Lebanon propelled them to adopt a religious identity in order that they may have some impact in the conflict, their secularism fell by the wayside. This is the same Christain right that Isreal has strongly supported in the past.
Don’t come complaining to us about ” poor Isreal” being surrounded by weak states, esp. the Lebanese one, when it is Isreal who contributes to its weakness.
Posted by the Sydneysider | May 27, 2009, 11:56 amI suggest that it would be wise to discuss an prepare for the possibility that Hizballah is indicted and all you guys can muster is the usual response that has become by now a caricature of Arab thinking. Is that the best you can do? Is inventing history and blaming Israel and the West really going to solve your problems?
So, let’s see. The Christians treat the Shia like shit since Ottoman times. Israel’s fault. Lebanon cannot develop its army? Israel’s fault. The Cairo agreement? Israel’s fault. Not enough electricity in Lebanon? Israel’s fault.
Let’s start with a simple, uncontroversial fact. It was Lebanon that first declared war on Israel. It was Lebanon that first invaded Israeli territory. It was Lebanon that first tried to “throw the Jews” into the sea. Second simple fact. In 47, Lebanon was RICHER and more advanced than Israel. Was it Israel that held Lebanon back between 48 and 67? Lebanon also did not suffer in the 6 day war and 73 war. What happened in Lebanon between 48 and 82? Was any of that Israel’s fault? You guys are really, really misguided about history and where the blame for Lebanon’s ills lie.
Israel has made many mistakes in Lebanon. We know very well that it is a treacherous swamp with shifting loyalties and ruthless genocidal ambitions that make political assassinations and killing fellow civilians par for the course and we never should have thought we had a chance of understanding it let alone manipulating it successfully to further our interests. But any serious student of history would know that the fault for Lebanon’s failure lies squarely in the hands of the Lebanese and their inability to accept each other as equal and trusted co-nationalists.
Posted by AIG | May 27, 2009, 2:20 pmpls reread my post AIG. i didn’t say anything was Israel’s fault. I merely said Israel contributes to x, y or z. In fact what i was trying to outline were the DOMESTIC reasons behind Hizbullah’s rise to power and then drawing a link to isreal’s support of those very Lebanese forces that treated the Shia ‘like shit’ – right wing Christains to be precise (Maronites especially).
as for blaming others, rather than accepting responsibility, I think Isreal is itself well versed in this. eg placing the blame and mistreatment of Palestinians on Arab states (like Jordan, Lebanon, Syria) rather than accepting that it is isreali acts that are the largest reason for their suffering. Lebanese, Jordians, Syrians and Egyptians do indeed treat Palestinians as pawns and exacerbate their suffering, but how about Isreal take responisbility for what it has done to them BEFORE it points the finger elsewhere?
For God’s sake AIG just go blog on some ‘I Love Zionism’ board.
Posted by Sydneysider | May 27, 2009, 3:19 pmDisarming HA cannot be done by force even ,lets say for arguments sake, they were indicted by the STL. Disarming is a long process which involves reforming Govt and creating a somewhat healthy,egalitarian system free of discrimination.Only then can the shiaa and every other sect that are represented by a politico-military party trust in the system and start absorbing into the state.
The blind allegiance to political parties in Lebanon creating an atmosphere of mistrust is the most dangerous plague affecting the population.In this sense, its not that the Shiaa are seduced by the anti-zionist rhetoric of HA, but the feeling of security and belonging coming from iconic representation.
I believe the recent show of political bickering and the vehement attacks on HA,although justified, within political circles is a course in failure and more voilence.Specifically, the Kataeb and the remergence of extreme right rhetoric reveals a return to the pre-1975 insecurities and as Walid Joumblatt is pointing out, any spark can light the powder keg,ie Der Spiegel.
Posted by Maverick | May 27, 2009, 4:03 pmAIG: It’s ironic that you’re talking about a lack of foresight, because every time I ask you what you’ll do when Jews are no longer a majority, you just say that you’ll cross that bridge when you get to it.
As for Hezbollah as a deterrent, I really don’t know where that idea is coming from. Hezbollah is an excellent resistance force and should be given its props for forcing the Israelis out in 2000, but when was the last time it deterred an attack by Israel? Certainly not in 2006 or 1996. And the Israeli overflights are certainly not being deterred.
Posted by sean | May 27, 2009, 4:42 pmI just wish AIG would tell us what kind of happy dope he’s on.
“and we never should have thought we had a chance of understanding it let alone manipulating it successfully to further our interests.”
I don’t know AIG, are you being serious here? You spend a page and a half telling the Lebanese they don’t understand themselves and they should listen to you and know better..bla bla bla..and yet you end up by stating that Israel would have never understood Lebanon anyway. If that’s true, it shall render all your views on Lebanon irrelevant, no?
Posted by offended | May 27, 2009, 5:00 pmThe above comment was reposted after the first one was held for moderation. Sorry QN, couldn’t resist the thrill of pwning AIG!!!
Posted by offended | May 27, 2009, 5:02 pmsean,
As difficult as it is to prove the reasons for non-action (and adding the overflights is silly and one could counter it with how many of those overflights have been used to attack Hizballah positions), you really don’t think the number of missiles Hizballah had/has and the distance they can now cover doesn’t make Israel take something into account that it never had to take into account before?
Doesn’t the fact that Israels towns and cities are now under direct constant threat should there be a war again not make the Israelis slightly less trigger happy? Doesn’t the fact that the Israeli leadership falls over itself to clear Hizballah of any wrongdoing everytime a missile has gone over the border since 06 mean something to you?
Hizballah isn’t a detterent? I would ask you to reconsider that one.
Posted by mo | May 27, 2009, 5:10 pmOffended,
No, I spend time explaining that it is worth discussion by LEBANESE what to do in order to avert catastrophe IF Hizballah is indicted. You have serious reading comprehension issues.
Unless you want to tell me that the Lebanese do not understand their country either. But what do you care? You are an Assad supporting Syrian that has zero respect for the wishes of the Lebanese people.
Posted by AIG | May 27, 2009, 5:14 pmSean,
IF the Israeli Arabs ever become a majority, (and that is a big IF because as they grow richer they are having less children), they will be a majority in about 100 years. You want me to deal with a problem 100 years in the future. I do not know how the world will look like in 10 years. I will start dealing with the Israeli Arab issue in 70 years. That will leave me 30 years to solve it.
Yet, you are not prepared to discuss a problem that could happen this year or early next year when the tribunal issues indictments. And by the way, I agree that disarming Hizballah by force is not a solution because it means a civil war in Lebanon. In my opinion, first and foremost the Sunni street must pacified and THAT is certainly in the control of March 14. Hey, but what do I know? I only know that when the indictment comes, you better be prepared.
Posted by AIG | May 27, 2009, 5:21 pmNo no AIG, you started off by lecturing that the Lebanese should prepare for the possibility that Hezbollah will indeed be indicted. That, I believe, is the aim of the Der’s article and its zionists protagonists like you. To set off a sectarian agenda of hatred and suspecions (or to make what’s already been a bad situation worse). If you’re wise enough, you’d have waited until official indictments are served to dispense your unsolicited adivce to the Lebanese.
And I’d further suggest that you try to control your obsessive-compulsive love for labels. An ‘Assad-supporting’ Syrian I’m not. And it’s not up to you to decide who have respect for lebanese people and who doesn’t.
Now, and since you admit you don’t understand Lebanon and never did. Aren’t you supposed to keep your hole shut and listen more?
Posted by offended | May 27, 2009, 5:28 pmOffended,
You should really get help for your reading comprehension problems. I have been consistently saying that the Lebanese plan for the contingency of Hizballah being indicted.
The fact that you misunderstand completely what you read is reflected in what you say: “If you’re wise enough, you’d have waited until official indictments are served to dispense your unsolicited adivce to the Lebanese.”
You see, you have to plan for something BEFORE it happens. That is what I have been saying. When the indictment comes, IF it comes, it will be too late. If the Lebanese do not plan ahead, they risk a catastrophe.
I have read enough of your comments on Syria Comment to know that indeed you are an Assad supporting Syrian.
Posted by AIG | May 27, 2009, 6:02 pmAIG, this is what I’ve already stated in my reply to you above. Sounds like you can’t read well yourself. Anyway, let’s hear it from you, AIG (aka the expert strawman), how do you propose the Lebanese plan for the contingency of Hezbollah getting indicted?
You see, no matter how you flip your s**t, it always sounds like you’re on to something. I’m sure the Lebanese have a better plan of handling their own affairs vis-a-vis the tribunal than any plan of action or a strategy your zionist backside might suggest.
Reading my comments on SC and then assuming I’m an Assad supporter is indicative of your stupidity or lack of understnaing of Syrian politics. Anyway, it’s always a pleasure to call you out on your bulls**t. Thanks for playin’.
Posted by offended | May 27, 2009, 7:34 pmGuys,
Here’s my opinion on the Hariri assassination. Hezbollah and Rafic Hariri had a very good relationship prior to the tragedy. In fact, they would meet almost weekly to discuss about issues. Furthermore, Hariri even publicly stated his commitment and support to the resistance. Therefore, it is not possible (and in my opinion untrue) that Hezbollah was behind the assassination. Also, Nasrallah has never targeted political figures in the past, so he would’nt have started then.
After talking to a good friend who’se well-informed in these matters, I have come to the conviction that Rustum Ghazali was behind the assassination. In 2002, he replaced Ghazi Kanaan as head of military intelligence in Lebanon. Kanaan and Hariri were in good relations. After the former was replaced by Ghazali in 2002, relations never went well between Hariri and Ghazali. The latter was, and still is, in my humble opinion a crazy maniac who wanted to subserve everybody in Lebanon. Kanaan was demoted back in Syria to head of political intelligence, then to interior minister. I think Bashar, and the people around him, wanted to dissociate themselves from the old guard of Hafez. What aggravated the situation was the extension of Lahoud’s mandate (to which Kanaan was opposed to himself).
These are some of the many mistakes of Bashar’s early years at the head of Syria. It’s very likely that he was himself aware of Rustum’s plan to assassinate Hariri, and did not do a thing. Then, following Kanaan’s “suicide” in October 2005, it was obvious that Rustom wanted to clean up as fast as possible.
This is simply my humble opinion: 90% chance Rustom Ghazali was behind it, 10% chance mossad was behind it (for reasons I haven’t cited because it’s becoming too long), and 0% chance Hezbollah.
Any comments?
Posted by Nidal | May 27, 2009, 7:57 pmAIG: Here is the thing – you’re saying that non-Jews becoming the majority is both unlikely and really far away, so you don’t need to think about it. Many people believe that Hezbollah being indicted is equally unlikely, so we needn’t plan for it. It’s like saying that one should plan for Sa’ad Hariri being indicted.
Personally, while I don’t think it’s impossible for a couple of reasons (first, that it’s always possible if not likely, that Hezbollah was involved, second, it’s again possible that the tribunal could be politicized to point Hezbollah even if it weren’t guilty), I’m not sure that it’s likely enough to really worry about. Or, maybe, I lack imagination, because I’m not really sure that there’s anything to be done in such an event. The cards would have to fall where they may.
If Hezbollah were to be indicted, no one is likely to try to force Nasrallah or anyone else to show up at the Hague. Nor is Hezbollah likely to give up anyone from the party who might be indicted. It would certainly look bad for the Hizb, and it would likely affect US funding, but again, I’m not sure there’s anything to be done about that.
But again, this all hinges on what I think is an unlikely hypothetical, so while I don’t think there’s anything to be planned for, neither am I losing any sleep over the matter. Personally, I’m more worried about another escalation with Israel that would surely come about if/when there’s a reprisal for Mughiniyeh’s assassination.
Posted by sean | May 27, 2009, 8:17 pmIt is truly comic when you read some of the Arab or Lebanese posters here complain about and degrade Israel for being racist and undemocratic.
come on folks!! be true to yourselves at least and admit that no other nation can even come close to how racist/tribal/feudal/undemocratic and ****’d up we the Arabs are.
Posted by V | May 27, 2009, 9:02 pmOK QN ya 3ayni,
I got your message. Thanks. I’ll do my best.
In the meantime do you have any antidotes for what have turned into electronic zio-parasitic propagating organisms? Do you know of any software that can deal with the problem?
Thanks again.
Posted by majid | May 27, 2009, 9:14 pmFile the Hariri murder in the same drawer as the Kennedy assassination and/or JonBenét Ramsey.
Anything else new?
When does the war with North Korea start?
Posted by Akbar Palace | May 28, 2009, 4:01 amIt is most likely that Israel did it.
Posted by Joe M. | May 28, 2009, 8:31 amWhat do you think about these?
Hizbullah asking IMF and EU for continued financial support
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/bd7faf1a-4a24-11de-8e7e-00144feabdc0.html?nclick_check=1
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/14ac7b8a-4a1e-11de-8e7e-00144feabdc0.html?nclick_check=1
Interesting implications are that a M8 government would have to put up with structural adjustment style IMF policies (VAT hike planned for 2010, privatisation). What does that do for their ‘street cred’?
Does anybody know what Ali Fayad’s think tank says about fiscal and monetary policy? The article mentions the Hizb’s desire to recruit Shi’a economists. Anybody knows about possible candidate? Several Lebanese economists have consistently pointed out the debt crisis and the profits banks make out of lending to the government (Corm, Hamdan, Dibeh).
Who in M8 has interests in Lebanese banks?
Posted by K | May 28, 2009, 1:41 pmBeen away for a while, and I see that nothing’s changed… 🙂
AIG is still trying to coach Arabs how to better understand themselves, AP is still encouraging AIG, and everyone else is begging them both to join “Zioblogs”. Oh and lately, AP’s former-buddy Majid has gone Ziomad and is looking for an arena, any arena, that’ll pat him on the back for it.
QN, I wrote on SC sometime ago that the biggest problem with the Hariri assassination, as I see it, is that all the parties here would have something to gain. In essence, no one could be ruled out. And if we now hear a German journal quoting undisclosed sources, we know the situation is hopeless. My guess, we’ll never know who did it. And, to be honest, does it even matter anymore?
What if it was a special unit in Hezbollah? Who could prove that Nasrallah gave the order? And even if he DID give the order, so what? It seems Olmert and Barak gave the order to assassinate a Hezbollah commander, and endless Palestinian leaders, and I don’t see them going to the Hague. And what if it was Syria? Even Bashar Assad himself. I don’t see anyone asking Bashar to step down, and be replaced by god-knows-what.
All these discussions are purely academic, theoretical with no grasp on reality. The most that could happen here, is that one or two individuals would one day be sacrificed, just as Libya’s leader did with his own men over the Lockerbie bombing.
No Lebanese in his right mind would risk civil war, even if Hezbollah was responsible. That Hariri is gone is a fact. No one can change that fact. But to ruin Lebanon in war, is still a decision. No one will choose that option because it is a lose-lose one.
Posted by Shai | May 28, 2009, 2:55 pmShai,
How about that Bibi? 😉
Posted by Qifa Nabki | May 28, 2009, 3:17 pmQN ya ha-Bibi,
If Bibi’s going to turn into mini-Begin (still my bet), then everything he’s doing makes sense (internally at least).
If Bibi’s not going to be a mini-Begin (most of the world’s bet), then everything he’s doing makes sense.
So far, so good… 🙂
AIG,
Sean is right – Israel should prepare for the non-Jewish majority contingency. And no, it will not happen in 100 years, it is already happening. But not exactly according to your definition.
The Central Bureau of Statistics in Israel recently published a report showing that, for the first time, there are more non-Jews living under Israeli rule than Jews. Since Israel has yet to decide whether the West Bank is part of Israel, or not, it seems with each day that passes, our Apartheid regime is becoming more and more transparent. Ten years from now, there will be an even-greater non-Jewish majority under our rule, with no voting rights, no equal rights or freedoms, and no independence.
If I were you, I think I’d spend less time exhaustively trying to convince Lebanese to plan for contingencies, and more time preparing my own. What will you say, AIG, when Obama asks you (your country): “Say, what do you think is the difference between Apartheid and Israeli Occupation of Palestine?” Isn’t it time, AIG, that you guys (pro-settlement) decide whether the West Bank belongs to Israel or not? If it’s ours, let’s annex it, call it Israel, give the 4 million residents their Israeli ID cards and a right to vote, and call it a day. If it’s not ours, what are we doing there? Babysitting the olive-groves for someone?
Posted by Shai | May 28, 2009, 3:27 pmShai,
There are parts of the West Bank (greater Jerusalem for example) that are part of Israel and there are parts that are not. All that is spelled out quite nicely in the letter Bush sent Sharon.
The answer to Obama is quite simple: There is no apartheid in Gaza. Is that what you want in the West Bank?
Personally, I would tell the Europeans and Americans that Israel is willing to withdraw to the 67 lines with certain exchanges but that for every rocket that is shot at Israel or suicide bombing attempt, they pay Israel 1 billion dollars. That is putting your money where your mouth is. If they think that the security risks for Israel are small, they should be happy with this deal. Since any deal will not allow the right of return, there will always be a sizable percentage of Palestinians that will be against it and they will be easily manipulated to attack Israel.
But hey, maybe I’m wrong. Maybe the Palestinians will change overnight. I am willing to take the risk if so are the Europeans and Americans.
Posted by AIG | May 28, 2009, 3:56 pmBy the way Shai, do you really not see the difference between Olmert giving an order to execute Barak and Olmert giving an order to target a Palestinian leader? Do both carry the same weight for you???
Because if Nasrallah ordered the murder of Hariri, the former applies. Forget the Hague. What does it mean for internal solidarity in a country?
It is legitimate for a country to fight its enemies. It is not legitimate within a country to assassinate your political rivals. But not for Shai I guess. If Bibi murders Livni you will be quiet about it because you will not want to risk a civil war. Right?
Posted by AIG | May 28, 2009, 4:11 pmA Russion born zionist (shai) thinks he is smart. Who’s looking for a pat and from who zio-pet? What a deranged state of mind you’re in, especially when you advise another zionist on how to conduct a so-called dialog with Arabs.
You haven’t got it yet. It is not appropriate for any Arab to conduct any discourse with any zionist and even from behind computer terminals. That particularly applies to mutating organisms like yourself who think their seemingly ‘peace’ blabbermouth will give their zio-infected minds the sufficient credentials to conduct such discourse. How much do you get paid from shin-bet for spending your time on your screen trying to talk to Arabs? I bet you a lot more than what you used to make in your former Soviet Union.
So buzz off and discourse solo or to like-minded zios.
Posted by majid | May 28, 2009, 5:42 pmAIG,
You’re funny. I guess in your real-politique nations pay billions for rockets fired. But in mine, one tries to understand the rockets, and what is truly behind them.
Btw, don’t get me wrong about the Hariri assassination. Of course I think it’s important to investigate such horrific crimes, and to punish those responsible. I just find it a bit odd (as I have at other times on SC) that you, AIG, are so concerned with the Arabs’ internal affairs. In the past, you’d say to me that their affairs influence “your” affairs. But here, you’re telling them to prepare contingencies. It seems to me that you’re sticking your nose a little too far in places it may not belong…
Posted by Shai | May 28, 2009, 5:45 pmQN,
I see your blog has gotten “spicy”… 🙂
(In the form of one Majid).
Posted by Shai | May 28, 2009, 6:07 pmShai,
If you do not understand what is behind the rockets you are hopeless. It is the same thing that was behind the 1929 Hebron Massacre. Not much has changed.
And thanks for the etiquette advice.
Posted by AIG | May 28, 2009, 6:14 pmSpicy indeed.
On an unrelated note, my three year-old is currently singing Reel 2 Real’s 1994 club favorite “I Like To Move It” as she gets ready for bed. What do they teach kids in preschool these days?
*sigh*
Posted by Qifa Nabki | May 28, 2009, 8:12 pmQN,
Don’t worry. She knows the song because it is the end theme of the animated movie Madagascar. Rather hilarious when sung by lemurs. This time it is not the pre-school’s fault.
Posted by AIG | May 28, 2009, 9:26 pmYa QN ya habibeee ya’bn akheee ya’bn mhanee,
Iza baddak mna3amillak yahee ba’albakiyeeeee w miyyi bil miyyi w bla bharat bilmarra kamen. ma mna’arifun koullon bayt rahme, kayrouz w mhanee. manoon jiranneee w koulloooon 3a lras wil 3ayn. Ba’a bala awarmeeee, bala keshk bala hasheysh, bala batteykh. Lahjee wad3ha walla mniksirheee aktar?
e shou 3emille hown? sou’ ‘ukaz lalyahowwd? e walla tikhneeet! w kameneee la meyyyyn? la hawdeeee l mhejreyn min saybiryeee? lah, lah lah lah ya 3hayf!
Posted by majid | May 29, 2009, 3:07 amThe answer to Obama is quite simple: There is no apartheid in Gaza. Is that what you want in the West Bank? Personally, I would tell the Europeans and Americans that Israel is willing to withdraw to the 67 lines with certain exchanges but that for every rocket…
AIG –
You’re correct. Gaza has changed the dynamic. Israel already did what the peace-makers wanted. They left a large chunk of land.
Any the peace-makers said, if you leave this land and they STILL attack you, you can claim we were wrong.
The data point has been created, and the “answer … is quite simple”.
Turn now toward Iran and North Korea for more “peace process” news and events.
Posted by Akbar Palace | May 29, 2009, 4:02 amQN you should be careful prety soon you’ll be accused of spying and turnned in to the “Mossadomizer” for allowing Israelis to post on your site
a classic reaction from the yahoodi-phobic “intellectual” he must be related to Talal Salman!!!
Posted by V | May 29, 2009, 11:06 amV,
Be careful, by commenting too close to Israeli commentators, you might be infected with Ziogerms… Wash your hands, just in case. 🙂 (p.s. I liked the Yahoo-diphobic term.)
AP,
The unilateral withdrawal from Gaza was a mistake made by Sharon, not the liberals. So was the unilateral withdrawal from Lebanon a mistake. Do you not recall even Yossi Beilin saying it is a mistake (before it took place)? But it was a nice try on your part, as the resident neocon, to reconstruct history. Maybe your Yahoo-diphobic friend believes it. You too seem to have developed some common language back a while ago, no?
Posted by Shai | May 29, 2009, 3:21 pm