Saturday, January 28, 2006

Pundits gone wild!

The American supporters of Israel have gotten over their initial shock of the Hamas earthquake and now they're really on a roll. Last night on Washington Week, Janine Zacharia was the point person on the Hamas issue and she was literally breathless trying to get the idea out that there was no way Israel or the US could possibly deal with Hamas---ever. The "peace process" is "impossible" now that Hamas is in control, she said. What she forgot to mention was that Israel hasn't participated in the peace process in the past four years either. Barbara Slavin on NPR's Weekend Edition Saturday with Scott Simon had an answer for that little problem, though. According to her, the Israelis have had to act unilaterally because the Palestinians have "such difficulties conceding land." That's a fine idea, unless you take into consideration that the Israelis were the aggressors in the 1967 war and every UN resolution since then has said Israel can't build on the land it took---and oh yeah, by the way, they have to give it back. The Palestinians have problems conceding land mainly because it's theirs to begin with. But since the Palestinians can't produce a viable "partner for peace" to negotiate with---even Abu Mazen isn't good enough---the Israelis just have to define their borders by themselves and if East Jerusalem just happens to be a part of what Israel says it wants, then too bad---to hell with final status talks.

Slavin said that even if the US and EU cut off funding to the PA the Palestinians would probably be able to get money from elsewhere, "unfortunately." I like that "unfortunately" part, as if the Palestinian people, who are already dirt poor, should have to suffer for electing Hamas. That's what David Brooks, my favorite pundit, was proposing on the NewsHour last night. (Mark Shields, as usual, was hunched over the table like he was bellying-up-to-the-bar.) Brooks said the Palestinians had to learn a lesson about democracy by living with the consequences of their decisions. See, next time they should vote for who the Israelis tell them to. Silly Palestinians, when will they ever learn?

Naturally, the Israeli/American mainstream media is getting a boost from the Palestinians themselves. This snippet from the AP demonstrates this pretty well: "Gaza City, Gaze Strip---Thousands of Fatah supporters burned cars and shot in the air across the Gaza Strip yesterday, demanding the resignation of corrupt party officials." I'm all for the ousting of corrupt party officials, but they have to cut out the gun fire and car burning. Someone ought to sit both the leaders of Fatah and Hamas down and explain to them that their followers look like crazy people to the rest of the world and everything Israelis say about them is reinforced every time they do stuff like this.

Oh, what the hell, both sides over there are ridiculous; I don't know why I bother getting so worked up about this stuff. It doesn't matter what you say one way or the other on this issue because you're either going to be called a Zionist apologist or an anti-Semite. Sanity need not apply in the Middle East!

Oh, Canada.

In addition to her looney views on the Palestinians and Hamas, Barbara Slavin predicted warmer relations with Canada, now that they have a "conservative" in Ottawa. Where have I heard that before?

USA Today 12/12/03 "(Paul)Martin, considered slightly more conservative than Chretien on some issues, has expressed interest in improving ties with Washington."

The CBC writes that another right winger Paul Weyrich says, the Canadians "are 'so liberal and hedonistic' that Stephen Harper can't hope to change their philosophy of 'cultural Marxism' right away. Given time, however, the Conservative prime minister-designate may straighten them out." Let's hope so.

Where do these crazy people get these warped ideas about Canada? Any PM who isn't the last one will have a better relationship with Bush, but they never do. No Canadian PM is going to "adopt a more reasonable view of the United States," as long as W. is in office, if they want to keep their job. That's called democracy.

By the way, didn't Harper just tell Bush to butt out of it's artic waters?

"Conservative leader Stephen Harper said Thursday he would assert more strongly Canada's northern territorial claims following reports that a US submarine recently traveled unannounced through Canadian Arctic waters. 'The single most important duty of the federal government is to protect and defend our national sovereignty,' said Harper. 'There are new and disturbing reports of American nuclear submarines passing though Canadian waters without obtaining the permission of -- or even notifying -- the Canadian government." [Democratic Underground]

Well, that and soft wood lumber ought to get us back to the status quo with the great White North in no time, I predict.


Post a Comment

<< Home

hit counter script Top Blog Lists Favourite Blogs Top List
My Zimbio
Top Stories