Propped-up stooge walks a tightrope on road map to nowhere

Gloom, gloom, gloom, gloom, gloom, ...
Nothing good to say about anybody.

On Monday the Palestinian Prime Minister, Mahmoud Abbas, will report to the Palestinian parliament on his
Government's achievements in its first 100 days in office.

With the militant ceasefire up in smoke, the road map for peace in shreds and Israeli settlements, roads and fences
creeping ever further into the occupied territories, it should be a gloomy session.

Mr Abbas, whose job was created specifically to make peace on the Palestinians' behalf, has little to crow about.

To make matters worse, the man he effectively supplanted, the veteran PLO leader and elected Palestinian Authority
chairman Yasser Arafat, is moving openly to reassert his power.

smh.com.au

There goes another hope for peace. As Abbas is delegitimized even more, Israel ounts more attacks against Palestinian militants, and Hamas and Islamic Jihad cry for revenge, we seem back where we started-if not worse off. Bye bye roadmap. Nice knowing you.

A copy of the "road map":

http://www.palestinemonitor.org/Special%20Section/Road%20Map/Roadmap_fulltext.htm

Somewhere back there I did a post with copies from both
Islamic and Jewish "advocacy" sites to make sure they match,
but I'm too laxy to figure out how to look it up today.

Also seems to fit Tony Blair.

All too true.

he`s got an election to win.....

From Jihad Unspun. I was doing another search on something else. This site came up. Probably it is another contravercial site just based on it's name. I am not familar enough with the site. I just find it interesting that in two searches this word colonization has come up. I was looking for information on the najef mosque bombing and I did not use the word colonization as a key word.


Story broke 5 hours ago. Because of the contraversy around the use of the word colonization, I opted to place it within a thread rather than open up a new thread.

snip

I have been trying to understand the Sharon-Blair-Bush Road Map for Palestine. Has anyone published a complete text of the road map? We heard and read about fourteen reservations of the Israelis – what are they? Regarding the Middle East “peace” proposals, it has been the practice of Israeli strategists to prepare a “piece” plan rather than a peace plan, give it to the U.S. for offering it to the Palestinians as American proposals; when the Palestinians show their willingness to discuss, Israel begins to alter their own proposals so that they become unacceptable. For the Palestinians the latest “road map” is just another exercise to manipulate the world opinion in favor of Israel; this is the reason why I have added Sharon’s name to the plan. The Sharon plan with the concurrence of ‘Bliar’ (yes, Blair the liar) and Bush is to put together a Saddam-like tyrannical government in Palestine or at least to instigate a civil war among the Palestinians. The divide and rule policy has never failed.

Nothing is specific. Everything is vague and I do not understand what is being offered and what is being accepted. It seems that this road map is a fuzzy page of abstract art and each party is seeing what it wants to see. The Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Palestinian people are not told about the contents of this fuzzy map. Naturally, the leadership of Islamic movements in Palestine is seeing what it wants to see and it is defining the road map accordingly. However, their agreement is conditional to the agreement of the other side and they would like to see practical steps of Israeli withdrawal. Based on my current knowledge, I am going to give my impressions of the road map. To sum up, this appears to be the road map to permanent colonization of Palestine by Israel, secured and guaranteed by the U.S. government. Please forward to me if you have drafts of the road map and Israeli reservations. If I find that these documents say something different from my impressions, I reserve the right to revise my own comments.

it is a lengthy commentary...

http://www.jihadunspun.com/intheatre_internal.php?article=74202&list=/home.php&

--------------

As someone said to me recently, I say this in regard to those words that tend to be buzz words for some people (like probably COLONIZATION is in terms of Israeli policy): I am a person that is interested in IDEAS not LABELS. I repeat the words of someone else only in that they apply to me.

How do you like that I am apologizing for placing an article... might that indicate our liberties are dwindling as we are being conditioned to maintain some semblance of POLITICAL CORRECTNESS in regard to what might be critical thought in terms of the IP conflict OR am I exercising an understanding that the issue is sensitive?

One way or another I guess I am making clear I did not write the commentary placed here, even though I might find some of the authors thoughts worthy and do make a habit of seek out thoughts from the Arab side.

but people post from it here from time to time.

which was I a wrote a disclaimer. It was the first time I have stumbled across it. I find sometimes those sites that may be considered contravercial can not be discredit entirely, unless of course they are clearly conspiratorial like those white supremist sites one runs across. However in the case of jihad unspun I have never seen it before to make a sound judgement as to it's worthiness. For instance, while electronic intifada may well have it's bias, it reprints many times articles from a variety of sources and I tend to find the are no more slanted than Foxnews, in fact I find them less so slanted.

I can not comment in regard to Jihad Unspun. NOt having run across the site before I can not say whether information on it cross references per se. As for their slant well that is clearly obvious. Slants of that nature are on occasion not merely to be discounted out of hand as aside from the use of various terminology it does account for the other perspective. Two sides. Two different perspectives. While one side might not appreciate the perspective from the other, two sides will garner two different perspectives as they do garner two completely different sides of the story.

Considered anti-american by some, I am not apt to discount what would normally be called the opposing perspective just because it is that perspective from those deemed enemy. I feel grievances are evident and in a perfect world IF the grievances of another (between two feuding factions) were addressed rather than ignored the warpath could be diverted. That would require diplomacy and compromise even sharing. None of that seems relevant to the agendas of the so called VICTORS either in the US, the UK or Israel. Diplomacy is passe.

"Objectivity" is a delusion.
The questions to ask are:
Do they inform?
Do they flat out lie?
Do they attempt to examine more than one point of view?
Do they attempt to incite fear, anger, hatred?
Do they attempt to incite compassion and reason?

A site that wants to make you angry, fearful, or full of hate
is not out to promote your well-being, regardless of their point
of view.

There is, however, nothing wrong with reading what Hitler
had to say, or any such. Let each be judged according to what
they freely said.

I steer clear of the sties that make me angry or fearful. As for hate even while I do get angry, especially within the debating game. I am 1-able to steer clear of the flame bait. 2- would never be one to have any of my anger justify the kind of prejudice that can goad one into condemning whole cultures, races and religions. I am just not built that way.

I do however have a fascination with covert operations, and as such have learned or I am always in the process of learning how to read the signs. Not that I will always be accurate or that my suspicions pan out. Generally with covert ops it takes 30 years to sort them out. But if you have read covert manueverings from the past in the various historic accounts of them, it can give you a sense for the possibility of which kind and how some may be at play on the game board now.

Whoever would have thought I would turn out to be such a news junky. Not me.

they seem to report items from a very wide variety of sources, from CNN (the most detestable as far as I'm concerned) to al-Muhajiroun, the more questionable items usually prefaced with some sort of "this isn't necessarily what we think, we're just a messenger" type of disclaimer before their reprinting. I guess in that sense useful as a collection of just what is said by many different sorts of people, rather than one distinct lense. Some other Islamic publications like Azzam & TWF think they're a CIA front.

Hah! That is funny. Well if that is the case they wouldn't be purporting the kind of slanted anti-zionist propaganda that one would expect from a sight with the name jihad unspun. If it does and it is a CIA front. Well that could just be indicative of the type of veiled prejudices that may well be lurking under the Bush facade.

I did not suspect a CIA front, however I did have a feeling it might just be a collection of articles from a wide variety of sources as you say.

I think Uncle Sugar is about done with Israel. It wouldn't suprise me in the slightest if the intelligence apparatus is planning some sort of downfall for Israel. Think about it, between our pissing around in Iraq killing Iraqi's and Israel pissing about in the West Bank and Gaza killing Palestinians the Arab Facade regimes (most importantly Saudi Arabia) are poised for collapse.

If the US seriously believes it's about to lose the Big Domino (SA, everything else will fall if that goes) they would flush Little Satan down the toilet so fast it would make your head swim and the much feared Zionist Lobby and the Jewish vote would show just how powerless they really are when they aren't working in the interest of the US.