By Hanlon, on December 31st, 2008 at 12:00 AM
 I have a well-cured beef in the Israel/Palestine conflict. I’m not inherently anti-Israel nor do I in any way support the prospect of annihilating Israel in order to give the whole chunk of land to Palestine. What’s chapping my ass is seeing the battle framed as poor Israel even as the death toll in any Israel/Palestine conflict seems to be weighted against the Palestinians by a factor of a hundred or so.
As evidence, take Israel’s “mulling over” a truce with Hamas. For 48 hours.
Israel is considering suspending its Gaza offensive for 48 hours to give Hamas militants an opening to halt their rocket fire, but the threat of a ground offensive remains if the truce does not hold, Israeli officials said Tuesday. Israel’s defense minister, prime minister and foreign minister met Tuesday evening in Jerusalem to consider the proposal, officials said.
Talk of a truce seemed to be the outcome of a strong diplomatic push, particularly from Europe and the United Nations, as well as the United States. But even as the meeting took place, a Palestinian rocket reached deeper into Israel than ever before, some 28 miles outside of Gaza in the Israeli city of Beersheeba.
A whole lot’s going on in these two paragraphs, so let’s break it down.
First off, Israel clearly sees itself (accurately) as the stronger party, since the deal is basically “we’ll back off for a minute and give you a chance to surrender; say no and we’ll flatten ou.” It’s been this way before, as we saw in the flare-up with Hezbollah. The standard pattern seems to be some anti-Israel wack-a-doodle throws a grenade into Israel, Israel carpet bombs a couple square miles in response, American media wonders why no one condemned anyone until Israel struck back.
Second is our proof of this, in paragraph two. Notice that last sentence. “A rocket.” One lonely rocket puttering along, missing anything interesting. Now look at the picture attached to this article. That was an apartment building that got annihilated as Israel sought one guy’s family.
The reason no one loses their bird until Israel strikes back is that the response is so unbelievably disproportionate. You can bet your ass right now that if Israel launched a rinky-dink little bottle rocket into Gaza and Hamas firebombed a dozen city blocks, killing 400 Israeli citizens, I’d be here saying everything I’m saying now just with the names flipped around.
Keep in mind Israel is threatening to kill more civilians if Hamas doesn’t back off. The murder or threat of murder of civilians in order to achieve a political end? I’m pretty sure that’s terrorism.
By Hanlon, on December 30th, 2008 at 11:23 PM
This is how it’s done, children.
By Hanlon, on December 29th, 2008 at 11:34 PM
 This is starting to get, to put it mildly, alarming. In an apparent declaration of war, Israel has amped up its attacks in Gaza, and the death toll is rising rapidly.
Warplanes pounded Gaza for a fourth day on Tuesday as tanks stood by to join the “all-out” war Israel vowed would wipe out Hamas, and the Palestinian death toll rose to at least 360.
Israel made it clear Monday the offensive was just beginning, even as UN chief Ban Ki-moon urged world leaders to work urgently to end the “unacceptable” violence.
As I idly predicted in my last post, we’re already seeing right-wing maniacs finding severely mangled logic in order to condone Israel’s actions.
The question is whether the Palestinian people are educable. Which brings me back to the first point: the Palestinians voted to put in power — i.e., vest with the power of a quasi-sovereign government — a terrorist organization which thinks legitimate governing consists of bringing about the annihilation of its sovereign neighbor and, meantime, targeting the said neighbor’s civilian population with bombing attacks. When you do that, you make yourself a target.
It’s one thing to defend Israel’s disproportionate attacks as a legitimate attempt to destroy Hamas’ capacity to launch rockets into Israel, but it’s quite another to defend them as an attempt to “educate” the Palestinian people. The former is debatable, the latter is a forthright embrace of terrorism, the use of force against civilians to achieve a political goal.
This is where we see a rather fundamental divide ‘twixt the left and right in terms of Middle East policy and opinions. Forgive what may sound like hyperbole here…
Liberals and conservatives have both clung to purported humanitarian causes as instances in which the United States needs to get involved: Darfur for the liberals and Iraq for the conservatives. Both are centered around a brutalized and oppressed citizenry that, so the supporters say, need the help of the United States in order to be delivered from their plight.
Where things divide, though, is that the neocon war-nuts seem to be saying out of one side of their mouths that we need to deliver democracy to the Iraqis and out of the other that the Iraqis are primitive towelheads and we should turn the whole country into a parking lot. They have zero concern for torturing citizens and exhibit and almost frightening antipathy towards them in any real sense. The Palestinians don’t “deserve” saving because they elected Hamas, we should nuke Iran, it would have been easier to just burn Iraq to the ground instead of wasting time in a battle, and the region as a whole is a backwards Islamic radicalist cesspool that should be obliterated for the safety of mankind.
They seem to want it both ways, claiming to support the Iraq invasion for the sake of spreading democracy while screeching that everyone with a rug that faces east should be thrown in a dingy cell and starved and beaten until they tell us where they and their family plan on suicide bombing next. If I didn’t know better I’d think the profession of humanitarianism toward Iraqis was smoke and mirrors.
By Hanlon, on December 28th, 2008 at 11:52 PM
 This is gonna get fun.
A $70m lawsuit filed by Dan Rather, the veteran former newsreader for CBS Evening News, against his old network is reopening the debate over alleged favourable treatment that Bush received when he served in the Texas Air National Guard during the Vietnam war. Bush had hoped that this controversy had been dealt with once and for all during the 2004 election.
…
He claims breach of contract against CBS. He has already spent $2m on his case, which is likely to go to court early next year. Rather contends not only that his report was true – “What the documents stated has never been denied, by the president or anyone around him,” he says – but that CBS succumbed to political pressure from conservatives to get the report discredited and to have him fired. He also claims that a panel set up by CBS to investigate the story was packed with conservatives in an effort to placate the White House. Part of the reason for that, he suggests, was that Viacom, a sister company of CBS, knew that it would have important broadcasting regulatory issues to deal with during Bush’s second term.
Among those CBS considered for the panel to investigate Rather’s report were far-right broadcasters Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter.
Are you kidding me? They couldn’t even get, you know, a pair of respectable right-winters to float for that job?
I wasn’t following that closely back in ‘04, but I had a gut feeling that the abrupt firing of Rather for reporting something erroneous was peculiar. The man was a veteran for decades, and for one report that turned out false he’s given the boot? Odd in the highest. It’s not like Rather was the first or even close to the only man to report on something that was wrong or from dubious sources (after all, that got us into a damn war and no one responsible got fired).
It’s funny that guys like Rather and Maher got canned but it’s conservatives who keep squealing about liberals who want to control speech or strong-arm the opposition. Hm.
By Hanlon, on December 28th, 2008 at 11:41 PM
It was 70 degrees outside yesterday in southwest Pennsylvania. If right-wing nutjobs are going to call a cold wave in August proof global warming is fake, I’m going to say yesterday was proof it’s real.
By Hanlon, on December 28th, 2008 at 12:56 PM
 Poll after poll shows that the majority of Americans think the United States shouldn’t be taking sides in the Israel/Palestine battle. Still, for reasons I still don’t grasp, politicians seem beholden to pledging unconditional support for Israel, on both sides of the aisle.
So the sudden massive airstrike in the Gaza Strip that killed a few hundred Palestinian civilians concerns me, because I fear that Washington will respond by coming up with ways to justify Israel’s actions.
Palestinian medics say that more than 280 people have been killed and more than 600 injured as Israel’s bombing of the impoverished Gaza Strip continued for a second day.
A police station and a factory were among the sites reportedly hit on Sunday, after a mosque and the headquarters of al-Aqsa television had been struck overnight.
Of course, to me, this is even more worrisome.
Ehud Barak, Israel’s defence minister, warned that the air raids could be followed by a major ground incursion into the Gaza Strip.
“We are ready for anything. If it’s necessary to deploy ground forces to defend our citizens, we will do so,” Barak’s spokesman quoted him as saying on Sunday.
Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas blamed Hamas for the attacks, citing their termination of the ceasefire on the 19th. I can understand that logic, but to me, it’s not illustrative of a civilized nation to start slaughtering citizens because a governmental body ended a truce. Take out Hamas’s HQ, knock off a few of the elites. Don’t go bombing police stations and hospitals.
UPDATE: Egypt is trying to negotiate a ceasefire much as it had six months ago. Let’s hope it works out.
By Hanlon, on December 27th, 2008 at 10:35 AM
 I’m going to say something potentially damaging here, because it sounds like a criticism of the United States. Which is okay, because it is a criticism of the United States, but here it goes: amongst the biggest problems facing the USA today is that our population is simultaneously self-centered and shortsighted.
Today’s proof comes in the form of hybrid sales falling, along with SUV and truck sales rising, as gas prices begin to come down. After a few years of $3-4/gal gasoline, a downward pop and suddenly everyone’s buying Hummers and extended-cab pickups that have their fuel economy measured in gallons per yard.
Trucks and SUVs will outsell cars in December, according to researchers at the automotive Website Edmunds.com, something that hasn’t happened since February.
Meanwhile the forecast finds that sales of hybrid vehicles are expected to be way down.
“Despite all the public discussion of fuel efficiency, SUVs and trucks are the industry’s biggest sellers right now as a remarkable number of buyers seem to be compelled by three factors: great deals, low gas prices and winter weather,” commented Michelle Krebs, Senior Editor of Edmunds’ AutoObserver.com.
What we’re seeing is a perfect trifecta of American thought.
First, we’ve got the people who always seem to think that “the storm is over” when we meander our way out of a sticky spot. These people are buying their F-150’s under the woefully flawed assumption that the astronomically high gas prices are a thing of the past, and that now we’re “back to normal” it’s okay to buy a gas guzzler because the kids really need to watch Kung-Fu Panda during a road trip.
Second we’ve got the people who probably know the risks, are aware that gas prices will pop upward, and probably are aware of how bad the whole gas-guzzler deal is both for American economic security and the environment, but frankly don’t care because they can get a good deal on it right now, durnit.
Thirdly we hop over to the other side to look at the American companies, rather than the buyers. After the conflagration that was the economic downfall and skyrocketing gas prices, you’d imagine these guys would take a step back and look at the road ahead, thinking up a way to make sure they don’t have any such problems in the future. No such luck. Which of the former two camps they identify with is up for debate, but I don’t think it matters that much.
By Hanlon, on December 25th, 2008 at 01:15 PM
 That’s right, Merry Christmas from curmudgeonly old Hanlon.
I hope the holiday treated you all well. I know my bank account is in serious pain from it all. I think it’s a sign of aging; I’m starting to like giving out gifts more than getting them.
So I leave you with my favorite Christmas poem of all time, written by one Alfred Matthew Yankovic.
Down in the workshop all the elves were making toys
For the good Gentile girls and the good Gentile boys
When the boss busted in, nearly scared ‘em half to death
Had a rifle in his hands and cheap whiskey on his breath
From his beard to his boots he was covered with ammo
Like a big fat drunk disgruntled Yuletide Rambo
And he smiled as he said with a twinkle in his eye
“Merry Christmas to all – now you’re all gonna die!”
The night Santa went crazy
The night Saint Nick went insane
Realized he’d been getting the RAW deal
Somethin’ finally must’ve snapped in his brain
Well, the workshop is gone now, he decided to bomb it
Everywhere you’ll find pieces of Cupid and Comet
And he tied up his helpers, and he held the elves hostage
And he ground up poor Rudolph into reindeer sausage
He got Dancer and Prancer with an old German Luger
And he slashed up Dasher just like Freddy Krueger
And he picked up a flamethrower and he barbecued Blitzen
And he took a big bite and said “It tastes just like chicken!”
The night Santa went crazy
The night Kris Kringle went nuts
Now, ya can’t hardly walk around the North Pole
Without steppin’ in reindeer guts
There’s the National Guard and the FBI
There’s a van from the Eyewitness News
In a helicopter circlin’ ’round in the sky
And the bullets are flying the body count’s rising
And everyone’s dying to know -”Oh Santa, why?”
My, my, my, my, my, my – you used to be such a jolly guy.
Yes Virginia, now Santa’s doing time
In a Federal prison for his infamous crime
Hey little friend now, don’t you cry no more tears
He’ll be out on good behaviour in seven hundred more years.
(Alternate verse used in concert)
Yes Virginia, now Santa Claus is dead
A guy from the SWAT team blew a hole through his head
Yes, little friend, that’s his brains on the floor
Guess you won’t have the fat guy to kick around anymore.
But now Vixen’s in therapy and Donner’s still nervous
And the elves all got jobs working for the postal service
And they say Mrs. Claus she’s on the phone every night
With a lawyer negotiating the movie rights.
(They talk about)
The night Santa went crazy
The night Saint Nicholas flipped
Broke his back for some milk and cookies
Sounds to me like he was tired of getting gypped
Wo, The night Santa went crazy
The night Saint Nick went insane
Realized he’d been gettin’ the RAW deal
Somethin’ finally must’ve snapped in his brain
Wo, Somethin’ finally must’ve snapped in his brain
Tell ya, somethin’ finally must’ve snapped in his brain.
By Hanlon, on December 24th, 2008 at 04:03 PM
 Now here’s something interesting.
Pat Robertson, Mr Evangelical himself, came out on CNN to tear Bush a new one and also praise Obama’s conduct, all in the same segment. Put on your hard hats kids, because this one might cause some headaches if you aren’t prepared.
“The Katrina matter was terrible. The rebuilding of Iraq has been terrible. The [handling] of the economy right now has been terrible. It hasn’t been handled in what I would consider a professional manner.”
Robertson said history may be kinder to Bush than current opinion. “But I believe I would look at about a C-minus right now if I were grading him,” he said.
…
Robertson said Tuesday he was optimistic about the incoming Obama administration. “I am remarkably pleased with Obama,” he told Malveaux. “I had grave misgivings about him. But so help me, he’s come in forcefully, intelligently. He’s picked a middle of the road cabinet. And so far, if he continues down this course, he has the makings of a great president. So, I’m very pleased so far.”
I want to make a distinction here. I criticized Obama’s recruitment of Rick Warren to give the invocation at his inauguration because that’s a case of pandering. This, however, is proof of actions leading to praise. Big difference. Obama doesn’t need to bring in nutjob pastors to speak at his events, his presidential conduct and intelligent handling of matters will bring even former adversaries to his side. This is proof of that.
By Hanlon, on December 24th, 2008 at 01:01 PM
 The fact that Bristol Palin’s baby is now roughly five days overdue completely slipped my mind here, thank you Plunderbund for reminding me.
Most of the reports were pegging the due date as the 18th, but the New York Post is saying the 20th. I don’t have a source on this but I’m willing to bet all the outlets waited until the 18th and then noted a sudden change in due date. Regardless we’re still four days over.
This isn’t monumental or anything, my sister was five days overdue. So I’m not out to start formulating big theories on why Bristol Palin’s baby hasn’t come out yet. Hell for all I know they’re forcing her to “hold it in” until the 25th so they can have a Christmas Baby and name him Eli. I just know that it’s one of a thousand hilarious stories surrounding the family lately. Sorta like Bristol’s baby’s daddy’s mama and her drug charges.
It’s like an episode of Springer, but it’s on CNN. “We know that ain’t really YOUR baby!” “Yeah well your mom’s in jail!”
|
|
|
