Politics, Everyday, All day... morning, noon and night....

[DVD Burner]

Anti-Israel Protests Turn Violent


Several protesters have been arrested during violent demonstrations against the Israeli bombardment of Gaza.


More than 12,000 people marched through London, joining thousands of others around the world staging public events against the attacks on the Palestinian territory.

Protesters in the English capital included singer Annie Lennox, Respect MP George Galloway and comedian Alexei Sayle, who marched along the Embankment in London to Trafalgar Square.

The demonstration calling for an immediate end to the Israeli attacks was the biggest of at least 18 organised across the country.

It saw clashes outside the Israeli Embassy between protesters and police wearing riot gear.

Police made several arrests, claiming protesters made repeated attempts to break through the barriers and throw missiles outside the embassy in south Kensington.

Human rights advocate Bianca Jagger and singer Lennox called on American president-elect Barack Obama to speak up against the bombardment.

"A few days after Christmas I came downstairs, put the television on, and saw smoke pyres coming from buildings and I was shocked to the core because I was thinking as a mother and as a human being," Lennox said.

"How was this going to be the solution to (find) peace?"

Former mayor of London Ken Livingstone and comedian Alexei Sayle also added their support to the campaign.

Comedian Sayle said he was speaking out because it was important for Jewish voices to be heard.

He said: "I want to feel proud of Israel, I want to be proud of my people but I am ashamed."

Israel has followed a week of aerial attacks said to have killed more than 400 people with an artillery bombardment and ground offensive aimed at halting rocket attacks by Hamas, the militant group that controls Gaza.

The UN said the death toll in Gaza included more than 60 civilians, 34 of them children.

Three Israeli civilians and one soldier have also died in rocket attacks.

Israel launched the offensive after more than a week of Palestinian rocket fire that followed a six-month truce.

[DVD Burner]

Just another example of what smart people do. They speak out and do something.

[Ugly Dougly]

Effective and appropriate, one would hope...

[DVD Burner]

Israelis admit militants not in UN school



http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/ja ... estinians1

* Rory McCarthy
* The Guardian, Thursday 8 January 2009


The UN said last night that the Israeli military had privately admitted that the shelling of a UN school in Jabaliya which killed more than 40 Palestinians on Tuesday was in response to militant fire from outside, not inside, the UN compound.

After the attack, the Israeli military said an initial inquiry had shown that several mortar shells had been fired at Israeli forces "from within the Jabaliya school" and that Israeli forces had returned fire.

However, a UN spokesman yesterday said the military had admitted that this account was no longer accurate. "In private briefings with diplomats the Israeli army has admitted that the militant fire from Jabaliya did not come from within a UN compound but outside and therefore allegations that this fire came from inside our compound are completely baseless," said Chris Gunness, spokesman for UNWRA.

Last night, the Israel Defence Force, stood by its initial account."The source of the fire was from within the school compound and that we returned fire and we have intelligence information that we hit the actual mortar firing squad that was firing at us," said Captain Benjamin Rutland, an Israeli military spokesman.

Earlier yesterday, John Ging, director of operations in Gaza for UNRWA, visited the school himself."I am very confident now that there was no militant activity inside the school nor militants in the school. If anybody has evidence to the contrary, then let's bring it forward."

[DVD Burner]

So anyone still think I'm picking on Israel?

It's amazing no one here has been able to disprove what I say about Israel lying.

[DVD Burner]

I have a feeling today Israel will pull the ultimate massacre, one that will top the Nazis.

The last video feeds out of Gaza have been cut.

Been off for 3 hours now.

[Simon of the Playa]

not to change the subject, for you know i am simpatico to the palestinian cause, but take a look at this little tid-bit that just popped up.


things that make you say "hmmmmmmmmmmmm".


http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/art ... AD95K8IMO0

[ygmir]

good info Simon.........
yes, interesting to say the least.............

maybe, we'll not need the "Amero"..........if Mexico becomes the 51st state............

[Simon of the Playa]

i like tacos....i dont see a problem with Anschluss.

[ygmir]

i like tacos....i dont see a problem with Anschluss.

could it, then, perhaps, be Anschluss a trois (not the french usage, just to "rub it in"), with Canada?

after all, the Knooks do lead the world in being north of the U.S...........

[littleflower]

sldhfiwhglauhrvl kejf lkjnfv jdnfkjvndjfv f kjdlsdkj ks kfjs kajshv kjf.

[littleflower]

mexico makes sense, but ... why would we want to annex canada? i have never seen a canadian restaurant in the U.S.

[Simon of the Playa]

[DVD Burner]

She falls into it every time.

[ygmir]

Simon:
do I remember Tim Horton as becoming famous for his auditory talents?

[DVD Burner]

Does anyone know of any kind of live feeds coming out of Gaza right now?
I cant find anything anywhere not even on regular tv.

[can't sit still]

Why would we want to annex Canada? Well, just for starters, They are our # 1 supplier of petroleum.... huge amounts of nickel,,, lots a trees,,,, good skiing,,,, moose burgers,,, hydro-power,,,wheat and lots of other things. I drove to Alaska 7 times. Canada is loaded,, like a rich uncle.

Simon, the US can talk tough about Mexico drug runners but the truth is different. The CIA makes tons of money from those drugs. Right now there are 2 border patrol agents in prison for shooting an armed drug runner who was going to shoot them.
Imagine sending US military personell and telling them not to infringe on the rights and freedoms of the drug runners.
The military can slaughter unarmed innocents in Waco, but beware of shooting armed drug runners. I imagine that the real problem is that the cartels aren't paying the CIA their cut.
Mexico is in the process of losing <50> % of their income. There will be far worse problems than drug cartels.

[ygmir]

Why would we want to annex Canada? Well, just for starters, They are our # 1 supplier of petroleum.... huge amounts of nickel,,, lots a trees,,,, good skiing,,,, moose burgers,,, hydro-power,,,wheat and lots of other things. I drove to Alaska 7 times. Canada is loaded,, like a rich uncle.

\

and, don't forget the leverage Canada will have as the polar ice melts for the northwest passage...........
them and the soviets will have some big chips to play in the game..........

not to mention beachfront property on the Barents sea...............

after all from the north pole, every direction is south...............

[littleflower]

!!!!

some people have no sense of humor...

[Oldguy]

Opinion
Christian Science Monitor. The American Century isn't over

.By Robert Dujarric and Andy Zelleke Robert Dujarric And Andy Zelleke – Wed Jan 7, 3:00 am ET.More from Christian Science Monitor:

Tokyo; and Cambridge, Mass. – The idea that the American Century is over may seem well founded. At home, the financial meltdown and imminent deep recession have exposed massive policy, regulatory, and enforcement failures. Overseas, the United States confronts partly self-inflicted dangers in the vast quadrangle bordered by Kurdistan, the Gaza Strip, Somalia, and Pakistan, alongside challenges from rising powers now coming into their own.

Yet there are reasons for optimism: Barack Obama's presidency could usher in an era of renewed American global leadership.

Even as the US appeared to be digging its own grave by recklessly invading Iraq and grossly mismanaging its own economy, few countries tried to exploit the opportunity to further weaken America. Allied nations in some cases vociferously opposed the Iraq war or refused to help in Afghanistan, but none sought to break its alliance with the US; it has even emerged that while former German Chancellor Gerhard Schröeder was lambasting the Bush administration, his intelligence agents were helping the US military strike Iraqi targets. China chose not to use America's Middle Eastern distractions to challenge the US-led order in Asia. India continued to seek closer ties with America. Even a newly aggressive Russia eschewed direct confrontation with Washington.

These countries – allies, strategic competitors, and potential foes alike – probably acted the way they did because they saw the downside of a world devoid of American power. For the allies, the calculus is simple: America guarantees their security.

For India, America provides a hedge against Chinese power. For China, an America-less Asia would bring to the surface latent but lethal rivalries among Japan, North Korea, South Korea, Taiwan, and China that could engulf Asia in war.

As for Russia, the demise of America would leave it alone facing a 1.3 billion-strong Chinese nation potentially eager to settle the empty former Chinese lands in the Russian Far East. America is uniquely valued as a market, a source of technology, and a place to educate elites.

Additionally, painful as it will be domestically, global recession ultimately will probably hurt other nations more than the United States. In China, Russia, Southeast Asia, and the poorer oil producers, economic downturns risk serious social and political upheavals. And in the developed world, neither the major European economies nor Japan are faring significantly better than the US. In relative terms, then, American power is not likely to decline as a result of the slump.

While these factors only mitigate the consequences of the financial and economic crises, they also suggest that the US could emerge stronger on a relative basis.

The US brings unique assets to the daunting challenges it faces. One is its extraordinary regenerative ability. In few other societies could a man with a name and background as exotic as Mr. Obama's hope to win much more than a seat on the city council. Though entrenched incumbents in the US are many, the barriers to entry into the highest echelons of public office are unusually low by international standards, as Obama, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Michael Bloomberg, and Bobby Jindal have demonstrated. Newness in itself is no guarantee of quality, but on balance is far preferable to rigid oligopolies. Japan, with four children or grandchildren of prime ministers (including the premier) in the cabinet, illustrates this.

Beyond political dynamism, US society continues to display a flexibility and openness that gives it not only renewal potential but also – despite its flaws – a high degree of competitiveness. It is no accident that so many of the discoveries, innovations, and new businesses and industries that are defining the early 21st century originate in America.

Finally, demography is a distinct advantage. The futures of Europe, Russia, Japan, and China are clouded by below-replacement fertility, in many cases low or near-zero immigration, and a rapidly aging citizenry. Though the US is not immune to population aging, its higher level of fertility combined with immigration gives it an enormous advantage.

Rebuilding a stable basis for American global leadership will of course require, among other things, changes in policy and strategy that restore the complex balance between diplomacy and force, and between consensus and coercion, so recklessly discarded during the Bush years. However, if the US is able to overcome the economic challenges of the coming years – something that cannot be taken for granted – there are structural and cultural factors that could cause it to emerge as an even more influential actor on the world stage.

Robert Dujarric is director of the Institute of Contemporary Japanese Studies at Temple University Japan in Tokyo. Andy Zelleke is a lecturer in public policy at the Harvard Kennedy School and codirector of its Center for Public Leadership.

[DVD Burner]

You mean the Project for a new American Century Statement of Principles was not enough?

June 3, 1997

American foreign and defense policy is adrift. Conservatives have criticized the incoherent policies of the Clinton Administration. They have also resisted isolationist impulses from within their own ranks. But conservatives have not confidently advanced a strategic vision of America's role in the world. They have not set forth guiding principles for American foreign policy. They have allowed differences over tactics to obscure potential agreement on strategic objectives. And they have not fought for a defense budget that would maintain American security and advance American interests in the new century.

We aim to change this. We aim to make the case and rally support for American global leadership.

As the 20th century draws to a close, the United States stands as the world's preeminent power. Having led the West to victory in the Cold War, America faces an opportunity and a challenge: Does the United States have the vision to build upon the achievements of past decades? Does the United States have the resolve to shape a new century favorable to American principles and interests?

We are in danger of squandering the opportunity and failing the challenge. We are living off the capital -- both the military investments and the foreign policy achievements -- built up by past administrations. Cuts in foreign affairs and defense spending, inattention to the tools of statecraft, and inconstant leadership are making it increasingly difficult to sustain American influence around the world. And the promise of short-term commercial benefits threatens to override strategic considerations. As a consequence, we are jeopardizing the nation's ability to meet present threats and to deal with potentially greater challenges that lie ahead.

We seem to have forgotten the essential elements of the Reagan Administration's success: a military that is strong and ready to meet both present and future challenges; a foreign policy that boldly and purposefully promotes American principles abroad; and national leadership that accepts the United States' global responsibilities.

Of course, the United States must be prudent in how it exercises its power. But we cannot safely avoid the responsibilities of global leadership or the costs that are associated with its exercise. America has a vital role in maintaining peace and security in Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. If we shirk our responsibilities, we invite challenges to our fundamental interests. The history of the 20th century should have taught us that it is important to shape circumstances before crises emerge, and to meet threats before they become dire. The history of this century should have taught us to embrace the cause of American leadership.

Our aim is to remind Americans of these lessons and to draw their consequences for today. Here are four consequences:

• we need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global
responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future;

• we need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values;

• we need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad;

• we need to accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.

Such a Reaganite policy of military strength and moral clarity may not be fashionable today. But it is necessary if the United States is to build on the successes of this past century and to ensure our security and our greatness in the next.

Elliott Abrams Gary Bauer William J. Bennett Jeb Bush

Dick Cheney Eliot A. Cohen Midge Decter Paula Dobriansky Steve Forbes

Aaron Friedberg Francis Fukuyama Frank Gaffney Fred C. Ikle

Donald Kagan Zalmay Khalilzad I. Lewis Libby Norman Podhoretz

Dan Quayle Peter W. Rodman Stephen P. Rosen Henry S. Rowen

Donald Rumsfeld Vin Weber George Weigel Paul Wolfowitz

[DVD Burner]

Well getting back to some other fucked up shit, ( yeah there is even more fucked up shit than the new American century.)



Last update - 02:57 11/01/2009

Gaza residents: IDF troops posing as Hamas men

By Amira Hass, Haaretz Correspondent

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1054461.html

The testimonies of Gaza Strip residents are revealing new details about the Israel Defense Forces' mode of operation there. In the past two days, Beit Lahia residents forced from their homes said soldiers were posing as members of Hamas' armed wing while advancing on the ground.

The daily pauses in bombing allow Gazans to meet with the displaced - most of whom are housed in an UNRWA school - and hear their stories.



Gaza resident S. told Haaretz he heard several people say they saw armed men wearing the uniforms and symbols of the Iz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades, who "called out to each other in Arabic, as if they had caught a collaborator, and then, with the element of surprise, went into the houses."

A Gaza radio station warned that troops posing as locals were driving a vehicle normally used by paramedics. Residents said the radio broadcaster listed the vehicle's license plate number and color.

Haaretz has also learned that one of the army's methods for evacuating a home is to fire a missile toward its upper level. That is how B.'s house in Sajaiyeh was destroyed. It was bombed just a few minutes after a missile struck and 40 shell-shocked family members walked out of the house.

The IDF has also forced at least 40,000 people to leave their homes in agricultural and border areas. In Rafah, most of the 20,000 people removed from their homes were lodging with relatives and not in UNRWA facilities.

[DVD Burner]

Mind you Haaretz is a Jewish/Israeli news paper.

[Apollonaris Zeus]

I have a feeling today Israel will pull the ultimate massacre, one that will top the Nazis.

If you put your weapons in mosques, schools and high density populated areas, you have no concerned for your civilian's lifes. Hamas purposely fired rockets from near the UN school knowing that Israel would fire on them.

During the war between Turkey and Greece, Turket used the Parthenon as a weapons depot knowing Greece would think twice about fire upon them. It was fruitless for the turks, they gased them and starved them to death cutting off all the supplies. During WWII the scumbags nazis tried the same and failed like the Turks.

Hamas is trying to do the same, except in this case, Isreal have no sentiment for any property in Gaza.

Hamas! They are an old concept of the past holding on to something that is never coming back at least for a very long time outside of a major natural catastophe.

Now the Palestinian Authority is doing something that is having a big effect. Fighting Israel thought peaceful means and now hamas is trying stop that. Israel loves hamas because it gives them the right to attack and take away their land.

Hamas is going down and not a few weeks too soon. The death of innocents is wrong and makes me very upset, but they are the fault of Hamas.

AIIZ

[DVD Burner]

If you put your weapons in mosques, schools and high density populated areas, you have no concerned for your civilian's lifes. Hamas purposely fired rockets from near the UN school knowing that Israel would fire on them.

Ok, here we go. Normally over the years of my being on eplaya, I read everything you post. Most times I never respond to your posts because you are usually wayyy out there and have no idea what you are talking about and other times when I do respond, it's in most cases to agree with you only to have you go on a tangent that amounts to going no where.
This time it is more than obvious you have not read any of the 3 pages of proof I've posted about Israels lies.

I'll give you a chance to read my posts and then you can try to disprove what I have posted with facts in kind with links to back your findings, which I am positive you will not be able to do.

Now as far as Israel claiming that Hamas is planting weapons in mosques, schools and high density populated areas, first, you did not read what I just posted above. and even if they did, Gaza is a crowded place. There is not much room to place weapons anywhere but where they place them. Why? because Israel has stolen most all of the Palestinian land. Not only that, Israel and many countries place weapons near populations and even near densely populated ares. Even in America. This is nothing new. Also as far as mosques go, Israel has leveled to this date 11 mosques. I'm sure they should be able to find at least bits and pieces to prove their claims. Even broken weapons. but Nope, you wont find them. This is a lame excuse. So let me guess, you like me have proof of these weapons that Israel claims Hamas was hiding in the mosques, right? At least some damaged weapons right? We find none.

Usually what happens is, Israel will admit they made a mistake as they did with the bombing of the UN school, but by then it is too late. The damage is done. I'm sure you and many don't want to hear the truth that Israel is lying, but it is a proven fact as I have continuously posted proof of their doing so.
If you think my proof is flawed, Prove it with some facts.

It's as simple as what I do. I post the facts. Just like I did here: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1054461.html

Other wise, what you have posted as just YOUR OPINION, is fruitlessly MOOT!

Fact, Israel is lying and I shall continue to post all of their lies here whether you like it or not. Why? because you have no idea what you are talking about and I do.

During the war between Turkey and Greece, Turket used the Parthenon as a weapons depot knowing Greece would think twice about fire upon them. It was fruitless for the turks, they gased them and starved them to death cutting off all the supplies. During WWII the scumbags nazis tried the same and failed like the Turks.

Hamas is trying to do the same, except in this case, Isreal have no sentiment for any property in Gaza.

Hamas! They are an old concept of the past holding on to something that is never coming back at least for a very long time outside of a major natural catastophe.

Now the Palestinian Authority is doing something that is having a big effect. Fighting Israel thought peaceful means and now hamas is trying stop that. Israel loves hamas because it gives them the right to attack and take away their land.

Hamas is going down and not a few weeks too soon. The death of innocents is wrong and makes me very upset, but they are the fault of Hamas.

AIIZ

This part of your post deserves no dignification. Why? Because if you had read my posts you would already know I addressed these issues.

All of them. Go back and read. Absolutely no reason or need for me to repeat myself or waste my typing time.

[DVD Burner]

In fact, I'll make it easy for you because these are easy for me and don't take any time for me and I understand you may have a short attention span. I posted these before and they are short, no reading involved FACTS.

This one is proof who broke the cease fire.

[youtube][/youtube]

And this is the time line of the lies of Israel and when Israel strategically placed these lies.

[youtube][/youtube]

Please, you are more than welcome to prove these facts wrong. In fact, take your time. You still wont be able to not prove the fact that these 2 pieces have proven Israel is lying.

[DVD Burner]

Mind you, if you don't answer, it' means you cant answer.

Hey, many here have done the same to me only for me to pull through with an accurate answer.

So you cant say I am not affording you the same opportunity.

Cheers!

[Oldguy]

Washington diary: While Gaza burns
By Rob Reynolds in Washington


Most of the world's attention is riveted by the war in Gaza, the raw sights and sounds of which are brought home most vividly by the coverage provided by Al Jazeera's English and Arabic channels.

Here in the US however, the Gaza story is seldom the lead on the major evening news programmes.

The mainstream media is too squeamish to show the reality of war - the blood, the pain, the screaming children.

And US cable networks and satellite systems seem afraid to allow Al Jazeera English into their lineup of channels, quailing at the prospect of a political backlash from far right-wing, self-appointed media "watchdogs" who caricature Al Jazeera as "terror TV".

The preoccupation here in the US is much closer to home: The economic crisis.

'Lingering' recession

With just a few days to go before Barack Obama takes over the White House and Americans bid George Bush a not-so-fond farewell, the president-elect has been outlining his economic recovery plans.

Attacking the growing economic crisis will be the prime objective of Obama's first 100 days in office.

He outlined the economic rescue package he says will create three million jobs, saying it will not be "just another public works programme".

"We'll invest in priorities like energy and education; healthcare and a new infrastructure that are necessary to keep us strong and competitive in the 21st century," Obama said.

Obama said this plan will be costly - adding to deficits that will top a trillion dollars.

The total price tag on the package is still unknown - but will certainly be close to a trillion dollars itself. Also in question: Whether such an epic amount can be spent effectively without equally huge waste and mismanagement.

Obama also vowed to undertake a fundamental reform of the freewheeling, hands-off ethos of Wall Street and the anything-goes style of US capitalism.

"No longer can we allow Wall Street wrongdoers to slip through regulatory cracks," he vowed.

"No longer can we allow special interests to put their thumbs on the economic scales."

Obama said that congress must work day and night to pass the measure quickly, and Nancy Pelosi, Democratic speaker for the house of representatives, predicted passage by mid-February, promising: "We will not go home until we have an economic reform package."

Now, if only the US government would use some of its power to bear on forging a halt to the bloodshed in Gaza.

Bush, as is his custom, sees the issue in black-and-white terms, with no shades of grey.

He has blamed the entire situation squarely and solely on Hamas, admitting no fault whatsoever on the Israeli side.

And while Condoleezza Rice, the US secretary of state, claims to be working "day and night" to establish a ceasefire, it is quite clear that the Bush administration has given Israel broad latitude to smash Hamas - no matter what the cost in civilian lives.

So far, Obama has largely kept quiet, saying the US could not appear to speak with more than one voice on foreign policy.

He did offer some tepid words of concern for the unfolding humanitarian disaster in Gaza, saying the loss of civilian life in Gaza and in Israel was a source of "deep concern".

By mostly avoiding comment, or by making bland expressions of concern about civilian deaths, Obama is playing a political game: remaining careful not to upset Israel and its many powerful supporters in and out of the US congress, while at the same time giving hope to Arabs who are desperately anxious that Obama will usher in a new chapter in US policy toward the Middle East.

Obama says he will have much more to say about the situation after he takes office January 20 - but by then many more lives may have been lost in the war on Gaza.

Presidential meeting

The new US congress that took its seats on Tuesday includes many enthusiastic supporters of Israel but few members - other than Keith Ellison, the Muslim congressman from Minnesota, and Dennis Kucinich, the Ohio congressman - are willing to speak up for the Palestinians.

On Wednesday, Obama had lunch with all the living presidents at the White House.

Looking at the roomful of grinning leaders past, present and future seemed to me symbolic of the twists, turns and dead ends of four decades of American Middle East policy.

There was the aged Jimmy Carter, who brokered the Camp David accord between Egypt and Israel and has more recently spoken out strongly on behalf of the Palestinians, but whose mishandling of the Islamic Revolution in Iran ushered in nearly 30 years of wasteful hostility between two great nations.

Standing next to Carter was Bill Clinton, who orchestrated the famous Rose Garden handshake between Yasser Arafat and Yitzhak Rabin, sealing the peace agreements of the Oslo process, but who fell short in a later push for a final settlement, and whose final months in office saw the beginning of the second intifada, or uprising, in the Palestinian territories.

Smiling by Obama's right stood George Bush the father, who launched the Madrid peace talks and tried to pressure Israel to stop settlement building on Palestinian land.

'Elusive' peace



Obama has been swift to assure US Jews
of his support for Israel [AFP]
And to his left was Bush the son, who gave Israel a free hand to strike the Palestinian territories and Lebanon, and virtually ignored the peace process till his final year in office and whose Annapolis "process" now seems nothing better than a cruel joke.

Bush welcomed the newest member of their select club, telling Obama: "All of us who have served in this office understand that the office itself transcends the individual.

"We wish you all the very best and so does the country."

While Obama says he is a strong friend of Israel - during last year's election campaign many American Jews were dubious about whether Obama would protect Israel - doubts he tried to assuage by fervent declarations of unconditional support.

Now, while Gaza burns, he promises to get involved in another round of Middle East peacemaking once he is sworn-in on January 20.

"I am doing everything that we have to do to make sure that the day that I take office we are prepared to engage immediately in trying to deal with the situation there," he said at a news conference.

"Not only the short-term situation, but building a process whereby we can achieve a more lasting peace in the region."

Peace in the Middle East - the same pledge, the same elusive goal, that has pre-occupied a roomful of presidents - now, being passed on to a new one.

_____________________________________________________________
Recently, I have been reading various news sources, public opinion , and obvious propaganda from many nations around the world via the internet.Included are several well known newspapers of various religious veiwpoint...the Jerusalem Post, the Christian Science Monitor ,and Al Jezzera ,to name a few. I have never been to the region but like most people get information from reporters, government agencies, and pudits who all seem to have their own particular biases. One man's hero is another man's terrorist.

The new American Century is a given across all cultures...It is a fact.

Obama's term or terms will be quite unlike Bush's. That means national policy will be different. America abstained on the truce vote when it could have vetoed it. That speaks volumes to me.

[DVD Burner]

Thanks Oldguy.

I've been watching Al Jazeera English online the past 2 weeks because they were the only ones that had live coverage from inside Gaza. they are not Broadcasting anymore as of yesterday.

This has me kind of worried. It reminds me of the "Downing street memos".

In it, it claims how Bush had originally wanted to Bomb Al Jazeera.

Mind you, yesterday, Israel bombed the roof of where the reporters were in Gaza yesterday. That was the last I saw Al Jazeera online.

Oh, and I really don't imagine Obama being able to do anything much about Israel.

But we have been surprised so far haven't we?

[Apollonaris Zeus]

Mind you, if you don't answer, it' means you cant answer.
:P

I am not digging up old news reports because I don't need to.

Long before you brought your sorry ass here I was posting on the middle east, so I don't live in vacuum. I don't have to look up propaganda on either side. I know when the rockets fly, you need to do something.

So continue your rage.

But answer something you have never posted.

What do you wish to see happen in the long run in Palestine?

AIIZ