Tony Blair

1. The addiction of “Comment is Free”

Sign the Ban Blair-Baiting petition here. “He’s not a war criminal. He’s not evil. He didn’t lie. He didn’t sell out Britain or commit treason. He wasn’t Bush’s poodle. He hasn’t got blood on his hands. The anti-war nutters must not be allowed to damage Blair’s reputation further. He was a great PM, a great statesman and a great leader.”

Comment at end

Ban Blair-Baiting

23rd March 2010

ANTI-ISRAEL, ANTI-JEWS, ANTI-AMERICA, ANTI-BLAIR …

WHAT ARE THE LITTLE CIF-ERS FOR?

If you’re into keeping an eye out for the bias on The Guardian Cif pages it can be a full-time job.

From time to time, when I can stand visiting this infiltrated/ignorant/brainwashed Excuse for Thought and Opinion, I have gone to the trouble of copying some of the comments written against Tony Blair. I could write a book. In fact one day, I might.

The Cif moderators are quick at removing the “Blair is/was the best PM we ever had” and “And now he’s gone, don’t we miss him?” comments, while they invariably leave the “to The Hague with the murdering WC” & sometimes even the “string ‘im up” incitements, just for the flavour. This one, thankfully, WAS removed.

I referred to the business of recognising one’s friends by noticing their friends here yesterday.

Next to the polite, appreciative, but removed comments at Cif you often find a moderator’s “this comment has been removed”.

[If and when they remove the murderous hanging 'n' flogging suggestions it is likely only because they don't want to be accused of soliciting or encouraging murder, not because they disagree in principle. 'Surely not?', I hear you ask. Why not ask the editor and chief moderator Matt Seaton? He's the one responsible, so to speak.]

Those they remove are obviously too virulently nasty to give online space to, unlike those they leave.

No?

That’s right – NO.

CIF WATCH

This site CiF Watch keeps an eye out for anti-Israel/anti-Jew comments. They’re on the job. If you want to read their relentless and well-deserved daily “dissing” of the Guardian and its largely brain-dead commenters and moderators, you should read Cif Watch regularly.

The particular article under scrutiny here is this one, written by Stephen Pollard – an excellent man who signed the Ban Blair-Baiting petition so he’s clearly on the right track.

Here are three comments Cif Watch managed to copy before they were removed by the Moderator in the Sky with di-i-iamonds (drugged to their eyeballs, presumably.) Such dastardly comments must NEVER be allowed to stand, clearly.

Quick resume -

Tewks give them a history lesson on whose land it is anyway – so Tewks’s comment is removed.
Ilovedoggies asks what was the point of Hamas, ‘purportedly’, (a word never used by the WE ALL KNOWER regulars) killing a foreign visitor in Israel. So Ilovedoggies’ comment is removed.
STAN58 provides an even more-in depth history lesson than did Tewks on whose land is it anyway. For that STAN58 joins Tewks and Ilovedoggies in the sin-bin.

From Cif Watch-

And of course what would an I/P thread be without the pro-Israel deletions:

Tewks

19 Mar 2010, 12:30PM

Who says it’s Palestinian land?

It was Jordan until in 1967 they started a war which they then lost, so now that land belongs to Israel.

Just like in 1939 Germany started a war which they lost, and so part of their earlier territory is now part of Poland.

Ilovedoggies

19 Mar 2010, 3:09PM

Hamas (purportedly Hamas) fired a rocket this week and killed an East Asian guest who was working an a kibbutz. What was the point of this despicable act?

STAN58

19 Mar 2010, 5:56PM

@Keo2008: The History is very simple, when you know it :

1. Jews are the original inhabitants of Israel in the last 3300 years. There is no another peple in world, except maybe Chinise, which history is so long.
2. Matk Twain, when visited the country in 1870, found there almost no population at all, except Jerusalem, in which the majority were the jews, so talking about populatino proportions in that time is nonsense.
3. The majority of arab populatin in 1947 was only the first or second generation in the country. The rest were the descandants of jewish population converted to Islam by force, since the 7 century, when they have been conquered by arabs. It explained why they have escaped so fast, instead ot fight for “their” land. To remind you, they was also been calledf by their arab “brothers” to live the country for while and come back with “victorius” arab armies after all the jews will be killed.
4.Why the local arabs under Jordanian occupatin did not demand indepandant state ? Because they feel themselves the part of this already exist “Palestinian” state . Remind you, the British colonizators illegaly gave in 1922, as gift, the eastern part (80 %) of the country to the Hasemite king Abdalla from Saudi Arabia. The 70 percent of Jordanian population today are the “palestinians”, exectly the same arabs that living in Israel. So why to establish another “Palestinian” state ? It is only to have excuse to demand Israel extermination.
5. There are lot of peoples in Europe itself in the the other corners of the world, they have not achived religious/national/ethnic/historical right to their own country/. So why the “palestinians” have the right for 2 states and they do not have even for one ? Why the so “liberal and freedomlovers” Westerns, like you, does not demand their freedm ? Maybe it is because of the financial and economacal selfinterests that you have ?
And finally there is no such thing as Zionist claim.
The jews have stopped to claim 62 years ago and started to do..

The travesty of balance and truth on offer in comments at his article is responded to by Mr Pollard himself, thus:

Hardly a surprise that my article has led to the usual stuff on the comments section.

But what’s always so frustrating with this type of thing – but again, not a surprise – is that the angriest commenters rarely read what the piece says or, perhaps still more important, what it does not.

I am accused of defending the settlements and Israeli building in East Jerusalem. Where though? You will not find a word of that from me, anywhere, in any piece, ever. Because I don’t defend them. I think the settlements are wrong morally, politically and practically, and I would to like to see some form of international protectorate over Jerusalem. And I’ve written that many times.

But the piece wasn’t a vehicle for me to spout such views; it was a piece in which I offer my views over the context of this crisis, and what lies behind it.

Still, I never expected anything else from the anti-Zionists, anti-Israeli brigade or whatever they choose to call themselves.

Even when commenters at Cif rant their “certainties” they show their ignorance, or inability to read; likely both.

RELATED

More recent posts from Cif Watch -

Excerpt:

“Tragically, widespread newspaper abuse has become so endemic, it has crippled the country’s ability to conduct a sensible debate about the “war on drugs“.”

And on any other “war on…”, perchance?

Not sure if the writer, Charlie Brooker, saw the analogy in his complaint about “newspaper abuse”. Probably not. It IS the Guardian, after all. Haven’t bothered to read the mind-altering commenters.

2. Nothing new about JNews

3. Mr Pollard, you’ve been eating too many kosher pies

4. Why were these deleted?

PREVIOUS RELATED POSTS HERE AT THIS BLOG

Q: I have a complaint about moderation, how do I escalate it?
A: Unfortunately, the huge (and growing) quantity of user content on guardian.co.uk means that we can’t enter into correspondence regarding specific moderation activity, although all correspondence will be read. If you have suggestions or questions about any aspect of moderation and community participation on guardian.co.uk, you can write to community.suggestions@guardian.co.uk or cif.moderation@guardian.co.uk (as appropriate)

Just remembered. Cif removed my comment at the ‘Blair, EU presidency’ article here:

ThisStinks

15 Jul 2009, 10:48PM

This comment has been removed by a moderator. Replies may also be deleted.

So what did I say that was so reprehensible?

Dear Cif-er,

If your concentration levels are limited – (what do I mean “if“?) – just scroll to 22 seconds to see what I did when I first glanced through your cloned comments at this article today.

Ah, ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha

Whoah, ho-ho-ho-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha

[Aside: If I thought you could grasp the value of it I COULD mention the fact that Mr Blair helped in no small measure to end the decade of civil war in Sierra Leone and is a hero in that land. But since former Liberian President Charles Taylor is defending himself today in the The Hague International Criminal Court today regarding war crimes charges in Sierra Leone, I won't mention it. (No, really I won't.)]

Wouldn’t want to bother your tiny minds as to the merits of pre-judging if and when exactly people are guilty, candidates for locking up, chopping up, disembowelling, frying, lynching or other tasty methods of doing away with that you so love to share in your juvenile chat rooms at the hang-out for society’s confused.

Hate to spoil the children’s fun.

Ah, ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha

Whoah, ho-ho-ho-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha

I saved it here, because I expected it to be removed.

If there’s one thing Cif mods hate more than the truth, it’s mocking.

The Laughing Policeman Blair Supporter

Tags:blair supporter, Cif, Cif Watch, comment is free, laughing policeman, Matt Seaton, stephen pollard, YouTube video
Posted in 1. Tony Blair, BBC, Broadcast Outlets & Press, Free Speech, Hamas, Israel, Law - British Domestic & International, Major Political Issues, Britain & World, Multiculturalism, Palestinian Issues/ Palestine state, Press - Truth & Lies, Religion & Religious Issues in Politics | 3 Comments »

Guardian, war criminal, Blair, Guardian, Cifers, citizen’s arrest, Guardian, Cronin, anti-free market, Milosevic, EU

March 22, 2010

Comment at end

Ban Blair-Baiting

22nd March 2010

Tony Blair was at the EU parliament today, as mentioned here yesterday. He nearly got slammed up. Not.

I’ve been busy with normal human things all day, and I already have too much in draft to write on this Cronin idiot to any extent.

So, since John Rentoul does it so well anyway, I’m sure he won’t mind if I use his post. I’ve pasted it here below.

David Cronin. So-called freelance reporter at Brussels, sometime Guardian 'elucidator'. Always wrong on Blair.

The Parliament.com: ‘Blair was harangued as he arrived for the hearing by journalist David Cronin who accused him of being a “war criminal.”

The Brussels-based reporter tried to make a citizen’s arrest on Blair but was bundled away by security guards.’

‘Bundled away’? If you ask me, and I know you haven’t but I’m telling you anyway, Cronin should have been arrested. You can tell a lot about someone by looking at those he admires. Rentoul admires Blair; Cronin admires Slobodan Milosevic. Cronin also doesn’t think much of Herman van Rompuy. With the foolish alacrity, skewed thinking and originality of many at the Guardian he suggests that van Rompuy will be “more (US) poodle than president”. What? AnOTHER “poodle”. And I thought it was the Brits and not the Americans who loved their canine pets.

Cronin seems to ‘think’ equally highly of NATO, the USA or the rest of the west. What the hell is he doing working in Brussels? To put it in the Irish colloquial -

EEJIT.

[The reason I mention the word "Guardian" so frequently in the heading will become clear in an upcoming post or two.]

RENTOUL’S ARTICLE

How to spot a war criminal

Posted by John Rentoul

Monday, 22 March 2010 at 06:57 pm

A freelance journalist given house room by The Guardian tried to “arrest” Tony Blair today, as the former prime minister arrived in Brussels to speak to Euro-MPs about his work as Middle East envoy. According to TheParliament.com:

Blair was harangued as he arrived for the hearing by journalist David Cronin who accused him of being a “war criminal”.

The Brussels-based reporter tried to make a citizen’s arrest on Blair but was bundled away by security guards.

A cursory glance at Cronin’s articles for Comment Is Free reveals that he has an unusual notion of what constitutes a war criminal. A recent contribution in December supports Serbia’s application to join the European Union, and criticises the Netherlands government for blocking it on the grounds that it suspected the Serbian government of “not co-operating fully with the war crimes tribunal in the Hague”.

What these hypocrites should be doing, Cronin suggests, is:

finally unearthing the truth about why Nato bombed Serbia in 1999.

As he points out:

None of the alliance’s personnel has yet been charged by an international tribunal with crimes relating to that war.

No, but Slobodan Milosevic was. Cronin wonders why:

[He] didn’t earn his status as a favourite bogeyman of the west purely because he did dreadful things to the ethnic Albanians of Kosovo, as the official narrative would have us believe.

The west could probably have tolerated his autocratic streak if he was more favourable to its pervading ideology. But Milosevic’s refusal to accept the neoliberal precepts on which the global economy is being run seem to offer a more plausible explanation as to why Bill Clinton and his then cronies in Europe insisted he must go.

It was Milosevic’s refusal to accept the precepts of free-market ideology that put him in the dock in The Hague, apparently. Of what, then, did Cronin’s “harangue” of Blair consist, I wonder: “Arrest this man for the crime of welfare capitalism”?

RELATED

23rd November 2009 – ‘The difference between a war criminal and Tony Blair’

22nd March 2010 – Irish Independent: ‘Blair calls for resumption of talks’

Excerpt:

‘Middle East peace envoy Tony Blair has called for Israel and Palestine to “get back on track” and open direct negotiations “as soon as possible”.

He was speaking after talks in Brussels with EU foreign ministers who later urged the two sides to aim at a two-year deadline for achieving an “independent, democratic, viable” state of Palestine.

Mr Blair, appointed in June 2007 as envoy representing the EU, US, UN and Russia, admitted the violence in the region in the last fortnight had been a setback, but added: “Setbacks occur, and the key thing now is to get back on track again and get the negotiations going. We have got to carry on, whatever the setbacks from time to time.”

Mr Blair said the EU was playing a big part in building up Palestinian law and order, security and the economy.’

Tags:anti-capitalism, Cifers, citizen's arrest, David Cronin, EU, European Parliament, Guardian, Middle East Peace, Milosevic, Tony Blair, war criminal
Posted in 1. Tony Blair, BBC, Broadcast Outlets & Press, Blair - Middle East peace - "Impossible Dream", British Politics, Europe/EU/Lisbon Treaty/Full-time President, Iraq, Iraq inquiry, Israel, Law - British Domestic & International, Major Political Issues, Britain & World, Middle East - Countries/Issues, Middle East Envoy Blair, from June 2007, Palestinian Issues/ Palestine state, Press - Truth & Lies | 7 Comments »

Tomorrow, 22nd March 2010, Tony Blair is to speak at the EU parliament

March 21, 2010

UPDATE 23rd March 2010: Questions to Blair

Comment at end

Ban Blair-Baiting

21st March 2010

Israel, Palestine – Peacemaking through Development?

Vice Chair of DEVE Committee invites Tony Blair to EP

Interview follows with Corina Cretu MEP, Vice Chairwoman of the European Parliament Committee on Development, who has invited Mr Blair to speak

Tony Blair speaking in his role as the Quartet’s special envoy on the Middle East, for the first time he will be speaking at the hearing organised by Corina Cretu MEP in the Development Committee on 22 March

One of the last times that Tony Blair, the then Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, spoke to the European Parliament was in the summer of 2005. He talked Europe (it was following a European Council Summit), he talked pro-Europe and he talked ideals.

‘Ideals survive through change. They die through inertia in the face of challenge,’ Blair said. Ideals are innately unbreakable we gather and his opinions are ones that the whole world knows he doesn’t bend on.

In her work in the last year as Vice Chairwoman of the European Parliament Committee on Development, and in previous years as a fast steady representative of Romania to the EP and before that as spokeswoman for Romania’s President she has maintained her ideals. Through visits to Israel and Palestine and thanks to her convictions she decided to hold a hearing on how Economic Development can assist Peacemaking in the Israel/Palestine question and the Quartet responded.

She took some time out before the Hearing on 22 March to talk to Alia Papageorgiou on why this was a turning point for the European Parliament and Europe’s presence in peacemaking.

The interview follows:

When was the last time that Tony Blair was in the European Parliament?

In his current position, as envoy of the Quartet on the Middle East, Tony Blair is for the first time in the European Parliament, and it matters. I think his response to the invitation of the Development Commission reflects not only his desire to illustrate a view about the current developments in the area, but also that we should offer some reference points for a better understanding of the needs that the parties have, especially the Palestinian party.

Therefore, I would like to emphasize one fact: our actions are not political, they are meant to be a clarification, to target more development policies in the area and to better define the support mechanisms. In the Palestinian territories, there have been several developments, some positive, but most negative. Some of them have gone practically to annul the European and international donor efforts made for over a decade and a half. We want to see what we can do, mainly because it is public money, and the current state of economic crisis requires a careful management of the financial resources.

Do you feel it is an opportune time to really commence resolving the problem of Israel /Palestine?

The Israeli – Palestinian relations are mostly a history of missed opportunities. I would be very optimistic in this case. What we feel is something else: it is a moment that we must not miss if we want to give peace and reconciliation a chance, when it will come. What I mean is if we do not do something significant for the Palestinians, especially those in Gaza, the extremist positions will prevail. Moreover, in this regard this situation is to the limit. On the other hand, those people should feel that there are alternatives to what is happening now, that they may depend on their own will to escape poverty and to solve their problems. Economic autonomy and decision-making autonomy, brings a reduction of dependence on certain extremist structures. Resolving this conflict is not for tomorrow, and if the old humiliations and frustrations will add new ones, it is hard to believe that the situation will ever reach lasting peace.

You yourself have visited Israel and the area how do you view the situation?

Yes, I have recently visited Israel, and I understand the fears and the security needs of both parties. They are legitimate. Neither Israel is happy to see that funds that may be spent for other sectors are used to ensure safety. However, it enters a sort of vicious circle, when things start to escalate. Someone has to break this cycle and give a signal of good faith to the other party. Moreover, I believe that peace in the region, beyond all other considerations, needs a strong economic stimulus. Therefore, the return of Palestinian products on the Israeli market and a greater number of Palestinians who can work in Israel would do more than any more or less direct discussion. Rebuilding trust, recently talked about Vice-President Joe Biden can begin with economic cooperation and with the economic activity stimulation in the territories.

Is economic development and trade the answer?

I think that economic development and trade, without being the answer to all mutual problems, is a strong and appropriate response, and especially a tangible one, which can persuade and may pave more slippery issues.

Could this be a time to really push the situation into some resolution? Into action?

I do not think a resolution more or less counts in the eyes of the parties. Let us be realistic: there have been many papers that were full of good intentions, that remained unnoticed, that did not impress anyone. Only facts matter, and among them, those that can change people’s lives for the better will be the most convincing. At our Monday meeting, we have people involved who know better what are the needs and the expectations of people and who can offer a hierarchy of priorities for a fairer allocation of resources in the area. Sustainable development is a long-term process that requires resources, financial and human resources, continuity and cooperation of institutional and informal participants, citizens, and civil society. We want to make their joint action possible, we want to offer our expertise and facilitate their access to decision-makers in Brussels.

What do you see as the European stance on the Israel/Palestine issue?

The position of the European decision makers’ is principled and consistent. Although I would not want to go into the analysis of purely political positions, and this not because I avoid a direct answer, but because I want the Commission’s approach to development not to turn into a political confrontation between the two parties I can not fail to note that, with the Americans, the Europeans make clear to the two parties that they do not have time; it is time to stop looking for excuses to delay finding a negotiated solution. Therefore, I would also call a pretext the Israeli announcement about the construction of new housing colonies in the Palestinian territories, this time in Jerusalem. I think that without disregarding the principle position, the freezing of all settlements, dialogue must take place, because otherwise any pretext will be used to block them. I know that no internal political situation in Israel is quite clear, that there is a pressure from some extremist trends. However, postponing a solution is expensive, as I have said, for everyone.

How would you characterize what has been going on in Gaza? How do you solve a humanitarian problem like aid in the region?

Humanitarian aspects of the situation in Gaza are the most urgent, and must be treated with priority. Since the conflict in early 2009 many hospitals, schools, houses, water networks, electricity, sewage, were destroyed or badly damaged. Their reconstruction must be our primary concern. Nevertheless, I do not want anything to happen after a Romanian recipe, which many Israelis of Romanian origin know too well: “Who makes and breaks has always something to do”. These facilities cannot be destroyed and rebuilt at infinity, as no human patience is infinite.

How do you see the hearing assisting this problem?

I hope that the Monday action is just the beginning of a process of collaboration between the Development Committee, the Parliament and the stakeholders to start a process of sustainable development of the area to re-launch the Palestinian economy, which alone can lead to an effective reduction of chronic poverty in the area.

Corina Cretu is a Romanian Member of the European Parliament, she is a Member of the S&D Group, Vice Chairwoman of the Development Committee, a member of the Special Committee on the Financial, Economic and Social Crisis, and the Delegation for relations with the United States

Tags:Alia Papageorgiou, Corina Cretu MEP, DEVE, economic development, Gaza, Interview, Middle East, Palestine territories, Romanian MEP, Tony Blair at EU parliament
Posted in 1. Tony Blair, Europe/EU/Lisbon Treaty/Full-time President, Israel, Major Political Issues, Britain & World, Palestinian Issues/ Palestine state | 4 Comments »

Yemen: Better to marry at 3 than be a spinster at 40!

March 21, 2010

Comment at end

Ban Blair-Baiting

21st March 2010

MARRIED AT 3. DEAD, IN CHILDBIRTH, AT 12

It makes you want to throw up your arms in incredulity, doesn’t it?

It makes some of us want to throw up.

Three-year-old child bride in Yemen. JESUS WEPT. In the name of all that's holy ... HUMAN!!!

YEMEN – LAND OF CHILD BRIDES

In a recent study by the NWC and Sanaa University’s Gender Development Research and Study Centre on early marriage in the governorates of Hadramaout and al-Hudeidah, 52 percent of 6,000 female respondents were married underage.

A 2007 report by the International Centre for Research on Women (ICRW) ranked Yemen 13 out of 20 worst countries in terms of the prevalence of child marriage. The report said 48.4 percent of women were married before 18.

Even as the Yemeni government tries to secularise its country, the women reported belwo, today proclaim Allah’s word on child marriage as the thing to follow. To follow this to its logical conclusion all girls can be married at aged 9. It seems these backward-looking women would prefer that there female children lose their virginity before puberty, and then possibly die in childbirth, whilst still a child, than be left “on the shelf”. Watch video on Child Marriage in Yemen.

March 21st, 2010: ‘Women oppose child marriage ban’

SANAA (Yemen) – THOUSANDS of Yemeni women, their faces covered in religious veils, demonstrated outside the parliament on Sunday to oppose proposed legislation banning the marriage of girls under 17.

The protesters held up banners proclaiming ‘don’t ban what Allah made permissible,’ or ‘stop violating Islamic sharia law in the name of rights and freedoms,’ an AFP correspondent said. Answering calls by Muslim clerics who oppose the proposal on grounds it goes against Islamic sharia law, the protesters arrived in organised buses.

Proposed amendments to the civil status law stalled in parliament last August after severe opposition to a government proposal that would ban girls females 17 and males under 18 from marrying.

Child marriages are common in impoverished Yemen, especially in rural areas, where girls as young as eight are known to have been married off by desperately poor parents. Last year a child marriage case in Yemen made international headlines after a 12-year-old girl died in childbirth, together with the baby.

‘Where will this… new law take us?’ asked Umm Abdulaziz, a protester clad in black from head-to-toe. ‘Most rights groups have women who are over 40 and still not married,’ she added in an apparent taunt at unmarried activists in Yemen, whose largely traditional tribal society looks down on single women past a certain age. ‘There is a significant spinstership among female students in Yemen universities,’ she added.

A handful of women’s rights activists outside the parliament were seen leaving after being outnumbered by the demonstrators. ‘It is unreasonable to marry our daughters at the age of eight or nine. This is a serious problem,’ said Houriya Mashhour, deputy director of Yemen’s Women National Committee. — AFP

The Lucky Ones get a Divorce – at 10

Tags:allah, bride at 3 three, deputy director of Yemen's Women National Committee, Houriya Mashhour, sharia law, Yemen women protest
Posted in africa, Islam, Major Political Issues, Britain & World, Middle East - Countries/Issues, Muslims, Religion & Religious Issues in Politics, Sharia Law/Sharia Finance | Leave a Comment »

“Insulting” to the USA. The language of …?

March 21, 2010

In a landmark ruling in The Netherlands last year it seems there’s still hope for those who dare to castigate an “insulted” religion.

Comment at end

Ban Blair-Baiting

21st March 2010

CONFUSED OVER “INSULTS”?

Did you notice anything unusual about the response from Hillary Clinton regarding Israel’s announcement of 1,600 settlements?

‘In an interview with CNN aired Friday night, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Israel’s announcement of new construction of homes in a Jewish neighborhood in East Jerusalem was “insulting” to the United States.’

I’ve racked my brains, and the search engines, but I can’t recall any other time that a grown-up western nation has described the decision/announcement/behaviour of another nation with which it is diplomatically and politically entwined and/or negotiating as “insulting”.

Not “political positioning” or “boundary (as it were) setting”? Or “negotiating from a position of strength”?

No. It was “INSULTING”.

We are all familiar with the insulted feelings proclaimed by some in our societies, such as evidenced here. Never before, between western states, has the language of diplomacy included such seemingly puerile statements as “we are insulted”.

SETTLEMENT BUILDING IS PAR FOR THE COURSE

Yet the Israeli settlement-building announcement is hardly unusual. In fact, it is par for the course.

It seems that -

In March, 1991, Secretary of State James Baker complained to Congress that “Every time I have gone to Israel in connection with the peace process.., I have been met with an announcement of new settlement activity… It substantially weakens our hand in trying to bring about a peace process, and creates quite a predicament.” In 1990, he had become so disgusted with Israel’s intransigence on the settlements that he publicly gave out the phone number of the White House switchboard and told the Israelis, “When you’re serious about peace, call us.”

WE’RE STILL INSULTED

But, hey! This is the Obama administration. In order to be understood by ALL who might be listening his administration needs to speak the prevailing language.

And the prevailing language is? One guess.

This is PC taken to a dangerous extreme.

Just in case Americans are still feeling “insulted” the Israeli Prime Minister today rubbed salt into the wounds:

“Israel has no intention of backing down in its argument with the United States over Israeli plans to build 1,600 apartments on disputed land in largely Arab East Jerusalem, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Sunday.

“Our policy regarding Jerusalem is the same as it was over the past 42 years. We have made it clear to the Americans that for us, building there is just like building in Tel Aviv,” Netanyahu said. Israel captured the land in question in the spring of 1967, nearly 43 years ago.

RELATED

Sky News - Israelis shoot two who tried to stab soldier

I’m not so sure about those who insult a nation, though.

THE HAGUE, 11/03/09 – The Supreme Court yesterday produced an important ruling in principle in favour of freedom of speech. The highest court of the Netherlands acquitted a man of insulting Muslims although he dubbed Islam a tumour.

The Supreme Court quashed a ruling by an appeal court in Den Bosch. As had a district court earlier, the appeal court did find the man guilty. Yesterday’s acquittal can have consequences for all future court cases on insulting followers of a faith or ideology, including the notorious case against MP Geert Wilders.’

Tags:America is insulted, diplomatic language, Hillary Clinton, insulting Muslims, insulting to the USA, Obama, par for the course, prevailing language, settlement construction
Posted in Israel, Palestinian Issues/ Palestine state | 1 Comment »

UK: Proscribed terror groups, March 2010. Just so you know

March 20, 2010

Tags:'The Abu Muhjin', 17 November Revolutionary Organisation (N17), 46 international terrorist organisations are proscribed, Abu Nidal Organisation (ANO), Abu Sayyaf Group (ASG), Al Ghurabaa, Al Ittihad Al Islamia (AIAI), Al Qa’ida, Al Qaeda, Al Shabaab, Al-Gama'at al-Islamiya (GI), Al-Muhajiroun, Ansar Al Islam (AI), Ansar Al Sunna (AS), Armed Islamic Group (Groupe Islamique Armée) (GIA), Asbat Al-Ansar ('League of Partisans' or 'Band of Helpers'), Babbar Khalsa (BK), Baluchistan Liberation Army (BLA), Basque Homeland and Liberty (Euskadi ta Askatasuna) (ETA), Call to Submission, DHKP-C, Egyptian Islamic Jihad (EIJ), Groupe Islamique Combattant Marocain (GICM), Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, Hamas Izz al-Din al-Qassem Brigades, Harakat Mujahideen (HM), Harakat Ul Ansar (HuA), Harakat-Ul-Jihad-Ul-Islami (Bangladesh) (Huji-B), Harakat-Ul-Jihad-Ul-Islami (HUJI), Harakat-Ul-Mujahideen/Alami (HuM/A and Jundallah), Hezb-E Islami Gulbuddin (HIG), Hizb ut-Tahrir, Hizballah Military Wing, International Sikh Youth Federation (ISYF), Islam4UK, Islamic Army of Aden (IAA), Islamic Jihad Union (IJU), Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU), Islamic Path, Jaish e Mohammed (JeM), Jamaat Ul-Furquan (JuF), Jammat-ul Mujahideen Bangladesh (JMB), Jeemah Islamiyah (JI), Khuddam Ul-Islam (Kul), Kongra Gele Kurdistan (PKK), Lashkar e Tayyaba (LT), Lashkar-E Jhangvi (LeJ), Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), List of proscribed International terrorist groups, London School of Sharia, Millat-E Islami Pakistan (MIP), Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Revolutionary Peoples' Liberation Party, Salafist Group for Call and Combat, Saved Sect, Saviour Sect, Shaqaqi (PIJ), signatory to Usama Bin Laden's 1998 fatwa, Sipah-E Sahaba Pakistan (SSP), splinter group, Tehrik Nefaz-e Shari'at Muhammadi (TNSM), Terrorism Act 2000, terrorism act 2006, Teyre Azadiye Kurdistan (TAK)
Posted in Al Qaeda, British Politics, Islam, Law - British Domestic & International, Major Political Issues, Britain & World, Middle East - Countries/Issues, Sharia Law/Sharia Finance, Terrorism | 4 Comments »

Comment at end

Ban Blair-Baiting

20th March 2010

This is the list of proscribed terror groups at the British government’s Home Office website as at 19th March 2010. Some of the time this information has proved hard to find at the government’s websites.

So in case it gets lost again – it’s all copied and pasted below.

Just so you know.

The terrorist threat

Proscibed terrorist groups

[sic] I think they mean “proscribed”. There are some things we should be careful about noting. This is one of those ‘things’.

These terrorist organisations are currently proscribed under UK legislation, and therefore outlawed in the UK.

Proscribed terrorist groups

46 international terrorist organisations are proscribed under the Terrorism Act 2000.
Of these, two organisations are proscribed under powers introduced in the Terrorism Act 2006, as glorifying terrorism
14 organisations in Northern Ireland are proscribed under previous legislation.

List of proscribed International terrorist groups

The information about the groups’ aims was given to Parliament when they were proscribed.

17 November Revolutionary Organisation (N17)

Aims to highlight and protest at what it deems to be imperialist and corrupt actions, using violence. Formed in 1974 to oppose the Greek military Junta, its stance was initially anti-Junta and anti-US, which it blamed for supporting the Junta.

Abu Nidal Organisation (ANO)

ANO’s principal aim is the destruction of the state of Israel. It is also hostile to ‘reactionary’ Arab regimes and states supporting Israel.

Abu Sayyaf Group (ASG)

The precise aims of the ASG are unclear, but its objectives appear to include the establishment of an autonomous Islamic state in the Southern Philippine island of Mindanao.

Al-Gama’at al-Islamiya (GI)

The main aim of GI is to overthrow the Egyptian government and replace it with an Islamic state through all means, including the use of violence. Some members also want the removal of Western influence from the Arab world.

Al Ghurabaa

Al Ghurabaa is a splinter group of Al-Muhajiroun and disseminates materials that glorify acts of terrorism.

Note: The Government laid an Order in January 2010 which provides that Al Muhajiroun, Islam4UK, Call to Submission, Islamic Path and London School of Sharia should be treated as alternative names for the organisation which is already proscribed under the names Al Ghurabaa and The Saved Sect.

Al Ittihad Al Islamia (AIAI)

The main aims of AIAI are to establish a radical Sunni Islamic state in Somalia, and to regain the Ogaden region of Ethiopia as Somali territory via an insurgent campaign. Militant elements within AIAI are suspected of having aligned themselves with the ‘global jihad’ ideology of Al Qa’ida, and to have operated in support of Al Qa’ida in the East Africa region.

Al Qa’ida

Inspired and led by Usama Bin Laden, its aims are the expulsion of Western forces from Saudi Arabia, the destruction of Israel and the end of Western influence in the Muslim world.

Al Shabaab

Al Shabaab is an organisation based in Somalia which has waged a violent campaign against the Somali Transitional Federal Government and African Union peacekeeping forces since 2007, employing a range of terrorist tactics including suicide bombings, indiscriminate attacks and assassinations. It’s principal aim is the establishment of a fundamentalist Islamic state in Somalia, but the organisation has publicly pledged its allegiance to Usama Bin Laden and has announced an intention to combine its campaign in the Horn of Africa with Al Qa’ida’s aims of global jihad.

Ansar Al Islam (AI)

AI is a radical Sunni Salafi group from northeast Iraq around Halabja. The group is anti-Western, and opposes the influence of the US in Iraqi Kurdistan and the relationship of the KDP and PUK to Washington. AI has been involved in operations against Multi-National Forces-Iraq (MNF-I).

Ansar Al Sunna (AS)

AS is a fundamentalist Sunni Islamist extremist group based in central Iraq and what was the Kurdish Autonomous Zone (KAZ) of Northern Iraq. The group aims to expel all foreign influences from Iraq and create a fundamentalist Islamic state.

Armed Islamic Group (Groupe Islamique Armée) (GIA)

The aim of the GIA is to create an Islamic state in Algeria using all necessary means, including violence.

Asbat Al-Ansar (‘League of Partisans’ or ‘Band of Helpers’)

Sometimes going by the aliases of ‘The Abu Muhjin’ group/faction or the ‘Jama’at Nour’, this group aims to enforce its extremist interpretation of Islamic law within Lebanon and, increasingly, further afield.

Babbar Khalsa (BK)

BK is a Sikh movement that aims to establish an independent Khalistan within the Punjab region of India.

Basque Homeland and Liberty (Euskadi ta Askatasuna) (ETA)

ETA seeks the creation of an independent state comprising the Basque regions of both Spain and France.

Baluchistan Liberation Army (BLA)

BLA are comprised of tribal groups based in the Baluchistan area of Eastern Pakistan, which aims to establish an independent nation encompassing the Baluch dominated areas of Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iran.

Egyptian Islamic Jihad (EIJ)

The main aim of the EIJ is to overthrow the Egyptian government and replace it with an Islamic state. However, since September 1998, the leadership of the group has also allied itself to the ‘global Jihad’ ideology expounded by Usama Bin Laden and has threatened Western interests.

Groupe Islamique Combattant Marocain (GICM)

The traditional primary objective of the GICM has been the installation of a governing system of the caliphate to replace the governing Moroccan monarchy. The group also has an Al Qa’ida-inspired global extremist agenda.

Hamas Izz al-Din al-Qassem Brigades

Hamas aims to end Israeli occupation in Palestine and establish an Islamic state.

Harakat-Ul-Jihad-Ul-Islami (HUJI)

The aim of HUJI is to achieve though violent means accession of Kashmir to Pakistan, and to spread terror throughout India. HUJI has targeted Indian security positions in Kashmir and conducted operations in India proper.

Harakat-Ul-Jihad-Ul-Islami (Bangladesh) (Huji-B)
The main aim of HUJI-B is the creation of an Islamic regime in Bangladesh modelled on the former Taliban regime in Afghanistan.

Harakat-Ul-Mujahideen/Alami (HuM/A and Jundallah)

The aim of both HuM/A and Jundallah is the rejection of democracy of even the most Islamic-oriented style, and to establish a caliphate based on Sharia law, in addition to achieving accession of all Kashmir to Pakistan. HuM/A has a broad anti-Western and anti-President Musharraf agenda.

Harakat Mujahideen (HM)

HM, previously known as Harakat Ul Ansar (HuA), seeks independence for Indian-administered Kashmir. The HM leadership was also a signatory to Usama Bin Laden’s 1998 fatwa, which called for worldwide attacks against US and Western interests.

Hizballah Military Wing

Hizballah is committed to armed resistance to the state of Israel, and aims to seize all Palestinian territories and Jerusalem from Israel. Its military wing supports terrorism in Iraq and the Palestinian territories.

Hezb-E Islami Gulbuddin (HIG)

Led by Gulbuddin Hekmatyar who is in particular very anti-American, HIG is anti-Western and desires the creation of a fundamentalist Islamic State in Afghanistan.

International Sikh Youth Federation (ISYF)

ISYF is an organisation committed to the creation of an independent state of Khalistan for Sikhs within India.

Islamic Army of Aden (IAA)

The IAA’s aims are the overthrow of the current Yemeni government and the establishment of an Islamic State following Sharia Law.

Islamic Jihad Union (IJU)

The primary strategic goal of the IJU is the elimination of the current Uzbek regime. The IJU would expect that following the removal of President Karimov, elections would occur in which Islamic-democratic political candidates would pursue goals shared by the IJU leadership.

Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU)

The primary aim of IMU is to establish an Islamic state in the model of the Taleban in Uzbekistan. However, the IMU is reported to also seek to establish a broader state over the entire Turkestan area.

Jaish e Mohammed (JeM)

JeM seeks the ‘liberation’ of Kashmir from Indian control as well as the ‘destruction’ of America and India. JeM has a stated objective of unifying the various Kashmiri militant groups.

Jeemah Islamiyah (JI)

JI’s aim is the creation of a unified Islamic state in Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia and the Southern Philippines.

Khuddam Ul-Islam (Kul) and splinter group Jamaat Ul-Furquan (JuF)

The aim of both KUI and JuF are to unite Indian administered Kashmir with Pakistan; to establish a radical Islamist state in Pakistan; the ‘destruction’ of India and the USA; to recruit new jihadis; and the release of imprisoned Kashmiri militants

Kongra Gele Kurdistan (PKK)

PKK/KADEK/KG is primarily a separatist movement that seeks an independent Kurdish state in southeast Turkey. The PKK changed its name to KADEK and then to Kongra Gele Kurdistan, although the PKK acronym is still used by parts of the movement.

Lashkar e Tayyaba (LT)

LT seeks independence for Kashmir and the creation of an Islamic state using violent means.

Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE)

The LTTE is a terrorist group fighting for a separate Tamil state in the North and East of Sri Lanka.

Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG)

The LIFG seeks to replace the current Libyan regime with a hard-line Islamic state. The group is also part of the wider global Islamist extremist movement, as inspired by Al Qa’ida. The group has mounted several operations inside Libya, including a 1996 attempt to assassinate Mu’ammar Qadhafi.

Palestinian Islamic Jihad – Shaqaqi (PIJ)

PIJ aims to end the Israeli occupation of Palestine and to create an Islamic state. It opposes the existence of the state of Israel, the Middle East Peace Process and the Palestinian Authority, and has carried out suicide bombings against Israeli targets.

Revolutionary Peoples’ Liberation Party – Front (Devrimci Halk Kurtulus Partisi – Cephesi) (DHKP-C)

DHKP-C aims to establish a Marxist-Leninist regime in Turkey by means of armed revolutionary struggle.

Salafist Group for Call and Combat (Groupe Salafiste pour la Predication et le Combat) (GSPC)

Its aim is to create an Islamic state in Algeria using all necessary means, including violence.

Saved Sect or Saviour Sect

The Saved Sect is a splinter group of Al-Muajiroon and disseminates materials that glorify acts of terrorism.

Sipah-E Sahaba Pakistan (SSP) (Aka Millat-E Islami Pakistan (MIP) – SSP was renamed MIP in April 2003 but is still referred to as SSP) and splinter group Lashkar-E Jhangvi (LeJ)

The aim of both SSP and LeJ is to transform Pakistan by violent means into a Sunni state under the total control of Sharia law. Another objective is to have all Shia declared Kafirs and to participate in the destruction of other religions, notably Judasim, Christianity and Hinduism.

Note: Kafirs means non-believers: literally, one who refused to see the truth. LeJ does not consider members of the Shia sect to be Muslim, hence they can be considered a ‘legitimate’ target.

Jammat-ul Mujahideen Bangladesh (JMB)

JMB first came to prominence on 20 May 2002 when eight of its members were arrested in possession of petrol bombs. The group has claimed responsibility for numerous fatal bomb attacks across Bangladesh in recent years, including suicide bomb attacks in 2005.

Tehrik Nefaz-e Shari’at Muhammadi (TNSM)

TNSM regularly attacks coalition and Afghan government forces in Afghanistan and provides direct support to Al Qa’ida and the Taliban. One faction of the group claimed responsibility for a suicide attack on an army training compound on 8 November 2007 in Dargai, Pakistan, in which 42 soldiers were killed.

Teyre Azadiye Kurdistan (TAK)

TAK is a Kurdish terrorist group currently operating in Turkey.

(Note: Mujaheddin e Khalq (MeK) was removed from the list of proscribed organisations in June 2008, as a result of judgements of the Proscribed Organisations Appeals Commission and the Court of Appeal.)

Proscribed Irish groups

Continuity Army Council
Cumann na mBan
Fianna na hEireann
Irish National Liberation Army
Irish People’s Liberation Organisation
Irish Republican Army
Loyalist Volunteer Force
Orange Volunteers
Red Hand Commando
Red Hand Defenders
Saor Eire
Ulster Defence Association
Ulster Freedom Fighters
Ulster Volunteer Force

HIZB UT-TAHRIR?

If you’re wondering why Hizb ut-Tahrir does not appear on the British government’s list, though it is proscribed by MANY countries, Islamic and non-Islamic, you’re not alone.

Without banning HuT conspiracy theories like this will sprout and flourish on the web.

Middle East Quartet’s March 19 statement in Moscow

March 19, 2010

Transcript here from US State Department

Comment at end

Ban Blair-Baiting

20th March 2010

From around 6 minutes “The Quartet supports their representative…”

TRANSCRIPT

Hat tip here for the transcript. [My highlighted sections in each paragraph below.]

Also reported here at Tony Blair Office website

The Quartet — UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov, US secretary of state Hillary Rodham Clinton, US special envoy for Middle East Peace George Mitchell, and High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of the European Union Catherine Ashton — met in Moscow on March 19 2010. They were joined by Quartet Representative Tony Blair.

This is the text of the statement issued after the meeting:

Reaffirming the fundamental principles laid down in its statement in Trieste on June 26, 2009, the Quartet welcomes the readiness to launch proximity talks between Israel and the Palestinians. The Quartet emphasizes that the circumstances which made it possible to agree to launch the proximity talks be respected.

The proximity talks are an important step toward the resumption, without preconditions, of direct, bilateral negotiations that resolve all final status issues as previously agreed by the parties.

The Quartet believes these negotiations should lead to a settlement, negotiated between the parties within 24 months, that ends the occupation which began in 1967 and results in the emergence of an independent, democratic, and viable Palestinian state living side by side in peace and security with Israel and its other neighbours.

The Quartet reiterates that Arab-Israeli peace and the establishment of a peaceful state of Palestine in the West Bank and Gaza is in the fundamental interests of the parties, of all states in the region, and of the international community. In this regard, the Quartet calls on all states to support dialogue between the parties.

The Quartet reiterates its call on Israel and the Palestinians to act on the basis of international law and on their previous agreements and obligations — in particular adherence to the Roadmap, irrespective of reciprocity — to promote an environment conducive to successful negotiations and re-affirms that unilateral actions taken by either party cannot prejudge the outcome of negotiations and will not be recognised by the international community.

The Quartet urges the government of Israel to freeze all settlement activity, including natural growth, dismantle outposts erected since March 2001; and to refrain from demolitions and evictions in East Jerusalem.

The Quartet also calls on both sides to observe calm and restraint and to refrain from provocative actions and inflammatory rhetoric especially in areas of cultural and religious sensitivity. Noting the significant progress on security achieved by the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank the Quartet calls on the Palestinian Authority to continue to make every effort to improve law and order, to fight violent extremism, and to end incitement.

The Quartet emphasizes the need to assist the Palestinian Authority in building its law enforcement capacity.

Recalling that the annexation of East Jerusalem is not recognised by the international community, the Quartet underscores that the status of Jerusalem is a permanent status issue that must be resolved through negotiations between the parties and condemns the decision by the government of Israel to advance planning for new housing units in East Jerusalem.

The Quartet re-affirms its intention to closely monitor developments in Jerusalem and to keep under consideration additional steps that may be required to address the situation on the ground.

The Quartet recognises that Jerusalem is a deeply important issue for Israelis and Palestinians, and for Jews, Muslims, and Christians and believes that through good faith negotiations the parties can mutually agree on an outcome that realizes the aspirations of both parties for Jerusalem, and safeguards its status for people around the world.

Recalling that transformative change on the ground is integral to peace, the Quartet continues to support the Palestinian Authority’s plan of August 2009 for building the Palestinian state within 24 months as a demonstration of Palestinians’ serious commitment to an independent state that provides good governance, opportunity, justice, and security for the Palestinian people from the first day that it is established and is a responsible neighbor to all states in the region.

The Quartet takes positive note of Israel’s steps to ease restrictions of movement in the West Bank and calls for further and sustained steps to facilitate the state building efforts of the Palestinian Authority.

The Quartet endorses fully the efforts of the Quartet Representative in support of Prime Minister Fayyad’s state-building and economic development program which has seen significant improvement in the Palestinian Authority’s performance with respect to security and law and order and improved economic growth.

The Quartet supports the Quartet Representative in his vital efforts to promote change on the ground in aid of the political negotiations.

The Quartet further calls on all states in the region and in the wider international community to match the Palestinian commitment to state-building by contributing immediate, concrete, and sustained support for the Palestinian Authority and, in this regard, looks forward to the upcoming meeting of the Ad Hoc Liaison Committee (AHLC) to coordinate international support for the Palestinian state building effort.

The Quartet is deeply concerned by the continuing deterioration in Gaza, including the humanitarian and human rights situation of the civilian population, and stresses the urgency of a durable resolution to the Gaza crisis.

The Quartet calls for a solution that addresses Israel’s legitimate security concerns, including an end to weapons smuggling into Gaza; promotes Palestinian unity based on the PLO commitments and the re-unification of Gaza and the West Bank under the legitimate Palestinian Authority; and ensures the opening of the crossings to allow for the unimpeded flow of humanitarian aid, commercial goods, and persons to and from Gaza, consistent with UN Security Council Resolution 1860.

The Quartet takes positive note that the Israeli government has just communicated its approval of a number of the UN Secretary General’s civilian recovery projects, including a stalled housing project in Khan Younis and looks forward to their early implementation. The Quartet condemns yesterday’s rocket fire from Gaza and calls for an immediate end to violence and terror and for calm to be respected.

The Quartet reiterates its call for the immediate release of Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit.

Recognizing the significance of the Arab Peace Initiative, the Quartet looks forward to closer co-operation with the parties and the Arab League and urges regional governments to support publicly the resumption of bilateral negotiations, enter into a structured regional dialogue on issues of common concern, and take steps to foster positive relations throughout the region in the context of progress towards comprehensive peace on the basis of UN Security Council Resolutions 242, 338, 1397, 1515, and 1850 and the Madrid principles, including through the conclusion of peace agreements between Israel and Syria and Israel and Lebanon.

The Quartet commits to remain actively involved on all tracks and to encourage and review progress. The Quartet commits to meet regularly and tasks the envoys to intensify their co-operation, to maintain contacts with the Arab League Committee on the Arab Peace Initiative, and to formulate recommendations for Quartet action.

The Quartet re-affirms its previous statements and supports, in consultation with the parties, an international conference in Moscow at the appropriate time concurrent with direct negotiations.

From left, former British Prime Minister Tony Blair (special envoy for the "quartet" on Middle East peace), Secretary Clinton, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, and EU foreign-policy chief Catherine Ashton attend a news conference after talks in Moscow today. The quartet on Middle East peace -- the United States, the United Nations, the European Union, and Russia -- urged the Israeli government to "freeze all settlement activity" and was "deeply concerned" about "the continuing deterioration in Gaza," Ban said.

MY THOUGHTS

Comprehensive heads of position. I see the hand of Tony Blair in much of it, as is to be expected. Perhaps Israel will feel it has not been dealt with quite as fairly as has the Palestinian side. But clearly the Israelis have felt the need to make a concession to the Quartet (following USA displeasure over the settlements plan?) reflected here:

RELATED

EARLIER POSTS ON MIDDLE EAST/BLAIR

BACKGROUND

1. NETANYAHU STANDS FIRM AGAINST EVICTING JEWISH SETTLERS

In what looks like a challenge to US President Obama and much of the international community the Israeli Prime Minister today vowed never to evict Jewish settlers from occupied Palestinian land.

It isn’t hard to see his rationale. Once Gaza had been handed over to the Palestinians by Israel it became a base for Hamas, the group still recognised by much of the international community as a “terror organisation.” There was a time when the words ‘Gaza Strip’ were synonymous with the high-life for western tourists, as are other parts of the Mediterranean today. Not any more, and not just since Israel’s bombing attacks in the closing days of last year.

2. BAD MEMORIES OF EARLIER ISRAELI EVICTIONS

JERUSALEM — Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu pledged on Sunday that he will never evict Jewish settlers from occupied Palestinian land as Israel did in 2005 in the Gaza Strip.

“The withdrawal from the Gaza Strip brought us neither peace nor security. The territory has become a base for the pro-Iranian Hamas movement and we will never make the same mistake again,” Netanyahu said at the weekly cabinet meeting.

“We will not evict any more people from their homes,” he added in comments carried by public radio.

In September 2005, the government of prime minister Ariel Sharon unilaterally removed all Jewish settlements from Gaza in a move aimed at ending Israel’s costly 38-year military presence in the Gaza Strip.

And now, clearly, providing the USA administration does NOT rub salt into Israeli wounds, the Quartet hopes the package will unlock Middle East talks

Tony Blair and Hillary Clinton hope package will unlock Middle East talks

Two members of the international quartet of Middle East mediators suggested today that stalled indirect peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians may be unblocked in coming days.

Speaking after a meeting in Moscow of the group – comprising the United States, European Union, United Nations and Russia – quartet envoy Tony Blair told Reuters he hoped for a package of measures to get the talks started.

According to The Guardian here George Mitchell did attend the Moscow meeting after all, despite seeming to call off his attendance earlier this week. He must have kept a VERY low profile. He was not in any of the videos or mentioned as being party to the statement. Interesting body language in the picture below. Caption? …

Hillary Clinton speaks with the US special envoy for Middle East peace, George Mitchell, during quartet talks in Moscow. Photograph: Alexander Zemlianichenko/AP

“I’ll pretend you’re not here, George, if you pretend I am.”

Tags:and High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security, Catherine Ashton, european union, George Mitchell, Hillary Rodham Clinton, March 19 statement, Middle East Quartet, Moscow, Quartet Representative Tony Blair, Russian foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, the Quartet, Tony Blair, transcript, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, US secretary of state, US special envoy for Middle East Peace George Mitchell, video, YouTube video
Posted in 1. Tony Blair, Blair - Middle East peace - "Impossible Dream", Israel, Major Political Issues, Britain & World, Middle East - Countries/Issues, Middle East Envoy Blair, from June 2007, Palestinian Issues/ Palestine state, Religion & Religious Issues in Politics, United States of America | Leave a Comment »

Hague dissembling on Ashcroft. NO, FGS! It’s NOT Blair’s fault!!!

March 19, 2010