28-Apr-11 News-Palestinian factions announce reconciliation

[John]

28-Apr-11 News -- Palestinian factions announce surprise 'reconciliation' on path to statehood


U.S. may end relations with Palestinians if unity government includes Hamas

** 28-Apr-11 News -- Palestinian factions announce surprise 'reconciliation' on path to statehood
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/cgi-bin/D.PL?xct=gd.e110428b#e110428b


** 28-Apr-11 World View -- Egypt and peace with Israel
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/cgi-bin/D.PL?xct=gd.e110428#e110428



Contents:
"Palestinian factions announce surprise 'reconciliation' on path to statehood"
"Israeli response"


### World View - Egypt and peace with Israel
"Egyptians appear prepared to end peace treaty with Israel"
"Syria's uprising causes Iran to lose credibility in the region"
"Fatah-Hamas reconciliation could help Israel"
"Boom times in the West Bank"
"Pakistan's PM encourages Afghanistan's Karzai to dump the US"
"President Barack Obama releases his birth certificate"
"Al-Qaeda leader put jihad before a sex life"

[OLD1953]

I have to doubt the reconciliation in Palestine will hold till the fall. If this goes to the General Assembly, and Palestine isn't in a civil war, there'll be a Palestine state before New Year's.

The birther groups have already moved on to questioning Obama's college records. Which, of course has no bearing on anything except their absolute belief that he's a liar and thief, and all they have to do is pick the right issue and prove it. There is no possible way this type of "issue/nonissue" will go away.

So Al-Qaeda leaders admit they are perverts - we already knew that, because demanding total submission from women is a perversion by definition. This is not exactly new, but admitting it as being proud of it certainly is.

[shoshin]

ok, John, I know you will make some snarky comment about my being an unwitting dupe of the radical left-wing conspiracy, but this pursuit of Obama is all about race. And, no, anyone who disagrees with Obama is not automatically labelled a racist. But hounding him about his birth certificate is just another way to make him out to be "the other." You grew up in Chicago, where I'm sure there was plenty of racism, but I grew up in the South, where we literally swam in it. And it hasn't gone away, it's still there, wherever white people resent the achievements of black people. Whether it's the evils of affirmative action or the evils of inter-racial marriage, it's always there. And Obama is almost worse than a black man - he's the son of black man and a white woman(gasp!). And he has actually appointed black people to cabinet positions and high executive offices! What is he thinking??

I see racism pretty clearly, and it's not in those who disagree with Obama's politics or policies. It's in the relentless, cloaked hounding of his personhood.

[John]

Dear David,

> ok, John, I know you will make some snarky comment about my being
> an unwitting dupe of the radical left-wing conspiracy, but this
> pursuit of Obama is all about race. And, no, anyone who disagrees
> with Obama is not automatically labelled a racist. But hounding
> him about his birth certificate is just another way to make him
> out to be "the other." You grew up in Chicago, where I'm sure
> there was plenty of racism, but I grew up in the South, where we
> literally swam in it. And it hasn't gone away, it's still there,
> wherever white people resent the achievements of black
> people. Whether it's the evils of affirmative action or the evils
> of inter-racial marriage, it's always there. And Obama is almost
> worse than a black man - he's the son of black man and a white
> woman(gasp!). And he has actually appointed black people to
> cabinet positions and high executive offices! What is he
> thinking??

> I see racism pretty clearly, and it's not in those who disagree
> with Obama's politics or policies. It's in the relentless, cloaked
> hounding of his personhood.

Well, you do see racism pretty clearly -- everywhere -- I'll grant you
that.

Then I guess you must believe that Hillary Clinton is a racist, as she
and her supporters were accused of during the campaign.

I'm sure you must find it upsetting that our Secretary of State is a
racist and goes around the world representing the United States.

I imagine you would be a lot happier if Condoleeza Rice were still
the Secy of State. At least then we would no longer be having
a racist representing the U.S. around the world.

It's those nasty Republican racists who are causing all the problems.
Remember how all those racists made vitriolic racist remarks about
Clarence Thomas and about Condoleeza Rice? Both of them are black
people who have made some really remarkable achievements, and serve as
wonderful role models for black people. Since you're from the south,
and you see racism pretty clearly, then I'm sure you want to condemn
those Republican racists as well, who resent the achievements of black
people. And as you point out, Clarence Thomas is considered WORSE
than a white man, because he's black, he's achieved a lot, and he's
married to a white woman. What is he thinking? It has nothing to do
with his policies; it's in the relentless, cloaked hounding of his
personhood. You should come down on those Republican racists pretty
hard.

Oh wait, those are all Democrats.

John

[shoshin]

oh, John, snark, snark, snark....first, I never said that it was Republicans that are racist bigots, behind the Birther agenda, it's an equal opportunity collection of zealots...and the South was (in my childhood and adolescence an exclusively Democratic stronghold, replete with racist demagogues....they've only turned Republican in the last 20 years or so....and as I recall, it was Anita Hill who impugned Clarence Thomas, but I guess she was just a front for the Democratic, liberal, left-wing conspiracy...as for Condoleeza Rice, I believe Don Rumsfeld made fun of her, not me...

As for Hilary Clinton, well, I'm sure she was urged to portray Obama as 'the other" during her campaign, and there were racist impulses behind that, and she was trying to get the Presidency, which she no doubt perceived as rightfully hers. Why do you want set me up as a straw man, and give the impression that I said things I never did? Don't you think xenophobia is a natural expression in humans? Rather than denying it, we should recognize that we are all subject tp those fears.

[Jack Edwards]

On the whole birth certificate thing:

Shoshin – why is it strange that people would ask about it? It’s a requirement that the President be a natural born citizen. It’s known that President Obama spent some of his childhood in other countries and that his father was from Africa. It’s seems a reasonable question to me given the absolute legal requirement to be a natural born citizen to be President of the United States.

What seems odd to me, and still seems odd to me is why this information wasn’t made available at the beginning of his candidacy. In my view, President Obama has made this an issue by ignoring reasonable requests. It’s just plain weird that he didn’t display the long form birth certificate years ago. It implies he has something to hide. Now that the birth certificate has been produced – there is still controversy – see links below.

I view the natural born citizen requirement as some sort of antiquated thing that the Framers put in to assure that a British loyalist wasn’t made President of a brand new country. I wish we’d change the requirement to be a naturalized citizen for 20 years or something like that – but we have the law that we have. I’ve pretty much ignored this whole argument except to wonder what Obama was hiding.

Here are some videos I ran into this morning that supposedly prove the on-line document is a fraud. I don’t know enough about Optical Character Recognition software and scanning technologies to know if the points they make are valid or not. But they make you scratch your head and wonder.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eOfYwYy ... ded#at=260

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQ2Gv_q-DJ8

President Obama’s race has nothing to do with my opinion of him. I’m an engineer. I care about results. I resent it that whenever I bring up any a criticism of a result that if that person happens to be of a certain class, I can be labeled as racist, a sexist an islamophobe… whatever.

I think the media did President Obama a large disservice by not asking the tough questions when he was a candidate. He’s too inexperienced to be President – now. If he had another few years as a Senator and a Governor then he would have had a sufficient track record to determine if he was qualified. We collectively turned a blind eye to his record because of his race. That was wrong, and honestly was unfair to him, because he has inherited one of the toughest situations any recent President has had to deal with – and from my perspective is not ready.

The next big question will be his college records. There is no legal requirement there. After being out of college 20 years, this is a stupid question to ask. My guess is that Trump is only doing that to get people riled up that President Obama got into the schools he did because of Affirmative Action. Who knows? In this case, I hope President Obama ignores him.

Regards,

Jack

[shoshin]

Dear Jack...Obama did present proof of his birth in Hawaii during his candidacy. Now, in retrospect, ask yourself why this wasn't sufficient.(And speaking of birth certificates etc. what about John McCain? Was'nt there some question about his citizenship, having been born in the Canal Zone? Oh, but he was a war hero, so I don't recall any question being raised.)

As for the youtube "evidence" it is nonsense, but that won't stop anybody.

As for his being "qualified." Well, by your definition, who is qualified? It's not as though there is a training program for being President, except maybe being Vice President. I'd rather have a smart, creative individual, rather than a dull-witted politician.(Can you say "Dan Quayle" or Spiro Agnew" or "Gerald Ford"?) No offense to any of those folks, as I think it's an "on-the-job" learning process, and what you need are values and principles, which I will admit, Obama is weak on.

Finally, ask yourself why the "Affirmative Action" issue has now arisen. Did Obama lie and cheat to get into Columbia, and then Harvard :Law School, and be president of the Law Review? Hmmm. Maybe. Or maybe there os something else going n.

[John]

Dear David,

> oh, John, snark, snark, snark....first, I never said that it was
> Republicans that are racist bigots, behind the Birther agenda,
> it's an equal opportunity collection of zealots...and the South
> was (in my childhood and adolescence an exclusively Democratic
> stronghold, replete with racist demagogues....they've only turned
> Republican in the last 20 years or so....and as I recall, it was
> Anita Hill who impugned Clarence Thomas, but I guess she was just
> a front for the Democratic, liberal, left-wing conspiracy...as for
> Condoleeza Rice, I believe Don Rumsfeld made fun of her, not me...

> As for Hilary Clinton, well, I'm sure she was urged to portray
> Obama as 'the other" during her campaign, and there were racist
> impulses behind that, and she was trying to get the Presidency,
> which she no doubt perceived as rightfully hers. Why do you want
> set me up as a straw man, and give the impression that I said
> things I never did? Don't you think xenophobia is a natural
> expression in humans? Rather than denying it, we should recognize
> that we are all subject tp those fears.

This answer is a total copout. I don't care what you said. There have
been plenty of northern white Democratic party politicians who have
been offensive to Clarence Thomas. (As I recall, the entire hearing
was a racist high-tech lynching by liberal Democrats.)

It's been going on for 20 years, and it's still going on today. Ted
Kennedy was always particularly vitriolic. I did a quick google, and
here's commentary on a Frank Rich column that questions Thomas' resume
-- a charge very similar to the birther chargers.

http://volokh.com/2007/10/07/frank-rich ... y-general/

By your own logic, Ted Kennedy, Frank Rich, and numerous other
northern white liberal Democratic politicians are vicious racists who
are attacking Thomas because he's black and he's married to a white
woman.

Here's a simple yes or no question: Do you concede that the attacks by
liberal Democrats on Thomas have the same kinds of motivations as the
conservative Republican attacks on Obama?

If you're going to say that Republicans are racist, while Kennedy and
Rich and other liberal Democrats are not racists, then I don't see
what more we have to talk about on this subject.

John

[Higgenbotham]

The key word that Obama's birth certificate debacle relates to is the word "illegitimate". It's a clever way to bring that thought across without saying the word. There's not a snowball's chance in hell this is going to go away. Everyone knows that any document can be faked up and sold on the street for under $100. If they don't know it, they will.

I think the difference between 2008 and 2011 is that people have stopped being afraid to speak their minds. More and more, the Internet can be used to vent various frustrations and opinions and there are no consequences for doing so. I can do a search for "Bernake is a liar" and find 5,000 people who agree with me and feel comfortable joining the chorus. The chorus can quickly grow to 500,000 and no amount of press conferences can be put together to contain the damage.

At some point, the whole thing becomes a farce. I feel we reached that point yesterday with Obama producing his so-called birth certificate and Bernanke standing in front of reporters demonstrating his astonishing incompetence while trying to show that he is competent. How can anybody take these people seriously? Lastly, and most important, when will they stop taking themselves seriously?

[JR]

Democrats called George Bush an illegimate president from the day he took office, and they vitriolically mocked his Texas accent and Texas hat. His reelection only made them angrier, and they even released a movie, "The Death of a President (2006)," that described Bush's assassination.

Well, I'm a Democrat, and I never heard of that movie. What did it gross? Who was the hero?

The Supreme Court decision that shut down the Florida recount in 2000 was shaky, Republican operatives deliberately and insultingly disrupted the process, the Florida Secretary of State had a clear conflict of interest, the Florida margin was razor-thin however you count it, and Gore received many more popular votes than Bush overall. Now, in the end, only one person is elected, and close decisions happen from time to time, but Bush and the Republicans were given all kinds of benefit of a doubt when they came into office and acted with arrogance. They did not have a mandate but acted as if they did, and that is, at best, questionable. (Note the typical liberal wording there - note that I find it difficult to bring myself to insult them they way they would me.)

When Clarence Thomas claimed to be the victim of a "high-tech lynching," that's what's called "playing the race card." In my opinion, he did what Anita Hill claimed he did. He admitted that such behavior was despicable, as head of the EEOC he absolutely knew better at the time, and in my opinion he lied about it under oath before Congress. And his performance in office has been abyssmal. Full-spirited defense of such a person's accomplishments seems highly partisan to me.

John, you claim,

We take no sides in any political battles (such as Republicans vs Democrats) ... If we have any bias at all, it's that we're pro-American.

So why doesn't your rhetoric reflect this claim? Honestly, while I think there's a lot to be said for Generational Dynamics theory, and I value and appreciate the wonderful nuggets of international news you show forth and place in context, your rhetoric often betrays a huge bias which undermines the credibility that this excellent website and news source deserves.