Nuclear Power Plants Fashionable in Middle East; Israel Pokes Fun at Biden

Syria announces that it wants to develop nuclear power now that Israel, Egypt, Iran, Jordan, Turkey and the Emirates have also begun or announced plans for nuclear plants.

Rivals Israel, Syria Want to Build Nuclear Power Plants
Tuesday , March 09, 2010

Mideast rivals Israel and Syria on Tuesday each announced ambitions to develop nuclear energy, with Israel facing the prospect that its plan could bring new attention to its secretive nuclear activities.

The countries laid out their hopes at an international conference in Paris on civilian nuclear energy — which contributes far less to global warming than burning of fossil fuels but still evokes many concerns about long-term safety issues.

Also on Tuesday, Egypt announced it would aim for four nuclear plants by 2025, with the first starting in 2019, Reuters quoted an Egyptian minister. The announcements raise the prospect that the countries’ nuclear programs could come under the microscope of international inspectors to ensure that they don’t cross the forbidden line into weapons programs. Iran, for example, has come under intense pressure to show its nuclear program is peaceful. The United States is providing financing and training for nuclear power plans in Jordan. The United Arab Emirates in December awarded a South Korean consortium a contract to build energy-producing nuclear reactors.

Iran and North Korea, whose nuclear program has also drawn international scorn, were not invited to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development conference. Israeli Infrastructure Minister Uzi Landau said nuclear plants built in Israel will be subject to strict safety and security controls, and even said his country would like to build them in cooperation with scientists and engineers from “our Arab neighbors.”

“Israel has always considered nuclear power to partially replace its dependence on coal,” Landau said. The program aims to help Israel secure its energy supplies and battle global warming. Israel currently uses coal and natural gas to produce electricity.

The effort by Israel, which has long been suspected to have a secret nuclear weapons program, runs the risk that its nuclear energy program will draw the eyes of the International Atomic Energy Agency. The construction of a nuclear reactor could draw international attention to Israel’s nuclear activities. Asked if Israel would allow IAEA inspectors to supervise any new project, Landau aide Chen Ben Lulu said only that Israel would follow all the relevant rules.

Israel has not signed the Nonproliferation Treaty, which aims to limit the number of countries capable of developing nuclear weapons. Separately at the conference, Syrian Deputy Foreign Minister Faysal Mekdad his country is looking at “alternative energy sources, including nuclear energy” to meet its growing demands for energy.

“The peaceful application of nuclear energy should not be monopolized by the few that own this technology but should be available to all,” Mekdad said, noting Syria’s growing population. He did not elaborate on specific nuclear plans.

Between the two countries, Israel is seen as closer to actually developing nuclear energy in terms of know-how and infrastructure. The idea of generating nuclear energy has been floating around for years in Israel. In 2007, one of Landau’s predecessors said he was working on a plan to build a nuclear power plant in Israel’s southern Negev desert. Landau met several months ago with the French Energy Minister Jean-Louis Borloo, and raised the idea of French-Israeli-Jordanian cooperation in developing a nuclear power plant.

Borloo was enthusiastic about that idea, Landau said. France derives more of its electricity from nuclear power than any other country and has a highly developed civilian nuclear industry — and Paris sees export potential.

It was France that, beginning in the 1950s, helped Israel build its nuclear reactor at Dimona. Israel is believed to have used that reactor to construct a stockpile of nuclear weapons. Israel has never acknowledged being a nuclear power, following a policy it calls “nuclear ambiguity.” Israel also has a smaller nuclear reactor for research at Nahal Soreq, not far from Tel Aviv. Landau’s office says no specific plans to set up a third nuclear power plant have been drawn up so far.

Will the Exiles Return to Iraq?Sunday’s election is a test of the permanence of the division between Iraq’s Sunnis and Shiites.
By Deborah Amos, Friday, March 5, 2010

Iraq’s electoral commission expects as many as 180,000 exiles to cast ballots in 23 voting centers across Syria, and Iraq’s Sunni politicians are courting the exile vote. … According to the latest U.S. government report, few of the 2 million Iraqis who fled the country from 2004 to 2008 have returned…..

An estimated 60 percent of the refugees are Sunni Arabs; approximately 15 percent are Iraqi Christians. Their departure represents a dramatic demographic alteration in Iraq, yet the sectarian nature of the exodus has been largely overlooked. This shifting population is a huge loss to Iraq, a vast problem to neighboring governments, a collective tragedy for many caught up in it, and a significant indicator of the future health, stability, and viability of Iraq and the Middle East. Most in the exile population have never sought refugee status with the United Nations. Indeed, fewer than 10 percent have applied to be considered for resettlement to the United States, Europe, or Australia, which suggests the overwhelming majority still hope to return to Iraq and are waiting for some indication that they are welcome there. So far, the signals from the election campaign have not been positive…..

U.S. Ambassador Christopher Hill summed up the trial ahead: “The real test of democracy is not so much the behavior of the winners; it will be the behavior of the losers.” There can be no stability without political reconciliation and the exiles’ return. They are in daily contact with their families, waiting for word that is time to come back. The rest of the region is waiting, too.

Barak approves 112 new apartments in West Bank
By The Associated Press and Haaretz Service

Israel authorized the construction of 112 new apartments in the West Bank despite a pledge to slow settlement building, the government disclosed Monday – a decision that enraged the Palestinians a day after they reluctantly agreed to resume peace talks. Word of the new construction in the Beitar Illit settlement came amid a flurry of activity by the U.S. to try to salvage peacemaking.

Biden Condemns Israeli Decision on Settlements,

…With the Interior Ministry adding insult to injury, (announcing a plan to build 1,600 new homes in East Jerusalem, on top of the new settlements on the West Bank) the VP came out sort of swinging.

“I condemn the decision by the government of Israel to advance planning for new housing units in East Jerusalem. The substance and timing of the announcement, particularly with the launching of proximity talks, is precisely the kind of step that undermines the trust we need right now and runs counter to the constructive discussions that I’ve had here in Israel. We must build an atmosphere to support negotiations, not complicate them. This announcement underscores the need to get negotiations under way that can resolve all the outstanding issues of the conflict. The United States recognizes that Jerusalem is a deeply important issue for Israelis and Palestinians and for Jews, Muslims and Christians. We believe 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. Unilateral action taken by either party cannot prejudge the outcome of negotiations on permanent status issues. As George Mitchell said in announcing the proximity talks, “we encourage the parties and all concerned to refrain from any statements or actions which may inflame tensions or prejudice the outcome of these talks.”

Netanyahu and Pastor Hagee’s Lovefest on Eve of Biden’s Arrival in Israel
On 03.09.10, By Max

Vice President Joe Biden was greeted in Jerusalem with the announcement that the Israeli Interior Ministry approved the construction of 1600 new homes in Occupied East Jerusalem contrary to U.S. wishes and complicating Biden’s mission to help jump start the peace process. But Biden should have known that Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu intended to upset his plans by Netanyahu’s appearance with John Hagee.

The day after a series of talks between US Special Envoy for the Middle East George Mitchell and Netanyahu, and a day before Biden’s arrival, Netanyahu appeared onstage with Pastor John Hagee in Jerusalem. The occasion was Hagee’s Night To Honor Israel, an event the far-right Texas-based preacher arranged to tout his ministry’s millions in donations to Israeli organizations and to level bellicose rhetoric against Israel’s perceived enemies.

At the gathering, Hagee called Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad “the Hitler of the Middle East” and denounced the Goldstone Report as “character assassination by an unbiased and uninformed committee.”

Netanyahu welcomed the crowd of 1000 American evangelicals to Jerusalem, a city he described as “the undivided, eternal capitol of the Jewish people. Then, he told them, “I salute you! The Jewish people salute you!” He used the rest of his speech to call for “tough, biting sanctions” against Iran that “bite deep into its energy sector.”

The price tag for Israeli intransigence
by Paul Woodward on March 9, 2010

The day before Vice President Joe Biden arrived in Israel — supposedly on a mission to help kick-start peace talks between Israelis and Palestinians — the Netanyahu government made its contempt for the Obama administration clear by approving new settlement construction.

They were quick to take offense — they being the Israelis! “While we welcome Vice President Biden, a longtime friend and supporter of Israel,” Danny Danon, the deputy speaker of the Knesset, told the Washington Post, “we see it as nothing short of an insult that President Obama himself is not coming.”

Washington on the other hand had no interest in creating a fuss about settlement growth — its impotence on that particular issue has already been amply demonstrated. Pushing for a real settlement freeze is passé. The new game is proximity talks and shuttle diplomacy. After 17 years of direct talks it’s now time to talk from a distance…

Israelis and Palestinians: Agreeing to Talk — and to Fail
By Tony Karon in Time Magazine

They won’t be talking directly to each other, but at least the leaders of Israel and Palestine have a common objective in the “proximity talks” the Obama Administration is launching this week. Unfortunately, that shared goal is not to reach a final agreement on a two-state solution to their conflict — both sides know better than to expect that U.S. special envoy Senator George Mitchell’s shuttling between Jerusalem and Ramallah will be able to bridge the chasm between their demands. Instead, the mutual goal in the latest round of talks is to avoid being blamed for their failure.

The very fact that two decades after the start of the Oslo peace process, the two sides are no longer even negotiating directly but instead communicating via the Americans is a clear sign of just how grim the prospects have become for achieving peace through bilateral talks. Both sides, in fact, are showing up for the U.S.’s latest version of a peace process largely to prove a point. For the Palestinians and their Arab backers, who have given the latest round of talks just four months to produce results (a deadline not endorsed by the Obama Administration), their purpose is to demonstrate to the U.S. that no credible peace agreement can be achieved with the hawkish government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and that creating a viable independent Palestinian state requires that the Americans press the Israelis to do things they’re not going to do voluntarily. Setting conditions and deadlines is a way for Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas to offset the domestic political damage he suffers from participating in endless rounds of fruitless negotiations. Abbas was helped by the fact that the new talks were endorsed by the Arab League last week, but the tone of its statement is telling: “Despite the lack of conviction in the seriousness of the Israeli side,” said Arab League Secretary Amr Moussa, his committee agreed to back the talks “as a last attempt and to facilitate the U.S. role.”

The Israelis, for their part, need to demonstrate good faith and position themselves to blame the Palestinians, as they have done up to now, for the absence of a peace deal. And Israeli officials make no bones about the fact that they need to go through the motions in order to pursue their own priority: resuming talks, a senior Israeli official told the dailyYediot Ahronot, “would create an atmosphere in the Arab world and the international community that would allow the world to focus on the real threat — Iran.”

Netanyahu, after taking office, came around to talking of a two-state solution, which he had previously rejected, but at the same time he defined Palestinian statehood in terms too limited to be acceptable to the Palestinian leadership. Netanyahu had publicly opposed the offers made to the Palestinians by previous Israeli governments, and his government made clear last week that new talks would not begin from understandings reached with any of his predecessors but would instead start from scratch — a position vehemently rejected by the Palestinians. Of course, none of those previous offers had been accepted by the Palestinian leadership; it’s hard to see how offering less than the proposals previously rejected by Abbas, as Netanyahu appears set to do, is going to break the deadlock. But Netanyahu will argue that Israel is willing to talk directly and without conditions and to use the Palestinians’ refusal to do so as a basis to blame them for the stalemate.


Read this story about travel in Syria with great photos

Ibrahim Hamidi, al-Hayat’s bureau chief in Damascus interviewed the Turkish FM Ahmad Daout Oglu after his meeting with Mr Assad and other Syrian officials.
He says that “the groundwork has been prepared to resume indirect talks between Syria and Israel under Turkish auspicious,” and that “all US officials with whom he has met strongly support resumption of these talks”

داود أوغلو: الأرضية جاهزة لاستئناف المفاوضات السورية ـ الإسرائيلية
الثلاثاء, 09 مارس 2010

دمشق – ابراهيم حميدي

قال وزير الخارجية التركي احمد داود اوغلو ان «الارضية جاهزة» لاستئناف المفاوضات غير المباشرة بين سورية واسرائيل برعاية انقرة، لافتا الى ان جميع المسؤولين الاميركيين الذين التقاهم «يدعمون بقوة» اعادة اطلاق هذه المفاوضات. واعرب عن «التفاؤل القوي» بان «المناخ الجيد سيستمر» بين سورية ولبنان. ودعا الرئيس الفلسطيني محمود عباس ورئيس المكتب السياسي لـ»حماس» خالد مشعل الى «الوحدة ونبذ الانقسام»، اذ «يجب الا تفكرا بالاهداف السياسية، بل بمستقبل فلسطين باكملها».

وكان داود اوغلو يتحدث الى «الحياة» في ختام زيارة لدمشق اول من امس تضمنت لقاء الرئيس بشار الاسد استمر زهاء ساعتين.

وقال الوزير التركي، ردا على سؤال عن مدى دعم الادارة الاميركية استئناف المفاوضات غير المباشرة بين سورية واسرائيل التي توقفت بعد الحرب على غزة في نهاية 2008: «نحن نتشاور دائما مع (الموفد الاميركي) السناتور (جورج) ميتشل والوزيرة (هيلاري) كلينتون وزملائنا الاميركيين. كلهم يدعمون اعادة اطلاق هذه المحادثات». واضاف انه لا يستطيع «الحديث نيابة عن الاسرائيليين» الذي اعلنوا رفض الوساطة التركية، لكنه قال:»اعتقد بان الارضية اكثر جهوزية واستعدادا حاليا لاعادة اطلاق العملية»، لافتا الى استعداد سورية لاستئناف المفاوضات غير المباشرة من حيث توقفت. واكد:»انني متفائل بان المفاوضات ستستأنف. لا استطيع تحديد التوقيت، لكني متفائل جدا».

Continues

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan announced on Tuesday that Israel has agreed to permit Ankara to resume its former role as mediator between Israel and Syria. This contradicts recent statements from Israel that Turkey’s fiercely anti-Israel statements since Operation Cast Lead disqualify it from playing this role in the future. The prime minister was quoted by Turkey’s NTV television, telling members of the press in Saudi Arabia that talks that broke off during the former Olmert administration between Jerusalem and Damascus may resume “at any moment’. (Yeshiva World News)

Turkey’s Domestic Controversy Unfolds Amidst Increasing Ties with Iran
By Shayan Ghajar, insideIRAN.org

Events the past few weeks in Turkey indicate that a sea change is occurring in the nation’s domestic politics. Prime Minister Erdogan’s maneuvering against the traditionally untouchable military marks a new phase in Turkey’s history. This shift in Turkey’s domestic politics follows a more gradual but no less relevant shift in its foreign policy, and likely indicates even greater changes to come. Mutual trade, investment, and tourism are growing between Turkey and Iran, and the two nations are increasingly in accord on three of the regions biggest security issues, namely the Middle East peace process, Iran’s nuclear program, and Kurdish separatism.

Simultaneously, American policy has been increasingly out of step with Turkey’s vision for its future. The recent American congressional vote to declare the Armenian deportations and relocations a genocide will certainly have damaged Turkish-American relations for the foreseeable future, and will be yet another factor in Turkey seeking alternative allies in the region.

Diplomatic contact between Iran and Turkey has increased in frequency and intensity in recent months, starting with Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan’s visit to Iran in October 2009. Concurrently with Erdogan’s visit, Iran announced that Turkey was investing $4 billion into Iran’s South Pars gas field, which holds one of the largest gas reserves in the world. Shortly after Erdogan’s visit, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad stated that there are “no limitations to increasing ties” with Turkey.

New Republic’s Marty Peretz: The Multitudinous Disasters Of The Obama Administration. Here: On Syria And Iran
2010-03-08 22:04:10.188 GMT

A Delusional Left, a Hysterical Right, and a Sullen Center: Have American Politics Ever Been This Bad? The Oscars Made Some Good Calls This Year. So Why Am I Still Disappointed? How an Obscure Nomination Fight Turned Into a Hinge Moment for the …

I’ve written myself about the Obama administration’s more-than-flatfooted policies on Syria (here, here, and here) and Iran (here, here, and here). So I am particularly gratified when I find myself in alignment with Barry Rubin, a truly brainy scholar with a slight polemical touch. His latest analysis is below.

Syria is a galling instance of the president’s obsessions … and for several reasons. A weak country, both economically and militarily, its only possible political sway is to exacerbate the hatreds of its neighbors towards Israel.

Lebanon Defense Talks Going Nowhere: AFP

“……… “This dialogue is going nowhere,” said Rafic Khoury, chief editor of the independent daily Al-Anwar, referring to national defence strategy talks that resumed on Tuesday at the presidential palace before being adjourned until March 15. “Hezbollah, as well as Syria and Iran, clearly stated recently their strategy of resistance against Israel,” he added.

The talks, which were launched in 2006, have repeatedly been adjourned because of the successive political crises that have shaken Lebanon. The last round was held in June 2009. The stated aim is for Lebanon’s Western- and Saudi-backed majority and a coalition led by the Iranian- and Syrian-supported Shiite militant group to agree on a national defence strategy as concerns neighbouring enemy Israel…….

“Syria and Egypt are competitors when it comes to attracting foreign investments,” writes Ehsani two. “Egypt is looking for $10 billion of foreign investment a year. Jordan is too. Lebanon has seen capital come into its real estate sector. Syria has set a target of attracting $85 billion over 5 years, which will not be easy at tall.”

Comments (75)


Pages: « 1 [2] Show All

51. Akbar Palace said:

Shai,

And the likelihood of the Palestinians saying “You Jews are right, there should be no Palestine. We give up on that dream, we’re part of your land now.”, is also a “fantasy”.

It will always be a border dispute between 2 states that are reluctant to negotiate a border. Biden should work on something else.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

March 13th, 2010, 11:14 am

 

52. Elie Elhadj said:

MR. PRESIDENT,

As I said in 37 above, I object to the construction of nuclear power plants not only in the Arab world, but any where in the world. The reason for this objection is due to the fact that there is no 100% assurance that an accident would never ever happen. All things mechanical break down. A breakdown here creates catastrophic results.

To argue that modern nuclear power plants are, or can be made, 100% safe is 100% false.

That in Russia “wood burning cooking stoves, leaking and polluted drinking water pipes, 18th century hospitals, and best of all Turkish style toilets” surround nuclear power plants does not take away from the fact that Russia’s scientific and industrial infrastructure designed, supplied, built, and operate these plants. However, in spite Russia’s scientific and industrial prowess, Chernobel happened. Likewise, despite the scientific and industrial prowess of the US, Three Mile Island happened as well.

Since absolute safety does not exist in Russia or the US, why should Arab countries think they’ll do any better? The whole thing is bewildering! Arab cities cannot even cope with a heavy rainfall. How many inventions do Arab universities contribute to science every year? How many scientific journals Arab universities and industry publish in Arabic or English? How many patents do Arab laboratories register every year. For a graphic picture on where we stand on these issues, you may wish to look at the Arab Human Development Reports (AHDR).

This position has nothing, repeat nothing, to do with Arab engineers being inferior to foreign engineers, nor has it anything to do with Arab technicians being incompetent.

As I said in comment 37, most exports from Arab countries are still in the form of raw materials, not even low-tech manufactured products. And, whatever is exported in a manufactured form is built in factories imported from abroad. If a mechanical part in these factories breaks down, the factory has to wait for a replacement from the foreign manufacturer to arrive.

Your statement: “years of (western) psychological/military/economic wars, installed governments, proxy colonialism (Israel), fueled wars,…” has little to do with being being able to operate state of the art nuclear power plants. The statement diagnoses the current malady, which might be or might not be a sound diagnosis.

Even if Arab countries become the world’s super stars in scientific and industrial prowess, they should ignore the nuclear option in order to protect their people from the risk of radio active leaks, no matter how tiny this risk might be perceived.

Even if nuclear electricity generation cost a fraction of the alternative, the nuclear option should not even be considered.

Elie

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

March 13th, 2010, 1:11 pm

 

53. Ghat Albird said:

YOSSI said:

Ghat,

……. you always find interesting references, I always learn something new from your data. I wonder how you stay on top of it (that goes to Alex too). Is it all in your heads?

YOSSI חול.

I do not know where Alex keeps his date. In my case its usually in my head. By asking the question are you implying that you are capable of not keeping your data and staying on top of it in your head?

PEACE…سلام……שלום

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

March 13th, 2010, 2:27 pm

 

54. Amir in Tel Aviv said:

No “right of return” to Greek Cypriots to occupied (or liberated)
Turkish land in northern Cyprus, after only 34 years of occupation (or liberation).

European Court of Human Rights ECHR ruling:

http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/view.asp?item=1&portal=hbkm&action=html&highlight=&sessionid=48724019&skin=hudoc-en

Yossi,

Looks like Ghat didn’t get your irony. I think he takes the fascinating stuff he posts here as “facts”, from
www dot ziegamerica dot com and from www dot jewsarethedevil dot com
.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

March 13th, 2010, 3:25 pm

 

55. jad said:

Open letter to The Pope by a Syrian priest, Elias Zahlawi.

رسالة مفتوحة من كاهن عربي ” الاب الياس زحلاوي” إلى قداسة البابا

“النقطة الثالثة، هي مدى مسؤولية كنائس الغرب، وعلى رأسها الفاتيكان، إزاء ما يحدث في العالم عامة، وفي الشرق العربي وغير العربي خاصة.
سؤالي الأول هو: هل تراني أجانب الحقيقة إن قلت أن كل ما يحدث في العالم عامة، وفي الشرق خاصة، هو من صنع بلدان الغرب، وأعني بها دون مواربة الولايات المتحدة الأميركية، وأوربا الغربية وروسيا وكندا وأستراليا، هذه البلدان التي تستأثر بغنى الأرض كلها، وتملك وحدها القوة الضاربة الكبرى فيها حتى الآن؟
سؤالي الثاني هو: هل تراني أجانب الحقيقة إن قلت أن معظم ما يجري، أولاً داخل العالمين العربي والإسلامي، ثانياً في البقع الإسلامية المنتشرة على امتداد العالم، ليس سوى ردود أفعال على مظالم الغرب، وهي ردود أفعال بدأت واستمرت في معظم الحالات، غوغائية، دموية وعفوية، ثم انتظم بعضها في نمطين من الحركات المسلحة، الأول كان المقاومة المشروعة في فلسطين المحتلة. وتلك هي حال المنظمات الفلسطينية التي وصفت ظلماً، من قبل الاتحاد الأوربي في أيلول 2002، بالحركات الإرهابية، والثاني كان المقاومة الأصولية، أولاً ضد الطغيان السوفييتي في أفغانستان، ثم ضد الطغيان الأميركي في أفغانستان عينها، وفي العراق وباكستان. وتلك هي حال حركتي طالبان والقاعدة.
ولكن هل من يجهل أن هاتين الحركتين هما أصلاً من صنع الولايات المتحدة؟
أما ما يجري في قلب العالم العربي، في فلسطين تحديداً، فلسطين التي لم تعودوا تسمّونها في كنائس الغرب إلا “الأرض المقدسة”، فليس سوى حروب ظالمة، واحتلال يستبيح كل شيء: القتل والسجن والتعذيب والحصار والتشريد حيال الشعب الفلسطيني برمته، بمسيحيّيه ومسلميه. وكل ذلك يتم تحت سمع العالم وبصره، وبدعم مطلق من الغرب، جعل السيدة كلينتون تقول: “إن ضرب اسرائيل يوازي ضرب مدينة مثل “سان دييغو” في الولايات المتحدة الأميركية”، وجعل السيدة ميركل، مستشارة ألمانيا، تقول أيضاً دون خجل: “إن ضرب تل أبيب هو كضرب ألمانيا بالذات”!…
فأين ما حلّ ويحلّ بالشعب الفلسطيني، منذ أكثر من ستين عاماً، على يد الاحتلال الإسرائيلي، من الحقوق الإنسانية المعلنة في شرعة حقوق الإنسان، ومن جميع المعاهدات الدولية، لا سيما معاهدات جنيف، ومن مئات القرارات الصادرة بحق إسرائيل من الأمم المتحدة ومن مجلس أمنها التعيس؟ وهل بات الغرب كله عبداً للصهيونية، حتى ينتهج مثل هذه الازدواجية الفاجرة في تعامل الغرب مع إسرائيل من جهة، ومع غالبية شعوب الأرض، وهي الشعوب الضعيفة والمستضعفة، من جهة ثانية؟
كل ذلك وكنائس الغرب كلها صامتة. أجل كلها، بدءاً من حاضرة الفاتيكان، قد صمتت بعد رحيل البابا يوحنا بولس الثاني، باستثناء كردينال بوسطن الشجاع، برنار لو.”

“لي أخيراً ستة أسئلة، أرى لزاماً علي أن أطرحها عليك، في ختام رسالتي هذه:
السؤال الأول: هل اللاسامية التي مارسها الغرب، كنيسةً وسلطةً وشعباً، طوال مئات السنوات، حيال اليهود، تبرّر اليوم إراقة دماء شعوب الشرق العربي وغير العربي، بدءاً من الشعب الفلسطيني، كرمى لعيون الشعب اليهودي “المسكين”؟ وهل هي تبرر صمت جميع كنائس الغرب، إزاء هذه المظالم، فيما هذه الكنائس لا تني تطلب الغفران عن خطيئة اللاسامية، التي ارتكبتها وحدها، دون العرب والمسلمين؟
السؤال الثاني: ألا يبدو جلياً لكم في الغرب كله، أن موقف الغرب وكنائس الغرب هذا، سينجم عنه لا محالة، شران فظيعان، لا أرى مغفرةً ممكنةً لهما:
الشر الأول هو تحويل الشعب اليهودي برمته إلى مجموعة من القتلة؟
الشر الثاني هو تفريغ الشرق كله، عاجلاً أو آجلاً، من مسيحيّيه الأصليين؟
السؤال الثالث: ألا ترى معي تشابهاً مرعباً ومخجلاً، بين ما تفعله اليوم قوى الغرب كله على نطاق العالم عامة، والعالم العربي والإسلامي خاصة، وما فعلته القوى الأوربية التي فتحت القارة الأميركية، بدءاً من أواخر القرن الخامس عشر، من إبادة وحشية ومنتظمة لِما لا يقلّ عن أربعين مليون إنسان من السكان الأصليين، كما يقدّر ذلك الباحثون الغربيون أنفسهم؟
السؤال الرابع: إزاء كل هذه الجرائم ضد الإنسانية، هل يكفي الغرب أن يأتي بابا جديد، بعد أربعمائة عام، يستغفر الشعوب، كما استغفرها البابا الشجاع يوحنا بولس الثاني، خلال زياراته الخارقة للعالم، كي نقول أن الكنيسة فعلت ما كان يتوجب عليها فعله؟!…
السؤال الخامس: ألا يجب على كنائس الغرب، اليوم قبل الغد، أن تخرج من سجن صمتها، وتقول كلمة الإنجيل، تدافع بها عن المظلومين والفقراء والجياع والمرضى والأسرى، الذين تماهى يسوع بكل حب معهم، والذين لم يعودوا أفراداً كما جاء في إنجيل القديس متى، بل باتوا شعوباً يغطون المساحة العظمى من الأرض؟ وقد يسمعها، فتحرر بعضهم، أولئك “الأثرياء” و”المتجبّرون” الغربيون، سواء منهم من تحرروا كلياً من الله، أو من استغلوه كما يحدث في الولايات المتحدة، ليجهزوا باسمه على المسيحيين والمسلمين في الشرق كله، ويؤلّبوا الشعوب على بعضها البعض، في حروب طائفية وإثنية، تنتشر يوماً بعد يوم، ولن ترحم أحداً؟
السؤال السادس: وهو سؤال أسمعك تطرحه علي، كما طرحه عليّ الكثيرون من أساقفة الغرب وكهنته: و”هل من يسمع؟”. وهنا بدوري أقول لك ولكل الكنيسة في الغرب: لستم خيراً من يسوع. “أتى إلى خاصته، وخاصته لم تقبله”، ومع ذلك فقد تكلم، وما قاله يسوع، لم يقله ولن يقوله أحد!
والآن هل من شيء أضيفه؟
أجل. شيء أخير.
أبتِ صاحب القداسة، أرجوك، أنا ابنك الكاهن العربي الكاثوليكي من سورية، أرجوك بكل محبة وإلحاح، أن تبادر أيضاً إلى دعوة صفوة صادقة من المسؤولين في كنائس الغرب، من رجال كنيسة وعلمانيين، كي يتدارسوا، في المؤتمر الذي دعوت إليه في تشرين الأول القادم، مع مسؤولي كنائس الشرق والملتزمين الصادقين فيه، من مسيحيين ومسلمين، مدى مسؤوليات الغرب، في ما يحدث اليوم، في الشرق وعلى نطاق العالم، لاتخاذ المواقف المطلوبة والصريحة، قبل فوات الأوان.
لقد فات من الوقت الكثير، والأيام حبلى بكوارث جديدة، لا يتمناها عاقل لأحد.
إن دنيا الله واسعة، سعة قلب الله، فعسى أن يتسع قلبك لكلامي.
أبتِ صاحب القداسة،
أسألك الدعاء من أجل جميع إخوتي في الشرق، من مسلمين ومسيحيين ويهود، وأهديك صادق محبتي واحترامي البنويين.

الأب الياس زحلاوي”

http://all4syria.info/content/view/22919/161/

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

March 13th, 2010, 4:32 pm

 

56. jad said:

Dear OTW, Elie,
This is a very interesting article of March NG.
OTW was the one who linked the idea on SC couple months ago.
It sounds like a great start for safer/compact nuclear power system.

“Small Town Nukes
They’d be carbon free, relatively cheap, and according to the industry, inherently safe. An underground mini-nuke could power a village.
Most nuclear power plants are behemoths, big enough to power a medium-size city. They are also behemoth investments, costing upwards of several billion dollars each to construct. Small wonder then that dozens of small-reactor prototypes are vying for attention in an industry newly energized by nuclear power’s advantages as a low-emission alternative to fossil fuels.

“Small reactors can’t address all the problems standing in the way of more nuclear investment, but they can address the biggest barriers—the economic ones,” says Richard Lester, head of nuclear science and engineering at MIT. Building giant reactors, he points out, isn’t the only way to achieve economies of scale; another way is to mass produce inexpensive mini-nukes. If they’re designed as modules, a single unit might power a remote town or mine, while a dozen used in tandem could match the output of a traditional nuclear plant. In the developing world, small reactors would place less strain on fragile electrical grids. And the ability to start small and gradually add power modules could appeal to cash-strapped utilities everywhere.
None of the new small reactors have been deployed yet. Some, like the one designed by NuScale Power, are light-water reactors that resemble ones long used on warships. Others are more novel. Toshiba and the Japanese Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry are working on a liquid-sodium-cooled “nuclear battery.” Delivered partially assembled and installed underground, the reactor would generate ten megawatts for 30 years until it needed refueling. The isolated Alaska village of Galena is in discussions with Toshiba to become its first customer.

Besides costing less to build, some small reactors could be inherently safer, says Vladimir Kuznetsov of the International Atomic Energy Agency. NuScale’s design requires no reactor cooling pumps, while Toshiba’s pumps are electromagnetic, without moving parts; either approach diminishes the possibility of a disastrous failure. Chinese researchers, meanwhile, are developing a small reactor in which the nuclear reaction itself is self-limiting. In a dramatic 2004 demonstration, they turned off the cooling system; the reaction just burned itself out. With any of the new reactors, of course, there will still be radioactive waste to contend with.

There are 56 reactors under construction in the world today, 19 in China alone. But with energy demand soaring—and the threat of climate change looming—even that much construction will not greatly increase nuclear’s share of the global electricity supply. Small reactors could help, Lester says. “The point is to scale up low-carbon energy sources rapidly. Nuclear has great potential to do this.” If regulators go along, that is. In the U.S., officials say some designs may win certification within five years. More innovative ones may take longer. —Chris Carroll”

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/big-idea/08/mini-nukes
http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/img/big-idea/mini-nukes-graph-660.jpg

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

March 13th, 2010, 4:38 pm

 

57. Yossi said:

Ghat,

>>> By asking the question are you implying that you are capable of not keeping your data and staying on top of it in your head?

Unfortunately, yes, I am very capable of NOT staying on top of the relevant data, at least in this field of interest 🙂

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

March 13th, 2010, 5:27 pm

 

58. Yossi said:

Amir,

I was not ironic at all in my post to Ghat. You need to start looking at what he brings more carefully rather than dismiss it off hand as anti-Jewish or whatever (how convenient).

About Cyprus. The case of the Orams is very interesting and relevant to Palestine/Israel, but it’s a lot of mess, and the EU human rights court is in conflict with the British courts. At any rate the EU rights court didn’t say that the Greek lost their rights, but they should pursue it with Turkish courts first.

Israel is not a member of the EU so the legal picture is different. Still, I’m sure this case is an inspiration to Palestinians on what they could do to either get their rights in their previous homes or just harass the current residents. For example, suppose you’re an Israeli with dual British citizenship living in a settlement built on private Palestinian land int the West Bank. The Palestinians may be encouraged by the Oram case to bring a case in front of the British court asking them to declare that the British citizen has broken either British or international law.

It will probably not stick, but it will draw attention to the role Western nationals are partaking in the illegal settlement enterprise.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

March 13th, 2010, 5:38 pm

 

59. Ghat Albird said:

YOSSI said:

Unfortunately, yes, I am very capable of NOT staying on top of the relevant data, at least in this field of interest

THEN YOU REALLY ARE NOT ” always learning something new from my data.” .And you say you are incapable of staying on top of the relevant data, at least in this field of interest.

A condition such as yours would at the very least merit consideration/treatment by a health professional. Take care of yourself, you hear.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

March 13th, 2010, 5:55 pm

 

60. Nicolas92200 said:

On the nuclear debate, for info, there was a recent dedicated conference in Tunisia attended by Arab the nuclear power authorities, and all outlined their plans for developing nuclear power generation. Only Syria clearly stated that it is NOT pursing this option; very rightly and realistically so.

Syria is focusing on developing the conventional fuel-based and renewable (wind) IPPs; which is the right move, and a move that still has a lot of way to run. The nuclear option is still far from tested in the region, and the most advanced project (the Abu Dhabi project) is still in its infancy, despite the large amount of work already carried out and the press releases, it still is not a sealed deal (let along the other announcements made by the other less wealthy countries in the region). Such projects require years of groundwork preparation on the legal, political and technical angles, let alone the financing to come in support.

I had noted in an earlier post, that there was talk in the market about Syria potentially joining the project in Jordan (2nd “more serious” approach in the region) and obtaining a share of the power outcome via a cross-country cable against Syria investing equity and providing the much needed water requirements for a nuclear project that Jordan does not have (not sure Syria does either but still…). This looks theoretically more realistic, despite the massive political uphill drive to get this through. Ideally, it would look good as part of peace incentive package with the world power’s backing.

The only other option would be for Iran to pass on the nuclear technology to Syria; if it were to happen, then that would be just folly as it would just drive the Syria into a position of confrontation with the entire world (maybe unjustified but this would be the case).

Luckily, there seems to be a good level of common sense within the circles running the power generation projects in Syria and they seem intent on focusing on realistic targets rather than fancy unrealistic schemes.

I do not see where in Mekdad’s statement he says that Syria wants to develop nuclear power.
Josh, frankly, I would rewrite the first phrase in your opening right before the article.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

March 13th, 2010, 5:55 pm

 

61. Nicolas92200 said:

For the sake of clarity:

1-I think nuclear power generation is the right way forward t orespond to the growing energy requirements globally. I do not agree with Elie’s assessment. It remainds me a bit of airlines, they are actually the safest form of travel, yet when an incident occurs it get all the media attention and everyone forgets the real record.

2-My point about the nuclear power projects being fantasy in the arab world is not in any way because I think arabs are not capable of running these at high standards; it’s more related to the massive legal, admin and financing structuring required, and which may not be achievable in all the arab states given important economic and political differences.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

March 13th, 2010, 6:12 pm

 

62. Off the Wall said:

Dear Elie

This is long, and I apologize for that.

Your argument against nuclear energy can be broken into two key objections (1) nuclear energy is not 100% safe, nor it will ever be and (2) Arab countries do not have the technological and scientific critical mass to deal with the “inevitable” nuclear accident, and therefore they should forgo any attempt to acquire nuclear energy.

I have no basis to argue against point 1, which is absolutely true, all I can say is that we differ on this point, but I think that the differences are not ideological as much as they are related to the distinction between fear and dread. Many diseases kill, perhaps as high as cancer, but cancer is dreaded because until recently, it has a 100% fatality associated with it, and dread is far stronger than fear. Similarly, the risk, in terms of constant exposure to pollution from thermal power stations, is very high, and we have residents of the mountain villages near Coastal Banyas, who are stuck between a refinery and a thermal power station to attest to the type of problems associated with fossil fuel energy. Over the long run, the damage of thermal power may be similar to that from a small nuclear reactor accident, but we tend to accept it and still dread the possibility of a nuclear accident, which is much less probable. I can not argue against dread, nor would I try to. In fact, i get the “look” from many of my liberal friends who see my strong support of nuclear energy as betrayal. But dread is a well established concept in political science, especially in public health policy studies and there is nothing wrong in dreading.

I am afraid that I can not as easily accept point 2. To me it sounds like saying, if you do not have technology, you should not get technology until you have technology. The inability of KSA or Syria to deal with flood waters is shared by every country on earth. Just recently floods killed tens of people in France and in fact over the past decade, the number of flood fatalities in Europe has risen in comparison to previous decades, despite of all the fabulous infrastructure, excellent weather prediction models, and sophisticated flood forecasting systems.

The role of climate change in enhancing extreme events is being studied and evidences are beginning to mount on that topic. So what really happened. As you said, any mechanical system is bound to fail although failure rate can be cut significantly by strict design standards, as well as by strict adherence to operating procedures. All large civil infrastructures, especially flood protection systems are designed to convey flood waters for an event of certain recurrence period or frequency (probabilistic construct). And the decision on what frequency one can tolerate is strictly financial in terms of cost/risk analysis. In the US, most urban flood drainage facilities are constructed to withstand the 100 years flood, and we use, day in day out, complex statistical analysis of historical observations (although continue to be insufficient), hydrological models, and hydraulic models to attempt to identify two numbers, which are how accurate the magnitude of that event is, and how high would the water be at position x if that event is to occur. Climate change throws all of our previous calculations aside. If precipitation patterns change that design number changes, and there is a possibility that what was a 100 years event, is no more than a 70 years event now. From public perspective, the notion of 100 years event can be greatly misunderstood, many think that being a 100 year event means that the event will not occur until a 100 years from now, in reality however, all what is being said is that the event has a 1% probability of occurring in any given year. A simple back of the envelop calculation (i mean spreadsheet calculation) will reveal that if you live near the 100 years flood-plains, you have a more than 37% probability of having your house flooded at least once during the life-time of a standard 30 years mortgage. Please note in most cases we have much shorter record than a 100 years, and as such any calculation of the magnitude of the 100 or better yet the 500 years flood (required for major structures), is nothing more than a very sophisticated extrapolation rife with uncertainties associated with any extrapolation, and better yet, with any probabilistic analysis, risk assessment being one of them.

I bring this to say that, while I severely fault both the Syrian and Saudi governments for the inadequacy of flood drainage system in the case of Aleppo’s recent flood, and for the utter negligence and complete absence of any facilities in Jedda. At the same time, I would argue that even the most advanced countries on earth are still incapable of bringing 100% safety to their citizens. All they can do is to designate an un-acceptable risk level, and move to protect infrastructures and people from any level higher than that (more frequent events such as the 5,10, 50 … up to 100 years return period), in the case of flood. This is a reality civil engineers live with every day as they design and build drainage capacity for flood control structures. And without these realities, no dam would have ever been built, nor a bridge and no one would have built anything within 20 miles of any major river, or within 2-4 miles of minor ones. But people continue to do so. What you are saying is that with respect to nuclear energy, the only acceptable risk is 0 risk. Now that is a personal dread factor, and the lack of existing technologies should not be used to explain it.

In our modern world, technologies are acquired, and In fact, it can be argued that developing countries who are managing to get out of scientific stagnation can primarily thank their nuclear programs for developing precisely the type of critical mass of science required to operate and manage both their legal and clandestine nuclear facilities. Since the establishment of Iran’s nuclear program, there has been a major (and I am serious in saying major) qualitative and quantitative advancements in Iranian Universities. Nuclear studies are prestigious, they require the development of advanced courses and laboratories in physics and chemistry not to mention high quality study programs in metallurgy, energy, electronics, system engineering, and the list goes on. By the time you get the 1000 or so qualified engineers required to build the program, the process would have resulted in training 100 times as many competent engineers and scientists from elite universities. A university is a living being, and once it acquires an elite status with respect to one or two programs, it strives to extend that status to many others. Excellent mathematics professors start teaching in engineering, you start developing interdisciplinary programs, and the bunch of elite students in elite programs interact with those from others, and by result the intellectual standards of the entire university rise. This is why people continue to pay to bankruptcy to send their kids to MIT, famous for engineering, event if the kid wants to study another non-engineering field. From my own experience I can say that Iran has developed at least 5 elite, national universities, primarily because of its nuclear energy program.

That my friend requires dedicated leadership, and whether I agree with the Mullah’s politics or indoctrination, I would say that they managed to build institutions of higher learning that will train and educated the generations of those who will, and may have already, build Iran scientifically and technologically.

Israel’s nuclear program can also be credited with much of the advancements and positioning of Technion as one of the leading institutes of learning in the world. Scientists who worked in Dimona, had affiliation with Technion as well as with the University of Haifa and with the Hebrew University of Jerusalem-Alquds. They taught engineers who later became the founders and designers in outstanding high tech firms and industry. The sad thing is that in both cases, the two nuclear programs were not civilian and peaceful. One must however reckon with the un-intended consequences.

With the exception of medicine, science seldom advances for altruistic reasons. This is a sad reality, but it is a reality nonetheless.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

March 13th, 2010, 6:14 pm

 

63. jad said:

OTW,
Very convincing argument, on both points that Elie represent, however, I do agree with Elie on both of them.
In case of Syria; corruption, mismanagement and the inability to understand codes. write codes and work with them is our main obstacle along our ‘unique’ way of thinking, so a nuclear plan would be a ‘dread’ disaster if you ask me.
We still have Homs refinery ‘pollution factory’ killing thousands and poisoning everything around it, Tartous cement factory the infamous environmental disaster, the water treatment system that didn’t work in Damascus, polluting water and soil without any clear rules or even cases against those who do that, the using of sewage for watering plants and destroying the soil, unstable damns, under construction building in a prime location still struggling to be finish for 30 years….(where do you want me to stop?)…do you trust putting such dangerous technology in the hands of any person with such lovely history of endless ‘incidents’? it will be ABOU AHMAD Simpsons.

I totaly agree with you about the Iranina universities and students, they are doing outstanding work and I envy them. Iranians are working on their universities and their education, they know what they want, our government doesn’t know and doesn’t want to invest in a sustainable and bright future, they only care about keeping Syrian living in the 60s maybe 70s of the last century and never ever to go forward.

No nuclear for you Abou Ahmad, for your own safety, Sorry buddy 😉

I just remember, all our opinions doesn’t count, only Al Ulamaa can tell us, I’m wondering what is their opinion on Nuclear power, is it Halal or Haram? 🙂

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

March 13th, 2010, 7:03 pm

 

64. Alex said:

Nour and Norman,

You know how hard line I am in general, I do not believe Syria needs to compromise on anything, Syria’s vision for a solution to the conflict is perfect as is… legitimate, wise and fair to everyone.

But I disagree with both of you … we need to be more creative in communicating, … that does not mean we will compromise our national rights in anyway.

Granting an interview to Zvi Bar’el or Akiva Eldar would not imply an early recognition of Israel … we already talked to borderline Israeli journalists, like CNN’s Wolf Blitzer

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

March 13th, 2010, 7:13 pm

 

65. Yossi said:

Ghat,

Thanks for the advice. You know what they say: self-awareness to ones condition is always the first step towards rehabilitation.

🙂

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

March 13th, 2010, 7:16 pm

 

66. Shai said:

Alex, Norman, Nour,

I’m sorry to be the only “court idiot” here, but you guys are debating whether an interview by a respectable Israeli journalist is considered “recognition of Israel”, while your own leadership decided long ago that meeting face-to-face with the Prime Minister of Israel (Ehud Barak), twice, isn’t a problem.

And, unlike your buddy Nejjad, your own leaders have long ago stopped referring to Israel as the “Zionist Entity”, and actually do call us by our name. I don’t think a “recognition” is any longer a relevant matter.

Again, I refer us all to two other bitter-enemies (no less than Israel and Syria), called India and Pakistan. And though they have yet to make Peace, both have established various forms of communication, including (and especially) ones between their people. There are cultural exchanges, interviews, etc.

I think we can and should learn from them.

(Alex, btw, I’m not at all sure that there is a “Peace Camp” in Israel at the moment. If there is, it is deep in winter hibernation.)

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

March 13th, 2010, 8:41 pm

 

67. Off the Wall said:

Dear Jad
You are absolutely right, and I have no option but to agree with you as well as with Elie on the need for education and above all commitment to the welfare of the nation and of its people. This is why I said that such program requires dedicated leadership, which I am afraid is not as demonstrable in Syria’s case at various levels.

Abu Ahmad Simpson is a scary concept, or better yet “dreadful”. But you know, I keep asking, can a man dream? Homer does that, even at work, at least I am dreaming from the leisure of my home, not in front of the control panel of a reactor 🙂 at least not yet !!!

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

March 13th, 2010, 8:52 pm

 

68. norman said:

Shai,
CC , Alex, Nour ,

You are making our case , and what did that get Syria, NOTHING , Syria has to find another way ,and Israel should help that before Syria does ,

What did communications get Pakistan and India , are they at peace , NO

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

March 13th, 2010, 8:54 pm

 

69. Shai said:

Norman,

Perhaps one of the reasons India and Pakistan haven’t blasted each other to Heaven already with their nuclear weapons, is precisely because of communication! There is hope in those two countries, and I want to give that to my people, by opening up their eyes. Hatred and suspicion are created and nurtured through ignorance (and self-interested politicians…) We need the counter-weight.

Otherwise we are truly at the mercy of corrupt politicians, and possibly heading towards war.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

March 13th, 2010, 9:15 pm

 

70. Alex said:

Shai

I said “early” recognition… the proper “official recognition” is one of the main things that Syria will give back in exchange for Israel’s decision to return the Golan Heights to Syria.

Just like in Israel you know that you have to return the Golan and the other 1967 Arab occupied territories, we in Syria know that we have to recognize Israel

But it takes place simultaneously.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

March 13th, 2010, 9:20 pm

 

71. Ghat Albird said:

An op. about the Biden visit to the ME and the subsequent rebuffs by Bibi and friends.

The main obvious cause is due to reports that suggest that top U.S. commanders in the Persian Gulf are in favor of dialoguing with Tehran. US. Adm. Mullen is on record supporting military-to-military dialogue. Neither the U.S. nor Iran can afford to allow an avoidable incident at sea to spin out of control or overlook the socalled “mad dog in the region” ( a reference first made by an Israeli General that Israel should project a mad dog image) to put fear in potential rivals.

Since the US will not attack Iran as the neocon/likudniks demand then Israel will not bow to US pressures to any kind of peace deliberations with neither the Palestenians, Syrians or any one else for that matter.

The one fly in the ointment as far as israel is concerned what would happen if the decision is made by individuals who carry multiple passsports to get rid of the “mad dog in the region”.

With such a probable scenario in the making and for the foreseeable future all those parties that feel it necessary to pursue their peaceful objectives must not address or contact any Israel officials.

Their attitude should be “been there and done that too many times”.

Leaning in support of NORMAN comments/suggestions above.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

March 13th, 2010, 9:28 pm

 

72. Off the Wall said:

AP
None of these pro-Israeli Christians is going to pack Semtex into suicide vests, sneak onto a commercial airliner with explosive underwear

may be not yet, but they have been sending cash to zealot settlers to buy Semtex and Uzies and blow Arab trees and homes or cement to plug a freshwater spring under protection from the IDF, terrorism is terrorism whether practiced by Aaron and his gang, or by Ahmad and his vest.

And before you ask for a link, HERE IT IS

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

March 13th, 2010, 10:20 pm

 

73. Nour said:

Alex,

“Israel” is an illegitimate entity by its very nature. It is founded on the usurpation of our land and the killing, disposession, and ethnic cleansing of our people. It is an inherently racist, cancerous entity that no self-respecting nation would recognize on its own land. How many nations do you know that would be perfectly fine with a group of people taking their land, forcefully evicting its people, and building in their stead a racially/ethnically exclusive entity. Therefore, we, as a living, vibrant nation, should never surrender our natural, inalienable national right to live freely on every inch of our territory. Otherwise, we would set a precedent that we recognize the right of foreign groups to occupy our land and disposess our people.

As for Wolf Blitzer, while he may very well be an “Israeli” for all practical purposes, accepting an interview with him is done so within his capacity as a reporter for an American institution, not an “Israeli” one. And thus talking to him does not amount to a recognition of anyone’s right to replace our people on our land and become citizens of their own exclusive entity there. On the other hand, receiving “Israeli” journalists or reporters working for “Israeli” media outlets does amount to such recognition because it gives credibility to news sources working as institutions that are part of the usurping entity. And our goal should always be the liberation of every single inch of our territory and the refusal to recognize the right of anyone to violate our national rights.

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

March 13th, 2010, 10:23 pm

 

74. norman said:

Alex, I like your suggestion and if Israel agrees , Syria will help Israel solve it’s Palestinian problem , ,

Shai,

Two things ,
one , Israel should change from being a Jewish state to a Hebrew state which will give Israel the color of non religious state ,and will make it easier for the Palestinians to become Israeli,

Second , you always talk about the Israeli public knowing the Arabs and the Syrians and their thoughts , you do not have to go far , just look at your Palestinian Arab neighbors and treat them well , let their kids go to as good schools as the other Israeli , let them live anywhere they want as Jews living in the US , with the treatment that you treat the Palestinians it is hard to believe that they would want to be Israeli ,Treat them well in the West Bank, Gaza , and in Israel then be concern if they do not treat you the same ,

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

March 13th, 2010, 10:35 pm

 

75. Shai said:

Driving Drunk in Jerusalem

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/14/opinion/14friedman.html

We said before that the Palestinians could not have hoped for a better Israeli Foreign Minister than Lieberman. Now they’ve got the best Israeli Prime Minister. Netanyahu is, so far, making every mistake possible. It’s only a question of time before Obama-Clinton make Bush-Baker seem like kids’ play.

At this rate, Peres will have to again reside himself in some French Ministry in Paris, as he did in the late 50’s/early 60’s, hoping France would take us under its wing. Even Jewish Congressmen are already getting tired of these games. We keep this up, and the U.S. will remind Israel that it is about the size of… New Jersey. Not China!

Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

March 14th, 2010, 2:28 pm

 

Pages: « 1 [2] Show All

Post a comment