Olmert Recognizes PA Flag

Good grief, lightning may strike this guy.
Or maybe a curse.
http://www.somethingjewish.co.uk/articles/1543_sharon_s_kabbalistic.htm

So, now we know that Iran and Shiism have emerged as a real threat in the Middle East. A picture's worth a thousand words.

Olmert's supporters constitute about 20% of the population. He is trying desperately to stay in power. It does not matter how. He is a disgrace. Can a country call itself a democracy when, on major decisions of war and peace, the person running that country, and behaving as if he had a mandate, possesses the support for the decisions he does take of only 20% of the population?

No, of course not.

And the same thing goes for George Bush. Only 17% of the American population supports the "surge" of more troops. If he decides to do this, he will be acting as an autocrat ignoring the wishes of 4/5 of the people in what is supposed to be a democracy. And the same goes for the continued squandering of men, money, materiel, military and civilian morale, all in this crazed campaign to bring "freedom" to the "ordinary moms and dads throughout the Middle East."

Quaere: Do we possess a democracy, or do we not?

"Many in Israel and abroad were surprised when the flags of the State of Israel and the Palestinian Authority flew side-by-side for the first time, at the official Prime Minister’s Residence."

Well, that will solve all their problems, I'm sure. Why didn't anyone discover this solution sooner?

Carolyn2

Re: http://www.somethingjewish.co.uk/articles/1543_sharon_s_kabbalistic.htm

You could change these "rabbis" religion to Islam, change their yarmulkas into turbans, their Torah into the Koran, and these Pharisees wouldn't even notice the difference.

Hope you get my drift.

Ynkedoodl2
Yes, Ynkedoodl2. I do.
But this curse business seems to work, at least on Israeli leaders. Looks like these guys should concentrate on "President Tom"...think?

Hugh, that's a pretty strange notion of democracy you have there. Leaders are elected to make decisions, not to follow opinion polls.

Nevertheless, Olmert's decision was hopelessly wrong. And we are talking about the flag with the semi-automatic held up in the celebration of violence?

"Hugh, that's a pretty strange notion of democracy you have there. Leaders are elected to make decisions, not to follow opinion polls."
-- from a posting above

No it isn't.

For two reasons.

The first is the nature of the subject matter about which "decisions" are being made. Clearly those who voted in Congress to support the war, and those outside who supported the invasion of Iraq and the deposing of Saddam Hussein. I did, for example, for two reasons. First, I had available only the kind of information that we were all supplied with, and the allusion to other, secret information about weaopns projects that, to this day, one does not know if it was false or true or somewhere in between. But it was neither irrational nor legitimate to deprive Saddam Hussein of possession of weaponry, or of the ability to produce or acquire such weaponry, and for that his regime had to be ended and the country scoured. Secondly, the removal of Saddam Hussein, I thought, would inevitably lead to a change in who held power in Iraq. For only with his methods could the Sunni Arabs, constituting less than 20% of the population, conceivably hold power. Exactly how slow or fast poweer would be taken by the Shi'a, and whether they would do it by force or, as it turned out, through that purple-thumbed election Bush thinks demonstrates some kind of commitment by "Iraqis" to "democracy" (he still has no idea how primitive these people, that society, that country, is -- perhaps some of the returning officers and men can begin to enlighten, if not Bush, then other political figures) was uncelar, but it didn't matter. The removal of Saddam Hussein made an end to Sunni dominance inevitable. And the aggression and violence and inablity to compromise that are natural emanations of the texts and tenets and attitudes of Islam, did not disappoint, and will prevent any "solution" involving a single Iraq from ever being arrived at peacefully.

When a "leadership-role" leader such as Bush makes miscalculation after miscalculation, when he flounders, when he continues in obstinate Captain-Queeg fashion to keep uttering the same increasingly irrelevant and idiotic phrases (such as that about the "ordinary moms and dads in the Middle East" which demonstrates he has no understanding of Islam and its teachings, and its effects on stifling the minds and shrivelling the hearts of its adherents), then he has lost the moral right to make decisions involving matters of life and death.

And the gigantic sums of money being squandered in Iraq (google "planned American embassy in Baghdad" and see what you find out about that $595 million dollar project, as emblematic of all the crazed plans and dreams and schemes and squanderings) now amount, in past, present, and committed future costs, about $500 billion dollars. That includes the lifetime support for nearly 25,000 wounded, and the replacement of desert-degraded tanks, helicoopters, planes, and other military equipment, and other costs as yet unappreciated except by a few economists such as Joseph Stiglitz (whose own figure, $2 trillion, assumes that the Americans stay for another six years, but it is clear that the 2008 election will be decided on the basis of one thing: Iraq. And that candidate will win who promises to withdraw the American forces promptly. Whether that candidate does so for the right reasons -- in order to better and much more effectively fight the world-wide Jihad, and especially to exploit the natural fissures (ethnic, sectarian, economic) within the Camp of Islam, and reunites the United States with the imperilled countriews of Western Europe, threatened by Da'wa and demographic conquest and incipient dhimmitude, or whether, alas, the successful candidate is one who wishes to remove the troops and to accompany that removal with a policy of full-blow, uncomprehending-of-Islam appeasement, is a matter that may be decided by how long Bush will obstinately cling to this failed policy, and if he is incapable of understanding Islam,then he should do little, tread water, and wait for others who do know or are willing to find out.

Hugh,
Actually we are not a democracy, never have been and never will be. What we are is a constitutional republic...

Article 4 Section 4 of the US Constitution states: The United States shall guarantee to every State in the Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.

A republican form of government refers to government by representatives. We are often referred to as a democratic republic because we elect representatives though a democratic process. In a true democracy, they are no representatives, every action of government is voted on by the people.

Thomas Jefferson said "A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine."

Olmert has got to be the worst PM the country has ever had. He was overwhelmingly elected, when people already knew what he was all about.
And yet, after all the damage he has caused, they let him get away with it, and still hasn't been thrown out of office.

Now, what does that say about the people of Israel? They have no one to blame but themselves for the sitution they are in, since they have apparently lost the will to live.
Israel is losing my respect day after day after day.
They are a sorry bunch and might as well pack up their stuff and leave, so the rest of us can focus on more important stuff than helping someone with a death wish.

On another thread I said Israel might last ten more years.

I am going to revise that figure w-a-y down. If they are lucky,,,maybe 18 months to 2 years. Maybe even less.

Bad enough being surrounded by murderous multitudes they have a quisling/ collaborator/ moron as Prime minister.

Ben-Gurion,Golda Meir and Moshe Dayan must be turning in their graves!

Israel will go. And no one will say or do anything about it. Why should they? (sarcasm off)

Their only option is nukes and then the whole world will come down on them. Talk about a rock and a hard place!

Why the hell is it that, at the very time of the worst crisis the civilised world has faced since 1939, the quality of virtually all of our politicians is lower than it has ever been before?

Chaimberlain and his gang were positively far-sighted compared to this lot.

Will Ehud throw a Islamofest on Eid? Put a Koran in the Prime Ministerial Library?

Now that the Jews are starting to dabble in Dhimmitude, they'll find that they can learn a lot from the White House and State Department.

Quaere: Do we possess a democracy, or do we not?

No. We're a post-democratic republic, where the people sit as an advisory commission to the ruling elites comprising the media, academia, permanent government, and international financial interests.

For example, the Marxists and Capitalists are in full accord that we shall have no southern border while 85% of the citizens disagree. Guess what's gonna happen this legislative session.

The American two party system is two wings of the same party representing the interests of 5% of the people.
--- Gore Vidal

It's dangerous to quote Gore Vidal on anything. He's a menace. He thinks of himself as the embodiment of an older, purer, better America. He's not. That's merely his schtick. He's a poor historian, a sensationalist. His viciousness about the so-called "yellow peril" (something he would prefer that we not remember) and his Buchanan-like viciousness about Israel, are both telling. Please attack the defenders and promoters of privilege all you want, and with that, the skewed distribution of wealth that is now getting to almost everyone. But don't offer Gore Vidal on anything.

After all, even Chomsky must be right about one or two things, but one should make it a rule never to quote Chomsky, unless such words as "morpheme," "phoneme," and "suprasegmental features" are in the excerpt quoted.

Are we a democracy or what?

We have become a very pure democracy. The Founders established a system where to qualify to vote, you had to own property, free of liens. Impure democracy was introduced when Kentucky became a state. Its been getting cleaner ever since.

If we lived in the democracy that was established in 1776, this conflict would have been over sometime in early 2002. Talk to Plato and Aristotle about what comes next.

Quaere: Do we possess a democracy, or do we not?

Posted by: Hugh at December 29, 2006 05:05 PM

Hugh,

Don't expect you to follow my posts but if you do glance at some, I have repeated, like a broken record, that dubya is a corrupt, sellout coward selling USofA to the wahhabbis on every turn, from Arbusto to 9/11 to increased visas to Saudi students. Unfortunate as it is, he holds untold power which he is using to destroy USofA. Needless to add his administration (Condi etc...) are toeing his line... throwing Iftaar dinners and dishing out 'sensitive training' to FBI.. all thanks to the corrupt and timid sellout in the White House. Repeating the saying.. Fish begins rotting in the head. In our system of government, the president who is ALSO commander-in-chief, is selling out America's present and future. So to answer your question, the answert is NO! but that does not even begin to describe the problem USofA has with the president/commander-in-chief/leader of the 'free world'.

A good question, none-the-less.....

Thomas Jefferson said "A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine."

Posted by: NeverSubmit at December 29, 2006 05:38 PM

That is quite a deep and a reveling eye-opener, NeverSubmit. Come to think of it, dubya got elected to he white house by exactly the same 'mob rule'which, he clearly exploited. Thanks for this deep and reveling eve-opener, which, if one really thinks about, has a deep and a profound impact on the present and future o USofA.

Thanks again.

So what's new ... dubya's an idiot on history and continues to commit blunder after blunder.

The world is facing the worst crisis since the the 1930's.

And western leadership is at an all-time low.

Is there light at the end of the tunnel?

A majority of fed-up Americans would like to rally around something to preserve our Judeo-Christian freedoms.

The light at the end of the tunnel is either the use of WMDs or a breakdown of the social welfare net. This is an interesting article about Plato’s view of Government:

Plato considered five possible types of government in the Republic: Rule by the lovers of wisdom, rule by the lovers of honor (something like a military aristocracy), rule by the rich (oligarchy), rule by the many (democracy), and rule by a single tyrant. He valued them in this descending order, rule by a council of philosophers being the best, and rule by a single dictator the worst.

We’ve slid from a nice balance between oligarchy and democracy to relatively pure democracy. Unfortunately, there is only one historical way to recover from pure democracy, and that is moving down the scale. Hopefully we can do better this time.

http://faculty.frostburg.edu/phil/forum/PlatoRep.htm

Hmmm... even during the 1930s, governments did not get this stupid.

Can you imagine...

1938 and FDR is flying a Nazi flag underneath the American one?

Wow... scary.

Unbelievable to read this. I really thought it must be a "joke post".

I remember the shock I felt when Rabin was assassinated by a Jewish Israeli. I would NOT be shocked this time, should Olmert meet the same fate.