Posted on 08/21/2004 9:54:50 AM PDT by Happygal
Yasser Arafat was reported on Thursday as having issued 'an unprecedented mea culpa admitting that he had made mistakes and promising to rectify them'.
In a speech to the Palestinian parliament, which has been increasingly critical of him and his aides, Mr Arafat conceded that his leadership has not been blameless.
'There were wrong actions, by some institutions and some [officials] were irresponsible and misused their positions,' he said. 'There is nobody immune from mistakes, starting from me on down.'
'Starting from me on down' - We can accept the complete sincerity of at least that part of Mr Arafat's declaration. And we can also accept that Mr Arafat now feels under pressure from his own party, and that he is feeling a bit insecure in his own leadership, though not at present directly threatened.
There are, however, some direct threats to the present EU leadership in Europe, which has up to now, been highly critical of Israel and has often favoured Arafat.
Rosemary Righter, probably the best-informed and most objective observer of Middle Eastern affairs, published an article on Thursday under the rather startling but accurate headline: 'Big two sidelined as new Europe deposes old'.
Rosemary's article opens with a metaphor, again rather startling, but again, fundamentally accurate. She writes: 'The king lies there like a beached whale, but he is not yet dead, nor will he die for another ten dreary weeks. His ministers are still formally in office, lingering until November 1 like ghosts, in a machine just ticking over.' She is speaking of course of Romano Prodi, whose successor as President of the European Commission has not only already been crowned, he is already shaping the character of his own reign.
As Rosemary crisply and accurately writes: 'France and Germany have had things their way for over fifty years, setting the agenda and embedding in EU thinking a "social model" that combined France's dirigiste tradition with Germany's welfare-padded consensual brand of "Rhineland capitalism". With enlargement, they can no longer expect to dominate EU decisions.'
Of the new team taking over, Rosemary singles out Noelie Kroes, whom Rosemary describes as "a redoubtable Dutch entrepreneur" and our own Charlie McCreevy.
Ms Kroes has sat on the boards of dozens of multinationals. Rosemary says Ms Kroes has 'zero hang-ups' about what the French call 'capitalisme sauvage' and having privatised the Dutch postal and telephone services at home can be expected to be dry-eyed at pleas for the preservation of similar monopolies'.
Rosemary expects - I am sure rightly - that the reforming Noelie Kroes will find an ally in our own Charlie McCreevy. My readers will be interested in what Rosemary has to say about Charlie, which runs as follows. 'In creating a genuinely open market [Noelie] will have a powerful ally in former Finance Minister [of Ireland] Charlie McCreevy, whose tax-cuts and supply-side reforms made Ireland the success story that most inspires "New Europe"'.
These momentous changes are obviously focused on Europe, but they will also have a significant reverberation throughout the world, especially in the United States. In the Presidential election campaign, the Bush camp will, I think, have the sense not to gloat publicly over the results of European elections, but the American Campaign to Re-elect the President will nonetheless have learned of these European developments with sober satisfaction, especially in that they constitute a check to French inclinations and ambitions.
Many French politicians - probably most of them indeed - have a visceral detestation of American leadership, as having replaced the rightful predominance of France in the world.
The obvious target for French resentment is the President of the United States unless, like President Clinton, he goes out of his way to butter up the French incumbent.
President Bush, having failed to win French support for his Middle Eastern policies, made no such efforts, and Franco-American relations have hardly ever been worse than they have been in the days of the ascendancy of Jacques Chirac.
John Kerry, especially in the early days of his Presidential campaign, courted Chirac and Chirac responded favourably to the courtship of Bush's challenger. But by now Chirac's attitudes matter very little, internationally speaking.
The new European members, having been alternatively patronised and snubbed by Chirac, feel they owe him nothing, and are happy enough to rally to the American President; no doubt largely in the hope of favours to come.
In the American Presidential contest, present polls show the candidates running about even, and of course a very serious setback in Iraq could at any moment lead to a victory for the Democratic candidate. Failing such a setback - which I think on the whole quite unlikely - the stage seems set for a second term for President Bush.
Two scheduled events, within the next two weeks are likely to favour the President. The first set of events is the three televised debates between the Presidential candidates to which Senator Kerry - as I think, unwisely - challenged the President, and to which the President agreed, with a promptness that may well have dismayed the more prudent of the Democrats.
Almost all the advantages here seem to lie with the President's camp. He is surrounded by experienced advisers, themselves surrounded by scores of experienced and well-informed experts. These are certainly already working on perceived weaknesses in Kerry's position and ready to discharge their batteries at the moment when they seem likely to do the most damage.
Kerry, for his part, has no corresponding assets.
The second Republican asset is the coming Republican National Convention. Traditionally Republicans are more disciplined, in their public behaviour, than Democrats. I would expect the Republican Convention to display a massive show of unity, with even Republicans who have in the past shown themselves to be a bit fractious, joining in prominently.
By the end of the Convention I would expect the Republicans to be looking like winners, and that usually creates a band-wagon effect. There are also Republican assets, which have hitherto been only partially unveiled. One of these is the Jewish vote: pivotal in four States: New York, Massachusetts, Illinois and California - and significant in a great number of others. Normally, with a definite, though not great, advantage for the Democrats.
But I don't think that will be the case this time round. Candidate Kerry in early speeches has spoken of 'holding the balance even' between Jews and Arabs, and his speeches went down quite well with Arafat and his followers. But for that very reason these speeches did not go down well with American Jews.
In consistently keeping Arafat at arms length, while having his door always open to the Jewish leaders, Bush, while saying very little on the subject in public, has, I believe, made sure of most of the Jewish vote. And I think that support, with other factors, will guarantee Bush a second term as President of the United States.
I just hope that in Dubya's second term, he'll give the Israeli's more room to take care of business over there. Leveling Tehran would be a good start. IMHO.....
Palestinians 'made millions' selling cheap cement for barrier they bitterly oppose
Telegraph UK ^ | Jul 26, 2004 | Inigo Gilmore
Posted on 07/27/2004 11:00:12 AM PDT by SunkenCiv
A damning report by Palestinian legislators, which has been seen by the Telegraph, concludes that Mr Arafat did nothing to stop the deals although he publicly condemned the structure as a "crime against humanity"... The report reveals that the cement originally came from Egyptian companies which supplied it at a huge discount of $22 (£12.50) a ton to help rebuild dilapidated Palestinian houses or buildings bulldozed by the Israelis. Between September 2003 and March this year, 420,000 tons of cement were allegedly sent to three big Palestinian companies. According to the report, however, only 33,000 tons were sold in the Palestinian market. The vast bulk was transported to Israel on trucks owned by the three firms. According to Mr Khreishe, the cement was then sold with a mark-up of at least $15 a ton - and possibly as high as $100 - making profits of well over $6 million (£3.4 million) for company executives.
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
The Israel Swing Factor[T]he greatest political strength of American Jewry lies in the fact that it is a uniquely swayable bloc . The issue of support for Israel has proven capable of spurring a sizable portion of Jews to switch parties - in large enough numbers to tip the scales in national or statewide elections. Moreover, the "Israel swing vote" is especially open to political courtship because, unlike the interests of other minority groups, support for Israel has long been compatible with traditional Republican and Democratic agendas. By contrast, most other issues (abortion, affirmative action, etc.) cannot be embraced by Republicans or Democrats without alienating certain support bases. A pro-Israel stance runs no such risk. On the other hand, being distinctively unsupportive of Israel can significantly hurt a candidate's chances.
by Jeffrey S. Helmreich
15 January 2001
| Year | Candidate | % of Jewish Vote |
| 1916 | ||
| Hughes (R) | 45 | |
| Wilson (D) | 55 | |
| 1920 | ||
| Harding (R) | 43 | |
| Cox (D) | 19 | |
| Debs (Soc) | 38 | |
| 1924 | ||
| Coolidge (R) | 27 | |
| Davis (D) | 51 | |
| La Folette (Progressive) | 22 | |
| 1928 | ||
| Hoover (R) | 28 | |
| Smith (D) | 72 | |
| 1932 | ||
| Hoover (R) | 18 | |
| Roosevelt (D) | 82 | |
| 1936 | ||
| Landon (R) | 15 | |
| Roosevelt (D) | 85 | |
| 1940 | ||
| Wilkie (R) | 10 | |
| Roosevelt (D) | 90 | |
| 1944 | ||
| Dewey (R) | 10 | |
| Roosevelt (D) | 90 | |
| 1948 | ||
| Dewey (R) | 10 | |
| Truman (D) | 75 | |
| Wallace (Progressive) | 15 | |
| 1952 | ||
| Eisenhower (R) | 36 | |
| Stevenson (D) | 64 | |
| 1956 | ||
| Eisenhower (R) | 40 | |
| Stevenson (D) | 60 | |
| 1960 | ||
| Nixon (R) | 18 | |
| Kennedy (D) | 82 | |
| 1964 | ||
| Goldwater (R) | 10 | |
| Johnson (D) | 90 | |
| 1968 | ||
| Nixon (R) | 17 | |
| Humphrey (D) | 81 | |
| Wallace (I) | 2 | |
| 1972 | ||
| Nixon (R) | 35 | |
| McGovern (D) | 65 | |
| 1976 | ||
| Ford (R) | 27 | |
| Carter (D) | 71 | |
| McCarthy (I) | 2 | |
| 1980 | ||
| Reagan (R) | 39 | |
| Carter (D) | 45 | |
| Anderson (I) | 14 | |
| 1984 | ||
| Reagan (R) | 31 | |
| Mondale (D) | 67 | |
| 1988 | ||
| Bush (R) | 35 | |
| Dukakis (D) | 64 | |
| 1992 | ||
| Bush (R) | 11 | |
| Clinton (D) | 80 | |
| Perot (I) | 9 | |
| 1996 | ||
| Dole (R) | 16 | |
| Clinton (D) | 78 | |
| Perot (I) | 3 | |
| 2000 | ||
| Bush (R) | 19 | |
| Gore (D) | 79 | |
| Nader (G) | 1 |
Franco-American relations have hardly ever been worse than they have been in the days of the ascendancy of Jacques Chirac.Huh, imagine that. Let's see, GWB was sworn in January 2001...
DeGaulle reportedly bemoaned having to try to govern a nation with "265 types of cheese". I'm sure that having a nation that is seriously hungover has nothing to do with it. As do the gov'ts of the Middle East and Germany, the gov't of France has to distract its people from the local bad news, and that means screaming about the US.Jacques Rene ChiracChirac was elected president of France in 1995 but has spent much of his time in office attempting to assuage an angry, disillusioned electorate.
Iraqi News
Do you write for Al Jezeera or just get your news there?
If that's why GWB went to war, I'll not only vote for Kerry but support his impeachment.
Ed Koch: "We also should not forget that President Bush, in my opinion, has been the greatest friend Israel has ever had in the White House. At the U.N. Security Council and in the U.N. General Assembly, allies of the U.S. and others who are indifferent or hostile to our country have conveyed the view that if we end our alliance with Israel, the only democracy in the Middle East, they would welcome back the U.S. into their circle. President Bush has refused to abandon our ally Israel.
In my opinion, the U.S. presidents who have been Israel’s greatest friends are, in order, the current President Bush, Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton. This November, we Americans in the Jewish community should remember our friends. We should thank President Bush for his courage in the war against terrorism and for his strong and consistent support for Israel and democracy. "
Ed Koch: Why Bush Must Be Re-elected
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-gop/1177308/posts
"A new poll commissioned by the National Jewish Democratic Council"
A Democratic Party source, plainly, is not going to willingly spread what is already Old News to we "Jews on the ground" (if you like): namely, that GWB is going to receive (at barest minimum) an unprecedented 35% to 40% of the Jewish vote in '04.
Stay away from the DNC-sponsored Kool-Aid. It has worms'n'stuff in it. :)
They're dreaming.
> Kerry, for his part, has no corresponding assets.
He has the sycophant MSM.
I don't see NY being close to in play either. Hope I'm wrong.
Correct, Jews voting 25% for President Bush would be more support for the GOP than any time in your/my lifetime.
I really don't understand it either, Clinton working with Prime Minister Ehud Barak would have been happy to give away all of Israel to Arafat if it made Clinton look good.
I read that poll too, but am highly skeptical. That poll probably didnt include religious jews, who have done a complete 180. Every religious jew(including myself) i know voted for Gore, and this year, every single one is voting for Bush.
Most jews however are not religious, and the secular jewish vote is not as independent-minded. Israel and Foreign affairs are not particularly important to this group, as they are basically just wealthy urbanites and barely even identify themselves as jewish.
I read that poll too, but am highly skeptical. That poll probably didnt include religious jews, who have done a complete 180. Every religious jew(including myself) i know voted for Gore, and this year, every single one is voting for Bush.
Most jews however are not religious, and the secular jewish vote is not as independent-minded. Israel and Foreign affairs are not particularly important to this group, as they are basically just wealthy urbanites and barely even identify themselves as jewish.
Hmmm, I've read an article recently, which says that most American Jews will vote for Kerry.
Could be, who knows. In a political context, it's fair to note FR's reaction to the Jewish vote. Not exactly outreach.
.......................
Yeah... maybe there IS no good reason... American Jews and American Muslims are both in bed with the Democrats,,, screw 'em both
Jews also overwhelmingly supported Stalin. I guess political stupidity is hardwired into the Jewish mind.
Given the choice between voting Republican and lining up to catch a train for Auschwitz, most American Jews would fight for a place in line for the train so long as Hillary Clinton was punching their tickets. It's the lemming vote.
How could such an educated and responsible group of people be so politically stupid for so long?
Please dont take this as being Anti -Semitic, but if 76% of American jews like Kerry over Bush there are some dumb-assed American jews.
You know something? It will serve them right if something really horrible happens to Israel if Kerry gets elected. Sad to say but sometimes people need a painfull reminder of who their real friends are.
Are Jews more anti-Christian than pro-Israel?
It is as amazing to me that Jews would vote for the party of anti-Semitism as it is that blacks vote the party of racism.
I can't stand how they want their cake and eat it too. Let these groups finally bear the consequences of their actions. We are damned if we do, damned if we don't. If these groups don't have negative consequences put upon them by their choices, then they will continue to support Democrats at no cost to their pork.
Well isn't this a kick in the junk! If they got their wish it would be hard to feel any empathy for the adverse consequenses they would suffer.
They seem determined to aid their own destruction. They seem to enjoy misery as away to exist.
I wonder if they felt the same way about Hitler?
And that racist blacks who hate them [Jews] vote in a democrat block also.
The Jews have been on the wrong side of history ever since the Exodus. So this shouldn't surprise anyone.
Not at all surprising to me. American liberal Jews are suicidal in the extreme. While they do not profess a hatred of Israel their actions tend to be more anti-Israel and anti-Jewish than any "hate" group I can think of. They support Nazi-style gun bans, a Nazi-style police state, Nazi-style propaganda (Jews own or control over 70% of mass media outlets...just a statistical fact folks, not me being a Nazi okay?), and Nazi-style socialism (government 'partnering' with private industry for the 'common good').
The devil has decieved them. They are blinded because of their unbelief.
If Bush Wins in November, then he should abide by the wishes of the Jewish voters and minimize support for Israel and make sure the hard working American tax dollars are completely cutoff from Israel. All aid to Israel should end. It is disgusting the tribe mentality of so many groups. I really have just now changed my view of American taxpayer support of Israel.
There is an extreme hatred/fear of Christians and Christianity among most American Jews that never really becomes obvious until something or someone Christian threatens to bubble up to the mainstream….That much is fact. I'm sure the reasons for it are more complex than I can guess at. It is ironic that if Christianity met the doom that most Jews wish for it that their own doom would swiftly follow.
the majority of Jews believe that in 1920 an organization known as the Muslim Brotherhood which is the original AQ and Arab Nazis was working with Hitler. It became the official policy of the The Third Reich to secretly develop the Muslim Brotherhood as the fifth Parliament, an army inside Egypt. After WWII they moved to Saudi Arabia at which time BinLaden became interested. They also believe the CIA is an arm of this secret society which hates Jews. On top of it all they believe Bush 41 and 43 are also involved and support the Muslim Brotherhood.
A Christianity that is hidden and without influence ( as clearly most American Jews prefer ) is in no position to guard against what the rest of the world desires for the Jews.
what I say is......let them face the consequences..... objectively, the Jews of America are all about money, period, with an occassional indignation for some percieved injustice, just so they can claim some civil right infringement.....
THE ONLY REASON I CAN SEE WHY AMERICAN JEWS VOTE THE WAY THEY DO IS THAT THEY PURSUE MONEY ISSUES ABOVE ALL ELSE....
Documented accounts of Jews who helped Hitler and the Nazis
For some damn reason, the Majority of Jews in this country are leftists, and leftists DESPISE Christianity and since Bush is a Devout Christian, they DESPISE him!!
Politically, as a group, the U.S. Jews are disgusting.
No! And I don't intimidate, either.
Except that 75% of U.S. Jews favor Kerry.
You forgot, conveniently, the subject of my admittedly gritty post. But I stand by what I wrote. Most "groups", Muslim, Buddhist, Christian, Irish, Mexican and lest we forget, the French, are their own worst enemy. I see no reason to exclude American Jews, when they are bent on ignoring their own self interest {*}.
Did Bush fight an ersatz war against Iraq for Israel? I think so. As well as cleaning up the neighborhood that needed a cleaning. No other country, at no other time and no other president had the resources, inclination and the moral duty to do so. Bush did and he took it. Like it or not!
So, you go ahead and vote for "Lord Jim" Kerry and impeach Bush. But there will be no "shalom" in the near or far future. For the West or the Middle East.
Wow, it's hard to believe, yet, some of these quotes make sense.
Adolf Hitler could not put it better.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.