Some People Are UNBELIEVABLE!!!!!

I cannot help myself! I have to write about the reaction of some insane people to an incident that occurred a couple of days ago with President Obama.

Many will have seen the articles, or perhaps Facebook video clips, of the President killing a fly during the taping of a CNBC interview that was aired last Wednesday. It was quite funny and he does have good hand/eye coordination as reported.

Today, a report has come in that an obscure animal rights group in the USA has criticised his action as "an execution".

They call themselves 'People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals', the PETA, and they are asking Obama to show a little compassion to even the "the least sympathetic animals"!

Can you believe this! It was a fly for crying out loud! It's a pest! It spreads disease! It tramps around on your dog's droppings and then on your food for heavens sake! I am aware there are 'nutters' (a good English word) around, but these idiots should be locked away as a danger to public health.

I suppose that if any of them ever got lice in their hair they would have someone gently remove them so they can be released outside!!! I can imagine they never wash because then they would be killing millions of mites that live on our skin constantly. Ugh!

When asked for their official response, their blog site gave the following answer; "In a nutshell, our position is this: He isn't the Buddha, he is a human being, and human beings have a long way to go before they think before they act." Eh! Pardon? I have heard some 'Codswollop' (another good old English word) in my many years, but this really does take first prize!

What gets my goat about all these animal rights half-wits is that most have no objection to animals being slaughtered so they can eat them, but The President cannot kill a fly.

Apparently, they have even gone so far as to send Obama some sort of fly trap that captures flies so they may be released outside. Flies being what they are, they just do a 180* and fly straight back in again, but I guess they haven't worked out a contingency plan for that scenario yet. Keep at it people!

Do they make people sized fly swats?

Roy.

A Missed Opportunity.

With his speech yesterday, Binjamin Netanyahu the Israeli Premier, stood on the dockside and watched the 'Peace Boat' sail without him. Most people were not expecting any earth-moving changes to the Israeli stance on a Palestinian State, and they were not disappointed.

Apart from a reference to the existence of a Palestinian State, which clearly had to be dragged out of him, he didn't make a single move that could be called constructive when it came to ending the dispute. Both the USA and European governments voiced muted acceptance of the speech, stating that at least the recognition for a Palestinian State was "a step in the right direction".

Netanyahu called for a de-militarised State for Palestinians with no control over its airspace, and recognition by the Palestinians of a 'Jewish State'. This latter statement alone was not acceptable to any of the Arab countries listening. It would mean that refugees from the 1948 founding of Israel would have no right of return to their ancestral home, or as many fear, be second class citizens in a state for Jews.

The speech made no reference to the removal of Jewish settlements on Palestinian land, much of it stolen, and all declared illegal by the United Nations, the EU and USA. It is clear this speech was an attempt to defuse the tension between President Obama and the Israeli's on the settlement situation. In that I am sure it failed miserably.

President Obama, quite rightly in my view, has insisted that all settlement enlargement on Palestinian land be halted immediately. If you read my post of June 3rd you will see a UN map of the restrictions placed on Palestinians in the West Bank. Not only have the Israeli's taken over huge tracts of land for the settlements, but severely restricted Palestinian access and travel to more than half of the West Bank (see map-Orange area).

It would be like England taking over half of Ireland, or the USA taking half of Mexico, and saying the local people can neither live nor travel in these areas because of 'our' security.

Firstly, I believe Israel does have a right to exist right where it is, but the Israeli hard-line Right attitude of, "It all belonged to us two thousand years ago" will not hold water. Netanyahu's problem is that this grouping in The Knesset is very strong, and if he wishes his government to remain in power he cannot be seen to make concessions on the settlements. This puts him on a direct collision course with not only the Arab World and The Palestinians, but with the Obama camp. Obama can also not be seen to give in on his demand for all settlement activity to stop, because he made a promise to the Muslim world in his Cairo speech, and let's face it, why should he, they are all illegal under International Law.

This in effect brings us back to the age-old impasse that has been going on for more than half a century. While I have a certain sympathy with the Israeli cause for a homeland, I cannot approve of the way they have being doing things for the last thirty years at least. I have often come out on the side of Israel's right to defend itself against attacks by the likes of Hamas and Hezbollah, and I still believe that to be true. Israel has had to fight for its very existence on several occasions and I agree with that, but the current atmosphere is of Israeli making because of their intransigence with regard to the settlements which they believe is their right because of history.

I have to say that were it my choice, all the settlements would be turned over to the Palestinians lock, stock, and barrel! The Israeli's have no right to be there, and for them to continue in existence would be pure land theft on a grand scale.

I can imagine the outcry if American citizens started building townships on Mexican or Canadian soil along the border and banned the locals from entering this territory. Imagine if you will that all nations acted in this way, WW3 here we come. But the Israeli's have gotten away with it for the past forty years! Incredible!!

Before any progress can be made towards a lasting settlement of the Israeli/Palestinian question the problem of the settlements has to be addressed by the Knesset.

Last but not least, Netanyahu did not give any ground on the question of Jerusalem. He told his audience, and the world, that the city would remain in Jewish Hands. The Palestinians of course want their Capitol to be in Jerusalem as do the Jews. So once again we have an impasse.

According to the original boundary's laid down for the State of Israel by the United Nations in 1947, the border runs through the city with Jews and Palestinians sharing. If Jesus were to return today and see the turmoil surrounding this Holy City he would be livid!

I fear this is a problem that will go on and on. I wish President Obama luck in his attempt and I hope he succeeds. I believe the answer lies with the US President and Government, for only they have the power to make the Israeli's come to the negotiating table with real gifts of compromise. Without the backing of America Israel will become a smoking hole, especially if the Iranians get nuclear weapons, although the Israeli Government may not let it get that far. If they do attack Iran and knock out their nuclear capability, they will bring upon themselves the wrath of the entire Arab and Muslim world, although I think in private many will be relieved.

I do not wish to reiterate my suggested solution to the problems here, for that you would need to read my earlier posts, but suffice it to say, at the moment the whole argument is going nowhere, and things will not improve until Israel starts facing up to reality instead of the past.

Abraham, your people need you - again!

Roy.

Obama's Message

Without being overly dramatic, I think yesterday we heard what may turn out to be the most important political speech for decades. I refer of course to President Obama's speech to Muslims world-wide, made from the University of Cairo, Egypt.

All reviewers have remarked how eloquent his speech was, and in general, it has been greeted with praise and enthusiasm. There are those of course who have criticised it as meaningless propaganda, but you know what they say about 'Pleasing all of the people'...

The most heartening part of all is that with perhaps the exception of Iran, Hamas, and Hezbolla of Lebanon, who remain sceptical of Obama's intentions, most Muslims seem ready to give him the benefit of the doubt, and are pleased that at last we have an American President who is ready, and it seems willing, to mend fences with the Muslim world.

He is without doubt as good an orator as Bush was bad, and one gets the feeling that he means what he says. He really is trying to gain a better relationship between America and the Muslims, which after all the sabre-rattling of the previous administration is a refreshing change.

His speech touched on just about all the main issues that are on the minds of Muslims, from the Israeli/Palestinian conflict to Iran's nuclear weapon ambitions, to women's rights and religious freedom.

It was a long speech, 55 minutes, and although it could not possibly have been unscripted, Obama was never once seen referring to notes and there was no evidence of tele-prompters around considering his eyes were constantly on the move. It was indeed a remarkable performance, and should he be given the chance to realise even some of the things he is trying to do, I think the speech could well go down as one of the great defining moments of history.

He is after all, only trying to achieve a world we all want for our children, a world at peace, with all peoples living in harmony. It is a pipe-dream, but you cannot fault him for trying to achieve it.

It saddens me to know there are some individuals who have ridiculed his speech as worthless and without substance. The biggest cry heard has been 'actions speak louder than words' and so they do. They want to hear the speech and ten minutes later see the fruits of it. The only being I know who can deliver that is God.

For once, lets put aside our back-stabbing, mistrust, and petty behaviour, and give the man a chance to achieve his dream, for all mankind will be better off if he succeeds.

I for one wish President Obama success in his endeavors, I hope you do to.

Roy.

Israel - Obama's Dilemma

No-one in their right mind would think President Obama is looking forward to a direct confrontation with Israel, but things seem to be headed in that direction.

After recent discussions between the President and Prime Minister Netanyahu of Israel, in which Obama made it plain that all West Bank settlement construction must cease, it would appear the Israeli Government is not prepared to play ball.

Since his return to Israel, Prime Minister Netanyahu has made it clear they will stick to an agreement made with George W. Bush, i.e. that construction would be restricted to 'natural growth' in established settlements. This can be interpreted to mean; We will continue to build and expand all existing settlements, but we promise not to start any more!

Both sides of the argument are easy to understand. On the one hand, President Obama cannot be seen by the Arab World to be favouring the Israeli's, while on the other, any attempt by the Israel government to halt construction would mean their downfall, with perhaps even more serious repercussions.

You have to look a long way back in history to find the Israeli justification for the settlements. They say the West Bank and Gaza was their land two thousand years ago, which gives them the right to build. The fact that the land has belonged to the Palestinians since then is, in their eyes, irrelevant.

There is a comparison to Argentina claiming the Falkland Isles and Spain claiming Gibraltar from Britain, both of which were taken by the British three hundred years ago by conflict. In today's world you cannot claim something because it used to be yours centuries ago. I do not think the case for the Israeli settlers under those rules is acceptable.

The settlements first began some time after the 1967 Six-Day War with Syria, Jordan, and Egypt. For a time the Israeli Government would not allow settlements to be built, but this rule was relaxed and eventually it actively participated in the plan. With regard to the West Bank, religious Zionists claimed the lands of 'Judea and Samaria' (ancient Jewish lands) had finally been liberated, while the Government thought building the settlements would give them an extra bargaining chip at any future negotiations. For the Military, it was an opportunity to have a buffer zone between Israel and its Arab neighbours, Jordan and Syria.

On the accompanying UN map, the orange areas mark places in the West Bank that are restricted or forbidden for Palestinians. Many of the roads that service the Jewish communities have military roadblocks and are forbidden to local Palestinian people. Most of the world population is not aware of these measures taken by the Israeli's. You must also bear in mind that all the settlements, and the travel restrictions placed on the Palestinians, have been pronounced illegal by the United Nations and the International Courts of Justice under International Law.

President Obama arrived in Saudi Arabia today on an official visit, prior to giving what will probably be his most important speech so far. He will leave Saudi for Egypt where he will address the Arab World, and possibly the subject of Israel will come up. This speech is eagerly awaited by the whole Arab and Muslim World, and I am sure they will judge him, and his intentions, on it. Successive US presidents have tried to settle the thorny issue of the Israeli Palestinian conflict, but none have yet come up with the magic formula.

Whatever happens, the settlements will remain at the heart of the solution. One only has to look at a map of the West Bank showing their locations to realise that Israeli settlers have colonised much of the West Bank as far as the Jordanian border, and as some Jewish web sites record, a proportion of them are on land stolen from the Palestinians. There is no way you can justify this!

Ideally, all these towns and villages built by Israeli's in the West Bank must be torn down and their residents rehoused inside the 1967 borders of Israel. When you consider that in excess of half-a-million people now live in the occupied areas, it must seem impossible.

President Abbas of the West Bank Palestinians stated during his visit to Washington that he is no longer prepared to talk of peace until the building programme on the West Bank is halted. This seems a reasonable request considering how vast the Israeli occupation of the West Bank is and it's illegal status. Unfortunately for Obama, he must walk a tightrope between the two.

While he is reaching out to the Muslim world in a way no previous president ever has, he must be mindful he doesn't alienate the Jewish State, especially with Iran's nuclear ambitions in the mix, and the threat of an Israeli 'solution' to the problem.

So what is the answer to this half-century old problem? Could there in fact ever be a Palestinian State in co-existence with an Israeli State recognised by the Arab World? Personally, I think yes, but it will take many years and a lot of soul-searching and tough action by the Israeli Government.

In 2005 the Israeli Government removed all the settlements in the Gaza Strip by force and rehoused its citizens within it's borders. The same is possible logistically for the West Bank, but it would be a huge undertaking. Any who refused to be removed could have the right to become citizens of Palestine. One measure that could force many to leave would be the withdrawal of protection by the Israeli Armed Forces.

Of course there is also the option of the land of Israelistine being run by a joint Jewish/Palestinian government with Arabs and Jews living side by side in harmony. Now wouldn't that be a miracle!

Whatever happens, eventually common sense must prevail, and both sides will realise they cannot go through the rest of eternity at each others throats. Either that or the Iranians will solve the problem for them.

I wish President Obama success in his mission.

Roy.

Guantanamo - Good or Bad?

Should Guantanamo be closed? There are arguments for and against it, but new President Obama seems to think it should be closed, and has vowed to do it. In light of new information that has surfaced, I wonder if that is wise.

A BBC News report has stated that a previous British inmate of the prison is now working with the Taliban in planning and organizing attacks on British and American troops in Afghanistan. According to the report, he is working with impunity in the Pakistani city of Quetta in the north-west provinces.

Since his release from Guantanamo last year, Mullah Abdul Kayum Zakir is a member of the Taliban High Command. According to sources, he returned immediately to Afghanistan to begin his work. American reports say at least 10% of all ex-prisoners from Guantanamo return to terrorism after their incarceration.

You could be forgiven for thinking the ill-treatment they endured would be enough to make anyone join a terrorist group, and you may well be right. The punishment these people received was far from what a normal civilized person would inflict on another, but was it justified? In some cases maybe. I only said maybe!!!

You have to bear in mind, these people are completely without conscience, have no respect for human life, and are totally ruthless in the methods they use to achieve their goals.

What if another 9/11 attack could be halted because someone gave away the plans during interrogation? Supposing a 'dirty' nuclear bomb attack on New York could be averted because a terrorist in Guantanamo cracked under interrogation? I think then his 'Civil Rights' would be quietly forgotten for the greater good. Hypocrisy? Most certainly! But aren't we all guilty of it at some time or other?

All detainees in the prison have sworn they are innocent of all crimes. Some British Muslims even went so far as to say they were on holiday in Afghanistan's Tribal Area during the NATO anti-Taliban operation there. There's only one word to answer that: Bullshit! Who goes to a war zone, especially in Afghanistan of all places, during a time of war? It would be like a halt being called in the middle of the D-Day landings while a coach-load of tourists disembark and take photographs. "Ja die sind weg. Los junghans, weiter machen! "OK Chaps! They've gorn. Carry on!"

It is well known that England has sent many fighters to the Taliban cause in Afghanistan, brain-washed by Muslim priests who preach death and destruction to non-Muslim people, while queuing each week for their welfare cheque from the British tax payer.

These evil men have convinced many young Muslim youths of impressionable age to leave their good life in Britain and fight for the Taliban or Al Quada. Such is the naivety of youth.

It is possible there are innocent men in Guantanamo, but to be honest I doubt it. The big problem in such a battle is to tell the innocent from the not so innocent. They all wear the same clothes, they all look alike, and for sure, if he has a gun in his hand he is one of them. If he knows he is beaten, throws his gun away, and is standing there as you a soldier enter the house, is he one of them or one of the other. If he tells you he is on holiday from Britain what do you think?

"I am not with the Taliban. I came here to get my teeth fixed because my dad told me the local dentist is very good!". Yea Right!

I cannot condone the practices used in Guantanamo to extract information because it reminds me of a certain 'master' race that used such methods or worse. We are supposed to be a 'civilized' society today, but now and again, the 'animal instinct' emerges. On the other hand, who would call a terrorist civilized? Not I that is for sure.

Their aim is to kill as many innocent people as possible, and the crazy thing is they all, Taliban, Hamas, Tamil Tigers or whoever, kill more of their own than anyone else. Is that civilized? So why should we treat them in a civilized fashion?

Another news item I found rather amusing was the offer of Hugo Chavez from Venezuela to take some of the detainees when Guantanamo closes. Does anyone believe he will keep them in jail when they land? Ha! He's more likely to throw a party for them, give them a medal and a free airline ticket back to Afghanistan or Pakistan.

OK! So should Guantanamo stay? Yes, I think so for one fundamental reason, it is far from anywhere and will prevent them rejoining the fight. The guilty terrorists deserve no better.

Should they be tortured? No, that is unacceptable, because to do that brings us down to their level.

Should they be given a fair hearing? Yes, and within three months of being captured.

Should it be a military court or civilian? Personally I do not think a civilian court would be capable of trying these people, because they were taken prisoner during a military operation and you need a military mind to understand all that took place leading up to the capture.

If found to be not guilty should they be compensated? Yes, I believe so. To be incarcerated in such a place and be innocent must be a traumatic experience, and if you are indeed innocent you should receive compensation. This must however go hand in hand with a ban on entry to either Afghanistan or Pakistan.

If they are found guilty, what then? Simple: Lock 'em up and throw away the key!

May all terrorists see Allah very very soon!

Roy

Obama - Messiah?

I watched in fascination yesterday as Barack Obama held an obviously unscripted question and answer period with some students in Strasbourg. At the end of it, the first thing that sprang to mind was 'Here is another JFK!'

He is clearly a man of vision who's main priority is to fix the world's problems as best he can. As President of the United States he is certainly in a position to do that. His fresh approach to the world's problems is something we have all needed for a long time.

For too long we have been stuck with the 'Rule of the Gun' instead of diplomacy, and the art of talking between nations with differences has been lost. It is widely recognised that George Bush was one of the worst presidents America has ever had, and thank goodness his time is over. Maybe it was the advisors he gathered around him, maybe it was the man himself, but either way, his approach to world problems and their solutions left a lot to be desired.

It is important for Obama to change the world's perception of the United States as a 'shoot first, ask questions later' society. This I think he can do, and has in fact begun.

His idea of talking to countries like Iran and North Korea show that he is a long way ahead of the game, more than Bush ever was. If the United Nations was more than a 'Paper Tiger', isolating these nations might have worked, but as it is, it hasn't.

Therefore, a new approach is needed to bring these countries in line with the rest of the world, and in my opinion, Obama seems to be the man to do it.

We must however be careful! Everyone is expecting so much from this one man that he is bound to fail some, and I sincerely hope he will not be pilloried for it.

I have read some of the reactions to his speech in front of the students of Strasbourg, and I must say that the sheer arrogance of some Americans who commented on his speech is horrifying.

No-one, to my knowledge, actually mentioned the word traitor, but he was roundly, and viciously attacked for admitting that America sometimes got it wrong, and that mistakes have been made by American Governments.

Even his innocent remark that America was founded by Europeans, which is true, came in for an attack of arrogance. He was castigated left and right for 'Sucking up to the Europeans', which to me is deplorable. By their words, these people have made it clear they have absolutely no idea of what this man is about, and what he is trying to achieve.

If this sort of unfounded criticism by people who think America is 'God's gift to the World' spreads among the American people then he has no chance, because if they do not understand what he is trying to achieve, no-one will!

Wake up People! Neither you, nor your country are God's gift to the planet. You live here by the grace of God just like the rest of us!

Barack Obama is not a Messiah, he is just a man with a vision as was John F. Kennedy. He aspires to great deeds, and the world and the American people in particular, must give him time to achieve his goals.

If he does, the world will be a better place in which to live.

May we all live in peace.

Roy.