Is thank fucking god, and throw the Iraqi Invasion Occupation support, conservative Israeli lobbyist turned politician down the well:
Embattled Sen. Joe Lieberman is trailing businessman Ned Lamont by double digits in the race for the Connecticut Democratic Senate nomination, a new poll released this morning shows.
My people skills have been impeccably honed due to two years spent on various large sailing yachts with multiple stinking, farting men, and combined with 14 months grinding corporate cock, I feel perfectly qualified to work within the high-stress, male-dominated atmosphere of Corporate America. I have an ability to compromise, perfected from the lengthy and demanding negotiations involved in my former employment (eg “Give me a blow job”, “No, fuck off”, “Give me a hand job”, “No, fuck off”, “Give me a lapdance”, “OK”) and yet a steely determination of where my goals are and how to achieve them (“It’s 850 bucks for a private room, no fucking freebies”).
ince the Cold War ended, they contend, Israel has become a strategic liability that ignites terrorism against the West and serves as a rallying cry and recruitment poster for bin Laden and al-Qaeda. What’s more, there’s no particular moral reason for the United States to support Israel. Despite a well-cultivated myth, Israel has always been stronger militarily than neighboring Arab states, racist and discriminatory in treating its own non-Jewish citizens and brutal when it comes to the Palestinians. “The creation of Israel entailed a moral crime against the Palestinian people,” the essay states baldly.
As for the United States, it is the “de facto enabler of Israeli expansion in the occupied territories, making it complicit in the crimes perpetrated against the Palestinians.”
And as a follow up, check out the chat with writer Glenn Frankel on his article.
My response to the contagious irrationality displayed at PubliusPundit:
I’ll give a synopsis of my opinion on the Middle East and the current situation before I discuss my reactions to what has been shared on this thread. I am not a peacenik; I am not a Palestinian apologist. In the Middle East, I do not find right or wrong, good or bad. There is ongoing violence and perspectives and prejudices that enable individuals to justify gruesome behavior on both sides without guilt.
In the context of the past month, Israel responded to Islamic Jihad firing rockets into Southern Israel from the Gaza strip by bombarding the coast of Gaza. This resulted in the death of a family of nine on a Gaza beach, and a prompt reaction from Hamas declaring an end to its informal ceasefire with Israel (for more information on the development of this incident, read this BBC article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5079464.stm ). Consequently, this enabled Hamas, specifically the hard-line faction in Damascus, to begin operations against Israel again. The political version of Hamas, which has showed more willingness to cooperate with Fatah and begin serious negotiations on the path to moderation, was in the process of signing an agreement with Abbas to endorse the Prisoners Document (a document drafted by Fatah and Hamas members in Israeli prisoners that recognizes Israel under pre-1967 borders). This drew the ere of the militant sect of Hamas, leading to Damascus Hamas to order the attack on Israeli soldiers to sabotage the process. Israel responded in kind, launching a significant operation in Gaza that collectively punished the population for the actions of Hamas with the bombardment of primarily civilian targets — water distilleries, power stations, and bridges. Hezbollah, working in unprecedented cooperation with Hamas, began its offensive against Israel from southern Lebanon, opening up a two-front conflict. Israel responded in a similar manner, attacking not only Hezbollah but Lebanonese targets that endanger civilians rather than debilitate extremists. And here we are today, with hardliners on both sides benefiting from violence and encouraging more.
In a political context, I believe Hamas and Hezbollah are acting against the United States and Israel as proxies of Syria and Iran. Lebanon is frankly unequipped to deal with Hezbollah, either politically or militarily. Removing Hezbollah would destabilize Lebanon to the brink of another civil war. For a more in-depth and informed opinion on this matter, I suggest Michael Young’s article ( http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/14/opinion/14young.html?oref=login ) in the NYTimes that details Syria’s efforts to reassert itself in Lebanon following the anti-Syrian protests and removal of the Syrian army from Lebanon.
Ugh, as I read through these responses, I’m confronted with the thoughts I face everyday: how do rational people turn into irrational actors in regards to the Middle East. I too became a victim of the contagious irrationality after reading this post: in my reaction I posted an emotional response that did not help the debate. I still believe that opinions like these are unconstructive and lead to dangerous actions but I could have presented that in a better manner.
While we may not be direct actors in the conflict, our opinions, whether in the US or in other nations, can either facilitate or debilitate the occurrence of violence that seems endless at times in the Middle East. We, as active, engaged citizens, must realize the consequence of our opinions that become the actions of our respective governments as members of democracies. While I know this issue inflames passions, we cannot allow ourselves to become so incensed that we either implicitly or explicitly allow a continuation of the violence that has plagued the Middle East since 1948.
