Wednesday, 14 January 2009

America's UN Resolution Abstention

Israeli PM Ehud Olmert getting Bush in a headlock to make sure the US abstains from the UN Resolution on a ceasefire in Gaza

Bush needed no convincing after Olmert shows him pictures of dead Arab children

Bush then looms behind Condoleezza Rice in order to humiliate her into abstaining from something she was going to support

The world demands it's free motherfucking cupcake!

I've done my level best to not blog on the current conflict in Gaza, mainly because I don't feel I can bring much to the debate in a blog format, when the issue at hand is so immensely complex and one false move can have you labelled an anti-Semite/Zionist.

And posting pictures of dead Arab children is exploitative and crass.

Having said that, my feelings on the issue can be best summed up by the fact that both Israel and the people of Gaza elected really awful people to represent them and they are reaping the dividends of those choices, as the two elements duke it out and the civilians get caught horribly in the middle.

My solution: Israel goes back to the Internationally approved 1967 borders, stops making illegal settlements and takes down the bizarre wall; then (the hardest bit) it has to bite it's tongue as Hamas (or whatever idiotic 'wipe Israel off the face of the map' political party is in charge) tries to provoke them into lowest common denominator battle. If Israel took the moral high ground and did all the things asked of it by the world, Hamas would still attack but then Israel would have the backing of the globe in its destruction. It's a win-win for them but all it takes is a long view and restraint, something Israel has lacked since its inception.

I'm more interested in the weight of power that Israel and Olmert seems to be able to exercise over Bush and his pals.

Rice it seems was all willing to vote for the ceasefire UN resolution, which would've made it a clean sweep of all 15 votes and total condemnation of Israel's activities from even it's closest allies. And on that note, I'll hand over to Olmert:
"When we saw that the Secretary of State, for reasons we did not really understand, wanted to vote in favour of the UN resolution...I looked for President Bush and they told me he was in Philadelphia making a speech. I said, 'I don't care. I have to talk to him now'.

They got him off the podium, brought him to another room and I spoke to him. I told him, 'You can't vote in favour of this resolution.' He said, 'Listen, I don't know about it, I didn't see it, I'm not familiar with the phrasing.' He gave an order to the Secretary of State and she did not vote in favour of it, a resolution she cooked up, phrased, organised and manoeuvred for. She was left pretty shamed and abstained on a resolution she arranged."
And lo, it came to pass that the US abstained on the UN security resolution with the White House overruling the State Department (yet again), fighting to the very last day of their miserable existence, to perpetuate their unconditional backing for Israel.

The official line from the White House is: "We've seen these press reports and they are inaccurate." So either Olmert is lying and posturing like the corrupt old toad he is, or the White House is lying...again...and again...and again.


  1. I would abstain from blogging on it too, because, heck? what is the point in ranting about this thing? All has been said and done. I do not agree with you however that Hamas would attack if Israel showed civility and restraint. The reason hamas started firing rockets in the first place was the Israel and the whole world has put Gaza under siege since 2006. A siege which is criminal and unjustified. It served no one, not Israel and no anybody else for that matter.

    In my current/last post at mine, I ranted about my journey in belief and to me this Palestine/Israeli conflict does in a mysterious way influence my view of the world.

  2. Yes but Hamas wants the eradication of Israel so that's a tough negotiating stance wouldn't you say?

    No one in this conflict is on the right side, either Hamas or Israel.

  3. Yes, I am disappointed in your man Obama for failing to criticize the Gaza offensive, as he hides behind the bromide: there is only one president at a time, though he's not afraid to upstage Bush on other issues.

    What? No criticism of Obama here?

    I did some reading and looked into the complete history of the conflict. It began when Arabs attacked Jews in Palestine as more Jews began to immigrate from Eurasia, which--quite naturally--threatened Arabs (or "Palestinians," if you like).

    'Course. When we white Americans complain about being subsumed by immigrants in OUR country, we're told we're zenophobic and racist and intolerant of diversity, when actually we're only human.

  4. I think Hamas would accept a deal from Israel. People forget Islamists are about enriching themselves. When Fatah was radical, Israel used to subsidize Hamas.

    There are so many settlers on the West Bank, that inside the 1967 borders, isn't large enough to absorb them. That is one of the main dillemas in territorialist Zionism.

    Zionism in two camps, territorialist which means staying in the pre-1967 borders, and expansionist which is like MZ at my blog.

  5. All that Israel is doing is creating the next generation of suicide bomber or freedom fighter.

    Let's bomb some more children. Hurrah!

  6. M@:

    My man? You voted for him, I wish I could've but I'm not a US citizen. As for his silence, he seems to have prepared an agenda to talk to Hamas, I don't see him ducking, he just has to bide his time as he is a world away from Bush's stance.

    The conflict goes back fruther than that M@, the battle over the land is older than time. Please see the bible for reference.

    FYI: America is the uber immigrant country cuz that's what you all are. Take a breath, it's okay to be racist as long as you work on it brother.


    I know the Israel/Hamas history but I still think Israel plays the wrong card here, as for not enough room, I don't buy that, just on population alone and square mass of Israel basic maths says that's not true.

    MZ is a fucking idiot.


    Of course they are feeding the fires of violence by their violence, that's a given but their was a lot of violent intent without provocation, such is the long-term trauma in the area.


Please do not be under the misapprehension that this blog has a laissez-faire comments policy where commenters can get away with whatever they want to say on account of their ‘freedom of speech’.

Blurred Clarity has a stringent comments policy. So anything off-topic, diversionary, trollish, abusive, misogynist, racist, homophobic or xenophobic will be deleted.

Cheers duckies.