In order to download Charlie Rose podcasts to iTunes for transfer to an iPod, you must have iTunes installed. If you do, please click the following link to download the podcast for this interview:
itpc://www.charlierose.com/view/itunes/11684
Otherwise, close this window to continue viewing.
Close
Page 1 of 1
Page 1 of 1
SharkswithfrikingLazers 06/03/2011 03:00 AM Report
Here he is 33 years ago under another name:
http://youtu.be/lixYEZ9M_dU
This never ends.
samiam 05/28/2011 05:25 PM Report
Perhaps Bret Stephens should read his own newspaper. When he says that Hamas' idea of ending the occupation is to take over all of Israel he shows he is the victim of his own ideology. This panel is so blatantly misinformed it damages the credibility of the show.
* The Wall Street Journal
* MIDDLE EAST NEWS
* JULY 31, 2009
Hamas Chief Outlines Terms for Talks on Arab-Israeli Peace
DAMASCUS -- The chief of Palestinian militant group Hamas said his organization is prepared to cooperate with the U.S. in promoting a peaceful resolution to the Arab-Israeli conflict if the White House can secure an Israeli settlement freeze and a lifting of the economic and military blockade of the Gaza Strip.
[HAMAS]
Khaled Meshaal, 53 years old, said in a 90-minute interview at Hamas's Syrian headquarters that his political party and military wing would commit to an immediate reciprocal cease-fire with Israel, as well as a prisoner swap that would return Hamas fighters for kidnapped Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit.
He also said his organization would accept and respect a Palestinian state based on 1967 borders as part of a broader peace agreement with Israel—provided Israeli negotiators accept the right of return for millions of Palestinian refugees and the establishment of a capital for the Palestinian state in East Jerusalem.
That pledge falls short of recognizing Israel, a necessary step for Hamas to be included in peace talks, but many Middle East diplomats said it could mark an important step toward that goal.
"Hamas and other Palestinian groups are ready to cooperate with any American, international or regional effort to find a just solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict, to end the Israeli occupation and to grant the Palestinian people their right of self-determination," Mr. Meshaal said.
A senior White House official said Mr. Obama's administration wouldn't respond to Mr. Meshaal's comments. Mr. Obama has said the U.S. would only hold direct talks with Hamas if it formally renounces terrorism and violence and recognizes the state of Israel. U.S. officials say that to engage directly with Mr. Meshaal would undermine the Palestinian Authority.
A spokesman for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Thursday dismissed Mr. Meshaal's comments. "Anyone who has been following Khaled Meshaal's comments over the last few months sees clearly that despite some attempts to play with language in a cosmetic way to give the impression of possible policy moderation, he remains rooted in an extremist theology which fundamentally opposes peace and reconciliation," said the spokesman, Mark Regev.
Hamas in 2006 was elected to rule the Palestinian territories, but a global boycott, Israeli arrests and a 2007 civil war left the group in charge only of the Gaza Strip. Fatah maintains control of the West Bank, leaving the territories bitterly divided.
Mr. Meshaal said his movement is waiting for Mr. Obama and his special Middle East negotiator, George Mitchell, to present a broader outline for conducting Middle East peace talks.
Mr. Mitchell has focused on securing an Israeli settlement freeze in disputed areas in return for Arab states beginning to normalize their relations with Israel, such as establishing trade and telecommunications links.
"If Israel doesn't accept a halt to stop building settlements, what then?" Mr. Meshaal said, seated under photos honoring fallen Hamas leaders and Jerusalem's al Aqsa mosque. "The end of the settlements is a necessary step, but it's not the solution itself."
Mr. Meshaal's conciliatory positions toward Washington come amid significant political shifts in the region that are affecting Hamas's principal allies.
This week, Mr. Mitchell met Syrian President Bashar Assad in Damascus and agreed to begin easing U.S. sanctions as part of a growing diplomatic rapprochement between the two rivals. In June, Hezbollah, the Lebanese political party and militia, failed in its bid to gain political power through elections in Beirut. And Iran's government—Hamas's chief arms supplier and financier—has been subsumed in a post-election struggle that could lessen Tehran's ability and willingness to project itself into the Arab-Israeli conflict.
Some Middle East analysts and Western diplomats said these events could be feeding into Hamas's conciliatory line.
Syrian officials said this week that they've been advising Hamas to play a more constructive role in Arab-Israeli talks. They specifically cite Hamas's recent offer to enter into a long-term truce with Israel. "We believe Hamas has evolved," Syria's deputy foreign minister, Fayssal Mekded, said Monday. "They are for building and developing a Palestinian state."
A number of Middle East experts say Hamas's willingness to accept the 1967 borders represents a quasi-recognition of the state of Israel, though the militant group hasn't formally taken this step.
Hamas's 1988 political charter formally calls for the destruction of Israel and the creation of a Palestinian state on the lands that currently make up the Palestinian territories and Israel. The organization is designated a terrorist organization by the U.S., Israel and the European Union because of its use of suicide bombers against Israeli citizens and military personnel.
The "Quartet" of bodies seeking to broker Arab-Israeli peace talks, which includes the U.S., EU, United Nations and Russia, has refused to collectively engage Hamas in the process until it formally recognizes Israel's right to exist, and renounces terrorism and violence. Russia has been holding bilateral talks with Hamas.
Mr. Meshaal's conflict with Israeli authorities is also personal. In 1997, Mr. Netanyahu ordered the assassination of Mr. Meshaal in Jordan and Mossad agents sprayed a lethal toxin into the Hamas official's ear that began shutting down his respiratory system. The late Jordanian monarch, King Hussein, intervened and forced Mr. Netanyahu to dispatch an antidote by threatening to end Jordan's peace treaty with Israel.
In the interview, Mr. Meshaal offered both conciliation toward the U.S. and the West, and enmity toward Israel and its leadership. "I don't care about Israel—it is our enemy and our occupier and it commits crimes against our people," he said. "Don't ask me about Israel, Israel can talk for itself."
In recent months, a number of leading European politicians and U.S. foreign-policy luminaries, including former U.S. national security advisers Brent Scowcroft and Zbigniew Brzezinski, have called on Hamas to be formally brought into the peace process.
Critics of engaging Hamas, including senior members of the Obama administration, are wary of Mr. Meshaal's statements of accepting a Palestinian state along the 1967 borders.
Palestinian Authority leaders attacked Mr. Meshaal Thursday, saying Hamas was moving arms into the West Bank and trying to launch a "coup" in the territory.
Mr. Meshaal said Hamas wouldn't be an obstacle to peace. "We along with other Palestinian factions in consensus agreed upon accepting a Palestinian state on the 1967 lines," Mr. Meshaal said. This is the national program. This is our program. This is a position we stand by and respect."
—Joshua Mitnick contributed to this article
Write to Jay Solomon at jay.solomon@wsj.com
Printed in The Wall Street Journal, page A10
IndianDalit 05/28/2011 07:01 AM Report
I agree with poster Ricardo Amaral's observation regarding the unjustifiably skewed attention Israel gets in discussions today.
The primary reason is because Israel has cunningly been able to use the position of the current superpower- USA and it's wealth to push forward it's own policy.
What Israelis don't seem to understand is that with every day of delay in the peace process, there's also a 'rise of the rest' towards prominence.....massive countries like India , China etc which do not consider Israel with special importance. Furthermore, the dictators in the middle east that Israel could previously count upon to make secret treaties with , are being forcefully thrown out by popular uprising in those countries.
Going forward, Israel won't be able to continue banking on their sugar daddy- USA , and world opinion is quickly moving, if not already, towards the Palestinian side.
JohnGelles 05/27/2011 10:39 PM Report
This commentary should (and does) continue on
http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/11695
robdverity 05/27/2011 05:49 PM Report
Gelles, your not gellen. Ricardo is, big time. Israel has become anathema, exemplified by its thuggery.
owldog 05/27/2011 04:51 PM Report
We already had a two-State solution in GAZA and look what happened after the last settlers left. U.S. and Israel tried to micromanage elections, sent in clandestine fighters, blamed it on Hamas "terrorists," tormented the poputlation with low-level sonic booms at night, and made the state a prison for exit, entry, and essential goods - killed hundreds, maybe thousands of Gazans, because of the few who protested with giant fireworks.
All in the name of security. The Gazans have no air defense.
No. I think the West Banker Palestinians might be better off as an occupied country (than having their own defenseless state) with the settlers there as a defense against IAF bombing campaigns.
I'd rather see one state, a true democracy that's not Jewish, Moslem, White Protestant, or any else, called "Israel" or The Holy Land, if you will.
JohnGelles 05/27/2011 01:52 PM Report
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli-american_relations
The above link is to the same topic as this discussion covers.
Reading Wikipedia, as a basic source for facts, may exhaust us all.
Opinions don't rely on facts -- they rely on memory and profound belief in the unique values opinion holders have.
Yet there are opinions that betray idiocy -- like other people's opinions -- others that make sense and will admit you to heaven like my own.
JohnGelles 05/27/2011 01:19 PM Report
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli%E2%80%93Palestinian_conflict
The above link focuses on the Palestinian - Israeli war and search for peace -- such as it is.
JohnGelles 05/27/2011 01:13 PM Report
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab%E2%80%93Israeli_conflict
The above link is to a relatively easy read to the facts in dispute in this discussion of US-Israeli relations.
In my view, all the anti-American anti-Israeli nonsense in these comments suffers from ignorance of facts and a twisted set of values for these times.
lyn117 05/27/2011 12:32 PM Report
In most cases, Zionists willfully distort history. I don't know whether Gelles does so on purpose however he certainly distorts it:
- More Arabs from Palestine alone fought with the British in WWII than the total number of Arabs who fought for Hitler from the whole Arab world. Few of today's Arab countries were even independent countries at the time, allowed to form alliances on their own. Yet JohnGelles would have you believe that the Arabs sided with Hitler. There's no evidence that the Mufti's support of Hitler had any significance effect in the holocaust, he didn't order it, he wasn't in charge of it, he didn't organize it, there's no evidence that he influenced Hitler's or the other nazis attitudes towards Jews whatsoever.
- The U.N. didn't divide Palestine into two nations, it recommended a partition. Neither did the Arab nations immediately attack one of these nations. Following a campaign of mass murder by Jewish Zionists and with Palestinian refugees fleeing in terror from attacks on towns, cities and villages, the Arab nations decided to declare war on the state of Israel. Of those states, only Egyptian armed forces entered that part of Palestine which had been designated by the U.N. partition suggestion for the Jewish state in a significant way (and that in the sparsely populated Negev), Jordan didn't enter it at all. Most of the fighting was outside the area designated for the Jewish state.
- As for the claim that Israel is a force for good, well, I guess anyone who claims this didn't stand in Gaza or Beirut when Israel was bombing them, targeting civilians and medical workers, and when Turkey sent an aid ship to Gaza, in fact Israel killed 9 of the people on board and prevented the aid ship from getting there.
Ricardo_Amaral 05/27/2011 02:51 AM Report
Population:
Brazil: 203,429,773 (July 2011 est.)
Russia: 138,739,892 (July 2011 est.)
India: 1,189,172,906 (July 2011 est.)
China: 1,336,718,015 (July 2011 est.)
Total Bric countries: 2.9 billion people
Israel: 7,473,052 (July 2010 est.)
.
Ricardo_Amaral 05/27/2011 02:09 AM Report
The Alex Jones Show: World War III by Quasi Stealth Part 1 of 3 – May 24, 2011
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CNg_zxsOEc
The US Gravy Train
Israel has the financial incentive to keep that area of the world into a mess and if possible Israel would like to expand the conflict even further – to include also Iran.
Israel has a major economic incentive to keep the Middle East unstable and in a constant state of war.
The $ 30 billion dollars in military aid the US just gave to Israel in 2007 – for a country smaller than New Jersey – and about $ 8 billion dollars of this aid it was in cash
For a country with a GDP of around $ 140 billion dollars – why make peace in the area and risk losing the free ride.
In 2007 the Israeli government annual budget was around $50 billion dollars, including defense spending of around $ 10.5 billion dollars.
You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to figure out that a large part of the defense spending from the Israeli government annual budget goes to pay salary for the soldiers, pensions, health care, maintenance of arsenal including the nuclear arms and so on….
After all these normal expenses related to defense spending there is not much money left to increase the Israeli destruction capabilities. That is where the US military aid comes handy – and most of the bombs, guided missiles, and god knows what else that have been killing thousands of people in the Gaza strip, in Lebanon and so on – the carnage and death toll in that area comes with the compliments of the United States government – and all these deadly weapons have the label “Made in USA”.
Israel have been receiving military aid from the United States since 1973 – adjusted for inflation and in terms of current dollars probably the United States have invested over $250 billion dollars in military aid to Israel during the period 1973 – 2011.
What would have happened if instead of giving all this military aid to Israel during all these years if the money had been invested instead in education, and a “Marshall Plan” to help lift all boats in that area of the world?
I don’t blame the Israelis from wanting to keep the Middle East unstable and on a state of constant war for them to be able to keep the US gravy train coming.
The records show that the United States government has been subservient to Israel and the Jewish lobby for many decades – and this association has been forged at the expense of a very high cost for the self-interest of the US government around the world.
For me Israel is nothing more than a small country with a small population, and the United States has been wasting too much time and political capital with Israel instead of using that time and political capital with things that matter such as focusing on China, India, and many other emerging markets that would be very important for the future of the United States economy.
Many years from now when future generations of Americans look back they are going to wonder why the US government were giving so much support to Israel and alienating so many people around the world instead of realizing that the world had been changing to the new world order of the 21st century?
Why the US government never grasped that this blind support to Israel was completely against the long-term self-interest of the United States as a country?
.
Ricardo_Amaral 05/27/2011 02:08 AM Report
Breakdown of Netanyahu's Appearance in US Congress – May 24, 2011
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8GMNwDJzgo
The United States and Israel
I don't hate Israel, and never did in the past. I just don't care about Israel, and Israel means nothing to me.
From my perspective, I care as much about Israel as I care about the Albania, Somalia, Sudan, or many other countries that are not important to me.
I have no reason to care about Israel in any way - other than I am sick and tired of hearing about Israel year after year on television all the time. I have tuned Israel off as much as I could for a long time, but just like a disease that it doesn't go away, it always keep coming back, time after time, until you are sick of it. I have been saturated about the subject of Israel since the decade of the 1970's.
I already explained a number of times on Brazzil magazine that I am not anti-Jew, or anti-Semitic, or any other name that people use to describe people who don't care about Israel.
I am agnostic. I am not a religious person, and I don’t care which religion anyone practices from Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, Hinduism, and so on….
I live here in the United States for a long time and it does not make sense to me why the United States gives so much support to Israel in the Middle East? – Since supporting Israel goes completely against the self-interest of the United States in that region of the world.
Israel it has manipulated the politicians in Washington long enough, and it is time for the United States disconnect itself from Israel and pursue new policies that support its self-interest in that area of the world.
Supporting Israel has been a losing proposition in every sense for the United States for a long time, and it is time to get wise and move in a new direction.
The continuous support (financial and in military armament) of the United States to Israel it is at the root of the problem in the Middle East.
This American support will guarantee that the conflict in the Middle East will continue forever, as long the US gravy train is an important part of the Israeli economy.
.
Ricardo_Amaral 05/27/2011 02:06 AM Report
BiBi more powerful than Barack – May 24, 2011
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aFNEog9CDI&NR=1
Remarks by the Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in “State of Union Address” to U.S. Congress at the United States Capitol, Washington, D.C.
During Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's appearance in the U.S. Congress on May 24, 2011
to present his case why the United States should support Israel, he built his case based on mythology such as the story of “David and Goliath,” and he claimed that this was not a distortion of history.
The basis for his claim that the Jewish people has the right to the land of Israel is based on an estimated 10,000 to 20,000 Jewish people who was supposed to have lived in that area of the world about 4,000 years ago – and by 721 BC the Assyrians overrun Israel, disperses the population of about 50,000 Israelites, and takes thousands as slaves. Israel as a nation vanishes.
Why anybody with any common sense would be taking seriously this conversation in 2011, and play along to give some credibility, and make an effort to try to validate such a land claim from thousands of years ago?
The world has changed 1,000 times in the last 2,000 years regarding people's claim to most piece of land all around our planet.
It is crazy to even bring up such a subject based on the claim of handful of people from 3 to 4 thousand years ago.
Hello!!! The lights are on, but is anybody home?
The enthusiasm and explosive way the Senators and Congressmen applauded Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu “Fairy Tales” shows the intellectual level of the American Congress – no wonder this country is going to hell in a handbasket.
I am glad that Netanyahu did not bring up the story of Moses to help build his case, since that was a story of the Jews and their Exodus from Egypt. And after leaving Egypt about 5,000 Jewish people were lost in the desert for 40 years.
What kind of people get lost in the desert for 40 years?
I guess they did not have a “Lawrence of Arabia” among them to find the way out.
If my ancestors were lost for 40 years in a desert, I would say that was not the brightest bunch of people in the world, and I would be embarrassed to claim that I was a descendent of such people.
If someone want to bring Hebrew history to support the case of why the United States should support Israel – that is crazy, since at best we are talking about a very small group of people who grew to at most 50,000 people by 721 BC – who had a brief history from 2,000 BC to 721 BC.
Based on that the Hebrews wanted to reclaim by 1948 the land their ancestors had lost 2,700 years ago.
The entire world has changed since 721 BC, and many other groups of people over the years got kicked out of their lands by other groups of people including the native Indian peoples who used to populate the Americas from North to South.
As a US foreign policy based on self-interest and also on a rational level it makes no sense for the United States to give the unconditional support that it has been giving Israel for a long time.
It is crazy!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Let’s review one more time: the claims that the Hebrew people has over the land of Israel.
Here is the “History of the Hebrews” in a nutshell:
Around the year 2,000 BC Abraham (the founder of the Jewish religion) is supposed to have migrated with his family into Canaan.
Egypt's king, Ramses II, is now thought to have reigned between 1290-1224 B.C. – this is supposed to be the time when Moses lived and the Jews had their Exodus from Egypt.
At this point they were lost in the desert for 40 years then they managed to find the Promised Land. That brings us to estimate the birth of the Promised Land to around the year 1,180 BC.
King David – Goliath and so on is supposed to have happened around the year 1,050 BC.
In 970 BC King David is succeeded by his son Solomon.
In 721 BC the Assyrians overrun Israel, disperses the Israelites and takes thousands as slaves. Israel as a nation vanishes.
********
Reality check:
Now let us put the spotlight on all this information and try to put it on a more realistic perspective looking back from today.
Around the time of Abraham – this is where Hebrew history starts – the total world population is estimated to have been around 27 million people – and demographers know that 70 % of the population at that time were living in China and in India. That leaves about 8 million people to populate the rest of the world.
I guess at that time Abraham is just starting the Hebrew lineage.
Then we go to Moses time and the Exodus. Total world population is estimated to be around 45 million people around the year 1,200 BC. Again 70 % of the total is living in China and in India – that leaves about 14 million people scattered around the world.
Is it possible that this Exodus from Egypt involved less that 5,000 people? If we want to stretch even further since these people were supposed to be building Pyramids then let’s says there were 10,000 people who left Egypt with Moses in the Exodus. (I can’t imagine 10,000 people being lost in the desert for 40 years, but again…)
Let’s go now to the year 721 BC when the Assyrians overruns Israel, disperses the Israelites and takes thousands as slaves. Israel as a nation vanishes. The year 721 BC is the end of old Israel, until Israel it is recreated by the British in 1948.
In 721 BC the total world population is estimated to be around 80 million people. Again 70 % of the total is living in China and in India – that leaves about 12 million people scattered around the world.
Is it possible that the Israel that were destroyed in 721 BC had no more than 50,000 people living in that area of the world in small villages raging in size from a few hundred people to maybe 2,000 or 3,000 people?
Can anyone on his right mind justify the mess in the Middle East based on this story of a very small group of people who happen to have lived a long time ago?
***********
Here is the estimated global population from 10,000 BC to 2011 AD.
Total World Population in Selected Years:
Year…………..# of World Population
10,000 BC…………4 million people
5,000 BC…………..5 million
4,000 BC…………..7 million
3,000 BC…………14 million
2,000 BC…………27 million
1,000 BC…………50 million
500 BC………….100 million
200 BC………….150 million
1 AD…………….170 million
200 AD………….190 million
300 AD………….190 million
400 AD………….190 million
500 AD………….190 million
600 AD………….200 million
700 AD………….210 million
800 AD……….…220 million
900 AD…….……240 million
1,000 AD………..265 million
1,100 AD………..320 million
1,200 AD………..360 million
1,300 AD………..360 million
1,400 AD………..350 million
1,500 AD………..425 million
1,550 AD………..480 million
1,600 AD………..545 million
1,700 AD………..610 million
1,750 AD………..720 million
1,800 AD………..900 million
1,850 AD……...1,200 million or 1.2 billion
1,900 AD……...1,625 million or 1.6 billion
1,925 AD……...2,000 million or 2.0 billion
1,950 AD……...2,500 million or 2.5 billion
1,960 AD……...3,000 million or 3.0 billion
1,975 AD……...4,000 million or 4.0 billion
1,985 AD……...5,000 million or 5.0 billion
1,999 AD……...6,000 million or 6.0 billion
2,006 AD……...6,500 million or 6.5 billion
2,011 AD.....7,000 million or 7.0 billion (people by October 2011)
Note: If you do check various sources regarding the history of world population then you will find out that the various estimates varies a little from source to source for the figures before 1 AD, but at the end of the day their estimates are not too far apart.
.
JohnGelles 05/26/2011 11:44 PM Report
In the possible future, after the information sciences have really matured, an audience such as our own -- for Charlie Rose -- will know the objective history and facts are, how many in the audience know them, and what use we are to make of the comments.
By that time there will be audiences, perhaps very much like today's. But comments by that time may NOT come from a lunatic fringe the way they do on this board. All the anti-American, anti-Israeli, anti-Congress commentary here is sick, twisted, false and morbid. There is not a word among its sentences worth reading.
Tonight on PBS News Hour there was a short documentary account of a truly evil government in North Korea. That government ought to arouse the kind of hate and disdain we see thrown at the democratic state of Israel for sick reasons that defy all understanding.
The Charlie Rose examination of the Israeli - American alliance was on topic and on top of the issues. The sick comments that have been posted would make some sense if aimed at a government like that in North Korea which is as savage as any I have ever seen exposed.
If I were Charlie Rose I would wonder just how many in the audience are as uninformed as those who've written here. And if that number is high I might take a few shows to consider the situation. Studying the brain is a wonderful adventure for us all. But if there are many in the audience, like the sickies I complain of, we had better study something more immediate: for if American institutions are producing many of the brains behind these comments, we had better get back to kindergarten before we spend too much time at a level these commentators are separated from by a million miles.
I have complained before of how poor the comments were. It just may be that they must be completely ignored -- while the show's professional content tries to exit the great wasteland TV has been called before.
DaveT5 05/26/2011 08:47 PM Report
It's always odd to see people who decry "Holocaust promotion" instantly compare the Knesset to National Socialists. If you think the Netanyahu postulate is false on its face--i.e. that Israel's interests really aren't the same as America's, and that it is unsound to help prop up a military state with dim prospects in the demographic long run--you should be chastening the President for wimping out here. Members of Congress have no morality and should not be confused with the voting public, who consistently aver their opposition to foreign aid and might be brought around to your point of view. I think it reveals a lack of true concern for remedying the situation; clinging to this ontology of scheming faraway Jews fulfills your emotional needs in some sick way. "The Israeli PM is a Fascist" is the best you can come up with?
lyn117 05/26/2011 08:36 PM Report
First, considering that Netanyahu's party Likud in its official doctrine denies the right of Palestinians to have a state, if Abbas is required to deny Hamas a place in a Palestinian government why should Likud be allowed a place in any Israeli government?
Secondly, what Netanyahu offered the Palestinians was a state in name only, the "generosity" didn't include Israel giving back what Israel has no legal right to retain
And if the Palestinians have to recognize Israel as a "Jewish state", will Israel recognize that the Palestinians are the original and indigenous inhabitants of the land it claims, or that Israel's zionist founders used a deliberate campaign of mass murder and terror aimed at otherwise peaceful Palestinian civilians. According to one report, after when some 25 captives from the village of Tira, south of Haifa, asked for water from the Israeli soldiers, they were instead given gasoline and burned alive. There are plenty of similar reports of massacres by Israeli/Zionist troops - that's how Israel was founded, that's how it acquired the land from the original Palestinian inhabitants, that's always been it's policy, to rid the land of as many non-Jews as possible.
And what Netanyahu means by "peace" is for Israel to keep it's stolen land in "peace," continue to deny equal rights or any rights including the right govern themselves, the right to live in their native land, or even the right to life to the native people. What a bunch of craven toadies our congress is.
robdverity 05/26/2011 06:13 PM Report
Bibi's Congressional appearance was disquieting on several counts. First, his delivery was reminiscent of a Mussolini caricature: jaw jutted, clipped English, chopping the air, guttural delivery pandering to the worst in the sycophantic venal whores.
Second, their venality overcoming them they in lock-step unison performed the sycophantic leap-to-their-feet on cue. The only thing missing was their arms extended in Nazi salute, shouting SIEG HEIL!
Fear of losing a PAC contribution is obviously compelling.
These same whores will doubtless some day vote for a proxy war for Israel against Iran. Our Israel support cost us 9/11, Iraq and Af-Pak. What's another bit of mayhem for our "ally.?" Heil Bibi!
JohnGelles 05/26/2011 02:44 PM Report
Zee puts it this way:
"... Palestine was stolen, its people tortured in camps and treated like animanls or at best second class citizens with no rights."
Gelles puts it this way:
Under the Ottoman Empire there were no Palestinian or Jewish Nations. Under the UN there will soon be both.
In between the time from 1918 until now, the Ottoman Empire withdrew to become the Turkish Nation, France and England administered territory where Arab Nations are now formed, such as Saudi Arabia and Jordan. And WW II finished what WW I had started in 1914.
World War II ended with the formation of the UN. In WW II the Grand Mufti's Arabian forces fought at Hitler's side and were significant in their war against the Jews in promoting the slaughter of six million European Jewish civilians.
When the UN divided Palestine into two nations, all the Arab nations attacked the new Jewish State.
Six million dead Jews were not enough for the Arabs, if the survivors were to live as a nation where, long before the Ottoman Empire was formed, these Jews had been a nation made a part of the Roman Empire by force of arms.
The UN camps for Palestinians were created to keep them alive. They were not developed as a nation by their Muslim brothers who had no better use for them.
After the Arabs were defeated by the tiny new state of Israel, the latter grew in size and strength until 1967, when in the six day war the Jews occupied land held by Jordan and Egypt that never was allowed to become Palestine by these Arabs.
There is more to the story in Wikipedia. I have no more time. But the solution to these problems favored by Congress is the fair one.
zee 05/26/2011 05:39 AM Report
How insulting is it to the arab world that bibi gets 27 standing ovations in the congress stating israel might be generous with some land, after all of palestine was stolen, its people tortured in camps and treated like animanls or at best second class citizens with no rights.
jasha 05/26/2011 01:40 AM Report
I enjoyed this show, but I think it really would have benefited from a Palestinian, or Arab-Israeli perspective. I realize the topic was US-Israeli relations but by not including any Arab voice I think a bit part of the picture was missing.
thorm197 05/26/2011 01:37 AM Report
When men lack the imagination for peace, they guarantee its absence.
thorm197 05/26/2011 01:34 AM Report
When men lack the imagination of peace, they guarantee its absence.
JohnGelles 05/26/2011 12:48 AM Report
Although we express our opinions out loud in this democracy, none of us have any hope that such opinions will influence the real world outcome we may prefer.
So why do we write them? IMO we write them to ourselves to influence our own thoughts on matters that we care about.
If I'm correct to some degree, does that mean we never read other offered opinions? Obviously not. Some of us read some opinions held by other people.
So, having talked to ourselves on these boards, what is our purpose in talking to other people? IMO, it is mostly to aggravate an already aggravated audience. However, some exchanges are intended to pacify opponents -- to cool it.
In this particular set of comments on Jews and Palestinians there is much to aggravate and little to cool an opponent. Chris Matthews frequently asks to be told something he does not already know. Among these 20 or more comments, there is nothing we don't already know. I know there are some Jews and some Palestinians who would be good neighbors in a two state solution. I know that all the nation states on Earth will expire some day. I know I want America to last the longest and be the best. It was founded and nurtured by many who saw it as the New Jerusalem. I am with these people and hope we will prevail. America's Civil War spoke to such issue.
Now we are confronted by Muslims who aim terrorist attacks on America and every other people whom they have not yet conquered. Some American see this the other way around. They share an opinion that we and not they are the terrorists. They are free to do this in America and the lands Muslims hate the most -- including Israel. In Muslim lands, people are not free to do the same.
This clinches the intellectual game for me -- we support free thought, they do not.
As to acts of KINDNESS TO STRANGERS by specialized rescue teams from America, Israel, the Germany and Japan of post WW II vintage, etc., I find Israel a real force for good. No Muslim nation is yet in the running for such honors.
BENEZRAA 05/25/2011 11:20 PM Report
IS PRESIDENT OBAMA TODAY'S SOLOMON OR ANTI-SOLOMON?
The challenge before the Israelis and the Arabs is whether or not two States will finally be fully realized, recognized, and well-defined in principle based on the 1947 intent of the UN to divide Palestine into a Jewish State and an Arab State.
It is naive to think that the movement by Mahmoud Abbas of the PA calling for UN recognition of an Arab "State of Palestine" was undertaken without the involvement of the Obama Administration.
Despite the pressure laid upon Israel by the Obama Administration and by consistent US Policy favoring a "Two-State Solution" that has reined in Israel far more than the media and world opinion give credit, it is also true that there is now pressure on the Arabs of the PA and Hamas to recognize Israel in the context of today's window of opportunity for the recognition of an Arab "State of Palestine"; recognition of Israel by the PA and Hamas may mean unequivocal recognition of Israel's existential right, Israel's actual existence, and the renunciation of any doctrine calling for the destruction of Israel past, present, and future.
The timeliness to "put up or shut up" is as much pressure on the Arabs as it is on the Israelis. And, just as it is naive to think that movement [at the UN towards recognition this autumn of an Arab "State of Palestine"] may exist in a vacuum independent of the Obama Administration, it is equally naive to think that world opinion - which in so many ways favors the Arabs - will tolerate failure of the Arabs to perceive and act on the present opportunity [for the creation of an Arab "State of Palestine" by fully recognizing Israel].
It is also naive for Israel to fail to consider and plan for a worst case scenario in which the entire world including President Obama may recognize an Arab "State of Palestine" without requiring the acceptance of any preconditions by the Arabs such as full recognition of Israel.
There may be the appearance above of two contradictory viewpoints. Lacking a "crystal ball" in which to see the future, the question is open: is the world fully lined up towards destruction of Israel, or is the world more objective than appearances strongly imply? If it comes down to the World v. Israel, is President Obama a Solomon or an anti-Solomon? Thus far it is Israel that has been willing to recognize an Arab "State of Palestine", and the Arabs have not been willing to recognize Israel. Like the two mothers, who come before Solomon, when one mother has "accidentally" smothered her own child and then claimed the other mother's child as her own, Israel and Arabia stand before the world, and the question is: will Arabia continue to smother her own child? Time and again Israel has given the Arabs far more than the world has acknowledged of Israel, much like the mother before Solomon, who was willing to give away her child to the other mother, rather than see the child split in half by the swipe of a sword; each mother would then walk away with half of a dead child.
May President Obama be blessed to be a Solomon and not an anti-Solomon.
nofoolonthehill 05/25/2011 09:31 PM Report
The Balfor Declaration of 1917 was as follows:
The declaration, a typed letter signed in ink by Balfour, reads as follows:
Foreign Office,
November 2nd, 1917.
Dear Lord Rothschild,
I have much pleasure in conveying to you, on behalf of His Majesty's Government, the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations which has been submitted to, and approved by, the Cabinet:
"His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country".
I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation.
Yours sincerely
Arthur James Balfour
I expect that you are quite familiar with it. Perhaps your four less than enchanting quests, our robust State Department, and the entire US Congress should consider the original intent.
robdverity 05/25/2011 07:43 PM Report
Bibi's: Bin Laden, "you got him!," to US Congress was graceless, misdirected and sophomorishly misguided. Obama got him, (most likely) because Congress wasn't involved.
If Bibi had an oz. of grace, he would have congratulated Obama in the W. Wing (privately - we've crowed enough). Revelatory high school chest thumping by the thug-of-all-thugs merely exacerbates and further radicalizes anti-US-Israeli sentiments for further terrorists acts. Which may be the underlying Bibi motive, hoping a second major US attack would galvanize more support (perversely) for Israel. After all any US price (a la 9/11), is perfectly fine per the arrogance of Bibi and Israel.
And Bibi's sooo magnanimous. He says Israel will be generous in negotiating borders - WITH LAND PREVIOUSLY STOLEN.
Support for ambivalent-US value autocracies such as Saudis at least gets us oil (or stable oil prices); while support of conflicting values for a non-pluralistic, non-democratic Jewish state gets boorish confrontation from the chief Yiddish thug.
mutex 05/25/2011 07:29 PM Report
To: JohnGelles
Over the course of my life I have got to know people from many countries around the world and you know what...they are pretty much all the same. They have hopes and dreams and they care about their friends and family. Politics and government are not usually very high up on their list of priorities unless they are oppressed. The unspoken truth is that Israelis and Palestinians, Jews and Arabs (as individuals) are pretty much the same. A very interesting social/psychological experiment would be for the two populations to switch places and histories. I believe if this were done you would see Jewish people strapping bombs to their children and firing rockets into neighborhoods while the Palestinians would probsbly end up exacting revenge with their tanks and planes. Just because it is understandable doesn't make it right though. In any battle between the 'haves' and the 'have nots' I put the burden of resolution on the 'haves'...to whom much is given, much is required. I don't hate the Jews. Most Jews I've met have been smart, witty, funny and kind, albeit very stubborn. The truth though is that they have brought about a great injury on the Palestinians (in their desperation to rid themselves of persecution) and because of this injury they owe a great debt. They need to make amends with humility and respect and if that means temporarily turning the other cheek and not responding to violence with more violence then that is what they should feel compelled by honor to do.
You are right that there is plenty of unfairness and injustice right here in the good ol USA. There is plenty of injustice all over the world but how about we all just agree to confront and combat injustice whenever and wherever we find it? Haven't the Palestinians suffered enough? One humble human being to another...can't we at least agree on this?
Ricardo_Amaral 05/25/2011 06:26 PM Report
Here is what the majority of Americans think about Israel:
The Alex Jones Show: World War III – Part 1 of 3 – May 24, 2011
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CNg_zxsOEc
Time: 12 min.
JohnGelles 05/25/2011 05:55 PM Report
Mutex -- David M. Gondek:
Your view of the history of recent and ancient times may be correct. My view, which is, like, the opposite of yours, may be closer to truth and nearer to fair.
What to do. Get to know real people from both places -- if possible. Read "A History of the Jews" by Paul Johnson -- you will love it.
Imagine the difficulty we have in America of being fair to Americans who are poor and out of work. Many Palestinians are poor and out of work. It's not easy to be fair to them. Some day it will happen in America and over there.
JohnGelles 05/25/2011 05:34 PM Report
DP suggests:
"Oh that's right two much money stands to be lost by U.S. contractors in line to build a wall and missile defense system for Israel."
DP has a sound point -- that peace between a new Palestine and the present State of Israel, -- is an unsolvable problem or wish.
But I do not see investment in defense as a big hurdle. Rather I see investment by many nations and private parties in Palestinian and Israeli business as likely.
Such investment may be very successful. If so, peace will be enduring without walls or expensive laser ray defenses. Such defenses will be cheap. And they will sell well in may places for a while -- until people learn to like peace and hate stupidity.
A rivalry between Palestine and Israel will be natural and positive -- if it becomes like many others between good neighbors.
I went to a Jewish summer camp when young that had half Canadian and half American campers. We were 200 mies from Montreal and Westchester County.
The rivalry was good for us. The camp was small. The food kosher.
The time was tragic -- in light of the Holocaust, rewarding in light of the people fortunate enough to be there.
Our finest athlete died as an RCAF gunner over Germany.
I did not die at that time -- but will see him soon in Heaven -- to tell him what happened after he died for me and you.
tabs 05/25/2011 05:34 PM Report
For decades one has been listening to talk about a ME peace process that would result in an equitable solution for the Israeli Palestinian question. At one time or another one side or the other has found something objectionable with the various proposed peace plans. One can conclude from this decades long standoff that neither side is willing to concede anything nor accept peace on any grounds except their own terms. So far be it for one to offer any commentary and or step in between two parties who for all intents and purposes are intent on continuing a Hatfield. McCoy like feud.
That said two points come to mind:
1. The strategic interest of the US has not been in play in the Israeli, Arab conflict since the US and USSR last stood toe to toe on the brink in 1973. Since the Egyptian, Israeli peace accords of the late 70's this issue has been left to simmer on the back burner for decades as the strategic interests of the US have moved on.
2. It is about time one side or the other has come to the conclusion that violence begets violence and that the peacefull intent of the Arab Spring is the path to follow. This will then either force one side to concede either in terms or moral standing.
mutex 05/25/2011 05:05 PM Report
To: ShalomFreedman
I don't agree that Jerusalem should be "wiped off the map" but I do understand the frustration that causes people to make statements like that. The elitist attitude that would condone a fake peace process while Palestinians are condemned to further suffering is indefensible. I David M. Gondek am willing to openly and clearly state that I believe you and your fellow conspirator, Bret Stephens, are immoral cowards.
The true "hegemonic power of the Middle East" is Israel via the United States. US foreigh policy has been exposed with the events in Bahrain and Saudi Arabia...if further exposure were necessary for any objective observer. US support of Israel is neither honorable nor even pragmatic which is why I ask again...Why can't even the US President stand up to Israel on even ONE small point? Something is terribly wrong for the tail to wag the dog like this.
It is unfortunate and unjust that Jewish people (with the help of the British and Americans) stole this land from the Palestinians 63 years ago but it happened. Now, it is up to every moral person in the world to work to at least mitigate this injustice. There is no moral defense for a 'Jewish State' any more than there is a defense for an 'Aryan State'. The very concept is elitist, racist and an anachronism. Many Jewish people realize this but just as in the US where many people realize our imperialist foreign policies have done us more harm than good the Israeli leaders continue to believe that fear and deception are the only way they can stay in power.
Honorable people would have solved this issue in months not decades. It starts with some humility from the Jewish people and their leaders. As it was in South Africa so it will one day be in Israel. It is time (past time) for the Jewish people to let go of their arrogance and stubbornness and ask for forgiveness. You don't obtain security by threatening or persecuting others. Trade in your military power for honor, integrity and compassion and in the course of time you will achieve the peace and safety you say you desire. Anything else just brings you more shame.
JohnGelles 05/25/2011 05:04 PM Report
A graduate student may some day analyze the Charlie Rose show staff and sponsors, its audience, and the comments posted on these classified topical boards.
That student will conclude the SHOW was, with Front Line, American Experience, Nova and a dozen others, damn good news, theater, and education, which eventually will lead to free Universities on wireless networks that bring civilization to the mass of human beings who need it most.
The STAFF and SPONSORS of the show will be found to have been well off, well educated and well meaning.
The shows OPINION BOARDS will be judged poor, under funded, under developed, overly open to trash and nonsense, and a total waste of time compared to Wikipedia.
Wikipedia is not perfect. It have helped the existing political economy to tolerate deadly unemployment, poverty and embedded ignorance to bring democracy to its knees in current years.
But Wikipedia and Google are trying to do better. The Rose Show Boards are not.
There ought to be two sets of boards. One the same as now.
A second set with zero cost to the SHOW that invites some among the audience who care to create BOARDS worthy of the SHOW.
Just how would they do that?
1. They would not be free. What you had accepted for publication would cost you money.
2. They would not be neutral. There would be classified boards, maybe half a dozen, each with unpaid volunteers who subscribe to a mission statement that explained its political purpose well enough for Charlie to allow it to operate.
3. When any board was deemed by CR to fail to live up to his expectations, it would be silenced.
SharkswithfrikingLazers 05/25/2011 04:49 PM Report
Charlie, I am so, so sorry you have to visit this issue week after week, month after month and year after year. I am boring myself just writing about it.
Perhaps in your new brain series you can have a segment on hotheads--those who refuse to develop--and operate from--their pre-frontal cortex.
tabs 05/25/2011 04:40 PM Report
It took exactly one day for that masterful CIC image that Obama adopted after snuffing out the lights of Bin Laden to relegated to the shyte can of history. All that had to be done is a leader from a nation whose very survival depends on the USA to scold Obama like a little boy who was up to mischief. Then this foreign leader goes before the US Congress and gets thunderous applause from both sides of the aisle. One wonders just what it would take for Democrats to be snapped out of their delusional state of denial not only about the leadership qualities but the very perceptions of the leader of their party and sitting President who seems to be using the WH as his own personal travel agency?
D-Program 05/25/2011 04:29 PM Report
The so called "experts" commentary was pretty embarrassing. If we are to believe them, it seems we are silly to even be discussing such an ridiculous issue and it is a unsolvable situation that the U.S. should continue to sweep under the rug. We are constantly making enemies with the Arab world because of our unwavering support for Israel as they violate UN Resolutions and continue building settlements, and not allowing humanitarian aid to reach those in need. The U.S. needs to get on the right side of history and support human rights. Perhaps we should all read the Palestine Papers and then decide who is being an obstructionist of the peace process. Oh that's right two much money stands to be lost by U.S. contractors in line to build a wall and missile defense system for Israel.
JohnGelles 05/25/2011 04:23 PM Report
The SHOW on this topic, "real peace between Muslim and Jew over the borders and purpose of a Jewish Nation -- where it is today (or will be in the foreseeable future)" -- was enlightening and praiseworthy.
Shalom Freedman and John Gelles, who are Americans of Jewish stock and persuasion, (I believe), make sense in their comment on the SHOW.
The other comment by AG, REM, and mutex, ignores the wisdom imparted by the SHOW and expresses anti-Zionist and anti-Jewish propaganda of the worst kind -- lies, prejudice and hate that are common among the ignorant.
Why do so many Americans like the Jews they know, and wonder why anti-Jewish, anti-American terrorists don't give up suicide and bombs and try to state their case in honest argument and seek to live in democracies -- not under tyrannical leaders who would impose their will with bloodshed instead of holding fair elections as is done in most modern successful heirs to Roman, Greek and Hebrew law and custom, as advanced by England, France and especially the United States of America.
Israel follows this democratic tradition. No Muslim nation does this -- but Turkey and Indonesia are trying not to be the worst that they can be.
As to force, French beginnings, American help, and Israeli effort, have made the Jewish nation a nuclear armed nation -- which they were not when Germany killed six million innocent Jews for being born.
There is every reason to have confidence in the common sense of Obama, Netanyahu, and the American people (in and out of Congress) to support human rights in the Middle East and peace where it is possible.
The Arab Revolution under weigh in Egypt and other Arab lands will turn into America's friends or enemies over coming decades. Israel will remain an American ally forever. It will do because, except for the disparity in their size, they are as alike as any two nations can be. In due course, they will be examples to all other nations of giant size and peanut size democracy -- whose love of life and all mankind is evident in all they do.
charlizecourriers 05/25/2011 03:49 PM Report
The imposition of a Zionist state on the homeland of the Palestinians was the last and greatest mistake of 20th century colonialism. The answer to this mistake is ONE state, with all people living peacefully, side by side. For this to happen, the Palestinians need to delay, as long as necessary, any negotiations with the interlopers (and not all Israelis fall into that category). The people of the world will ultimately resolve this issue and impose it on all actors. This show once again demonstrates the Zionist bias of Charlie Rose. Where is the Palestinian guest? Shame on the Propaganda Broadcast System and Charlie Rose! Let remember that those who live by the sword shall die by the sword...
AntonGrambihler 05/25/2011 03:35 PM Report
If Israel becomes a Jewish State, does that mean all other States will become Non-Jewish?
If Israel denies the Gentiles their Right-Of-Return, does that mean that the Right-Of-Return granted to Jewish people will be nullified?
Is this what over 35,000,000 Gentiles (Including Middle East Gentiles) died for?
ShalomFreedman 05/25/2011 02:50 PM Report
This was an illuminating discussion and I learned a lot from it. The consensus seems to be that there is no immediate prospect of a real peace being made, and that the United States should not be making an impossible goal its first priority. The U.S. focus should be on containing Iran and preventing it from becoming the hegemonic power of the Middle East. I also appreciated especially Bret Stephans analysis as he underlined the fact that despite the conflict Israel has in its sixty- three years as a state made great progress and become a First World nation.
PS The anti - Semitic commentator with diarrhea of the mouth who goes by the alias of ReMant and posts regularly on the 'Charlie Rose' site should have the courage and post under his own name. His remark that he would like to see 'Jerusalem wiped off the map' shows the quality of his mind and his morality.
REMant 05/25/2011 11:46 AM Report
Most headlines read something like "Netanyahu to Palestinians: Drop Dead" The Wash Post however called it "Netanyahu's Vision of Peace," but dumped onto a back page. If that's the vision of the Rose show as well, as it appears to be from the opinion floated here, it certainly involves them in a conundrum, for it should not go unnoticed that the Israeli prime minister is making the same argument as Mubarak and Qaddafi.
IMHO the Congress should be ashamed of themselves for treating him like Churchill or Mandela or our own president, and I fear the Bin Laden's assassination has carried them back 10 years in time. They have now made it abundantly clear what they think of both Palestinians and Muslims, and proved his point. Mr Netanyahu, himself, is a good illustration of why Jews have made themselves repugnant to every population in which they have sought refuge. When Shakespeare ridiculed them, he was right on, and so was Jesus of Nazareth. If Netanyahu wants a war of annihilation, like Shylock he deserves no less. If the united Muslim nations (and I would not assume that only Shiites hate Israel or are upset with the US) attack them now I doubt there is any way they could be stopped. Not by the French, not by Britain, not by the US, not by the whole Security Council. Perhaps our eschatological minister was right after all.
Personally, I'd just as soon see Jerusalem wiped off the map. It's caused more than enough trouble. But there's no need to bother with that. All the Palestinians have to do is march on Israeli cities just like the kids in other Mediterranean countries are doing. If those youth flood Israel's streets it is hard to see how Netanyahu can continue to wrap Jews in that flag. Not everyone can be oppressed at the same time. Indeed, Israeli youth should join them. The Zionists have been war criminals for 100 years and richly deserve to hauled before the ICC. Let them try to stop a protest. If Netanyahu were really interested in a just settlement with the Palestinians, he could start with the treatment of those remaining within its borders.
None of the bluster matters either, nor telling us to accept the status quo, because within a generation the Jews will be so outnumbered that transfer of power will be a fait accompli, unless, of course, our progressive fundamentalist American legislators are willing to sign off on Israeli-run gas chambers. In any case there's a big difference between recognizing Israel's right to exist and recognizing its present existence. During WWII the Zionists fought a guerrilla war against the British like the Irish. In 1947 the UN gave them half of historical Palestine, but they took three-quarters. Since 1967 they've occupied all of it. But this fall a Palestinian state will no doubt win world recognition. Perhaps "Bibi" should go to France.
So, no, the inclusion wasn't a presidential blunder, altho wavering about it may be, because there's no way Israel can continue to paint itself as the oppressed when Palestinians descend onto the streets. To have sided with Netanyahu would have been to abandon them, as well as the principles Obama annunciated. Netanyahu has chosen to side with misguided Republicans like Michelle Bachmann and Jason Chaffetz, who are no doubt looking to revive the Cold War, and thumb his nose at the administration for siding with the Arab youth, which further reduces his chances of pretending to be the oppressed instead of the oppressor. If Obama stands firm against them, and the likes of Harry Reid and Steny Hoyer who've joined them in a reprise of TARP, and we get another Bush or McCain from the GOP, I'd be forced to vote Democratic and give up any hope of financial reform, because if we go to war in the Middle East, there won't be any anyway.
BTW, the Balfour Declaration stated: "His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."