Op-ed: US secretary of state keeps saying Israeli-Palestinian issue cannot remain unchanged. What about the situation in Syria, Iraq, Russia, China and Turkey?
Like a regular mantra, US Secretary of State John Kerry has a habit of saying that the Israeli-Palestinian issue cannot remain unchanged.
Strangely enough, he isn’t saying that about the conflict in Syria, where the death toll has already crossed the 200,000 mark with people being slaughtered, beheaded and dying in different ways, on its way to the 250,000 mark; he isn’t saying that about four million refugees from Syria and 10 million displaced people; he isn’t saying that about the Islamic State, which is beheading people and butchering minorities; he isn’t saying that about Iraq, which has been torn into pieces, or about Baghdad’s airport which is about to fall into the hands of jihadist terror.
He isn’t saying that about Libya either, a country controlled by a coalition of insane jihad organizations, on the verge of Europe. He isn’t saying that about Yemen, which has died and is controlled by wild tribes navigated from behind the scenes by the “smiling” Iran; he isn’t saying that about the intolerable uranium enrichment in Tehran, which has him and the West wrapped around its little finger.
He isn’t saying that about Russia either, which not only conquered eastern Ukraine, but also annexed the huge Crimea region. It isn’t an “occupation,” after all; that only exists in Israel.
He isn’t saying that about Turkey, which brutally conquered one-third of the island of Cyprus, and still controls the area; he isn’t saying that about China either, which is slowly turning Tibet into a region inhabited by Chinese; he isn’t saying that about Hezbollah, which is piling up tens of thousands of missiles on Israel’s border; he isn’t saying that about his Qatari friends, who are cunningly funding the terror that the United States is fighting against; he isn’t saying that about Hamas either, which proudly announced that it is rebuilding its network of terror tunnels targeting Israeli territory.
He is only saying that about Israel – the only safe, stable, democratic place one can rely on in the Middle East. Only in Israel, the situation cannot remain unchanged.
I would just like to mention that it was John Kerry who was Syrian President Bashar Assad’s personal friend and sat down with him many times for intimate meetings. It was John Kerry, in his former position as chairman of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, who worked to return the American ambassador to Damascus and pressure Israel, with the price being the Golan Heights of course. Then too, the situation could not remain unchanged, and aren’t we lucky that it did remain unchanged.
The question is why is he always singling out Israel of all the nations in the world? Could it be that it pains him to see Israel secure and thriving, and that’s why he has such an urge to weaken it? To sell it to a Palestinian gang whose only goal is to weaken Israel, and then resume the fighting against it after it crumbles?
Can’t he hear the leader of this gang, Mahmoud Abbas, referring to the Jews as “impure,” as they are defiling the Temple Mount when they visit it? Can’t he see the law sentencing a Palestinian to death for daring to sell a house to a Jew? Abbas even added that he would step up the punishment for selling homes to Jews, but how can a death sentence be stepped up?
The situation cannot remain unchanged. Perhaps the foreign minister of the United States would care to explain to us why he only uses this expression here. Why is he singling Israel and the Jews out of all the nations?
yamit82 Said:
I prefer Prime Rib roast which I fix frequently. Most go supper.
honeybee Said:
Do you think we will be hungry?
I love Steak though how do you like yours bloody rare, medium, or well done?
yamit82 Said:
In that case I won’t share my steak tartar with you.
@ honeybee:
In 3 min? Even manning ain’t that good.
Actually it was a boring game I’ve been watching with one eye mostly listening while I read and type.
The only reason I tuned in was to razz you. 🙂
@ yamit82:
The Broncos have the Pat on the run, only 27 more points to go.
dweller Said:
Here is where your dirty mind belongs
honeybee Said:
🙂 🙂 >>>
dweller Said:
the quiet drooling all over the pundit !!!! Sweetie
yamit82 Said:
Ted is correct !!!!
yamit82 Said:
dweller Said:
your’re the Energizer bunny?
dweller Said:
Cindy, if the slipper fits just wear it and enjoy
Bingo!
dweller Said:
You are drawn to the christian church e.g.marketing jesus
you defend the deceptions of Paul as marketing
you extoll the virtues of celibacy
The roman church contains these characteristics plus a reputation for pedophilia, celibacy, sexual repression, etc.
You tell lies and then deny it which exhibits the same hypocrisy used by the church. you call it marketing.
You pretend to be of a high moral character but exhibit the opposite in your behavior, similar to the church.
you despise women and demonstrate your derision by using psychobabble as a deception, like Paul, to exploit their vulnerability and to establish a dominating position in order to continue your derision(e.g. Twinkie?)
considering all these traits and characteristics of your behavior my “insight” informs me that you were probably sexually abused by a pedophiliac “celibate” priest when young and are “acting out” that trauma repeatedly today.
dweller Said:
me too 🙂
dweller Said to Yamit:
misogyny, lying, psychobabbling, narcisism, OCD,empty suitism, for starters.
dweller Said:
100’s of psychobabble postings You appear to have a poor memory when convenient and OCD when trying to prove yourpoint. did you forget my posts citing your psychobabble by example and even providing the definition? Or is your forgetfulness a form of deception or marketing? As you keep records I am sure you can pull them out, if you wanted to. Of course, you will ludicrously and transparently deny that your statement is a lie, perhaps its Pauline marketing?
fits to a tee.
dweller Said:
I’ve shown hundreds in the past, no need to repeat the examples, i am not an OCD like you. You can go back in the posts and find them, but we both know that you remember and are being deceitful. Everyone here has seen your MO. Your denials mean nothing just like your fairy tales of psychobabble. According to your warped logic it is for you to prove my statement wrong.
dweller Said:
Not the sole purpose but when present, the main purpose. Your other purpose is a form of narcissistic exhibitionism to demonstrate how clever you are to yourself.
the main thing to remember is that:
each time you tell another fairy tale, that you brought from the recesses of your mind, this timeless statement is once more to be remembered. How odd that you have never ONCE been able to show you are right by any normal standards. You state your psychobabble opinions as if they were fact and have never been able to demonstrate their veracity, not once! Your argument is that they are right until proven wrong, like Cinderella or Goldilocks.
Why do you always call HB Twinkie?
Kerry is a Librul
Obama is a Librul
Most Jews in America and the West are libruls
The Democratic party is Librul
Europe is librul
Liberals are hypersensitive to Islamic sensibilities.
And Muslims regard Jews as being vermin.
Ergo…
I feel I must warn you: Mainlining PCP sure makes you wet your pants!!
My philosophy of Life: Never resort to reason when violence is a viable option.
dweller Said:
Thanks for the plug I do hope many read it.
Your comment above seems like effete whining to me and probably to everyone else!!! Do continue.!!!
@ Ted Belman:
If it looks like blackmail, and it sounds like blackmail, and it smells like blackmail — it’s blackmail.
This is his not-so-subtle way of trying to USE you to intimidate me into changing the way I write. I don’t tell other people how to write, and I won’t be dictated TO in that regard by others. Blackmail by any other name would smell no less foul.
I put good store in what insights come to me about people & their psychological motivations. Anybody who doesn’t like or agree with those observations is free to dispute them — or ignore them.
They are NOT offered for the sole purpose of insulting. (I don’t need to to ‘disguise’ an insult in order to express it. When I want to insult somebody, you’ll know it!)
Frankly, the very imputation of insulting intentions on my part in these matters is ITSELF insulting.
And the idea that the attacks (that have come largely from the individual who made the above remark) are supposed to constitute ‘EXPOSURE’ would be hilarious if it weren’t so obviously absurd. Just READ them, for heaven’s sake! — They’re caricatures.
Why wouldn’t I want to give you a break? For what it’s worth, this current riff had its beginnings at around post #42, previous page.
@ b-e-r-n-a-r-d-r-o-s-s:
Of course. You’ve offerred no examples of the charges you make.
What “psychobabbling”?
What “condescending”?
What “deprecating insults to women”?
SHOW me some. Let’s see the posts you rely on for such claims.
I deny vehemently each-&-every one of your charges.
I am not drawn to any ideology OR institution known for any such thing.
If you think I am, then identify the ‘ideology’ and ‘institution’ — and show how I am ‘drawn’ to them.
You haven’t the ghost of a case.
@ y-a-m-i-t-8-2:
I never assumed anything of the sort. Show me ANY post of mine saying or implying such — let alone, one ‘disparaging’ the (non-)fact.
Till recently, I’d regarded it an open question as to whether you had KIDS. (I have no problem with leaving a matter as an open question; doesn’t bother me a bit.) It was only recently that you’d spoken of children or of grandchildren — and then only (at first) by answer to a question of MINE — in an exchange about something you’d said regarding whether Jewish descendants will know anything about a chupah, etc.
— to which I’d replied, “Will yours?” Your answer to that question was the first reference I recall your making to kids & grandkids.
HOWEVER. . . . it was quite clear to me almost from the day I began reading this blog in 2007 (and posting to it a cpl months later), that you’d been married and were no longer so. And THAT was because notwithstanding what you’ve said here, you had unambiguously SAID that you’d been married — that you’d “cried like a baby when she left, etc.”
You have YET to display such an error on my part. Show it to me. Pull up the actual post which demonstrates or illustrates your allegation, and I’ll be delighted to LOOK at it..
There is no record here of any assessment of mine to have constituted ‘psychobabble’ — and a great many instances of yourself (and that other bozo) to be PRACTICING psychobabble while accusing me of it.
Nor is there any record of your having ever so much as attempted — even once — to examine any assessment of mine ON ITS OWN TERMS, so frightened are you of the intuitive process itself. . . .
I showed you one, but you refuse to take it seriously — R-O-S-S’s two posts atop this page and his #50 on previous page are gratuitously sneering attacks on me; that’s ALL they are. Read them for yourself. They were not in response to any post of mine which had been either addressed to him or even written about him. He just leaped in and seized the opportunity for a new slime fest.
— If you honestly can’t see in those posts the evidence of the smallness, enviousness, vindictiveness, and maliciousness I’m talking about, then you just don’t WANNA see it, buster.
@ y-a-m-i-t-8-2:
You don’t need my ‘agreement’ to hate me. I’m afraid I can’t reciprocate, however.
— Hating you would be a luxury I cannot afford. Haters make stupid, unnecessary mistakes. I don’t need to be making more than I absolutely have to. . . . Made more than enough of ’em in the past. Trying to cut back; you do understand.
Of course you will. You need to. I quite comprehend.
Strictly an illusion, albeit a common one. The ‘rewards’ are short-lived and decidedly addictive (a lot like smack, actually, CTTOI). Moreover, precisely because of the escapist nature of hate, you can’t see what it’s doing to your emotional life itself.
It isn’t “me” you want to beat — you don’t KNOW me from Adam.
(And I’ve deliberately kept it that way. I never deliberately misstate anything about myself online, but I do know how to throw a false flag — in order to keep personal irrelevancies from intruding on a discussion, and to keep personal confidences just that, confidential.) So you really have no way of knowing ENOUGH about me to hate me or ‘venerate’ me. Not really.
What you ACTUALLY hate about me is not myself — what you hate about me is, rather, what I symbolize to you
— THAT’s what you’d like to “beat to a pulp”. . . .
@ y-a-m-i-t-8-2:
They realize that IF they recognize a difference between friends & enemies.
By the time they are old enough to be running a country, lot of people have forgotten what it was like to be five years old.
@ y-a-m-i-t-8-2:
By NO means the ‘first’ time ever. And I am correct this time as well
— but not in the way you think.
The other part of you I was alluding to as getting tweaked “(besides the part below your belt)”
— is your CONSCIENCE. It’s bothering you, but you resent its nagging.
@ y-a-m-i-t-8-2:
The pertinent post (which was HB’s) was considerably more recent. But show me the one you mean, and I’ll look at it.
It happens occasionally. It’s a rare occurrence, but it does happen.
Usually over military matters, I think.
Most people realize that treating their friends like enemies and vice versa is flawed policy.
And they realize it by the time they are about five years old.
The Obama foreign policy is more infantile than the average kindergartener.
@ honeybee:
Hard to miss. You don’t exactly ‘hide’ it.
Hardly. More like embarrassment.
@ honeybee:
Don’t forget to turn your clocks back tonight you gain an hour of sleep.
honeybee Said:
Don’t you dare!!!!!
honeybee Said:
Yes we had a great time she met her boyfriend Blackie. Ran for about 45 min but it rained and we got soaked. Dried her off under blow dryer.
You are in elevated company minus one 😉
I too that’s why I live were I do.
You should see the wild flowers here that cover the landscape like a carpet after it rains. I’ll find some photos and post them. How are you feeling now? >>>>>
Ted Belman Said:
Sorry that I have been a problem. I shall amend my ways.
yamit82 Said:
Did Miss Dagmar enjoy her time out. I had to laugh a little when I saw my name list with boys. I though just like when I was a girls. me and the boys. always up to mischief. Always been happiest out in the country free to roam. >>>>
honeybee Said:
I know >>>>>>
@ honeybee:
Taking Dag out for a walk >>>>
@ yamit82:
I am sorry if I have you trouble, I never meant too. >>>
Ted Belman Said:
I would be happy to, can you ask Dweller to stop disguising his insults with psychobabble? If he is allowed to insult posters in this transparent manner then it should be allowed to be exposed and ridiculed.
dweller Said:
That your mouth is capable of saying anything cannot be mistaken for fact…utterance and fact are not synonymous in spite of your delusional fairy tales. You can tell the story of Goldilocks but your narrative does not render it right or true. Since I arrived I’ve watched you repeatedly insult posters here behind the cover of psychobabble. Therefore the fact remains:
still waiting for that one instance where you can show you were right….
dweller Said:
There is no need to debunk the fairy tales of the delusional, and no need to prove that Goldilocks did not eat breakfast with the 3 bears. e.g.
do you disagree with or dispute that statement? can you prove it wrong? Does my ability to state it show that it is right?
I think you should cease this foul practice of insulting posters behind a disguise of psychobabbble, it is as transparent as the emperors new clothes.
@ bernard ross:
@ yamit82:
@ honeybee:
@ dweller:
You guys may enjoy going at each other but I don’t. I see a major negative to you doing so. Most of the people who visit Israpundit , I believe, have no interest in your chit chat or your legalistic defenses. And your comments dissuade the audience for reading comments that matter, comments that deal with the issues or the news report. So give us a break.
dweller Said:
for over 4 years you assumed I wasn’t married and and made disparaging references to that fact. In the 8 years I have been commenting on this forum I never mentioned my status or whether I had progeny till recently.
You were and are in error of me as you are with most others.
There is no record here of your assessements and psychobabble ever have being correct and if you can point to a single instance maybe you might achieve some little credibility. So far you have yet to produce any.
“— So far,you’re batting a spectacular 0.000.”
dweller Said:
No your original reference was on the 24th of Oct.
I have noticed that every time you agree with me, you turn out to be right.
It is uncanny. Then again you never agree with me.
Let’s agree to continue to hate each other I will. So emotionally rewarding. Still want to beat the living “feces” out of you just for my own pleasure.
yamit82 Said:
May I offer a suggestion:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ChZl-D7Ocgc
dweller Said:
Maybe for the first time ever you are correct but I can assure you we are now back to our old flaccid selves.
dweller Said:
Oh but yawl sur nuff have noticed !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
dweller Said:
Voyeurism, Sweetie ???????????????
@ yamit82:
Not so. I don’t plagiarize. If you made such a claim, then for one reason or other, I didn’t see it — or I would’ve insisted on your backing it up. There are several articles I miss each day; I don’t read every one — let alone, the attached threads.
The only claims of plagiarism you’ve ever made against me have been promptly denied, refuted & blown away.
If you think I ‘plagiarized’ something — and that you made the claim & I ignored it — then produce the post containing the purported ‘plagiarism.’
No magnifying glass needed. Bombast is hard to miss.
Right. With all the online time I have, why not have a little fun?
Not a week. Scarcely two days.
You’re overreacting because this online thing you’re doing w/ HB is affecting not only your judgment but also your sense of perspective; and it’s tweaking another part of you as well (besides the part below your belt). . . .
@ b-e-r-n-a-r-d-r-o-s-s:
I don’t ‘pretend’ to anything. I’ve said on several occasions that I don’t CARE whether the cretin who made that remark does or doesn’t want to consider my observations ‘seriously.’ Anybody can take ’em or leave ’em. No skin off my nose one way or the other.
Says who???
— only somebody with an axe to grind, that’s who: somebody who hopes it can’t ‘EVER’ be demonstrated to be right.
Now THAT is truly psychobabble — and ignorant psychobabble at that. The only things which MAY be called delusional in “accepted Psychological circles” are those claims which, though asserted, are KNOWN to be not so (and which are persisted in beyond that point) — not claims which remain open to question.
Well, as the adolescent boys will say, “He that smelled it — dealt it.”
All the smeller has to do to get that ship off the docks is come up with an example or two of my being ‘wrong’ — for starters.
— So far, he’s batting a spectacular 0.000.
@ b-e-r-n-a-r-d-r-o-s-s:
Don’t have to. It’s been done FOR me.
The very individual making that remark has shown — in his own slimy, mean-spirited postings on this subject — just how right I’ve been about HIM specifically. But then, that’s WHY he persists in revisiting his ravings, like a dog returning to his vomit. He can’t help showing one & all the truth of what I’ve said about him.
The truly consistent record of failure is that of the twit compulsively trying to deflect attention from the observations which have wounded his bloated ego. He continues to feel threatened by those observations, so he has no choice but to persist.
This is what’s known as wishful thinking on the writer’s part — essentially an attempt to prime the pump of a well that’s bone dry.
No, I offered the [next quoted] comment strictly as an answer to Yamit’s claim that my remarks constituted “analysis.” Being wrong or right had NOTHING to do with that comment. [see post #44, prev pg] B-R-O-S-S deliberately & dishonestly took the remark out of context — so I’ve restored the context WITH the comment, here:
No fig leaf, and not new either. I’ve noted many times in the past (esp w/ Yamit) that insight does not arrive by rational pathways, but that rational discourse is how one communicates it to other persons.
@ b-e-r-n-a-r-d-r-o-s-s:
“We ALL”? — note how he keeps trying to convince himself that everybody’s with him (apparently he needs that)
— however, so far — and despite numerous opportunities (and indeed challenges) to produce the evidence — he has objectively very few takers to confirm his wishful thinking of unanimous support in the matter.
This is R-O-S-S’s backhanded way of inadvertently admitting that HE really hasn’t anything on the lunatic claiming to be Napoleon.
In that case, let him produce the ‘record.’
Whenever someone begins with such words, it’s a lead-pipe cinch that it’s LOADED with doubt.
I’ve been dead-bang right about this particular individual’s being an envious, vindictive, bitter, malicious obnoxious putz. And his resorting to the slime in this post of his is compelling evidence of it.
The truth of the matter is that he (nor anybody else he relies on for support) has ever been able to show any single emotional/characterological insight of mine to be wrong — even to the point of a simple denial of what I’ve said about HIM being eaten up with envy (even such a denial would have constituted a form of evidence to the contrary).
NO, what he has to do is frame the tiresome refrain of an inveterate crank as something other than what it obviously is in order to justify his pulling it out and boring once again anybody who’s still willing to read his tired rants on the subject of YoursTruly. “For posterity”? — for posteriority.
— “Timeless principle”? — LMAOSHMSFOAIDMT.
@ honeybee:
You do throw bones, Twinkie.
But it’s actually YAMIT that chases your bones
— in case you hadn’t noticed.
His blockquoted words atop this post are an obvious case-in-point.
@ yamit82:
So you say.
You’d have to be somewhat stronger than you are (and a whole LOT faster) to pull that off.
In that case, what’s in it for me?
— I told you your offer was tempting because I was due for another visit soon anyway — not because all I want is a chance to trade fisticuffs w/ a tired, over-the-hill buffoon anxiously trying to prove to himself that he’s still got it.
yamit82 Said:
No, I think you got it right before: OCD
@ bernard ross:
I caught mr. hard skin and bones in two acts of plagiarisms and presented it to him. Nada no reply. Yet he tracks my comments with a magnifying glass. I am convinced he keeps organized files on me you and HB to use readily. In this post he searched back a full week for an innocuous comment by HB to drag up out of context so he could inject himself offensively and dominate the tread around it. Do you think he might be a low stinking troll?
yamit82 Said:
I doubt that such a person exists,…
this is more likely:
dweller Said:
“Bob the builder”?
dweller Said:
HMMMMMMM? Where Have I seen “Bob the Builder” before?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AO43p2Wqc08
honeybee Said:
Perhaps its due to this:
dweller Said:
or maybe its this:
dweller Said:
LOL, Guru at work 😛