And this was by someone that actually EARNED his Nobel.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
|
And this was by someone that actually EARNED his Nobel.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Your guy is a shoe-in then. Congrats!Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Hello again,
Romney follows up insults in London with straight-up racism in Israel.
Rightly, Palestinians were offended by the comment. Tying Israel's economic advantage to cultural superiority rather than acknowledging the geopolitical realities affecting the region is not only racist, it's downright ignorant, they said. Saeb Erekat, top authority in the Palestinian Authority, said:Quote:
As I come here and I look out over this city and consider the accomplishments of the people of this nation, I recognize the power of at least culture and a few other things. …
As you come here and you see the GDP per capita, for instance, in Israel which is about $21,000 dollars, and compare that with the GDP per capita just across the areas managed by the Palestinian Authority, which is more like $10,000 per capita, you notice such a dramatically stark difference in economic vitality.
Looks like THAT situation ain't going to get fixed if he's elected president..Quote:
It is a racist statement and this man doesn't realize that the Palestinian economy cannot reach its potential because there is an Israeli occupation.
It seems to me this man lacks information, knowledge, vision and understanding of this region and its people. He also lacks knowledge about the Israelis themselves. I have not heard any Israeli official speak about cultural superiority.
What is Steve fond of saying, you can't make this stuff up?
Excon
One would think that the Gaza Strip would be thriving now that there is no 'occupation' . Romney is not only right ,but he was understated . The Palestinians will never prosper as long as they cling to their anti-semitic hate .
The Palestinian economy will never be fixed while they waste their resources on the goal of the destruction of Israel,and investing their faith in corrupt leaders like Saeb Erekat. He more than any other Palestinian is the reason why the negotiations with Israel always falls short of any real progress.
There was nothing offensive or new in Romney's observation. His words echo UN's Arab Human Development Reports, written by Arab authors , who have noted the lack of freedom, education, women's rights, and other factors holding back the Arab world.
AHDR Reports: Detailed Contents
He should though give props to Prime Minister Salam Fayyad who has actually been working on solutions to increase educational and economic development in the West Bank rather than simply blaming “Israeli occupation” for all their woes. .
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Hello again, tom:Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
What HE, and apparently YOU, don't understand, is that even if it may be FACT, it's NOT the way to fix it.. In fact, it's the way to screw it up during your entire presidency.. Romney does NOT get that.. He seems unable to take off his business mans hat, and wear the presidential hat.
I'd RATHER he kept his MOUTH shut and just bowed!
excon
He should tell it like it is . Nothing destabilizes more than not being sure what a world leader thinks. Do really think it's helpful to the region that the sitting President of the US is not clear on such basic issues as where the Capital of Israel is ?
Hello again, tom:Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
In my view, telling the Arabs/Palestinians that they're NOT on the cultural level of the Jews, all by itself, destabilizes the world pretty good..
Where did you study diplomacy? Montgomery wards?
excon
If the shoe fits.. wear it . When the Israelis left Gaza ,they left thriving businesses intact. Jewish organizations from Israel, USA, and around the world set up the means for the population to support themselves. It took the Palestinians hours to trash them and the chance for a useful existence with it.
The only export business they have are rockets fired at Israeli elementary schools.
Perhaps if Romney visits Palestine he can talk smooth and cuddly and sooth their bruised egos. He was speaking to an Israeli audience ,and to an American audience.
He has sent a clear signal that he is a friend of Israel ;something the current administration had trouble with.
How tiresome can this get? He insulted the Brits, he insulted the Palestinians, he managed an endoresement from a pole from the archives, and next, wait for it, he will say he had a successful visit. Well he shored up the jewish vote, if there is one in Republican circles, and now we know he has foreign relations credentials. I feel very sad for the american people
Where do you get these cretians from?
Hello again, tom:Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
I know you LIKE what he's saying, and you want to get stuff off your chest, but I don't believe that YOU believe a president should go around the world saying stuff like that...
If I'm wrong and you think he SHOULD, I've misjudged you.
excon
Yes, we need a leader who should be going around the world saying stuff like that.Quote:
Behind me stands a wall that encircles the free sectors of this city, part of a vast system of barriers that divides the entire continent of Europe. From the Baltic, south, those barriers cut across Germany in a gash of barbed wire, concrete, dog runs, and guard towers. Farther south, there may be no visible, no obvious wall. But there remain armed guards and checkpoints all the same--still a restriction on the right to travel, still an instrument to impose upon ordinary men and women the will of a totalitarian state. Yet it is here in Berlin where the wall emerges most clearly; here, cutting across your city, where the news photo and the television screen have imprinted this brutal division of a continent upon the mind of the world. Standing before the Brandenburg Gate, every man is a German, separated from his fellow men. Every man is a Berliner, forced to look upon a scar.
..
Where four decades ago there was rubble, today in West Berlin there is the greatest industrial output of any city in Germany--busy office blocks, fine homes and apartments, proud avenues, and the spreading lawns of parkland. Where a city's culture seemed to have been destroyed, today there are two great universities, orchestras and an opera, countless theaters, and museums. Where there was want, today there's abundance--food, clothing, automobiles--the wonderful goods of the Ku'damm. From devastation, from utter ruin, you Berliners have, in freedom, rebuilt a city that once again ranks as one of the greatest on earth. The Soviets may have had other plans. But my friends, there were a few things the Soviets didn't count on--Berliner Herz, Berliner Humor, ja, und Berliner Schnauze. [Berliner heart, Berliner humor, yes, and a Berliner Schnauze.]
In the 1950s, Khrushchev predicted: "We will bury you." But in the West today, we see a free world that has achieved a level of prosperity and well-being unprecedented in all human history. In the Communist world, we see failure, technological backwardness, declining standards of health, even want of the most basic kind--too little food. Even today, the Soviet Union still cannot feed itself. After these four decades, then, there stands before the entire world one great and inescapable conclusion: Freedom leads to prosperity. Freedom replaces the ancient hatreds among the nations with comity and peace. Freedom is the victor.
And now the Soviets themselves may, in a limited way, be coming to understand the importance of freedom. We hear much from Moscow about a new policy of reform and openness. Some political prisoners have been released. Certain foreign news broadcasts are no longer being jammed. Some economic enterprises have been permitted to operate with greater freedom from state control.
Are these the beginnings of profound changes in the Soviet state? Or are they token gestures, intended to raise false hopes in the West, or to strengthen the Soviet system without changing it? We welcome change and openness; for we believe that freedom and security go together, that the advance of human liberty can only strengthen the cause of world peace. There is one sign the Soviets can make that would be unmistakable, that would advance dramatically the cause of freedom and peace.
General Secretary Gorbachev, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, if you seek liberalization: Come here to this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!
Mitt ain't the one, not even close. I know you aren't comparing the two are you?
Ex: "I don't believe that YOU believe a president should go around the world saying stuff like that..."Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Yes we should. Reagan was a great example of why we should. But no, I don't compare anyone to Reagan.
Hello again, Steve:Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Telling the Palestinians that their culture doesn't measure up, ISN'T like telling Gorbachov to tear down the wall...
Are you NOT able to make the distinction??
excon
Quote:
"As you come here and you see the GDP per capita, for instance, in Israel which is about $21,000 dollars, and compare that with the GDP per capita just across the areas managed by the Palestinian Authority, which is more like $10,000 per capita, you notice such a dramatically stark difference in economic vitality," Romney told a group of Jewish donors at a Jerusalem fundraiser that netted more than $1 million for his campaign.
Like two peas in a pod. But I'm sure you're going to blame the Palestinians plight on the Israelis and not a culture whose sole ambition is eliminate Israel. Like tom said, Israel left them an infrastructure and they laid waste to it.Quote:
In the 1950s, Khrushchev predicted: "We will bury you." But in the West today, we see a free world that has achieved a level of prosperity and well-being unprecedented in all human history. In the Communist world, we see failure, technological backwardness, declining standards of health, even want of the most basic kind--too little food. Even today, the Soviet Union still cannot feed itself.
Arab Israelis have equal rights and I'm sure have it much better. You have a culture that assures freedom and equal rights for its citizens and one whose singular focus is the destruction of Israel. Which one measures up?
Hello again, Steve:
I'll try ONE more time, but if you keep on mixing up what's SO, with what a presidential candidate should SAY, I'm out of here.
I'll ask you again, can you NOT make that distinction??
Oh, never mind..
excon
There was no Israel before 1948. Palestinians got along with Hebrews just fine before the Jewish government decided that the Palestinians were second class citizens.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
The American Jewish population should closely observe the Palestinian- American progressive alliance ;and vote accordingly. I hope the President uses that exact wording on the campaign trail. By the way ;that is just factually incorrect. Israel predates most Western nations (established 1020–931 BCE) ,and certainly the concept of a 'Palestinian people.'
Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Quote:
Following the adoption of a resolution by the General Assembly of the United Nations on 29 November 1947, recommending the adoption and implementation of the United Nations partition plan of Mandatory Palestine, on 14 May 1948 David Ben-Gurion, the Executive Head of the World Zionist Organization[8] and president of the Jewish Agency for Palestine, declared the establishment of a Jewish state in Eretz Israel, to be known as the State of Israel, a state independent from the British Mandate for Palestine.[9][10][11]
Quote:
The notion of the "Land of Israel", known in Hebrew as Eretz Yisrael (or Eretz Yisroel), has been important and sacred to the Jewish people since Biblical times. According to the Torah, God promised the land to the three Patriarchs of the Jewish people.[33][34] On the basis of scripture, the period of the three Patriarchs has been placed somewhere in the early 2nd millennium BCE,[35] and the first Kingdom of Israel was established around the 11th century BCE. Subsequent Israelite kingdoms and states ruled intermittently over the next four hundred years, and are known from various extra-biblical sources.[36][37][38][39]
Lets not confuse ancient tribal affiliations with modern national sovereignty.Quote:
The northern Kingdom of Israel, as well as Philistine city states fell in 722 BCE, though the southern Kingdom of Judah and several Phoenician city states continued their existence as the region came under Assyrian rule. With the emergence of Babylonians, Judah was eventually conquered as well.
What should he say?Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
He should shut up since he knows nothing of the regions nor the history of its people.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
yeah that will cement his foreign policy credentials
Hello!! He was speaking to an Israeli audience ;and he was speaking truth .
Yes Tal there is a great deal of tribalism in the middle east and few, what we might describe as, modern nations. Democracy in that region is a vague notion, as we are witnessing a few short miles to the north of Juresalem. Romney would do well to stay out of the regions politicsQuote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Romney did well to identify a basic truth in the region. For as long as I can remember American leaders have tip-toed around this issue in the hope that the Palestinans would come around to a reasonable solution . I suggest that a little tough truth is needed . There is a simple solution to the problem... The Palestinians should look in the mirror and see where their faith in trust in their leaders have led them .
He was throwing red meat to American conservatives, Jew and Gentiles. The Knesset is not ruled entirely by conservatives, and as an aside, Slick Mitt gave praise to the socialized health care system in the UK, and Israel.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Your link doesn't work, nor does your history, or your truth. Or your candidate.
Might I suggest you take your own advice. The palestinians are in most respects a displaced people looking for a homeland. You are asking these people to take a rational approach to an emotive issue, such as when can I have my family property back. I acknowledge that the use of violence to solve their problems is not the way to go, they need to be resettled far away from the Israeli border, but all that has happened is they have been herded into ghettos called camps, unlike many who have taken the refugee trail these people have stayed put and as a result find themselves a repressed minority and a nobody who would be somebody, an american millionaire, a person who wants for nothing, says to them wake up. It is he who needs to wake upQuote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Isn't that how WWII began?
Sorry Tal you will need to be more specific, are you drawing the analogy between the palestinians of the twenty first century and the jews of the twentieth century. WWII began because a despot dictator wanted to enforce his will on the peoples of Europe and while one motivation was for him to solve the "jewish question" it wasn't his sole motivation. Another motivation he has was what he called "living space", an option not open to either the Israeli or the palestinian. I'm sure the Israeli's would like to solve the "palestinian question" but it cannot be solved in the same way. Whether both parties like it or not the only real solution is integration, a solution offered by the Israeli's at the very beginning but rejected in favour of war. Occupation has been tried without success and until they can get rid of the radicals conflict will persist
It wasn't a link, he engaged the sarcasm font.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
I think this is a turning point for Mittens. Can he pick Lech Walesa as his running mate?
Seems the president agrees with Romney...
How dare he insult their culture that way.Quote:
s Barack Obama Prejudiced Against Arabs?
Noah Pollak
July 31, 2012 5:30 PM
The press is having fun today amplifying the complaint of Palestinian "negotiator" Saeb Ereikat that comments Mitt Romney made in Jerusalem yesterday are "racist." What was Romney's offense? In the course of expressing amazement at Israel's economic miracle, he merely pointed out that cultural differences lead to differences in economic performance.
In Romney's own words:
"And as you come here and you see the GDP per capita for instance in Israel which is about 21,000 dollars [sic] and you compare that with the GDP per capita just across the areas managed by the Palestinian Authority which is more like 10,000 dollars per capita [sic] you notice a dramatic, stark difference in economic vitality. And that is also between other countries that are near or next to each other. Chile and Ecuador, Mexico and the United States.. . there was a book written by a former Harvard professor [David Landes] named ‘The Wealth and Poverty of Nations.’... and he’s in his early 70s at this point, he says this, he says, if you could learn anything from the economic history of the world it’s this: culture makes all the difference. Culture makes all the difference. And as I come here and I look out over this city and consider the accomplishments of the people of this nation, I recognize the power of at least culture and a few other things."
The funny thing is, there's another candidate for president who has also made this point, and in fact made it repeatedly over the past few years. That candidate is the current president, Barack Obama.
In his famous 2009 “Speech to the Muslim World” in Cairo, he said:
“But all of us must recognize that education and innovation will be the currency of the 21st century -- and in too many Muslim communities, there remains underinvestment in these areas.”
He pointed out that "a woman who is denied an education is denied equality... And it is no coincidence that countries where women are well educated are far more likely to be prosperous."
He added that he has "an unyielding belief that all people yearn for certain things: the ability to speak your mind and have a say in how you are governed; confidence in the rule of law and the equal administration of justice; government that is transparent and doesn't steal from the people; the freedom to live as you choose...Governments that protect these rights are ultimately more stable, successful and secure."
Two years later, in another speech (this one on the Arab Spring), he told the U.S.-Islamic World Forum:
"Throughout the region, many young people have a solid education, but closed economies leave them unable to find a job. Entrepreneurs are brimming with ideas, but corruption leaves them unable to profit from those ideas."
Maybe Obama has read the same fine David Landes book that Romney cited – which discusses the importance to a healthy economy of women’s empowerment. Why might we think this? Because Obama said:
"History shows that countries are more prosperous and more peaceful when women are empowered… The region will never reach its full potential when more than half of its population is prevented from achieving their full potential."
Reading all this, one might even conclude that Obama has been quite a bit more critical of Arab societies than Romney has. One trusts it isn’t racist to point that out.
Hello again, Steve:Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Once more with the distinctions...
One was an insult.. The other was inspiration...
excon
Hello again:
By the way, how did Mitt get his horse to London?
excon
LOL, I like the way Obama said it and didn't point fingers and piss people off. He didn't pander to his base, by throwing them red meat.
He looked, spoke, and acted like a leader, Romney didn't. You could tell that by the cheering crowds where ever then Senator Obama went on his 8 country tour.
So much for looking presidential on the world stage.
There was virtually no difference in the message.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
You can tell the difference in the delivery can't you? And the way it was received? That's the difference.
And you tell me which PLO leader is going to receive anything well from an American Israel supporter.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Correction, by a racist american israeli supporter. Using culture instead of conditions is blatantly racist. Right wing fringers love racist rhetoric.
I don't know anyone that loves racist rhetoric so they must all be confined to your part of the state. The culture leads to the conditions, you can't get around it Tal. Nothing racist about it, it's reality, and it's exactly the kind of response you guys have that prevents anything from being done about it because you're so absorbed in not offending anyone - except conservatives and Christians - that you won't tell them the hard truth.
Like tom said, if the shoe fits, wear it.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:54 PM. |