TODAY'S COMMENTARY: Israel, Palestinians OK negotiating plan.Mr Abbas, aren’t you Forgetting the other half of your Palestinian brothers and sisters?

(Photo: Reuters)

TOPICAL ISSUE-per Matthew Lee, Associated Press Writer reporting from Annapolis, Md, Tuesday, November 27, 2007: Israeli and Palestinian leaders agreed today to immediately resume long-stalled talks toward a deal by the end of next year that would create an independent Palestinian state, using a U.S.-hosted Mideast peace conference to launch their first negotiations in seven years. In a joint statement read by President Bush, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas pledged to start discussions on the core issues of the conflict next month and accepted the United States as arbiter of interim steps.

COMMENTARY: I am a very optimistic person, but I must admit that in the case of the Israeli and attending Palestinian un-elected leadership reaching an agreement that will address all the major issues that divide them is impossible without the participation of Hamas, the Western shunned, legitimate and democratically elected leadership of the Palestinian peoples. The hypocritical message is” We support democracy, as long as you elected the leaders we want or the party we back.” It is simply mind boggling as to why the Bush administration would call a meeting of some 50 representatives from Middle Eastern states and exclude Hamas. Sure Hamas will not renounce terrorism or agree to recognize Israel-at this point in time. But if I recall, the US talked with its most formidable enemy during the Cold War period, that being the Soviet Union-some 40 years or so. Mr Bush seems to ignore former Secretary of State James Baker’s wise statement and prudent advice that “one should always talk to one’s enemies. It doesn’t mean one has to give anything away, or appear weak by talking.” And last but not least, in my strongest opinion, if Mr Abbas, the attending unelected Palestinian leader, truly cares about his peoples as a whole, he would have insisted that Hamas be at the conference table; irregardless of their political and ideology differences. After all, aren’t they all Palestinians? You decide.

_________
Read the rest of the story at LINK below.

TODAY'S COMMENTARY:: Iraqis May Offer US Deal To Stay Longer! Daaaaaaaaa!

TOPICAL ISSUE- as reported from Baghdad by Abudul-Zahra, Associated Press Writer on November 26, 2007: Iraq's government, seeking protection against foreign threats and internal coups, will offer the U.S. a long-term troop presence in Iraq in return for U.S. security guarantees as part of a strategic partnership, two Iraqi officials said Monday."

COMMENTARY: There being some 160,000 or more US troops, plus other coalition forces occupying Iraq, what else can the Iraqis do but agree under the US concocted pretext that the Iraqi government is seeking protection against foreign threats and internal coups. Having guns pointed at their heads from all directions, literally, I would surmise that a so called deal is being coerced, and that the Iraqis really do not have a choice. But in actuality, the deal was sealed a long time ago due to the fact that some 13 military facilities have been or are being built by the US on Iraqi soil, coupled with a $732 million-steadily increasing-US embassy that is under construction now. Do those that are conquered ever have a choice? Daaa! You decide!
__________
Read the entire story by clicking on LINK.

COMING SOON: Daily Comments and Tidbits! Please Stay Tuned By Checking Back!

MUSHARRAF: HAS THE PAKISTANI PRESIDENT BECOME A GIGANTIC EMBARRASSMENT FOR THE USA? Or Did The US Give Tacit Approval To Impose Martial Law?

(Photo:The Sunday Times)
As the historic developments unfold in Pakistan with the military “dictator” and president, General Musharraf, declaring a “state-of-emergency or martial law ” by suspending the Constitution and sacking Supreme Court judges, coupled with arresting opposition leaders, one cannot help but laugh at the manner in which the General continues to play the West, in particular the Bush administration. Besides ruling in a non-democratic manner for almost eight years, the General’s total disregard for the rule of law is a blatant exhibition of unquestionable arrogance, and utter desperation to hold on to power at any cost. The term “democracy” is just a meaningless “word” in his mind.

It is obvious the General could care less about the “rule of law,” that is supposed to be the foundation for the country’s system of governance; which includes the judiciary. This goes to show that the West, especially the USA, cannot continue to waiver in its position of turning a blind eye to rulers such as Musharraf when democracy is placed on the back burner under the guise of fighting extremism and terrorism. After all, the so called “Islamic extremists” are Pakistanis too. One might pose the question as just who is actually the extremists in this case; the General or the Islamic factions ?

General Musharraf is obviously playing into the hands of opposition groups, including “Bin Laden” as well. Even though the General may give the impression he is taking “extreme” actions unilaterally, irrespective of whether the US and other western nations agree or not, there is not an iota of doubt in this blogger’s mind that he conferred with the US ambassador in Pakistan or someone in the Bush administration before embarking on such a calculated and well orchestrated effort to preempt the Supreme Court’s forthcoming ruling on whether his candidacy for the presidency was legal. Unquestionably, more-likely-than-not the USA gave its tacit approval.

Thus, it is quite hypocritical of the Bush administration to publicly condemn the actions of President Chavez of Venezuela, who by the way-whether rightly or wrongly-is attempting to amend the Constitution “within” the democratic process to allow him to run for another term in office versus a military dictator such as General Musharraf who is in actuality perpetrating a second coup against the Pakistani people and their democratic system of government; claiming there is a swirling Islamic terrorist threat that must be squelched by taking “extreme” measures.

Certainly, there will be public pronouncements from the US administration admonishing President Musharraf’s “extremism,” talk of applying sanctions or suspending certain aid programs, but privately and behind the scenes-out of the public eye-there will be encouragement to contain the so called Islamic extremists as well as a promise of expanded military support. In other words, the hell with democratic ideals when a USA supported dictator’s political future is at stake. As a consequence, the end justifies the means. But there are no gray areas in this case; purely black and white. Either democratic principles are supported and enforced, or they are not. You decide!


__________
Read more on this issue: Click Link.