Light holiday reading:
• “Carlton’s lone classical liberal”, Andrew Norton, weighs in on Liberal hyperbole over third party political campaigns. New Mayo MP Jamie Briggs reckons these to be a “cancer in our democracy” due to the efforts of GetUp! and the ACTU at the last election. Briggs argues that “Australians are entitled to know who is behind the campaigns, how much is being spent and where the money is coming from”, evidently having failed to notice that such groups are indeed required to provide annual disclosure of receipts, expenditure and debts. However, in an interesting discussion at Larvatus Prodeo, Norton also argues that lowering the donation disclosure threshold from $10,000 to $1000 (as proposed by a bill currently before a Senate committee due to report on June 30) could theoretically catch independent political blogs in a “massive compliance net” thanks to a loose definition of “persons or organisations expressing views by any means on candidates or election issues”. Elsewhere, The Australian’s Janet Albrechtsen tugs at the heart strings by complaining the disclosure amendments are designed to cut donations to the Liberal Party (from which you can readily infer why the Howard government used its Senate majority to jack the threshold up from $1500 to $10,000 in the first place). More substantially, she argues that “the nature of third-party campaigns in Australia is such that if we ban or cap donations (except by individuals) and allow third-party campaigns by unions to continue unabated, the political field is skewed against one side: the conservatives” – particularly in light of government plans to scrap tax deductibility of party donations while maintaining it for union dues and levies.
• “Dotcom millionaire” Evan Thornley has made himself popular in Labor circles by pulling the plug on his political career on the eve of his anticipated promotion to the Victorian state cabinet. The talk around Thornley was that he viewed his state political career as a stepping stone to federal politics via Simon Crean’s seat of Hotham, beyond which his ambitions were apparently without limit. His entirely unheralded decision to “pursue opportunities outside of political life” has inevitably fuelled all manner of speculation, most of it involving his financial wellbeing. It has also created a vacancy for his upper house seat for the Southern Metropolitan region. The Age reports that the new upper house system instituted at the last election “has created an anomaly for Labor, as party rules do not specify how preselection for an upper house vacancy should be conducted”:
Party sources said the anomoly was expected to be tackled by rule makers in May 2009 before preselections began in earnest for the 2010 election. But Mr Thornley’s shock departure – which sources from both major factions of Victorian Labor described as the most bizarre incident they had ever witnessed in politics – could force the anomaly to be dealt with sooner. While some within Labor believe the rules offer no guidance over preselection, others say the spirit of preselection processes in the lower house should also be adopted for the upper house. Under that scenario, Mr Thornley’s replacement in the Southern Metropolitan electorate would be decided 50:50 by a ballot of ALP branch members and a central selection panel. Many expect Labor’s national executive to ultimately choose his replacement but all agreed it was too early to speculate on the names of likely candidates.
A commenter at Andrew Landeryou’s VexNews writes:
The Left were promised Thornley’s spot but they agreed not to insist as Thornley was then non aligned. Thornley then joined Labor Unity. They left will claim they are entitled to fill Thornley’s vacancy. Labor Unity will most likely want it and there will be an internal facional brawl like Kororoit. Then Mr Dearricott’s non-aligned group will claim their right to the vacancy. A strong tip tonight is that (former Brimbank mayor) Natalie Suleyman is a favourite for the position.
Another hopeful is said to be Dick Gross, former Municipal Association of Victoria president and Port Phillip councillor defeated in recent elections in a “resident revolt over his support for the St Kilda triangle development”. There is also the question of the political future of Theo Theophanous, charged on Christmas Eve with rape. An end to Theophanous’s political career would create another upper house vacancy in Northern Metropolitan. In lieu of Evan Thornley, Theophanous’s position as Industry and Trade Minister has been filled by Martin Pakula, previously best known for his failed preselection bid against Simon Crean in Hotham ahead of the last federal election.
• Michelle Grattan of The Age reports that the Victorian Liberals are “set to reluctantly give the Nationals the number two spot on a joint Senate ticket for the 2010 election”. This would continue an agreement initiated after the 1987 double dissolution election giving the Nationals the unwinnable fourth and safe second seats at alternating elections. The party’s seat in the Senate has been held since 1993 by Julian McGauran, who quit the party for the Liberals in January 2006. One possible explanation for the move was that he did not expect the Liberals would continue with the existing joint ticket arrangement, which as Grattan explains is widely opposed within the party. It had long been thought that the Nationals had been able to negotiate the joint ticket partly because the McGauran family helped delivered it preferences from the Democratic Labor Party, whom they had assisted in legal action to prevent its deregistration. The Nationals’ apparent success in keeping the arrangement going might suggest otherwise. However, another possibility is that McGauran thought his prospects of winning Liberal preselection less unlikely than those of keeping his place with the Nationals. McGauran had an uncomfortably narrow preselection win ahead of the 2004 election over Darren Chester, now the member for Gippsland, and his family’s clout might have been further weakened since by brother Peter’s departure from politics.
• Labor’s Mark Dreyfus, chairman of the House of Representatives Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee, says he hopes the government will “soon” announce a non-binding plebiscite to test opinion on a republic before the federal election.
• Robert Taylor of The West Australian has an interesting overview of the new entrants to the WA state parliament.
UPDATE (3/1/09): Malcolm Mackerras reviews the Queensland state redistribution and offers his prediction for the election to be held some time this year, namely an 11 seat Labor majority from an even split on two-party preferred.
619 Comments
Pages: « 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 … 13 » Show All
Treasurer Keating handed down four surplus budgets: real surpluses with no asset sales or mining boom hiding underlying deficits.
Gunns thinks they can still build the mill:
http://www.smh.com.au/news/specials/environment/or-has-he/2009/01/05/1231003922260.html
Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has called on Hamas militants to stop firing rockets into southern Israel and has urged both parties to negotiate a ceasefire.
“Any diplomatic solution must find a way in bringing a halt to rocket attacks against Israel by the terrorist organisation Hamas,” he said.
“Any diplomatic solution must also bring about a halt to armed shipments into Gaza.”
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/01/05/2459488.htm
I am very pleased that our Prime Minister has shown leadership on this.
Dario (# 288)
Thank you for the link to the Gunns article.
It seems that Gunns have more hide than a rhinocerous… “The company believes that further environmental studies should be paid for by the Government because it has already invested $100 million in the project”
Typical, one-sided response that will reassure the Jewish lobby, but expected.
The reference to Hamas as a terrorist organisation is interesting, though not novel. By what definition does he, and many other countries, class Hamas as terrorists?
As a journalist from The Independent whose father and cousin were killed by an Israeli airstrike on their farmstead yesterday put it “What’s the difference between those who drop bombs from planes and blew my father to pieces and those who fire home made rockets into Israel?”
People would say “Oh Israel is targeting terrorist infrastructure”. That brings up a number of issues. Firstly, Israel has denounced the elected government of Palestine as a terrorist organisation which gives it leeway to target and destroy government buildings and services like the police, which it has. Secondly, they are clearly targeting civilian areas unconnected to terrorism such as that man’s house, a university, schools, markets and mosques. And finally, it suggests that all Hamas has to do is say “We’re targetting Israeli military and government infrastructure” to give their attacks legitimacy.
OZ, what other message could they give their shareholders?
Here’s an interesting concluding remark from a piece by Robert Gottliebsen in the Business Spectator, Jul 2008:
I can’t think of a project where a company has sufficient freehold resources and has committed to meeting incredible emissions standards to be unable to obtain money in Australia because of the green ‘fear factor’. I think we will look back on the Gunns affair as a fork in the road where Australia’s banking industry became too ‘politically correct’.
Earlier, he remarked that
Environment Minister Peter Garrett says that 12 out of 16 project ‘modules’ are still awaiting approval. Given the legislation and earlier decisions they should not provide a problem. Still, nothing is certain.
So I’d say any fear on the part of the banks is less “green” than “garrett”!
So firing 80 or more rockets a day into Israel is OK and not an act of terrorism?
Enjaybee the whole thing is a disgrace. Israel is the ilegitimate country. The palestinian state should be set up and fair borders for all. Unless this happens there will be no peace. Israel should be allowed to exist and acknowledged by the arab states
Two problems with HowRudd (and BushObama, if Sheridan is right):
1. allowing re-election to dominate policy decisions
2. heading for the centre, ‘balanced’ and ‘practical’ decisions when the problem (CC response) does not allow for traditional ‘balanced’ and ‘practical’ responses.
Example. If Howard has made a decision to unilaterally run a 5% ETS 12 years ago, would the MDB still have had 22% in its storages as at 12 December 2008?
Almost certainly.
Centaur I agree the whole thing is a disgrace but every time the Palestinians are given an opportunity to set up their own state they knock it back presumably because some of the hardheads will not agree to the existence of the state of Israel under any circumstance. They trot out the same old reason for their actions every time, i.e that Israel is a terrorist state and so they have every reason to carry out their acts of terrorism against Israel and will not stop until every Jew has been annihilated. It has always seemed to me the old chicken and egg analogy. Instead of who came first, who committed the first act of terrorism. Unfortunately, I think they will still be arguing the same thing in a hundred years.
UMR Research report on republicanism. “Don’t know” up since six months ago. “Men and younger Australians more in favour of a republic”. Thank/blame Women’s Weekly, I guess. “Australians want to elect the president” – and how.
The people of Gaza and the West Bank are in a pitiable position, it’s true. They have been and continue to be routinely sacrificed by their own leadership and habitually exploited in power-games by the reactionaries of Teheran or the gangsters of Damascas and (in the past) Baghdad.
The only ones to benefit from the conflict now being played out are the leaders of Hamas and Hezbollah and their sponsors in Iran, who must be thrilled to bits to see the chaos in Gaza and the political reactions around the Arab world.
The Iranians have made a lot of gains in recent years – in Iraq, where an enemy regime has been removed – in Palestine, where the Israel has been drawn into a second conflict it would surely prefer to avoid – and in the wider Muslim world, where public anger threatens to upset the (anti-Iranian) political order. As well, the US is being drawn once again into events it cannot control.
Wisely, the Australian Government has stuck to the familiar policy of supporting Israel while calling for peace and opposing Hamas. This is the only viable path to order, self-determination and statehood for the people of Palestine as well as peace for Israel.
So firing 80 or more rockets a day into Israel is OK and not an act of terrorism?]
Clearly they are both as biased and full of hatred as each other.
You know it’s true.
enjaybee, the only thing noticeable from that post is that you failed to read mine correctly.
I’m wondering what narrowly shaped definition of terrorism exists that when party A does it, it’s terrorism, but when party B does it it’s not. And if there is such a line, whether or not it should be challenged.
Your second post doesn’t really make sense. “Every chance they get they knock it back”. Well yeah, Palestinians want to stop being treated like second-class citizens in what used to be their country but they also want to live their lives.
Can you tell me how many Palestinians voted for Hamas due to their promises on education, social welfare and other services, and how many voted for them because of their stance on Israel? Hamas spends 90% of its money every year on social welfare and education programs. It stopped suicide bombing in 2005. Rocket attacks after the ceasefire dropped from 500 a month to 2-12 a month, and Hamas is by no means the only group launching rockets. Remember how the last truce was broken? Israel shelled a beach killing 8 Palestinian civilians and injuring another 30.
Boerwar, I think you are too ready to liken Rudd to Howard on Climate Change. The Liberals have positoned themselves to oppose any move to an ETS, while the Greens have said they will not settle for less than a 40% target. As a result, as things stand, the Government will not get their proposal through the Senate.
The Liberals and the Greens are playing for political advantage with the toughest economic and political issue ever placed on the agenda. Rudd is at least trying to make a start. You might think 5% is not worth having, but you can be very certain it is at least 5% more than the US, China, Japan, India or Canada will be offering in Copenhagen.
I also think that even if the Government gets its plans turned into law 5% is going to be hard to achieve. Re-wiring the economy is not going to be anyone’s picnic.
Some of the stuff raised in that study about reasons against becoming a republic is scary.
“Because the sovereignty of God will be removed from our constitution and so
our country will fall into total disarray.”
I watched Peter Garrett on the 7.30 report tonight. He performed far more strongly than I expected him to.
I thought he showed a sound grasp of the decision making process that is required of a minister, and effectively what is and is not a relevant consideration under administrative law. Not something the Howard ministers were very good at.
He also managed to put the thing into the perspective of the decisions made by ex Minister Turnbull, and pointed out that it is more sensible to require Gunns to do the scientific studies before a final decision on the remaining modules is made, rather than afterwards as Malcolm Turnbull ridiculously proposed.
No new year gift for the coalition with this one.
BB at 313
Always admire the eloquence of your postings. In relation to the Israeli/Palestinian issue, I’ve always had the feeling (probably naive) that if the Israelis were allowed to live their lives without constantly being harrassed with rockets, suicide bombers, etc. that they would leave the other side alone.
Oz at 314
Do you have knowldege that the number of rockets being fired was 2-12 per month which in any case is 2-12 per month too many. Reports would seem to indicate that the number fired is much more than you state.
According to medics in Gaza, almost 20% of all deaths have been children.
Yes Oz, I agree, and just as silly an argument against a republic as as this one given in favour… “We should allow ourselves to grow up – and let our Indigenous people mature as well and preserve the oldest surviving culture in the world!”
When republicans can decide on a republican model that addresses the issues of selection, powers, reserve powers, emergency replacement of president etc, please let us know, and then we may be able to have an informed debate on the relative merits and risks of the proposed model in comparison and contrast to our existing arrangements.
By the way, the state by state poll figures (in favour) in the link kindly provided by William are in the case of QLD ludicrously inflated, I think, considering the usual QLD voting pattern, our demographics, and the results from the last referendum.
Yes enjaybee, the source is right here from the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs:
http://www.mfa.gov.il/NR/rdonlyres/297F5195-4BB4-4C98-9DCE-A9BFF91E6407/0/rockets2008.jpg
It should also be noted that in direct response to your point of Israeli’s being “constantly harassed”, over 5 years of rocket attacks 20 Israeli civilians have died. To give you some perspective, Israel has killed more than 80 Palestinian children alone in the last two weeks.
Hamas also stopped suicide bombing in 2005. That didn’t stop Israeli shelling and airstrikes which killed up to a 500 Palestinians in a 6 month period.
Yep fargo outstanding decison by Garrett. What next. What he has said is that they can begin building it and then we will have a look at whether they are complying with environmental standards set regarding the affect on marine life. What kind of policy is this? yep if you are not meeting the standards we set you have to demolish the pulp mill… yep and who is he kidding… Garrett is pie without any meat like the rest of the Rudd Government unable to speak its mind because it is to frightened to upset people.
Israel a case in point.
The latest view from America and Israel is that Hamas must abide by Un resolutions and how many Un resoloutions has Israel abided by in last forty years! Very few maybe zero…
Ah, Marky the true blue Labor man who hasn’t got a kind word to say about them. It seems to me you and the Liberals have a lot in common. Just a thought but have you thought of actually making it official and joining the Libs? Malcolm would make you most welcome. Or maybe the Greens are more your go, anything but Labor obviously.
Oz i find it odd that you would support a terrorist organisation over a free democratic state…i really dont understand your logic here?
Also how does your statements square with the fact that Hamas broke the ceasefire using Grad rockets into Southern Israel…they started this war and Israel is going to end it!
Hamas are a bunch of thugs and terrorists who hide behind civilians or their families thinking the Israelis would not bomb them…every last Hamas fighter in Gaza should be killed the sooner that happens the sooner Fatah can get back into power there and the sooner the peace process can continue…
Marky Marky,
On the issue of ‘Israel and Hamas’, our Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, has spoken his mind today, and very clearly. I happen to agree with him.
I find that Mr Rudd usually speaks very clearly about whatever subject he is addressing, regardless of whether I agree with his pronouncements or not. The same goes for most of his ministers. The contrast to the rabble on the opposition benches is very clear to me.
Thinking back over the past 13 months, are there any shadow ministers you wish to name as outperforming the current ministers? Are there any you wish to name as having scored a draw? Any got even close?
Could I ask for a bit of self-regulation in discussion of Gaza? If your comment has political, historical or (best of all) electoral dimensions of a kind that might generate constructive discussion, dive right in. If you’re merely damning one side or the other in terms that can only provoke heated argument in response (I’m looking at you at the moment, Glen), take it somewhere else.
fargo (325), your point is well-aimed. The Government are getting better by the month while the Opposition spiral into an oblivion of their own making. So far, on the issues that matter most – the economy and climate change – the Opposition have yet to show they deserve to be taken seriously. They were a bunch of frauds in power and they have not changed one bit.
Sorry William i get carried away sometimes though this time not in German…
Well i am surprised no one thinks this military operation is a synical ploy by Kadima and Labor to beef up their security credentials before the Feb election…Bibi must be spitting chips because Labor in particular are getting a boost in the polls and if anything Likud will drop…
Anyway it is smart politics but still Bibi being Bibi is calling for a wider incursion and the elimination of Hamas completely without negotiations…
BTW i still think Likud will win a plurality of MKs…with Bibi as PM.
a synical ploy…distantly related to a septic audience…
Seriously though, Glen, I do think the Israelis have been sucked in, just as they were in Lebanon. This is a fight they cannot possibly win, no matter how many casualties they inflict on Hamas and no matter whether they have the law on their side or not. And yet, tragically for all, it may be a fight that Israel could not postpone.
This just points again to the futility, stupidity and cruelty of war – as if the people of the Middle East need reminding – and the wisdom of trying to stay out of other people’s conflicts.
I cant see how Israel could lose a fight in Gaza there is nowhere for the enemy to melt away to and is a much smaller battleground to duke it out than southern Lebanon…Livni and Barrak are going to do better than they would have in Feb but Likud will win in the end the Israelis are fed up with Hamas…
Have a look at the Financial Times….sobering views:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e56ac646-da93-11dd-8c28-000077b07658.html
“A dangerous gamble in Gaza
Published: January 4 2009 19:35 | Last updated: January 4 2009 19:35
Israel’s decision to pour ground troops and armour into the Gaza Strip is a dangerous gamble. If the goal is to reduce the number of rockets Hamas can fire at neighbouring, southern Israeli towns, it is probably achievable – for now. But if Israel proposes to cut the heart out of its most implacable Palestinian opponents, it will fail.
In either case the mounting casualties, including civilians, from Israel’s disproportionate air, sea and artillery bombardment in densely populated urban areas will so blacken its reputation, and so undermine moderate Arab and Palestinian opinion, that its political position will be seriously weakened.”
This fellow is also well worth reading:
http://blogs.ft.com/maverecon/2009/01/can-the-us-economy-afford-a-keynesian-stimulus/
“Willem Buiter on US fiscal policy
In a very long, and very good, analysis of the challenges facing US economic policy makers now, Willem Buiter casts doubt on the effectiveness of a fiscal policy stimulus in the US . The problem, he writes, is a “deep structural rot” which leads to extreme balance sheet adjustment in the financial and household sectors, which will take years, or maybe decades, to complete. Keynesian policies might work in healthier economies, but not in the US.”
The basic point is that the US is broke and that the unfolding burst in US Govt debt has only one conclusion: inflation and the collapse of the USD.
Such events would have significant implications for this country: a highly unstable currency, a reverse in the trend to lower interest rates, further contraction in international trade and – almost inevitably – a decline in our ability to roll over our foreign liabilities. Much pain will ensue…..
Just wanted to say how turned off I am from reading pollbludger comments since the conflict broke out. I come here for election related information, not Israel/Palestine bashing veiled in the form of election discussion.
Briefly @ 315
If a unilateral 5% ETS is not going to make a skerrick of difference (as per my MDB example) why have it at all? If it is spinning wheels without making a subtantive difference to global CO2 levels, why do it? Why not spend the funding on something useful, like on CC damage amelioration? The answer can only be: getting re-elected.
Rudd and Howard are different. They start with different values. Nevertheless, they are also very, very similar. They want, above all, to be re-elected. A test here is whether Rudd has stuck his neck out on anything? Answer: No. (Arguably, Howard took greater political risks than has Rudd at a similar time in their Governments).
The HowRuddian convergence is the place where master politicians try to ensure their political future by wheeling, dealing and working the market segments. The spin words are ‘balanced’ and ‘practical’. Howard used them. Rudd uses them.
In normal times, this does not matter much. Canny politicians merely endlessly cycle through successive governments, with varying results that most of us can more or less live with. But we are not in normal times. We are in abnormal times and the HowRuddian Convergence has failed us.
The fact that the GG and Greg Sheridan approve of Rudd and Obama merely underlines what is going on here: much ado about nothing.
The proposal to run a unilateral 5% ETS is a FAIL. Putting it on the table for international negotiations is a FAIL. Let’s hope the rest of the world comes up with something more substantial.
Boerwar (336), I think it is pointless to complain about politicians trying to win elections: that’s what they do in democracies. You can choose between an Opposition that will make a virtue of resisting any move to an ETS and a Govt that is willing to try to get an ETS up and running.
The probability is though, the ET will fail to pass the Senate and we will end up with nothing. Perhaps this will cheer you up.
Boerwar, “Let’s hope the rest of the world comes up with something more substantial.”
You are hoping for the best from the super-emitters. What are the chances?
Oh Dear, Springborg returns to work today and makes a major gaffe by challenging Mal Brough to run as an Independent Conservative candidate in Glasshouse at the next Queensland election. Talk about waving a red flag at a bull!
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24876731-5006786,00.html
US in Presendential “transition” , Bush/Obama on holidays , post xmas no one in th Western world is around , ruling ‘left’ Israeli partys facing defeat in an imminent elction whereas war with ‘terorists” always helps poll support …Israel attacks initially by air th Gaza just just then …over one israeli death I must be getting cynical in my young age
Having exposed th fallacy of Adams UN arguments in my #181 , and then quoting resolution 242 , th 1967 participants to which it related ( being Isreal , Jordon , Egypt & Syria) and that under resolutions 242 point (i) Israel should hav withdrawn in 1967 from West Bank/Gazza , and that irrespective th separate ‘non beligerance’ requirements of 242 point (ii) hav been adhered to anyway for past 30 years by those first 3 Countrys (Israel , Jordon & Egypt being th Countries for which th West Bank/Gazza applies) meaning even under 242 point (ii) Israel should ve withdrawn over 30 years ago , and furthermore having pointed out since 1994 Isreal , Jordon , & Egypt even hav peace agreements which absolutely prove non beligerance thereby makning th ‘non beligerance’ requirements of 242 point (ii) actually over complied with meaning even under 242 point (ii) Israel should hav withdrawn over 10 years ago….is there any intellectual response from Adam or Israeli supportrs to those points…..zero reasons hav given for non Israeli withdrawal
Why , because there is no valid reason for not withdrawing under th unaminous UN resolution 242…none at all …which is why these points can not be challenged So what th Israeli supporters ar left with is th Palestiniens th invadee , th occupied peoples should not be forsably trying to forse Israel th invader th occupier to withdraw Th Palestiniens should not be firing rockets to pressure th invader Israel to withdraw YET no Israeli supporter has said how long after 42 now years th Palestiniens should UNNATURALY desist from trying to forse th Invador Israel to withdraw , before Israel in response will actually withdraw
Fact is over 42 years there hav been numerous “ceasefires”….yet th Israeli’s still have not withdrawn….notwithstanding th Palestiniens th invadee has every right to demand Israel th invadee withdraw irrespective of whther th Palestiniens th invadee ar still firing rockets to forse them out or not Point is Israel’s false premise allows them to occupy permanently…currently for 42 years…Israel’s excuse for remaining is a charade & no Israeli supporter can intelectualy defend such an occupation excuse
Gallingly , th Israeli’s hav built numarous Israeli “settlements” on non Israeli land….that also is NOT th action of an Invador who intends to leave at all Again no Israeli supporter can justify why these Israeli settlements ar being built on non Israeli land ….non Israeli land that under 242 they ar supposed to withdraw from …nor th continued “settlementing” of Arab East Jurulesm (under 242 they ar supposed to withdraw from )
What we got from Adam instead is red herrings muddying th waters about 1948 histary , and j.wish-nes of Israel , and suggestions of forced Israeli Arab resettlements to some new Adam suggested boundaries to ‘deport’ these Arab Israeli’s into …none of which address’s either my #181 or th abov which is th issue…ie there’s no justificaton for occupying when th UN says to withdraw , when there is no reason to occupy “arab’ land AND when NO ONE including Israeli supporters hav remotely argued that th West Bank or Gazza belongs to Israel at all
So we hav ridiculous situation of Israeli supporters NOT even claming th West Bank or Gazza belongs to Israel…but somehow claiming Israel is allowed to occupy this “arab” land …for 42 years and counting …based on th claim th invadee occupied residents should not be trying to forse th illegal invader Israeli out of land that Israel supporters even consede is not Israeli land
Most unaligned objective people wuld conclude…after 42 years an occupier Isreal (and a “deemed Western and christen one at that) still ilegaly occupying “muslim”/Arab land by forse and against also th express unaminous UN resolution will guarantee continued armed Palestinien resistanse…and has …and will forever
So th solution to non conflict obviousley is Israel must withdraw unconditionally to its pre 1967 boder as required by UN resolution 242 annd now…and concurrently USA th worlds military super power should unambigousley verbally and by a physical presense deterrent back up Israels quite legitmaite right to exist for which I’ve never questoned ..but inside ITS own pre 1967 borders…….USA cann’t say that’s to hard “to protect democracy” because afterall th USA hasn’t hesated to go into Iraq , Afhanistan , Vietnam “to protect democracy” ….why not then for Israel who in spirit is its 52 nd state compared to Iraq , Afhanistan , Vietnam
….whatever State-hood arrangements Palestiniens decide for there Country is not Israel’s business at all (but Israeli subsequent humanitarian aid and ‘trade’ to indepenant Palestinien State wuld assist future reltions if it choosed)
So I’m back as that cynical young man at start , about timing of this war…other Agnda’s ar at play and pity that seems to be for th Palestiniens…for th Israeli’s an Agenda of annexing Arab east Jurulesm and parts of West Bank for land & religous basis’s …and at no economic coist as Israel is financed from th US budget annually and gets th latest military hardware as well plus there own innovations with US financing ….AND for USA an Agenda of a “controlled” M/E destabilised region does reely keep those oil rich /strategic Saudi Arabia , Emriates , Egypt and Kuwait only too desperate to keep friendly with th USA for military protecton (and didn’t th foolish Saddamm play right into there fears & to USA stratagic interests)
Billy Clinton went against th abov Agenda’s and made ‘demands of Israeli PM Barack in 1999 AND of Arafat , and almost got a deel …but his presendency time ran out I genuinely hope Obama takes Billy’s final 95% land template as a start and then a premium on getting 100% Arab East Jurulsm and realistic ‘return’ trade off , and forses Israel to first agree ..then publicly declares it to forse Palestiniens out to accept it (I believe Abbas would , and that will be enough to weaken both exrtreme Israeli and Palestinien zealots
But enough of red herrings camoflating not withdrawing , we all know non withdrawal guarantees continued conflict…and those disgraceful one ton bombs th Israelis’’ ar inflicting on innocent Palestinien civilians….well 80 Palestiniens kids alone hav died since xmas , so those that use th word ‘terorist’ in defense of Israel neither know of th 1948 Hagganoh or understand 80 kids lives lost from one ton bombs has a “name” , and sooner or later history will record what that ‘name’ is , and it is th same name you’d call a suicide bomber because neither can reely be justified …..of course describing those “ethnic separations within West Bank of Arab and Isreali with pre Mandela South African connotations
I ‘ve descibeed a way out of this , make th abov just histary & move forward …if Israel and US choose…after that if Palestinien side won’t party then as described th onus publicly is on thems and its cost should be by UN resolution
Of course being young and cynicol means when I get old I’ll become wise realizing th West is never wrong and Western Mediaa hav been always so even handed in reporting One can hope in reality solutions abov , rather than Geo political selfish abuse Agendas
“MAL Brough’s career may still have life, with Opposition Leader Lawrence Springborg suggesting he could run for a seat in State Parliament.”…
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,24874904-3102,00.html
The land now called the West Bank by the Palestineans was called Judea (land of the Jews) and Samalia, this war had been going on for thosands of year, and the land is as much the Jews as the Muslims
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_bank
For me 2 to 12 rockets a day is an act of war, imaging if 2 to 12 rocket hit Australia everyday, most lands in the desert, but some will kill Australian, I would not want to live in that situation.
While I blame it on the Palestineans, I think it is just a few lunatics that fires the rockets who are at fault and the Hamas Government either supporting these lunatics or refusing to do anything about them who are at fault, they are just using the life and children of their civilians as political tools. These people are to blame for the conflict.
Some people just want to see the world burn
Great to see the Queensland Nationals bringing out the big guns against the Queensland Liberals on their first day back at work in an election year. The merger and champagne is just so last year.
Ron
UN resolution 242 asked the Isrealis to remove troups from part of the West Bank, it did not at any time ask Isreal to move out of the West Bank
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_242#Semantic_dispute
Per Lord Caradon, the chief author of the resolution:
It was from occupied territories that the [r]esolution called for withdrawal. The test was which territories were occupied. That was a test not possibly subject to any doubt as a matter of fact…East Jerusalem, the West Bank, Gaza, the Golan and Sinai were occupied in the 1967 conflict. I[t] was on withdrawal from occupied territories that the Resolution insisted.[12]
Lord Caradon also maintains,
We didn’t say there should be a withdrawal to the ‘67 line; we did not put the ‘the’ in, we did not say all the territories, deliberately.. We all knew – that the boundaries of ‘67 were not drawn as permanent frontiers, they were a cease-fire line of a couple of decades earlier… We did not say that the ‘67 boundaries must be forever; it would be insanity.[13]
Hi Glen,
Re your “BTW I still think Likud will win a plurality of MKs…with Bibi as PM”. Do you mean that you think that Likud will win 60 seats or more? (I am not having a go at you, I am just unsure if that is what you actuallly mean).
Given the electoral system of Israel, and recent published polling, it seems highly unlikely to me that anyone can gain a majority (hence my confusion about the point you have made above).
http://alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L1463965.htm (Link to polling results)
I am thinking at the moment that it is more likely that there will be a coalition of Kadima / Labour with (I presume) Tzipi Livni as P.M. I suppose it depends on who they can get to support them as they still would seem to end up about 12 seats short of a majority, even at 32 ands 16 seats respectively. If Likud can only muster 27 seats or less, I don’t see how they will be able to get enough cross bench support to form anything like a stable government, although I readily admit that I do not know much about what any of the other parties stand for, nor how much political differences and personal differences come into play when they decide who if anyone they will ultimatly support.
I read yesterday that the qualifying % for Knesset representation is 2%. It was originally 1%, then was increased to 1.5% then again to the 2%. I think it is really necessary to have a 5% qualifying limit to get a workble trade off between workability and fair representation in a proportional voting system.
Here is a description of the Israel electoral system… http://www.knesset.gov.il/deSCRIPTion/eng/eng_mimshal_beh.htm There is a link on that page that goes to previous results.
Is a blockade an act of war? It used to be called one. Is the shelling of beaches, markets and schools an act of war? No one wants rockets dropped on them, but stop pretending that it’s only Palestinian militants engaging in indiscriminate killing.
This discussion should not be framed as though the Israeli-Palestinian conflict began when militants starter firing rockets randomly into Israel. An excellent article here demonstrates the naivety of such a view.
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/robert-fisk-why-bombing-ashkelon-is-the-most-tragic-irony-1216228.html
“How easy it is to snap off the history of the Palestinians, to delete the narrative of their tragedy, to avoid a grotesque irony about Gaza which – in any other conflict – journalists would be writing about in their first reports: that the original, legal owners of the Israeli land on which Hamas rockets are detonating live in Gaza.
That is why Gaza exists: because the Palestinians who lived in Ashkelon and the fields around it – Askalaan in Arabic – were dispossessed from their lands in 1948 when Israel was created and ended up on the beaches of Gaza. They – or their children and grandchildren and great-grandchildren – are among the one and a half million Palestinian refugees crammed into the cesspool of Gaza, 80 per cent of whose families once lived in what is now Israel. This, historically, is the real story: most of the people of Gaza don’t come from Gaza.
But watching the news shows, you’d think that history began yesterday, that a bunch of bearded anti-Semitic Islamist lunatics suddenly popped up in the slums of Gaza – a rubbish dump of destitute people of no origin – and began firing missiles into peace-loving, democratic Israel, only to meet with the righteous vengeance of the Israeli air force. The fact that the five sisters killed in Jabalya camp had grandparents who came from the very land whose more recent owners have now bombed them to death simply does not appear in the story.”
Wonder if Springborg will give up his seat of Southern Downs that any National in Queensland could win and search out a Labor held seat to win. Or is that just reserved for Liberals in general Queensland and Brough in particular?
Oz
Blockade is not an act of war, it has never been. It can be part of a war, but a lot of country had been blockaded without the country coming to war
The last one is Cuba by the US
Oz Said
That is why Gaza exists: because the Palestinians who lived in Ashkelon and the fields around it – Askalaan in Arabic – were dispossessed from their lands in 1948 when
Israel was created and ended up on the beaches of Gaza.
You are doing exactly what you are asking people not to do, this is only the last instalment of war in the area.
The West Banks was once called Jeffa (ie land of the jews) and Samala, this land was occupied by the jews over 2000 years ago, it was taken over by the muslim at the decline of the Roman empire and the start of the Ottoman empire. At the end of the Ottoman empire, it was returned to the Jews, and then taken over by the Jordanians
To say that only the Muslim have rights to the land is wrong, both the Jews and Muslim has claims to the land, they have fought over that parch of the desert for thosands of year and will do so for eternity
Hoping for a Palestinian State after this schomozel
One final outrage, Bush rewarding his war criminal stooges before he departs
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/01/06/2459675.htm
Pages: « 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 … 13 » Show All