Wow it's all Israel and the US's fault.

You know what Gotham? You just fanned the flames for even greater violence in the middle east and you have no clue of what you just did because you towed the leftist line and condemmed the only two decent countries in this great sturggle of our time. And since you felt the right to do so, then certainly others will as well.

So go ahead and continue your rants and let's see what happens.

Go ahead and continue to re-enforce victimization, the sure recipe for allowing parents to strap on a bomb and murder innocent civilians.

NY Times, a great source of objectivity, the gospell of the left and Jimmy Carter as it's saint.

Steve

Gotham,

Steve and Gotham, perhaps your passions can meet on common ground through the weaving "solution" that is part of Gotham's post:

"I'll tell you that the start of a solution comes with educating and enabling a new generation of Arabs with the skills to transform their own people and communities into self-sustaining members of society and prosperous economies such that the Palestinian territories can become something other than hotzones for terrorist breeding."

How much energy does one put into what's wrong compared to what's a solution? That dispension of energy creates more of the same.

Trish~~

To add to what Gotham said, here's my take:

According to the New York Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/30/world/middleeast/30gaza.html

"The American State Department has withdrawn all Fulbright grants to Palestinian students in Gaza hoping to pursue advanced degrees at American institutions this fall because Israel has not granted them permission to leave."

Aside from the obviously despicable nature of this sort of thing, its worth reflecting for a moment on the fraud of Israel's "withdrawal from Gaza" that this decison reveals.

The Israeli "withdrawal" from Gaza seems to have had one real purpose: confusing the reality of an emerging Palestinian majority living under Israeli rule. By pulling out of Gaza (but still exercising all the blunt instruments of colonial domination against its residents) Israel can claim to still be a state with a Jewish-majority, and therefore, according to the impoverished vision of democracy that we have come to accept, "democratic." This sort of creative accounting puts Hillary Clinton's campaign to shame. It is the sort of Orwellian game that leads Israelis (and their supporters) to call a 26 foot high concrete wall "a fence."

As human rights violations go, obstructing the movement of an aspiring Palestinian MBA may seem like small potatoes. But as the aspiring MBA himself explained:

"If we are talking about peace and mutual understanding, it means investing in people who will later contribute to Palestinian society," he said. "I am against Hamas. Their acts and policies are wrong. Israel talks about a Palestinian state. But who will build that state if we can get no training?"

Indeed.

What this policy reveals, of course, is that Israel has no interest in the emergence of a viable Palestinian state. Israel wants Palestinian lands and the resources (particularly water) underneath them. This means talking endlessly about a "two state solution" while continuing to put into place the infrastructure of continued colonial domination, including multiple second, third, and fourth class legal statuses for the Palestinian people (Israeli Arabs, "residents" of Jerusalem, occupied in the West Bank, and completely disposable in Gaza).

Unfortunately, there is little reason to hope that any of the presidential candidates will do anything to appreciably challenge this dynamic.

the elders always talk about education...the key to freedom and the end of ignorance...

1...education is always a good thing, it must be encouraged...no?

2...talking to your friends and foes seems to be an educated thing to do...when u talk to ur enemies...they might be less likely to want to harm u...avoidance and dissing seems to be an ignorant thing to do and can lead to more hatred...i think...that is why mac..bs is so wrong and barack is so right...go barack...

You continue to make statements like "Israeli imperialists"
and "Congratulations America, you're in the process of buying yourself another two decades of worth of bloodshed in the so-called "Holy Land."

What would a teenager in Gaza think Gotham?

And btw, in spite of all of this, these kids want to come to the US to study, why would that be?

Why not clamor to study in Saudi Arabia or Iran?

Btw, Diablo, the day after Jimmy Carter met with Hamas leadership, one of the largest Hamas rockets attacks to Israel occured.

The NY Times article sounds like an opinion piece not objective reporting.

Steve

It should also be acknowledged that this policy has generated Israeli opposition as well:

'"This could be interpreted as collective punishment," complained Rabbi Michael Melchior, chairman of the Parliament’s education committee, during the hearing. "This policy is not in keeping with international standards or with the moral standards of Jews, who have been subjected to the deprivation of higher education in the past. Even in war, there are rules." Rabbi Melchior is from the Meimad Party, allied with Labor.' [NYT]

"The NY Times article *sounds like* an opinion piece not objective reporting."#6

I suggest you first read the said artcile before jumping to pre-determined conclusions and formulaic right wing responses regarding liberal print media.

Gotham's artcile is an opinion piece based on the NYT artcile which is sourced and very much objective compared to the relative standards of traditional media in this country.

There is a human case here which supersedes "partisan" opinion. Any right thinking person can see the wrongness of this. Why should we punish scholars? How much more punitive damage must the Palestinian people endure because some are cowed by their own fear or the self interest of the Israeli state?

I'm glad to see the comments of Rabbi Melchior. I'm sure many Israelis might concur.

In March 2008 eight students were shot dead in an attack on a rabbinical seminary in Jerusalem. My niece was living and studying there at the same time, just a few blocks away from these murders. I don't have to tell you who performed this unspeakable act.

Hopes and dreams of teenagers gone.

#9 is one more reason why one should question this policy. One doesn't need to have a given opinion about the long-term issues at stake to understand the right course of action in this instance.

If people respond to this news with reflexive, ideologically rigid views, it's not New York Times' or Gotham Chopra's fault. Moreover, it becomes a teachable moment for how in the Middle East simple issues with obvious pragmatic solutions become disasters.

Nothing Gotham Chopra wrote crosses the line. It is totally appropriate to question why Fullbright grants should be withheld to Palestinians in Gaza.

I simply can't understand the logic, from either the US or Israeli point of view. The best possible way to improve relations between all sides is to offer more Palestinians a chance to pursue higher education in US universities. The only reason why the US people - as opposed to the Administration - remain reasonably popular and accepted in the Middle East today is because many Arabs either have relatives in the United States or have had some person-to-person contact with Americans. It's harder to hate America if you go to college here, develop friendships, and get exposed to an environment of free inquiry.

This should not be a political football. Gotham is merely stating the obvious - most people would agree that all sides benefit by exchange programs like this.

Preity's interpretation and position are correct.

Hello Gotham and Everyone,

Gotham you write, , "More suicide bombings by Islamic martyrs inspired by Israeli imperialists terrorizing and dehumanizing Palestinian citizens..."

Your choice of the word "inspired" in the above sentence is the most telling aspect of your perspective on this conflict...and, I might add, I have read this kind of perspective before, just different wording....and this is how that wording interprets for me...

By saying that the suicide bombings are "inspiried by" you are, imo, letting the Palestinians off the hook as far as RESPONSIBILITY goes, THEIR RESPONSIBILITY, in CHOOSING and ACTING on THAT WEAPON of CHOICE as a
legitimate act of rebellion against their oppression, and this is where I think your whole argument(others as well with this particular perspective) against Israel and the US falls apart.

I am not at all giving Israel a free pass on what they do to engage and nurture this conflict..I think they do plenty and much of what they do is unnecessary....and it seems to me what you are complaining about in your blog is something I would consider unnecessary on Israel's part...

The Palestinian people, not just members of Hamas or other organizations that are labeled terrorist organizations, have a certain amount of responsibility for the leaders they have voted for and continue to support even though they are not getting their needs met by the actions and policies of those leaders.

It is a conflict that is allowed to fester by both the Israelis and the Palestinians, both, do tons of sh*t to the other and cry victim but I think the perspective of it being the big bad Israelis and the big bad US while saying oh, those poor Palestinians have no choice in their decisions to self detonate their children or stock pile rockets upon rockets while their citizens suffer is bullsheet not onlike the continuted building of Isreali settlements in questionable territories.

have a great day, ruth

How can anyone disagree with your observation, Gotham, and the message attached to it? Thanks for posting it.

It is obvious that poster # 1 has not thought about your memo with a clear mind, he may be too close to the problem to see your point. You’re crying out for a different course and a possible solution, and he figures, “you just fanned the flames for even greater violence...”

John F Kennedy. "Never negotiate out of fear, but never fear to negotiate.”

I read this appalling story today, and wish to make the point, among others, that friends of Israel need to be able to criticize its mistaken policies or actions. I also laud the fact that the chairman of the Knesset Education Committee, Rabbi Michael Melchior, held a hearing on the subject, at which he, too, criticized the action:

"This policy is not in keeping with international standards or with the moral standards of Jews, who have been subjected to the deprivation of higher education in the past. Even in war, there are rules."

Indeed, even the rather hawkish Natan Sharansky is quoted in the NYT article as criticizing the action:

"We correctly complain that the Palestinian Authority is not building civil society, but when we don’t help build civil society this plays into the hands of Hamas," said Natan Sharansky, a former government official. "The Fulbright is administered independently, and people are chosen for it due to their talents."

And, since the NYT reports that even if the Israeli government reverses its decision, the Fulbright money is gone for this year, I would call on American Jewish organizations and the Israeli government to step up to the plate.

Indeed, under the heading Let Fulbright Scholars out of Gaza, the story currently is featured on the Engage website.

http://www.engageonline.org.uk/blog/

We should not be approaching this by simply using the story as a stick with which to beat Israel, and which ignores the critical response from some rather prominent Israeli leaders.

An opportunity for cooperation, progress, and righting a wrong is the positive I see in all this.

Hmmm... this is OUR State Department and they had -- hopefully still have -- a choice: to withdraw the grants or to press Israel (or maybe Egypt, which also has a border with Gaza) to permit those students to leave for America.

Disgracefully, the State Department seems to have made no effort on behalf of the students. Perhaps they didn't really want Gazans coming to the US. As the quoted New York Times article reports:

"But when a query about the canceled Fulbrights was made to the [Israeli] prime minister’s office on Thursday, senior officials expressed surprise. They said they did, in fact, consider study abroad to be a humanitarian necessity and that when cases were appealed to them, they would facilitate them.

They suggested that American officials never brought the Fulbright cases to their attention. The State Department and American officials in Israel refused to discuss the matter. But the failure to persuade the Israelis may have stemmed from longstanding tensions between the consulate in Jerusalem, which handles Palestinian affairs, and the embassy in Tel Aviv, which manages relations with the Israeli government."

As Americans, we should be demanding that the State Department work to facilitate the departure of the Fulbright scholars to the US.

And maybe the world would also be a little better place if the State Department officials who work with the Palestinians, and the officials who work with the Israelis, would also learn how to work with each other.

Freyja, (#4) why pick on Clinton?

I was enjoying your comment until I read "This sort of creative accounting puts Hillary Clinton's campaign to shame."

But Clinton and Obama's position on Gaza and Palestine in general is exactly the same. They are both self-proclaimed "strong supporters of Israel." Oh sure, President Obama might talk with Abbas a little more quickly than Clinton (although the chances are that events would unfold in exactly the same manner), but neither has uttered a word of condemnation of the blockade/attempted genocide of Gaza.

The Clinton remark (by the way, I am a former Clinton supporter) was totally gratuitous.

The events described in the NYT article are, of course, utterly abominable. I particularly "loved" this statement:

"This could be interpreted as collective punishment," complained Rabbi Michael Melchior, chairman of the Parliament’s education committee, during the hearing.

As if everything going on with Israel's treatment of Gaza isn't collective punishment. No "interpretation" needed.

On a cheerier note:

from Haaretz:

"The American mathematician David Mumford, co-winner of the 2008 Wolf Foundation Prize in Mathematics, announced upon receiving the award yesterday that he will donate the money to Bir Zeit University, near Ramallah, and to Gisha, an Israeli organization that advocates for Palestinian freedom of movement."

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/986898.html

The siege of Gaza is a cruel form of collective punishment. This particular event is only the tiniest expression of how Gaza has been turned into a giant prison camp by the Israeli administration.

From today's Jerusalem Post:

Tutu: Situation in Gaza Strip has become 'scary'

"Archbishop Desmond Tutu on Thursday said he was shocked by conditions in the Gaza Strip after months of Israeli sanctions.

South African Archbishop and Nobel Peace Prize laureate Desmond Tutu speaks at a press conference in Gaza City, Thursday.

The Nobel peace laureate said the coastal strip has become "desolate and scary" as a result of shortages of fuel and other basic goods."

Two questions. One is why on earth the Fulbright committee simply does not withdraw its Fellowships from Israeli scholars - imagine the uproar if that happened. The second should be addressed to whatever is left of the collective conscience of Americans who continue to blindly support the pettiness and collective punishment of the joint Bush/Israeli regime.

#17 mini:

Agreed.

Obama and Clinton's positions on Israel are equally rotten. The Clinton comment was a throwaway that popped into my head when I was thinking about the "creative math" involved in pretending that the Palestinians living in Gaza are no longer under Israeli occupation. There is a sort of demographic "moving the goalposts" here that reminded me of the Clinton campaign's shifting metrics of what constitutes victory. But I certainly didn't want to imply that Obama gets a pass here.

Well perhaps we have some promising news from the US:

WASHINGTON - The Bush administration predicted Friday that Israel will reverse its decision to deny visas to Palestinian students from the Gaza Strip whom the U.S. government had selected to receive prestigious Fulbright scholarships.

State Department spokesman Tom Casey told reporters that the U.S. objected to the Israeli decision and "they heard our concerns." The U.S. lobbying included a call from the No. 3 State Department official to Israel's ambassador in Washington on Friday morning.

"I expect we'll have some positive outcome for this in the not-too-distant future," Casey said."

This is why I didn't like the way the Times reported this, no mention of the above. So it looks like the teenagers will get their scholarship. Perhaps Skep I wasn't that muddled afterall.

Gotham, it's good to debate these issues, you know happens, one or both of us will get hot headed and let out a blast of emotions then cooler heads prevail. I know the US is a great friend of Israel, you can count with one hand the number of supporters. Look who supports Hamas, pretty much most of UN with Iran always close to lend a helping hand of chaos and lust of destruction. We have all read the headlines.

You have seen what can happen over there, I recall it was before the fence or wall was put up right?

My other niece was there at the time of second Intafadah and was planning to go visit this one mall on a Saturday evening when the taxi driver refused to take her for some strange reason. Turns out, that was the suicide bomb blast that killed dozens and she was going to be in the thick of it.

Ask Palestinians if they prefer to live amongst Israelis or merge in with it's neighboring countries. You know the answer to that, and that's why they are free to protest. No such freedoms in other countries, they wouldn't dare.

If Israel pulls its support from Israel, game over.

Good luck with your Celtics tonight Gotham,

Cheers,

Steve

Re. #22 posted by Ambasteve

In regards to "promising news" according to Ambasteve:

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/988686.html

The scholarships were not cancelled they were... transferred to the West Bank...

"The eight won the prestigious grants for education at U.S. universities and are still eligible, U.S. State Department spokesman Tom Casey said.

"The issue was that they could not get visas, so the decision was made to transfer the Fulbrights to the West Bank rather than lose them for this year," Casey said."

The students can't travel to the west bank. Can they?

"It was not clear whether replacement candidates were already in line. Casey said the decision to defer the scholarships was made because time was running short for students to make arrangements for the coming school year."

People are not fungible. The responsibility of the State Department was to work on behalf of the actual individuals who received the grants, not to take what seems like a bureaucratic shortcut and transfer this year's funds from one group of Palestinians to another.

Evidently no such effort was made, and a decision was taken without the participation of the highest levels of the State Department (The Haaretz link contains Condi's denial of knowledge). Perhaps somebody at State thought they were helping the good guys in the West Bank and hurting the bad guys in Gaza. However, anyone with intelligence should have understood that this decision would have negative consequences.

The apparent callousness within the State Department is reminiscent of other times in history when its officials were incapable of considering the merits of individual cases caught up in red tape.

That might be promising news for you Ambasteve.

But, that's an awfully cynical move by the State Department.

Reportedly the Gaza student scholarships were not lost by them but deferred, presumably to another year. The existing scholarships were transferred to West Bank recipients. Terrible news for the Gaza students but given the constraints of time and politics it makes some bureaucratic sense.

Hopefully this works out for everyone, media attention could push Rice into getting the Gazans exit visas and with additional funding the West Bank students would still get theirs.

The U.S. and Israel had been hoping to make the West Bank successful while Gaza stagnates under Hamas, and this seemed like part of it. A resolution of the Gazan students' issues would be far preferable.

Dear Ambasteve

Please remember...

the NY Times did an excellent job on this article. As they did on the Pentagon Propaganda Campaign.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagon_military_analyst_program#New_York_Times_expos.C3.A9

Ref # 27
“CBS, NBC, and Fox did not comment on the involvement of their analysts. With the exception of two mentions on PBS, there has been a de facto blackout of this story by the networks”.

That is frightening to say the least!

amber...no matter what...it is still better to talk than not to talk....

two mates cannot reconcile if they keep giving each other the cold shoulder ...right? same must me said for anyone other human situation...no? amber u really need to change ur skewed attitude to life dude...damn! u must be listening to too much limpbag or hennutty! damn!

Yes sir Irvine. If you say the NYT article was excellent it must be.

I will be pleased to remember that in the future Irvine sir.

Permission to exit sir?

Thank you,

While I certainly don't agree with the popular notion that Israel is responsible for everything that is wrong there's no denying the fact that it is not all blameless either and the same is true for the other side. However, one reason this problem remains unsolved is also because no one side is willing to admit its own mistakes. Every debate on the subject descends to they did - we did - they said - we said and so it goes on. To add to it, the US is most certainly not an honest broker.

This business of withdrawing of scholarhips just proves what most people around the world feel. US foreign policy is generally an unmitigated disaster.

Dara

Dara,

Can you give wxamples of 3 countries who have done a better job than the US as a middle east broker?

I'm not sure how you came to your conclusions but everyone here is entitled to their opinions whether in this case are emotion based or otherwise

Steve

Hi Steve,

I think you have missed the point Im trying to make. It isn't that others have done a better job. The point is that the US has itself volunteered to be help out and facilitate, it is thus natural to expect it would be neutral. The fact is it hasn't been so. The scholarship issue is just another example.

If you wish I'll find out the link, you could probably google it yourself faster than me. The list of countrywide US vetoes in the UN and the reasons. The vetoes (on this topic) made by the US in support of Israel and earlier in conjunction with the UK and France, to protect the apartheid regime of S Africa will perhaps help to make my point clear.

Now look at it from this angle please. Surely the rest of the countries were not always wrong whenever they brought up a topic that censured or embarrassed Israel? The standard answer to this has always been that the Russians and sometimes the Chinese did the same whenever resolutions condemning the Arab countries came up. That is true, but this cannot be a justification. All it tells me is that Chinese and the Russians were equally guilty of being biased. It does not absolve anyone else from being partial.

Suppose now, that even if one of these countries had admitted that yes their protege was in the wrong and had let them face the music, wouldn't it have helped in the long run? I think so.

Regards
Dara

Yeah, that's a great job by the Bush administration with Iraq and Iran.

Historically, US was more like Oil brokers than peace brokers in the middle-east to begin with. The current Bush foreign policy is based on realpolitik, of pragmatism and self-interest rather than based on ideology and fighting for what's just and right. Still, they screwed up big time in Iraq. Total incompetence.

Sure, US strongly "supports" Israel and works hard to broker peace in th I/P conflict, but they did a lousy job. The region is as insecure as ever for all, including of course Israel.

Hi Dara,

Thank you for your points. I will say that the UN General Assembly has passed 429 resolutions against Israel and was condemned 321 times, the most resolutions and condemnations against one country by far. Do you see a little bias here?

Irvine, when Bush was recently in Israel did you get the impression from the speeches by Israeli leaders that the US has done a lousy job?

I'll take a lousy job from the US over most any country Irvine. Do you have perhaps another leftist leaning country in mind that you favor?

Have a great day Dara and yes you too Irvine,

Steve

Also Dara you mentioned treating countries equality and the US isn't doing this, well in the middle we have good relations with countries that border Israel like Egypt and Jordan, but we don't support terrorist nations like Syria or Iran. Also Hamas is a terrorist group that controls Gaza and gets much aid from Iran. We have better relations with Palestinian leadership in the West Bank. Israel is a great friend of the US, of course they will be favored, but also during the Clinton admin. the Palistinians were so close to getting bascially 90% of what they want in regards to land and Arafat said no.

Yes perhaps a lousy job by the US, but you can see how complicated it is in this region, why it's so difficult to equally treat all countries the same way, when Israel isn't recognized even as a country and in some cases calls for it's destruction.

Cheers,

Steve

Final thought,

You know what Israel means? It means to struggle. To support Israel means to struggle with them, might be a better way to look at it instead of simply saying the US does a lousy job in the middle east.

Steve

Israel is not 'the' middle-east.

Hi Steve,

Thanks for the information regarding the General Assembly resolutions, quite an eye opener. To me the fact that the general assembley has passed so many resolutions against Israel is further proof of bias on the part of the US in this affair.

As you may be aware, the General Assembley is really a talk shop - its resolutions are not legally binding on member states and there is no question of any country having the power of veto in the GA. In fact to pass any resolution in the GA requires a 66% or 75% majority. So if that many countries have indeed passed so many resolutions against Israel, isn't it really a reflection of what the majority of countries the world over think? Isn't it also possible that there is some substance to them? Surely one cannot take the stand that 66% or whatever of the countries of the world are anti Israel all the time? I am also pretty certain that the US, if it did vote on these resolutions would either have abstained or voted against.

The General Assembley also has the right to recommend certain issues to the Security Council for consideration, and it is here that the veto plays a very significant role. Resolution of the SC are legally binding on the member states and a veto effectively negates any resolution being passed. It is most unlikely that the US would vote for a resolution in the GA and then veto it in the SC when it came up for discussion. Incidentally the US has vetoed close to 40 resoltuions on Israel alone in the SC. Maybe some of these were sent up to them by the GA after discussion.

Steve, my point is really this, the US is too committed to Israel, because of its own internal political equations to view things dispassionately. Obviously you don't agree, I am willing to be convinced but so far am not. The other point I have made is that this scholarship issue is one more wrong step that has been taken because of political considerations and not on merits. Here again I am open to being convinced otherwise.

I would be at fault if I didnt admit that the same holds good for those who blindly support the Palestinian cause and feel that they can never be wrong. However, the role the US is playing or is rather unable to play is what we are discussing here. Without taking this thread into the rights and wrong of the Israel Palestine affair I would like to make just one more point. When Bush rolled out his famous road map for peace about 4 years ago he said he would give it the same priority and effort as Tony Blair gave to the peace talks with the IRA. Unfortunately it remained just another Bushism.

Regards and pleasant dreams to you Steve :)
Dara

Hi Steve,

Thanks for the information regarding the General Assembly resolutions, quite an eye opener. To me the fact that the general assembley has passed so many resolutions against Israel is further proof of bias on the part of the US in this affair.

As you may be aware, the General Assembley is really a talk shop - its resolutions are not legally binding on member states and there is no question of any country having the power of veto in the GA. In fact to pass any resolution in the GA requires a 66% or 75% majority. So if that many countries have indeed passed so many resolutions against Israel, isn't it really a reflection of what the majority of countries the world over think? Isn't it also possible that there is some substance to them? Surely one cannot take the stand that 66% or whatever of the countries of the world are anti Israel all the time? I am also pretty certain that the US, if it did vote on these resolutions would either have abstained or voted against.

The General Assembley also has the right to recommend certain issues to the Security Council for consideration, and it is here that the veto plays a very significant role. Resolution of the SC are legally binding on the member states and a veto effectively negates any resolution being passed. It is most unlikely that the US would vote for a resolution in the GA and then veto it in the SC when it came up for discussion. Incidentally the US has vetoed close to 40 resoltuions on Israel alone in the SC. Maybe some of these were sent up to them by the GA after discussion.

Steve, my point is really this, the US is too committed to Israel, because of its own internal political equations to view things dispassionately. Obviously you don't agree, I am willing to be convinced but so far am not. The other point I have made is that this scholarship issue is one more wrong step that has been taken because of political considerations and not on merits. Here again I am open to being convinced otherwise.

I would be at fault if I didnt admit that the same holds good for those who blindly support the Palestinian cause and feel that they can never be wrong. However, the role the US is playing or is rather unable to play is what we are discussing here. Without taking this thread into the rights and wrong of the Israel Palestine affair I would like to make just one more point. When Bush rolled out his famous road map for peace about 4 years ago he said he would give it the same priority and effort as Tony Blair gave to the peace talks with the IRA. Unfortunately it remained just another Bushism.

Regards and pleasant dreams to you Steve :)
Dara

Sorry for the double posting.

Steve, that it is difficult to treat all countries equally and how complicated the whole thing is, I do not for a moment disagree with. It is not about being friendly with some and not so friendly with some others, thats true for every country. Its about treating every case on its merits.

I am aware that the US has in the past succeeded in bringing about peace between Israel and Egypt. However, my contention is that given its internal compulsions on Israel, it is not possible for the US to be an honest broker. If it were one, perhaps the problem would become easier to handle. Obviously this is what you disagree with, though you do imply that it is difficult for the US to do so.

Regards,
Dara

Just heard that the US State Department has decided to continue with the Fulbright scholarships. That is positive news and I just wish that they hadn't been so fast on the draw in the first place. Good news and a timely correction.

Worth a read for those interested, gives a good picture of just how things are there:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080602/ap_on_re_mi_ea/gaza_fulbright_scholars

Regards
Dara

Hi Dara,
This is good news and I reported earlier that the US was pressuring Israel to allow these students to come to the US.

I just saw this news of recent comments by Ahmadinejag regarding the US and Israel.

His comments speak for themselves, consistent with his earlier threats.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad predicted on Monday that Muslims would uproot "satanic powers" and repeated his controversial belief that Israel will soon disappear, the Mehr news agency reported.
"I must announce that the Zionist regime (Israel), with a 60-year record of genocide, plunder, invasion and betrayal is about to die and will soon be erased from the geographical scene," he said.

"Today, the time for the fall of the satanic power of the United States has come and the countdown to the annihilation of the emperor of power and wealth has started."