Logical incoherence - Obama style

Fill in the blanks:

"We did note that while we recognize that ___ is part of ___, the United States supports the early resumption of dialogue."

Finished guessing? Here’s the answer:
"We did note that while we recognize that Judea and Samaria are part of the State of Israel, the United States supports the early resumption of dialogue."

Just kidding, here’s the real answer:
"We did note that while we recognize that Tibet is part of the People's Republic of China, the United States supports the early resumption of dialogue."

Backtrack, analyze – and then reach for your medical diagnosis encyclopaedia.

China covets Tibet because it has water, space and direct proximity to the Indian subcontinent and the Middle East.

China invades Tibet. China transports more than a million Tibetans to China, and replaces them with more than a million Han Chinese. In old-fashioned English this used to be known as “population transfer” and was a social, ethical and political no-no.

US President Barack Hussein Obama, who recently refused to meet with the Tibetans’ spiritual leader the Dalia Lama, today acknowledges that China has full entitlement to Tibet.

Round about the same time, the combined force of the Arab world invades Israel after decades of pogroms in which Jewish civilians are massacred in their homes. Israel fights back and in a succession of defensive wars to fend off the aggressors eventually creates the strategic depth it requires by holding on to some of the territory it has captured in the course of its defence.

US President Barack Hussein Obama, who recently refused to be seen in public with Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu, has consistently maintained that any territory Israel captured in the pursuit of its defence must be handed over to its aggressors.

Take a deep breath, then review the logic. Naked aggression, the rape of a nation and the transfer of its population are given official US approval and Washington recognizes that the aggressor is entitled to the victim’s property.

That’s in Asia.

Naked aggression, a racist ideology and a climate of fanatical religious supremacy are given official US approval and Washington recognizes that the aggressor is entitled to international backing in prosecuting the victim.

That’s in the Middle East.

Is “logical incoherence” a known medical condition?


Media reports:
Indian Express
Times of India
Times Online
Telegraph
Guardian
NDTV
ZOPAG


Articles from this site (in Swedish):
Terror pays
The Palestinians never miss a chance to miss a chance

Peace Prize gone to pieces

"Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future." Norwegian Nobel Committee, 2009.

Barack Hussein Obama took up the office of President of the United States of America less than a fortnight before the nominations closed for the 2009 Peace Prize.

Within that short period of time, he made it onto the shortlist of candidates for what was once a prestigious award for duty to humanity.

He must have done an awful lot of really good work in those few days, because today he was confirmed as being the most deserving of all candidates for the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize.

He gets the prize while managing to alienate all America’s loyal allies and at the same time becoming pally with some of the worst dictatorships and inhuman rights regimes the modern world has ever known.

And, not least, under his stewardship the economic crisis he admittedly inherited has worsened to such an extent that many US commentators talk about a forthcoming civil war in a nominally federal America where the gulf between the haves and the have nots – in particular as regards jobs and future prospects – is widening rather than narrowing.

It would appear that the Peace Prize was gifted to Barack Hussein Obama in a desperate attempt to shore up his flagging reputation. A reputation he has lost in record time – the quickest slide in US presidential history. A slide compounded by his refusal to meet the Dalai Lama on the latter’s visit to Washington, in a remarkable break with protocol. It’s an insult on a par with hitting Mahatma Gandhi on the nose and kicking Mother Theresa on the shin. Perhaps Obama will head-butt the Pope if he ever visits the Vatican, we seem to live in an age of unspeakable wonders.

The Nobel Committee has either lost its way or, like so many others, been dazzled by the sparkling oratory skills of a Teflon figurehead whose most lasting contribution to domestic US and indeed international peace and stability is the phrase “Yes we can”.

The world has long since stopped waiting to find out just what he can.

For 2010, the Norwegian Nobel Committee, which awards the Peace Prize, should consider the following candidates:

1.
Robert Mugabe. Like Barack Hussein Obama, he too has dedicated his administration to wiping out the past and changing the course of his nation’s history. While Obama contents himself with transforming the most powerful nation on earth into a disparaged weakling, Mugabe has succeeded in transforming what was once the bread-basket of Africa into one of the poorest nations on earth. And while Obama is adopting policies that are driving skilled and dedicated Americans away from the country of their birth, Mugabe is using his armed forces to drive away white farmers from the country of their birth, solely on account of the colour of their skin. Obama, meanwhile, remains silent. Obama’s “Yes we can” has been transformed by Mugabe into “We already did.”

2.
Should Robert Mugabe be unsuccessful in his bid for the 2010 Peace Prize, the only other candidate who stands a chance of winning the prestigious award is of course Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Because while Iran’s strongman has been making clear his determination to rid the world of its only Jewish nation to make way for the 53rd Islamic country, Obama has remained silent in the face of this racist onslaught and even given him floor space in New York from which to grandstand his racist views.

3.
There is however a third candidate. In announcing next year’s Peace Prize winner, the Norwegian Nobel Committee will not even have to write a new speech. They can simply repeat the words used to announce the 2009 Obama victory.

With just one exception, one tiny little letter:

"Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future." Norwegian Nobel Committee, 2009.

"Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Osama captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future." Recommended wording, 2010.

Osama Bin Laden certainly captured the world’s attention, and he most certainly has given a lot of people hope for a future that is way better from their blinkered viewpoint.

Perhaps, next year, the Nobel Peace Prize Committee will make a departure from protocol and deliver their announcement from that outstanding stronghold of peace and human rights, Myanmar?

JPost, Haaretz, Weekly Standard, Yahoo News, Google News, Asia Times, Gloria Centre, Daniel Pipes, Daniel Pipes, Tundra Tabloids, Reuters, Ilya Meyer on that other US Presidential Peace Prize winner, Jimmy Carter, Ilya Meyer on the UN and Mahmud Ahmadinejad,

Meningen med livet

Israels premiärminister Bibi Netanyahu har ett styvt jobb.

Han ska försöka förmå USAs president Barack Obama att se det som resten av världen - och framför allt det som Israels arabiska grannar - ser:

Hur saker och ting hänger ihop. Orsak och verkan. Aktion och resultat.

Hittills har President Obama inte visat sig vara speciellt mottaglig för resonerade argument om Mellanösterns situation, utan stirrar sig blint på behovet av att Israel ensamt ska göra det som de palestinska arberna själva inte förmår göra: ta de mått och steg som krävs för att åstadkomma vad de själva vill ha, istället för att hänge sig till våld av gammal vana och skicka räkningen till FN.

Istället för att avkräva palestinierna ansvar för sina handlingar, väljer Obama att lägga ansvaret för uteblivna framgångar enbart på Israel. Medan Gazaaraberna fortsätter att skjuta raketer mot Israel - i genomsnitt en om dagen. Detta ska föreställa "fred" eller möjligen "eldupphör" - Gaza style. Allt skylls åndå på världens enda judiska stat. Som förresten inte erkänns som en judisk stat av någon av världens alla muslimska stater. Som kräver omvärdens erkännande som exklusivt muslimska stater där andra religioner inte får förekomma...

Det är mycket som President Obama inte tycks kunna se eller höra.

När Netanyahu möter Obama bör han därför överväga att lämna därhemma all bevisbar statistik, alla aktuella kartor, de många kilometer med filmat bevis för palestinsk terroraktivitet och all annan fakta som hans säkerhetsstab tar fram för honom. Obama kommer inte att lyssna på det örat ändå.

Netanyahu bör dra ner ambitionsnivån rejält och istället förse den amerikanska presidenten med följande teckande film, ett slags "Gaza för dummies". Den är kort, den innehåller allt väsentligt och den innehåller inget språk alls. Allt är på enklaste nivå, så enkelt att till och med en amerikansk president kan förstå budskapet:

Orsak och verkan.



Den förödande enkla logiken är ofelbar.

Låt oss se om President Obama har förmåga att förstå en kort, enkel tecknad film. Förståelse är en bra grund att bygga strategi på.

DN, GP, Rabnor, MXp, SapereAude, Israel i Sverige, Gilboa,