Friday, February 27, 2009
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Photo caption contest!
Imagine what O and N are saying...These are my suggestions:
a) Dude, you got soup on your shirt!
b) Hmmm, your tie feels nice...
c) Is that your passport in your inside pocket? Can look at the stamps?
etc...
Write your caption of choice!!
Winner will get a... hmm.. I dunno. How about a postcard? :)
Friday, February 20, 2009
How will the economic crisis affect international aid flows?
I was first alerted to the topic by this article, which warned in very strong terms against the risks of letting large aid recipients down.
And the prospects look bleak.
Beyond Official Development Assistance (ODA), which may shrink by 30%, we're also talking private donations (think Gates foundation, etc) as well as remittances from workers abroad.
The flow of money from expat nationals often supports a good part of the local population, and represents, interestingly, more than ODA and private foreign donations combined. We're talking a yearly flow of $ 300 bn.
Out of a dozen countries that receive at least 20% of their income from remittances, 9 are conflict/post-conflict locations: Lebanon, Burundi, Liberia, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Afghanistan, Bosnia, Moldova and Haiti.
And DDR projects (disarm, demobilise, reintegrate) are often contingent on financial benefits promised to those who lay their weapons - and they often don't lay them very far, despite best efforts to physically collect and destroy these weapons.
Add to this that some countries are planning on cutting expenses on UN Peacekeeping missions (which are normally financially stretched already - remember Rwanda 1994? At one point the whole UN mission had 2 functioning jeeps. 2.); further putting at risk the fragile peace situations where those missions operate. (and the Peacekeepers, for that matter).
International aid is often contingent on public approval and whims. A survey done in the US a few years back asking people about the percentage of their GDP that was allocated to foreign aid; responses had an average of 10-15%, some going as far as 40%.
The real answer is 0.15%. (Which is far below the OECD target of 0.7% of GDP).
Despite what seems to be a seriously interventionist new administration, I do not foresee US aid flows to increase any time soon. Nor anyone else's, given the current world mood of saving on 'unnecessary spending', despite the definition of 'unnecessary' being incredibly short-sighted.
The focus needs to be put on aid already pledged and not committed, and committed and not delivered.
This will bypass the need for new popular approval (in donor countries, that is) and has the benefit of having already been promised - a good argument for pressure.
Let me give you an example.
I started working in Palestine a few weeks after the December 2007 Paris conference where a whopping 7.2 billion dollars were supposedly pledged in assistance to the Palestinian territories. Which sounds awesome.
However:
about 0.8 billion of those pledges were ALREADY promised; the donor countries wanted to gain a little more publicity by passing them as new pledges. Grmbl, grmbl.
Of the remaining 6.4 bn, it is safe to assume that a third of that will never make it past the press declaration stage.
And of what will be signed in agreements with the Palestinians (a.k.a. "committed"), probably another third will never see the sunshine of the Levant.
So we're talking.. (counting on his fingers...) about 2.85 bn dollars. Let's say 3 bn. Be kind.
Reading the fine print of the Paris declaration and realising that the pledges are for 5 years, then we're talking less than $600 million per year.
Which is, well, significantly less impressive than $7.2 bn, isn't it.
What we need therefore is a good advocacy team on the recipient countries side to get rich countries to honour their pledges.
And the prospects look bleak.
Beyond Official Development Assistance (ODA), which may shrink by 30%, we're also talking private donations (think Gates foundation, etc) as well as remittances from workers abroad.
The flow of money from expat nationals often supports a good part of the local population, and represents, interestingly, more than ODA and private foreign donations combined. We're talking a yearly flow of $ 300 bn.
Out of a dozen countries that receive at least 20% of their income from remittances, 9 are conflict/post-conflict locations: Lebanon, Burundi, Liberia, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Afghanistan, Bosnia, Moldova and Haiti.
And DDR projects (disarm, demobilise, reintegrate) are often contingent on financial benefits promised to those who lay their weapons - and they often don't lay them very far, despite best efforts to physically collect and destroy these weapons.
Add to this that some countries are planning on cutting expenses on UN Peacekeeping missions (which are normally financially stretched already - remember Rwanda 1994? At one point the whole UN mission had 2 functioning jeeps. 2.); further putting at risk the fragile peace situations where those missions operate. (and the Peacekeepers, for that matter).
International aid is often contingent on public approval and whims. A survey done in the US a few years back asking people about the percentage of their GDP that was allocated to foreign aid; responses had an average of 10-15%, some going as far as 40%.
The real answer is 0.15%. (Which is far below the OECD target of 0.7% of GDP).
Despite what seems to be a seriously interventionist new administration, I do not foresee US aid flows to increase any time soon. Nor anyone else's, given the current world mood of saving on 'unnecessary spending', despite the definition of 'unnecessary' being incredibly short-sighted.
The focus needs to be put on aid already pledged and not committed, and committed and not delivered.
This will bypass the need for new popular approval (in donor countries, that is) and has the benefit of having already been promised - a good argument for pressure.
Let me give you an example.
I started working in Palestine a few weeks after the December 2007 Paris conference where a whopping 7.2 billion dollars were supposedly pledged in assistance to the Palestinian territories. Which sounds awesome.
However:
about 0.8 billion of those pledges were ALREADY promised; the donor countries wanted to gain a little more publicity by passing them as new pledges. Grmbl, grmbl.
Of the remaining 6.4 bn, it is safe to assume that a third of that will never make it past the press declaration stage.
And of what will be signed in agreements with the Palestinians (a.k.a. "committed"), probably another third will never see the sunshine of the Levant.
So we're talking.. (counting on his fingers...) about 2.85 bn dollars. Let's say 3 bn. Be kind.
Reading the fine print of the Paris declaration and realising that the pledges are for 5 years, then we're talking less than $600 million per year.
Which is, well, significantly less impressive than $7.2 bn, isn't it.
What we need therefore is a good advocacy team on the recipient countries side to get rich countries to honour their pledges.
Saturday, February 14, 2009
The Arab review of Israeli television: 'Srugim', and the normalcy of fringe behaviour
I have been diligently watching Srugim (which is only subtitled in Hebrew - which means a dictionary pause every other sentence of dialogue), an Israeli television series about the lives and loves of a group of religious Jews in Jerusalem.
True, a couple of months after it aired, but give a brother a break!
One of the things I personally enjoyed about the show, those who know me will understand, is how I could grasp some details which, a year ago, I wouldn't have. Why parmesan cheese on spaghetti bolognese is such a HUGE problem; the fridge you can't shut on Shabbat because the light is on; a group of people singing Carlebach tunes; the single woman at the mikvah; the money exchange booth on Hillel street...
Spaghetti bolognese (with minced meat, hence) with parmesan cheese.
(this is where you're supposed to say Ewwwwwwwwwww!!)
I've also found hilarious how rude Israelis are to one another! Hanging up on each other, kicking each other out because they're 'busy' - Jeez! People, be nice! :)
Anyways. Back the show.
They’re young - all hovering around the ‘big’ 3-0 - single, beautiful, and, let’s face it, a little horny. Which is all the more complicated when you’re religious and you’re not supposed to, you know, ‘lie with’ anyone but your spouse. They’re also annoyingly liberal with the use of the word "love". And "moments". And "somethings". Kids, yes, you're virgins, but you're not 14 anymore!
And their lives seem to rotate around their 'dates' which are in effect pre-marital screening processes, even if packaged as speed-dates in trendy German Colony cafes rather than strolls in Ha-Pa'amon park, seemingly reserved for the religious extremists in black and wigs - whom are nowhere in the show.
Interestingly, I think they too would be 'guilty', just like their Tel-Aviv dwelling secular brethren, of living in their own bubble. Which proves the ridicule of this accusation to either groups.
But those characters get on my nerves sometimes!
Yif’at is too often crying and way too often in her pink pajamas and fluffy slippers, but is perfect for the role of cute-but-second-choice-'why-does-nothing-good-ever-happens-to-me'-girl. Who ends up getting a second-choice guy.
Amir is a little pathetic - you're divorced, get over it already, especially when you're still doinking your ex-wife. Seriously!
And some other characters a little uni-dimensional: Yochai is the Torah nerd slowly coming out of his shell to the big-blue-world. זהו? And Reut's little sister is shallow as can be, which is a little sad.
More interestingly though, I think the concepts pictured are, when seen from an adequate distance, more universal than the show makers probably intended them to be. (I don't think Muslims were invited to the test screenings, hahaha).
As a young-and-hip-and-(somewhat?)-religious person (c'mon, give me that one!) coming from a traditional and religious society, I can relate with plenty.
How very complicated it can be to try to be with someone who’s not religious. (or not of your religion). You feign to be more secular than you actually are. Then you bend over some minor rules, then convince yourself that there’s a bigger religious loophole that you insistently know isn’t there, then regret it deeply, then eventually realise that despite your best efforts, religion will always be a barrier, and what was always supposed to happen eventually does.
(the scene with Hodaya crying at the ritual bath was particularly touching).
Or wanting what you cannot have, and losing interest in what you do have. Or going after something because you feel you're missing out.
(last item was worth adding because I watched that episode the day I learned an old crush was getting engaged to a complete doofus. That was funny.)
Nati (played by Ohad Knoller, whom I am having trouble viewing as a religious 30-year old virgin given that I too vividly remember him shagging Joe Sweid) is the quintessential weepy ("I feel I am made of stone! Snif, snif!!") and emotionally immature man who couldn’t see a good thing if it hit him in the face and instead goes on to chase an old flame who's getting married, breaking up her engagement, and dumping her the next day.
And he sure as hell didn't deserve perfect Nitsan - btw, if anyone knows her, have her call me - whom he breaks up with pretty much just because.
(and who, for the love of Elohim, should NOT have been given a Harrison Ford “I know” reply to an “I love you”. That's just plain wrong.)
How do you say "trading down" in Hebrew?
On a more societal level, how "love" nearly automatically entails "marriage", and how holding hands and gazing into each other's eyes (and, if you're particularly brazen, a stolen kiss) may very well be all the action you're going to get before the wedding, sounded very 'local' to my eyes.
Remember Ahmed Zaki in "Smile for the photo" (اضحك عشان الصورة تطلع حلوة): "a look is a contract; a smile is a contract; a kiss is a contract" ? - close enough.
Or how the guy wanted to marry the girl as "Tikkun" ('repair') is the equivalent of our good ol' "bisalla7 ghatelto" ('correcting his mistake').
There are purposefully few political discussions in the show - a little disappointingly so. I mean, this is a country where political conversations are so pervasive it's considered okay to ask someone who they voted for! :)
A dinner discussion between a secular and a religious guy where the tone climbs up a notch when the religious guy throws a "of course, right-wing!" was too quickly cut off by a dating problem.
But the newspaper they all seem to be subscribed to is Makor Rishon, a right-wing/conservative/ national-religious paper, which is an interesting hint and which Arab-hating extremist-settlers blogs seem to relate to..
What else. There's a supposedly amusing scene where two of the protagonists start running in fear as they see two figures at a distance (“They're not Aravim, are they?”, asks Amir) only to find out that, pfiiou!, they were neighbours David and Benny. Hmmm.. Was there no better excuse to have them hold hands but to throw an "Arab Alert"? Really?
L to R - (1) "They're not Arabs, right?" --- (2) "They're from ours." (our people, that is? our yishuv?)
A guest character, Hodaya's 14-year old cousin, provides some political relief. She has lost her faith in God over the disengagement from Gaza, which had seen 8000 settlers removed from Gaza (many of whom were moved to West Bank settlements, and many openly advocating for a return to Gaza - so much for peace-making). So the rebellious teenager is 'mad at God' because she prayed they wouldn't be evicted:
"I was sure that God was listening.. until the last moment i was sure this wasn't happening.. this cannot happen, we were good (hayinu tovim) (!!!).. it took them seven minutes to destroy my house. Between God and I, it's over".
The discussion goes onwards to faith, that God doesn't deliver on-call, etc.
That's it? I hoped for at least a little discussion on the rationale of colonising the territories, or something about the national cost of catering to the Gush Katif-ers whims.
And, "we were good"? Darling, your parents are people who voluntarily chose to move onto someone else's stolen land. Hayitem mechablim, that's what you are. Terrorists.
But I digress.
Overall - I enjoyed the show, which has clearly appealed to wide segments of the Israeli public as well. "This normal life" covers the spectrum of reactions pretty well.
I'll be waiting for season 2 - which I'll try to cover in due time rather than six months later!
So, what will it be for the next review.. Ha-ach ha-gadol? :)
PS - In case you're interested, Katamon was a Palestinian neighbourhood before 1948. I can't seem to find the original name, though... Anyone?
One of the things I personally enjoyed about the show, those who know me will understand, is how I could grasp some details which, a year ago, I wouldn't have. Why parmesan cheese on spaghetti bolognese is such a HUGE problem; the fridge you can't shut on Shabbat because the light is on; a group of people singing Carlebach tunes; the single woman at the mikvah; the money exchange booth on Hillel street...
Spaghetti bolognese (with minced meat, hence) with parmesan cheese.(this is where you're supposed to say Ewwwwwwwwwww!!)
I've also found hilarious how rude Israelis are to one another! Hanging up on each other, kicking each other out because they're 'busy' - Jeez! People, be nice! :)
Anyways. Back the show.
They’re young - all hovering around the ‘big’ 3-0 - single, beautiful, and, let’s face it, a little horny. Which is all the more complicated when you’re religious and you’re not supposed to, you know, ‘lie with’ anyone but your spouse. They’re also annoyingly liberal with the use of the word "love". And "moments". And "somethings". Kids, yes, you're virgins, but you're not 14 anymore!(image from the big felafel)
And their lives seem to rotate around their 'dates' which are in effect pre-marital screening processes, even if packaged as speed-dates in trendy German Colony cafes rather than strolls in Ha-Pa'amon park, seemingly reserved for the religious extremists in black and wigs - whom are nowhere in the show.
Interestingly, I think they too would be 'guilty', just like their Tel-Aviv dwelling secular brethren, of living in their own bubble. Which proves the ridicule of this accusation to either groups.
But those characters get on my nerves sometimes!
Yif’at is too often crying and way too often in her pink pajamas and fluffy slippers, but is perfect for the role of cute-but-second-choice-'why-does-nothing-good-ever-happens-to-me'-girl. Who ends up getting a second-choice guy.
Amir is a little pathetic - you're divorced, get over it already, especially when you're still doinking your ex-wife. Seriously!
And some other characters a little uni-dimensional: Yochai is the Torah nerd slowly coming out of his shell to the big-blue-world. זהו? And Reut's little sister is shallow as can be, which is a little sad.
More interestingly though, I think the concepts pictured are, when seen from an adequate distance, more universal than the show makers probably intended them to be. (I don't think Muslims were invited to the test screenings, hahaha).
As a young-and-hip-and-(somewhat?)-religious person (c'mon, give me that one!) coming from a traditional and religious society, I can relate with plenty.
How very complicated it can be to try to be with someone who’s not religious. (or not of your religion). You feign to be more secular than you actually are. Then you bend over some minor rules, then convince yourself that there’s a bigger religious loophole that you insistently know isn’t there, then regret it deeply, then eventually realise that despite your best efforts, religion will always be a barrier, and what was always supposed to happen eventually does.
(the scene with Hodaya crying at the ritual bath was particularly touching).
Or wanting what you cannot have, and losing interest in what you do have. Or going after something because you feel you're missing out.
(last item was worth adding because I watched that episode the day I learned an old crush was getting engaged to a complete doofus. That was funny.)
Nati (played by Ohad Knoller, whom I am having trouble viewing as a religious 30-year old virgin given that I too vividly remember him shagging Joe Sweid) is the quintessential weepy ("I feel I am made of stone! Snif, snif!!") and emotionally immature man who couldn’t see a good thing if it hit him in the face and instead goes on to chase an old flame who's getting married, breaking up her engagement, and dumping her the next day.
And he sure as hell didn't deserve perfect Nitsan - btw, if anyone knows her, have her call me - whom he breaks up with pretty much just because.
(and who, for the love of Elohim, should NOT have been given a Harrison Ford “I know” reply to an “I love you”. That's just plain wrong.)
How do you say "trading down" in Hebrew?On a more societal level, how "love" nearly automatically entails "marriage", and how holding hands and gazing into each other's eyes (and, if you're particularly brazen, a stolen kiss) may very well be all the action you're going to get before the wedding, sounded very 'local' to my eyes.
Remember Ahmed Zaki in "Smile for the photo" (اضحك عشان الصورة تطلع حلوة): "a look is a contract; a smile is a contract; a kiss is a contract" ? - close enough.
Or how the guy wanted to marry the girl as "Tikkun" ('repair') is the equivalent of our good ol' "bisalla7 ghatelto" ('correcting his mistake').
There are purposefully few political discussions in the show - a little disappointingly so. I mean, this is a country where political conversations are so pervasive it's considered okay to ask someone who they voted for! :)
A dinner discussion between a secular and a religious guy where the tone climbs up a notch when the religious guy throws a "of course, right-wing!" was too quickly cut off by a dating problem.
But the newspaper they all seem to be subscribed to is Makor Rishon, a right-wing/conservative/ national-religious paper, which is an interesting hint and which Arab-hating extremist-settlers blogs seem to relate to..
What else. There's a supposedly amusing scene where two of the protagonists start running in fear as they see two figures at a distance (“They're not Aravim, are they?”, asks Amir) only to find out that, pfiiou!, they were neighbours David and Benny. Hmmm.. Was there no better excuse to have them hold hands but to throw an "Arab Alert"? Really?
L to R - (1) "They're not Arabs, right?" --- (2) "They're from ours." (our people, that is? our yishuv?)(3) "So there's nothing to worry about" -- (4) --> Let's run for our lives anyway!
A guest character, Hodaya's 14-year old cousin, provides some political relief. She has lost her faith in God over the disengagement from Gaza, which had seen 8000 settlers removed from Gaza (many of whom were moved to West Bank settlements, and many openly advocating for a return to Gaza - so much for peace-making). So the rebellious teenager is 'mad at God' because she prayed they wouldn't be evicted:
"I was sure that God was listening.. until the last moment i was sure this wasn't happening.. this cannot happen, we were good (hayinu tovim) (!!!).. it took them seven minutes to destroy my house. Between God and I, it's over".
The discussion goes onwards to faith, that God doesn't deliver on-call, etc.
That's it? I hoped for at least a little discussion on the rationale of colonising the territories, or something about the national cost of catering to the Gush Katif-ers whims.
And, "we were good"? Darling, your parents are people who voluntarily chose to move onto someone else's stolen land. Hayitem mechablim, that's what you are. Terrorists.
But I digress.
Overall - I enjoyed the show, which has clearly appealed to wide segments of the Israeli public as well. "This normal life" covers the spectrum of reactions pretty well.
I'll be waiting for season 2 - which I'll try to cover in due time rather than six months later!
So, what will it be for the next review.. Ha-ach ha-gadol? :)
PS - In case you're interested, Katamon was a Palestinian neighbourhood before 1948. I can't seem to find the original name, though... Anyone?
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Where did I hear this stuff before?
I didn't have to look very far, both quotes are from the same BBC News article:
Netanyahu: "The people want a change and they will choose it today.
Livni: "think about hope".
I love that campaign. Everything feels like a deja-vu - from the campaign slogan to the candidates...
Netanyahu: "The people want a change and they will choose it today.
Livni: "think about hope".
I love that campaign. Everything feels like a deja-vu - from the campaign slogan to the candidates...
Monday, February 09, 2009
Why I would vote Livni* (+ my favourite campaign photos)
Let's set some things straight:
I think Livni is a war criminal and should be tried. No doubt about that.
Then again, so have all prime ministers in the history of Israel. Oh well.
But there is no pro-peace camp in Israel. Labour, the traditional heart of the "left", is dead, and has been overtaken in polls by the extreme right of Yisrael Beitenu and its Moldovan bouncer of a leader.
The real choice is now between a right-wing government, or a VeryRight-ExtremeRight (and very wrong, hahaha) coalition.
That the alternative to a Kadima government is Netanyahu as prime minister, Avigdor Lieberman as minister of Defense, Moshe Feiglin as minister of Finance (or Foreign Affairs, ha, ha!), and Eli Yishai as minister of Education (as already promised by Netanyahu), well, I'd rather see Livni at the helm.
How can I explain that? Between cancer and gangrene, well, I'll take cancer.
At least with cancer there's a good chance of survival.
I'd vote for an Arab party if I could find a decent one. Part of me would vote for them just to piss off the Israeli political establishment, which failed in its - democratic - attempt to make politics an exclusively Jewish affair. The original Greek democracy was one for free men only; slaves were not invited to the party. Israelis seem to believe the same applies there.
But I fear it would be a lost vote, unfortunately.
Same is a vote for Meretz, which, with its support for the war against the people of Gaza, lost its primary raison d'etre - d'exister, rather. Meretz ought to be intronised as merely a clean-looking succursal of Labour.
Hadash could've found resonance with me. They seem to have more moral fortitude than most other parties combined. (except the Green Leaf, but these are too stoned to have any anyway).
And the coolest election ads.
But the same 'lost vote' dilemma arises. If it weren't for the current critical situation, I would've encouraged a bloc of pro-peace small parties.
But it feels like a real emergency now.
Likud is trying to convince people to vote for it, saying that "a vote for Yisrael Beitenu is a vote for Kadima".
Same applies with Kadima. With a knot in the stomach as I type, I think a vote for a left-wing party, decent as it may be, is unfortunately a vote for Netanyahu and Lieberman.
Cancer -sorry, I meant, Livni - lost the premiership a few months ago because she wouldn't submit to the extorsion of the religious extremists of Shas. Netanyahu, on the other hand, was happy to bend over to Yishai at the first occasion.
Exposing the political system to be hostage - or rather, confirming that situation - to the extremists should neither be encouraged nor rewarded. Shas - which support the Hebron terrorist settlers - should be cast aside. Sharon (another war criminal, oh jolly!) did that in 2003. It should be done again.
People - vote for cancer.
And good luck.
I think Livni is a war criminal and should be tried. No doubt about that.
Then again, so have all prime ministers in the history of Israel. Oh well.
But there is no pro-peace camp in Israel. Labour, the traditional heart of the "left", is dead, and has been overtaken in polls by the extreme right of Yisrael Beitenu and its Moldovan bouncer of a leader.
The real choice is now between a right-wing government, or a VeryRight-ExtremeRight (and very wrong, hahaha) coalition.
That the alternative to a Kadima government is Netanyahu as prime minister, Avigdor Lieberman as minister of Defense, Moshe Feiglin as minister of Finance (or Foreign Affairs, ha, ha!), and Eli Yishai as minister of Education (as already promised by Netanyahu), well, I'd rather see Livni at the helm.
How can I explain that? Between cancer and gangrene, well, I'll take cancer.
At least with cancer there's a good chance of survival.
I'd vote for an Arab party if I could find a decent one. Part of me would vote for them just to piss off the Israeli political establishment, which failed in its - democratic - attempt to make politics an exclusively Jewish affair. The original Greek democracy was one for free men only; slaves were not invited to the party. Israelis seem to believe the same applies there.But I fear it would be a lost vote, unfortunately.
Same is a vote for Meretz, which, with its support for the war against the people of Gaza, lost its primary raison d'etre - d'exister, rather. Meretz ought to be intronised as merely a clean-looking succursal of Labour.
Hadash could've found resonance with me. They seem to have more moral fortitude than most other parties combined. (except the Green Leaf, but these are too stoned to have any anyway).
And the coolest election ads.
But the same 'lost vote' dilemma arises. If it weren't for the current critical situation, I would've encouraged a bloc of pro-peace small parties.
But it feels like a real emergency now.
Likud is trying to convince people to vote for it, saying that "a vote for Yisrael Beitenu is a vote for Kadima".
Same applies with Kadima. With a knot in the stomach as I type, I think a vote for a left-wing party, decent as it may be, is unfortunately a vote for Netanyahu and Lieberman.
Cancer -sorry, I meant, Livni - lost the premiership a few months ago because she wouldn't submit to the extorsion of the religious extremists of Shas. Netanyahu, on the other hand, was happy to bend over to Yishai at the first occasion.
Exposing the political system to be hostage - or rather, confirming that situation - to the extremists should neither be encouraged nor rewarded. Shas - which support the Hebron terrorist settlers - should be cast aside. Sharon (another war criminal, oh jolly!) did that in 2003. It should be done again.
People - vote for cancer.
And good luck.
Just to break the seriousness of the post, some Livni photos I selected from her campaign's flickr photostream.
Barack had the Obama Girl: Livni got, well, him.
(and, "Believni? I mean, darling, was that necessary?)
Okay, adopting two black girls and calling them Sasha and Malia may have been a tad too much.
The bubbles behind her remind me of laundry soap advertisements.
"Bono, no, I don't want to dance. You can let go of me now or I'll break your pretty glasses."
Tzipi loves everyone, even the nation's ugliest twin babies.
"Pssst, Tzipi, you're standing behind the wrong party sign - we're Kadima. K-a-d-i-m-a. That's H-a-d-a-s-h".
Psychedelic Livni, special edition for LSD consumers.
"In case you forgot, I am a woman! Vagina power!"*Not that I can vote. It's hypothetical. Shame. Does Nefesh b'Nefesh accept Arabs? :-)
-
Sunday, February 08, 2009
The conversation at the Netanyahu family dinner table
Says Natanyahu the father, Benzion. The man is less of a politician than his son, but they share the same basic ideas.
This is the essence of Israel's next prime minister's ideas.
Good luck with that.
From an interview of Benzion Netanyahu with Ari Shavit, in Haaretz, 1998. (via the print edition of Courrier International, hors serie "Juifs et Arabes: les haines, les conflits, les espoirs". Translated from French.)
"I think that after the Six-Days war, we should have annexed the freed territories, developed them, and planted there millions of Jews and deployed a strength that our enemies would've been forced to acknowledge. As for the demographic threat, if we had treated the Arab minority of Eretz-Yisrael as we should, they should've been given the choice between the Israeli and the Jordanian citizenship.
I do not think that Arabs referring to themselves as "Palestinians" have the slightest right to a State. There is no Palestinian people, and the Arab group living in Eretz-Yisrael are but a branch of the Arab nation.For me, they have no right to any kind of linguistic, religious, or cultural autonomy".
"The possibility that an Arab state will be created in the middle the Jewish state is a nightmare to me. Such state can only be a permanent terrorist base. Hence the crucial role played by Bibi. The goal of the agreements with the PLO being the creation of an Arab State, we must avoid this trap without formally cancelling the agreements, so that we are not accused of breaking our word. The important thing is not to clash with the US."
"We must be inspired by the Reconquista and the Spaniards, who did not hesitate to lead a war for centuries. They did not stop until they had liberated Granada from the muslim oppression. They understood they only had one choice: to conquer the entire territory, or to be in a permanent state of war. With no such ethos, such a popular move, we will never be able to maintain our presence here. The only difference between us and the Spaniards is tiny: we regained our country after 12 centuries of exile, the Spanish only after 8. The essence is in what our peoples have in common: they had no other country, and have never given it up".
I do not think that Arabs referring to themselves as "Palestinians" have the slightest right to a State. There is no Palestinian people, and the Arab group living in Eretz-Yisrael are but a branch of the Arab nation.For me, they have no right to any kind of linguistic, religious, or cultural autonomy".
"The possibility that an Arab state will be created in the middle the Jewish state is a nightmare to me. Such state can only be a permanent terrorist base. Hence the crucial role played by Bibi. The goal of the agreements with the PLO being the creation of an Arab State, we must avoid this trap without formally cancelling the agreements, so that we are not accused of breaking our word. The important thing is not to clash with the US."
"We must be inspired by the Reconquista and the Spaniards, who did not hesitate to lead a war for centuries. They did not stop until they had liberated Granada from the muslim oppression. They understood they only had one choice: to conquer the entire territory, or to be in a permanent state of war. With no such ethos, such a popular move, we will never be able to maintain our presence here. The only difference between us and the Spaniards is tiny: we regained our country after 12 centuries of exile, the Spanish only after 8. The essence is in what our peoples have in common: they had no other country, and have never given it up".
This is the essence of Israel's next prime minister's ideas.
Good luck with that.
From an interview of Benzion Netanyahu with Ari Shavit, in Haaretz, 1998. (via the print edition of Courrier International, hors serie "Juifs et Arabes: les haines, les conflits, les espoirs". Translated from French.)
Friday, February 06, 2009
Spam email of the day
I love my spam folder. While most of the emails are either about receiving a 10,000,000$ transfer for Ms. Nyugati, wife of a former African dictator, or winning the yearly giveaway from Bill Gates who got tired of counting his money, or weight loss or penis enlargement pills, I get the occasional gem.
I've been collecting my favourite spam subject lines and will post them eventually.
This one, however, deserved a post of its own. The idea is well elaborated, the extra link that does look like a UN website link leads to a hidden *.exe trojan file is smart, and the guy who invented a new UN Commission deserves a nod for creativity. Enjoy!
I've been collecting my favourite spam subject lines and will post them eventually.
This one, however, deserved a post of its own. The idea is well elaborated, the extra link that does look like a UN website link leads to a hidden *.exe trojan file is smart, and the guy who invented a new UN Commission deserves a nod for creativity. Enjoy!
REFUND PAYMENT FROM UNCC
United Nations Compensation Commission (UNCC)
In Affiliation with Barack Obama Campaign to Assist Scammed Individuals In The Settlement of Disputes through Banque Int' Du Benin.
Attention: Honorable Beneficiary
I wish to congratulate you for the approval of the compensation payment of $500,000.00 USD by this commission. The United Nation Compensation Commission (UNCC) was created in 1991 as a subsidiary organ of the UN Security Council. Its mandate is to retrieve lost fund through various law agents and also to process claims and pay compensation for losses and damages suffered as a direct result of Internet Fraud.
The UNCC in conjunction with the Barack Obama Campaign on the 12th of October 2008 organized a confederation meeting which ended 2 weeks later with the Secretary General to the UNITED NATIONS. This meeting was first held on the 8th of April 2003 by the then secretary to the UN. You can view this page for your perusal then do the needful by contacting the paying agent accordingly.
http://www.un.org/News/Press/doc/2003/ *******
This email is directed to all individuals that have been scammed in all parts of the world. In reference to the just concluded meeting, the UNCC in affiliation with Barrack Obama Campaign for Global Economic Crises eradication have agreed to compensate them with categorical payment sum of $500,000 each.
Banque Int'l Du Benin (BIBE) will handle the transfer of the fund through their Online Transfer System (E-Transfer). Your payment file has been forwarded to the BIBE so you should contact the bank today as soon as you receive this letter of notification. Contact:
Banque Int'l Du Benin - BIBE
Director: Mr. Joseph Tebus
Email: ****@****.com
DO REMEMBER YOUR PAYMENT REFERENCE: BR/FMWH/1001/08 AND IF YOU HAVE IN THE PAST MADE ANY FORM OF PAYMENT FOR THE TRANSFER OF THIS FUNDS, PLEASE DO STATE IT FOR OUR RECORD PURPOSE AS WE HAVE A MANDATE TO REPORT BACK TO THE PRESIDENCY THE PROGRESS OF THIS PAYMENT.
Mrs. Karen B. Magolie
Secretary to UNSG
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
