home

Happy New Years (For Real) and Open Thread

By Jeralyn, Section Blog Related
Posted on Sat Dec 31, 2016 at 07:54:47 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

A very happy New Year to all of you, with our very best wishes for a year filled with good health, justice and peace!

Who's cooking? Is anyone staying in and watching TV?

Showtime has begun airing the first episode of Homeland Season 6 two weeks early -- Carrie is living in Brooklyn and Quinn is there too, although he's not in very good shape. The President is a woman, but supposedly a composite of candidates, not a Hillary clone. [More...]

Season 6 picks up several months after Carrie Mathison (Claire Danes) thwarted a terrorist attack in Berlin, with Carrie living in Brooklyn and working at a foundation that provides aid to Muslims living in the U.S. The season will tackle the after-effects of the U.S. presidential election, which in the “Homeland” universe ended with a woman elected to the office for the first time in the country’s history.

The entire season will take place between election day and the inauguration — a strange, transitional time in the halls of government, filled with anxiety and different competing interests, where a very fragile and complex transfer of power takes place between the outgoing president and the incoming president-elect. And, yes, Quinn (Rupert Friend) is alive.

The menu tonight at Casa TalkLeft: Red Chile (Alice's Restaurant Cookbook) and a pitcher of Mojitos. Dessert: Fresh-baked Cherry Pie.

Once again, a Happy New Year to All. This is an open thread, all topics welcome.

< Feelings on The Last Day of a G-d Awful Year | Terror Attack by "Santa" Clad Terrorist(s) in Istanbul >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Happy New Years (For Real) and Open Thread | 157 comments (157 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    We just enjoyed a once-a-year treat, (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by Peter G on Sat Dec 31, 2016 at 09:34:54 PM EST
    a home-cooked lobster dinner, with one couple of friends. We're putting "Singin' in the Rain" into the DVD player now. A little champagne is waiting in the fridge for midnight.

    Interesting on the lobster (none / 0) (#6)
    by Green26 on Sun Jan 01, 2017 at 11:08:10 AM EST
    The "traditional" Christmas dinner for my immediate family is lobster, and champagne. X-mas is my daughter's birthday. The kids loved lobster when they were young. I think they liked playing with the lobsters as much as eating them. We have good Maine lobster overnighted to us. Prime rib on X-mas eve. 2 of 5 kids came home for holidays this year. Still turkey for Thanksgiving. I love the holiday seasons, especially spending time with family and friends.

    Happy New Year.

    Parent

    isnt pork roast most trafitional? (none / 0) (#26)
    by linea on Mon Jan 02, 2017 at 07:25:02 PM EST
    i wanted to make salmon deviled eggs. but i was told to buy a large apple pie from Costco instead. probably for the best. im not a very good cook.  

    Parent
    Saw Fences (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by BackFromOhio on Sun Jan 01, 2017 at 11:01:12 AM EST
    It was extraordinary. Acting superb. I found Manchester by the Sea interesting (as well as depressing), but in dire need of editing at the beginning.

    David Frum outlined many well thought out reasons to be concerned -- primary (to me) among which is importance of keeping up critique of whittling or dismissing of traditional democratic (small d) ways of doing things in the US.  

    I saw Fences, also. Loved it. (none / 0) (#7)
    by caseyOR on Sun Jan 01, 2017 at 01:13:38 PM EST
    Excellent film. Emotionally draining. This is a movie based on August Wilson's play of the same name. Wilson also wrote the screenplay for this movie. Brilliant performances from Viola Davis and Denzel Washington, both reprising roles they played in the Broadway revival of Fences.

    Denzel directed this movie. It very much has the feel of a stage play. The relatively simple sets, the intimate feel, that closeness to the actors one gets with a play. All wrapped up in beautiful cinematography.

    Fences if one of a series of plays, written by Wilson, that trace the African American experience through the 20th century. if you get the chance to see any of Wilson's plays take it. It will be time well-spent. Wilson died in 2005 at the age of 60. A huge loss to the theater and to American literature.

    Parent

    Agreed (none / 0) (#16)
    by BackFromOhio on Mon Jan 02, 2017 at 04:15:11 PM EST
    I had seen the original play on Broadway with James Earl Jones. I am expecting many awards for the movie as well as each of the actors. There wasn't a less than extraordinary performance in the lot. Thinking best screen play as well.  

    Parent
    I found "Fences" somewhat depressing. (none / 0) (#59)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jan 03, 2017 at 06:38:55 PM EST
    It certainly does come across as a stage play set to screen, as you suggest. I can only figure that Denzel Washington must have respected August Wilson's play so much that as a director, he was really reluctant to tamper with its staging, even for greater cinematic effect. As a result, although its staginess proved somewhat disconcerting in the beginning, I quickly adapted to it.

    I also wholeheartedly agree that both Washington and Viola Davis as Troy and Rose Maxon are true forces of nature in their respective performances. And Stephen McKinley Henderson is also wonderful as Washington's always-jovial sidekick Bono, who finally musters up the nerve to confront his friend over his risky and self-indulgent personal behavior.

    That was the moment when I finally realized how much I disliked Washington's Troy, and why. Washington is never better as an actor, than when he plays an otherwise fairly ordinary fellow who allows his less flattering side to get the best of him. Troy is a bully who's somehow conflated self-pity with personal strength. The fence he's building between his house and his neighbor's isn't the only barrier he's been erecting around home.

    As for Ms. Davis, her tour de force as Troy's supportive but long-suffering wife Rose is practically slam dunk material for a Best Supporting Actress Oscar. Anyway, we'll know in a week or two, when nominations are announced.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Trump and (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by KeysDan on Tue Jan 03, 2017 at 03:54:17 PM EST
    guest, "Joey No Socks" Cinque, at Sea and Lake (in the language of Mexico) New Years bash.

    Oh, yeah (none / 0) (#60)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jan 03, 2017 at 06:49:08 PM EST
    They are laughing it up at the fact that they aren't going to pay any taxes and the little people arent' going to have any insurance. Hardy har har.

    Parent
    I wonder (none / 0) (#61)
    by FlJoe on Tue Jan 03, 2017 at 07:06:38 PM EST
    how the quisling rubes will try to spin this one? Racists, Russian and Mobsters, oh my!

    Parent
    The pretzel (none / 0) (#77)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jan 04, 2017 at 06:22:10 AM EST
    people will have their apologia handed out to them by talk radio.

    Parent
    RIP, J2 aka "Granny" (1908?-2016). (5.00 / 3) (#58)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jan 03, 2017 at 05:45:25 PM EST
    The Center for Whale Research has announced that J2, the long-time matriarch of the Southern Resident Killer Whale community's J pod and affectionately known to scientists as "Granny," has apparently died sometime this late autumn.

    "Granny" -- whose age has recently been estimated by cetologists to be well over 100 years -- was last seen by researchers in October 2016, leading her pod through the Haro Strait between Washington state's San Juan Islands and British Columbia's Vancouver Island. Multiple sightings of J pod since then have failed to establish her presence among them, leading scientists to sadly conclude that she must have finally died.

    We've come to know a lot about orcas now, thanks to decades of research about "Granny" and her fellow orcas of the Southern Resident population, who've long resided in the waters of Puget Sound, the San Juan Islands and Vancouver Island. They are one of the most readily accessible orca populations for scientific observations anywhere on earth, and they've provided many tourists and local residents with a once-in-a-lifetime thrill at their sighting.

    We got to see some of these orcas once in 2002 while taking the ferry from Seattle to Bainbridge Island, when the captain announced their immediate presence as his reason for stopping the ship temporarily to avoid hitting one of them accidentally. There were well over 1,000 passengers on board that afternoon, and everybody crowded the rails on top deck or the windows on the cabin deck below to catch a glimpse of them. And what an impressive sight they were, about 30 of them swimming leisurely by us on their way south toward Vashon Island.

    Rest in peace, "Granny."

    The best bowl game by far ... (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jan 03, 2017 at 07:13:07 PM EST
    ... of the 2016-17 college football postseason has to have been yesterday's Rose Bowl thriller between USC and Penn State, which was won by the Trojans on the game's final play, 52-49. Many longtime observers are ranking it as one of the very best Rose Bowl games ever played in its 103-year history. My brother scored us tickets, so it was a real treat to have seen it in person, even though I didn't have a dog in the hunt.

    The (none / 0) (#63)
    by FlJoe on Tue Jan 03, 2017 at 07:56:32 PM EST
    Orange Bowl was no slouch either.

    Parent
    I only managed to catch the 2nd half ... (none / 0) (#67)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jan 03, 2017 at 08:53:11 PM EST
    ... of the Orange Bowl, unfortunately, as we were over at my brother's house for dinner that night. So we watched it afterward. And while the Orange Bowl was exciting, it appeared to me to be a rather close-run contest which didn't have the wild swings of momentum throughout the entire game as did the Rose Bowl, which left first one team and then the other literally on the ropes.

    After a first quarter in which the Nittany Lions did everything wrong and the Trojans (almost) everything right, I thought Penn State was outmatched and done for, and USC was going to roll right over them. But the Lions climbed off the mat in the second quarter and back into the game by halftime. Then, in the early minutes of the third quarter, the Lions delivered a rapid series of staggering roundhouse punches which sent the Trojans sprawling, and had us thinking that it was USC that was about to be blown out rather than vice versa.

    It's been a really long time since I've seen a wild game like that, with the teams trading body blows and knocking each other silly. Now that I think of it, the last one I saw personally was Hawaii-Houston in the 2003 Hawaii Bowl, which went to triple-overtime before the Rainbow Warriors finally pulled it out.

    Only difference between that game and yesterday's Rose Bowl was that afterward, the bad blood which had clearly been building up between the Cougars and 'Bows all throughout the 2003 contest finally erupted into a major post-game brawl, which unfortunately aired on national television and quickly became the lead story on ESPN SportsCenter that night. There was no bad blood between the Trojans and Nittany Lions yesterday, and the post-game atmosphere was quite amicable, considering the battle royal we had just witnessed.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    QB is hometown boy (none / 0) (#64)
    by MKS on Tue Jan 03, 2017 at 08:06:12 PM EST


    Parent
    To Donald, following up on the UN resolution (1.00 / 2) (#8)
    by Green26 on Sun Jan 01, 2017 at 11:43:02 PM EST
    I knew you wouldn't have support for your statement. You mention what occurred over 2 decades ago. What about something since then? The Palestinians have not shown any good signs of wanting to negotiate a settlement for many years.. Commentators are saying the Palestinians know their only hope is for the UN to impose something. That isn't going to happen.

    You should consider updating your knowledge and views on this subject by a decade or two. And also developing better manners.

    See Alan Dershowitz's view on the topic:

    "[History will see President Obama] as one of the worst foreign policy presidents ever," Dershowitz charged on Fox News' "Fox and Friends" Monday. "He called me into the Oval Office before the inauguration -- he said he wanted my support, and he told me he would always have Israel's back."

    "I didn't realize what he meant: That he would have Israel's back so he could stab them in the back," he added."[History will see President Obama] as one of the worst foreign policy presidents ever,"

    ...."He called me into the Oval Office before the inauguration -- he said he wanted my support, and he told me he would always have Israel's back."

    "I didn't realize what he meant: That he would have Israel's back so he could stab them in the back," he added.

    "What he did was so nasty, he pulled a bait and switch. He told the American public this is all about the settlements deep in the West Bank. And yet, he allowed he representative to the U.N. to abstain -- which is really a vote for a resolution that says the Jews can't pray at the Western Wall, Jews can't live in the Jewish Quarter [of Jerusalem] where they have lived for thousands of years. And he's going to say, `Whoops! I didn't mean that!' Well read the resolution! You're a lawyer, you went to Harvard Law School."

    Article.

    I would not go by (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by MKS on Mon Jan 02, 2017 at 10:23:23 AM EST
    Alan Dershowitz.  He is often on his own wavelength.  Especially with respect to Israel.  He is also pro torture.  So, he has lost perspective and his moral footing.

    Israel is violating the UN Resolutions having more and more settlements in the West Bank.  That should stop.  Pointing figures at the Palestinians does not excuse the Settlements.

    The UN Resolution recently passed is way overdue.

    Parent

    Dershowitz.. (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by jondee on Mon Jan 02, 2017 at 12:06:41 PM EST
    what more needs to be said about the character of the reptilian, sink-to-any-level Dershowitz, besides the fact that when Professor Norman Finkelstein suggested that Dershowitz's book The Case For Israel had been ghostwritten, Dershowitz charged that Finkelstein's mother survived Auschwitz by being a capo, and then launched a campaign to get Finkelstein fired from his job.

    That's your authoritative source?

    Parent

    Dershowitz was invited into (3.00 / 2) (#13)
    by jondee on Mon Jan 02, 2017 at 12:14:27 PM EST
    the Oval Office.. Oy.

    I wonder what the maintenance staff used to get the slime trail out of the rug.

    Parent

    i know this is true because of an interview (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by linea on Mon Jan 02, 2017 at 07:09:27 PM EST
    re:  He is also pro torture.

    one's "politics" are irrelevant once you endorse torture.

    Parent

    Do you consider Dershowitz are right winger? (3.00 / 2) (#15)
    by Green26 on Mon Jan 02, 2017 at 03:40:05 PM EST
    Where are your arguments? Why just attack people like Dershowitz? Point out where he's wrong? Show us you have some game.

    Parent
    Why? You haven't (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by Yman on Mon Jan 02, 2017 at 06:58:24 PM EST
    You simply posted an opinion from Dershowitz.  That's not "game" - simply his opinion.  All you need to do to counter an opinion is deny it, offer a differing opinion, or -if you don't respect the source of the opinion - point that out.

    Done.

    Parent

    Show you "I got game?" (5.00 / 2) (#22)
    by MKS on Mon Jan 02, 2017 at 07:06:56 PM EST
    What an impertinent, ridiculous comment.

    I have described my position quite clearly and at some length.  I have said Netanyahu is on the road to turning Israel long term into a South Africa.  You have not responded.

    And, you are the one who argues from authority.  You held up Dershowitz as some kind of authority, which appears to be your favorite argument--as you  most often cite an article or say someone said something as some purported final word on a subject, providing little of your own input or reasoning.

    So, you should respond to me:  By increasing the Settlements is not Netanyahu driving Israel into the situation where Arabs will constitute a majority of those living in land controlled by Israel?

    Why don't give us your thoughts, instead of someone else's?

    Parent

    Dershowitz is an authority (none / 0) (#27)
    by Green26 on Mon Jan 02, 2017 at 07:50:20 PM EST
    You aren't, at least on this topic. You are free to express your opinion on the subject. Others are free to ignore your opinion.

    Don't think Netanyahu cares if Palestinians are a majority of in areas that Israelis occupy. Netanyahu cares more about security.

    Don't agree with your South Africa comments. Makes no sense to me.

    Parent

    Dershowitz endorses torture!!! (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by linea on Mon Jan 02, 2017 at 08:13:21 PM EST
    let him retire and light candles and maybe his wife and daughter, over his remaining years, will teach him to be an actual human being. in my opinion.


    Parent
    How many people would you (1.00 / 1) (#41)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jan 03, 2017 at 08:07:01 AM EST
    let die?

    My basic point, though, is we should never under any circumstances allow low-level people to administer torture. If torture is going to be administered as a last resort in the ticking-bomb case, to save enormous numbers of lives, it ought to be done openly, with accountability, with approval by the president of the United States or by a Supreme Court justice. I don't think we're in that situation in this case.

    Link

    Real Torture

    Your brother's keeper

    In the real world answers are not easy.

    Parent

    The anomaly here (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by MKS on Tue Jan 03, 2017 at 10:25:17 AM EST
    is Dershowitz's support of torture.  

    As a prior staunch defender of the rights of criminal defendants, he forfeits much credibility by supporting torture.

    Parent

    How many innocent people would (5.00 / 1) (#49)
    by MKS on Tue Jan 03, 2017 at 10:26:07 AM EST
    you torture?

    You  know, it has already happened.  We have tortured the innocent.

    Parent

    You provide no source (none / 0) (#53)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jan 03, 2017 at 01:10:24 PM EST
    so I cannot comment on your claim. We don't know what the "torture" was.

    But we can safely say that none met the requirement that they had information that detailed an imminent attack that would kill large numbers of Americans. So they don't meet Dershowitz's qualifications.

    BTW If you want to continue our previous debate go

    here

    Parent

    Tall Cotton requires a lot of manure (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by jondee on Tue Jan 03, 2017 at 01:54:54 PM EST


    Parent
    No, thank you (none / 0) (#55)
    by MKS on Tue Jan 03, 2017 at 03:04:45 PM EST
    I did take a quick look and you refer to my comments as "blather."

    No interest in that.

     

    Parent

    torture is beyond disgusting (none / 0) (#65)
    by linea on Tue Jan 03, 2017 at 08:10:23 PM EST
    it's a perverse psychiatric sickness. it is the rejection of humanity, all values and ethics, it is the embrace of twisted ugly minds:

    see jeralyn's entry:
    Gitmo Detainee to Receive Rectal Surgery as Result of Torture

    this is your false heroism, your false salvation.

    Parent

    linea (1.00 / 1) (#66)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jan 03, 2017 at 08:34:34 PM EST
    Answer the question.

    How many would you let die if you could save them by showing no mercy to the killers?

    Would it make you feel all warm and fuzzy and pleased that you are  a gooooood person?

    It's a hard question and it deserves some hard thinking. Go back and read what Dershowitz said.

    My basic point, though, is we should never under any circumstances allow low-level people to administer torture. If torture is going to be administered as a last resort in the ticking-bomb case, to save enormous numbers of lives, it ought to be done openly, with accountability, with approval by the president of the United States or by a Supreme Court justice. I don't think we're in that situation in this case.

    If you cannot see the logic of that I pray that you will never never never have any connection with our security and safety.

    We are our brothers keeper. Failure to do what must be done is a sin. It is a sin of omission.

    Parent

    Those are dumb questions, Jim. (5.00 / 3) (#68)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jan 03, 2017 at 09:00:57 PM EST
    jimakaPPJ: "How many would you let die if you could save them by showing no mercy to the killers? Would it make you feel all warm and fuzzy and pleased that you are a gooooood person?"

    Stop being such a silly drama queen.

    Parent

    Stop acting like you are (1.00 / 1) (#69)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jan 03, 2017 at 09:19:34 PM EST
    the arbitrator of morality around here, Donald.

    You aren't.

    And it is exactly that. It is a question of morality and we need to know how our leaders will react in a time of crisis.  

    Parent

    You keep moving the goal posts, Jim. (5.00 / 2) (#78)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Jan 04, 2017 at 06:32:56 AM EST
    Nobody can have a rational discussion with you, when you keep looking for some edge by which you can berate and belittle someone, rather than be content to hear and accept an honest difference of opinion. linea spoke her mind on the subject of torture. And I spoke mine on the subject of your moronic questions, by which you hyperbolically demanded that linea respond to baseless and silly hypotheticals: "Answer the question! How many people are you willing to let DIE???" It leaves one to wonder if you've been binge-watching "24" while chugging espresso shots.

    Parent
    Donald (none / 0) (#80)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jan 04, 2017 at 07:23:50 AM EST
    You might ask the victims of radical islam that have died so far what they think of the situation.

    As for your screeds re my point to linea, I refer you to her undoubtedly heartfelt, but wrong response to my point.

    Given the constraints mentioned...stopping an imminent attack that will kill many innocent victims...it is morally correct to do whatever is necessary to prevent it.

    And the point hinges on that question.

    How many people are you willing to let DIE???

    And we must be prepared to answer that question. Remember the hard drive and the Chinese firewall? That was crucial in letting 9/11 happen.

    Something similar will happen again. Only this time the stakes will be much higher.


    Parent

    Well, in a way (none / 0) (#81)
    by jondee on Wed Jan 04, 2017 at 12:14:53 PM EST
    it all kind of balances out.

    Jim and his buddies have no problem with torturing a terrorism suspect, but they also have no problem with selling him assault weapons and ammo.

    He's his brother's keeper after all.

    Parent

    Your over-the-top hypotheticals are ... (none / 0) (#84)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Jan 04, 2017 at 07:03:12 PM EST
    ... the result of an overactive imagination. Sound policy development requires rational thought, not an outrageous plotline from an old B movie.

    Parent
    Sound logical thought? (none / 0) (#91)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jan 04, 2017 at 09:18:27 PM EST
    Start by understanding that we have done nothing to prevent a "suitcase" nuke from being smuggled into the country.

    But again. His qualifiers are well laid out.

    Given those, what would you do??

    How many would let be murdered?

    Parent

    Why? (5.00 / 1) (#96)
    by Yman on Wed Jan 04, 2017 at 09:59:53 PM EST
    Start by understanding that we have done nothing to prevent a "suitcase" nuke from being smuggled into the country.

    Why would anyone start with a premise that is completely fabricated/made up with no basis in fact?

    Parent

    He probably saw a mosque once (none / 0) (#97)
    by jondee on Wed Jan 04, 2017 at 10:06:52 PM EST
    and immediately leapt to the conclusion that "we've done nothing" to prevent suitcase bombs.

    Parent
    Your fellow conservatives (none / 0) (#94)
    by jondee on Wed Jan 04, 2017 at 09:52:43 PM EST
    who are obsessed with defunding and deregulation, could maybe use a reminder  that small amounts of weapons grade material could theoretically be hidden fairly easily in amongst shipments of otherwise innocuous imported goods.

    But preventing that possibility would require more dreaded "Big Government spending", that is always anathema to the Right.

    Plus, it's just more fun to concentrate on imprisoning and torturing people.

    Parent

    You can scare yourself all you want, Jim. (none / 0) (#101)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jan 05, 2017 at 05:09:25 AM EST
    That shouldn't require the rest of us to cower in fright alongside you. Speaking for myself only, I lost my own father to a terrorist attack in 1964, so I'm certainly not unaware of the potential threats we face in this world. And to be sure, some people throughout history have certainly proved themselves more than capable of doing some terrible and awful things, if they set their minds to do so.

    But that said, I absolutely refuse to live my life in fear, because I also so happen to believe that there are those who profit from the creation and maintenance of just such a climate generally, and I don't feel obliged to indulge them. And Heaven forbid that I should ever exist in a state of perpetually heightened anxiety such as yours, brought about by a wholly contrived and self-imposed fear of "The Other."

    I just think you're being very silly here, at times cartoonishly so, and I have no problem telling you that and even laughing at you, if need be. But if you want to continue to play the part of right-wing punchline, I certainly can't stop you. As for myself, I've got better things to do than pay any more attention to it.

    Have a nice day.

    Parent

    Uh Donald, in the past (none / 0) (#110)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jan 05, 2017 at 09:14:08 AM EST
    you have wrote that your father was killed by communists in Vietnam. I honor his service just as I do friends who died in that war.  But that has no relationship to the current war being waged on Western Civilization by radical islam.

    And it has nothing to do with the point that what we should be prepared to do is a hard question and it deserves some hard thinking. Go back and read what Dershowitz said.

    My basic point, though, is we should never under any circumstances allow low-level people to administer torture. If torture is going to be administered as a last resort in the ticking-bomb case, to save enormous numbers of lives, it ought to be done openly, with accountability, with approval by the president of the United States or by a Supreme Court justice. I don't think we're in that situation in this case.

    That's it. You can try and muddy the water by claims about how brave you are, etc., etc. just as jondee can write things that have nothing to do with Dershowitz's comments and guidelines. But the facts are that we have been attacked in a manner that killed thousands twice. Pearl Harbor by Japan. WTC 9/11.

    That is the frame around his comments and my comment that we need to discuss our options in this matter because there is no doubt that it will happen again. While Orlando, San Bernardino and dozens of other attacks, both failed and successful, bleed us, one will be horrifically successful.

    I have written how I see this matter as a moral one and should not be taken lightly. Indeed it is one of the bedrocks of western civilization and especially of the modern day safety nets enacted to protect people.  

    We are our brothers keeper. We first learn that in Bible school when we study Genesis 4:4-10.

    Then the LORD said to Cain, "Where is your brother Abel?" "I don't know," he replied. "Am I my brother's keeper?"

    He said, "What have you done? The voice of your brother's blood is crying to Me from the ground.


    So try to avoid this all you want but it won't go away. The question remains.

    "How many people will you let die?"

    Parent

    Another question remains (none / 0) (#115)
    by jondee on Thu Jan 05, 2017 at 05:54:47 PM EST
    how many NEW terrorists will you inspire and radicalize by torturing-assassinating-bombing etc people, thereby sowing a thrst for vengeance and endless propaganda opportunities for this country's enemies?

    Parent
    Try paying attention (none / 0) (#131)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jan 05, 2017 at 09:20:53 PM EST
    The situation under discussion is one in which an severe attack is imminent and the prisoner is known to have information that will stop the attack.

    At that point, what would you do? How many lives would you be willing to sacrifice?

    As for creating terrorists that is simple. They will be created no matter what we do. It is silly to think we can stop the attacks by playing nice nice to the terrorists.

    Parent

    No, Jim - that's the situation YOU'RE discussing. (5.00 / 2) (#136)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jan 05, 2017 at 10:08:09 PM EST
    The rest of us have already rejected that scenario and premise as both cartoonish and unrealistic. You're simply not one to easily take a hint.

    Nobody here has suggested that we play "nice nice" with terrorism. Rather, we accept the general consensus of most intelligence experts, which is that:

    • The use of torture is counterproductive to the process of soliciting relevant information from a suspected terrorist or terrorist ally whose under interrogation; and
    • The best way to combat terrorism is to be quiet and effective in one's methodology, not bombastic and obnoxious.

    Suffice to say that you are not the sole arbiter of what constitutes an effective response to the challenge of terrorism. What you are doing here is -- to put it crudely -- pulling your d*ck out of your pants and banging it on the table while yelling for our attention, because you think it's sending everyone a message that you're tough.

    Well, it's not. Quite the opposite, actually.

    Parent

    this is too silly (1.00 / 1) (#135)
    by linea on Thu Jan 05, 2017 at 09:40:23 PM EST
    what about a terrorist with syfilis "and the prisoner is known to" divulge information for a BJ?

    we're depending on you jim!

    lol

    Parent

    linea, insults aside (none / 0) (#155)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Jan 07, 2017 at 11:30:39 AM EST
    You are starting to display jondee/yman/DIH/MKS characteristics of ignoring what is written and then posting a nasty personal attack totally unrelated to what others have written.

    The issue is not unrestricted torture. Everyone I know is against that including Dershowitz.

    The point is this.

    What limits should we place on self defense?

    You probably don't remember but the FBI had the hard drive of one of the 9/11 radical muslims before the attack.  Yet, although they had suspicions, they didn't turn it over to the CIA because of a "Chinese Firewall" between the two groups.

    The intent of the Chinese Firewall, put in place during the Clinton administration, was to keep the CIA from spying inside the US.

    Good intentions. Yet 2996 people died.

    And since then we have seen failures at Orlando, San Bernardino and now Fort Lauderdale in which many people were killed.

    What happened? Someone dropped the ball. Someone didn't push the envelope. People died.

    Dershowitz's scenario assume that doesn't happen. Agents down the line have done their job and they have a person in custody who knows the details of an impending attack.

    What would you do??

    Parent

    Need to find a tiny violin (none / 0) (#156)
    by Yman on Sat Jan 07, 2017 at 05:40:36 PM EST
    You are starting to display jondee/yman/DIH/MKS characteristics of ignoring what is written and then posting a nasty personal attack totally unrelated to what others have written.

    Dear Gawwwwwd ... like a 6th-grade bully making $hit up while projecting and hypocritically whining about being picked on.

    Are you actually related to Trump?

    Parent

    ROTFLMAO (none / 0) (#158)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Jan 07, 2017 at 05:56:27 PM EST
    Tiny violin, YEAH.

    Parent
    Someone dropped the ball (none / 0) (#157)
    by jondee on Sat Jan 07, 2017 at 05:41:48 PM EST
    and someone worked overtime to make it as easy as pie for the killers to procure an unlimited supply of assault weapons and ammo.

    In a severely myopic, misguided attempt to protect our "freedoms."

    Good intentions, yet many people died.

    And the obsession with arming anyone in this country who wishes to be armed, for whatever reason, didn't start under the Clinton administration.

    You say no one you know supports unlimited torture, yet you also claim drowning people (waterboarding) isn't torture. Contrary to the testimony of everyone who has actually experienced waterboarding.

    Does this mean you support unlimited waterboarding and other similar methods that "aren't torture" because you say they're not torture?

    Parent

    Ya gotta love it (none / 0) (#159)
    by jondee on Sat Jan 07, 2017 at 06:00:12 PM EST
    Obama had a responsibility to modify the SOFA with Iraq, but Bush had no responsibility to do anything about the legendary "Chinese Firewall" that led to 9-11.

    His hands were tied. Probably because Barney Frank put the yankee-liberal-queer hoodoo on him again.

    Parent

    Should we haved tortured Dylan Roof (none / 0) (#87)
    by jondee on Wed Jan 04, 2017 at 08:26:15 PM EST
    and his alt-right buddies if it possibly might have prevented the Charlestown church shooting?

    Or, maybe a little harsh interrogation would work on certain internet posters who spread the stories that set Robert Dear off..

    How good at are you at holding your breathe, Jim?

    Parent

    wow (none / 0) (#98)
    by linea on Wed Jan 04, 2017 at 10:08:30 PM EST
    "On November 27, 2015, a gunman attacked a Planned Parenthood clinic in Colorado Springs, Colorado. A police officer and two civilians were killed; five police officers and four civilians were injured."

    Parent
    And free ... (5.00 / 2) (#30)
    by Yman on Mon Jan 02, 2017 at 08:14:12 PM EST
    ... to ignore Dershowitz's opinion.  he's just one man with his own, biased opinion - worth no more or less than anyone else's opinion.

    Parent
    Alan Dershowitz is an authority (5.00 / 4) (#31)
    by Peter G on Mon Jan 02, 2017 at 08:24:11 PM EST
    on criminal law and procedure. On Israel, I'm sorry, but Dersh is just an opinionated blowhard, exploiting the name, reputation, and media access that he earned in an unrelated field.

    Parent
    Nope, Dershowitz is an authority (none / 0) (#32)
    by Green26 on Mon Jan 02, 2017 at 09:09:35 PM EST
    Wrote "The Case for Israel", a NY Times bestseller. Did a later documentary by the same name. Wrote "The Case for Peace: How the Arab-Israeli Conflict Can be Resolved". Has written other books on Israel. Has spoken and debated on Israel and the peace process.

    Parent
    Exactly what (5.00 / 3) (#34)
    by Peter G on Mon Jan 02, 2017 at 10:25:50 PM EST
    I was referring to.

    Parent
    So how many books have you written (1.50 / 2) (#36)
    by Green26 on Mon Jan 02, 2017 at 11:09:49 PM EST
    on Iraael?

    Parent
    Or Israel? (1.00 / 2) (#37)
    by Green26 on Mon Jan 02, 2017 at 11:10:58 PM EST


    Parent
    I do not have to have written a book (5.00 / 3) (#44)
    by Peter G on Tue Jan 03, 2017 at 08:55:55 AM EST
    on Israel to have an opinion about who is or is not an expert on the subject. That's a pretty ridiculous question, don't you think? It seems that quite a few law professors at presitigious universities get the idea that this makes them experts on pretty much anything that strikes their fancy or appeals to their biases.

    Parent
    Peter, I like your criminal law posts, (none / 0) (#71)
    by Green26 on Tue Jan 03, 2017 at 09:43:23 PM EST
    but like was said, you are not an expert on Israel and are wrong on saying Dershowitz is not an expert. He just is. You may not agree with him, but anyone who has written as many books on the subject as he has and is called an expert by some, is an expert.

    Parent
    Dershowitz is certainly an expert for your purpose (none / 0) (#73)
    by jondee on Tue Jan 03, 2017 at 10:27:24 PM EST
    but, if the only measure is the number of books written, than Noam Chomsky and Dersh's nemesis Norman Finkelstein would also have to qualify as experts.

    But, somehow I doubt you'll be quoting Chomsky or Finkelstein any time soon.

    Parent

    The only point was whether he was an expert (2.00 / 1) (#74)
    by Green26 on Tue Jan 03, 2017 at 10:40:27 PM EST
    I don't believe people have to agree with me to be experts. Apparently, some of you do.

    One of the curious things that often occurs on TL, is that a number of posters immediately attack authors or commentators or posters, if they disagree with them. And usually, these posters don't try to refute or discuss the point; they just attack. Really inhibits discussion.

    Instead of a counter point or discussion or question, it's the poster/commentator is an X, is using Fox News or Repub talking points, supports Putin, supports Trump, is a troll, is a 5th grader, etc.

    My view is that anyone who calls someone else a 5th grader probably needs to look in the mirror.

    Parent

    You have that backwards, Green (5.00 / 3) (#111)
    by MKS on Thu Jan 05, 2017 at 10:31:30 AM EST
    Your arguments rely almost exclusively on "appeals to authority," using the classical term.  You usually cite an , or an article and say, basically, "see, this article says X, and this expert says X" and then you leave it at that.

    [These appeals to authority also are a big "tell" imo.....Conservatives are the ones who genuflect to authority, and not many on the Left care that much for your "authorities."]

    So, when the sum and substance, and usually the sole basis of, your argument is an appeal to authority, you will get pushback on the authority you cite.  You appear oblivious to the contradiction in putting forward someone as an authority and then criticizing those who respond to that exact point--whether or not someone is compromised as an authority.  It is glaring and becoming humorous.

    Moreover, you look like you are trying to act like a lawyer here.  Today, you have a series of demands that a poster answer your questions with a "yes" or "no" answer.  Like it was a cross examination.  And you seem fixated on whether someone, this time Dershowitz, is an expert. As if that would end the discussion.  It really is an irrelevant question; exerts testify at trial all the time and are discredited as biased or ill informed or as quacks.  Happens all the time.  Perhaps in most trials an expert's testimony is disregarded in some form or fashion.

    Your demands that people here acknowledge that Dershowitz is an expert are quite simply petty.

    But, you do try to dominate the conversation by telling everyone here how they must respond to you, and what the question is that they must respond to.    

     

    Parent

    Nope (none / 0) (#133)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jan 05, 2017 at 09:25:18 PM EST
    .Conservatives are the ones who genuflect to authority

    I've been watching the right dispute what the "authority" is selling re the Russians...

    And the Left just suck it up....

    ;-)

    Parent

    Basing conclusions on facts and evidence (none / 0) (#134)
    by Yman on Thu Jan 05, 2017 at 09:33:10 PM EST
    ... is not "genuflecting to authority", and willful ignorance is not "disputing authority".

    BTW - Unlike your beloved Iraq War, the intelligence community is not "selling" anything re" the Russians and their interference in our election.

    Parent

    Nope (none / 0) (#141)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Jan 06, 2017 at 08:44:52 AM EST
    The only evidence we have is what we're being told.

    You wouldn't accept that re Iraq but you suck it up now.

    What is so funny is that the hacking has been going for years and years and your "authority" didn't mind at all until Wikileak's "source" tried to hack the Repubs and failed but did break into the Demos by using such hitech tools as asking for Podesta's password, which he willing gave....

    And this is one of your leaders?? Excuse me while I giggle and laugh. But I shudder to think this man was a "leader."

    And your candidate used a private email system that wasn't even as secure as Gmail or AOL.

    Now you claim that the information "changed" the election.

    Yet you don't deny that it was accurate. You didn't want them to know how you were cheating for Hillary.

    Looks like you folks didn't want the voters to know what was going on.

    lol

    Parent

    JimakaVladimir (1.00 / 1) (#142)
    by jondee on Fri Jan 06, 2017 at 09:13:02 AM EST
    the Russians tried to help their boy and your buddy get elected and you're obviously fine with that.

    We get it.

    So much for loyalty and the America way and that tissue paper thin flag you formally wrapped yourself in.

    The enemy of half of your own country is your friend. Good for you.

    Do svidaniya, Comrade. Thank you for your service to the Motherland.

    Parent

    He is (none / 0) (#144)
    by FlJoe on Fri Jan 06, 2017 at 09:33:08 AM EST
    not only fine with it, he thinks it's "funny".

    Parent
    So sayeth (1.00 / 1) (#143)
    by FlJoe on Fri Jan 06, 2017 at 09:31:44 AM EST
    the quintessential quisling.
    PufP

    Parent
    The quisling (1.00 / 1) (#148)
    by FlJoe on Fri Jan 06, 2017 at 03:34:49 PM EST
    has no leg to stand on so he hands out ones, all while PufP.

    Parent
    "Cheating for Hillary" ??? (none / 0) (#145)
    by Yman on Fri Jan 06, 2017 at 10:33:52 AM EST
    Hahahahahahahahahaaaaa...

    Much like your lying candidate, you can't refute actual facts and evidence and have no grasp of reality,  so you just make $hit up.

    As usual ...

    Parent

    BTW - Podesta was mistakenly told by his IT ... (none / 0) (#146)
    by Yman on Fri Jan 06, 2017 at 10:36:55 AM EST
    ... staff that the email was legitimate and he should log in to change his password, so your attack on him is a laughable and false as all of your claims.

    But you already knew that.

    Parent

    you continue to misrepresent the Iraq debacle (none / 0) (#147)
    by mm on Fri Jan 06, 2017 at 12:08:27 PM EST
    You wouldn't accept that re Iraq but you suck it up now.

    The IC did not screw up the Iraq intelligence.  The Bush administration did.


    Parent

    Fool me once.... (none / 0) (#149)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Jan 06, 2017 at 05:06:33 PM EST

    "The intelligence estimate also heavily qualified its evidence of any link between Saddam's regime and al Qaeda, noting that the sources were not entirely reliable."

    Snip

    In December, the RAND Corporation issued a report that stated the CIA assessment "contained several qualifiers that were dropped ... As the draft NIE went up the intelligence chain of command, the conclusions were treated increasingly definitively."

    Link

    So Bush was acting on information that had been "politicialized" to provide the administration what the IA's thought their bosses wanted to hear.

    Now, has it happened again??

    But the real questions are these.

    Why didn't Obama order an investigation last summer?

    Why didn't Obama order an investigation over the Chinese hack?

    Why did the DNC have such a lack of cyber security? It is claimed that its IT team said it was okay to respond to the request.

    Really?? An IT professional said that??

    And why would anyone besides Podesta need his password???

    And why did the system allow a password with only 8 characters and no numbers be used??Are you kidding me?? That's AOL circa 2000.

    And was the IT guy fired? If not, why not?

    There's lots and lots of questions here that need answering. But, just like Iraq, we get the "we can't tell you" because it would reveal too much.

    But the real question is this. We didn't get excited over the Chinese hacking but we get excited because stuff that American citizens has every right to know was given to American citizens.


    Parent

    So the question is this, Jim (none / 0) (#150)
    by jondee on Fri Jan 06, 2017 at 05:22:03 PM EST
    when you were up on your high horse and asking over and over again "how many Americans would you let die?", did it ever once occur to you that you were siding with a historically hostile nation against 65 million of your own countryman?

    The enemy of your enemy is your friend. Is that it?

    Parent

    So many fake "questions" (none / 0) (#160)
    by Yman on Sat Jan 07, 2017 at 06:24:49 PM EST
    But the real questions are these.

    Why didn't Obama order an investigation last summer?

    You have no idea when Obama was informed or when the investigation began.


    Why didn't Obama order an investigation over the Chinese hack?

    He did.  I don't even have to check to know you just made that up.

    Why did the DNC have such a lack of cyber security? It is claimed that its IT team said it was okay to respond to the request.

    Everyone can be hacked.  The fact that you want to blame the victim means literally nothing.

    Really?? An IT professional said that??

    It was a typo from one of his aides.  You know how to use Google, right?


    And why would anyone besides Podesta need his password???

    Who said they did?  If you want to push some silly, winger CT, you'll need to provide specifics.

    And why did the system allow a password with only 8 characters and no numbers be used??Are you kidding me?? That's AOL circa 2000.

    No idea what you're talking about - and like most of your claims, it's likely false.  As usual, you provide no sources for your claims.  Were you duped by that silly, baseless winger CT going around the internets?

    And was the IT guy fired? If not, why not?

    Don't know - don't care.  If you do, you should let them know.


    There's lots and lots of questions here that need answering. But, just like Iraq, we get the "we can't tell you" because it would reveal too much
    .
    Just like Ira - heh.  You mean the false claims about WMDs that were sold by the Bush administration, when they told the intelligence agencies to rewrite assessments that didn't back their stories?  The WMD claims that you're still defending as true?

    Heh.

    Parent

    In this particular instance (none / 0) (#75)
    by jondee on Tue Jan 03, 2017 at 10:53:49 PM EST
    you did only quote the opinions of an "expert" who agreed with you.

    If you care to allow equal weight and devote space to some counterpoint opinions from other experts who disagree with you and Dersh, by all means feel free.

    Parent

    Dershowitz is an accomplished (none / 0) (#76)
    by TrevorBolder on Wed Jan 04, 2017 at 06:12:47 AM EST
    Attorney. He has written many books, more than 3 on Israel, others on his religion.
    http://tinyurl.com/zll5tkh  Goodreads

    The amount of research involved in writing these would make Dershowitz an expert on Israel.

    You might not agree with his conclusions and analysis, but he is quite knowledge on the topic.

    If you feel like citing an expert with contrary conclusions, please go ahead.

    I am still stunned by the actual numbers of Resolutions against Israel, as compared to the rest of the world. A liberal Democracy gets pummeled by the UN, while dictatorships that flaunt human rights abuses receive nothing from the UN.
    Quite frankly, this significantly reflects quite poorly on the UN
    http://tinyurl.com/7m95wrw  Gallup polling
    This might well lead to actions taken by Congress regarding the UN based on their discriminatory actions towards Israel.
    Obamas letting this resolution through just adds fuel to the anti UN sentiment in the US.

    Parent

    Per the subject of Alan Dershowitz's expertise ... (5.00 / 1) (#79)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Jan 04, 2017 at 07:10:28 AM EST
    ... on matters pertaining to Israel, there's this rather glaring issue:

    The Harvard Crimson | September 29, 2003
    Dershowitz Accused Of Plagiarism - "A DePaul University professor has charged Frankfurter Professor of Law Alan M. Dershowitz with committing plagiarism in his recent bestselling book The Case for Israel -- an accusation that has set off a furious back-and-forth about what does and does not constitute plagiarism. Norman G. Finkelstein first accused Dershowitz of plagiarism last Wednesday, when both professors were on a talk show called 'Democracy Now!' to debate the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The charge has also surfaced in the October edition of The Nation, in a column called 'Alan Dershowitz, Plagiarist,' which cites Finkelstein's research."

    You are clearly grasping at straws here with accusations of anti-Semitism. I won't question Prof. Dershowitz's impeccable credentials as both a Harvard professor of law and a criminal defense counsel. But his hyperbolic advocacy on Israel's behalf does not necessarily equate with expertise on that topic.

    Further given both the aforementioned plagiarism charge and his unfortunate tendency toward invoking the polemical whenever he's discussing all things Israel, Prof. Dershowitz is invariably compromised and hopelessly biased. And as such, he constitutes a rather dubious source upon which to base your argument.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Even if the claim were true, what (5.00 / 1) (#100)
    by Green26 on Thu Jan 05, 2017 at 12:27:14 AM EST
    would that have to do with whether Dershowitz is an expert or whether what he is saying now is right or wrong?

    Parent
    Jondee, you are welcome to quote any expert (none / 0) (#99)
    by Green26 on Thu Jan 05, 2017 at 12:25:06 AM EST
    or non-expert you want. That is not my job.

    One question. Do you think Dershowitz is or isn't an expert on this topic?

    Parent

    If an expert is someone (5.00 / 2) (#109)
    by jondee on Thu Jan 05, 2017 at 09:08:00 AM EST
    who even-handedly weighs all aspects of an issue, while, as much as possible, acknowledging and leaving to the side his own issue-clouding wishes and desires, than no, in my opinion Dershowitz is no expert.

    Parent
    Who says that experts have to do that? (none / 0) (#114)
    by Green26 on Thu Jan 05, 2017 at 05:13:42 PM EST
    I never thought that an expert needed to take that approach.

    Parent
    They don't "need" to do it (none / 0) (#116)
    by Yman on Thu Jan 05, 2017 at 05:57:36 PM EST
    He stated it was his opinion that an expert needs to be objective.

    Of course, if you have someone who's an "expert" who fails to be objective when analyzing facts and evidence, the value of their opinion lies somewhere between negligible and worthless.

    Parent

    No, not true at all (none / 0) (#120)
    by Green26 on Thu Jan 05, 2017 at 08:28:06 PM EST
    In many situations including for example in law, the experts who offer their views are not objective at all. One doesn't have to be objective to be an expert. That's just plain silly.

    And even reasonable people often can't agree on what being objective is.

    Parent

    Completely true (none / 0) (#123)
    by Yman on Thu Jan 05, 2017 at 08:50:24 PM EST
    An "expert" who isn't objective and bases their conclusions on their own biases and preconceived notions has an opinion that is worthless.

    To believe otherwise is just plain "silly".

    Figured out what an opinion is, yet?

    Parent

    Really? (none / 0) (#119)
    by TrevorBolder on Thu Jan 05, 2017 at 07:26:48 PM EST
    expert witnesses in a trial, both sides have them.
    They have to convince the jury which expert is more believable, with the facts being what they are.

    Parent
    Green, please try and use (5.00 / 5) (#45)
    by fishcamp on Tue Jan 03, 2017 at 08:57:27 AM EST
    some common sense and logic.  Peter G does not claim to be an authority on Israel.  Yours was a 5th graders response.

    Parent
    Nope, Fishcamp, you are wrong. (none / 0) (#72)
    by Green26 on Tue Jan 03, 2017 at 09:44:32 PM EST
    What I said was perfectly fine. Consider whether you are the 5th grader.

    Parent
    If simply writing books (1.00 / 1) (#39)
    by jondee on Mon Jan 02, 2017 at 11:23:49 PM EST
    makes you an authority, than David Irving is an authority on the Holocaust.

    Parent
    The point being (5.00 / 1) (#117)
    by jondee on Thu Jan 05, 2017 at 06:35:53 PM EST
    simply publishing a lot of material about a particular subject in no way automatically qualifies a person as an authority or "expert" worthy of serious consideration.

    Parent
    The point being (none / 0) (#118)
    by TrevorBolder on Thu Jan 05, 2017 at 07:26:44 PM EST
    He did a lot of research to write 3 books, and is quite knowledgeable on the topic.
    You just don't like his conclusions.

    Parent
    Dersh did what a lot of people (5.00 / 1) (#129)
    by jondee on Thu Jan 05, 2017 at 09:17:10 PM EST
    do: he went looking for evidence to support his already arrived at conclusions.

    Like the guy who lost his keys and only looked for them under the street lamp because that's where the light was.

    Parent

    Talk about not being objective (none / 0) (#121)
    by Green26 on Thu Jan 05, 2017 at 08:30:29 PM EST
    As I said previously, some posters seem to believe that only people who agree with them can be experts. And now apparently only people who agree with them are objective too. Ha.

    Parent
    That IS funny (none / 0) (#124)
    by Yman on Thu Jan 05, 2017 at 08:54:44 PM EST
    Not what you claim is amusing, but your habit of misstating of what others are saying be misstating what they "seem to" and "apparently" are saying.

    Heh.

    Parent

    No, you are funny (none / 0) (#137)
    by Green26 on Thu Jan 05, 2017 at 10:44:14 PM EST
    You are the one who misrepresents. And then this post of yours is "apparently" the best you've got. And that too is funny.

    Parent
    "Middle East Expert" (none / 0) (#38)
    by Green26 on Mon Jan 02, 2017 at 11:20:12 PM EST
    "Dershowitz, a prominent legal scholar and Middle East expert, also discussed the possibility of renewing the peace process during the administration of president-elect Trump: "Obama pushed away Israel, the Palestinians, Jordanians, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia. The only country he got closer to is Iran. It is obvious that during his administration negotiations with the Palestinians cannot go forward, but I believe that during Trump's administration it certainly could."

    Article.

    Parent

    Latest News Biblical Perspective (none / 0) (#40)
    by jondee on Mon Jan 02, 2017 at 11:40:33 PM EST
    followed by a passage from Exodus.

    Can't we leave the perpetually wrathful guy in the sky with the beard and the lighting bolts and rain of frogs out of a debate that supposed to be about rationality and fairness?

    Parent

    Speaking of Biblical perspectives (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by jondee on Tue Jan 03, 2017 at 08:10:06 AM EST
    and odd alliances..

    At a Zionist Organization of America dinner, Dershowitz introduced Ted Cruz as "a man of principle, a man of high intelligence, a man of determination, and one of Israel's strongest supporters in the United States Senate."

    Also honored at the dinner was John Hagee, pastor of the mega-church Cornerstone Church in San Antonio and founder of and chairman of Christians United for Israel.

    Parent

    Dershowitz? Some authority (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by jondee on Mon Jan 02, 2017 at 10:26:27 PM EST
    there's some compelling evidence that Dersh, or ghostwriters unknown, plagiarized at least part of The Case For Israel from Joan Peter's widely discredited book From Time Immemorial.

    His subsequent hysterical overreaction when called out on it, has to be the epitome of Shakespearian "protesting too much." Like some nasty-spirited creature back into a corner.

    Parent

    How so? (none / 0) (#43)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jan 03, 2017 at 08:48:21 AM EST
    Roughly 21% of Israel's more than eight million citizens are Arabs. The vast majority of the Israeli Arabs - 81% - are Muslims. Arabs in Israel have equal voting rights; in fact, it is one of the few places in the Middle East where Arab women may vote. Arabs currently hold ten seats in the Knesset. Israeli Arabs have also held various government posts.

    Link

    Parent

    That only works (none / 0) (#47)
    by MKS on Tue Jan 03, 2017 at 10:20:13 AM EST
    so long as Arabs are in the minority.

    When Arabs become the majority, it will be a different story. At that point, Israel will cease to exist as an Jewish state.

    So, the more Palestinian land Israel takes, the more Arab people it must govern.  The demographics will undermine what Israel is attempting to do--preserve Israel as  Jewish state.

    And, the Israelis are sensitive to the subject.

    Parent

    And, this (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by KeysDan on Tue Jan 03, 2017 at 11:45:26 AM EST
    is where the legal definition of Apartheid comes into play.

    Parent
    When is a qualifier (none / 0) (#52)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jan 03, 2017 at 12:59:04 PM EST
    What you are doing is called "speculating" or "guessing."

    Parent
    What he is doing is exercising foresight (none / 0) (#70)
    by jondee on Tue Jan 03, 2017 at 09:23:29 PM EST
    which is an ability one utilizes to avoid disasterous situations in the future.

    Parent
    And there is is (none / 0) (#10)
    by TrevorBolder on Mon Jan 02, 2017 at 10:39:28 AM EST
    http://tinyurl.com/hovk3tb   Daily Beast

    Why Did Obama Pander to the UN's Stunning Anti-Israel Bias?
    There are horrific injustices all over the world, including and especially in the Muslim world, but those are ignored by an institution obsessed with Israel.
    Maajid Nawaz

    Y

    ou would think that the head of the UN knows when his own organization is displaying an institutional bias. Resolution 465 already existed, rightly condemning settlements. To this day, 47 resolutions concerning the Israel-Palestine conflict have been adopted by the UNSC.

    From 2016 alone one need only look at the 18 resolutions against Israel adopted during the UN General Assembly in September, or the 12 resolutions adopted in the Human Rights Council. These were more than those focused on Syria, North Korea, Iran, and South Sudan combined.
    Arabs, Muslims, Islamists, liberals, leftists, and our international organizations share this institutional bias.
    Opposing Israel is The One Ring that binds us all. It is the sacred god that must not be questioned. So deep runs this bias against Israeli transgressions, that to call it out is to arouse immediately incredulity and ad hominem abuse.



    Parent
    Even the article you cite (5.00 / 2) (#11)
    by MKS on Mon Jan 02, 2017 at 10:56:37 AM EST
    states:

    Settlements are illegal

    The more settlements, the harder to have two states.  The article you cite to states that Israel already integrates the Arabs living in Israel.  But this has limits as even acknowledged by Israel because it cannot give citizenship to the Arabs living within Israeli occupied territories, lest Israel cease to be a Jewish State.

    If Israel were to grant citizenship to all Palestinians residing in Israeli held land, then I for one would be less concerned about the Settlements.  But that is not what Netanyahu proposes.  He is steering Israel off the cliff and towards South Africa's apartheid style of government.

    No, Obama did not have the U.S. abstain because he is anti-Semitic.  He did so because Israel continues its illegal activity of expanding settlements.

    Ever since the Yom Kippur War, Israel has ceased to face any realistic military threat. It currently faces what we face now--organized terrorist attacks.  But the day when Israel could realistically fear a tank column careening down the Golan Heights towards Haifa have long since passed.  Israel has achieved military dominance in the Mid-East.  No one will militarily defeat it.

    The issue is how Israel deals with the ongoing threat of terrorism.  The Settlements are a bad way of doing that.  Unless it wants to give up its unique position as an overtly Jewish State.

    Parent

    Has anyone on TL even suggested the settlements (3.67 / 3) (#14)
    by Green26 on Mon Jan 02, 2017 at 03:37:29 PM EST
    are legal? Why can't you stick to the main discussion, i.e. the abstention on the UN resolution? Why do you have to keep creating straw men?

    Parent
    The Settlements Are What Caused the Resolution (5.00 / 2) (#17)
    by vicndabx on Mon Jan 02, 2017 at 05:19:29 PM EST
    Why you keep wanting to focus on the silliness of an abstention vote seems to be a continued attempt to avoid the real issues.

    Regarding your claims re: lack of effort by Palestinians some details here.

    Parent

    The settlements have existed for decades. (none / 0) (#18)
    by Green26 on Mon Jan 02, 2017 at 06:50:12 PM EST
    "For the first time in 36 years, the United Nations Security Council was able to pass a resolution that criticized Israeli settlements after President Obama's administration broke long-standing tradition and didn't veto the measure."

    The US changed its long stranding policy. The US did this despite Trump asking them to veto the resolution.

    "Despite the words though, many see the abstention as a "parting shot," as Reuters puts it, by Obama, who has not enjoyed the friendliest of relationships with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in part because of a fundamental disagreement over settlements."

    Slate article.

    Parent

    Trump asked him not to do it(?) (5.00 / 2) (#19)
    by MKS on Mon Jan 02, 2017 at 06:54:59 PM EST
    So what?

    I do not care what Trump wants or does not want.

    Parent

    Like it or not, Trump will soon be the president (none / 0) (#25)
    by Green26 on Mon Jan 02, 2017 at 07:22:19 PM EST
    He will be in charge of any peace talks the next 4 years.

    Parent
    No, he won't (3.00 / 2) (#33)
    by MKS on Mon Jan 02, 2017 at 09:54:30 PM EST
    He couldn't find his own arse with a company of U.S. Special Forces and a map tattooed on his forehead.

    He will outsource anything having to do with foreign policy first and foremost to Putin, and then to Netanyahu....and yes, those may be contradictory in most people's universe but not Trump's. It all depends on who flatters him more and more recently.  

    Parent

    No he won't (none / 0) (#130)
    by Jeralyn on Thu Jan 05, 2017 at 09:17:33 PM EST
    He won't have any impact on them, regardless of what he claims. Israel has to agree to peace talks and Israel has rejected the conference rescheduled in France later this month on how to move the peace talks forward. Trump will probably send his son in law, waste of time.

    More here on how Israel won't accept outside influence on peace talks

    Parent

    Nawaz's Article Explains Nothing (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by RickyJim on Tue Jan 03, 2017 at 09:02:52 AM EST
    I want to know why every other civilized county (France, Britain) votes for such resolutions while the US get heat (from people in the US and Israel) for abstaining.  I also think he is wrong about the fate of the Jewish enclaves in the West Bank.  There is no way Israel will allow those enclaves to be part of a Palestinian state as Nawaz seems to believe.  Israel will insist on a military presence so it can defend them.

    Parent
    omg! (3.00 / 1) (#24)
    by linea on Mon Jan 02, 2017 at 07:18:40 PM EST
    "stunning anti-israel bias" is absurd.

    and omg!

    "The One Ring That Binds Us All" - 4-chan wankers are running america's foreign policy? i mean, omg!

    Parent

    Actually (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by TrevorBolder on Mon Jan 02, 2017 at 07:57:05 PM EST
    That was written by
    Maajid Nawaz is Co-Founder and Chairman of Quilliam - a globally active think tank focusing on matters of Integration, Citizenship & Identity, Religious Freedom, Extremism and Immigration - and Founder of Khudi, a Pakistan based social movement campaigning to entrench democratic culture among the nation's youth.

    Not some 4 chan wanker  (English football smack talk on TL)

    He specifically gave excellent reasons why the settlements are not a insurmountable obstacle to peace between Palestine and Israel,
    Also stated that the Palestinian Israeli conflict is no one of the major issues existing in the Middle East today,
    And that the UN has extreme Israel bias, and points out specifically why.


    Parent

    I'm celebrating Christmans and NYE tonight (none / 0) (#2)
    by McBain on Sat Dec 31, 2016 at 11:24:14 PM EST
    Due to minor illness, we postponed xmas.  After visiting my parents we are staying home tonight.....looking for something fun to watch.

    I gave up on Homeland last season.  It was great for a couple seasons, good for a couple more but I've had enough.

    Anyone see The OA yet?  

    We just got back... (none / 0) (#3)
    by desertswine on Sat Dec 31, 2016 at 11:57:13 PM EST
    from the movies, we went to see "Arrival."  It was very thought provoking, I recommend it.  We are now watching the Three Stooges Marathon on IFC.  Tomorrow we will have a big dinner with family.
    The champagne is on ice.

    My favorite Stooge is Shemp.  My least favorite is Trump.

    Got to see a double feature (none / 0) (#4)
    by McBain on Sun Jan 01, 2017 at 12:45:37 AM EST
    of Manchester By The Sea and Lala Land a few days ago and enjoyed both. Sounds like both will be best picture nominees.

    I'm the only one I know who didn't like The Arrival.  

    Rogue one was disappointing but but not entirely bad.  

    Trump and (none / 0) (#57)
    by KeysDan on Tue Jan 03, 2017 at 04:02:21 PM EST
    guest, "Joey No Socks" Cinque, at Sea and Lake (in the language of Mexico) New Years bash.

    I dropped Showtime (none / 0) (#82)
    by ruffian on Wed Jan 04, 2017 at 02:11:26 PM EST
    so I will miss out on Carrie this season. I really was mostly hate-watching most of the Showtime shows anyway, and it was not worth the money.

    I got into 'The Man in the High Castle' and am almost caught up. It's pretty good - I could quibble with some of the dialogue being clunky, but the performances are mostly good, especially Rufus Sewell, who I always love anyway.

    These days I do worry a little about even planting the seeds of a depiction of Nazis running the US these days. I would like to see Amazon's viewer statistics on this show.

    i quit after (none / 0) (#86)
    by linea on Wed Jan 04, 2017 at 08:08:14 PM EST
    "my boyfriend is being tortured by the Imperial Japanese... oops, i just had sex with a nazi double-agent."

    but maybe i should try again?

    Parent

    Chelsea Clinton's wedding CT (none / 0) (#83)
    by Yman on Wed Jan 04, 2017 at 03:17:53 PM EST
    Heard this wingnut conspiracy theory mite than a few times right before the election.  In the land of reality,  of course,  there's absolutely nothing to back it up,  but that doesn't stop the useful idiots from making $hit up ...

    Oy. (5.00 / 1) (#85)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Jan 04, 2017 at 07:30:51 PM EST
    It's enough to make you want to stop trying to convince people with evidence, and just slap them silly instead. Yeah, all right, I don't really mean that -- but sometimes it's sure fun to imagine it.

    Parent
    i like chelsea (none / 0) (#88)
    by linea on Wed Jan 04, 2017 at 08:26:27 PM EST
    i also like that she had an interfaith ceremony. ivamka's decision (yes, i know it was her choice) to take on her husband's orthodox religion may cause confusion for her children. in my opinion.

    Parent
    What? (none / 0) (#89)
    by RickyJim on Wed Jan 04, 2017 at 08:56:27 PM EST
    The children are being raised as Jewish Orthodox.  Do you think the children would be less confused if they are raised bi-religious?

    Parent
    yes (none / 0) (#92)
    by linea on Wed Jan 04, 2017 at 09:26:20 PM EST
    i feel they would be less confused if raised bi-religious. thank you for suggesting that option. isnt that what chelsea will do?

    i always have an unsettled feeling when a woman (may be) subsumed in a relationship or marriage.

    with regard to the children, it seems unfair to raise them as orthodox jewish when many jewish will not accept them (for a variet of reasons).

    im also not a fan of any fundamentalist or othodox religions in general.

    so yes, lots of issues.

    but really this topic rises to the level of chit-chat or inconsequential conversation for me. celebrity gossip. like talking about mariah carrey. so dont take this too seriously.

    just my feelings. 😀


    Parent

    Ohhhhhh ... (none / 0) (#93)
    by Yman on Wed Jan 04, 2017 at 09:27:13 PM EST
    ... kaaaay, then.

    Parent
    Well, today (none / 0) (#90)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jan 04, 2017 at 09:15:57 PM EST
    the orange idiot decided to once again side with Putin. A report is going to be released to the public on the 6th and more detailed classified reporting is going to others who I guess would be congress.

    sided with putin on what exactly? (none / 0) (#95)
    by linea on Wed Jan 04, 2017 at 09:56:36 PM EST
    i have not heard this news.

    it really is unprecidented in the modern era, the idea that (a country like russia) can annex and change the borders of an existing country. this is true even with my quibling issues with Euromaidan.

    this is why europe needs a European Defence Agreement independant of NATO and the EU-commerce-politic. or even better a serious Baltic-Nordic defense agreement. which will never happen as long as resourses are squandered on american-controlled NATO actions. i feel NATO and the EU defence treaties weaken countries like Norway, Finland, Estonia, and Latvia from cooperatively defending themselves. in my opinion.

    Parent

    According to some (none / 0) (#103)
    by TrevorBolder on Thu Jan 05, 2017 at 05:27:42 AM EST
    When Trump breathes, he agrees with Putin

    Parent
    There's (5.00 / 1) (#104)
    by FlJoe on Thu Jan 05, 2017 at 06:05:26 AM EST
    none so blind who will not see.

    PfuP

    Parent

    I suppose (none / 0) (#105)
    by TrevorBolder on Thu Jan 05, 2017 at 06:14:41 AM EST
    I will wait and actually see how US policies are crafted.

    Parent
    Yep (5.00 / 1) (#108)
    by FlJoe on Thu Jan 05, 2017 at 08:03:32 AM EST
    just put on the blinders and "wait and see".

    PufP

    Parent

    Of course (none / 0) (#107)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Jan 05, 2017 at 07:51:42 AM EST
    you would say that. Repeated evidence from the intelligence community with regards to Trump is completely discarded by Republicans and now Trump wants to dismantle the intelligence agencies.

    Lindsay Graham says 99% of congress believes Trump is a Putin stooge but are too afraid to admit it. Keep puckering up for Putin, Trevor and putting on that Russian Red lipstick.

    Parent

    i would be in favor of (none / 0) (#122)
    by linea on Thu Jan 05, 2017 at 08:31:03 PM EST
    dismantling the intelligence agencies.
    they dont really belong in a democracy.

    Parent
    Democracies have no need ... (none / 0) (#125)
    by Yman on Thu Jan 05, 2017 at 08:59:33 PM EST
    .. to gather intelligence?

    What?!?

    Parent

    nope (none / 0) (#128)
    by linea on Thu Jan 05, 2017 at 09:16:03 PM EST

    • Army Intelligence during actual wars.
    • National Criminal Investigation (FBI) for threats domestically.

    that's all we need.

    how large is the "intelligence community" now compared to the 1960s at the height of the "red scare"? twenty times larger? thirty times larger? it's absurd whatever it is.

    Parent

    So (5.00 / 1) (#140)
    by FlJoe on Fri Jan 06, 2017 at 06:35:27 AM EST
    then, we must blind ourselves to what is happening in the rest of the world? Should we ignore what the likes of Kim Jong-un are up to?

    IMO we could do without most or all of the covert action BS, but the actual gathering of information is indispensable.

     

    Parent

    i agree (none / 0) (#151)
    by linea on Fri Jan 06, 2017 at 07:37:41 PM EST
    that it would be prudent for the Army Intelligence Units of south korea and japan to monitor the north korean military.

    america's intelligence gathering is a massive intrusion on americans, angels merkel's cellphone, everyone. there is no need for that. it is spying for spying's sake; because they can.

    Parent

    Lol (none / 0) (#152)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Jan 06, 2017 at 07:47:05 PM EST
    We are the primary protection forces for South Korea and Japan

    Parent
    yes (none / 0) (#153)
    by linea on Fri Jan 06, 2017 at 08:30:24 PM EST
    but you don't NEED to be.

    japan is fully capable of funding and maintaining modern army and naval forces. as is south korea.

    Parent

    well (none / 0) (#154)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Jan 06, 2017 at 09:02:23 PM EST
    That is what The Donald says,
    That maybe they should get their own nukes as well

    And everyone went crazy.

    But the underlying point was The Donald said Japan should arm itself, or pay us for protection

    Parent

    So wait until you're ... (none / 0) (#132)
    by Yman on Thu Jan 05, 2017 at 09:21:24 PM EST
    ... involved in an actual war before gathering intelligence.

    That's nice you think that's "all we need", but it's not.

    Parent

    Excuse me (none / 0) (#139)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Jan 06, 2017 at 06:02:26 AM EST
    But Google is running their own intelligence agency, gathering information on every user of their services.
    Nah, if private companies have their own intelligence agencies, our country should as well.
    A necessary evil in todays world

    Parent
    Unbelievable (none / 0) (#126)
    by MKS on Thu Jan 05, 2017 at 09:01:02 PM EST
    What a sh*t show.

    What can you say.

    Parent

    The intelligence (none / 0) (#106)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Jan 05, 2017 at 07:48:51 AM EST
    on Russia. Trump believes Assange and praises him while attempting to discredit the intelligence community.

    Parent
    I can't begrudge California any relief ... (none / 0) (#112)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jan 05, 2017 at 03:37:59 PM EST
    ... from its long drought, but this has certainly been a rather soggy vacation for us. It rained again in Pasadena last night and this morning, and another huge storm system -- estimated to be the strongest in a decade -- is about to hit this weekend, while we're in the Bay Area. We're flying up to San Francisco later this afternoon, and will be returning to Hilo (via LAX) Sunday night.

    Dershowitz has written at least 3 books (none / 0) (#113)
    by Green26 on Thu Jan 05, 2017 at 04:58:17 PM EST
    on Israel and the peace process, written articles and spoken on the subject many times. He is an expert on the subject, like it or not, agree with him or not. Some article on possible plagiarism in one book does not impact whether he is an expert.

    I do way more homework than you do. You are often longwinded, but your research and citations are usually very narrow, not relevant, and/or grossly outdated.

    I also know a lot more about Israel than you appear to know, and I know I have better sources.

    When someone disagrees with you, you often get mad or run and hide.

    So says the guy who takes personal cheap shots. (5.00 / 1) (#138)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jan 05, 2017 at 10:50:57 PM EST
    If you have to resort to doing that, then you've pretty much lost the debate. I know who I am and what I'm about, and I have confidence in my own knowledge. As a now-doctoral candidate in history and U.S. foreign policy, I've likely studied this particular issue a lot longer than have you, and I stand by everything I've said.

    And if you do know more about Israel than do the rest of us, well, given what you've written thus far over the course of two threads, you've sure had me fooled. From what I've seen here, most everyone who's taken issue with your position has demonstrated some knowledge and insight about the subject, whereas you have merely, repeatedly and often arrogantly insisted that everyone's wrong but you.

    What you're now insisting that we do is consider the UN resolution separately from Israeli settlement policy, which is absurd on its face, since that resolution so happens to be about that very policy. You clearly don't understand the nature and premise of public policy development, and you further refuse to acknowledge the crucial role that history has played and continues to play in the Middle East, hich is particularly unfortunate given that the people involved have awfully long memories and tend to hold grudges for several generations.

    Rather, you've approached this entire matter from the standpoint of our own domestic politics and more specifically, your own personal political orientation, which is a dubious premise in any event. As a result, you've crafted your position on the fly and then scrambled afterward to find sources which might support it, such as Prof. Dershowitz. I'd lay better than even odds that you've probably never even read his book, The Case for Israel, whereas I have.

    Now, this is the last I'm going to say on this matter because I feel like I've been blog-clogging over the course of two entire threads in an often frustrated response to your nonsense, and I'm sure Jeralyn's getting annoyed by all the back and forth. So, I'm going to enjoy my last few days in California and sign off for the duration. Don't bother to respond.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    See? The prefect example ... (none / 0) (#127)
    by Yman on Thu Jan 05, 2017 at 09:04:31 PM EST
    ... of a baseless, unsubstantiated opinion.

    Now you just need to work on using the reply button so that your post shows as a reply to the parent comment, rather than as a new post/comment.

    Parent

    Happy New Years (For Real) and Open Thread | 157 comments (157 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment