Thursday, April 29, 2004

War in Iraq has gone just fine this month: 133 invaders dead,
1000 wounded. In whole war, about 850 invaders dead, at
least 5000 wounded. Should be enough that the Anglo-Saxons
don´t organize new crusades to Iran and Syria when this mess
is over.

I have nothing against "humanitarian wars", on the contrary,
I support them. For example, intervention in Darfur and the
defeat of Arab militias, intervention in Palestine and the defeat
of Israel, the kicking of Morocco out of Western Sahara and
the ending of Burma´s military dictatorship(in power since 1962)
would all be wars that I would support. But the war against
Iraq was about oil, Israel and neocon obsessions.

A humanitarian war in Iraq would have been justified in 1988,
when maybe 30 000 Kurds were killed in the ANFAL campaign,
or during the 1991 Kurd and Shia uprising. But in 1988 Iraq
was still on the "good side" and in 1991 realpoltik dictated that
the Baath party should remain in power.


These misperceptions are pillars of Bush's support,
according to a study by the University of Maryland:
57 % of those surveyed "believe that before the war
Iraq was providing substantial support to al-Qaida",
and 45% "believe that evidence that Iraq was supporting
al-Qaida has been found". Moreover, 65% believe that
"experts" have confirmed that Iraq had WMD.


Sidney Blumenthal:Pulp fictions triumph over truth,
The Guardian 29.04.2004.

US Republicans have been claiming some time, that US
presidents "should not be too wise". No wonder, after all,
their is the party of Gerald Ford, Ronald Reagan, George
Bush I and II and vice presidents Spiro Agnew and Dan Quale.

But nowadays it seems, that the the saying should probably
go "Presidents should not be too wise, and the voters
shouldn´t be too wise either."

After all, there are two possible explanations for these kind
of poll results: a)Americans are mostly liars, they either know
the facts but choose lies that suite them better, or they don´t
have sufficient knowledge and choose the more "patriotic"
answer b) Lack of intelligence, stupidity.

I saw a gallup half a year ago, which stated that 59% of those
Americans that voted George Bush II in the 2000 elections,
claimed that they didn´t follow news at all. Not at all.

Wednesday, April 28, 2004

I have been reading Alistair Reynolds novel "Redemption
Ark"(2003) and found it disappointing. It´s not a bad
book, but "Revelation Space", "Chasm City" and
"Diamond Dogs & Turquoise Days" were better.

"Redemption Ark" would have needed huge amounts of
editing and re-writing. As I read it, one famous horror
author comes to my mind - Stephen King. "Redemption
Ark" feels like it would be a space opera written by Stephen
King. It moves slowly, has sideplots that are pretty useless,
has useless minor characters who simply haven´t that
much to do with the plot, it´s main characters act stupidly,
the characters feel flatter than in the previous books. It´s
not a bad book, it´s just that it feels like the author has
cobbled it together with great pain from parts that have
little to do with each other. And there´s too many infodumps
where previous happenings in the Inhibitor universe are
retold. Reynolds could have put a chronology and a little
explanation in the form "what happened before" on the
first pages of the book, it would have achieved the same
results in a better way.

I have now read 430 pages of the book and for all that
has happened, the plot has moved about as much as the
British forces in the battle of the Somme. It´s not a bad
book, but "Chasm City" was a masterpiece and it´s not.

Sunday, April 25, 2004

Greek Cypriots don´t seem to understand that there is
such a thing as a last chance. Yesterdays referendum was
such a last chance. They think that they can get a better
deal in the future, but what they are getting is one more
sad chapter to the list of Greek losses in the last centur
in the eastern Mediterranean. They compete for the title
of the biggest loser in the geopolitical game of the area
and would be my choice for the title.

What the Greek Cypriots don´t understand is, that fairness
and justice are good things, but you have to be able to make
compromises.

This would have been a good deal for them; the Turkish
Cypriots would have been the losers in every way. Yes,
not all refugees would have been able to go home, but
this rarely happens after any conflict, and surely after 30
years of living as exiles, those that could have gone home
should have been given the right to do so. A truly unified
Cyprus, where everybody could live where they wanted,
would have slowly emerged. But principles meant more
than reality for the blind Greek Cypriots.

Northern Cyprus will soon be a part of mainland Turkey, in
all possible ways. After Rauf Denktash finally dies, his republic
can´t live long after him, except maybe in theory. Then the
Greek Cypriots will regret their decision. But now they
celebrate - a defeat.

Thursday, April 22, 2004

In the last week, two dozen Palestinians have died in Israeli
attacks. At the same time, only one Israeli have died in
Palestinian attacks. He was a police officer. Of the Palestinian
dead, at least five are children. 95 have been wounded, large
part of them teenagers and other children.

How the West would weep if these would be children of
Israeli Jews... Foreign ministers would be thundering on
their condemnation of terrorism. But when Israeli terrorists
in uniforms murder children, the West at best meekly condemns
the aggression, before declaring that "Israel has the right to
defend itself."

But in this they are wrong. Serial killers, like the Israelis,
have no right to defend themselves. They have a right
to stop their crimes and repent, or face the consequences
of their actions.

Of course, the Israelis believe that there isn´t a force on this
planet which could end their crimes and bring them to justice.
They think that every day they are doing the perfect crime,
never having to be afraid of getting caught, because nobody
in the position to challenge them has the courage to do so.
Ordinary people have every right to pass judgment on
"great" persons, because they seldom judge themselves.
Or at least, they don´t judge themselves harshly,
considering mercy to be more important than justice,
when they themselves are considered.
It is a pity that D. H. Lawrence(1885-1930) died so soon,
because if he would have lived to the end of the Thirties, he
would have most likely embraced Fascism, sung the praises
of Nazis, and so would be seen today as the bastard he was.

Like many other persons of humble birth, he hated the people
of the class he was born in, worshipped the elite and hoped
nothing more than to be accepted among them. To gain their
admiration and to distance himself from his past, he was more
elitist than anyone born in elite could be. Even a snob like `Miss´
Evelyn Waugh(1903-66) had a more balanced view of English
working class - about as balanced as any writer of Socialist
realism had of the bourgeois - than the one which Lawrence
brought forward in his writings.

It would have been just if he would have never been able to
escape the bleak landscape of his birth.

It´s curious thing to read the texts of a man who has died over
70 years ago and hate him as much I hate Lawrence every time
I read him. Yet, I fully believe he totally deserves it; he was part
of the disease that gave birth to Nazism, another bastard child
of Nietsche, a sign of his times.

He was a great writer, but like many other great writers, his
greatness was solely confined to his art.
As long as Israel doesn´t recognize that all of Gaza and West
Bank belong to the Palestinians, that East Jerusalem belongs to
them, as long as Israel continues occupy them Israel don´thave
a right to exist. If you deny from others rights that you demand
to be given to you, you don´t deserve them. There can´t be two
rules for two people, as the majority of Israelis seem to believe,
and as the western countries cowardly accept.

If there will be no real, viable Palestinian state in the Gaza and
West Bank, only nominally "independent" collection of bantustans,
then should be no Jewish in Palestine either. And there shall be
none such thing, if the plans of the current Israeli, American and
British leaderships go through.

There is two choices: Either a unified, heterogenous state in all
of Palestine or two independent, viable states of Israel and Palestine.
And the current plans of the Western Axis of Evil give no room for
this. Whatever the future cost in human lives, a unified state will
wait in the future if Israel will not withdraw fully from the West Bank.



According to the World Banks American director James
Wolfensohn- tells AFP - the Palestinians "will get back 50% of
their area". By this Wolfensohn means Gaza and less than half
of West Bank. Wolfensohn says that the World Bank is ready
to help the creation of Greater Israel by helping to build bantustans
in West Bank, giving 500-2000 million dollars to this mission, which
according to him "will bring back hope." Oddly he doesn´t mean
that this will bring back hope to fanatic supporters of Greater Israel,
but to the Palestinians. He seems to have a sick sense of humor.

I hope that James Wolfensohn loses all his limbs. I promise I will sent
him a one euro and few cents to help in his medical bills, if my wish
comes true.
By the way, how many current female
Israeli politicians you can name?
Bush probably thought that the Arabs, Muslims and large part
of the other people of Earth didn´t hate the US enough, so he
had to throw one show more in support of the aged Sumo
wrestler that rulers Israel.

Does he think that the whole world will now rush to sing the
praise of Ariel and give him free hand to slice himself huge
pieces of the West Bank? Or is this just rhetorical bullshit
for the local folk, part of his campaign to get four years more
to create as much death and destruction as possible? He might
not even know himself.

And what Bush said about "peaceful Palestine" - we need a
peaceful Israel in the Middle East, but we will never see it! There
will be no peace, because the majority of the Israelis don´t want
peace and they don´t want peace, because they frankly haven´t
suffered enough! They haven´t grown tired of the violence and
are still seeking to grab huge chunk of West Bank. If they really
would want only peace and etc then they would just leave the
occupied areas and go home. But they don´t.

After the latest Bush praise for Sharon ("The world must
support Sharon... The world must thank Sharon") I have just
one, modest wish: Could some people go and "extrajudicially
assasinate" them both?

Sharon is a monster, a being that lacks humanity. Bush is a
twat in a wrong place.

I bought yesterday Ian R. MacLeod´s "The Light Ages"(2004,
originally 2003), which is a mix of alternative history and fantasy in
the modern vein á la China Mieville&company. It has been highly
praised, was relatively cheap and had a beautiful cover, so I bought it.

I very rarely read alternative history - the whole concept is not
to my taste, to put it mildly. Somehow I just don´t like the idea
that things could be otherwise - maybe because history as it is
is a pretty slippery thing and - more than people usually
understand - really a more like "current interpretation of past
events" than "a chronological collection of solid facts". Every
historical era is like a huge jiggsaw puzzle that has lost large part
of it´s pieces. You have to fill in the holes, and getting to
consensus can be very hard - or impossible.

Writers of alternative history have a very mechanical view
of history and human society - and it´s also usually old time
macrohistory, of princes and emperors and empires. Of course,
it really has to be, because it´s just fiction and these kind of
themes produce of course good plots (there´s of course
alternative history from the ordinary person´s viewpoint, but
even then alternative history the person lives is a consequence
of something that happened or did not happen to some Very
Important Person). But I don´t like it. I like space operas (like
the work of Alastair Reynolds, whose "Redemption Ark"(mine
2003, orginally 2002) I also bought yesterday), I like fantasy
worlds invented from scratch (or stolen from Tolkien), but
alternative history - rarely. I hope that "The Light Ages" will be
an exception.



Winning a war against "terrorism" is impossible; especially
so if your side is also using terror as a weapon.

Wednesday, April 21, 2004

In Iraq, the Americans with their slave states slaughter Iraqis
to free them from dictatorship and guerillas who fight the
invaders slaughter Iraqis to free them from foreign occupation.

It´s same for the person who dies whatever noble goal his or
her´s killer had in mind when caused his or her´s death.


"For some bizarre reason, Bush continues to play out
the role that Osama bin Laden has scripted for him."

Matthew Rotschild:Sharon, Bush, Kerry Subjugate Palestinians,
The Progressive(http://www.progressive.org/), through
www.commondreams.org.

Well, it´s benefial to both sides, Bush and bin Laden (at least
they think so).

Bush gets to do what he wants to do(conquer Iraq, meddle
with the Middle East, win second term) and bin Laden gets
his big confrontation between "Christendom" and Islam.
Both of course think that they will in the end emerge
victorious.


More "Bush gets votes by supporting Israel" stuff: Boston Globe
writes that Bush "likes" that Arab-Americans "denounce [his] ...
move." (http://www.boston.com/news/politics/president/articles/
2004/04/18/bushs_beatability_factor/). Because it´s going to
bring him votes from Jews and those that except that the existence
of the state of Israel is a sign of the end of the world and a return
of a Jewish rabbi executed by Romans 2000 years ago.

Let´s see: Bush alienates Arab-Americans, of whom 33%
supported him last year to get votes from Jewish-Americans,
of whom 10% supported him in the last elections and also to
get votes from Protestant fundamentalists, who would all vote
for him anyway, the fanatic imbeciles that they are.

Sounds really stupid, but it could be working according to the
latest polls. More likely, the few points he has gained are the
usual "support the president in a bad time" extra points every
American president gains when things fall apart (and loses, if
the situation doesn´t improve soon). Odd that he hasn´t gained
more, really. 4-6 points only.

I really don´t think that he´s going to win many more Jewish
votes because of his geopolitical blunder. After all, John Kerry
will deliver everything that Bush the Meak can, and he ha
Jewish roots.

Christian fundamentalists would be funny if they wouldn´t have
any power. Even clowns are dangerous when they can control
what the government does.

Elections in India seem to be going on in the usual fashion:
19 dead this far.

Tuesday, April 20, 2004

Israelis have been on their favorite hobby again: Killing
innocent people.

But we should not judge the Chosen People of the God
by mere mortal terms and say this is wrong, as they have
a right to do this, granted both by an invisible supernatural
being and the Fundamentalist States of America.
The situation in Afghanistan is like in the Roman empire in
476-534: The area of the former western empire was ruled
by German kings, who officially were local representatives of
the East Roman emperor, who gave them Roman titles. In
reality, the loyal subjects were independent operators. Of
course this is a strained analogy (another strained would be
Japan after the Onin war of 1467-77; the powerless emperor
lived in Kyoto, and the powerless shogun lived in Edo(Tokyo)
and daimyos ruled different parts of the country as they pleased).

But, Afghanistan is not a state at the moment; it´s an area,
where a former state has broken up into pretty much independent
provinces - whose own rulers, the warlords aka governors, are
themselves unable to totally control them, which gives the Taliban
room to operate.


Erasmus of Rotterdam(circa 1465-1536) said to his opponents,
that "You think you are Christians, but you are not even human
beings."

I think that there is now a very large number of people who keep
huge noise about their Christianity and use it for political goals,
economical or other earthly goals, and yet they are not truly
Christians nor human beings; after all, Christianity, to me at least,
is a religion of peace and humility, whose founder declared that one
should not answer to evil by evil, but by turning the other cheek.
But many Christians forsake this, and believe that the sword that
he said he brought to Earth was to be taken literally.

Being human is about being a moral animal, capable of feeling
empathy towards all people, whatever their background. Thus many
people all around the world, who think that they are Christians are
neither good Christians, nor human beings.


Monday, April 19, 2004

After the White House´s statement today, that Hamas "must be
got of out business" I can´t but wonder what kind of logic drives
the United States government to do it´s best to create new
enemies against the United States?

It sounds like a conspiration theory, but does the United States
government try to gain even more support for Israel inside the
United States by getting Hamas to strike against American targets?
After all, Bush the Inferior and his Mistress Rice have been declaring
in the recent days that "Hamas equals Al-Qaida".

Or it can be just pure stupidity, to them ordinary licking of Israeli
ass, whose consequences the American government is uncapable
of understanding. John Kerry has been claiming that he has
supported 100% Israel and that his "record" proves it. White
House then must declare it´s loyalty to Tel Aviv, whatever
consequenses these idiocies cause among the billion muslims of
the world.

To foreigner it is very odd how much weight the main contenders
for the presidency think that Israel has in the United States. One
would think that they are running for president of some "Friends
of Israel" organisation and not the United States.



Sunday, April 18, 2004

I really don´t get this claim in American media that Bush gifted
West Bank to queen Ariel to "get Jewish votes" which could win
him some state.

A year ago, 33% of Arab-Americans supported Bush. Now
when he loses these votes, he could lose some state.

At best, he´s facing a scenario where the votes he loses are
balanced by the votes he gets.

Maybe Bush is trying to get Jewish votes. But there really ain´t
so many Jews in the United States, except in movies and
television series. Bush would use his time better trying to catch
Latino votes, like he did in last elections.

Saturday, April 17, 2004

Abdel Aziz al-Rantissi´s death doesn´t bring any tears to my eyes.
But murder is no solution. And three other people, one of them
bystander, died too.

I do sincerely hope that the leaders of Israel will get the same
treatment they are so eager to give to others. If they think that it
is their right to kill people without trial, so let their own fate be the
same.

Eye for an eye, ear for an ear. That´s after all is the favorite
recipe of Israel´s own leadership. Endless spiral of blood.
Hopefully they will one day find out what it´s like to lie in pool
of your own blood, dying.

Almost 4000 people have died because of them in the last three
and a half years, after Sharon stormed the al-Aqsa mosque. It
would be time for him to by for his crimes with his own life. Because
fact is, he will never face trial. Not even for his shady business
dealings - George the Simple´s gift pretty much ensured that.

Now Israel´s leadership waves a red flag before Hamas.

After the latest mass show of cowardice by the EU foreign ministers
I have little hint for the leaders of the European Unionin: If they
want the European Unionin to be a one of the leading powers in
the world and compete with the Fundamentalist States of America
for world hegemony, then they have to start acting like one.

They will not wake up one morning and find out that they are
leaders of a political and economic superpower, but they will be
if they start acting like they are.

Power is not granted, it can be taken, but it can also be created.
And as long as the European Union is scared with lilliput states like
Israel and doesn´t challenge the crumbling hegemony of the USA,
then they will be a paper tiger. A microscopic paper tiger.
American newspapers claim that George Walker Bush gifted the
West Bank to queen Ariel because he wants Jewish votes.

In the last elections, 90% of those American Jews that voted,
voted Al Gore. Ok, he had Lieberman as his vice presidential
candidate (which probably lost him enough votes in Florida
to make George the Simple the president), but now American
Jews can vote John Kerry, who would be the first American
president with Jewish roots. He promises to support loyally
Israel and he´s liberal, like most of American Jewish voters.
And George Bush Senior was nasty to Israel and didn´t always
obey it´s commands.

So, does Bush the Lesser get Jewish votes because of this gift?
Probably not.

And the Christian fundamentalists(they make up 25% of the
voters), another group which the newspapers have claimed will
vote for him now even more eagerly, would havel voted him for
almost 100% anyway.

The claim that this "major geopolitical achievement" (as it has
been called), will give him votes from the "average" voters is pretty
much nonsense too: Bush could grant Israel half of Eurasia and
they wouldn´t care about it, one way or another, and so we can be
pretty sure that the elections hadn´t got to do anything with
Bush´s generous gift.

What did have todo were his stupidity and the fanaticism of those
he "trusts" - people who tell him what to do - like Condoleezza Rice
and the rest of the ministers and advisers loyal to Tel Aviv.
"One of the real motives for the invasion of Iraq was to give the
world a demonstration of American power. It's a measure of how
badly things have gone that now we're told we can't leave because
that would be a demonstration of American weakness."

Paul Krugman:The Vietnam Analogy,
The New York Times 16.04.2004.

What would happen if now China would invade Taiwan and North
Korea would invade South Korea? What could United States to
do to support these client states - except launch nukes and let
them die along with tens of millions of other Asians (and few
million Americans that the Chinese nuclear missiles could kill -
more would die later because of the radiation)?

Basically United States army is in the Middle East. United States
has now no capability to operate in a global scale, if the operation
demands large numbers of foot soldiers and other troops.





I hope for all my heart that United States attacks Najaf and Kerbala
and causes terrible damages to the mosques in these towns. Then
whole Iraq would rise against the invaders and Bush&Blair could
start writing their memoirs, because they would be politically dead.
The loss of Iraqi lives would be huge, but it will be huge anyway.
The invaders will have to be driven away sometime and if they are
driven away now, it will end their projects of attacking Iran and Syria.

Friday, April 16, 2004

Tony Blair is like a dumb character in some comedy, who is always
being tricked by a fellow he thinks is his friend and only wants
good for him; so, he is endlessly humiliated in public, being laughed
by everybody, and doesn´t understand it himself.

That´s the relationship between Tony and George. Of course, George
is an idiot, who is unable to read, so the boss of CIA has to read
his briefs to him. So Tony´s humiliation is so much greater; being
humiliated by a village idiot, a smart man likee him; how it its
possible? How can he stand it? Doesn´t he really understand it?

Does he really take Winston Churchill´s snub (that forced to
choose between The United States and France, the UK will always
choose siding with the United States) to de Gaulle during the
Second World War that seriously? "Stand by your Man" must be
Tony´s favorite song.

So, he´s endlessly abused, betrayed and humiliated. And still he
battles on, ever the trusty foot soldier of the Americans, who laugh
to him behind his back. For his support he gets nothing. For all the
trouble that he had caused to the United States, Ariel Sharon gets
to do with the West Bank what he wants to.

Maybe Tony should just be more like Ariel. Stabbing the Americans
in their back every chance he gets, sabotaging their plans claiming
he has got their permission. Maybe then the Americans would
respect him and he could too be feted in Washington the way Ariel
just was.

Thursday, April 15, 2004

United States gracious gift to Greater Israel should not be so
surprising to me. After all, they have already served Western
Sahara to Morocco and destroyed the 1989 peace agreement
there. Same script.

And I do hate Morocco too. I would not be disappointed if one
fine morning the rising Sun would find Muhammed VI hanged
from the minaret of the giant mosque his father build in
Casablanca.
Czar Vladimir´s adviser Andrey Illarionov claims that the Kyoto
protocol is "economical Auschwitz" and that it will kill "international
economy".

He is little bit off the track there. The whole humanity, so to speak,
are prisoners of Oscwiezcim and mister Illarionov and his master
are the among the guards. Sending huge number of people,
probably billions, to their death, for their own (supposed) gain.

The climate change won´t go away. It will happen. The question is,
how large the change will be. It can be relatively minor or it can be
catastrophic. And all depends from us, human beings.

And that´s why I am so pessimistic about our changes. Humanity
has an uncanny ability not to act according to it´s own interests.

All these Illarionovs should be ferried to some Pacific atoll that´s
barely above sea level and there personally experience the climate
change. By drowning.
John Kerry claims that Bush´s gift for queen Ariel "is a positive
step", but that "the most important thing is the safety of the
state of Israel."

Utterly and totally stupid garbage. Well, it seems that Israel
don´t have to worry if Georgie boy gets beaten in November;
the pretender is already tightly in their leash.
Israeli-loving American politicians often claim that Arab countries
should give part of their land for the Palestinians to live on, so
that the übermensch could "live in peace" in the land that a
supernatural being - so they claim - promised to them.

Why not establish a Jewish state in the continental United States?
There they could live in the safe bosom of America, far away from
the evils of the world!

And why not two? One for the orthodox Jews and one for the
secular ones (so that problem would be solved too). In the
traditional American way, you could make them tourist attractions.
Let´s say a modern New Jerusalem for the secular Jews and a
for example 1st century BC or AD Jerusalem for the orthodox ones.
All in the open prairies of the west!






There can´t be peace in the Middle East long as the collection
of human waste that Israel is, exists.

Wednesday, April 14, 2004

And now Blair tells that he will make his best to get the Secretary
General of the United Nations Kofi Annan to be Israel´s lapdog, just
like he himself is.

The delusional Blair claims that this is a great new chance to peace.
There´s Neville Chamberlain for our age.

In the Brazilian Amazon, members of a native tribe have killed
35 prospectors, who had come to their land.

That´s the way to go.
Qureia pleads for the help of the other members of the "quartet",
but he will plead in vain.

They will all demand that the Palestinians surrender and give to
Israel what it demands.

They are all afraid of Israel.

It is ridiculous to claim that Jews don´t rule the world.

After all, the last time I checked, Israel still claimed to be a
Jewish state.

No Elders of Zion. Just tiny fly´s shit on the map, that makes all
the great powers of the world to dance in the tune it plays.
If the ruling idiot of White House wanted "boldness and
courageous" answer from Palestinians, then Qureai gave it:
"We refuse it and we reject it."

Good. Now if so major power would back him and his cabinet...

No one?

No one is seen. No one is heard.

Seems that the haven of eternally suffering Jews will have free
hand to do whatever they want.

Hapless Tony has pledged his loyalty to queen Ariel and has
declared his support for the creation of Greater Likudia.

Is he really sane or has he some kind of mental ilness that
makes him uncapable of independent decisions in foreign policy?

Why does he seek the rise of Muslim hatred against the United
Kingdom?

To please George? To please George.

Harold Wilson had the courage to say "no" when America came
asking British troops to be sent to Vietnam. After Harold, "no"
hasn´t been part of the vocabulary of British prime ministers
when dealing with the United States.


The United States is trying to drive the Palestinians into a trap.
If they refuse to accept Bush´s gift to queen Ariel, they will be
denounced as the bad side who dosn´t want to negotiate with
the peace-loving, humanist government of Israel.

But if they accept future negotiations, they will have to accept
the loss of right of return and large part of the West Bank!
Catch-22!

The Americans and their Israeli overlords think they are so smart...

And so, another wave of violence in the Middle East. I wouldn´t
be surprised, if one or two Arab governments friendly to the
United States would be gone by the end of the year.

But there seems to be no price that the United States isn´t
ready to pay for the creation of Greater Israel.
George Walker Bush demands Palestinians "to respond to
the boldness and courage of Israelis". By giving away large
chunk of the little land of their still held? Would that be
"boldness and courage"? In my vocabulary, that would be
capitulation.

The United States political elite, human garbage, is allways
mouthing about the Münich in 1938 and how you should
never accept any deals like that. Well, to me this is Münich
1938: Little guy is forced to give away large part of their
land, because major power is not interested to challenge the
bastards. In 1938 the bastards were Nazis, in 2004 Israelis.

I hope that the Palestinians answer to Bush´s shit talk by killing
as many Israelis a possible. That would be a just answer. In the
spirit of the Old Testament.

Israel is a colonialist monstrosity, a racist apartheid state. It´s
majority population don´t want any kind of realistic peace deal.
They always demand more and more. Since Oslo in 1993 they
over doubled the size of the settlements in the West Bank. That
shows how much they want peace. Their heads are full of human
urine.

The only way to deal with them is by use of arms. They think
that when the other side is ready to negotiate, they can set
the terms of any peace deal. And good old Uncle Sam will
stop others to intering with their ongoing crimes.

Israelis should all go to Hell - or to the United States, which
is in the end pretty much the same thing.
There will be plenty anti-American, anti-Israeli and anti-Jewish
violence around the world in the coming days, weeks and months.
George Walker Bush and his administration can proudly take the
credit for all of it after today.

United States destroyed all hope of peace in Palestine today.

What next? Encouraging Russia to withdraw it´s troops from other
parts of Georgia by granting Abhasia and Southern Ossetia to Russia?

As new nonsense of the Turin shroud gets headlines, it´s
good to remember that Christianity is about faith. Not
evidence. True Christians should not need the face of
their Saviour miracuously imprinted in a piece of old cloth;
they should just believe. After all religion is not science, it´s
not about what is true, but what feels true, what we are
able to believe, even if it seems impossible.

Religion that needs Turin shroud for people to believe in it
is a religion of the Apostle Thomas.

Can United States be called a "Christian country"? After all,
it´s residents may think that Jesus Christ is their favorite
philosopher, but usually they are far more fond of the Old
Testament and seem to enjoy to read from the New Testament
mainly The Book of Revelations.

The massacres, murders, betrayals, incestuous rapes and
other gory stuff in the Old Testament seem to be more to
their taste than their "favorite philosopher´s" teachings of
turning to other cheek.

After the 11.09.2001 attacks the United States leadership,
whose most often used word seems to be "God", wanted
revenge in their public speeches and told the citizens that
they would revenge the atrocities.

Doesn´t sound pretty Christian to me.

True Christians would have prayed that God would make
people responsible to the attacks to see the error of their
ways and repent.

True Christians would have prayed for the salvation of Osama
bin Laden and his followers.

"...senior US commanders have visited Israel specifically to
discuss what the Pentagon jargon calls "Military Operations
on Urban Terrain"."

Jonathan Marcus:Analysis: US 'emulates' Israeli tactics,
BBC(http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3625315.stm),
14.04.2004.

And the United States senate has passed a resolution in which
it praises Israeli help in training American troops to oppress
Arabs in their own land in truly Judeo-Christian manner.

Of course, according to the United States, it´s Israel who is in
need of help. Like overprotective parents, who never see their
children as adults, the Americans never seem to understand,
that the Israelis are not almost skeletal survivor just saved
from destruction camps, but the biggest military power in
the Eastern Mediterranean, Middle East and large part of Asia!

No, to the Americans they are always helpless Jews in need of
rescue by the Americans, whose duty to their God is to act as
un-Christian manner as possible to protect Israel from it´s
victims.

Israel needs no rescue from it´s neighbours. It´s victims need
rescue. But it´s far easier to support one of the world´s
strongest military powers, imagining it to be threatened, than
to support it´s victims.

Maybe Israel needs rescuing. From itself and from the friendship
of the United States.

Runciman wrote about the Crusader states, that one of their
major weaknesses was that even if ther leadership was ready
to "go native" and be in peace with their neighbours, they
couldn´t because of the Latin Christendom, which was always
organising crusades and sending crusaders and preaching
against the destruction of the infidels etc. Crusader states
had to go along. And perish.

Too eager friends can be deadly.
Reading the newest articles of the United States leaderships support
for Biblical Utopia´s need for lebensraum, I can´t but wonder why,
oh why the United States almost always supports the big bully and
can´t resist the temptation and go himself kick the little fella lying
in the ground?

In the 1990´s I thought that United States was starting to get rid
of this, but alas! I was wrong.

The United States has returned to it´s roots, after a small retour to
the side of the Good. The power of the Dark Side was too strong.
After Ariel Sharon has ended his latest tour on which he entertains
his loyal fans in the New World, will the hapless prime minister of
England arrive to once again plead that the masters of the White
House would give him something as a reward for his loyal support
to their cause.

He will get vague promises that will be broken as the previous ones
were; after all, why should they be kept? The worshippers of Israel
know that not Tony Blair nor Howard or Kennedy or any other possible
future prime minister of Great Britain will leave their side; they are
ready to sacrifice themselves for the occupants of the White House,
Republicans or Democrats.

In the White House the British prime ministers are viewed as loyal
sidekicks, at best; more likely like loyal, old black slaves in movies
that glorify the South that never was. You don´t have to reward
them - to serve you is a reward enough for them!

And so Tony will come, plead and beg. He will be praised, but he will
got nothing. But why should he? The one who comes after him will
be as loyal, and will be praised too - but they too will not get
anything.

But queen Ariel - well, he will flying back to Biblical Utopia with a
big chunk of West Bank with him!

(And yes, Ronnie did have crush with Maggie; but he didn´t care
what she said. "Don´t occupy Grenada", Maggie said, but Ronnie
occupied Grenada, and what did Maggie do? She swallowed it like
a good girl!")

Tuesday, April 13, 2004

The New York Times writes today under the headline "Gaza First, but
Not Last":

"The United States cannot allow Mr. Sharon to maneuver it into
sanctioning an indefinite Israeli occupation of the West Bank."

The problem with this is that the United States doesn´t have to
be maneuvered to sanction this; it´s pretty willing to sanction it
without Israeli manouvering. After all, the leaders of the United
States see themselves as loyal supporters of Israel. In the failed
negotiations in 2001 president Clinton was - according to Israeli
negoatiators - no neutral third party, but more hawkish than the
Israeli negotiators themselves; they had to calm him down.

The problem with Palestine is that the United States is more
pro-Israel than most Israelis and that the European Union is
acting weaker than it is, to it´s own misery. United States may be
quite happy to sponsor eternal Israeli oppression of Palestinians,
but the European Union really needs peace on it´s neighbouring
areas and rising tension between Islam and "Christendom" will
have bigger effect in Europe than in the Fundamentalist States
of America.
Why the leaders of the United States have this obsession of
"nation building"? South Vietnam and now Iraq and the noises
they make about Japan and Germany?

Well, they didn´t do any "nation building" in Japan and Germany.
Those nations existed before the Allied occupation; that was the
reason of the success. In Japan, the government and byrocracy
were pretty much intact and McArthur could take place in an
existing system of power. Germany was more shambles, but it
too was a nation and it was a totally and utterly defeated nation:
It people wanted only peace and they were handled pretty
graciously by the occupiers considering what Germany had done.

South Vietnam had no own identity. It was a fiefdom carved for
themselves by people mainly from the area of North Viernam,
usually Catholics when the South Vietnamese were usually
Buddhists. No history, nothing that would have separated it from
the North, except an elite minority, which the United States
supported.

And why did the US support South Vietnam?

Well of course there was the rabid fear of communism, ignorance
on the situation in Vietnam and the neighbouring countries. US
leadership thought they knew what kind of impact a unified,
communist Vietnam would have, when in fact they knew very
little. Bluntly speaking, they had very wild imaginations. But still,
I think that there was still a one reason: Ambition and fame.

"Nation building" seems to have an odd attraction for American
politicians, when most think that it is a heavy burden. I personally
think that the challenge itself has been one reason that has driven
American policy makers. After all, to be able to show a "new nation"
as a memorial of your presidency would be quite spectacular.
And when you and your advisers have as exact knowledge about
the situation and problems concerning "nation building" as
Columbus had about the size of the Earth, then the challenge
may become too tempting.

It´s not uncommon that American foreign policy has often become
a testing ground of presidents own pet projects; but in Bush´s
administration one feels that it´s not the president that is behind
"free Iraq" and "democratic Middle East". Plainly speaking, he is too
dumb to be accused of it.







Monday, April 12, 2004

Colin Powell - a man I once admired and now loath - promises to
"defeat the insurgents in Iraq".

Since when people who fight to free their occupated homeland have
become "insurgents" and "rebels"?

This is part of the same disease that makes American press write
nonsense about Palestinian freedom fighters; foreign born colonialists
are defending their "homeland", but native peoples are "terrorists".

The offspring of Menahem Begin can always go back home in Milwaukee;
the Palestinians have no place to go.


If you want to now what the Nazis thought, in what kind of world
they thought they were living, one could do worse than read the
major Republican newspapers and magazines in the United States,
especially Weekly Standard (Walll Street Journal is still, in all of its
delusions, is still a "moderate"); the mind of a extreme rightwing
fanatic comes clear when reading them

If al-Sadr´s al-Hawza -newspaper was banded because according
to Bremer it wrote "lies" and "anti-American propaganda", then
certainly the major Republican newspapers should be banned too.
They offer their readers a view of a world that´s hugely distorted
by political ideology and pure 100% fanatism; no objective journalism,
but hateful, inhuman propaganda, that´s certainly not going to make
their readers better or more informed human beings.

When occasionally reading them I become very, very angry and
anti-American. Just like today.

When I have a positive view of the United States, I have to only read
an article from Weekly Standard and be instantaneously "cured"!


Have there been any thought in the US government on what kind
of effects their generous reward to Israel for the pullout from Gaza
will have in the Muslim countries and Iraq?

"Because Israel have withdrawn from Gaza, we will know give them
written promise, that they can gobble up 50% of the West Bank."
This is it what they will utter and happy smile will spread on their
stupid faces when they have uttered it. "They will love us in Israel
and all the evangelical Christians will vote George!" will be the
Republican message.

Yes, but the price will be paid in three fronts: 1)In American blood
in Iraq, where the attacks will intensify and the environment will
become even more hostile 2)The project of making Middle East
democratic can be buried, no doubt about it, whatever the neocons
claim and 3)the price of oil will go up, as the arabic countries punish
US.

And what will then happen to George in November?

Well, George will be an unemployed man, come January the 20th!
My other blog, in Finnish: http://luettua.blogspot.com/

Sunday, April 11, 2004

How to lower the number of US casualties in Iraq?

Well, according to the great thinker of Texas, George Walker Bush,
the answer is to pray and ask for less casualties!

So it is God Himself who is killing US servicemen in Iraq?

As Cassini creeps closer to Saturn, it´s nice to follow it´s travel and
see how the planet grows in the succeeding photos. Now invidual
storms can be tracked in the planet´s atmosphere.

Things have changed much from the days of the Voyagers. I joined an
astronomy club - which member I still am - in 1989 because there were
so little in the newspapers, TV and radio of Voyager 2 flyby of Neptune
and its moons and I wanted to get the club´s magazine to get more
news and information. I got more information, but because the magazine
was published 6 times a year at the time, I got it slowly. Nowadays I can
open the computer, go to Cassini´s homepage and see latest pictures.

It´s fantastic and realising how much the world has changed in 15
years, makes me feel myself pretty old - I was born the year the
Voyagers were launched; too young to have had much knowledge of
the Saturn flybys, but old enough to remember the Uranus flyby.
In the years since, the solar system has become far more interesting
place than then thought to be. It has been nice to follow the discoveries.





According to the Reuters news agency, the United States government
will give Israel a written promise, that it will never have to withdraw
totally from the West Bank and that it can steal as much land from the
Palestinians it wants to. This would be a reward for Israeli withdrawal
from Gaza - of course the Prime Murderer of Israel has said in a
interview to the Maariv newspaper, that in reality, Israel will not withdraw
from Gaza; it will empty the colonies, but will continue to occupy the
borders of Gaza and the areas of the colonies.

It seems that the leadership of the United States once again thinks
not what its good for the United States, the Middle East or the world,
but thinks that it´s mission is to provide only what the current rulers
of Israel want.

United States has no right to give any promises, written or otherwise,
of this kind. Now, I promise here, written down, that Canada can, if
it wants to, make Oregon it´s province. It´s about as much legally or
otherwisely binding that the promise Reuters tells of.

Giving these kind of provinces will only deepen the hate felt towards
United States not only in Muslim countries, but pretty much every
where (Micronesia, the staunch supporter of Israel, exempted) in
the world. And why? To show that the government of the United
States is totally subservient to Israel? To show that countries that
occupy other people´s lands and cruel oppress the native people
should be rewarded for their actions?

If there would be any kind of sense in the US, the conflict in Palestine
would have long been history; but alas, Israel is a holy cow for
fundamentalist Americans, object of worship. Reason or what is good
for the US has then no meaning in decision making, only religious fervor
and the need to show obeisance to Israel, the earthly manifestation of the Christian God.

The Israelis will pay dearly for the love that the Americans feel for them.
Love blinds, and certainly when it comes to Israel, the majority of
Americans are blind.

According to AFP, 2932 Palestinians and 899 Israelis have died since
the fairy queen Ariel stormed the al-Aqsa mosque. When one reads
American newspapers, one would think that only a few Palestinians and
several thousand Israelis would have died.

I have to admit, it´s hard not to hate Israel and Israelis. Israel is the
last major bastion of European colonialism and the majority of Israeli
Jews seem to be totally lacking of human decency. Palestinians are
ready to give up 78% of the former British colony of Palestine, yet this
is not enough to the majority of Israeli Jews. Hunger grows when you
eat, it is said, and the same seams to be in case when you are talking
about stealing of land.

I hope that in the end all the US support of Israel will be in vain and
Israel will go the way of the Crusader kingdoms; it should not be
necessary, but the both current governments of Israel and the United
States make their best to destroy all hope of a negotiated settlement.
And if the fate of Palestine will be decided by force, Israel will certainly
dominate for so time, but in the end all states that fight endless wars
will fall. Violence destroys in the end those that use it. Israel will be no
exemption.


Saturday, April 10, 2004

Now, as Moqtada al-Sadr is playing the "bad cop" - or "bad cleric" in
this case - al-Sistani - the "good cleric" - with his followers probably
will extract from the occupiers a heavy price for their peacefulness.
After all, the occupiers (should) know, that if al-Sadr´s rather feeble
militia can cause to them these kind of troubles, the bigger, better
trained other Shia militas with far larger support are able to create
far greater havoc and casualties - and most likely, wrench the country
from their hands (Iraqi Kurdistan excepted).

Of course, Americans are rather blind to the realities of life and war.
If the use of force don´t bring to them what they want, then they
think that the use of greater force will. Think about Richard Nixon:
He was withdrawing American forces from Vietnam for much of his
presidency, but he was also increasing the number of bombings
(and Vietnamese casualties) until 1973. He too thought that force
will work. It didn´t. It rarely does, if used alone.
If there´s one thing that the Americans don´t lack, that´s hubris.
Smugly claiming their superiority, they tumble from one mistake to
another, always relaying on their "can do" -attitude.

Self-confidence and endless resource of optimism can be helpful in
life, but for a whole nation to think that these are one of the pillars
of their success... Little more pessimism on the behalf of American
politicians and soldiers, and less belief in their own talents and
abilities, would have been helpful in Iraq.

Most likely, Iraq will end up as another "failed state", another Somalia,
another Afganistan, or a pawn between it´s neighbours. We might end
seeing Saudi Arabia, Iran and Turkey (but not Syria, which is too weak)
fight in the future over the control of Iraq; not new Vietnam, but new
DR of Congo(former Zaire). A bleeding wound of a country.





Wednesday, April 07, 2004

What Ruanda taught is that people and the governments are very
concerned about genocides in other countries - when they have
become history. But genocides that are unfolding, happening just
now? Well, concern maybe, but action to stop them? No! It´s better
to say later "We are sorry, next time we will do better" and rise statues
and so on.

And then give the victims a free hand to go berserk themselves, like
the tutsi-dominated Ruandan government in former Zaire, what is
now DR of Congo. They have participated in a war that has killed
something between 3 100 000 - 6 300 000 people. And one of the
financiers have been Western countries. United Kingdom has given
tens of millions of dollars to the Ruandan government at the same
their army and their allies have been killing or causing the death of
huge number of people.

And the deaths of 300 000 people in neighbouring Burundi have got
little attention. Now that the civil war there seems to be ending, it
has gotten some attention.

So, I doubt that the demands that the situation in Sudan´s Darfur
province needs action before it becomes "another Ruanda" will lead to
much action by the leading powers of the world. Better to look away
and apologize later is, after all, the usual way of handling these kind
of things. And so massacres continue, and combine to make a genocide.

The latest figure coming from Ruanda about the number of people
killed in the 1994 genocide is 937 000.
Whatever the outcome of the current battles, they have proven that
even if (which I doub) the United States with is vassals can still win
the war, they have certainly lost the peace and that their masterplan
of controlling Iraq and shaping the Middle East is in every practical
way as dead as the 12 American marines killed in fighting in the town
of Ramadi.

Now it is up to the United States to decide when it walks out and leaves
a mess of a country behind it, after once again fucking up things pretty
mightily.

Monday, April 05, 2004

Only al-Sistani´s death could now be a greater blow to United States
plans in Iraq than Muqtada al-Sadr´s. Bluntly speaking, if they kill him,
they lose the support of pretty much all of the religious Shiia´s, even
those that don´t especially like him and his tactics.

If Americans kill him, they lose Iraq. I rather doubt that the American
forces on the ground understand this; he would be a huge security
threat as a prisoner, but as a martyr, coming from a family of martyrs...

They should have let the Shiia´s themselves to defuse him.
I am glad that the Baathist regime fell, but now we are seeing why it
and the preceding regimes, like that of Kassem´s between 1958-63,
were so bloody. There´s always some group ready to use violence to
achieve it´s goals; to gain power and to keep it. And they draw others
to a circle of violence, which is ended when some group achieves
dominant position, usually by way of large-scale bloodshed and
backing from foreign powers.

I have to admit, that I don´t think there´s any good way to solve
this mess that would leave everybody happy. One realpolitik solution
would probably be the splitting of Iraq in de facto independent
Kurdish north and Shia dominated central and southern parts. They
could even be democratic. But I think it is very unlikely that the Shiia
and Sunni are able to share power. Even if there´s some joint battle
against the occupation ahead, they would probably afterwards turn
against each other.

There could be decades of civil war ahead. The United States has once
again opened Pandora´s box and seems as bewildered as ever that
their clumsy schemes have fallen apart. The sad thing is, that so has
Iraq. And what emerges from this chaos probably isn´t democratic,
Israeli loving Middle East who sells cheap oil that keeps American voters
happy.

George Bush the First didn´t want to end the Baathist regime because
he felt brought stability to the region. The price of this stability was of
course paid in Iraqi lives. George Bush the Second thought otherwise -
or his advisers, whatever the case - because they are blinded by USA´s
power. Yet the father saw the limits of the power, which usually is seen
as the trademark of a succesful presidency when it comes to foreign
policy. In the end, the United States have far less power in reality
compared to the power it in theory wields. And this they are learning
the hard way. A lesson, which is again paid mostly in Iraqi lives.

Sunday, April 04, 2004

The recent methane finds in the martian atmosphere may indicate life
on Mars. But what are the implications of finding life, that has been
born separately from our own (which may not be the case, if life will
be found on Mars) outside Earth?

To science? Huge. To people, like me, who are interested on these
kind of stuff? Huge. But to the ordinary (which I mean people not
"obsessed" with these kind of things, because of their work, hobby
etc.) people? Probably not too great, except maybe in the first few
days.

Why? Because I think that most people are not really interested on
these kind of things. For example, I have been thrilled to observe
the finding of new planets outside our own solar system. Over 120
planets in about 100 solar systems (and "pulsar systems") have
been found since 1994. Yet, when I try to speak about these findings
to other people, they are not interested, except of courtesy. I have
found out that extrasolar planets are far less interesting subject than
I have thought of. In fact, even academically educated people may ask
me, "Are you talking about astronomy or astrology?" when I talk about
these fascinating finds, and be pretty much ignorant on the subject.

Yet, on the average people find astronomy, my hobby, more interesting
than history, which I study. For example, I am now writing an exam
paper about how the concept of heresy changed from the 12th to the
14th century. Not the best subject for small talk, I have to admit.

In the end, the finding of life outside Earth will be hailed as great news
and will claimed to have changed our worldview. Of course it will, slowly,
when it will become fact in school books and class rooms. Yet one can
ask, how much really the average Europeans, who in the 1490s and
1500s heard news about the finding of a new land beyond the seas,
really cared about it? Did it change their life? Did they wake up in the
next morning to a brand new world? I doubt it.

Saturday, April 03, 2004

I just read once again an opinion piece from a newspaper whose writer
raged against that the reasons of terrorism are thought of at all and
that some people are ready to make peace with those who use terror
as a weapon!

Terrorism is a bad thing, and all whose use terrorism to gain something
are bad, and no attempt should be made to understand the reason of
their actions nor to negotiate with them. This was the essence of his
writing.

He was thinking of course individuals and groups, not the states that
use terror as a weapon. State terrorism seems to be sacred to people
like him; the thing that people in a uniform or in a political office are
behind it makes it legal to him.

I am always struck how naive and innocent these people are. They see
all in black and white and are not troubled at all to suggest that the
right way to fight terrorism is kill more people than the terrorists. They
see are clear line with "lawful" and "unlawful" violence where I can see
none. I don´t know should I call them fanatics or just totally naive
idealists.

But if people choose the road they suggest to be taken, then there is
no end to violence. No peace deal would have been ever made if all
parties should have been squeaky clean. I remember what one
Afghani wrote after the new government was established in Afghanistan
after the fall of the Taliban regime; he wrote that almost all the members
of the government were war criminals. The thing was, that no one that
had some kind of power was nice nor what we could call a "good person".
In ideal world, they would not have become ministers but prisoners
waiting their trial.


The problem with us human beings is that we are able to do pretty
much what we want. What we can´t do as individuals, we can do as
a part of a greater number of people, in the end as a members of the
human race. But our Achilles heel is the fact, that we have a tremendous
lack of will.

If we would want to, we could fight global warming and lessen it´s
impact on the planet; we could bring clean water, basic education,
healtcare and adequate food to all human beings; we could damn well
reach the stars.

But we don´t. Except in our rhetoric; in the real life we are doing a
excellent job of making a mess of this planet and maybe getting
ourselves extinct in the process. And all because we are shortsighted optimists, who see imaginary weapons of mass destruction hidden in
every country we dislike, but don´t see the greater threats: the famines, disease epidemics, destruction of nature, oppression of basic human
rights in countries we like. And enough of us always think that there´s
do need to worry, that everything will turn out allright; the cavalry will
arrive to save us, a miracle will happen, or that all is a delusion or a
conspiracy to trick the simpleminded, like some US senators claim the
global warming to be.

In the end, we are a suicidal race.



United States, whose people are fond of comparing their country with
the Roman empire, seems to have arrived to the era of the military
emperors, 193-284, when the purple gown of the emperor went to
the one who could pay most to the military, who then shouted him
emperor.

John Kerry has become the democratic record holder in collecting
campaign money; he will soon reach 50 million dollars. But the election
has already been decided: The other rich boy from East Coast, George
Walker Bush (who pretends to be a Texan), has collected 170 million
dollars and thinks that 250 million dollars will be in his reach.

With that kind of difference in campaign many, his second term in
office is already in George Walker Bush´s pocket - or should I say,
in his wallet?

Thursday, April 01, 2004

United States government folk don´t seem to know much about
the history of democracy in the West, not even in US, when they
are preaching for "instant democracy" - that describes it well - for
Middle East. Democracy is not a tree that grows in a year or two:
It´s an ongoing struggle, that has no end.

Right to vote for both genders and all ethnic and religious groups
is a very young phenomenon in the West. If one thinks of the great
Western democracies, none had the kind of democracy 80 years ago
that the US wants to transport to the Middle East. Birth of democracy
takes time, it has to get it´s roots deep so that it will not fall when
the first storm comes.

Of course, political democracy can in the end mean little in a world
where the dictatorship of free market economics rules.

When I was in school, I had a Christian Zionist teacherm who one
day, pretty much out of the blue, started to preach propaganda for
Israel. The highlight was this: "And an angel appeared to the Israeli
helicopter pilots over the Sinai and said to them the words of God:
To you I give this land!"

This was not in 1967, by the way, nor 1973. It was in 1992. Ten
years after Israel had retreated from the last part of Sinai it had
occupied.

One of the reasons why I hate Christian Zionists is that I have met
several of them and they have all been ready for mental hospital.
Reality is totally alien country for them.

So, when I see them marching for Israel, carrying flags of Israel
and demanding ethnic cleansing in Palestine, I always hope that
someone would gun them down. It would be an act of mercy.