Just what does Condoleeza Rice mean when she talks about creating "a new Middle East?" The seemingly glib statements made by the American secretary of state during visits to Beirut, Ramallah and Jerusalem are sending ripples of alarm throughout the Middle East. Do these statements made so casually signal the Bush administration's alliance with its oldest friend, hoping to redraw maps and boundaries in an increasingly volatile region?
The Independent in London has an excellent article outlining five options for resolving the current conflict.
Every time I see Condoleeza Rice, Bush, Cheney, all of the pack, I just feel so angry that they are allowed to do what they do, seemingly without impunity. Why more Americans don't believe this Pres and Vice Pres should be impeaced truly amazes and sickens me.
Posted by: Alexandra | 29 July 2006 at 04:32
Have you seen the Angry Arab News Service?
Posted Thursday, July 27, 2006 on the Angry Arab News Service - "According to 48 percent of Americans, Israel responded proportionately in the conflict with Hizbullah, while 26 percent believed Israel’s response was exaggerated...7 percent believing the US should criticize Israel."
Also -
Where else would you find such brilliant analysis of the motives of those who are fighting Israeli occupiers in South Lebanon? WP: "their families will be looked after and their children educated at Hezbollah's expense if they die in combat. "
And this - "Domestic Workers Abused Worldwide" (Israel/US blame abuse on Hizbullah)
posted by As'ad
http://angryarab.blogspot.com/
Found in a comment posted on the Angry Arab News Service (it seems to work) - Send a message to the IDF http://my.ynet.co.il/front/eng/
Posted by: Your friend Marian | 27 July 2006 at 10:56
waste not, want not. why don't we just work with the middle east we have instead of creating a new one?
ever pragmatic, I am.
Posted by: ally bean | 26 July 2006 at 15:57
And how will Bush and his cronies defend the Israeli attack on a UN post in which 4 UN observers were killed? (Washington Post, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/25/AR2006072500260.html)
Excellent article in The Independent...thanks for sharing!
Posted by: susanlavonne | 26 July 2006 at 15:14
Hi Tara! I don't know if you're familiar with this blog, but I thought you'd like it: great photos from the author's very recent trip to Lebanon (two weeks ago!!) made very poignant by the fact that her family is still THERE.
http://goshdarnknit.blogspot.com/
Posted by: Laini | 26 July 2006 at 07:43
CR makes me sick to my stomach. I can barely stand to watch/listen to her. thanks for the link.
Posted by: jojo | 26 July 2006 at 04:10
Condie is just like everybody else Bush has chosen for his cabinet--they are all like those bobble-head dolls people put in the back windows of their cars. But more dangerous.
Posted by: pepektheassassin | 26 July 2006 at 03:22
The options were interesting and scary.
Posted by: Tammy | 26 July 2006 at 01:05
This is the woman who was shopping in New York while New Orleans was sinking.
Posted by: Colette | 25 July 2006 at 18:21
*sigh*
:)
Posted by: amber | 25 July 2006 at 17:52
Yes, a very poor example of diplomacy - by any stretch of the imagination!
Posted by: Paris Parfait | 25 July 2006 at 17:21
I'm familiar with manipulation via editing...but what really galled me yesterday were clips of Rice in a meeting over there LAUGHING. Should this woman be laughing in those meetings about anything (with cameras in the room)? All I could think of was how Bush always has that inane damn smirk on his face at all the wrong times. Thanks for the article link.
Posted by: Marilyn | 25 July 2006 at 15:36