Once again the NY Times proves that it is All the Lies fit to line you bird cage with.Today they published News “Analysis” from Helene Cooper which belies the truth and ignores any fact which may cause rational people to ignore the NY Times slanted Israel hating ways.
The analysis which only uses Palestinian sources to report why the meeting failed basically says
- Saudi Arabia is our best friend in the region. This might be right, after all look at all the US flight crews that came from the Kingdom, you know those crews that flew on 9/11. Or how about that price of gasoline? Yep that Saudi King with the funny beard is our best friend.
- The US pushed Saudi Arabia to try to become a peace maker in the area. Another falsehood. The Saudi King is not happy with the fact that he is losing influence in the region. They have always felt that since Mecca is in their country they should be the center of Islam. The Times does say that King Funny-Beard, wants to pull Hamas away from the Iran, but takes an ethnocentric point of view, like the King is not smart enough to come up with it himself–he needs papa US to push him to do it.
- The talks on Monday, failed because Israel pushed the United States not to talk to any government that has Hamas as part of the coalition. You know the Times wants to have it both ways. First they tell us that George Bush is a big bully pushing around the Saudi King. Now the tell us that the most spineless Prime Minister in the history of Israel beat him up causing him to avoid the new Terrorist Unity Government (TUG).
NY TIMES IGNORED FACT # 1: This TUG refuses to adopt the three principal that the US and the quartet put in place over a year ago. The first of which is to recognize that Israel exists. You might think its a small point (remember the NY Times thought the Shoah was a small story an buried it in the back of the paper) but what it means is that they see Israel as a viable negotiating partner. Without that what do you negotiate about. The last three PM’s of Israel Barak, Sharon, and the Leaning Tower of Jell-0 have ALL called for a two state solution, with one of the states being a viable Palestinian Arab State, the other being a viable Palestinian Jewish State called Israel. Another of the principals is that the TUG renounce terror and disarm the terrorists. Now I can see the why the Times ignored this, they have never really cared about dead Jews.
NY TIMES IGNORED FACT # 2: The US decided it had problems with the TUG, a week before Olmert did. I even made fun of Olmert about it, see US Cuts Ties with New Abbas Govt./Israel Doesn’t: Is Olmert Auditioning for the Twilight Zone?
NY TIMES IGNORED FACT # 3: Olmert did NOT say he will not negotiate with a government that includes Hamas, he DID say he will not talk to a government that refuses to Acknowledge that it can exist as a free Jewish nation, it won’t talk to a TUG that doesn’t acknowledge that blowing up Israel’s civilians is a bad thing, and a government that won’t guarantee that it will follow previous agreements.
What if the NY Daily News Said that the Times had no right to publish in NY and started blowing up the NY Times delivery people? What would you do? You would probably protect your people (OK maybe except for the Jewish ones).
No one is showing the TUG any love because it doesn’t want to follow three civilized rules. These were the Quartet’s rules Abbas knew it before Mecca, Hamas knew it and the king with the funny little beard knew it. The only people that didn’t know it was the NY Times. Maybe they should start reading a good paper.
News Analysis After the Mecca Accord, Clouded Horizons By HELENE COOPER Published: February 21, 2007 BERLIN, Feb. 20 — With Iran steadily gaining power in the Middle East, the United States recently made a strategic decision to encourage Saudi Arabia to take a more active role in diplomacy in the region. Two weeks ago, the Saudis took a bold step, mediating an accord between warring Palestinian factions whose battles in Gaza had left more than 100 dead. But that agreement, signed in the holy city of Mecca, brought Hamas — which the United States and Israel consider a terrorist organization — into a unity government without requiring that it recognize Israel or forswear violence against it. And that added to the already formidable challenge the United States faces as it tries to accomplish another strategic goal: getting the Palestinians and Israelis back to the negotiating table for peace talks for the first time in six years. The Saudi-brokered pact largely torpedoed the American-sponsored meeting on Monday between the Israelis and the Palestinians that was meant to jump-start peace talks. The crosscurrent is a case study in how the divergent worldviews of America and Saudi Arabia, its closest Arab ally, will color the two countries’ attempts to quell violence in the region and put a brake on Iran’s ambitions, analysts say. To be sure, both the United States and its Sunni Arab allies, particularly Saudi Arabia, say they want peace between Palestinians and Israelis and the creation of a Palestinian state. For the Saudis, the end of Israeli-Palestinian hostilities would mute a rallying cry for militants, intent on upending the status quo in the region, who say Arab leaders have done too little to help Palestinians. So why did Saudi Arabia broker a power-sharing agreement between Hamas and the moderate Palestinian Authority president, Mahmoud Abbas, and his Fatah faction at the same time that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice had decided to try to revive peace talks? One reason, no doubt, is that Saudi Arabia — as a leader in the Arab world — wanted to help end the Palestinian-on-Palestinian violence by Hamas and Fatah. But another big reason, analysts said, is that the war in Iraq has intensified the split between Sunnis and Shiites, and deepened a power struggle between the Sunni royal family of Saudi Arabia, and Iran, which is largely Shiite. Although the United States is rooting for the Saudis in that power struggle, the two countries have some distinctly different ideas about how Saudi Arabia should fight for its leadership role in the region. The Bush administration has a view that pits America, its Arab allies, Israel and Europe against Iran, Syria and groups, including Hamas, that the United States considers terrorists. While that alignment may work for the Bush administration, it is not necessarily how America’s Sunni Arab allies view the world. In the battle for influence in the Middle East, Hamas is a prize Saudi Arabia is willing to fight for. Put simply, in the past year, Iran has been wooing Hamas, which is Sunni. The Saudis did not like that. So they fought to get Hamas back. “The Saudis did a switcheroo,” said Martin Indyk, the United States ambassador to Israel in the Clinton administration. “The U.S. views the Middle East as a battle between the moderates against the Iranian-led extremists. But our regional allies see this as a divide between Sunnis and Shiites, and Sunni extremists like Hamas may be extremists, but they are Sunnis first.” “The Saudis,” he said, “don’t want Hamas on the Shia side, on the Iranian side.” The fight over Hamas began in earnest last year when the United States and EuropeIran, which provided it with $120 million. Saudi Arabia meanwhile, shied away from giving much aid to Hamas. cut off most of the $1 billion in direct aid to the Palestinian government after Hamas took control by besting Fatah in legislative elections. Unable to cover its bills — or even to meet payroll for many of its civil servants — Hamas turned to On Dec. 7, the Hamas leader, Ismail Haniya, in his first tour abroad as Palestinian prime minister, went to Tehran, where he met with Iranian leaders, including President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia responded quickly to the deepening ties between Hamas and Iran. On Dec. 29, he sent a plane provided by the Saudi royal family to carry Mr. Haniya and other Hamas leaders to Saudi Arabia, where Mr. Haniya had a private audience with the Saudi king, according to Palestinian officials. As all of this was going on, Ms. Rice was working with Tzipi Livni, Israel’s foreign minister, to organize peace talks between Mr. Abbas and Israel’s prime minister, Ehud Olmert, to present Mr. Abbas as the only leader capable of leading the Palestinians to their own state. It was a complicated set-up; the American-Israeli hope was that Mr. Abbas, empowered by peace negotiations, could call for new elections and see his Fatah party beat Hamas. Mr. Abbas had threatened several times to call the elections because talks on a unity government were stalled. But less than two weeks before the scheduled Israeli-Palestinian meeting, Saudi Arabia brokered the power-sharing pact: Hamas and Mr. Abbas would politically cohabitate in a national unity government. In announcing the agreement, Saudi Arabia promised $1 billion in aid to the Palestinians. The Saudis pressured both sides to reach a pact; Mr. Abbas said he did so because he could not stand to witness intra-Palestinian bloodshed. The pact put an end, at least temporarily, to the bloodletting. It also put an end, at least temporarily, to Ms. Rice’s attempt to restart peace talks. Ms. Rice flew to Jerusalem for the scheduled meeting anyway, which began on Monday morning with a stilted three-way handshake between Mr. Abbas and Mr. Olmert at Ms. Rice’s hotel, with Ms. Rice standing in the middle. After about an hour of discussions about the Mecca accord, Ms. Rice tried to move the discussion to the peace agenda. “Let’s go upstairs and talk about your future,” she said, according to a senior Bush administration official. The three went up to her 10th-floor suite, overlooking Jerusalem’s Old City, where she broached what she has termed the “political horizon” — diplomatic speak for the contours of an eventual Palestinian state. “She pushed for it in the meeting, but Olmert was adamant about not going for it,” said a Palestinian official familiar with the talks. The reason: the Saudi-brokered Mecca accord. In the end, the Israelis said they refused to open peace negotiations with a unity government that includes Hamas