17 thoughts on “Olmert: ‘This is the End, My Friend, My Only Friend’ – Tikun Olam תיקון עולם إصلاح العالم
task-attention.png
Comments are published at the sole discretion of the owner.
 

  1. I would be interested to know why you think she is qualified to be Prime Minister. From what I know she is an unprinicpled opportunist with no ideas of her own and only an immense ambition to propel her. Her parents were revered fighters in the ETZEL pre-state underground. She used this to enter the Likud who always welcomed children of fighters (the so-called “princes”) regardless of whether their ideological orientation was that the of “right-wing” Likud. Once there she attached herself to Sharon and as he moved to the far-Left and betrayed his explicit promise to his voters NOT to destroy Gush Katif, she went along with him.
    When he split the Likud he took her with him to Kadima. There she made a speech saying that Israel, the Jewish state, is legitimate only if the Arabs set up a Palestinian state which would then grant legitimacy to Israel, this ignoring Jewish/Zionist rights entirely.

    Regarding Netanyahu, his period as Prime Minister was the quietest since the Oslo Agreements so I don’t understand why you think there would be a war. Rabin had numerous terrorist attacks while he was Prime Minister, Peres had a big wave during his short term in 1996 which led to his defeat by Netanyahu. Barak had the biggest terror of all time start in his turn, and Sharon, well, you know his background, and he allowed the terror war to go on and on until the 2002 Pesach
    Nite Massacre in 2002 when he was finally forced to act. Thus I don’t see why you fear Bibil.

  2. she is an unprinicpled opportunist with no ideas of her own and only an immense ambition to propel her.

    That says a lot more about you than about her. You admire ambition when it comes from right wing pols like Bibi, but you deplore it when it comes from centrist pols like Livni.

    Sharon and as he moved to the far-Left

    Again you’re revealing the insularity of yr right-wing Israeli views by claiming that implementing the Gaza disengagement as a “far-left” position. It was a position approved by the vast majority of the Israeli people & the rest of the world concerned about Israeli Arab peace. I’d venture to say you are one of the settlers “far right” supporters. It’s you who are in the minority I’m afraid.

    The reason Livni is so popular is that she is much more a successor to the type of views that Sharon represented at the end of his career. That’s the reason you find her an opportunist. She has changed her views as Sharon did. You can’t abide that since both betrayed you (at least in yr mind).

    she made a speech saying that Israel, the Jewish state, is legitimate only if the Arabs set up a Palestinian state which would then grant legitimacy to Israel, this ignoring Jewish/Zionist rights entirely.

    A preposterous claim. If you wish to be taken seriously you’ll have to find the speech, link to it & provide a quotation fr. it that bolsters yr claim. Otherwise, yr claim is simply not credible. Tzipi Livni would never say what you claim she said.

    his period as Prime Minister was the quietest since the Oslo Agreements

    I don’t know that this is true & cannot accept yr mere claim that it is (though it could be true). But “quiet” is not the only measure of the success of a prime minister. For me and many other Israelis, the measure of success is movement toward peace and a negotiated settlement. By that yardstick Netanyahu was an abject failure. Further, Netanyahu did more damage to the Israeli poor than all previous Israeli finance ministers combined during his tenure in that office. He isn’t fit to lead–unless you want to be lead to more war, more bloodshed, & more frozen relations w. the outside world.

  3. Richard,

    Unlike you, I actually think Netanyahu’s election could actually be a positive development.
    I may sound crazy, but hear me out here:

    You know what you’re getting with Bibi. In my opinion, what was most dangerous about Ariel Sharon’s reign was his success at convincing the world (including important segments of the Israeli Left & Center) that he had turned into a “man of peace” willing to make “painful compromises”, when the actual purpose of “disengagement” was to put the peace process on “formaldehyde.” With Bibi, you don’t have that problem: His extreme right-wing views are transparent to all, not only to Israelis but to the international community as well.

    He also has no support from Israel’s elite, even within the IDF. I would argue that during his tenure from 1996-1999 you saw far greater dissent and pluralism within Israel than you did during Sharon or Olmert’s reign, or even Barak or Peres’. Certainly, there was far more international pressure on Netanyhu (even from the United States ) than there is now.

  4. Livni has called on Olmert to resign. But he isn’t resigning. So why hasn’t she resigned from her post? How can she serve as foreign minister under a prime minister she does not have confidence in? This, IMO, is a test of her integrity.

  5. why hasn’t she resigned from her post? How can she serve as foreign minister under a prime minister she does not have confidence in?

    I think she sould resign & it’s very possible she still will. I don’t much understand what she gains by staying other than to needle Olmert w. her presence every chance she gets.

    This, IMO, is a test of her integrity.

    There’s hardly a minister in that cabinet who has integrity & you question hers?? At least her hands aren’t dripping in blood like Halutz, Olmert & Peretz’s are; or cash like Hirshon, Olmert & others. Since Israeli opinion polls have her leading Kadima to a 31 seat Knesset result were the election held today, I guess many Israelis feel confident in her integrity.

  6. Richard, If Olmert does end up resigning under pressure and if Livini is picked as Prime Minister, do you think that she will negotiate a settlement with the Palestinians?

  7. Answer to Walter Ballin-
    No, if Livni becomes Prime Minister, she will not be able to reach a “peace agreement” with the Palestinians. It doesn’t matter if who the Prime Minsiter, no peace agreement is achievable with the Palestinians. They have no government, no agreed ruler, no civil society (read Avi Issarcharoff’s article in Friday’s Haaretz.com), no govermental armed force to impose order.

    Anser to Richard Silverstein-
    I worked as a volunteer for Ariel Sharon’s election because he specifically promised NOT to destroy Gush Katif. Now, he betrayed his promise. In spite of the claim you make here that it was an “overwhelmingly popular” decision to go back on his work, I maintain there is no evidence of this except quotations from newspaper polls. Sharon refused to get a public mandate by calling a new election, knowing he would lose it, just like he lost the Likud party membership referendum (which he lost be a large majority, even though he called it a “vote of confidence” in his leadership. Thus, I have every reason to despise him, Livni and all the rest of the Likud people who followed him in this disastrousdecision.

    Regarding Netanyahu-I don’t understand this image of him as “an extreme right winger”. Judea/Samaria Settlement did expand (thank G-d) under him, but they have under all other Prime Ministers including Rabin, Peres, Barak, and even under Sharon, those he didn’t destroy have flourished as well. Netanyahu’s platform
    sound the same as Labor’s and Kadima’s…strengthen the “moderate” Abbas againt the evil “HAMAS”, dismantle settlements for creation of a Palestinian state, negotiate with Syria on the Golan, etc.

    I personally do not want the Likud in power. They have proven themselves dishonest and unreliable. It is the Likud that destroyed the Jewish communities
    in the Sinai in return for the useless “peace agreement” with Egypt and they also destroyed Gush Katif. Olmert talked about destroying far more settlements
    under his “hitkansut” plan, but that has been dropped. Thus, we see “strong-right-wing governments” under the Likud are the biggest destroyers. Thus, for me, the least damaging government, pending a true Zionist revival of the whole political, military and economic echelons, is a weak, discredited Leftist goverment like we have now. Olmert is now in a weak position to make dangerous concessions to the Palestinians and Syrians, so as far as I am concerned, he can stay in power, as incomepetant as he is, because the others are no better. A sad situation.

  8. if Livni becomes Prime Minister, she will not be able to reach a “peace agreement” with the Palestinians.

    I hate hearing this type of defeatism from Israelis. First, it’s simply not true. Second, you’ve convinced yourself so completely that it’s not possible that it never will be possible. War will continue eternally. You will never vanquish the Palestinians. What is yr prescription? Are you prepared for endless bloodshed & murder? I’m not. Most Israelis are not. Thankfully, while Isarelis may be discourage they are nowhere near as defeatist as you, which means thankfully that peace is still possible.

    In spite of the claim you make here that it was an “overwhelmingly popular” decision to go back on his work, I maintain there is no evidence of this except quotations from newspaper polls.

    You’re simply amazing. Countless national polls were conducted by respected pollsters and all confirmed the vast majority of Israelis in favor of withdrawal & you still don’t believe it? Pls. do show me a single poll that said otherwise & supported yr pt of view that withdrawal was unpopular. Of course it was unpopular among the settler movement & their allies in the Israeli far right. But that is by no means anywhere near a majority.

    Sharon refused to get a public mandate by calling a new election, knowing he would lose it, just like he lost the Likud party membership referendum (which he lost be a large majority, even though he called it a “vote of confidence” in his leadership.

    That’s not right. You’re projecting yr own views into Sharon’s mind which is ludicrous. Sharon was far the most popular political figure in Israel when he was PM & could’ve easily won any election he called. I don’t recall him losing any Likud internal membership referendum. I recall that he decided to dump Likud & formed Kadima (though you could be right). At any rate, the argument isn’t over whether Sharon had the support of Likud, but rather whether he had the support of the Israeli people, which he overwhelmingly did.

    Regarding Netanyahu-I don’t understand this image of him as “an extreme right winger”.

    Sorry to say, but someone on the right as you are who doesn’t recognize that Netanyahu is your soul brother–what more can I say? He was a disaster for the poor as finance minister. He was a disaster as a PM for refusing to engage in any substantive negotiations with the Palestinians. He hasn’t said any of the things you claim he has. He’s never said he’s in favor of negotiating over the Golan; never said he supported Abbas; never said he’d dismantle settlements. Show me otherwise.

    a weak, discredited Leftist government like we have now.

    Your politics & analysis are quite bizarre. If Ehud Olmert is a leftist to you then you must be a Kahanist or somewhere way out there off the rightward edge. Who would you prefer to be leading Israel? Avigdor Lieberman? Meir Kahane?

    If you publish comments here in the future could you try to write the comment in the comment box & not paste it into it. When you do that the format creates very short text lines & makes the whole comment much longer than it should be. I have to edit yr comment by removing the excess paragraph returns so that it’s in the proper format.

  9. (1) I am sorry but you are wrong. SHARON CALLED AN INTERNAL LIKUD PARTY MEMBERSHIP POLL ON THE GUSH KATIF DESTRUCTION. I worked as a volunteer for the “NO” camp. 300,000 people were eligible to vote, of that 150,000 did. Sharon swore he would honor the results. He called it a referendum on his leadership. The polls of which so many people are fond of predicted it would pass by a 60-40%. IT LOST BY 55-45%. Peres then said that 150,000 are a tiny minority and they will not dictate policy. Sharon promptly said he made a mistake in calling the referendum and that he would ignore it. The Likud leadership backed him on t his betrayal. This is why, although I am a “right-wing-religious-pro-YESHA-settler”-type, I hate the Likud and do not want it in power. I would much prefer keeping Olmert in power (well, it seems A.B Yehoshua and I agree on something!). In the last election, I voted for a party that did not pass the electoral threshold as a protest vote. If elections were held now, I would not vote. I spoke to one of the members of the National Religious Party/National Union list recently and he told me HE ALMOST DIDN’T VOTE, either! Haggai Segal, the top political commentator of the right-wing “Makor Rishon” newspaper agrees with me.

    (2) Public opinion polls in Israel are notoriously unreliable. They always overstate the support for the “Leftist” position or candidate. This is for several reasons. One is that it is “politically incorrect” to identify with the Right since the intelligentsia and Establishment are Leftist. Thus people will tell the pollsters what they want to hear, possibly because when you are called by a pollster, they know who you are and one might suspect that it will be recorded what you position is. At one time in Israel, holding a job often involved having the “correct” political position (although this isn’t really true anymore)) and some people still worry about being identified as being “right-wing”. Secondly, the 3 main newspapers all support the Left and there may be a belief that people want to be part of a majority and so publishing a poll showing a certain position will become a self-fulfilling prophecy and thus push public opinion in that direction. An example is that every election Shimon Peres lost had polls showing him winning. Third, an investigative TV show discovered the people who were supposed to be calling potential voters were too lazy to do this and so they filled in the forms themselves. This is simply fraud. Fourth, the Right has little ability in the media to get its message across. The media is overwhelmingly Leftists and biases its reporting, giving far more coverage to the Leftist position. I myself was able to convince several Likud members who said they were for destroying Gush Katif to vote against once I was able to clearly lay out the message to them.
    The bottom line is that there never was a “majority” for destroying Gush Katif. I would say the “majority” was “Undecided” to the very end. I recall clearly the last polls done before it happened and they showed something like 40% in favor, 30% against and 30% Undecided. Considering the factors I mentioned above makes me believe that, indeed, most people had mixed feelings about it. That is why Sharon refused to call a national referendum or national election. He knew he would lose.

  10. SHARON CALLED AN INTERNAL LIKUD PARTY MEMBERSHIP POLL ON THE GUSH KATIF DESTRUCTION

    In yr earlier comment, you said Sharon called a Likud “membership referendum” and didn’t make clear what the issue was. I thought you were referring to a vote for party leadership, a vote which he never lost. That is why I questioned what you said. It’s entirely possible that he called a Gush Katif vote & lost. Personally, I don’t remember. It’s also possible that he called it a referendum on his leadership. But in effect he did act upon the defeat realizing he could not continue in Likud as long as he persisted in his withdrawal policy. That is why he ditched Likud & created Kadima. You see this as perfidy while I see it as smart, pragmatic political leadership (& I have always detested Sharon so for me to say that is quite significant).

    it seems A.B Yehoshua and I agree on something!

    Not really. Yehoshua said Olmert only deserved to stay in power if he purused peace talks w. the Palestinians. SInce you detest the idea of such talks, you don’t agree.

    It wouldn’t cause me great pain to hear you didn’t vote, though I think everyone including those with whom I disagree should exercise their rights as citizens.

    Public opinion polls in Israel are notoriously unreliable.

    Provide any credible source to verify this statement. I’ve been following Israeli public opinion polls for several yrs. now & have never heard they were unreliable, nor have I ever heard that they seriously misrepresented the views of those they surveyed. This isn’t a credible charge unless authenticated.

    Thus people will tell the pollsters what they want to hear,

    This sometimes has been a problem in polls in many places. But polling has been going on long enough in Israel that I am certain the pollsters have learned to account for any possible underreporting of right-wing views in order to get an accurate reading of people’s real views (as they express them in the polling booth). And if you were right, it would mean that electoral polls seriously underrepresented the proportion of rightist votes & Knesset representatiton. I’ve never heard of such a mistake happening in Israeli polling. At least not since I’ve been following such polls.

    the 3 main newspapers all support the Left

    NO, the papers are to the left of YOU. But not to the left of the Israeli political spectrum. Haaretz is liberal & similar to the NYT. Yediot is centrist (or even center right). Maariv is generally a Likud oriented paper & farther to the right. The Post is center right though usually Likud oriented. Your comment in a U.S. context would be as if Michael Ledeen or Jerry Falwell said that Washington Times and Fox News were too far to the left for their taste!

    every election Shimon Peres lost had polls showing him winning.

    The last election Shimon Peres ran in for PM was 1998. You mean to tell me you’re claiming inaccuracy of all Israeli polling based on a result that is 10 yrs old??!

    an investigative TV show discovered the people who were supposed to be calling potential voters were too lazy to do this and so they filled in the forms themselves.

    And you mean to tell me that on the basis of a single TV news rpt. you conclude that all Israeli polls report the poularity of the right parties incorrectly?

    the Right has little ability in the media to get its message across. The media is overwhelmingly Leftists

    Where have I heard this music before? From Dick Cheney perhaps. The right is quite well represented in the Israeli media, though if you’re talking about the far-right settler movement perhaps you might be right. But I’m certain the media reports on the settler movement quite fairly & accurately in comparison to the amt. of support it actually has within the electorate which is approx 20% in the last poll I saw.

    The bottom line is that there never was a “majority” for destroying Gush Katif.

    Maybe not within the Likud, but there certainly was within the overall population which is all that matters to me.

  11. First, the election you refer to regarding Peres was in 1996, not 1998.
    Second, I stand by what I said about the polls being biased and inaccurate.
    if you look at the results of the elections, since I began following them in 1981, they always overestimated the Knesset representation for the Left, both in the elections they won and in the ones they lost. Peres was last predicted to win in 2005 when he competed against Amir Peretz for the leadership of the Labor Party. Something like 100,000 people were eligible to vote and, as usual, the polls showed Peres winning, but as you are aware, he lost.
    Third, another way of getting the results you want in a poll is to phrase the question a certain way. If for example, you ask “Are you in favor of a unilateral withdrawal from Gush Katif”, you will get a different answer than if you is “Are you in favor of a unilateral withdrawal from Gush Katif IN RETURN FOR PEACE”, and again, you will get a different result if you ask “Are you in favor of a unilateral withdrawal from Gush Katif KNOWING THAT THE ARABS MIGHT USE IT TO LAUNCH ROCKETS AT ISRAEL”. (There is a good discussion on this matter in the classic TV Series “Yes, Prime Minister”!)
    I understand that you applaud Sharon for going back on his election promises (I worked as a volunteer based on that promise), but I have a feeling that if a politician went back on what you consider an important promise, I think you would be as upset about it as I am.

    Regarding my belief that no Israeli government will ever be able to reach a “peace agreement’ with the Palestinians, it would take hundreds of pages to explain why I think this. However, this does not mean I don’t believe some sort of peaceful situation can’t arise..but it will only arise when Israel STOPS MAKING POLITICAL CONCESSIONS and starts working UNOFFICIALLY but effectively improving the lives of the Palestinians , particularly in the economic sphere.
    Briefly, there is no possibility of reaching a “peace agreement’ with them because the Palestinians neither want a state, nor are capable of running one. They don’t want a state, partly for the reason that they do not have a “Palestinian national identity”. I can see you in my mind getting agitated at this statement, but it is true.
    Read this article from Ha’aretz. I realize it is anecdotal but it corresponds with reality.

    http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/855923.html

    The Judea/Samaria Arabs do not view themselves as the same people as the Gazans
    and despise them. That is the real reason the “safe passage” route from Gaza to Judea was never really implemented..besides the security problems, THE JUDEA/SAMARIA ARABS DON’T WANT IT. This was reported by Deborah Sontag some years ago in the New York Times.
    Thus, the Palestinian leadership is fatally divided. There is much more I could say about this, but this is a good start.

  12. Peres was last predicted to win in 2005 when he competed against Amir Peretz for the leadership of the Labor Party.

    As far as I know, they don’t poll about intra-party leadership races. So there were no polls conducted that would’ve predicted a Peres win. If you have evidence otherwise let me know. Reporters thought he would win. But others thought Peretz would win esp. near the end of the voting. Second, Peres always has had problems w. people publicly committing to vote for him & privately voting otherwise. But that has nothing to do w. polling. That has to do with his weakness as a political figure.

    if a politician went back on what you consider an important promise, I think you would be as upset about it as I am.

    Bill Clinton did a lot of things I didn’t like politically as president which I thought betrayed the party’s liberal values. I still think he was a fine president & would vote for him again if I could. Many politicians have gone back on promises & still managed to carry the populace along w. them. It doesn’t disqualify them ipso facto from leading.

    Palestinians neither want a state,

    This is an outright lie & I do not appreciate such statements here.

    The Judea/Samaria Arabs do not view themselves as the same people as the Gazans
    and despise them.

    And this is an ignorant lie based on no proof whatsoever. Look, I’m not in the habit of printing lies here. If you keep going in this direction future comments, if there are any, may not be published.

  13. Did you read the article whose link I posted? It is from a newspaper that I am sure you view as acceptable (i.e. not “right-wing” biased) and the writer, Zvi Barel is also a supporter of the “peace process”. The person interviewed clearly stated that he despises the Gazans. Deborah Sontag wrote the same thing some years ago in a New York Times article.
    Regarding my statement that “the Palestinians do not want a state”, I think you made a pretty strong statement that it is a “lie”. Did you hear about George Tenet (who was CIA director during the term of Bill Clinton, who you stated you like)? He said Arafat never had any intention of making a peace agreement on any terms. In the book review in the Jerusalem Post about the book Tenet is quoted as saying “Arafat wanted a peace process, but not a peace agreement” or something to that effect (look at the Jerualem Post site under books, it is still probably posted there).The late Faisal Husseini, in an interview just before he died, said that the Oslo Agreements were a “Trojan Horse” (his words) in order to give the Palestinians a territorial base from which to attack Israel. Thus, “making peace” and “building a state” were not on the agenda. For years prior to Oslo, people in the West begged Arafat to declare a government in exile in order to grant legitimacy to the PLO. He refused.
    So if I am lying, so are Tenet and Barel and Sontag and many others who are quite knowledgable about the situation here.

  14. The person interviewed clearly stated that he despises the Gazans.

    You might despise yr fellow countrymen too if you had to live as he does. He despises the violence, anarchy, corruption & hellishness of life under Occupation. Yes, some of his hatred is directed at his fellow Palestinians for making his life more miserable than it has to be. But ultimately Israel shares much blame for these conditions. It wants Palestinians to fight over scraps. It wants anarchy & chaos. It wants a weak Palestinian government or even no Palestinian government.

    The fact that one Palestinian says that the Right of Return will be a disaster is not a phenomenon worthy of much notice.

    Regarding my statement that “the Palestinians do not want a state”, I think you made a pretty strong statement that it is a “lie”

    No, not a “strong” statement, but an obvious, clear as day statement.

    I don’t hold George Tenet in much esteem including his qualifications to speak about the I-P conflict. And his comments about Arafat are irrelevant to the current debate since Arafat isn’t going to be negotiating for the creation of that Palestinian state you claim the Palestinians don’t want. Faisal Husseini too is dead & gone lo these many yrs. You’re talking about past history & dragging in the dead to bolster yr contention that nothing has changed for those left behind. That’s a real stretch.

    I won’t let you drag Deborah Sontag into this argument without you providing a link to document what she actually said, rather than what you say she said.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Share via
Copy link