Peace

What does it take to make peace? Probably the same thing it takes to “make” babies.

Not unlike making babies, peace, it seems, is an illusive reality. You might believe you are at peace, when in reality, you are at war. For example, an embargo or a blockade is an act of war. A physical breach of one's borders or person is also an act of war. By the same token a false, lying accusation impugning your person or character and reputation is the same as a physical slap in the face – you are at war. Violating another's sovereignty is an act of war. Each of these examples possess one characteristic, rejection or refusal to recognize the legitimate existence or legitimate right to exist as an equal of the other, whether it be an individual, a community or a country.

A classic example of this was and remains the underlying reasons that the Jews used to justify taking and possessing by force land that did not legally belong to them and then calling it their country. Getting the United Nations to agree by majority consent granting or decreeing Israel as their nation state. To the Jew, the legitimate land owner, the Palestinian people, were and remain a sub-human race or species. It is solely upon this basis or forced judgment that the legitimacy and continued existence of Israel stands justified. For 63 years the Jews have successfully kept these people from becoming any kind of an entity equal to them. Moreover they along with their “supporter,” intend to keep the world through the United Nations from doing for the Palestinians what was done for them, acquire legal recognition through a nation state. That way they can continue to wage legal war on the Palestinians without any accountability; they're only defending themselves. It isn't a matter of choice and never was. Total and complete rejection of any Palestinian rights let alone statehood is a matter of mutual survival. Unfortunately, for Barack Obama and all of his Israeli supporters the 63 year history of the Jews as they enforce the unenforceable condemns and convicts them exactly for who and what they are – a corrupt, illegitimate usurper.

So what does it take to make peace? I thought this chance encounter with Hussein Ibish was a good example. Mr. Ibish's bio is located on his blog. I'm always impressed when people respond to my observations. You would think that at that first encounter their actions would denote or establish their tacit recognition and acceptance of you and of your legitimacy same as theirs. Here you are doing them a favor by personally acknowledging their actions or statements and they respond by trying to make you justify that right. They refuse to accept you on the terms YOU offer them, rather they demand that you accede to the terms they demand of you. They do this by openly disputing your intentions as offered and make you the deviate liar really waging war with them. Fortunately, they expose the truth for all to see when they act on their lies, accusations and judgmental beliefs.

Apparently, Mr Ibish is some sort of an authority on all matters Jew, Israeli, Arab and Palestinian. For sure from what he says, someone sure thinks he is. I make it a habit to follow certain individuals on Twitter like Glenn Greenwald and Matt Duss among many others for current world and local updates. The other day Matt Duss retweeted something Hussein Ibish said about Benjamin Netanyahu's speech where he asserted the Israel was NOT occupying Palestine. So I tweeted the following response which elicited the following exchange and terminal course of conduct by Mr. Ibish. Some of the Tweets were edited, but you can get the point of the interaction.

Here is my first edited retweet of his comment and second clarifying comment:

1) And NEVER will. Israel's legitimacy to exist precludes that reality. RT @Ibishblog: [] Israel has never recognized Palestine. 24 May 10:01

2) He's right - Palestinians are. RT @Ibishblog: Bibi claims Israel not "foreign occupiers" in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. 24 may 10:05

This is his first reply:

Ibishblog reply: @JoeBlowReport The US, UN, every country in the world and all of international law would beg to differ with that bizarre theory. 24 May 10:06

Now my questioning response:

@Ibishblog Why then did Netanyahu take that position? The de facto reality supports his position. That's why NO peace – ever. 24 May 10:11

And his final reply. Notice he does not answer my question, but personally attacks me. Classic method used by someone unable to sustain or defend what they did or said with an unsubstantiated or totally unjustified personal accusation.

Ibishblog reply: @JoeBlowReport I have nothing to say to a supporter of conflict and war and an opponent of peace and compromise.

What Mr. Ibish demonstrates here is why there is no peace or peace prospects for Israel and the Palestinians.  He gives himself away as a warmonger by his demonstrated attitude. He's totally clueless as to who and what I am and yet he's publicly judging me and my intentions as if he is God Almighty.

More importantly is, one, his inability to see beyond his own narrow point of view and limited understanding. And two, his complete inability or incapability to listen or see six decades of de facto reality. Benjamin Netanyahu is not postulating some "bizarre theory." He's trying to tell people like Hussein Ibish that he and his people have a legitimate position that justifies their actions and their historical actions. It is for this reason, because Arabs and Palestinians, are working at cross-purposes and cannot see how they are working against themselves that they are so totally controlled and predictable.

Consequently, based upon my own personal life's experiences, I'd say the prospect for lasting peace between Arab and Jew is a non-negotiable reality, if not an impossibility. How do you negotiate peace with people like Mr. Hussein Ibish? The fact is you cannot as long as he is dropping bombs on you. You can surrender, but that's all.

Not long after this exchange he wrote the following article on Foreign Policy: Should the Palestinians Recognize Israel as a Jewish State? No -- it's just another delaying tactic by Benjamin Netanyahu.”
 
Then there was the conversation on BlogDog Crosstalk: “Obama, Israel & Peace Illusion” with Daniel Pollak, Paul Scham and Hussein Ibish where Daniel Pollak reaffirmed Netanyahu's assertion and my observation.

*****

The so-called two-state solution was a ruse designed to do exactly what has happened, stall until Israel consolidated everything it wanted as intended right from the beginning. Just like Mr. Ibish, there was never ever any recognition of my legitimate right to dare question him or assert my right to imply individual legitimacy as a human man equal to him. The legitimacy of his whole existence is based upon a dream or a mirage contained within his mind and anyone that questions or threatens that fantasy is at war with him. And so it is with the Jews.

--Joe

"God-Speak" and The Dreamer

 

[COMMENT UPDATE Below - Look who monitor's this Report]

 

Dave Stancliff adds another sleazy contribution to his many indictments of self. The irony here is that he is unable to see, let alone understand, that what he says to me are really statements about himself. He can't live my life, even though he keeps trying. He can only live in his own little fantasy world - his world of dreams. His problem, demonstrated by his constant ad hominem litany, is that he keeps getting his fixated dreams mixed up with what he "thinks" is real. If not, he would not keep trying to convince himself that everyone else is as confused and as mixed up about reality and life as he is.

Relevance. The problem is not that I'm afraid or unable to protect and defend my family from predatory, racist lunatics that keep crawling out of the sewer assaulting anyone they think they can get at. The statement made is that the anonymity of the writer(s) of this Report should be considered a "gift." Problem is, the Dave Stancliff's of this world are too stupid to understand what that might mean. Then too, everything he's lyingly accused me of being and doing, really only defines him and since I never take (almost never, ever) anything personally (The Second Agreement) I do not need to be sorely tempted.

Irrelevance. Notice in his last comment his inability to distinguish between what is said directly "to" someone or observations "about" someone. (D. Stancliff below: "If I'm so irrevelant (sp)..why do you continue to write about me?") I used the word "think" above advisably, because even when I explain the difference and why he is so totally "irrelevant" regardless of his continuing attempts to force me (us) to acknowledge or recognize him in some way directly, he still is unable to comprehend. I (we) don't write about him. That is a total waste of time and energy. What he says and does, his conduct and behavior is another matter. Perhaps a quote from an esteemed Bible writer would help explain: "Hate what is evil; cling to what is good." -Romans 12:9 NIV.

Objective Observation. I and Joe Blow write this blog Report anonymously in order to retain its primary purpose: impersonal objectivity. Objectivity means we focus on the "object," NOT the "subject." Dave Stancliff is unable to make the distinction. The distinction being, D. Stancliff is the "subject," what he thinks, believes, says, writes or does is the "object." When the Report makes observations about his newspaper column no one is writing about, commenting about or attacking Dave Stancliff the person. When he comes on my blog and tells me and the whole world that I am a "hatemonger" for writing about his conduct, he changes the rules. Our observations are now about "him," - the subject. So, we observe that such conduct generally is derived from the conduct of a racist-based personalities. Which is generally consistant with people that are unable to distinguish reality from fantasy.

Remember, "hatemonger" is defined as: 1) A person who kindles hatred, enmity, or prejudice in others - 2) One who incites others to hatred or prejudice. -- Even with capital letters, Stancliff never justifies his accusations. Not one example! But, then that would show some respect for the reader. That way you, the reader, could decide for yourself if what he says is the truth. That is not the way of little tin gods. -tin god:
"An often pompous or dictatorial person who demands or receives more respect than is merited."

Interesting observation, though, based upon feedback, people see right through Stancliff and his god-like dictates and demands in his vain attemps to get people to make him relevant by focusing on him. When the Dave Stancliff's of this world measure up to "this" standard, maybe then we can all accept these little would-be tin god's disrespect and think and believe exactly what they tells us is and is not. "This": Love for Enemies - Words of Jesus Christ.

Matthew 5:43 "You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' 44 But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect. - Holy Bible, New International Version. [Emphasis added]

--Joe

---

Dave has left a new comment on your post "Warmonger Writes About Peace II":

Looks like the multiple personalities are back.

Back when I was talking to the personality that calls himself Joe, I thought there might be a chance of civil communication.

But your osession with me, coupled with anger, has brought back the "we" - or all those voices in your head.

Just want to let you "all" know that I'm not going to write about you, because that's what you really want; some form of
recognition.

Oh yeah, why would you have to move to Brazil if you let people know who you are(your words)?

Could it be you fear retaliation from all of your HATE MONGERING on your blog?

If I'm so irrevelant..why do you continue to write about me?

Like I said, I'm not going to write about you because this appears to be your goal. Sorry, all of you will just have to suck wind and move on.

Posted by Dave to Joe Blow Report at July 10, 2010 8:50 AM  -[Emphasis added] [Pic Source]

Duplicity and Betrayal Will Not Save America

As an avid follower of Glenn Greenwald, I just had to bring this post to the Report. Bullies and criminals seem to think, if not believe, that just because they get away with their crimes that somehow they are not criminals. History, if nothing else, should teach us that there is always a day of reckoning. But, then that's why the criminals all want to "look forward, not back," isn't it?

The only way America redeem itself before God, the Universe and man, despite the Swede's beliefs to the contrary, was for President Obama to enforce the Law -- ALL LAWS. Now it's too late. He's made himself part and party to all the crimes and criminals that's gone before him. And it only took him 9 months.

He didn't do it all by himself; he a lots of help. What do we call these enablers? Oh, yeah! Democrats and Republicans.

Here is Genn's Thursday, October 8, 2009, post: "A historian's account of Democrats and Bush-era war crimes" -- Read it and weep.

The American Prospect's Adam Serwer notes that, yesterday, Sen. Joe Lieberman successfully inserted into the Homeland Security appropriations bill an amendment -- supported by the Obama White House -- to provide an exemption from the Freedom of Information Act's mandates by authorizing the Defense Secretary to suppress long-concealed photographs of detainee abuse.

Click to continue ...

--Joe