Monday, July 28, 2003
I am going out of town for a few days, and I most likely won't have internet access.
Posted by Woty @ 05:01 AM EST [Link]
In an LGF post, Charles wrote:
As Arafat's puppet, the Holocaust denier Abu Mazen, defiled the White House with his presence, this is what the Palestinians were doing in Gaza City. They celebrated our deaths on September 11, they sided with Iraq, they burn and step on our flag, and President Bush wants to create a state for them.
They're laughing at us.
It is not yet feasible to establish a Palestinian state, as the last thing we ought to do right now is create yet another terrorist-sponsoring state. If a state was created without the dominant values in Palestinian society changing, such a state only be used as a base for attacking Israel and otherwise supporting anti-Western terror. Establishing a state will not, in itself, cause this change in values. If one believes that it is inherently impossible for the dominant values in Palestinian society to change, then it is necessary to oppose in principle the creation of a Palestinian state.
However, if it is inherently impossible to improve Palestinian society, what is the right thing to do? One might say that Palestinian national identity didn't exist before Israel was established, or that Israel is the only Jewish state anywhere, but there are many Arabic states that could take in the Palestinians. Someone who made these arguments would have a point – but a proposal along these lines would be rejected rather emphatically by the Palestinians and the Arabic states. A solution that involved the Palestinians becoming part of other nations would have to involve destruction of Palestinian national identity, and their acceptance by other nations.
To oppose the eventual creation of a Palestinian state is to say that it is more moral and more feasible to destroy Palestinian national identity than it is to help the Palestinians to create a better culture. We've succeeded in the past in improving nations – when have we ever succeeded in solving problems by destroying them?
Posted by Woty @ 01:25 AM EST [Link]
Tuesday, July 22, 2003
Whenever Tony Blair is accused by Tories of managing something badly, he responds by saying that he spends more money on it than they do, as though it is impossible to spend more money and do something badly. Here's an example from the June 18 PMQs:
Mr. Duncan Smith: I have not finished yet. The Prime Minister will not get away as easily as that.
Let me remind the Prime Minister what he actually did pledge. Eight months ago, at the Labour party conference, he said that transport under Labour was "probably the worst area of public services". Will he explain how full-time chaos on the roads can be dealt with by a part-time Secretary of State for Transport?
The Prime Minister: I am sorry if the right hon. Gentleman is not prepared to acknowledge that I now agree with Conservative party policy, at least in relation to the Secretary of State for Scotland. As for transport, we are investing billions of pounds in our transport system. That is public investment, and also private sector investment.
The problem that the right hon. Gentleman must explain is this. That investment programme was put to the House a short time ago, and it was voted against by the Conservative party. How can the right hon. Gentleman say that he is going to improve the state of Britain's roads and railways when he has opposed the investment that will make that possible?
Mr. Duncan Smith: It is the usual story. The Prime Minister is rattling out the same old Labour lie machine, every single time. [Interruption.] Oh yes.
Let us remind the Prime Minister exactly what state all his transport policy is in. One in five trains is now late. Train services are being cut by his Government. Train fares are set to be increased by his Government. Congestion on the roads is growing every single day.
So the Prime Minister thinks that a record like that�a record of chaos like that�can be dealt with by appointing a part-time Secretary of State for Transport.
He must be the only person who does. Is that not the real reason why every pledge he makes is broken, and no one believes a single word he says any more?
The Prime Minister: First, let me say something about rail punctuality. Until the Hatfield rail crash, it was more or less constant. It is true that since Hatfield we have realised that the state of the railway infrastructure was infinitely worse than was anticipated. It is for that very reason, however, that we are committed to substantial investment. There are billions of pounds of public money, and also private sector money.
Now�can the right hon. Gentleman tell us whether he is in favour of that extra investment or not? One thing is for sure: spending less money on transport is not going to help it.
Posted by Woty @ 08:53 AM EST [Link]
Wednesday, July 16, 2003
Secular Islam is a great blog written by an American who converted to Islam and is now unhappy with it. Her blog is good because she takes Islam seriously, and criticizes the bad parts of it. She doesn't make the error of dehumanizing Muslims by writing them off as diversity, or the other error of considering Muslims to be subhumans who have no other choices. Well worth reading!
Posted by Woty @ 11:12 AM EST [Link]
Ronnie commented on the Palestinians are not Israelis entry:
