War and the Peace Prize

Elie Wiesel jointly authored a rather spurious ad that drew the criticism of US officials. This guy is a Nobel Peace Prize laureate. Granted, it was 1986, but still!

There is a lot of talk in the news that Obama is reaching the Israeli audience and changing some minds over Netanyahu's head. I don't know if that's true, but Weisel (an American) feels he needs to hit back (at Obama?). I guess.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mj-rosenberg/elie-wiesel-and-the-rest_b_544027.html


Text of ad:

It was inevitable: Jerusalem once again is at the center of political debates and international storms. New and old tensions surface at a disturbing pace. Seventeen times destroyed and seventeen times rebuilt, it is still in the middle of diplomatic confrontations that could lead to armed conflict. Neither Athens nor Rome has aroused that many passions.

For me, the Jew that I am, Jerusalem is above politics. It is mentioned more than six hundred times in Scripture—and not a single time in the Koran. Its presence in Jewish history is overwhelming. There is no more moving prayer in Jewish history than the one expressing our yearning to return to Jerusalem. To many theologians, it IS Jewish history, to many poets, a source of inspiration. It belongs to the Jewish people and is much more than a city, it is what binds one Jew to another in a way that remains hard to explain. When a Jew visits Jerusalem for the first time, it is not the first time; it is a homecoming. The first song I heard was my mother’s lullaby about and for Jerusalem. Its sadness and its joy are part of our collective memory.

Since King David took Jerusalem as his capital, Jews have dwelled inside its walls with only two interruptions; when Roman invaders forbade them access to the city and again, when under Jordanian occupation, Jews, regardless of nationality, were refused entry into the old Jewish quarter to meditate and pray at the Wall, the last vestige of Solomon’s temple. It is important to remember: had Jordan not joined Egypt and Syria in the war against Israel, the old city of Jerusalem would still be Arab. Clearly, while Jews were ready to die for Jerusalem they would not kill for Jerusalem.

Today, for the first time in history, Jews, Christians and Muslims all may freely worship at their shrines. And, contrary to certain media reports, Jews, Christians and Muslims ARE allowed to build their homes anywhere in the city. The anguish over Jerusalem is not about real estate but about memory.

What is the solution? Pressure will not produce a solution. Is there a solution? There must be, there will be. Why tackle the most complex and sensitive problem prematurely? Why not first take steps which will allow the Israeli and Palestinian communities to find ways to live together in an atmosphere of security. Why not leave the most difficult, the most sensitive issue, for such a time?

Jerusalem must remain the world’s Jewish spiritual capital, not a symbol of anguish and bitterness, but a symbol of trust and hope. As the Hasidic master Rebbe Nahman of Bratslav said, “Everything in this world has a heart; the heart itself has its own heart.”

Jerusalem is the heart of our heart, the soul of our soul.

- Elie Wiesel

A Response:
http://www.counterpunch.org/amin04212010.html

settler clash deemed intolerable?

I was encouraged by this headline, thinking the Israeli military might be coming to its senses and might start to see Palestinians as human beings with rights or something moving in that direction...

(here's the article)
Israeli military dubs settler clash 'intolerable'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8634754.stm


Until I saw this quote:

"Violence and raising hands up against IDF [Israeli Defence Forces] soldiers is crossing the line in an intolerable manner," the statement said.

Business as usual. Shame for throwing rocks at soldiers, but forget about how Israel itself is facilitating or participating in the subjugation and torture of an entire population.

In light of what I referenced here-
http://notanotherpoliticalblog-j.blogspot.com/2010/04/more-settler-terrorism.html

the indignation at settlers' attacking the IDF is ridiculous!

(More) Settler Terrorism

There was an attack on a mosque in Harawa, West Bank April 14 by settlers. This one was just graffiti and some reports describe a burning car as well.

Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words can never hurt me. That’s how the saying goes, but in this case it is accompanied by violent acts by people who mean to terrorize and hurt others. The words (slogans, racist graffiti, etc) take on a bit more life and significance. The latest graffiti at a West Bank mosque was preceded by more burning cars, 300 uprooted olive trees and shooting at a shop. This is the point when freedom of speech and words one can ignore cross the line into viable threats and cause for action.

What will happen to these guilty settlers? And if Israelis fail to act or set the guilty free, will it be appropriate for the rest of the world to flag all settlers or all Israelis or all Jews as threats? Will it be appropriate for Palestinian security officials to assassinate the guilty parties or kidnap, imprison and interrogate them and those who know them indefinitely? No, it’s not appropriate, but that’s what happens to Palestinians.



December 2009 mosque arson:
http://notanotherpoliticalblog-j.blogspot.com/2010/01/hebrew-slogans-and-another-reason.html


April 2010 mosque attack:
Vandals Attack West Bank Mosque
http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/14/vandals-attack-west-bank-mosque/

“…the attack was the second on the village this week. He said that settlers has set another car on fire and shot at a shop on Monday.”

Mon-Tue
No-one saw, no-one heard: 300 Palestinian olive trees uprooted
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1163243.html


Tue-Wed
Jewish settlers suspected in West Bank mosque attack
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8619741.stm

*two burning cars, mosque graffiti

Israeli soldiers showed up after the attack and erased the graffiti. They prevented journalists from taking photographs until they completed the cleanup.

quote from http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2010/04/14/105843.html



Is this to destroy evidence and protect settlers or are they doing Palestinians a favor?


“Price tag” again shows up as racist graffiti this time as it did in December '09. It has been described in the news so far as a “policy” as far as I have seen. Some would call such a policy of retaliating on innocent people for the actions of your own government for merely threatening to crack down on your illegal state of being (settlements) crazy, unjust, unfair, illegal, criminal, TERRORISM, but to most it remains a mere policy.

***I wonder if they are "reacting" to the Israeli human rights organization who condemned Israel for trying to push through a rather old measure that would make all West Bank residents illegal aliens and able to be "deported" elsewhere. They could be "reacting" to Obama's strong words (in the absence of actions), especially if the Israeli public seems swayed by them against settlements. "Reacting" is settlers' interpretation.

I haven't been able to find a description of what was written in the April 2010 attack that constitutes racist graffiti, but there are examples here if you are at a loss as for what to expect:

Dec 2009 arson:
http://notanotherpoliticalblog-j.blogspot.com/2010/01/hebrew-slogans-and-another-reason.html

IDF T-shirt (March 2009):
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1072466.html
http://www.khabrein.info/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=21080&Itemid=57
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7960071.stm

IDF graffiti (March 2009):
http://www.pchrgaza.org/files/campaigns/english/aftermath/5.html
"...soldiers left behind dozens of bags of faeces in the bedrooms, despite the presence of a functioning toilet, and left crude sexual diagrams on the walls. "
"Death will find you soon”
Have you ever wondered what hell looks like? Well… look around you -----! Ha ha ha”
“Die you all”, “Make war not peace”, “Arabs need to die”, a gravestone engraved with the words “Arabs 1948-2009”
“There will be a day when we kill all the Arabs”
“Bad for the Arabs is good for me”
“A good Arab is an Arab in the grave”
“Peace now, but between Jews and Jews, not Jews and Arabs”

more on T-shirts:
http://norabf.wordpress.com/2009/03/22/dead-palestinian-babies-and-bombed-mosques-idf-israeli-destruction-forces-fashion-2009/

http://www.kuna.net.kw/NewsAgenciesPublicSite//ArticleDetails.aspx?id=1984651&Language=en

There is no Christ in Christian Zionism

April 2010 edits are this color.

This link was presented in a mailing list I'm on in September 2009:
What Would Jesus Say (to a Zio-Christian)?umkahlil.blogspot.com/2009/09/what-would-jesus-say-to-zio-christian.html

This was my response:

I want to echo this sentiment.

In addition to this sentiment and the ones expressed, I'd like to present a minority (IMO) belief among Christians in this country. I belong to a rather small, conservative group of Christians, but we take great pains to live by the Bible and in so doing we reject this majority opinion (Christian Zionism) plaguing the nation and infecting the political landscape- premillennialism/Christian Zionism.

The points in this article (What Would Jesus Say) were good about the Golden Rule and relationship between Muslims and Christians being misconstrued and things like this. I would like to add a few solid, but often overlooked, points in the argument against Christian Zionism.





 *(this one added 11/14/11, but arguably a critical issue) 
What I most want to know from Christian Zionists is what about Christian Palestinians? I mean, maybe it is easy to justify denying rights to Muslims for whatever reason, but what about those individuals with whom you probably would consider brothers and sisters in Christ? Should they suffer for the sake of your false doctrine because they will go to heaven anyway in the end? Or do you as Christians bear some responsibility to help them gain dignity, safety and basic rights in this life? I'm not even talking about going over and fighting or the US invading Israel, here. I'm just talking about tossing out Israeli propaganda, learning the facts from Palestinians (Palestinian Christians if you wish- though Muslims and Christians will have pretty similar stories of loss and oppression at the hands of Israelis) and changing US policy to support justice rather than just Israel.

*A theme that runs through this blind, dogmatic support for Israel is that the Jews are still God's chosen. This is a ridiculous notion for Christians as such would render worthless the foundation of our faith and salvation- the sacrifice on the cross of Jesus that turned the page on the old and looks to the new (Hebrews ch8-10). It boggles my mind. We would also be required to follow the old law for diet, travel, animal sacrifices, etc, btw, if Jews are God's chosen today. Also absurd for a Bible believing Christian.

*Rom 2:28For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:
29But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.

*Ephesians 2:14 For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation, 15 having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace,

*Gal 3:23But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.
24Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
25But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.
26For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
27For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
28There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
29And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the
promise.
*They are eager to quote Old Testament verses about God proclaiming his love for Israelites and the fact of their chosenness, but they fail to tell you the rest of the story. The Israelites' chosenness was conditional (Deut 28). God laid out the consequences- scattering, wars, desolation, famine like nothing seen before. They in fact did violate the terms God set before them and did experience the consequences. You can see even in secular history the completion of the consequences with the Roman invasion an destruction of the temple in Jerusalem in 70AD. Jesus' illustration of the tree in Matthew 21 is pretty clear about Israel's futureas a nation. The Pharisees understood it.

* In saying that 1948 is the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy, you call God a liar:
Joshua 21:45Not a word failed of any good thing which the LORD had spoken to the house of Israel. All came to pass.

*About Israelites- I also find it hard to believe that the Israelites of the old testament are in fact today's Jews (another of their claims). 2000 years in the diaspora and no intermarriage?? And to think that people literally trying to return to a figurative location (see next point) after 2000 years have more of a claim to the land than Palestinians 30-60 years removed is just crazy and unfounded.

*The return after this destruction is in fact figurative- one of Christians- Jews and Gentiles both- the destination being heaven at the end of time, not the political state of Israel in 1948.


A Christian focus on a literal return to Jerusalem in 1948 or any other time after this destruction flies in the face of Jesus' declaration (we Christians believe- God inspired declaration) that the kingdom is not of this world- John 18:36.

The belief in premillennialism can be explained by the same idea that gives rise to militant Islam- people take the word of men instead of reading it for themselves or they read bits and pieces to find what suits them and stop there.

This link below has something written by a better writer than I and he includes Bible verses- for those interested. I've also got my own study, but thought this would be sufficient and more appropriate given the forum.

http://www.christiancourier.com/articles/28-god-and-the-nation-of-israel

***
Perhaps I will post a few verses now that I'm not responding in that forum...

***

Related post:
http://notanotherpoliticalblog-j.blogspot.com/2009/07/bible-prophecy-about-iran-electionsor.html

Palestinians stop rockets; Lieberman threatens against a Palestinian state

Gaza groups agree to stop rockets
http://www.jpost.com/Israel/Article.aspx?id=172485


Good news, right?

Maybe we can expect peace and goodwill from Israel as well?


Israeli FM warns Palestinians not to declare state
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100406/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_israel_palestinians


Wrong!


Israeli FM warns Palestinians not to unilaterally declare a state??

You know, this would be funny if it weren’t for the fact that the US backs whatever Israel decides. So, as dumb as this sounds coming out of this bigoted (former?) terrorist’s mouth, it matters. ☹

Israel was allowed to declare a state on mostly Palestinian land.
Whose permission did they get?
Israel is allowed to unilaterally “disengage” from Gaza and try and dodge responsibility. Israel is allowed to do whatever in the name of security.

Palestinians, however, aren’t even entitled to basic necessities, let alone national aspirations!

Most free nations consider freedom and national identity a God-given right. Not Israel.

http://tinyurl.com/yzql4qn

Israel vs Palestinians

A few thoughts about another large scale attack on Gaza...

Most of it has been said before, I'm sure.

The Gaza attacks and the recent rocket attack for which Israel “retaliated” are always described as a Palestinian attack and Israeli retaliation- as though they are doing absolutely nothing to deserve such attacks. (???) Attacks by Palestinians always occur in a vacuum unprovoked. Israel is the eternal victim, always on the defensive, always retaliating, never the provocateur- or so they (and everyone) say.

We talk about the two as though they are equal- Israel and Palestine. It is said that both sides should stop violence and both sides have to support peace; both sides in the 2006 Gaza assault should investigate its war crimes.

They aren’t the same, though.

One is a government ordering war crimes. One is a dispossessed and occupied people who have received no compensation for their stolen land and no justice for the crimes against them. (Would any American not be ready to fight when faced with that???)

One gets massive amounts of financial, military, diplomatic and every other kind of aid possible along with the assurance of an unending and unbreakable bond from a superpower; one gets sporadic support, but mostly blame from the same superpower/mediator.

One is the Occupier attacking largely innocent people; one is the Occupied people struggling for their freedom and rights.

As highlighted by the Gaza attacks, this isn’t a struggle between two militaries; this is the Israeli military targeting the already captive and starving Palestinian people.

The Israeli government is punishing the civilian population of Palestine for crimes fringe groups perpetrate fueled by the Israeli occupation, so essentially Israel is attacking for something it is causing. The civilians (and PA- not really an applicable term anymore) are in a lose-lose situation.

“Wait the retaliation tomorrow”

Edit 4/6/10: I've been looking for more info from my favorite podcasts on NPR and the BBC, but haven't been finding nearly as much for this incredible threat for Gaza as for the pretty minor Biden snub. It figures, but it's still frustrating. Israel has bad timing for an announcement and it news. A threat for a larger scale Gaza attack? No one cares.

Near the time I wrote my last post about the handful of headlines saying Israel was building settlements, advancing on Gaza, but still “hopes for peace,” apparently things were happening in Gaza.

They were being leafleted on Thursday.

***
From
http://www.imemc.org/article/58344 :

The leaflets just stated “Wait the retaliation tomorrow”.

***
And attacked Thursday/Friday.

Israelis do love to bomb a milk factory. Perhaps this is for the “demographic threat?” Are we supposed to believe the Israeli military is that bad that it bombed these things by mistake?? I think also police stations and security training facilities were targeted. Given their propensity attacking security installations, someone please tell me how anyone can expect them to “reign in terror,” especially under the Occupation conditions of poverty, curfews and closures?

***

They bombed metal workshops, farms, a milk factory and small sites belonging to the military wing of Hamas “in retaliation” for the deaths of 2 soldiers a week or two ago.


Thirteen Israeli air strikes hit Gaza Strip
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8600285.stm


Israel pounds Gaza with missiles
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2010/04/201041224613622604.html

***

Israel threatens new Gaza offensive
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2010/04/20104265845904380.html

"If this rocket fire against Israel does not stop, it seems we will have to raise the level of our activity and step up our actions against Hamas," Silvan Shalom, Israel's deputy prime minister, told public radio on Friday.

"We won't allow frightened children to again be raised in bomb shelters and so, in the end, it will force us to launch another military operation.

"I hope we can avoid it, but it is one of the options we have, and if we don't have a choice, we will use it in the near future."

***

They don’t have a choice but to attack?? They are the only ones with a choice!!

If Israel's hope to avoid war is anything like their hope for peace, consider that a declaration of an imminent attack on Gaza a la January 2009! The minute we in the US have a national distraction on the scale of a presidential election or something, Israel will bomb Gaza and claim it's because of the rocket attacks. Or will they bomb to distract us from the settlement standoff? That way, they can stop bombing and look like they are making a concession and giving up a lot for peace.

What garbage.

When will we call a spade a spade? And boycott it?

Palestinian aspirations are clear, but what does Israel want?

Palestinian aspirations are clear, but what does Israel want?
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1160894.html

An age old question made ever more pressing by my previous post and my next one...

Israel threatens and is uncompromising, yet hopes for peace (???)

I saw these headlines at the BBC website today:

Israeli tanks 'advance into Gaza'

No change on Jerusalem, says PM

Israeli PM hopeful on peace talks

Israel 'will build in Jerusalem'

Hopeful on peace talks? Really?

Israel: Our tanks are advancing on Gaza. Despite the fact that international law says settlements are illegal and E. Jerusalem's occupied (illegal to build), Jerusalem's ours, we're building on it, and we hear you America (and the law and rest of the world), but we're still building on Occupied Territory.

How can they be hopeful for peace when they can't even follow international law, much less make concessions for peace?! What is their hope? That Palestinians will suddenly be satisfied with being prisoners on part of their land? That Palestinians will out of the blue be satisfied with no homeland, representation, freedom, justice, food, water, movement, etc??

Would/ did Jews accept that? Did we expect them to? Why are we waiting on Palestinians to do so?

Total garbage!

I am a candidate!

Edit 4/6/10: I received another one, slightly different- see below.

OK, not really.

Gotta love how this thing is so general. Complete with spelling errors, as all good scam letters are. I just signed up for LinkedIn, so I'm thinking this could be something floating around there.

Read the text:

From: info@newyorksamplesuite.com
Subject: Jennifer - Your Recent Nomination Into Distinguished Professionals
Date: March 30, 2010 4:49:17 AM EDT
To: xxx@xxx.com (my work email)
Reply-To: info@newyorksamplesuite.com

Dear Jennifer,

You were recently chosen as a potential candidate to represent your professional community in the 2010/2011 Edition of Distinguished Professionals Online.

We are please to inform you that your candidacy was formally approved March 15th, 2010. Congratulations.

The Publishing Committee selected you as a potential candidate based not only upon your current standing, but focusing as well on criteria from executive and professional directories, associations, and trade journals. Given your background, the Director believes your profile makes a fitting addition to our publication and our online network.

There is no fee nor obligation to be listed. As we are working off of secondary sources, we must receive verification from you that your profile is accurate. After receiving verification, we will validate your online listing within 7 business days.

Once finalized, your listing will share prominent registry space with thousands of fellow accomplished individuals across the globe, each representing accomplishment within their own geographical area.

To verify your profile and accept the candidacy, please visit here. Our registration deadline for this year's candidates is April 25th, 2010. To ensure you are included, we must receive your verification on or before this date. On behalf of our Committee I salute your achievement and welcome you to our association.

Sincerely,
Robert Patterson
Vice President, Research Division

Distinguished Professionals Online
26 Bond Street
Westbury, NY 11542, USA

Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail communication and any attachments may contain confidential and privileged information for the use of the designated recipients named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this communication in error and that any review, disclosure, dissemination, distribution or copying of it or its contents is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please delete the communication and unsubscribe from the mailing using the options available in this email.

To remove yourself from future mailings, please visit here to use our automated removal system. You will be removed from our mailing database within seven (7) days.

***

I was selected due to "current standing, but focusing as well on criteria from executive and professional directories, associations, and trade journals."

What trade? What standing? Do they know what I do? Why would being in a directory be criteria for being a candidate, anyway?

Relief! There is no fee! This can't possibly be a scam. (sarcasm)

The catch: They need verification -click on the hyperlink. There is no way I'd click that. I mean, they have selected me as a candidate but need verification since they are working from secondary sources? If I'm a candidate, shouldn't they have talked to my boss or others in this mysterious directory that won me this esteemed status? Am I unreachable by phone to bestow such an honor? :)

By the way, the two things I link to are these, not the bad phishing one in my actual email! :)
http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/consumer/alerts/alt127.shtm
http://computer.howstuffworks.com/phishing.htm

So, the only question left is- is this a scam from this country or abroad?

I'm certainly no computer expert, but I think this is the IP: 173.224.211.218

http://www.dnsstuff.com

Location: United States [City: Milton, Wisconsin]

OrgName:    Psychz Networks
OrgID:      PSL-86
Address:    20687-2 Amar Rd. #312
City:       Walnut
StateProv:  CA
PostalCode: 91789
Country:    US

A week later, I receive this one:

From: info@newyorksamplesuite.com
Subject: - 2010 Nomination Into The Global Directory of Who's Who
Date: April 6, 2010 1:59:18 AM EDT
To: xxx@xxx.com (my work email)
Reply-To: info@newyorksamplesuite.com

***
This was the IP address 173.224.211.207 ; I didn’t get a location, but the same Psychz Networks in CA showed up with the unknown location.

They didn't use my name on this one. :( I'll try and highlight the differences from the one above. Basically, the company, sender and address, approval date and deadlines are different. The exact wording, including the fact that they are "please to inform me" are the same.
***

Dear , (To their credit, they sent me a duplicate right after with my name in it.)

You were recently chosen as a potential candidate to represent your professional community in the 2010/2011 Edition of The Global Directory of Who's Who Online.

We are please to inform you that your candidacy was formally approved March 30th, 2010. Congratulations.

The Publishing Committee selected you as a potential candidate based not only upon your current standing, but focusing as well on criteria from executive and professional directories, associations, and trade journals. Given your background, the Director believes your profile makes a fitting addition to our publication and our online network.

There is no fee nor obligation to be listed. As we are working off of secondary sources, we must receive verification from you that your profile is accurate. After receiving verification, we will validate your online listing within 7 business days.

Once finalized, your listing will share prominent registry space with thousands of fellow accomplished individuals across the globe, each representing accomplishment within their own geographical area.

To verify your profile and accept the candidacy, please visit here. Our registration deadline for this year's candidates is April 30th, 2010. To ensure you are included, we must receive your verification on or before this date. On behalf of our Committee I salute your achievement and welcome you to our association.

Sincerely,


John Franklin


Vice President, Research Division 


The Global Directory of Who's Who

4250 Veterans Highway, Suite 2050

Holbrook, NY 11741, USA

Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail communication and any attachments may contain confidential and privileged information for the use of the designated recipients named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this communication in error and that any review, disclosure, dissemination, distribution or copying of it or its contents is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please delete the communication and unsubscribe from the mailing using the options available in this email.

To remove yourself from future mailings, please visit here to use our automated removal system. You will be removed from our mailing database within seven (7) days.

US to abstain at UN on settlements???

Quote from:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8591461.stm

"Meanwhile, the US is reportedly considering abstaining from a possible UN Security Council resolution against Israeli settlement expansion in East Jerusalem. The US usually blocks Security Council resolutions criticising Israel."

Part of me says- Wow. Really? Amazing.

On the other hand, since we are so opposed to this, shouldn't we be voting NO instead of just bowing out and abstaining???

Boycott! Sanction! Divest!

U.S. Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel
http://usacbi.wordpress.com/


http://www.stopthewall.org/boycott/bds/cupe.shtml


http://www.bdsmovement.net/?q=node/9


http://www.bigcampaign.org/

Patreaus talks about Israel/Palestine??

As with other American involvement in the Middle East, I'm still pretty pessimistic, but every time another high level official dares to publicy challenge in any way our one sided approach to peace in the Middle East, that is good news.

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2010/03/17/bacevich_on_petraeus_israel
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1157108.html

***

http://mideast.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/03/14/the_petraeus_briefing_biden_s_embarrassment_is_not_the_whole_story

Some quotes from FP:

The briefers reported that there was a growing perception among Arab leaders
that the U.S. was incapable of standing up to Israel, that CENTCOM's mostly
Arab constituency was losing faith in American promises, that Israeli intransigence
on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was jeopardizing U.S. standing in the region, and that Mitchell himself was (as a senior Pentagon officer later bluntly described it) "too old, too slow ... and too late."

"Everywhere they went, the message was pretty humbling," a Pentagon officer
familiar with the briefing says. "America was not only viewed as weak, but
its military posture in the region was eroding."

The message couldn't be plainer: Israel's intransigence could cost American
lives.

--Cetainly this is a wake up call? The situation has never publicly been framed this way by a top dog.

--Can the US military lobby win over the Israel lobby, AIPAC?? I had never thought about the military stepping in, not only in a more diplomatic fashion, but at all. Plus, I had never thought of them in the lobbying mix, but they are. ARe they the game changer we need? That would be unbelievable if that's what brought peace to the region. But I guess it would accomplish what many have been trying to do for some time- get the Arab opinion, history, and narrative to be considered equally with the Jewish one rather than ignoring it or relagating it to a footnote.

AIPAC 2010

AIPAC 2010 / Harsh messages wrapped in love
Wow. Look at those pictures. Are they going to kiss? So much love. The harshness had dissipated (from the settlement crisis) in the space of about 24 hours. It’s back to the same old love fest. Let the lovin’ begin. Here's my take.

\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/


Some quotes from Secretary of State Clinton at the most recent AIPAC Conference:
Netanyahu's are below hers.

"And I'm very pleased that you will be hearing from a good friend of mine, Congressman Jim Langevin, a great champion for Israel. And let's hear it for Jim."

-- ??? Let it be known throughout the land we love Israel no matter how they spit on our faces or disregard law. We are proud of that? I have to look into Langevin to see what the deal is with the odd shout out...

"Petitioning your government, expressing your views, speaking up in the arena - this is what democracy is all about."

--Lobbying for the interests of a foreign government? There are debates (with good reason) that it should be registered as an agent of a foreign government…

"And therefore, we firmly believe that when we strengthen Israel's security, we strengthen America's security."

--Even if this is true, one has to ask- are things such as the Palestinian birth rate (just one example) something you want to support Israel in combating as a security threat??? Israel has a very broad definition of security and even a very broad and generous definition of Israel for that matter, as it often includes land the international community has defined as Occupied Territory. Even if our interests are close, we need to be clear and stand firm in where we deviate and choose international law over Israel’s hearts desires.

"So from its first day, the Obama Administration has worked to promote Israel's security and long-term success."

--What is success? Everything needs decoded in this conflict. For Israel to stay Jewish primarily or stay democratic? Which is more important- peace and democracy or keeping Israel Jewish? Sometimes I’m not sure where we are on that.

“our commitment to Israel's security and Israel's future is rock solid, unwavering, enduring, and forever”

--We should never declare such a thing to anyone. This seems to strike a rather religious tone. You should only declare this sort of devotion to God. Sometimes people confuse modern Israel and God it seems. It’s sad.
Our diplomatic relations should be determined by how well our goals match up, mutual trust, mutual respect, etc; not by whatever is currently governing this relationship. In the trust and respect department, Israel is sorely lacking. I would argue we don't have goals either, but another time...

"Americans honor Israel as a homeland for a people too long oppressed and a democracy that has had to defend itself at every turn, a dream nurtured for generations and made real by men and women who refused to bow to the toughest of odds. In Israel's story, we see our own. We see, in fact, the story of all people who struggle for freedom and the right to chart their own destinies."

--Why, then, can we not see Palestinians struggle for a homeland?? This sounds like their current struggle. I guess we can't see the similarities because we share with Israel the bond of ruthless colonizer. Native Americans probably can see the Palestinian story as their own more easily than we. The bond of colonizers is apparently stronger than more noble values and peace, justice and human rights!


“desert bloom”- Yes, she used these words! Twice. This is one of the biggest lies people still believe is true in the history of the Middle East. This language refers to the big, fat, deliberate lie that the desert was uninhabited, devoid of people, structures, flora and fauna when Israel’s first terrorists turned statesmen arrived on the scene in the 40s and Israel is responsible for all that is good- all greenery, fruit trees, olive trees, industry, trade, culture, food, etc. ??? This is definitely not the case if you know anything about the history of the region.


She gives an account of meeting an IDF soldier, going to a graduation of first responders, visiting the sites of suicide bombings, seeing the faces of the Israeli victims. Though this administration has used the term Palestinian suffering, they don’t stand up and say these sorts of things in solidarity with Palestinians who want peace. Either Clinton hasn’t bothered to visit the sites and people affected by Israeli violence or Palestinian suffering is just words to them. Granted such imagery would not be well received at this engagement, I don't see her saying this anywhere. They constantly give a face to Israeli suffering, while just paying minimal lip service to the massive range of Palestinian suffering.

"Under President Obama's leadership, we have reinvigorated defense consultations, redoubled our efforts to ensure Israel's qualitative military edge, and provided nearly $3 billion in annual military assistance."

--She boasts about US military aid to Israel (even though Amnesty said Gaza-and probably other- attacks couldn’t have happened without it) ??? She should be reminding them that because of this, they owe us- at least to follow international law and our laws so we don't look like total idiots and funders of massacres for doing this!

--Finkelstein boils the Amnesty report, Fuelling Conflict down to 3 points:
1. US is the top supplier of weapons to Israel
2. Supplying weapons to Israel has proven illegal under international and US law
3. Gaza attack could not have happened were it not for US taxpayer money

"New construction in East Jerusalem or the West Bank undermines mutual trust and endangers the proximity talks that are the first step toward the full negotiations that both sides want and need."

--The much publicized tough talk and rebuke. We have again backed down in the face of Israeli pressure. They clearly have learned their lesson. Israel is going to do what it wants and there's nothing we can do about it.


She almost praised Arab leaders, but fell into a comfortable and familiar refrain:

"But their rhetoric must now be backed up by action."

--In the next breath she uses “momentum” toward peace to describe Netanyhu’s actions. ??? In what alternate universe is this remotely possible? He has only nominally accepted the two state solution. Official Israeli policies show disregard for international law and human life and rights. It is with him also that she should use such inflammatory language as “rhetoric” and backing words with actions!

\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/


Some quotes from Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu at the most recent AIPAC Conference:

"In recent decades the hatred of the Jews has reemerged with increasing force, but with an insidious twist. It is not merely directed at the Jewish people but increasingly at the Jewish state."

--Criticism of Israel = anti-Semitism. Everyone's favorite way to avoid meaningful discussion.
--Also, many people think Israel is criticized and reviled becaues it is Jewish, but it is actually hated due to the murder and poverty of the Occupation, disregard for internaitonal law, other countries' allowing them to get away with breaking internaitonal law.

"But Israel should be judged by the same standards applied to all nations, and allegations against Israel must be grounded in fact. One allegation that is not is the attempt to describe the Jews as foreign colonialists in their own homeland, one of the great lies of modern times."

--I agree with that first sentence wholeheartedly. However, Bibi believes Israel is being judged more harshly than other nations when in fact it is catching more breaks than anyone ever has. Clearly, there is a disagreement on the facts vs. myths in the Israel-US relationship as well as the Israel-Palestine relationship. The second sentence is pretty subjective and against modern law and conventional wisdom.

"The connection between the Jewish people and the Land of Israel cannot be denied. The connection between the Jewish people and Jerusalem cannot be denied."

--And the Palestinian connection to the land? If the land was empty upon your arrival in 1948, then who, praytell, did you fight so valiantly against?? And what are the refugees in your area refugees of??

"This is what my government has done for peace. What has the Palestinian Authority done for peace? Well, they have placed preconditions on peace talks, waged a relentless international campaign to undermine Israel's legitimacy, and promoted the notorious Goldstone report that falsely accuses Israel of war crimes. In fact, they're doing right now in the UN in the grotesquely misnamed UN Human Rights Council."

--Ahhh. The old "we've done everything; they've done nothing" refrain. Gotta love 'em for trying. Preconditions. Ask that you follow international law? Is that really too much to ask? If so, who is really the problem, here? That must have been satisfying to slip in another swing at the meticulous Goldstone report and UN. It's international law. You don't have to like it. You have to obey it, though. Unless you deal with the US. Then, you can do whatever you want- provided you can deal with our Presidents' frownie face now and again.

"Regrettably, the Palestinian Authority has also continued incitement against Israel. A few days ago, a public square near Ramallah was named after a terrorist who murdered 37 Israeli civilians, including 13 children. The Palestinian Authority did nothing to prevent it."

--I wonder how many public squares and streets and buildings are named (renamed, that is) for Israelis who have killed, massacred, or ordered such on Palestinians?? Hmmm… Not only is nothing done, they are celebrated as patriots, not the terrorists they were known as before 1948.

NPR: Diane Rehm Show: Perspectives on the U.S.- Israel Rift

Perspectives on the U.S.- Israel Rift


This was a more interesting show. At least the Israel love fest was tempered a bit.


I'll just comment on some callers, here:


Dave in MA- I thought he had a very valid concern. 25%, though? Cut it all!

“Insults don’t get any worse than what Israel did to us last week. Israel has done this before. They continue to do it because they know there are no ramifications to its actions. This has to change. President Obama should withdraw 25% of Israel’s massive foreign aid immediately.”

Guest Ziad Asali: The US has to make clear what the interests are and it has an obligation to defend those interests. We need to assert the leadership of the President which is being challenged. Israel needs to be part of the solution and rearrange the political situation and be a player in the region with Arab states.

David Makovsky: That would be true if Israel didn’t want to negotiate, but they do. It was an unfortunate result of a perfect storm that they have to be sure it never happens again.


But it does happen! All the time! Israel may well want to negotiate, but it’s actions always make this impossible to see!


Eddie in MD is on the other side…

"I feel, as an American Jewish person, that Israel has made many concessions and continues to do so. Israel has had its back pushed to the waters, to the sea. I think it wants to have peace talks, but I think its made concessions and I don’t think the United States or anybody else should bully them into giving up what they feel they need. And I think somebody ought to think about the little guy, and that’s Israel, who’s trying to fight for its life in this world."

Israel is the little guy. (???) I'm glad he clarified, because I wouldn't have guessed that. Fourth largest (or best?) military in the world and attached at the hip to the world's superpower doesn't exactly scream little guy.

"what they feel they need" ??? What about the law? Jewish national aspirations have always been respected and supported. What about Palestinian national aspirations? Are Jews the only ones allowed to fight "for what they feel they need?" For Palestinians, now, it is less about what they feel they need and more about basics- water, food, shelter, employment.

And, really, who's pushing whom into the sea these days? When was the last time Palestinians were condemned for creating life threatening poverty, demolishing Jewish homes as government policy, occupying Jewish land and moving and building such that it can claim it outside of negotiation? When you can talk about ethnic cleansing openly and speak of another population's birth rate as a threatening to you as a bomb, you have truly arrived. You are no little guy. Actually, you are quite the bully by that point.


Ann in Washigton DC mentioned- Israel bringing extreme Jewish settler groups to worship at al Aqsa- a guest said that had stopped – he does admit it happened, though, so to call it conspiracy theory may not be truthful.

A guest called it conspiracy theory fueled by Rabbo, Dahlan when it isn’t true… ?
--I need to check this out..more research needed on this thing to see who is remembering incorrectly or stretching the truth.

Settlement announcement, Biden embarrassment, Israel apology, and after...

When this story broke, we saw these sorts of headlines:

As Biden Visits, Israel Unveils Plan for New Settlements- March 10, 2010

Israel Apologizes To Biden Over Settlement Announcement: We Didn't Mean To 'Taunt An Important Man' – March 10, 2010

Several headlines since have read ‘Clinton: Settlements Undermine Peace’ or ‘Settlement Announcement Insulting’.

And?? When are we going to do something about it?? Isn’t this same old, same old with this “special” relationship with Israel? When are we going to realize that this is a trend or indication of Israel’s motivation (or lack thereof) to be a part of the solution rather than an isolated, rare event that we (or more importantly, Palestinians) can afford to overlook?

And what of the insult? This is a continued, serious and blatant trashing of the Geneva Convention. Is this not a cause for concern on that front??

Israel announces new settlement construction just in time for one of Israel’s biggest fans, Vice President Joe Biden, to visit.

I remember writing him when he was head of the Senate Foreign Relations committee. He had a statement on his website mourning the “massacre” by Palestinian extremists of 10 Israelis on a bus. It is sad, for sure, but why no mention (not to mention mourning)- ever- of the scores and at times hundreds of Palestinian civilians that die in “unfortunate accidents” involving the Israeli military???

In return for this snub, he apparently arrives to dinner with Netanyahu 90 minutes late. Ooooh. That’ll teach ‘em. Is this how they hope to get Iran to slow or regulate its nuclear ambitions?? Yikes! Probably not. We don’t tend to cut Muslim countries any slack. Israel, on the other hand, would have to invade our country, take over Washington and begin Occupation and “Judaification” there, too, before we’d wake up and see there might be a problem and we just might have to do more than slap Israel on the wrist. I still think we might defer to them in this case. They are a tiny country under such an immediate existential threat, after all! (--I say sarcastically.)


And after the crisis, Israel is more defiant than before it:

Netanyahu says 'no concession' on Jewish settlements – March 21, 2010

"As far as we are concerned, building in Jerusalem is like building in Tel Aviv," Mr Netanyahu told his cabinet.

His position on the UN and international law is clear. Ignore it. It doesn’t exist- or at least it doesn't apply to Israel. It does exist, when it tells Palestinians to do something. The US allows them to indulge in this fantasy world.


Netanyahu reaffirms 'right to build' in Jerusalem- March 23, 2010

Settlements in occupied East Jerusalem were an "inextricable" part of the city, he said, and would remain part of Israel under any peace agreement.

"Therefore, building in them in no way precludes the possibility of a two-state solution."

If you are a magician, maybe…

He said Israel wanted Palestinians to be "our neighbours, living freely" and called on Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas to "come and negotiate peace".

The existence of settlements, their barricades, walls, towers, armed guards, Jewish only roads kind of precludes the whole “living freely”… not to mention that stuff takes up more stolen land and Palestinians are expected to be happy Israel is “ready” (in words) to give them a sliver of desert it can't for the life of them make bloom plus some towns isolated by massive Jewish-only fortresses??

“Come and negotiate peace” sounds like more of a dare than an actual extending of a hand in peace. Come and negotiate peace, I dare you. See how much more of this land we can take right out in the open under your nose with US approval while spitting in their face! Or maybe it’s an invitation to be a part of this spectacle.

NPR: TOTN: Tough Talk Between U.S. And Israel

March 18, 2010 NPR Talk of the Nation

Tough Talk Between U.S. And Israel

Transcript:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124828535

The costs and benefits of the US Israel relationship was the call in topic.

If you want an Israel love fest, you can listen to this. A lot of garbage. Neal Conan was none to pleased (a bit agitated?) with the caller criticizing the US Israel relationship and allowed the guests to pretty well marginalize his view without asking any insightful questions to slow their attack. At least Diane Rehm had herself to moderate and Ziad Asali to try to balance out Miller and Makovsky.

Miller does comment at the beginning that we have lost the balance and the relationship should not be exclusive as it has become.

When someone questions the foreign aid to Israel given what atrocities they've committed, Conan steps in and talks about the treaty with Egypt and how that’s a relationship we need to support. Who started that conflict, though? Israel. And never mind the extra aid, loan guarantees, military agreements, full support of Congress for whatever they want from settlements to the Gaza massacre, and many other perks of this very special exclusive relationship.

One caller made reference to the Goldstone report in their criticism of Israel and one guest or the other made sure we knew that the reason the Gaza massacres happened was because Israel pulled out of Gaza and “Gaza” attacked even though it wasn’t the main point of the call. Oh, and Israel restrained itself for 4 years, blah, blah, blah... The guests addressed lobbying (in general) and justified the Gaza massacres, but missed the point of the call- the lack of balance and the preferential treatment of Israel by the US while trying to be fair, etc.

Anti-semitism, not by name, mind you, was mentioned as the reason for the belief that the Israel lobby is pushing Israel’s agenda in opposition to the American people’s wishes. ??? Did they miss Mearsheimer and Walt's work??

Some pinhead brought up the “demographic threat” as a real problem or reason why we should support Israel.

So, I wrote a letter to TOTN about that:

Dear Neal,

A caller on that show brought up the “demographic threat” as the "biggest challenge" or reason why we should support Israel. The birth rate. How racist is that? Or bigoted if you prefer. Some Jews are afraid of the Arab birth rate. If someone here said they feared a high Jewish or black birth rate such that it would cause white or Christian influence to be less, you would be immediately and rightly called out and condemned for it. When you say it about Arabs, it’s apparently ok, though. ???

I was appalled that there was no comment on that by you or your guests.

Israel should be a democratic state for its people. If we support Israel as a Jewish state as some consider us a Christian nation, then so be it. If Israel is to be a Jewish state for Jewish people at all costs, we will soon find ourselves supporting Israel in measures amounting to ethnic cleansing to combat this so called "demographic threat." I would hope we wouldn't follow them down that path, but some might say we already are... (denial of Arab housing permits, house demolitions, visa problems, etc)

You had two advocates for Israel; an Arab perspective would have been refreshing and could have made the show a little more educational.

Sincerely,
J


Conan also downgraded the crisis to kerfuffle. Why would we want to make a big deal about Israel's flouting another international law?

There were so many annoying things, I'll leave it at that for this show. There is so much annoying coverage of this latest slap in our face by our best friend.

More on the messy Mossad operation - Dubai, Mabhouh, passports, tennis, etc

Britain to expel Israeli diplomat - BBC

Israel has promised to not clone British passports before. This is not some rogue group or terrorist organization. This is the Israeli government and or its security force. At least Britain has the guts to do something about it. Sort of.

Israel calls it hypocrisy to accuse it of killing someone considered an enemy or terrorist by Britain...

***

From
http://www.thejc.com/news/israel-news/29778/mk-calls-british-dogs-over-dubai-passport-row

Mr Eldad compared the British to “dogs” and accused them of having no loyalty. He also said that he believed a British diplomat should be expelled in return.

He added: “I think the British are being hypocritical and I do not wish to insult dogs here, since some dogs show true loyalty. Who gave the British the right to judge us on the war on terror?"

Hmmm… What gives them the right? They are messing with British passports and disregarding British citizens’ rights and security. Are they hypocritical? I’m going with no. While they may regard Hamas as a terrorist organization, we in the civilized world don’t employ hit men for all of our security needs. I’m not saying the US hasn’t done some horrible things with mercenaries, hit men and the like, but we and Britain, in general (I like to think), value the rule of law, peoples’ rights, and bringing people to justice rather than executing them on sight without a trial in another country (violating another’s sovereignty as well).

Also different is that Palestinians are like the early Israelis (terrorist turned statesmen) in that they are trying to win their freedom and statehood. Terrorism on our soil isn’t for that end. It’s just terrorism.

In thinking about Israel's "fight against terrorism," I always have to think- are they fighting terrorism or Palestinian statehood?

It always amazes me how similar accounts are of Palestinians being forced from their homes in 1948, most notably (one could add other dates) and of Jews being rounded up for work camps. Another striking similarity is that of Palestinian “terrorists” and Israeli terrorists turned statesmen (early PMs and leaders were Haganaagh, Irgun, Stern, etc terrorists).

And yet another is how Israeli Occupation and oppression is very similar to Nazi rule. Israelis want to Judaify and say Jews are superior; Nazis wanted only Aryans and considered themselves superior.

I always wonder how a people who has gone through so much tragedy and loss cannot see the similarities or want to guard against becoming so like the people that were the cause of their own tragedy.

LOST Episode 616: What They Died For/ SPOILERS from the Transmission

Post episode:

Ok, so I am again in the minority. I didn't love the episode. I didn't even like it as much as I liked Across the Sea. I wouldn't call it a comic episode. I did laugh a few times, but it was more disbelief than funny, ha ha. A wild ride? I don't think so. It was ok.

A lot of things were clarified that we already assumed. I do realize they had to set up the last episode, so I'm not saying it was pointless or that I hated it. We did get some classic Ben, not the whipped, scared version.

Jack again notices a cut on his neck in the flash sideways, this time at his house. I think it happened on the airplane last time? Either way, David doesn't pop in on him the first time. Same cut of different one? I didn't get a good look. He has noticed an appendix scar in the flash sideways. What does all of this mean??

I thought we'd get to see or find out who David's mom is when they were talking about his piano concert and his parents were going and Jack wasn't to "act weird" around her. No luck on the mom still! That and the MIB's name- will we find out Sunday?? Will it kill me if we don't? No.

Oceanic calls Jack about his "cargo" and says it will arrive in LA at the end of the day.

It's really Desmond! Nice. What is he planning. Toward the end, he is getting everyone to come to the Widmore's concert event. Is this the concert David is in? I had assumed it was a recital, but LAX and Christian's body wouldn't help Jack reach the other people, so maybe the concert is the Widmore's? Or does he want them all to go to LAX fo rsome reason and Jack will take the more direct route?

Jack is stitching Kate up- like when she stitched him up in Season 1. Nice touch. Also I believe this is a spoiler scene described in a Forward Cabin of The Transmission. They both agree they need ot kill Locke, with Jack adding they need ot get Desmond. A plan. Things are moving.

Desmond's going to run over Locke again?? Noooo! But, Ben intervenes... and gets beaten up by Desmond for it. A scene also described in the Forward Cabin. Ben gets his island vision moment.

Ben is leading Miles and Alpert to his house to get the C4, but he seems to return to the old Ben, not the weak and scared one that we saw when he faced MIB. Miles indicates dead people are buried here- I thought perhaps he was hearing everyone from the Purge along with Alex talking to him or something, but he doesn't say and doesn't even get Alex's thoughts for us. It couldn't have been good, though.

At Ben's secret secret closet, he reveals this was how we was told he could summon Smokey, but he realized it was summoning him. Interesting...

Widmore is strangley calm at the other end of Ben's gun. (In the kitchen) We find that Widmore was the one who rigged the plane. Wasted trip, Ben!

Locke sees Ben in the hospital- he "saw something" while being beaten. His expression is of the old Ben (or Henry Gale with the beating)- did he see what he did, how he killed Alex, etc? He tells Locke that he wasn't trying to hurt him, but to help him let go. I wonder if Locke was at the hospital to see Jack originally (we know he saw at least the button portion of the island life), or did he make the decision about getting fixed when Ben told him that?

Desmond turns himself in to Sawyer and is quite pleased to be locked up with Sayid and Kate.

On their way to find Desmond, Jack and Sawyer talk about the Rules:
S: If Locke wanted Desmond dead, why not kill him himself?
J: Maybe it's one of his rules.
S: Thought he couldn't kill us. (Yeah, what's up with that??)

It was nice to see Sawyer realize Jack may have been right about not touching the bomb. He just wanted to do teh opposite of what Jack said because of Juliet and who wouldn't have done the same, but bad move, Sawyer. I say Sawyer killed those 3.

Hurley sees young Jacob in the jungle. This one's not a weak type, but very commanding and he takes the ashes out of Hurleys' hand. Why the kid form? Jacob didn't want him to know it was him??? Suddenly there is old Jacob, as though he needed those ashes so that everyone could see him (later) and to put himself to rest for good? He says that




***

Leaked screenplay of the last two LOST episodes!!! Is it real or not? I don't know. Is it fun? Yes.

http://www.macchianera.net/2010/05/01/scoop-macchianera-pubblica-6-pagine-della-puntata-finale-di-lost/#pages-call


***
Description:
(From ABC Television Network) While Locke devises a new strategy, Jack's group searches for Desmond.

***
Analucia and young Rousseau are in this episode?? Crazy. And more flash sideways? We will find out if that leaked script is legit or somebody's big joke!

Guest Cast:

• Henry Ian Cusick as Desmond Hume
• Michelle Rodriguez as Ana-Lucia Cortez
• Mira Furlan as Danielle Rousseau
• Alan Dale as Charles Widmore
• Tania Raymonde as Alex
• Mark Pellegrino as Jacob
• Dylan Minnette as David
• Sheila Kelley as Zoe
• Kenton Duty as teenage boy
• Wendy Pearson as Nurse Kondracki
• Ashlee Kyker as student (apparently she has the last name as a prop guy on LOST?)
  
• Ernesto Lopez as LAPD cop.

***
From The Transmission: Across the Sea - also see Mar 21 and 28 episodes of podcast

These are just a few clues from the viewing of this episode that was done not long ago:

Actor readings from message in a bottle (?)
One of the top episodes (that's said of a lot of them!), amazing, satisfying.
LOST's comic episode. People were laughing a lot? I don't know if I like that.
Laughter, shock, sadness were expressed in the crowd.
Coincidences revealed (comicly), deadpan dialogue, winks and nods to the fans (don't know if I love those...), soon to be classic LOST lines..
Good pace, many characters.
"When a certain character was shown on screen it elicited a collective groan from the audience, eventually followed by outright cheering."
Ending was anticipatory. (Figures)
Wild and highly enjoyable ride.

***
Part 1 of the Finale? Or the episode before the finale?

A fan sighting says Jack and Kate were lying on the beach and Hurley was sitting on a crate. Kate had an ipod, though, so it may have been just them resting rather than filming? Of course this is from The Transmission- see sidebar.

Zoe will play a big role in this episode or part 2, whichever is the last one.

*** *** ***
The Transmission LOST podcast: Forward Cabin from Ab Aeterno edition

Probably the last week of filming? This is a rough copy. There hasn't been much editing and I haven't had a chance ot comment...

I apologize for the butchering of the spelling of Hawaiian locations! Here is a transcription of sorts:

RYAN: "On Monday the 22nd, they were still at Waikanae, this is by the pier again, north of Kooaloa. This is where they were at the end of last week and again they were well out of sight. I can say that at the trailers the folks did spot Kate and Hurley and Sawyer. And specifically noted that Kate seemed to have some kind of injury or blood on her left shoulder, but that's pretty much it for that day. Thanks to Jan as well as Francie for that report."

"The next day, the 23rd, it was Jack, Kate, Sawyer, and Hurley, but they were filming on the beach. Now, interestingly enough, they covered the sand up with boxes and life jackets and again things that kind of looked like the results of a shipwreck of some kind and they were all sort of staring out at the ocean."

"In the scene, Jack basically goes down near the water to pick up a backpack and he opens it up. He then goes to the other three. He tells them something and starts walking away and they all follow him."

"Later, a separate scene was Jack and Kate filming alone on the beach. Now first they were having a conversation, but then Jack was on his knees, basically bending over Kate, who was kind of lying down or against a log and he was basically doing something that wasn't clear, but it looked like he was sewing up a wound. Basically sewing up an injury that Kate had. And that kind of jives with an earlier report and is a nice parallel of Kate sewing up Jack in teh pilot episode. And thanks to Francie for that report."

"Now Wednesday was a fun day- or not. They were at Judd Trail. That's a very popular filming location. Now, interestingly enough, for the last week, Judd Trail, that location was being used for another production. It's a George Clooney movie. It's being called The Descendants. I'd been so used to people calling me and saying, "Hey, I think LOST is there and it took me awhile to baiscally figure out it was them. So when I heard there was, yes, film crew working at Judd Trail, that oh, that's probbaly George Clooney and his buddies. Unfortunately it was not. It was LOST, but nobody went to see. But I can tell you there was a jungle scene on Wednesday."

"Now on Thursday, it was an interesting day. They were down in Waikiki. And interestingly enough they revisited and rebuilt a set or a location from the past. It was the Flightline Motel. That was Locke's motel basically where he lived near the airport. We saw the Oceanic plane fly over. And where he basically tried at the last minute to propose to Helen and got shot down. So I thought that was interesting. It was Locke's motel, but nobody saw any fiiming. But spotted on the scene was Hurley's yellow Hummer. So, I'm not sure if Locke's involved, but Hurley was definitely involved in a scene at the Flightline Motel near the airport. And I do want to thank Steven for that report."

They were also on that day supposedly seen at Sacret Hearts Academy, that's on Waiaili, but unfortunately that report came in well after the fact. I do want to thank Eric for letting me know. "Now Sacred Hearts Academy has been a location before as well. The exterior was the exterior of the church under which the Lamp Post was hidden, so maybe that was it? The church right next door was also the church where Christian Shephard's funeral as held. So maybe they were using that location. No way to know, but that's where they were. I just share what I have. "

"Now Friday it gets more interesting. They were at Rehab Hospital of the Pacific that's on Kuakini Street, up in Nuauno Valley. The scene included Sawyer and Juliet. So, yes, Elizabeth Mitchell back in town. Back working and for whatever reason at that set. Now again we don't know if it was actually a hospital or if it was playing something else. I guess we're going to see. According to a guard there were also scenes with Kate and Jack as well."

"That same day they were also out at Police Beach. That's the famous beach camp once again. And for that scene, Claire, Miles and Lapidus were at work. And in the scene, Claire comes out of the bushes with a rifle, and, well, unfortunately everybody got moved off the beach at that point. But certainly at some point there was a shot fired in that scene."

"And finally, that day, still Friday, they moved down the beach to near the Ajira plane once again. And actually they set up rain machines, so it sounds like another sudden storm. And in that scene at the plane, Miles and Lapidus once again. Not sure if Claire stuck around for that. And I do want to thank Billy and Francie for their reports."

"On Saturday, actually that's today, as we record this podcast, they were again back at the base camp which is parked along Nuananu Avenue and this is where they've been for the scenes that I just mentioned filming at the Rehab Hospital and a number of actors were sighted there. They include: the actors for Locke, Jin, Sun, Sawyer, Claire, Kate, Desmond and Juliet. Yes, Elizabeth Mitchel back in town working again. Now, what makes this interesting is that was again the base camp for the hospital shooting, but there was also a shoot today downtown Honolulu at O'Toole's which is an Irish bar right there on Merchant Street. Also a previous LOST location."

JEN: "That's where Desmond was thwhacked in the head."

RYAN: "Right. It was Desmond's bar. Although I'm presuming they're not in London in this case. In any case they've been there before. But since they were in two locations along Nuananu Avenue, the actors that I just listed, we're not entirely sure which scene or which location they were necessarily working at. They could be at either. We can say that at least at the trailers Kate, curiously enough, was dressed in a robe or maybe a hospital gown. So that was kind of curious. And perhaps she's in the hospital scene."

"But, let's move back downtown again to O'Toole's. They were basically setting up for a stunt or fight scene for Sayid, so Sayid was there, Naveen Andrews as well as Jorge Garcia or Hurley and his yellow Hummer of course omnipresent, now it seems in that scene. And basically what seems to happen is that a bunch of men are having a brawl or a fight on the sidewalk there and Sayid jumps out of Hurley's Hummer and basically gets involved. And he fights with a dark haired man. And perhaps most curiously also on that scene toward the end, Shannon turns up. Yes, Boone's sister, or I guess better said Sayid's on island love interest turns up. She was dressed a little, shall we say, ..."

JEN: "...provocatively?"

RYAN: "...provocatively in that scene. Maybe she was the cause for the brawl and perhaps Sayid gets involved to come to the rescue. I don't know, that's kind of an interesting development for Shannon to turn up and for Sayid to be in the scene, but certainly a resolution I think that a lot of people are hoping for or imagining in their head. "

"And a late report just in that they were filming at a church I'm not sure where. This comes in by text message, but there was a church scene as well because they had extras they were all dressed up as if they were going to, say, a wedding, which would be kind of cool because we're looking for the Locke and Helen wedding perhaps. But it could also be unfortunately, a funeral. And as we've learned on LOST, the wardrobe and locations for both of those events are essentially the same, so we're going to have ot wait and see if we get more details, there. That's just hot off the presses. I do want to thank Wanda for her report, going down and checking it out, and again Francie."

"Now that's the shoots for this week, and certainly I think there's quite a bit to chew on, but I did want ot share one last tidbit that actually comes from an earlier shoot because it was at the Rehab Hospital, the one where they were filming this week, but this was several weeks ago. And as I reported on out podcast, that scene involved Locke and Jack as well and Helen. And now I'm getting basically details on what was gong on at that time. In that earlier scene, Locke was at the hospital because he got injured, and we're presuming that that's the car accident that we also reported on. But he's in the hospital and Jack is there because he happens to be there making his rounds. He wasn't specifically there to see Locke, but he does indeed get into a conversation with Locke to try and get him to take him up on the offer for that free consult that he mentioned at the beginning of the season. And of course Locke was resistant to that. In this scene, he tells Lcoke that you have to have faith. So, a neat little tidbit of dialogue from another scene at that same hospital where it seems everybody is starting to converge and come together. And I do want to thank Billy for his report there as well. So, that's it for the Forward Cabin."