The current diplomatic situation

I see no conflict among the diplomatic cards that got stuck in my hands. Exposing the lynchmob at work does not decrease the strength of the international united front, but rather increases its credibility. 9/11, my understanding of the various intelligence actors and the diplomatic relations involved will not change.

Life should not be that simple, but it is in this case. Obama did not bring his own can of cards into office. If he had, he would have solved a number of problems while I was relatively absent in 2009. There was no “can of whup-ass” that Obama could whip out and solve problems just because he was now president. Quite the contrary, the weaknesses of his campaign came back to bite him, while the true underlying logic of diplomacy, the reason that we have to struggle for anti-Amerikkkan cards remains the same.

Last year Gordon Brown asked just “another six months” for Obama. The six months passed and nothing happened.

Now we supposedly should wait four months for I$rael to fail in negotiations and then Obama organize a conference on recognizing Palestine at 1967 borders. What Democratic president could not do that? And what suckers on the diplomatic defensive are we? If Obama rolls the diplomatic team to September, he will roll the diplomatic team till after November, 2010, and then have to roll it again till 2012, with primaries on. In other words, the diplomatic team has to be on the timeline offensive. It has to obtain what it wants, when it wants, and the problem is that the international united front has lost diplomatic credibility from an inability to expose the imperialists after the failure of Annapolis.

There is no one better situated than me to point this out. The “New York Times” and the rest of the Establishment media sat back and watched Obama take Palestinian diplomatic cards in 2008. The media with the exception of “Fox News” rooted for Obama the whole way and “Fox News” needed the deal with Obama for the reason of not getting McCain thrashed by Bush Jr.’s debts. The media lacks credibility for failing to vet the 2008 campaign. It has money to lose if the truth comes out.

The whole reason that there was a conspiracy by long-term intelligence professionals against me is what makes me best situated to judge–among all actors available. Abbas must appear affable in diplomacy regardless. Hamas will be accused of having an “agenda” and really does not need the grief. Of course not Iran nor Syria nor Saudis are in a perfect position to judge either. Their interests are directly at stake.

There may be those prepared to accept that Obama, Abbas and Hamas are not in the best positions to decide. Some will still buy the idea that I have a “persynal stake” without suggesting who a better or more objective decider would be.

Arguing that I have a “persynal stake” is Alinskyism that should have been left at home, not brought into diplomacy. Ad hominem attack has no place, and in this case it is bias toward I$rael. Nor is the degree of my potential stake very big. I was anonymous before the 2006 goings-on. There is no persynal stake of mine that amounts to rewarding lynching with state power. Raising my persynal stake is ultra-Christian in the sense of downgrading all issues to one of one’s status before God instead of the society’s relationship to its power structure.

What MIM has proposed with anti-Amerikan diplomacy is a kind of minimal step, a step of strengthening diplomacy by removing it from the grips of the two parties. Complaining about “terrorism” while undermining Palestinian diplomacy is bats. What I am saying here is so minimal, that for once I’m sure the Amerikan public would agree. It would not want Republican and Democratic ass covered in diplomacy while troops go abroad to die to cover that ass. That’s probably half the reason the conspirators picked me for some of the conspiracies. In that sense I agree with them: I am a better judge than the Democrats, Republicans or the media that supported them. If somebody had to witness something, somebody from outside the two-party system, then the conspirators picked the right bastard.

The card should be exposed as a matter of securing the credibility of diplomacy, as a debt owed. The Democrats should be promising the same package of geopolitics as Obama regardless. It is best for them now to do so. Republican and diplomatic interests will diverge in September, but more importantly, Obama has a driving interest to roll the players onto the defensive.


%d bloggers like this: