Tuesday, January 17, 2012

Nick Clegg bends over, spreads buttocks, then ‘criticises’ Zionist Entity…

Torygraph:



The Deputy Prime Minister drew a hostile reaction from Israel by saying the government’s continued construction on internationally recognised Palestinian land was “an act of deliberate vandalism” that undermined the basis of the Middle East peace process.

In some of the most critical language ever used by a senior European politician in government, Mr Clegg accused Israel of making the likelihood of a negotiated settlement to the conflict impossible to deliver.

“It is an act of deliberate vandalism to the basic premise on which negotiations have taken place for years and years and years,” Mr Clegg said.

He said there was “no stronger supporter of Israel than myself as a beacon of democracy in the region”, but added: “The continued existence of illegal settlements risks making facts on the ground such that a two-state solution becomes unviable.


“That, in turn, will do nothing to safeguard the security of Israel itself or of Israeli citizens. That is why I condemn the continued illegal settlement activity in the strongest possible terms.”



Clueless Clegg will undoubtedly be smugly pleased with what is essentially lame and seriously outdated commentary, even though it will have a lot of Israel Firsters foam at the mouth (it’s official Nick: you’re a New Anti-Semite!)

Or is this simply a case of having incompetent ‘special advisors’? “Making facts on the ground”? Settlement building in the West Bank (ooops: ‘Judea and Samaria’!) and East Jerusalem (ooops: ‘a neighbourhood of the eternal and indivisible capital of the Jewish State’!) has gone on unabatedly and in crescendo since Israel’s pre-emptive war [cough!] of 1967 and has practically reduced the Two State Solution to nothing more than soft porn for the impotent.

Clegg’s therefore no less guilty than any other Western mainstream politician: guilty of aiding and abetting land theft and much more beside that, committed by ‘the only democracy in the ME’ (an irrelevant point if there ever was one)

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home