Amid displeasure with UK, Olmert to go to London
Herb Keinon, JPost, Dec 10 2008
Olmert will go to London on Monday for meetings with Brown, at a time when Britain, according to diplomatic officials in Jerusalem, is causing problems for Israel inside the EU. For instance, Britain, along with Ireland, Cyprus and Malta, led the unsuccessful charge inside the EU to link its agreement on Monday to upgrade diplomatic ties with Israel to developments in negotiations with the Palestinians. Senior diplomatic officials said the British position was that it was not the time to give Israel the “prize” of an upgrade, and that the EU should not rush into the matter. Likewise, Britain has pressed the EU to be more stringent regarding the import of goods from Israel that may have been produced in the West Bank. The British complained in an internal memorandum to the EU countries a few months ago that goods produced in the West Bank were coming into Britain in violation of the EU-Israel trade agreement that exempts tariffs on goods from within the Green Line, but not from the territories. According to Israeli officials, Britain was behind an initiative that would have Israel clearly label on each product where it was made, specifying whether it was made in Israel or the “occupied territories.”
Furthermore, Britain, according to Israeli officials, has joined other EU countries in holding quiet talks with Hizbullah in Lebanon, saying that they were only meeting with parliamentarians and not members of the organization’s armed wing. Israeli officials said these moves, which they believe have their origins with Miliband and not with Brown, are meant to place pressure on Israel to stop all settlement construction. One diplomatic source speculated that the sudden rise in Brown’s popularity, as a result of the way he has handled the financial meltdown, has sent Miliband looking for favorable headlines, something that can be found by coming across as a champion of Palestinian rights. By the same token, the officials said that Britain’s policy on Iran and the diplomatic process remain unchanged and favorable. The Prime Minister’s Office, meanwhile, would not confirm that Olmert’s trip was connected to any glitches in the relationship with Britain. Rather, a spokesman for Olmert said the visit had been discussed for some time. “We want to discus with the British regional challenges and issues, as well as bilateral relations,” the spokesman said. “Our relationship with Britain has always been an important one.” It was not clear whether Olmert will meet with Miliband during his visit. Olmert is scheduled to leave on Monday evening, and return on Tuesday night.
Niqnaq 
5 Comments
What happens. Is someone spoofing you over at Mondoweiss? I can’t believe you are an adherent to the Protocols?
I can’t comment anymore, it seems. Yesterday it still worked via Internet Explorer now not even that works anymore. No time to study the issue.
No one is spoofing me, as far as I know. I am not ‘an adherent to the Protocols’. You are engaging in pseudo-logic. Consider how often a TRUE accusation has been derailed by planting a FORGED confirmation of it, in order that the forgery be exposed. The fact that someone forges a statement that seems to confirm an accusation does not in itself have any bearing on the factuality of the accusation at all. You may CLAIM that the resort to forgery shows the lack of real evidence, but this is just naive. Forged documents and associated false claims are constantly used by all sides in propaganda. It’s normal operating procedure, and the only context to put it in, that really does justice to it, is psychological warfare.
Regarding posting on MondoWeiss, I suggest you log out and post anonymously, but sign your name. This is what I do now, and in fact it seems to detect my Typepad identity, which has a link to here.
There is absolutely no doubt about psychological warfare or strategic perception management. But you are utterly mistaken to suggest Russian Jews planted the hoax themselves, or even suggest it.
There are a series of literary sources for the protocols. Shortly the Jews didn’t invent Machiavellism. Maybe you should read Machiavelli’s the price or the development over the ages of this “bible of politicians”.
The Protocols simply mirror this authoritarian mindset over the ages.
I can’t comment anymore. Simply because both preview and post button are not available for me.
Maybe that is a good thing.
I am in a hurry. You are mistaken to even suggest it.
Read Machiavelli’s The Prince. (Il Principe) Or Maurice Joly’s attack on Napoleon III, published anonymously. That will give you an idea.
I really thought, SOG/Bill Pearlman is spoofing you.
What about a preview button?
Machiavelli’s work was appropriated by the producers of the Protocols.
There are at least four possibilities concerning those responsible for the reappearance of Machiavelli’s “manifesto” as the Protocols.
1. They were appropriated by the Zionists(?) as a feasible plan that would maximize their chances of securing “power” in the “systems” that they coveted.
2. They were introduced by Zionists(?) or others as a sort of straw man that could be debunked, thereby undermining the credibility of the accusers.
3. Or maybe they were appropriated by the enemies of Zionism who felt that they would be effective anti-Zionist propaganda.
4. There is also the possibility that the subject is just a distracting red herring, introduced by a competing clique to obscure their own activities, and perhaps making Zionism a bigger boogie than it actually is.
The thing occurs to me about the Protocols is that, although they may be more art than fact, they do outline the types of activities that the power struck mind is capable of coming up with and implementing to achieve its aims.
And Zionists aren’t the only group in the world interested in obtaining and holding power or inserting themselves in this or that income stream.
Regarding power seeking groups in general, I think that they themselves can be duped into carrying out another group’s agenda, or generally used for purposes other than originally intended.
eg. Peak oilers as dupes of energy market rent-seekers, Greens as dupes of AGW proponents.