When Their Mouths are Moving

The effect of saying that appeasin' is the purpose of any attempted diplomacy once again highlights the incapacity of the cretin in chief and his succubi to perform the basic tasks they have taken on. Wars are the only tactic they understand, putting the last thing anyone in his right mind would want ahead of any reasonable action.

We really are taking a chance, by letting the cabal play their proven course for any longer. Another observer in Lebanon watched from closer than Merka as the idiocy drove home its point, that the occupied White House is campaigning in Israel.

Yesterday morning (and here I will spoil the story by telling the end of it), the schools reopened round my seafront apartment and I saw a woman in a hijab riding a bicycle down the Corniche and I took a call from my travel agent about my next trip to Europe – Beirut airport reopened – and I realised that Lebanon had "returned to normal".

The roads were open again; the hooded gunmen had disappeared; the government had abandoned its confrontation with Hizbollah – the suspension of the Shia Muslim security chief at the airport (who bought me a bottle of champagne a year ago, I seem to remember – some Hizbollah "agent" he!) and the abandonment of the government's demand to dismantle Hizbollah's secret telecommunication system was a final seal of its failure – and I opened my newspaper and what did I read?

That George Bush declared in Jerusalem that "al-Qa'ida, Hizbollah and Hamas will be defeated, as Muslims across the region recognise the emptiness of the terrorists' vision and the injustice of their cause".

Where does the madness end? Where do words lose their meaning? Al-Qa'ida is not being defeated. Hizbollah has just won a domestic war in Lebanon, as total as Hamas's war in Gaza. Afghanistan and Iraq and Lebanon and Gaza are hell disasters – I need no apology to quote Churchill's description of 1948 Palestine yet again – and this foolish, stupid, vicious man is lying to the world yet again.

He holds a "closed door" meeting with Lord Blair of Kut al-Amara – a man stupendously unfit to run any Middle East "peace", which is presumably why the meeting had to be "closed door" – but tells the world of the blessings of Israeli democracy. As if the Palestinians benefit from a democracy which is continuing to take from them the land which they have owned for generations.

Do we really have to accept this? Bush tells us that "we consider it a source of shame that the United Nations routinely passes more human rights resolutions against the freest democracy in the Middle East than any other nation in the world".

The truth is that it is a source of shame that the United States continues to give unfettered permission to Israel to steal Palestinian land – which is why it should be a source of shame (to Washington) that the UN passes human rights resolutions against America's only real ally in the region.

The use of words sure to arouse antagonism has long hampered U.S. diplomacy, and calling N.Korea part of the 'axis of evil' has done irreparable harm to this countries' interests. We have been appeasing N.Korea ever since then.

Appeasement takes historically educated minds back to Neville Chamberlain, who tried to avoid war by giving up our western right to refuse acceptance of aggression. He proved to be wrong. Appeasement is a word that attempts to smear the accused with cowardice. In the present instance, it is nothing more than campaign blithering, and meaningless in relation to actual events. Like calling the population of a country which refuses to accept invasion "insurgents", it is the refusal to reason.

We have nothing to gain by the continued domination of our government by politically motivated warmongers, warmongering in words and in actual armed state.