DesertExile: Whose Priority?

16 August 2006

Whose Priority?
Despite the circumstances, Netanyahu didn't take advantage of the situation for to go for a total knockout; if there had indeed been a duel at the Knesset Monday, it took place without firing a single shotSima Kadmon YNet
While thousands of soldiers are still deep inside Lebanon, millions of civilians are slowly coming out of the bomb shelters and hundreds of families are mourning their sons - many of whom are still to be buried - the prime minister concluded the second war in Lebanon in his Knesset address Monday.
It wasn't just an address to the nation; Olmert gave his version of the war. From now on the version presented at the Knesset will become the official version presented by his advisors, his attorneys, his aides and his supporters when they try to prevent the setting up of a commission of inquiry and when they try to stabilize the coalition and prevent discord within the Kadima party ranks.
Olmert is an excellent orator. He combines a measured dose of emotion and rationalism with poetic anecdotes and matter-of-factness. It was an expected speech, and its timing important. It came at a time when the public was attuned to the messages, its emotions yet to be consolidated.
However, Omert directed his speech primarily at public opinion. At the public sitting at home still unable to digest the developments of the past month. The public's stance will in the coming weeks become a deciding factor on whether and what type of commission of inquiry will be set up.
This was the reason Olmert addressed everyone yesterday, and I mean everyone, with a warm embrace. No one escaped his embrace: not the chief-of-staff, the commanders, the soldiers, the bereaved families, the abducted soldiers' families, the security and rescue forces, the mayors, the volunteers, the northern citizens, the people of Israel, the Knesset members, the defense minister, the foreign minister, nor the cabinet members – no Israeli citizen could argue that he did not appear on the list of Olmert's credits.
Olmert called on everyone with paternal moderation, including those who may have been disappointed - as mentioned in passing as if it were a trivial complaint: friends, have patience, patience. Or in other words, you are yet to discover we won.
Netanyahus' address no less important
Benjamin Netanyhu's address was no less important than Olmert's. As head of the opposition, he could have taken advantage of the moment and challenged the leadership. He could have protested, as Begin did, following the Yom Kippur War by asking why they didn't bring the armament closer? Netanyahu could have accused Olmert's government of failure; he could have called for a legal commission of inquiry. He could have conveyed a message that he was the right person to replace Olmert as prime minister, that there is an alternative to a failed cabinet.
However, Netanyahu chose to maintain a low profile. Perhaps his bitter experience in previous instances silenced him; perhaps he found it difficult to abandon the image he had acquired during the war, an image of a stately opposition leader of fine caliber. His speech was excellent. It was controlled and careful. He managed to maintain this sterile image, almost without friction. The applause coming from the plenum attested to his growing popularity.
The two speeches delivered by the prime minister and the opposition leader met on the Knesset podium. They addressed a country licking its wounds at the end of a war plagued with question marks. Despite the circumstances, Netanyahu didn't take advantage of the situation for a knockout shot, if there had been a duel it took place without firing a single shot.
Perhaps Netanyahu was right when he decided that this wasn't the time to rock the boat, to call for a commission of inquiry at this point in time.
And perhaps, Netanyahu like Netanyahu, lost the moment because of his stateliness.
Nothing can better demonstrate the problem in the Knesset. It is a big happy club with its members sitting in that building being more important than the welfare of the Jewish people and the State of Israel.
Chief William J. Bratton announced on August 14 that Hollenbeck Area Officer James Tuck, 26, remains in good spirits, despite sustaining serious injuries from an AK-47 assault late Saturday night.
"This was an attempted assassination on two police officers," Chief Bratton said. "We can credit the officers’ quick reactions and excellent training for keeping these two violent criminals from getting away. I am very thankful that neither officer was killed."
The incident took place in the Montecito Heights area when Officer Tuck and his partner, Officer John Porras, 48, made a traffic stop. As their police car rolled to a stop behind the vehicle, a passenger violently emerged, charging the officers and spraying the police car with high-velocity rounds.

O K--What is the common thought here?
The modern day idea of " The Bottom Line" or "Who is getting the Perks".

The focus in the first event is the welfare of the members of the Knesset-Israeli citizens be damned!
In the second case, LA Police Officers still only have short range hand guns tocounter a threat like this--The Officers be damned, and probably killed. Afterall one study showed that it is CHEAPER for the Officer to be killed, than for the officer to kill the suspect. And, OH MY, The Chief might have to defend against the image of Storm, Troopers with Automatic " Assault Weapon" Rifles!


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home