Democrats pushing Albanian cause?

According to Belgrade daily Vecernje Novosti (Evening News), the most influential Albanian drganizer of the event was Richard Holbrooke, while many of his former cohorts from the Clinton days took part: Madeleine Albright, Wesley Clark and James Rubin, as well as local Congressman Eliott Engel, known supporter of Albanian causes.
“The purpose of the meeting was to raise funds and secure Albanian-American votes for Democratic presidential candidate [John] Kerry,” says the Novosti report, adding that in return, the Democrats promised Albanians the independence of Kosovo.
The unnamed Novosti source in New York also claims that Kosovo Albanians sent a low-level delegation to the meeting, trying to stay below radar. Among the conclusions of the gathering, the report alleges, was that the process of Kosovo’s separation was proceeding according to plan; that the March attacks on Serbs did some short-term damage to the cause, but that in the big picture, the ethnic cleansing that occurred actually served the Albanians’ purpose.
Kosovo and American Albanians were supposedly also told that if Kerry were elected, he would most likely appoint Holbrooke the new Secretary of State, and he would continue Albright’s policies, namely support the independence of Kosovo.
General Wesley Clark, reportedly admonished the Kosovo Albanians for the March events, tlling them to “influence their local commanders so as to improve relations with KFOR,” say Novosti.
According to the paper, the participants agreed to organize the All-Albanian Congress, which would formulate the new strategy of Albanian national policy in the Balkans; the Congress would take place mid-summer, in Macedonia… Continue reading “Democrats pushing Albanian cause?”

Extra! Extra!

James Taranto of the War Street Journal puts a little wiggle in his EEG!

UPDATE: I do take issue, by the way, with Taranto’s assertion that suicide bombing is a “particularly horrific” kind of murder–it may be particularly terrifying, since you never know when or where it might happen, but it’s no more horrific than, say, firing a missile into an apartment complex. (Unless, as Taranto suggests, you get all choked up about the self-inflicted death of the poor bomber.)

“Israbluf” leads to one state

Aron Trauring on “Israbluf” and why a two state solution for Israel and Palestine is likely impossible:

In an earlier post I talked about how Sharon’s unilateral withdrawel plan is an example of “Israbluf” – viz. the extraordinary capacity for Israeli governments to say one thing and do the opposite. Meron Benvinisti points out that while Bush and Sharon talk about “two states,” eveything they are doing guarantees that there will be one binational state in Israel/Palestine.

Of course, the demographic dilemma of the one-state solution means that Israel will no longer be a Jewish state.