 |
 |
 |
Abbas and his demands
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.israpundit.com/mt-tb.cgi/10888
Comments
1
.
Chen
said:
My bottom line. This is post 9-11. It is time for George Bush to do the right and moral thing and suspend talks with Abbas. But he won't you know. Jewish life means nothing. HOWEVER the street means everything!
It will be written within history that offering the palestinians a state right smack in the middle of their slaughtering Jews as one of the most bankrupt chapters in all of histroy.
For as much whitewashing, lying and rationalizing there is pertaining to the palestinians and as much whitewashing, lying and rationalizing as to why Bush is rewarding them, in the end the final chapter will not escape with a squeaky clean wash.
Posted by: Chen on October 17, 2005 12:01 PM
2
.
Steve Klein
said:
I entirely agree with the commentary and comment #1 above. I read Joseph Farah's commentary this morning 10/17/05, "Defining the Enemy" (World Net Daily). Mr. Farah thinks the president should be commended for making some progress in better defining our enemy, a thing which he has been loath to do in the past. The following is what I wrote:
Dear Joseph,
Perhaps we ought to grudgingly concede that the president's speech last week was a step in the right direction, though miniscule. President Bush persists in making a clear distinction between this so-called militant "ideology" and Islam itself which is inherently peaceful in the president's view, a notion disputed by many scholars and historians. This isn't to say there are not peace-loving Muslims. Clearly there are but how many? How many do not sympathize with these cold-blooded killers?
Also according to this president, "The United States makes no distinction between those who commit acts of terror and those who support and harbor them, because they're equally as guilty of murder." These are noble words that ring hollow by the fact that this president does business with and is personally close to regimes who support (the Saudi royal family) and harbor terrorists. Mr. Bush is scheduled to meet Palestinian Muslim terrorist-supporter, enabler and Holocaust denier, Mahmoud Abbas on Thursday in the White House. At times I wonder, who side is the president on?
Posted by: Steve Klein on October 17, 2005 03:37 PM
3
.
Ted Belman
said:
Steve
I couldn't agree with you more. Pipes says the same thing.
Posted by: Ted Belman on October 17, 2005 04:48 PM
Abbas and his demands
Hugh Fitzgerald of Jihad Watch writes
Jihad Watch Board Vice President Hugh Fitzgerald examines the situation Israel faces as Mahmoud Abbas prepares to meet with President Bush:
Abbas' good behavior will last just as long as he needs to get the Israelis to retreat from their perfectly justified -- legally, morally, historically -- presence in the West Bank, just as he succeeded in doing in Gaza. [..] the deepest wellsprings of Arab hatred for Israel are clear: they come out of Islam, out of the absolute refusal to contemplate a permanent non-Muslim sovereignty within dar al-Islam. [..]
The grim fact remains: Israel is dealing not with a moral question. Morally, historically, legally, Israel has a perfect right to hold onto all of the territories it captured in the 1967 war of defense (including Gaza, which it has now voluntarily relinquished). This is true given the numbers of wars it has had to fight, given the terms of the Palestine Mandate itself, given the mistreatment of Jews who were first exiled, and then maltreated wherever they lived, and not only in Europe, but -- which keeps being overlooked -- throughout the Muslim lands, where they endured lives of humiliation, degradation, and insecurity, despite all the propaganda about the "convivencia" in Spain, and the wonders of Haroun al-Raschid, and the sanitized view of the Ottoman treatment of the dhimmi.
No, it is a military question. [..]
Forget about negotiations and treaties. Figure out how to make sure that Israel can ensure its own military superiority -- in such a way that the Arabs and other Muslims are convinced that the results of further attack will be so harmful to them that they will have to refrain. It may not work, given the fanaticism to which Islam, unconstrained, always tends, but it is far better than the madness of continuing to push Israel back -- or allowing it to do it to itself.
(Read More)/a>
Posted by Ted Belman at October 17, 2005 10:26 AM