The absurdity of the two state solution

The absurdity of the two state solution

The State Department nest of ninnies

Jihad Watch Board Vice President High Fitzgerald shows that the State Department's myopia and miscalculation is nothing new and cxoncl;udes with the following,

[..]The tutelary spirits of those in the State Department who deal with such matters, that is to say, matters connected to the Middle East and to Muslim terrorism, are two: one is that of Breckenridge Long, the Assistant Secretary of State who was so instrumental in keeping Jewish refugees from being accepted into the United States before and during World War II; the second is the late and unlamented Loy Henderson, he of the doleful countenance, who was so instrumental in moving heaven and earth in keeping the United States from recognizing the nascent state of Israel, and did what he could to help smother it in its cradle. The palpable want of sympathy of Long and Henderson continues to this day -- only now it is aided and abetted by the prospect of working as hirelings of Arab governments and the fear of recognizing the true nature of the Arab opposition to Israel -- which is simply a case of a classic Jihad against an Infidel sovereignty in the midst of dar al-Islam, carefully redefined as a struggle for "nationalist operations" of the recently (post-1967) invented "Palestinian people."

One regrets that the Secretary of State appears unaware of this problem. The refusal to understand the tenets of Islam in some quarters, precisely because a true understanding would make Israel's case stronger, and the Arab case weaker, is not surprising. In the 1930s, those with an inherited or acquired animus against "the Jews" were the last to see or admit to the threat that Hitler posed -- for precisely the same kind of reasons.

That is why even those who are not outraged at the hypocrisy of the treatment of Israel had better become outraged at the larger issue: the failure to come to grips with the Jihad as a natural and logical expression of central tenets of Islam, and not, as the State Department would still have us believe, simply the beliefs of a "handful of extremists," something that expresses a "sense of humiliation." No, it is not "humiliation" but a feeling of being thwarted, because Islam "is to dominate and not be dominated," as the celebrated phrase puts it. Any evidence that this is not happening goes against the natural order of the universe and is intolerable to Arab and Muslim beliefs and amour-propre.

The State Department is not, as a whole, a nest of ninnies, but in the area that is now of most concern -- that of the understanding of Islam, it certainly seems to be. Of course, there are those who have a glimmering of such understanding, who are horrified by the appeasement and apologetics that have characterized so much of what has gone on among those who deal with the Middle East. These include those now retired to posh positions elsewhere, and who like to assure one and all that "everyone agrees on the final disposition of things -- a two-state solution." This is said with a tone of complacent self-assurance by the likes of Edward Djerijian and his colleagues. But the evidence that this is an absurdity, that it ignores the uncompromising division of the world between dar al-Islam and dar al-Harb and the real nature of the relentless Jihad against Israel (it is Israel in any dimensions that is the problem for the Arabs and those Muslims over whom they hold sway) is not even addressed. When people start prating about what "everyone knows to be true" or start invoking the word "solution" for something that in fact will exacerbate the problem -- that idiotic "two-state solution" -- then one's mental antennae should quiver.

In its coddling of the Palestinian Authority and relentless pursuit of moderate Muslims, State shows that it has learned nothing since the Nazi period. Reinhard Gehlen lives, and moves and has his being at State to this day. A confederacy of dunces, a nest of ninnies, well -- you are free to come up with your own brand-new terms of venery, just like Julian of Norwich.

Posted by Ted Belman at October 3, 2005 10:43 AM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.israpundit.com/mt-tb.cgi/10766


Comments

1. BobW said:

US State Depatment official Loy Henderson had the institutional support of the American Jewish Committee. This is such an important point I ask readers NOT to rely on my aforesaid statement and check independently. Here are some names to start with:

Joseph M. Proskauer
Brandeis
Ben Cohen
Frankforter
Samuel Rosenmann
Abba Hilel Silver

In contrast to the above names, check on Peter Bergson (Hillel Kook)

Besides the "Arab opposition to Israel", the Bush administration (and the Republican Party) do not want to acknowledge that the Arabs have considerable control over the US economy.

I'd just add one point to Hugh's high-quality article; besides Israel, Christian Lebannon was also sacrificed because of the oil trade.

Kol tuv,
BobW

Posted by: BobW on October 3, 2005 11:30 AM

2. Chen said:

BobW said:

"Besides the "Arab opposition to Israel", the Bush administration (and the Republican Party) do not want to acknowledge that the Arabs have considerable control over the US economy."

I find it absurd not to mention INSANE that the greatest strongest country in the world would fall to such great depths as to give into the arab world simply because they contribute to our economy. The United States built itself from nothing now we will be owned by Arabs because we have no way to go back to our own strength??! So we will rely on our weakness and it will cause even greater heartache and regret.

Today I read that Syrian airlines will now be flying into Iraq. What a crock of crap. Syria is most likely responsible for all the new hell we now witness in Iraq. For all we know if there were nukes they are in Syria. Yet we ignore it and only give toothless condemnations to Syria and not much more to Iran. For that Syria spits in our face and makes even closer ties to Iran. Both arch enemies of the free world and both getting away with murder. For who the Saudi's who contribute to our economy?

Post 9-11 and we are appeasing more and weakening ourselves more then ever before. We do it for our economy and or we will do it for reasons that will kill us all or save our lives In the mean time we gave Israel a couple good stabs in the back and dozens upon dozens of ruthless double standards, threats, and everything else under handed and for who and what?

And everyone obsesses over the left in an effort to divert our attentions to the matters at hand. And we thought Jimmy Carter was a weak kneed, arab loving kool-aid drinker!

If we give in to excuses that don't amount to a hill of beans we are no better than the numbskulls who run our government, past and present.


Wishing you a hearty L'Shana Tova.


Posted by: Chen on October 3, 2005 01:17 PM

3. BobW said:

Shalom Chen,

And likewise; L'Shana Tova, Chen !

One hundred years ago the 5 richest nations were the US, UK, France, Russia and Argentina. Today the list is different. Just before WWII who would not have laughed about London withdrawing from east of Aden and East of Suez - and India ?! Things change.

The US can still be called the "greatest strongest country in the world" but there are conditions and narrative to allow the quoted expression to stand. The US is in massive debt. The US is indebted to 3 foreign nations; PR China, Saudi Arabia and Japan. As powerful as the US is, if China ever went public with a "sell order" ie that it's selling off its US bonds , there would be severe problems in the States. There would be financial panics and do not dismiss political disturbances with violence. This scenerio is applicable to Saudi Arabia's foreign economic policy positions also.

Bush & Co. is addressing this. It takes time and risk.

I don't use a left-right or Democrat-Republican split to look at this stuff. I follow the el-gelt-o. An illustration; about 10 years ago Armenia fought Azerbajzan, both bordering on Iran. Who did Iran back? Eastern Orthodox Armenia or Islamic Azerbajzan? The Islamic Republic of Iran backed Eastern Catholic Armenia ! They're in it for the money!!

American politics is different but the fundamentals are present. My illustration here re the US would be to ... ... ...

not forget about Libya !!!

Happy New Year Chen and all !!

Kol tuv,
Bob

Posted by: BobW on October 3, 2005 02:13 PM

4. t said:

Maybe the U.S. isn t so great?

Posted by: t on October 4, 2005 12:49 PM

Post a comment




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)