A Call To Action

[ibrodsky]

I believe it is a big mistake for Israel supporters to completely dismiss the "road map."

Mind you, I do not believe that violent conflicts can be settled through committees and negotiations. They can only be settled by one side's total military defeat of the other.

So why do I give cautious and limited support to the "road map"?

Most of the world believes in this type of illusion. Convincing them not to believe in such illusions is simply unrealistic. It is wiser to exert some influence over the process than to move to the sidelines.

The Bush administration conceived the "road map." The administration has proved very supportive of Israel and has rejected the argument that the cause of 9/11/01 was US support for Israel. The cause in President Bush's words was "Evil-doers."
President Bush has wisely outlined a solution to the Israeli-Arab conflict requiring a new and reformed Palestinian leadership that is not "compromised by terror" and takes real action against terrorist groups.

What you shouldn't do:

We should not go from one extreme to another. Israel and many of her supporters swallowed the Oslo Peace Process whole. They continued to support the Oslo Peace Process even when it became clear (early on) that the PA had no intentions of adhering to it. Instead, they should have screamed "Foul!" and demanded the process be halted until the Palestinians complied.

Now is not the time to completely dismiss the "road map." This makes Israel's supporters look like the obstacle to peace. In fact, it makes all of the Palestinians' lies about how they want peace, Israel is the aggressor, and so forth seem credible. "You see, it's those right-wing Jews who don't want peace who are the root cause" they will say.

What you should do:

There are two key points that Israel and her supporters should devote all of their energy to making:

1. The government of Abu Mazen is not an independent, reform-minded government. Arafat is still in charge and no progress can be made until the Palestinians comply with President Bush's call for a new Palestinian government not compromised by terror.

2. All progress on the "road map" must be linked to real, verifiable, and measurable results fighting Palestinian terrorism. Currently, Abu Mazen is trying to broker a temporary halt to mass murder attacks with Hamas et al. This is not fighting terrorism, it is conspiring with it.

There are many ways to get these points across. You can write letters to the editor of major newspapers. You can write or call your elected leaders. Most people don't realize that members of Congress have aides who specialize in areas such as foreign affairs and these people are often accessible; don't be afraid to call and speak with them directly.

Remember, by simply dismissing the "road map" you resign from the discussion and have no influence. Since Israel will probably never implement forced transfer of the Palestinians back to Arabia, the most humane solution, the only other option is to force the Palestinians to create a somewhat democratic government based on rule of law and force and/or bribe them to squash Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and the other Palestinian terrorist groups.

[Isiah 2:4]

Well said! :)

[ibrodsky]

From the Jerusalem Post:

CIA training PA antiterror force
By KHALED ABU TOAMEH AND LAMIA LAHOUD

A team of CIA monitors and advisers on security have arrived in Cairo, and will soon move to the Gaza Strip, senior Palestinian Authority sources told The Jerusalem Post. The team will advise the PA in reorganizing its security, and is part of the team that will monitor both sides' implementation of the road map.

The CIA operatives are training a new PA antiterror force ahead of a possible confrontation with Hamas and Islamic Jihad, according to the sources.

The new force, which consists of several hundred agents, will operate under the direct command of Security Minister Muhammad Dahlan.

PA officials said they are preparing to start implementing their obligations under the road map, soon after a planned meeting between Prime Ministers Ariel Sharon and Mahmoud Abbas a meeting that could come within 48 hours, according to PA Chairman Yasser Arafat.

Meanwhile, talks between Palestinian factions on suspending terrorist attacks Israel might be resumed in the Gaza Strip and not in Cairo, PA Foreign Minister Nabil Shaath said Monday.
He said Abbas was awaiting a response from Hamas to his demand that the movement accept a temporary cessation of terrorist attacks now that Sharon's cabinet has accepted the road map.

Abbas met in Gaza City last Thursday with several leaders of Hamas and urged them to agree to a one-year cessation of terrorist attacks. But the Hamas officials, including Abdel Aziz Rantisi, Mahmoud Zahar, and Ismail Haniyeh, vowed to continue attacks against Israel.

Some sources close to Hamas said the movement would consider the offer only if Israel agrees to stop assassinations, withdraw from Palestinian cities and villages, and release all prisoners.
"Hamas knows that what's required is a full cease-fire and not a conditional one," Shaath said. "We don't want to give Israel any excuse."

He expressed optimism that all the Palestinian factions would agree to a cease-fire once Israel stops all military operations in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. He said the PA would not try to disarm any group or individual "as long as Israeli tanks are besieging our cities. Israel wants us to confiscate the weapons of the resistance while it is surrounding our cities and repressing our people. This will not happen."

Abbas reportedly met Monday with former West Bank Preventive Security Service chief Jibril Rajoub, trying to convince him to cooperate with him regarding security in the West Bank, said PA sources close to the two.

Abbas apparently wants Rajoub to work as his adviser for the West Bank, so that he does not have to work under Dahlan.

While Dahlan has begun to reorganize the security forces in the Gaza Strip, there is still chaos within the security forces in the West Bank, and Dahlan faces a lot of opposition from members of Fatah and Arafat loyalists there.

To implement security in the West Bank, Abbas needs Rajoub's help, a Fatah source said, but added that it was very unlikely that Rajoub would work with Dahlan.

Rajoub was angered by Dahlan when the later accused him of surrendering to the IDF during Operation Defensive Shield. Rajoub agreed to a US-brokered compromise, by which his men were allowed to leave his Ramallah compound, which was surrounded by the IDF.

"Whether Rajoub will agree to join forces with Abbas will largely depend on whether Abbas can offer him some independent position," a senior PA official said.

Rajoub has said he does not want to work in security in the present situation, but he might consider it once there is some progress on the implementation of the road map, the official said.
In any case, Rajoub, who recently underwent stomach surgery in the UK, will leave PA-controlled areas again on Tuesday and it is unlikely he will make a decision before the upcoming meetings between Sharon and Abbas, and the planned summit among US President George W. Bush, Sharon, and Abbas in June, PA sources said.

There are rumors that Arafat is also trying to bring Rajoub back under his own control, a Fatah source said. He wants to move the Preventive Security Service from the Interior Ministry to his own control, a Fatah source said.

An adviser to Arafat denied this. "There was a decision that the Military Intelligence of Moussa Arafat would coordinate its work with Preventive Security, as part of the reorganization of the security," he said. Military intelligence is under Arafat's control.

Israel will consider handing over any part of the Gaza Strip to the control of PA security services if they prove their willingness to combat terror, Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz told Israeli military reporters in a briefing in Ankara on Monday.
An example of this, Mofaz said, could be the northern Gaza Strip town of Beit Hanun, where troops are currently operating.

"We could hand it over to them and see how determined they are," said Mofaz. "It's not a question of capability, but leadership and determination."

Mofaz said he would not support handing over any areas in which failure to act will endanger the lives of Israeli citizens.

He added that Sharon had already informed the PA that he would be willing to hand over territory to Palestinian security control in order to test the PA's terror-fighting resolve.

Margot Dudkevitch contributed to this report from Ankara.

[ibrodsky]

In fact, since it is widely reported that Yaser Arafat delayed the US-Israeli-Palestinian summit planned for this week, it is clear the Palestinians are already in blatant violation.

[L@mplighterM]

Presidents come and go and Bush has a maximum of six years left to govern. After Bush’s reign as President it’s impossible to know what thoughts successive President will have about the then current world situation.

Since the state of Israel was first formed there haven’t been likeminded opinions from US Presidents relating to the Middle East situation. Foreign policy changes with new administrations and will most likely continue to be the case in the future..

I’ve always given Bush the thumbs up when it comes to tackling terrorism and whatever the outcome years down the road he should be commended for his actions. To date the US has done an outstanding job in Afghanistan and Iraq IMO.

There has been many augments made that it would alienate the Muslim world if the US continued the fight against terrorism within the borders of countries like Syria and Iran. I know it’s easy for me to sit on my butt and recommend a full scale invasion in countries that harbor terrorists because it’s not my life that’s on the line but I still believe that it must be done if the war against terrorism is to be won.

Under the current conditions in the ME any implementation of a roadmap to peace becomes an impossible dream. Of course its all right to engage in dialogue with ones enemy in the midst of fighting but such talks should be meaningful and be backed up by more than mere words.

Each and every Arab/Muslim state, including the PA should be cracking down on terrorists and their supporters as I write this. I know that it can be done if the leaderships are sincere in ending the bloodshed but I fear that it’s not the case and I don’t think it’ll ever be a reality. Such action will be extremely difficult given the dramatic rise in Islamic Fundamentalism during the past several decades.

The way things stand in the world at the moment is that a few want to dominate the world in the name of Allah and they will stop at nothing to make it so.

[ibrodsky]

Originally posted by L@mplighterM

Each and every Arab/Muslim state, including the PA should be cracking down on terrorists and their supporters as I write this. I know that it can be done if the leaderships are sincere in ending the bloodshed but I fear that it’s not the case and I don’t think it’ll ever be a reality. Such action will be extremely difficult given the dramatic rise in Islamic Fundamentalism during the past several decades.


It can be done. It's just that the punishment for terrorism has to be swift and clear, yet there has to be some reward for good behavior, too.

I don't agree with everything President Bush has done by a longshot. But one thing I've noticed is that the media works overtime trying to put a negative spin on everything he does. There have been several times when I was ready to denounce him based on articles and TV/radio reports(and statements attributed to Colin Powell). But when I saw the actual text of Bush's statements it became clear they were misreported.

But one thing I want to say about Bush. For Israel supporters who think he is ready to sacrifice Israel at a moment's notice... Consider this: he certainly doesn't owe his Presidency to Jews, who voted overwhelmingly against him *and* it was some little old Jewish ladies in Florida who went around whining about how they couldn't understand the ballot and may have voted for the wrong candidate. What unadulterated BS.

So everything Bush has done to fight terrorism and try to save Israel from the Oslo death trap was done in spite of Jewish voters--not in thanks.

[L@mplighterM]

I’m sitting here looking at a pocket watch from 1864, once in a while I take it from my safe, wind it up and let it do it’s thing. The watch hasn’t let me down yet it has never lost time it’s a beautiful precision timepiece.

If that watch was able to see, hear, think and speak I’m certain that it would have a lot of stories to tell.

One thing for certain is that the road to hell is paved with good intentions and there have been many who thought they had the solution to the situation in the Middle East. The fact of the matter is that Arabs want the whole state of Israel that has been the case since it was incorporated in 1947 and prior to that they wanted to rid the area of Jews.

Man has never succeeded in creating anything that is everlasting and past experience indicate that it’ll most likely remain that way. Still the nature of humans is to pick them selves up and try again to achieve whatever goals they want to reach, so the quest for peace goes on.

There’s a problem with the roadmap for peace being that its conditions are going to be imposed on the State of Israel and the Arabs. There will be impasses in these talks to reach an agreement but they will be swept aside and will resurface sometimes later in the future.

Successive generations will cry foul and there will be flare-ups from time to time. Still I suppose that one must try to obtain the unobtainable everlasting peace.

[Alfred]

Originally posted by ibrodsky
But one thing I want to say about Bush. For Israel supporters who think he is ready to sacrifice Israel at a moment's notice... Consider this: he certainly doesn't owe his Presidency to Jews, who voted overwhelmingly against him *and* it was some little old Jewish ladies in Florida who went around whining about how they couldn't understand the ballot and may have voted for the wrong candidate. What unadulterated BS.

So everything Bush has done to fight terrorism and try to save Israel from the Oslo death trap was done in spite of Jewish voters--not in thanks.


Well said. He is supporting Israel on PRINCIPLE, not for political reasons per se. Most Christians in the US support Israel for the same reason....despite the Jewish vote in the US.

Here is something to consider.

What if Bush was giving the PA a last chance on this? What if it were decided that Arafat was the stumbling block to "Peace in the Middle East?" What if Bush, with his political "capital' were to take a Delta Force team and remove Arafat?

I honestly think that is in the cards. I think the new realities in the Mid East allow us to remove warts from the equation when necessary.

Think of it. Who will really complain if it is the US who removes Arafat? (I hope we drop him out of a helo from 5000 feet over Paris, but that is only because I am not a violent person:). The world would cry for bombing Israel if it were Israel who did the deed.

I am all for it.

[JustPat]

Originally posted by ibrodsky
From the Jerusalem Post:
Now here's a scary thought! The CIA is going to teach the PA its anti-terrorism operations and techniques. From now on the terrorists know what they were doing to tip their hand to the intel community and can make the necessary corrections. Truly insane! :rolleyes:

[L@mplighterM]

I don’t recall ever reading that the PA was active in combating terrorists on the contrary they would round up terrorists/suspected terrorists and incarcerate them in a jail with a revolving door.

To teach the PA authority the tricks of the trade is indeed a scary thought because in my mind once you know how to apprehend individuals you also know how to avoid detection.

In any event it takes a better person than me to let bygones be bygones and continue onward as if the past had never happened.

[ibrodsky]

Originally posted by JustPat
Now here's a scary thought! The CIA is going to teach the PA its anti-terrorism operations and techniques. From now on the terrorists know what they were doing to tip their hand to the intel community and can make the necessary corrections. Truly insane! :rolleyes:

The trick is to bribe the right Palestinians to kill Hamas and Islamic Jihad. Bribes, like honor killings and waving your blood-drenched palms to the cameras, are highly esteemed in Palestinian culture.

Oh, did I mention they only feel productive when they are killing someone, and that Hamas and Islamic Jihad seek martyrdom? So by killing each other, they would merely be satisfying each other's needs.

[JustPat]

Originally posted by L@mplighterM
I don’t recall ever reading that the PA was active in combating terrorists on the contrary they would round up terrorists/suspected terrorists and incarcerate them in a jail with a revolving door.

To teach the PA authority the tricks of the trade is indeed a scary thought because in my mind once you know how to apprehend individuals you also know how to avoid detection.

In any event it takes a better person than me to let bygones be bygones and continue onward as if the past had never happened.
Convenient disguise for training sessions, strategy sessions, etc, don't you think? How else will they stay current on the latest technology, easily distribute their illegally procured weapons, etc. It's not like they can announce, "Terrorist recruitment meeting, 6pm, Saturday. Bring snacks."

Originally posted by L@mplighterM
The trick is to bribe the right Palestinians to kill Hamas and Islamic Jihad. Bribes, like honor killings and waving your blood-drenched palms to the cameras, are highly esteemed in Palestinian culture.

Oh, did I mention they only feel productive when they are killing someone, and that Hamas and Islamic Jihad seek martyrdom? So by killing each other, they would merely be satisfying each other's needs.
Now there's a thought. Not only would it promote efficiency, it would only affect those who are bent on such behavior.

[L@mplighterM]

JustPat, the first quote was by me.

The second quote below is by ibrodsky, not me.

Originally posted by ibrodsky
The trick is to bribe the right Palestinians to kill Hamas and Islamic Jihad. Bribes, like honor killings and waving your blood-drenched palms to the cameras, are highly esteemed in Palestinian culture.

Oh, did I mention they only feel productive when they are killing someone, and that Hamas and Islamic Jihad seek martyrdom? So by killing each other, they would merely be satisfying each other's needs.

[JustPat]

Originally posted by L@mplighterM
JustPat, the first quote was by me.

The second quote below is by ibrodsky, not me.
My mistake ... my apologies. Old fat fingers tend toward inaccuracy.

[L@mplighterM]

Originally posted by JustPat
My mistake ... my apologies. Old fat fingers tend toward inaccuracy.



No apology needed Just...just didnt want credit for someone elses work.

[ibrodsky]

Krauthamer speaks:

No Phony 'Cease-fires' with Terrorism
By Charles Krauthammer
Friday, May 30, 2003; Page A23


On May 23, just a week ago, the official newspaper of the supposedly reformed Palestinian Authority carried a front-page picture of the latest suicide bomber dressed in suicide-bomber regalia. It then referred to the place where she did her murdering as "occupied Afula." The town of Afula is in Israel's Galilee. It is not occupied. It is not in the West Bank or Gaza. It is within Israel. If Afula is occupied, then Tel Aviv is occupied, Haifa is occupied and Israel's very existence is a crime.

This bit of incitement and delegitimization was, to my knowledge, reported in not a single American newspaper. It is simply too routine. It is the everyday stuff of Palestinian newspapers and television, schoolbooks and sermons. Appearing, however, after the Palestinians had presumably adopted new leadership committed to (1) ending terrorism and (2) accepting Israel, this outrage caught the eye of Robert Satloff of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. Satloff brought it to American attention noting that "it is difficult to imagine a more chilling message to Israelis who doubt Palestinian commitment to a two-state solution."

President Bush, engaging his personal prestige in the Arab-Israeli peace process, is headed to Middle East summits in Egypt and Jordan. He is in danger, however, of heading straight back to Oslo, that eight-year exercise in delusion and self-deception that led to the bloodiest fighting between Israelis and Palestinians in 50 years. Dennis Ross, chief U.S. negotiator through the Oslo process, has admitted that one of the great failings of Oslo was the willful refusal of both Americans and Israelis hungry for peace to confront Palestinian violations of the agreements, most notably the incitement to kill Jews and the constant propaganda delegitimizing Israel's right to exist.

There was some hope for change when Mahmoud Abbas became Palestinian prime minister and spoke of ending the violence and accepting Israel. But as of now, Abbas has done nothing. And just this week Yasser Arafat demonstrated who is the real boss of the Palestinians when he deliberately forced a postponement of a summit meeting between Abbas and Ariel Sharon. Until Abbas is in control, the president's visit will constitute a reward for nothing more than cosmetic reform.

The only logic of Bush's visit is that perhaps a photo op with the president of the United States will elevate Abbas and give him the authority to do what he has to do. But the premise of the president's Middle East policy, announced last year on June 24, was that the United States would help the Palestinians achieve statehood in response to real Palestinian reform, not just words.

Moreover, the "road map" for peace, which the Palestinians say they have accepted, explicitly demands of the Palestinian leadership "sustained, targeted, and effective operations aimed at confronting all those engaged in terror and dismantlement of terrorist capabilities and infrastructure."

Abbas is talking very differently. His objective, he says, is to persuade the suicide bombing specialists -- Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades -- to accept a temporary cease-fire. This would be a disaster for any prospect of peace. It means that the terrorists who have been hunted down by Israel ever since it finally decided to strike back after last year's Passover massacre would receive immediate sanctuary: time to rebuild, regroup, rearm and prepare for the next, more deadly orgy of violence.

If what Abbas means by peace is that the terrorists just lay low for a while, then it is not a peace of the brave but a peace of the knave. If that is what President Bush accepts as "peace," he not only will have betrayed Israel, he will have doomed American policy, because he will have ratified a prescription for continued and much more bloody violence.

The requirements of a successful summit are clear. Abbas has to take real steps to curb terror. Let him begin in just one city. Israel will withdraw, but only if Abbas asserts authority and actually goes after the terrorists in that town. No revolving-door arrests. No temporary cease-fire. Nothing less than "sustained . . . operations aimed at . . . dismantlement of terrorist capabilities and infrastructure."

And Abbas has to do something even simpler. Stop official Palestinian media from extolling suicide bombers. Stop official Palestinian media from referring to Israel as occupied territory. Talk about peace -- in Arabic, not just in English -- the way Anwar Sadat did 25 years ago. Israel reciprocated then; it will reciprocate now. Without such elemental steps by Abbas, however, no peace is possible -- and the new Bush peace initiative will amount to nothing more than Oslo redux.


© 2003 The Washington Post Company

[L@mplighterM]

May. 30, 2003
Israel's Republicans warn Bush of election fallout over roadmap
By MICHAEL FREUND

Advertisement

In an unprecedented move, the official Israeli branch of Republicans Abroad has sent a letter to US President George W. Bush warning that his support for the road map threatens to drive potential voters away from the party, The Jerusalem Post has learned.

The letter, a copy of which was obtained by the 'Post, was sent to the White House on Wednesday, and cautioned that "pressing ahead with this plan will only serve to alienate American Jews and the Christian right."

"We are aware of increasing numbers of American citizens, both here in Israel and in the United States, who are now considering abandoning the Republican party as a result of your Administration's pursuit of the 'Road Map'," the letter said.

In unusually strong language, the letter's signatories, which included the president of Republicans Abroad Israel, Eliyahu Weinstein, and the group's Co-Chair Bob Lang, further stated that, "pressuring Israel to negotiate with terrorists at the same time that America is waging war on terror is both morally untenable and intellectually inconsistent."

"It blurs the clarity of vision which you have repeatedly enunciated since the September 11 terror attacks in New York and Washington, and sends the wrong message to terrorists around the world, namely, that violence can and does pay," Weinstein and Lang wrote to Bush.

According to the Republicans Abroad website, the group "is the international arm of the Republican Party" and "helps the Republican Party develop policy and campaign strategy at the highest levels."

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/A/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1054270640672




The goal of Arabs/Muslims is to kill or drive every Jew out of the region. The goal of Adolph Hitler was to kill every Jew on this planet.

The goal of Radical Islam is to establish a world where the words of Mohammed are law.

There should be no reward for nations to weed out terrorism. The Syrian leader is quite capable of eradicating terrorist organizations operating from within that states soil.

Arab leaders (including Arafat) know exactly what needs to be done.

The cart should not be put before the horse, eliminate the terrorist organizations and then implement some form of map that would minimize terrorism.

[L@mplighterM]

Again Sharon has made it quite clear that he’s willing to broker a deal with the Palestinians that will lead to an independent state in the WB and GS.

IMO if the Palestinian leadership were truly interested there would be an immediate cessation of violence in the region. Alas that just isn’t the case there are and there will remain elements whose goals are the destruction of Israel. Death to Jews is their motto!

In the midst of negotiations the attempt to kill and/or main Jews continues and this writer truly believes that the majority of the Palestinians supports it.


Snip:

Two Palestinians were killed while trying to carry out terrorist attacks over the weekend in separate incidents in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, while an Israeli Arab was wounded in a shooting in the Jordan Valley.
On Saturday, IDF troops foiled an attack when they spotted two Palestinians planting a bomb on a route used by security forces between Sanur and Jaba, south of Jenin.
Two Palestinians were killed while trying to carry out terrorist attacks over the weekend in separate incidents in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, while an Israeli Arab was wounded in a shooting in the Jordan Valley.
On Saturday, IDF troops foiled an attack when they spotted two Palestinians planting a bomb on a route used by security forces between Sanur and Jaba, south of Jenin.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/A/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1054364027808

I think the message should be quite clear to the dumbest of dumb that Islam’s/Arabs goal is to remove every Jew from the region be it alive or dead.

[JustPat]

Originally posted by L@mplighterM
Again Sharon has made it quite clear that he’s willing to broker a deal with the Palestinians that will lead to an independent state in the WB and GS.

IMO if the Palestinian leadership were truly interested there would be an immediate cessation of violence in the region. Alas that just isn’t the case there are and there will remain elements whose goals are the destruction of Israel. Death to Jews is their motto!
And this is why the "Roadmap" is a dead end.

[L@mplighterM]

Originally posted by JustPat
And this is why the "Roadmap" is a dead end.

A dead end for the Israelis is right.

It’s debatably whether or whether not Sharon’s use of the word occupation is going to worsen the situation in the ME once the roadmap is dead. I think it was bad judgment to use that word and in my opinion I don’t consider the actions of the Israelis as occupation.

In effect Sharon has taken the position of the Arabs and called it occupation. All this backtracking on his part is BS because I saw and heard him make the statement. Personally I’ve always viewed the situation as the IDF being there to help the PA do the job they agreed to do.

But hey what do I know?

[Moskal']

Originally posted by L@mplighterM
A dead end for the Israelis is right.

It’s debatably whether or whether not Sharon’s use of the word occupation is going to worsen the situation in the ME once the roadmap is dead. I think it was bad judgment to use that word and in my opinion I don’t consider the actions of the Israelis as occupation.

In effect Sharon has taken the position of the Arabs and called it occupation. All this backtracking on his part is BS because I saw and heard him make the statement. Personally I’ve always viewed the situation as the IDF being there to help the PA do the job they agreed to do.

But hey what do I know?

That is exactly the problem. Israel backs down, gives up positions while getting nothing but empty promises in return. Once there was a time when the mossad was keeping all of world's terrorism at bay, when israeli government refused to talk with terrorists. After the lebanon campaign, the PLO was having it's worst time since ever.

Israel gave up it's principles and settled the terrorists into it's country. For the sake of peace. The outcome was seen. So, being in the position Israel is now, it would be unwise to back down even further. Terrorists will never be statisfied. They voiced their demands and it is highly unprobable that they will back down. They never did. All their concessions were theatral, not more.

Bush may wish good for Israel, but he does no good to it. There will be other people in charge, but the anti-israeli treaties, the lost positions will stay, just like Oslo remains, haunting israeli government into more concessions.

Sharon's statement is very dangerous in this matter. Not only Israel recognized terrorists as equal partners, but also recognizes itself as agressor by statements like this. Let us see how long it will last till an israeli official refers to Israel as "Palestine" :rolleyes:

[Moskal']

Originally posted by ibrodsky
Krauthamer speaks:
...


Palestinians violate the treaty before even signing it... where are the guarantees that they won't in the future? Where are the guarantees that they will be punished for violating them? When the road map is to be tried, it will be settled. Every Israeli decision is irreversible. Therefore, the madness should be halted as soon as possible. There are reasons to do so. These reasons would excuse the end of road map talks. Israel can deal with the situation. It should.

[JustPat]

If you can't trust a man to keep an eye on your hat, do you give him the keys to your house?

[ibrodsky]

Originally posted by Moskal'
Palestinians violate the treaty before even signing it... where are the guarantees that they won't in the future? Where are the guarantees that they will be punished for violating them? When the road map is to be tried, it will be settled. Every Israeli decision is irreversible. Therefore, the madness should be halted as soon as possible. There are reasons to do so. These reasons would excuse the end of road map talks. Israel can deal with the situation. It should.

I disagree. Israel must consistently advocate peace with reasonable security guarantees.

This means that as hard as it is, Israel must be receptive to every peace plan. That doesn't mean surrendering the right to protest when third party plans are unfair and one-sided, or when the Palestinians fail to honor their part.

And I believe this is exactly what is happening. Rather than dismiss the road map, Israel has raised 14 or 15 objections. Israel has pointed out that a terrorist time out is not acceptable. Presumably, the Bush administration has assured Sharon that if Israel goes along the US will force the Palestinians to comply.

In fact, I'm quite sure the administration's philosophy re: the road map is that the precise wording is not the main thing. The main thing is that the road map requires the Palestinians fight terrorism and accept Israel as a fait accompli.

The road map does indeed come down to how it is interpreted and enforced. I don't understand why so many people focus exclusively on the exact words.

Remember, we are talking about a peace process with liars and mass murderers. Words mean nothing to these people. But if the road map can be used to provide cover for forcing them to fight terrorism, then it could turn out a good thing.

Personally, I would love to see the Arab occupation of our homeland ended. It is outrageous that we are reviled the world over for offering these bloodthirsty barbarians part of our homeland... which they stole from us. But if we can force or trick them into killing Hamas et al, that would be cool, too.

[L@mplighterM]

My emotions are mixed when it comes to the ME roadmap. On one hand I realize that if the situation continues it’ll be a continuous never-ending bloodbath where Jews end up being murdered by religious Islamic fundamentalist madmen.

If however Israel refuses to engage in meaningful dialogue they will loose a lot of support, which is running rather thin these days. It’s a catch 22 type of situation damned if you do and damned if u don’t.

Still there’s no question that there would be great celebrations throughout the Arab/Muslim world if the area was ever rid of Jews.

[ibrodsky]

Originally posted by L@mplighterM
My emotions are mixed when it comes to the ME roadmap. On one hand I realize that if the situation continues it’ll be a continuous never-ending bloodbath where Jews end up being murdered by religious Islamic fundamentalist madmen.

If however Israel refuses to engage in meaningful dialogue they will loose a lot of support, which is running rather thin these days. It’s a catch 22 type of situation damned if you do and damned if u don’t.

Still there’s no question that there would be great celebrations throughout the Arab/Muslim world if the area was ever rid of Jews.

Of course, you are absolutely correct. Israel can negotiate with the Palestinians but should never trust them. Their signature on a document is just a meaningless ink mark.

Israel must demand that the US keep up the pressure on the Palestinians to establish an independent government not run by the Father of Modern Terrorism. The Palestinians must also be forced or bribed to dismantle Hamas and the other mass murder groups.

Hopefully, the pressure will precipitate a Palestinian civil war. But just in case it doesn't, Israel must remain prepared to deal the barbarians their final defeat--and send them packing back to Arabia from where they came.

[ibrodsky]

So much for the Arabs' supposed quest for peace:

Report: Sharm summit delayed over normalizing ties with Israel

By The Associated Press and Haaretz Staff

The Qatari-based Al-Jazeera satellite channel
reported that the opening of the Sharm el-Sheikh
summit on Tuesday between U.S. President George W.
Bush and Arab leaders was postponed by two hours
due to Arab leaders' rejection of Bush's demand to
advance the normalization of ties with Israel.

[L@mplighterM]

Friday, June 6, 2003 Posted: 1435 GMT (10:35 PM HKT)

GAZA CITY (CNN) -- The Palestinian Islamic fundamentalist group Hamas on Friday stopped talks with Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas on a possible cease-fire with Israel.
"We are cutting off all dialogue with the Palestinian Authority," said Hamas leader Abdel-Aziz al-Rantissi, accusing it of trying to dictate the terms of Wednesday's peace summit in Aqaba, Jordan, to the group.
Hamas, whose military wing has been responsible for many of the recent terror attacks against Israeli civilians as well as the Israeli military, has been labeled by the U.S. State Department as a terrorist organization.
In reaction to the Hamas announcement, U.S. National Security Council spokesman Mike Anton said, "There's now a real prospect for peace. All parties agree that terrorism needs to stop and that all parties must fight terror. Those who pursue terror have made clear that they are enemies of peace."
http://edition.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/06/06/mideast/index.html

The article includes a picture of masked Hamas members demonstrating in Nablus, WB.

[yehudi]

Originally posted by ibrodsky
I believe it is a big mistake for Israel supporters to completely dismiss the "road map." At first, I had an agreable surprise seeing a hardliner supporting a peace plan.


Of course if you read the post itself, it's pretty disappointing. Basically it's a call for hardline zionists to lobby the newspapers and politicians to fight the roadmap but without admitting it.

I guess that's the very best an extremist can do in matter of subtlety :D .


Anyway...

...let's check ibrodsky editorials for what they are worth. The previous ibrodsky editorial was 'this time finish the job'. Basically it was "After Iraq now let the US blast Syria".
It's now clearer everyday the US attacked Iraq because it was a/ weak b/full of oil c/to make an example and d/to get their troops out of Saudi arabia. Never would the US have attacked Syria with these motivations. Never.


So let's assume ibrodsky is as wrong today as he was last time.

Let's see what we get...

Good news then !
The US will effectively resist to the Likoudnik Zionist lobby and the roadmap will get going. Bush looks pretty resolute to push things forward (and with the WMD controversy along with the considerable loss of support for the US in the world, he wil probably do what he says).

.

[L@mplighterM]

The US attacked Iraq because there was evidence that the country possessed WMD. Hans Blix himself stated that Iraq had removed the hard drives from their computers and the scientists refused to be interviewed by the inspectors. The country simply wasn’t upfront with the weapons inspectors.

I’ve seen no evidence that indicate that the US has removed one drop of oil from Iraq to date.

[L@mplighterM]

SniP:

June 6, 2003


WASHINGTON--President Bush held two Middle East summits this week. The first, with the Arab states, was an abject failure. The second, with the prime ministers of Israel and the Palestinian Authority, was merely a troubling echo of another abject failure, the Oslo handshake of 1993.

Let's be plain about what happened at Sharm el-Sheik. The president of the United States put his prestige on the line for the sake of Arab-Israeli peace and the Arab states gave him nothing. They refused to endorse Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state. They spoke of their opposition to ``terrorism,'' even as they repeatedly present their own publics with the most elaborate intellectual and religious justifications of why the killing of Jews in ``Palestine'' is ``resistance'' and not terrorism.

They did not take a single concrete action, not even a gesture, toward Israel. Egypt did not offer to return its ambassador to Israel. The Saudis threatened a boycott if Israel was even invited. And most important, the Arab states refused what Bush most desperately wanted: explicit endorsement of the American view that Yasser Arafat's time had come and passed.

That would have been crucial in elevating Mahmoud Abbas, who appears to want to make peace. What did Bush do? What American presidents always do in response to such rebuffs: smile politely and say thank you.

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/charleskrauthammer/ck20030606.shtml


The article is named “The unilateral surrender of Israel continues” and I kind off see it that way as well. I acknowledge that steps have to be taken in an effort to establish a relative calm in the ME however I see this effort materializing at a cost to Israel.

The US administration or Bush if you will is taking a lot of things for granted if he/they believe(s) that the implementation of the ME Roadmap is a magic pill that will cure all that ails the region.

I think Bush has a simplistic way of looking at the situation, he believes that if Israel forfeits land the Islamic fundamentalists will call it a day and stop terrorist actions against Israelis. I don’t believe that cessation of violence directed against Israelis will ever stop and I firmly believe it’ll be cases of give them an inch and they’ll want a mile in other words they want it all.

If I was sincere in wanting peace and I was the leader of the Palestinians I would ask Israel to assist me in rounding up known terrorists and their supporters. The leadership of organizations such as Hamas has stated that they will not cease terrorist activity. It is common knowledge who the leaders of these terror clubs are and they should be rounded up then dealt with severely.

Action like that would not set a precedent because this is already taking place in the case of Kuwait and Saudi Arabia where US presence has been protecting these regimes for years.

[ibrodsky]

Abu Mazen should be given a very narrow window during which to initiate armed attacks on Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Al Aqsa Brigades, and the other mass murderers. He must prove that he is willing and able to kill them.

Of course, he is Arafat's puppet and will never do this. Israel should then declare the Palestinians to be in flagrant violation of the "road map" and clearly uninterested in a negotiated settlement.

Arafat succeeded in creating a society that overwhelmingly supports terrorism. Arafat's compound should be obliterated, and the forced transfer of the Palestinians back to Arabia should begin.

The reaction of the rest of the world is immaterial. Israel has repeatedly offered concessions to the forces of jihad-genocide. Not all Arabs are terrorists, but most of the Palestinians occupying parts of historic Israel are terrorists or terrorist supporters.

If they had the power, they would kill all Jews. Israel has the power, and should forcibly transfer them. Forced transfer is far more humane than allowing mass murder attacks.

[L@mplighterM]

Snip:


Palestinian PM Shuns Hamas, Says No Talks
Sat Jun 7, 5:58 PM ET Add World - Reuters to My Yahoo!


By Nidal al-Mughrabi

GAZA (Reuters) - Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas ruled out dialogue with Hamas after the militant group suspended truce talks due to his conciliatory stance at a peace summit with Israel, a Palestinian official said on Saturday.



"Abbas will not meet Hamas, even if Hamas requests to meet him. Their irresponsible decision has indicated that they are not interested in cementing the national unity of the Palestinian people," the official told Reuters, referring to Hamas's walkout on Friday.


In another sign of in-fighting, a meeting of Hamas and other Palestinian factions, convened in Gaza City to discuss Wednesday's U.S.-led summit in Jordan, ended with no consensus on Abbas's pledge to take the violence out of their uprising for independence.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=574&ncid=721&e=1&u=/nm/20030607/wl_nm/mideast_dc


Perhaps this is just a game being played between Abba and the Hamas. Good cop, bad cop.

[ibrodsky]

Originally posted by L@mplighterM
Snip:


Palestinian PM Shuns Hamas, Says No Talks
Sat Jun 7, 5:58 PM ET Add World - Reuters to My Yahoo!

...

Perhaps this is just a game being played between Abba and the Hamas. Good cop, bad cop.

Unfortunately, I think this report is inaccurate. It is widely reported today that Abu Mazen has called for "dialogue" with Hamas.

See:

http://www.newsnow.co.uk/newsfeed/?name=Israel

[JustPat]

Originally posted by ibrodsky
Unfortunately, I think this report is inaccurate. It is widely reported today that Abu Mazen has called for "dialogue" with Hamas.

See:

http://www.newsnow.co.uk/newsfeed/?name=Israel
Does dialogue equate with strategy session? By meeting with Hamas in clesed sessions, can we be sure that they are not just planning further destruction on Israel and its people? Can you trust a liar to tell you the truth?

[ibrodsky]

from the BBC:

Blunt US warning to Palestinians

The failure to end violence against Israelis is threatening the creation of a Palestinian state, the White House has said.

President Bush's spokesman said continuing attacks by Palestinian gunmen hurt the implementation of the US-backed peace plan under which Israel has agreed to the principle of a Palestinian nation.

The blunt warning came just hours after the Palestinian prime minister said he wanted to resume talks to persuade militant groups to agree a ceasefire.

[ibrodsky]

from Jerusalem Post

Abbas snubs Berlusconi for not meeting Arafat By HERB KEINON

Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas refused to meet Italian Premier Silvio Berlusconi on Monday because Berlusconi refused to meet PA Chairman Yasser Arafat.

It is the second time in two weeks that Abbas refused to meet a senior European official who snubbed Arafat. Last month he would not meet Bulgarian Foreign Minister Solomon Passy for the same reason.

[L@mplighterM]

I think the bottom line is that Arafat is very much in charge and Abbas is his puppet. In my opinion Abbas is just conning the Israelis he wants weapons to fight Hamas but of course that scam has been played before.

[ibrodsky]

Yes, I think Israel and the U.S. should declare a halt to the "road map."

It's clear that Abu Mazen is just Arafat's puppet. He has twice refused to meet with heads of state because they would not also meet with his boss, Arafat.

Plus, Abu Mazen has made it clear he has no intention of taking real action against terrorist groups.

Once again, the Palestinians have showed they are shameless liars. President Bush has no choice but to declare that Abu Mazen's promise to end the violence and fight terrorism was a Big Fat Lie.

Let the forced transfer of the racist, jihad-genocide Arabs occupying the West Bank and Gaza begin.

[ibrodsky]

Dear President Bush,

The U.S. should declare a halt to the Middle East "road map."

It's clear that Abu Mazen is just Arafat's puppet. He has twice refused to meet with heads of state because they would not also meet with his boss, Arafat.

Plus, Abu Mazen has made it clear he has no intention of taking real action against terrorist groups.

Now you know what Israeli leaders have known for a long time. Palestinian leaders make statements and sign agreements merely to fool those in the West who are willing to be fooled. They have built a terrorist society, they act in solidarity with Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein, and their goal is the destruction of Israel.

Sincerely,

ibrodsky

[ibrodsky]

Dear President Bush,

I am deeply troubled by your insistence that Israel not target the leaders of Palestinian mass murder groups.

It is the height of hypocrisy for the US to shoot at a car carrying terrorist leaders in Yemen, yet to scold Israel for doing the same in Gaza.

How can we hope to win the war against terrorism if we treat Palestinian terrorists, who killed many American citizens and expressed solidarity with Al Qaida and Saddam Hussein, as 'off limits'?

The new Palestinian PM is making a total fool out of you. He is clearly working for Arafat. He has refused to meet two heads of state because they refused to meet with Arafat. He declared an end to the violence, yet Palestinian terrorist groups immediately contradicted him, and he made it clear he has no intention of fighting them.

I have supported the road map until now. What matters most is not the exact wording, but how it is enforced. Unfortunately, your comments today show that you are torn between fighting terrroism and appeasing Arab leaders who support and excuse terrorism.

Sincerely,

ibrodsky

[L@mplighterM]

Abbas demands US action

10jun03
PALESTINIAN prime minister Mahmud Abbas demanded today immediate action from the United States following Israel's assassination attempt against Hamas leader Abdul Aziz al-Rantissi, a statement said.

"The prime minister conveyed an urgent message to the US administration expressing his condemnation of this terrorist attack, and warning of the grave dangers facing the implementation of the roadmap as a result of this Israeli action," it said.

"He demanded immediate action by the United States to stop this serious deterioration," said the statement, issued by the Palestinian Authority.

http://www.theadvertiser.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,6577436%255E401,00.html


If Abbas was seriously interested in the peaceprocess he should have arrested Rantissi himself. The trouble is that it’s difficult to arrest your partner in coruption.

[ibrodsky]

What I don't understand is why Israel has not been jumping up and down screaming in response to Abu Mazen's declarations that he has no intentions of fighting terrorism.

This is a clear and blatant violation of the "road map."

Why dismantle outposts in return for nothing but phony declarations?

Why suggest Israel is occupying Arab land and this must end... when Palestinian leaders can't bring themselves to say that those trying to destroy the only Jewish state are wrong and must stop?

The only solution to this conflict is military victory.

[Mediocrates]

Like Father, Like Son
Yedidya Atlas
10 June 2003

http://www.israelnn.com/article.php3?id=2379

Much has already been written as to why the Bush “Road Map” is dangerous for Israel, why it rewards terrorism, etc., etc. So I won’t bother to focus on the obvious. After all, we in Israel have already lived through the Rogers Plan, the Vance Plan, the Reagan Plan, the Mitchell Plan, the Tenet Plan, the Saudi Plan and probably some other plans I’ve forgotten about - all of which are basically the same, including the Bush “Road Map” Plan.

In essence, all of these Plans boil down to this: Israel, the victim, is labeled the aggressor and must give up tangible assets, which puts her national physical survival in jeopardy, while rewarding the terrorist aggressors, who are officially designated “poor, misunderstood victims”. Their brutal and murderous violence has to be excused because:

a. they are stateless (although they never had a state before. Their purported nationality was only recently invented as a tactical weapon to make an amnesiac world forget that 21 heavily armed Arab countries with hundreds of millions of people have been trying their darnedest to destroy Israel and the Jewish People for most of the last century; and so their Madison Avenue flunkies came up with the “poor Palestinians” ploy);

b. they live in a violent culture (Islamic, which in a multi-cultural world is okay, because who’s to say what is moral and what’s not?);

c. their enemies are Jews. So automatically it’s okay, because they’re only killing Jews (who should be used to it by now and should stop complaining), and by supporting the “poor Palestinians” and opposing the “Israeli aggressor”, one can be anti-Semitic in Politically Correct company, where it is not de rigueur to admit that the real reason you oppose Israel is because you hate Jews; and

d. All of the above.

Therefore, I am going to focus on why US President George W. Bush, considered up until recently as the best friend Israel ever had in the White House, has now apparently joined the Threaten Israel’s Existence Club.

Various media pundits are valiantly making efforts to somehow explain Mr. Bush, Jr.’s sudden hostile behavior garbed in reassuring words of concern for Israel’s security. In fact, irrespective of actual intentions, he is openly aiming to divide Israel, thus rewarding terrorism and mass murder (including the killing of 27 Americans since Arafat’s minions attacked Israel in September 2000); financing, arming and giving further training to a Palestinian Arab terrorist army; forcing “ethnic cleansing” of Jews from their Biblical heartland at the demand of the terrorist murders; and returning Israel to the pre-1967 or 1949 Cease-Fire Lines, described by the late Abba Eban as “The Auschwitz Lines” because of their indefensibility against attack, making Israel easier to destroy.

Why has George W. Bush seem to have become another Bill Clinton, purporting to be Israel’s best friend while holding Israel back from defeating its enemies, supporting and giving legitimacy to those enemies’ false claims, and morally equating legitimate and peaceful settlement activity with brutal terrorist mass murder?

Why has George W. Bush reportedly threatened America’s only loyal, democratic and dependable ally in the Middle East, Israel, to deliberately weaken itself and refrain from winning a vicious terrorist war? It is a war being waged by the very same Palestinian Arab terrorist organizations who openly supported Saddam Hussein and even participated in the war in Iraq against American troops; yet, nonetheless they are being protected, encouraged and actively supported by the US State Department and now also by US President George W. Bush, whether he understands it or not. There are a number of possible reasons being suggested for this apparent sudden change of heart:

a. Mr. Bush is a born-again Methodist who believes in “replacement theology”; i.e., the Christians have replaced the Jews as God’s Chosen People and is therefore against Jewish hegemony in the Holy Land (this, according to several leading Evangelical Christian leaders who reject “replacement theology”);

b. His father, former US President George Bush, Sr., and former US Secretary of State James Baker, leading the pack of Aramco/Saudi corporate sycophants, are playing son George W. like a puppet and are willing to sacrifice Israel and key American strategic interests for economic gains for members of their cronies club;

c. Carl Rove, US President George W. Bush’s political advisor has decided that this will help re-elect Mr. Bush in the upcoming US presidential election next year, and therefore Israel can be thrown to the terrorist wolves if it might help the campaign;

d. Initially pushed by Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to move forward on a “Road Map” type plan, Mr. Bush, Jr., who, as a “Big Picture” man, soon allowed the Arabist State Department to cut Mr. Sharon and the Israelis out of the formulation of the plan and re-introduce the usual reekingly biased plan against basic Israeli interests, rather than deal with actual life and death (for Israel) details; and

e. All of the above to varying degrees.

I can’t tell you which reason is the most accurate. I can’t get inside Mr. Bush’s head. I can tell you that US President George W. Bush, intentionally or not, is making the same mistake his father made. He is choosing the immoral, even if perceived-to-be politically expedient, path, which is in direct contradiction to God’s Road Map Plan for the Land of Israel and the Jewish People.

Mr. Bush, Jr. will be running for re-election next year. But if he continues on this path, he will have lost the bulk of the Jewish vote that until now, was potentially increasing in number, and is key in at least three electorally important states (New York, Florida and California). He will also have lost a significant percentage of what was his hardcore voter base, some 40-50 million Evangelical Christians, who are strong supporters of Israel, and who are key voter blocs throughout the south, southwest and parts of the mid-west.

A decade ago, the Bush-Baker corporate cabal tried hard to force similar dictates down Israel’s throat. Then US President Bush, Sr., whose popularity was at an all time high after his perceived victory in the 1991 Gulf War, plummeted to ultimate defeat after he arrogantly wielded his political power to force Israel to make unilateral tangible concessions to the officially designated representatives of the same Palestinian Arab terrorists.

Like father, like son. George W. Bush, who started out as a world-class leader after September 11th, as he took the moral high ground and declared and carried out a war against terrorism, is sadly throwing it all away as he chooses the immoral low ground with his practical persecution of Israel, his country’s only true ally in the region, on behalf of the very terrorist murderers he claims to oppose. And as a result, if he does not return to be the George W. Bush we once admired, he too will be a one-term president, going down in the annals of American political history as one who had it all and blew it.
--------------------------------------------------------
Yedidya Atlas is a senior correspondent and commentator for Arutz 7 Israel National News (www.IsraelNationalNews.com). He can be reached at atlas@a7.org.

[ibrodsky]

from LittleGreenFootballs:

Also note that these actions by Israel against the top leadership of Hamas come only after:

1) Abu Mazen stated that he absolutely would not take any action against the terror gangs, and

2) The terror gangs stated that they absolutely would not stop their attacks against Israel.

[L@mplighterM]

Solutions can only be found if both parties are willing to negotiate in good faith. The Palestinians backed by the rest of the Arab/Muslim world has consistently indicated that they are not interested in establishing law and order in the ME.

Military solutions unfortunately only seem to work in the short term and there never will be a war that ends all wars.

The bottom line is that there are elements within Islam that will never rest until each and every Jew is either dead or gone from Israel.

Bush and Blair may have a romantic notion that they can establish order in the region but the fact remains that they cant.

[ibrodsky]

Originally posted by L@mplighterM

Military solutions unfortunately only seem to work in the short term and there never will be a war that ends all wars.


There may never be a war to end all wars. But there can be a war to end Palestinian terrorists.

By forcibly transferring the Palestinians back to Arabia, Israel will have more defensible borders.

Sure, the Arabs will continue to attempt an occasional terrorist attack against Israel. And they may focus more attention on killing Jews outside Israel. (After all, to them all Jews deserve to die.)

But by forcing them to operate from existing Arab tyrannies, that ensures the existence of a return address. Then the Arab dictators can decide whether they want to absorb Israeli counterattacks or just rid themselves of the Palestinians.

[yehudi]

Originally posted by ibrodsky
By forcibly transferring the Palestinians back to Arabia, Israel will have more defensible borders. A very good example of what is an extremist. This site is actually run by extremists and propagates many ideas like this "ethnic cleansing" doctrine.

Please try to stop and think sometimes: You were not born an ethnic cleanser, what turned you into one?

.

[L@mplighterM]

I would not oppose undertaking drastic measures to solve the situation in the ME because I believe that it’s the only option after having considered all the circumstances.

Forced transfer however would never work because it violates the Geneva Convention and/or International Law.

The State of Israel is under a microscope and whatever action they take to combat terrorism is condemned by much of the world community.

I’m often classified as a hardliner rightist when it comes to the ME situation but I don’t consider myself that way. I have this strange philosophy that Israelis should be allowed to walk down streets unmolested and above all I love peace.

[ibrodsky]

Originally posted by yehudi
A very good example of what is an extremist. This site is actually run by extremists and propagates many ideas like this "ethnic cleansing" doctrine.

Please try to stop and think sometimes: You were not born an ethnic cleanser, what turned you into one?

.

I am old enough to know that while there need to be rules, there also need to be exceptions.

Personally, I consider 50+ years of mass murder attacks to be "extreme." I would much prefer that people of different religions, ethnic groups, and races learn to live together. Unfortunately, Israel's Arab enemies have convinced me that they have no desire to do so and will commit any crime necessary to see that it never happens.

Given that, is it more extreme to watch Palestinian terrorists blow up busloads of Jews and Israel respond with military incursions and curfews, or would it be more humane to send the bulk of Palestinians to live in Arab ruled lands?

Actually, the side demanding ethnic cleansing is the Palestinian side. I don't call for all Arabs to leave Israel, but they do call for all Jews to leave the West Bank. They also have a popular racist ideology to systematize and elevate their demands. Since the Father of Modern Terrorism was allowed to set up shop in the territories, the Palestinian media, schools, and mosques have preached ethnic cleansing as the solution to all of their problems.

Forcibly transferring the bulk of Palestinians would provide more defensible borders, would allow those Arabs to fullfill their dream of living in Arab dominated and controlled societies, and--if they wish--they can even go to one of the Islamist fascist theocracies where their racist sensibilities need not be offended by the presence of uppity infidels.

[Mediocrates]

Originally posted by yehudi
A very good example of what is an extremist. This site is actually run by extremists and propagates many ideas like this "ethnic cleansing" doctrine.

Please try to stop and think sometimes: You were not born an ethnic cleanser, what turned you into one?

.



Nobody wakes up one finds a shoebox full of C4, a Kalashnikov and a video camera and mindlessly decides to go blow up a bus full of children. So what made you that way? OR are we still pretending that terrorism is like Marxist Santa Claus? Random, out of anyone's control, spontaneous upwelling of downtrodden people and the bombs they stumble over on their way to lunch?

It completely baffles me how Hamas can say they are an army, Hezbollah say they are an army, Tanzim, PFLP, Fatah, Force 17, al Aqsa all say they are an army but the armchair revolutionaries say there are no armies. Honestly there is no denser substance in the universe than radical revolutionary dogma.

Schizophrenics build castles in the air, neurotics live in them, my mother vacuums the place and the peace movement lays down on the doorsill to prevent the landlord from coming round. As long as its a Jew free Palistan.

[ibrodsky]

Shades of Oslo

By Charles Krauthammer
Friday, June 6, 2003; Page A27


President Bush held two Middle East summits this week. The first, with the Arab states, was an abject failure. The second, with the prime ministers of Israel and the Palestinian Authority, was merely a troubling echo of another abject failure, the Oslo handshake of 1993.

Let's be plain about what happened at Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt. The president of the United States put his prestige on the line for the sake of Arab-Israeli peace and the Arab states gave him nothing. They refused to endorse Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state. They spoke of their opposition to "terrorism," even as they repeatedly present their own publics with the most elaborate intellectual and religious justifications of why the killing of Jews in "Palestine" is "resistance" and not terrorism.

They did not take a single concrete action, not even a gesture, toward Israel. Egypt did not offer to return its ambassador to Israel. The Saudis threatened a boycott if Israel was even invited. And most important, the Arab states refused what Bush most desperately wanted: explicit endorsement of the American view that Yasser Arafat's time had come and passed.

That would have been crucial in elevating Mahmoud Abbas, who appears to want to make peace. What did Bush do? What American presidents always do in response to such rebuffs: smile politely and say thank you.

Then on to the second summit at Aqaba, Jordan. Here, Bush managed to extract enormous concessions from Israel. Ariel Sharon's speech was revolutionary. He explicitly recognized the legitimacy of a Palestinian state. He further recognized that the state would need to be "contiguous," which instantly conceded to the Palestinians most of the territories in the West Bank and Gaza. And even more painful for Sharon was his statement, largely overlooked, that "no unilateral actions by any party can prejudge the outcome of our negotiations." ("Unilateral actions" is Middle East-speak for settlements, which means that in drawing the final border between Israel and Palestine, Jewish settlements would be of no account.)

This is a serious moving of the goal posts. What did Bush get out of Abbas? Did Abbas recognize Israel as a Jewish state? No. He refused to give up the Palestinian principle of "return," which means eradicating Israel by flooding it with millions of Palestinian refugees (most of whom, by the way, have never lived in Israel). Yet without recognition of Israel as a Jewish state, there is nothing to prevent the disaster of Camp David 2000, when Arafat, after pocketing truly astonishing Israeli concessions, insisted at the last minute that there would be no deal unless Israel agreed to commit suicide by allowing the refugees to move to Israel, instead of to their homeland of Palestine.

What did Abbas offer? An end to terrorism. Fine. But until the lip service is carried out, this is nothing but a restatement of the famous letter from Arafat to Yitzhak Rabin -- September 1993 -- in which he pledged that "the PLO renounces the use of terrorism and other acts of violence."

At Aqaba, Abbas recognized Israel. So did Arafat pretend to 10 years ago in the first line of the Oslo agreement.

Abbas pledged there will be no more incitement of hatred against Israel -- another repetition of another Oslo pledge. The Palestinians then spent the next decade poisoning their children with the worst anti-Semitic propaganda since the Third Reich.

What then happened at Aqaba? Israel bought the same rug a second time. In 1993, it bought supposed recognition, a supposed end to violence and a supposed end to incitement by recognizing the PLO, bringing Arafat and his terrorists out of Tunis, planting them in the heart of Palestine, giving them control of all the major Palestinian cities, outfitting his army with Israeli rifles, etc.

In 2003 the rug was sold again, this time fetching Israeli acceptance of a Palestinian state with contiguous borders in which Israeli settlements are uprooted. This might be the outline of the final settlement. But these were concessions given away before the negotiations even began.

The unilateral surrender of Israel continues.

Now, forcing the unilateral surrender of Israel might be a policy, if it promised peace. But the first round of unilateral concessions, from 1993 to 2000, yielded nothing but the establishment of a terror base in Palestine -- a "Trojan horse," as Faisal Husseini called it, from which the bloodiest Palestinian violence has been launched.

There is only one hope that we will not repeat that doleful experiment. And that is if Bush is serious -- as President Clinton was not -- about requiring more than just words from the Palestinians. Abbas must end the incitement, stop the violence and disarm the terrorists. Bush, having taken his friend Sharon to the cleaners, needs now to make sure that Abbas keeps his word.


© 2003 The Washington Post Company

[yehudi]

Originally posted by ibrodsky
I am old enough to know that while there need to be rules, there also need to be exceptions.

Personally, I consider 50+ years of mass murder attacks to be "extreme." I would much prefer that people of different religions, ethnic groups, and races learn to live together. Unfortunately, Israel's Arab enemies have convinced me that they have no desire to do so and will commit any crime necessary to see that it never happens.

Given that, is it more extreme to watch Palestinian terrorists blow up busloads of Jews and Israel respond with military incursions and curfews, or would it be more humane to send the bulk of Palestinians to live in Arab ruled lands?

Actually, the side demanding ethnic cleansing is the Palestinian side. I don't call for all Arabs to leave Israel, but they do call for all Jews to leave the West Bank. They also have a popular racist ideology to systematize and elevate their demands. Since the Father of Modern Terrorism was allowed to set up shop in the territories, the Palestinian media, schools, and mosques have preached ethnic cleansing as the solution to all of their problems.

Forcibly transferring the bulk of Palestinians would provide more defensible borders, would allow those Arabs to fullfill their dream of living in Arab dominated and controlled societies, and--if they wish--they can even go to one of the Islamist fascist theocracies where their racist sensibilities need not be offended by the presence of uppity infidels. Nice answer for an ethnic cleanser. As we say in France, "the road to hell is paved with good intentions"...

It seems you are not happy being an ethnic cleanser. Terrorists are not happy being terrorists either, you know.

.

[yoyo]

Originally posted by yehudi
Nice answer for an ethnic cleanser. As we say in France, "the road to hell is paved with good intentions"...

It seems you are not happy being an ethnic cleanser. Terrorists are not happy being terrorists either, you know.

No, as we say in France "The more things change, the more they are the same". That includes blattant appathy to antisemitism from "l'Islam de France" and the inacceptability to muslims of a non muslim state in what they believe is muslim land.

Since there NEVER has been a Palestine nor Palestinian as a country and as a people, don't call it "ethnic" cleansing, call it instead "political" cleansing!

And please spear us your "moral high ground", we saw how French reacted to a few "nique ta mere" and burned car by bringing Le Pen to the second round. Imagine now that you cannot take the bus without taking your life in your hand?? How would French react??? WORST THAN ANYTHING ISRAEL COULD DO. But that is allright, isn't it? I mean antisemitism is the beleif that Jews cannot live as equal within a host nation and antizionism is the beleif that Jews cannot live as equal in the family of nations. If Jews reacted with the same determination and had the power to do so against Hilter they would have been doubled in size today.

NEVER AGAIN - WHICH PART OF THIS MESSAGE DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND? No, never again will any Jews let Europe to decide of their fate or sell them to a genocidal evils to try and "save themselve". Yes you European knows, yes Chirac himself knew when he was visiting Hizbollah school that arabs wants the Jews dead by any mean necessary, YOU have translation of what they openly say in their state control media and for many wahabist schools, yet YOU decide to have a "selective hearing" (l'oreille selective, oui monsieur!) like your grand fathers did and like their grand fathers and it would be YOUR children who will be told "how could we possibly not know" if WE let YOU govern the life and death of Israel. NEVER AGAIN - you can rant and rave all you like, you can have Oslo and the Road Map "2 en 1" should it please yourself but world peace will never be achieve at the expense of Israel and btw will never be achieved at all with a "Chamberlain and Munichois" attitude!

[ibrodsky]

Originally posted by yehudi
Nice answer for an ethnic cleanser. As we say in France, "the road to hell is paved with good intentions"...

It seems you are not happy being an ethnic cleanser. Terrorists are not happy being terrorists either, you know.

.

Please do not use ad hominem arguments.

You completely ignored the main point: the Palestinians demand a Jew-free West Bank. Arafat complains about the "Judaization of Jerusalem." Arab media spreads the blood libel, Protocols of Elders of Zion, and other racist filth. They are the ones who seek an ethnically-cleansed Middle East.

Imagine if Israel demanded an Arab-free Israel.

Your excuses for terrorism do not impress me either.

[yehudi]

Originally posted by ibrodsky
Please do not use ad hominem arguments. Right right, ibrodsky. I'm the first to think we should attack ideas, not people. But ideas exist in the head of people who defend them. Thus one can be "a pacificist", or "hawkish" or anything (as long as the label remains appropriate, accepted and courteous of course).

So am I doing wrong?



Personnally I think I'm not calling you names or "terrorist" or "fascist" or anything. Would it be unfair If I asked you "what made you become a Pacifist"? "or are you happy being a pacifist?"

What you are proposing loud and clear is called "ethnic cleansing" (or "deportation" if you prefer a more loaded term). I'm not making it up.



If you think "ethnic cleanser" is an ad hominem insult and not what you are proposing, I shall certainly withdraw that... but you want to "forcibly transfer the Palestinians back to Arabia" these are the words from your mouth, I'm not interpreting. Am I?


Anyway, tell me what you think, I do not mean to be unfair

.

[yoyo]

The only solution to this conflict:

http://www.moledet.org.il/english/

[ibrodsky]

Originally posted by yehudi
Right right, ibrodsky. I'm the first to think we should attack ideas, not people. But ideas exist in the head of people who defend them. Thus one can be "a pacificist", or "hawkish" or anything (as long as the label remains appropriate, accepted and courteous of course).

So am I doing wrong?

Personnally I think I'm not calling you names or "terrorist" or "fascist" or anything. Would it be unfair If I asked you "what made you become a Pacifist"? "or are you happy being a pacifist?"

What you are proposing loud and clear is called "ethnic cleansing" (or "deportation" if you prefer a more loaded term). I'm not making it up.

If you think "ethnic cleanser" is an ad hominem insult and not what you are proposing, I shall certainly withdraw that... but you want to "forcibly transfer the Palestinians back to Arabia" these are the words from your mouth, I'm not interpreting. Am I?

Anyway, tell me what you think, I do not mean to be unfair



Calling me an "ethnic cleanser" is an ad hominem attack. I have repeatedly made it clear that I am not advocating killing all Arabs in Israel and the territories. Nor do I advocate transferring all Arabs.

My point is that Yaser Arafat has created a terrorist culture. Polls consistently show the majority of Palestinians support terrorism. To the extent it is possible to only remove terrorists and those actively involved in supporting them, I support that.

Unfortunately, Palestinian society is so thoroughly terrorist that one can't talk of isolating and removing small groups.

Now, some questions for you:

Are the Palestinians who advocate blowing up busloads of Jews "ethnic cleansers"?

Are the Palestinians who demand a Jew-free West Bank "ethnic cleansers"?

Is someone who advocates the use of force against these Jew-killers an "ethnic cleanser"?

Which is more egregious: indiscriminantly blowing up busloads of Jews or forcing Palestinians who have refused for decades to accept the right of Jews to their own state--on land conquered by Arab invaders--to go settle elsewhere?

The Palestinians want to live in an Arab-controlled state. Yet they refuse their own state as long as it doesn't include all of Israel. Many want to live in an Islamist police state. I advocate helping them achieve their goal in a way that protects the lives of innocent Israelis.

[ibrodsky]

Yehudi, note that I have never called for an Arab-free Israel. As an American, I very much appreciate the benefits of cultural melting pots--as long as immigrants come for a better life and to be loyal citizens rather than to commit mass murder.

Now do you understand the difference?

[Canajew]

Originally posted by ibrodsky
Yehudi, note that I have never called for an Arab-free Israel. As an American, I very much appreciate the benefits of cultural melting pots--as long as immigrants come for a better life and to be loyal citizens rather than to commit mass murder.

Now do you understand the difference?

do you really need to ask?

[yehudi]

Originally posted by ibrodsky
Calling me an "ethnic cleanser" is an ad hominem attack. I have repeatedly made it clear that I am not advocating killing all Arabs in Israel and the territories. Nor do I advocate transferring all Arabs.

My point is that Yaser Arafat has created a terrorist culture. Polls consistently show the majority of Palestinians support terrorism. To the extent it is possible to only remove terrorists and those actively involved in supporting them, I support that.

Unfortunately, Palestinian society is so thoroughly terrorist that one can't talk of isolating and removing small groups. :confused: So what's the difference between your doctrine and ethnic cleansing? You want to use force to exile people from the land they live in. That's the very definition of ethnic cleansing.

I'm saying you are an ethnic cleanser because you repeat that doctrine very consistently in each and all of you messages.
And it's not only simply transferring people that you advocate. You want to use force to achieve your aim. In short you plan to mass kill, to exterminate people who want to stay in their homes.


Make it politically correct by speaking of the "good arabs" you want to allow to stay. Milosevic wanted to keep "the good croats" and the "good muslems too". We all know the horrible, inhumane reality behind.



Another thing: you compare the society after your ethnic cleansing to a "melting pot": do not turn things upside down. Palestinians are on their own land (well what they have left of it). To them people who want to seize their land are immigrants, foreigners, invaders. And it turns out the palestinians do not want to melt with them. Maybe one day they will but today they refuse. This is their right.

.

[ibrodsky]

Originally posted by yehudi
:confused: So what's the difference between your doctrine and ethnic cleansing? You want to use force to exile people from the land they live in. That's the very definition of ethnic cleansing.

Yes, you are confused.

I don't demand a "Jews-only" or "Arab-free" state. But the Palestinians demand a "Jew-free" West Bank and you approve of their murderous ethnic cleansing campaign (see below).

I'm saying you are an ethnic cleanser because you repeat that doctrine very consistently in each and all of you messages.

And it's not only simply transferring people that you advocate. You want to use force to achieve your aim. In short you plan to mass kill, to exterminate people who want to stay in their homes.

No, that is a lie. I have only recently and reluctantly come to the conclusion that forced transfer is necessary. I've posted over 1,800 messages and the vast majority do not mention transfer. In fact, if you look back far enough I'm pretty sure you will find posts from me opposing forced transfer.

I never said anything about exterminating people other than known terrorists. Please show where I called for exterminating Palestinian civilians.

Make it politically correct by speaking of the "good arabs" you want to allow to stay. Milosevic wanted to keep "the good croats" and the "good muslems too". We all know the horrible, inhumane reality behind.

That is another lie. I never said anything such thing. I've never called for transferring any Israeli Arabs. The issue is not "good Arabs" versus "bad Arabs." The issue is mass murderers and their supporters. To defend these people is to defend genocide.

Another thing: you compare the society after your ethnic cleansing to a "melting pot": do not turn things upside down. Palestinians are on their own land (well what they have left of it). To them people who want to seize their land are immigrants, foreigners, invaders. And it turns out the palestinians do not want to melt with them. Maybe one day they will but today they refuse. This is their right.

This is where you expose your support for Arab ethnic cleansers. Jews have lived continuously for 3,000 years in what is now the West Bank. You accept the fact that they massacred and drove out Hebron's Jewish community as "their right." I do not.

Your support for Arab ethnic cleansing is despicable.

[minusthejihad]

Originally posted by yehudi
Palestinians are on their own land (well what they have left of it).

Sorry, you are wrong. This is the Jews land too. Always was, long before there were Arabs, and certainly before your Western Jordanians/Southern Syrians became known as Palestinians. Try to stick to facts please.

[ibrodsky]

Originally posted by yehudi


Another thing: you compare the society after your ethnic cleansing to a "melting pot": do not turn things upside down.



Try working on your reading comprehension. I was using the USA as an example of how an ethnic melting pot can be very beneficial. I approve of Israel admitting non-Jews to live in Israel and to become citizens as the Israeli people, through their elected leaders, see fit.

Contrast that to the xenophobic and intolerant Arab world, where there is a violent aversion to even the temporary presence of "infidels" in their racist, barbaric societies.

[yoyo]

Yehudi is a product of French media. He strongly beleive that "Israel was palestine and palestine used to be Israel". For him there is no anomalie of a place being called the West Bank at the East of this supposedly ancient country. Don't be too hard on him, French information is so filtered and edited that French have been brainwashed. The AFP (Agence France Press) is controlled by the French government and any serious news organization has to go through them.

Un article pour Yehudi
http://www.guysen.com/articles.php?sid=1148

[L@mplighterM]

Jun. 11, 2003
Sharon: "Israel will chase and fight terrorists to the death"
By THE JERUSALEM POST INTERNET STAFF

Prime Mister Ariel Sharon, speaking at a special service for the Border Police in Latrun Wednesday night, said that Israel would continue to chase and fight Palestinian terrorists "to the death".

Reacting to Wednesday afternoon's terrorist attack on a Jerusalem bus which killed 16 and wounded more than 100, Sharon said that the victims were innocents, and that their only 'crime' was being Jewish.

"Israel will continue to chase the Palestinian terrorist organizations and their leaders and fight them to the death.

They are the initiators, the trainers and the senders of terrorists whose sole aim is the murder of Jews, " said Sharon.

He added that Israel still hoped to take the path of the 'road map' to peace, and added that his government would take "every measure to safeguard the security of the people of Israel."

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/A/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1055321865907

Quite frankly I don’t see how the one can take the “road to peace” under the current circumstances.