Is Bush selling Israel out on a whim?

[Miriam]

Can someone who is closer to the epicenter please explain what is going on? According to a new report,

From news article:

Behind-the-scenes exchanges between President George Bush and Prime Minister Ariel Sharon at last week's Aqaba summit may hint at a certain shift in the American stance, from the Israeli to the Palestinian side, according to a participant in the three-way meeting of the delegations.

The source quoted Bush as telling his National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice that "I see that we have a problem with Sharon," while saying of the Palestinians led by Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas, "We can work with them."

At one point, an irked Bush reportedly rebuked Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz, telling him "Oh, but I think that you can [help the Palestinians]. And I think that you will."

At the advance request of Israel at the summit, Bush's aides had put security problems at the top of the agenda for discussion. "The first thing that Bush was required to talk about was security," the participant said, adding, "It was a request of the Israelis. So [Bush] asked Dahlan to give a briefing."

According to the source, Dahlan gave an excellent five-minute synopsis of the situation, and concluded by saying to Bush: "There are some things we can do and some things we cannot. We will do our best. But we will need help."

Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz burst in at the end of Dahlan's presentation and said: "Well, they won't be getting any help from us; they have their own security service."

You could see that Bush was irritated, the participant said, and Bush turned on Mofaz angrily: "Their own security service? But you have destroyed their security service."

Mofaz shook his head and said: "I do not think that we can help them, Mr. President," - to which Bush said: "Oh, but I think that you can. And I think that you will."

Then Bush turned to Abbas - again according to a script insisted on by the Israelis - and said: "Mr. Prime Minister, perhaps you could give an overview of the situation in the West Bank and Gaza."

Abbas outlined the increasingly dire situation of the territories, saying that the humanitarian crisis was deepening, and that while recent actions of the finance minister had eased the problems, the insertion of new funding was necessary.

Sharon then interrupted and said: "The insertion of new funding must be dependent on your good behavior." Bush was again visibly irritated: "You should release their money as soon as possible. This will help the situation."

Sharon shook his head: "We have to deal with security first, and we will condition the release of their monies on this alone." Bush peered at Sharon: "But it is their money ..." Sharon said: "Nevertheless, Mr. President ..." and Bush interrupted him: "It is their money, give it to them."

After that meeting, Bush turned to National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice and said, "We have a problem with Sharon I can see, but I like that young man [Dahlan] and I think their prime minister is incapable of lying. I hope that they will be successful. We can work with them."

Bush was also pleased with the determination with which Abbas rebuffed pressure from his ministers, Nabil Sha'ath and Yasser Abed Rabbo, to toughen the language of the Abbas speech, which he had agreed upon with the American delegation before the summit. They said it would cause trouble in the Palestinian Authority. They argued heatedly with Abbas about his comments, at one point in front of the president. But Abbas insisted that his remarks follow the outlines set out by Bush.

Bush watched the interplay and was pleased that Abbas agreed to the American president's suggestions on the draft remarks: "If you will just do this, I pledge to you we will get where your colleagues want you to go. But we are going to take one step at a time."

[yoyo]

Op-Ed from Arutz Sheva

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 national assets that 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 amnesiatic 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 it's OK, because who's to say what is and is not moral, after all),

c. their enemies are Jews, so automatically it's OK, 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.

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 thrown in his hat in the Threaten Israel's Existence Club.

Various media pundits are valiantly making efforts to somehow explain Mr. Bush, Jr.'s sudden hostile behavior however garbed in reassuring words of concern for Israel's security. Yet in fact, irrespective of actual intentions, it is openly aiming at dividing Israel thus rewarding terrorism and mass murder (including the killing of 27 Americans since Arafat's minions attacked Israel in September 2000). The Bush Plan provides financing, arming and giving further training to a Palestinian Arab terrorist army, not to mention forcing "ethnic cleansing" of Jews from their Biblical Heartland at the demand of these same terrorist murders, and returning Israel to the pre-1967 or 1949 Cease-Fire Lines, described by the late Abba Eban as "The Auschwitz Borders" because of its indefensibility against attack.

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 its false claims by 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 ideology" , 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 ideology");

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, rather than deal with actual life and death (for Israel) details, 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.

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 comprise 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, when 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.

[Revkha]

Originally posted by yoyo
Op-Ed from Arutz Sheva
........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 comprise key voter blocs throughout the south, southwest and parts of the mid-west.

As a Floridian I expect Bush will definitely lose ground in Florida and Florida will be as unpredictable as it was in 2000. Unfortunately there is really no one in the wings to replace Bush. Evangelicals may opt to stay home and not vote if Bush continues his new path for Israel. This will cost him votes. Perhaps Bush believes that the Evangelicals have no one else to vote for and will vote for him anyway. It may be a costly mistake on his part coupled with the economic and the high unemployment figures.

[richcrassus]

Too bad lee harvey oswald isnt alive. Hey Mr President,lol
Although Mossad could be more effective.

So bush is saying israel cant kill the leader of the organisation who wants to destroy israel, but the us army can bomb or main anyone it wants, in the name of freedom and democracy, right??

I swear Mr pres, dont drive a limo in dallas, lol

[richcrassus]

Originally posted by yoyo
Op-Ed from Arutz Sheva

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 national assets that 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 amnesiatic 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 it's OK, because who's to say what is and is not moral, after all),

c. their enemies are Jews, so automatically it's OK, 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.

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 thrown in his hat in the Threaten Israel's Existence Club.

Various media pundits are valiantly making efforts to somehow explain Mr. Bush, Jr.'s sudden hostile behavior however garbed in reassuring words of concern for Israel's security. Yet in fact, irrespective of actual intentions, it is openly aiming at dividing Israel thus rewarding terrorism and mass murder (including the killing of 27 Americans since Arafat's minions attacked Israel in September 2000). The Bush Plan provides financing, arming and giving further training to a Palestinian Arab terrorist army, not to mention forcing "ethnic cleansing" of Jews from their Biblical Heartland at the demand of these same terrorist murders, and returning Israel to the pre-1967 or 1949 Cease-Fire Lines, described by the late Abba Eban as "The Auschwitz Borders" because of its indefensibility against attack.

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 its false claims by 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 ideology" , 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 ideology");

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, rather than deal with actual life and death (for Israel) details, 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.

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 comprise 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, when 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.

Theres one more reason, he wants to 'appease' the arab countries for attacking iraq, as a good will sign, we have destroyed iraq, but we are creating a new terrorist arab state, please forgive us for iraq. Knowing no WMD will be found in iraq, they will create a new terrorist arab state.
Could they be the reasons??

[RichardP]

Originally posted by Miriam
Can someone who is closer to the epicenter please explain what is going on? According to a new report,

From news article:

Behind-the-scenes exchanges between President George Bush and Prime Minister Ariel Sharon at last week's Aqaba summit may hint at a certain shift in the American stance, from the Israeli to the Palestinian side, according to a participant in the three-way meeting of the delegations.

The source quoted Bush as telling his National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice that "I see that we have a problem with Sharon," while saying of the Palestinians led by Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas, "We can work with them."

At one point, an irked Bush reportedly rebuked Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz, telling him "Oh, but I think that you can [help the Palestinians]. And I think that you will."

At the advance request of Israel at the summit, Bush's aides had put security problems at the top of the agenda for discussion. "The first thing that Bush was required to talk about was security," the participant said, adding, "It was a request of the Israelis. So [Bush] asked Dahlan to give a briefing."

According to the source, Dahlan gave an excellent five-minute synopsis of the situation, and concluded by saying to Bush: "There are some things we can do and some things we cannot. We will do our best. But we will need help."

Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz burst in at the end of Dahlan's presentation and said: "Well, they won't be getting any help from us; they have their own security service."

You could see that Bush was irritated, the participant said, and Bush turned on Mofaz angrily: "Their own security service? But you have destroyed their security service."

Mofaz shook his head and said: "I do not think that we can help them, Mr. President," - to which Bush said: "Oh, but I think that you can. And I think that you will."

Then Bush turned to Abbas - again according to a script insisted on by the Israelis - and said: "Mr. Prime Minister, perhaps you could give an overview of the situation in the West Bank and Gaza."

Abbas outlined the increasingly dire situation of the territories, saying that the humanitarian crisis was deepening, and that while recent actions of the finance minister had eased the problems, the insertion of new funding was necessary.

Sharon then interrupted and said: "The insertion of new funding must be dependent on your good behavior." Bush was again visibly irritated: "You should release their money as soon as possible. This will help the situation."

Sharon shook his head: "We have to deal with security first, and we will condition the release of their monies on this alone." Bush peered at Sharon: "But it is their money ..." Sharon said: "Nevertheless, Mr. President ..." and Bush interrupted him: "It is their money, give it to them."

After that meeting, Bush turned to National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice and said, "We have a problem with Sharon I can see, but I like that young man [Dahlan] and I think their prime minister is incapable of lying. I hope that they will be successful. We can work with them."

Bush was also pleased with the determination with which Abbas rebuffed pressure from his ministers, Nabil Sha'ath and Yasser Abed Rabbo, to toughen the language of the Abbas speech, which he had agreed upon with the American delegation before the summit. They said it would cause trouble in the Palestinian Authority. They argued heatedly with Abbas about his comments, at one point in front of the president. But Abbas insisted that his remarks follow the outlines set out by Bush.

Bush watched the interplay and was pleased that Abbas agreed to the American president's suggestions on the draft remarks: "If you will just do this, I pledge to you we will get where your colleagues want you to go. But we are going to take one step at a time."

The only thing that scares me more than George Bush is the Democrats when speaking of Israel, and her citizens' right to security and survival. if he truly believes he can work with Abbas he is delusional! His double-speak when it comes to fighting terrorism, shows the true nature of Mr. Bush. As the USA hammers her "enemies", the "Evil-Doers": Bush has the audacity to demand that Israel should not defend herself and her citizens with the same intensity as America! Would Bush negotiate with Bin-Laden? No! Abbas is a wolf in sheep's clothing, a mere mascot for Arafat and his terrorist thugs. Israel has the right to defend herself by any means, with as much power as is needed to defend the borders and Israelis - and if Georgie-Porgie doesn't like it... tough!! Frankly, this two-faced twit is starting to sound like he's reading the Koran and praying to Allah!

[RichardP]

I am not a Bush fan by a long-shot, as he is making a fine mess with his "Road Map"! However, does anyone out there believe, the Democrats would serve Israel better?
It's a quandary that is driving me to distraction... if any "genius" has the answer, please, tell us.
If Bush isn't the man, then who is?? This whole scenario is driving me to distraction! Bush and his minions don't have it right, that is a given! Who does? Genius, are you out there??

[Lowell]

An alternative interpretation is that Bush and Sharon are laying an elaborate trap for the 'Palestinians' and their PM Abbas, hence the publicized disagreement between Bush and Sharon , and the friendliness toward the flunky of Arafat. The Road Map might lead toward the removal of 'Palestinian' terrorism and thus to peace... hopefully.

[RichardP]

Originally posted by Lowell
An alternative interpretation is that Bush and Sharon are laying an elaborate trap for the 'Palestinians' and their PM Abbas, hence the publicized disagreement between Bush and Sharon , and the friendliness toward the flunky of Arafat. The Road Map might lead toward the removal of 'Palestinian' terrorism and thus to peace... hopefully.

I hope your scenario is correct, Lowell; actually, it makes sense.
Hopefully, Abbas and Arafat overplay their hand and put their real cards on the table. We all know what that is, murdering Israelis and and the elimination of the State of Israel.

I'm sure Canada would gladly give them political asylum. With that and the UN in Toronto... WOW... perhaps Canada would lose its inferiority complex! LOL!!
Take care,
Ric

[MichaelC]

Originally posted by Lowell
An alternative interpretation is that Bush and Sharon are laying an elaborate trap for the 'Palestinians' and their PM Abbas, hence the publicized disagreement between Bush and Sharon , and the friendliness toward the flunky of Arafat. The Road Map might lead toward the removal of 'Palestinian' terrorism and thus to peace... hopefully.

I would like to think that this is a possibility.

[Lowell]

Originally posted by RichardP
I'm sure Canada would gladly give them political asylum. With that and the UN in Toronto... WOW... perhaps Canada would lose its inferiority complex! LOL!!
Take care,
Ric

Canada best not give shelter to known terrorists- the US still has that MOAB bomb we didn't drop on Baghdad....

[RichardP]

Originally posted by Lowell
Canada best not give shelter to known terrorists- the US still has that MOAB bomb we didn't drop on Baghdad....

Canada shelter known terrorists... honestly, I have very little faith in our present Government and its agencies. In the words of our PM, Jean Chretien, (I paraphrase) "Dare is no trute dat dare is terrorists in CA - NAH - Dah!" Sure, they are everywhere else in the world but not in the Great white North!
The US doesn't have to waste its MOAB by dropping it here... our government (past and present) have decimated our armed forces. I truly fear for our men and women who are serving on oversea missions, as "peacekeepers". Our weak-kneed stance on Israel is inexcusable.

Oh Canada!!

[Lowell]

Originally posted by RichardP
Canada shelter known terrorists... honestly, I have very little faith in our present Government and its agencies. In the words of our PM, Jean Chretien, (I paraphrase) "Dare is no trute dat dare is terrorists in CA - NAH - Dah!" Sure, they are everywhere else in the world but not in the Great white North!
The US doesn't have to waste its MOAB by dropping it here... our government (past and present) have decimated our armed forces. I truly fear for our men and women who are serving on oversea missions, as "peacekeepers". Our weak-kneed stance on Israel is inexcusable.

Oh Canada!!

Don't feel too bad about it, Richard, the US probably has two or three times as many terrorists loose here as Canada does, and we can't account for them. They are in deep cover in every large city.

[RichardP]

Originally posted by Lowell
Don't feel too bad about it, Richard, the US probably has two or three times as many terrorists loose here as Canada does, and we can't account for them. They are in deep cover in every large city.

Sadly, that is true, Lowell. However, I think the UK has us all beat... London is permreated with terrorist-cells and sympathisers. It is going to be a long, tough, battle; this war on terror has merely began!
Cheers!!

[richcrassus]

Ill tell why the scum bush is selling out israel. Its because he wants the arabs to have a scapegoat to blame, if there was no israel to blame, the arabs would overthrow their governments, and become terrorist states like afghanistan was b4. This in turn would be bad for the USA. So its in americas interests to keep the arabs attack and keeping an interest in israel. Dont worry bush dosent want israel destroyed, he just wants it to be beaten up abit now and than, like a little kid being bullied at school, and not allowed to defend himself.

But we all know what can happen if someone is bullied all the time and not allowed to defend himself, because he will be seen as the bad guy. One day he SNAPS and steals his dads gun and starts a school massacre and kills all who bullied him.

Thats why, israel will either kill all these evil arabs one day, or be bullied forever. Of course a kid cant stand to be bullied forever, he EVENTAULLY SNAPS and POW, the arabs are sent back to 1,000,000BC where the only weapons they have it their fist.