47 2 mins 15 yrs

condimadart_4.jpgHas Condoleeza Rice got the world’s worst job? Makes you wonder when you see her pathetic attempts to “broker peace” between Israel and the Jihad-crazy Palestinians. The idea that a “Two State Solution” has any legs is sheer madness, when the Palestinian people overwhelmingly support Hamas – a terror group dedicated to the destruction of Israel. Condi seems to play this down, treating it as a pesky minor administrative detail when in fact it cuts to the heart of the matter.

If you carve up Israel and give the Palestinians a State, it will become an even bigger base from which to launch Jihad. The error Condi Rice makes is in portraying Mahmoud Abbas – the holocaust denier who has succeeded the terror godfather Arafat – as a moderate. He is not. It’s like saying Himmler was not as fanatical as Hitler.

The UK media continually misrepresents the Israeli/Palestinian situation. They suggest that progress depends on “painful compromise.” But this is wrong Progress depends on Palestinian society extricating itself from the moral sewer it currently and willingly wallows in. It is about Palestinian society weaning itself of the death cult that Hamas represents. It is about those in the West, such as Rice, facing up to the fact that the more concessions Palestinians get, the more they expect.

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]

47 thoughts on “CONDI-MINIMUM!

  1. Is Condi Rice suggesting negotiations take place about anything Israel is unwilling to negotiate about? No.

    Is Condi Rice pursuing an agenda that Bush disagrees with? No.

    What is the real issue with Ms. Rice?

  2. Why the scowling Condi picture ? She’s a pretty girl.

    Let’s have a nice picture – preferably including her legs!

  3. Colm,

    Yes it does

    Mahons,

    1. You conflate Osloid Olmert with "Israel".
    2. Bush is wrong on this issue and I have frequently condemned his stance here.
    3. The deal is not with Condi – but the pro-Arabist State Dept.

  4. I like and admire Dr. Rice – but she says herself that she is an academic at heart – and I think it shows. She’s approaches the Middle East like a theoretical exercise; I don’t think she (or Karen Hughes) have a clue as to the actual nature of the cultures they are dealing with in the ME.

    We need someone meaner, tougher, and less analytical.

  5. David: Condi Rice hasn’t taken a single position at odds with the Administration. Bush is the head and the buck stops there. That is why I am amused by the fact that she is a fallgal for Administration positions.

    I don’t confuse Olmert with Israel. But her proposals are ones that the majority of Israel’s citizens would consider.

    I know the Sate Department is often accussed of being pro-Arabist (though not in the Arab world by any stretch of the imagination). It would be impossible for any peace to be achieved without the creation of some sort of state for the Palestinians.

  6. Colm,

    In what way does it not mean carving up Israel?

    Notme,

    Amen to that. I’m sure she is a decent person, and she has achieved a tremendous amount prior to her current role, but she is WAY out of her depth. I blame the reptiles in State that surround her.

  7. if you can’t defeat violent resistance, the method you use is to reward them in exchange for peace.
    Eminently sensible

  8. Mahons: Condi is part of the Administration – she’s not a "fallgal." And yes, she is towing the State Dept. line and Bush thinks she’s doing the best job possible. But she’s not a passive player and her performance should be wide open for criticism. I happen to really admire Condi but ever since last summers war in Lebanon/Israel. I think she’s been on the wrong track.

    I think she’s "book smart" – and I think we need street smarts.

    And no, not seeking office. I’m a house wife and a fairly gullible soft touch although I’m flattered you think I’m mean and tough – I would be steamrolled in the ME.

  9. David

    Because the Internationally recognised borders that constitute the state of Israel are the ones prior to the 1967 land conquests. Those Palestinian territories are the only ones which should make up a Palestinian state and Israel proper does not need to lose an inch of it’s lawful sovereign territory.

  10. Her proposals are not those that the majority of Israelis would accept though, that is the salient point here. The creation of a Pali "State" is one that will auger in even more Jiad attacks. I would deny them one GRAIN of Israel’s soil. Period. I have an issue rewarding terrorism.

  11. David,
    If you don’t reward terrorists for ending bloodshed, how do you actually stop the bloodshed?

  12. >>I have an issue rewarding terrorism.<<

    Even the pre-1967 borders of Israel were a reward for terrorism!

  13. David – If Israel is to get peace with security it will have to do what it has previously agreed to do and that is yield land.

  14. David

    All of that doesn’t distract from the fact that Palestinians are not Israelis, don’t wish to be Israelis and should not be occupied or controlled by them, any more than unionists in Northern Ireland should be occupied by or controlled from Dublin.

  15. >>Remember the Holocaust?<<

    I’ll never forget it. It gives the Jewish people a right to a secure and strong country.
    It does not give that country the right to terrorise people into leaving, commit massacres and ethnic clensing, seize land from the inhabitants on the basis of racial-religious supremacy, expand its territory by virtue of overwhelming force and reduce subjugated people into second-class status in their own country – to name just some of the crimes Israel has been and continues to be guilty of.

  16. "Isolate them, punish them, kill them. End of."
    Doesn’t work though, the British General admitted you’ll never defeat the IRA.
    So John Major said : we’ll help you end your campaign, by bringing you into the political process, but you must stop the violence.
    See what happened, they’ve diarmed and are on the verge of sharing power, and see how many lives have been saved. Surely you welcome the changed place that is norn iron?
    If so then the project has worked.

    The alternative would have been continual blooshed on the streets. I can’t believe you’d prefer that option

    This is 0ne of the questions I’d like to raise on Air, perhaps in the next few weeks on ATW Blog Radio

  17. Alison

    You don’t give Palestinians a state as a reward for terrorism. You do it because they are not Israelis and shouldn’t be occupied controlled or annexed by Israel.

  18. alison
    Rewarding terrorism generates more of the same. That isnt the way forward
    That is not the experience of NI.
    Rewarding terrorism has stopped terrorism

  19. Colm

    If you launch a war of agression and lose, you lose your land. The land that was Jordan’s is now Israel’s. Boo hoo.

    Ehud Barak actually offered Arafat virtually all of what they were asking for. Arafat walked away and began the second intifada.

    The ‘Palestinians’ are just one of many islamic parties who state clearly and repeatedly that there will never be any peace with Israel and that she must be wiped out. How do liberals think you can negotiate peace with that?

  20. Well, I’m off to catch the end of "The World At War" – what a wonderful series that was – followed by Termintor 3. Be good folks.

  21. <Q>the British General admitted you’ll never defeat the IRA.</Q>

    A British general – and the British Army proved him wrong when thy DID defeat the IRA.

  22. David
    You’re entirely wrong and I look forward to debating this point with you or anyone on Air.. Live
    By giving people a voice, you end terrorism.
    Its been proven time and time again.
    I look forward to calling in,
    and may waive my appearance fee on this occasion 😉

  23. Pete

    We occupied Germany after WW2 , we didn’t think we had the right to do so indefinitely. The only point I am making is that it makes no sense to continue occupying a territory whose population has no affinity with and do not identify with you. It is a recipe for permanent misery and it is wrong. Israel should leave the Palestinian areas, and then say – we no longer occupy or control anyone but our own people. We are within our own borders and no-one has any justification to attack us. It should make absolutely clear that any neighbour who attacks will be hammered and it would have every justification in doing so, but I feel it must end the futile occupation of Palestinian peoples and lands.

  24. >>Israel should leave the Palestinian areas, and then say – we no longer occupy or control anyone but our own peopl….It should make absolutely clear that any neighbour who attacks will be hammered and it would have every justification in doing so,<<

    Agreed, Colm, but there would probably be no need. If the Israel govt offered the Palestinians the goal of a state with the pre-’67 borders, the fanatics among the Palestinians would be isolated. The vast majority of the people would go for it and the form of withdrawal, removal of the settlements, etc. could ne negotiated.

    Israel, however, never has, and without US pressure never will, offer the Palestinians that kind of just settlement. Local resistance is therefore inevitable and, IMO, justified.

  25. Cunningham – Israel has offered a just settlement and it was rejected. There is a substantial portion of the Palestinian crowd that is in power simply because of the turmoil and can’t live without it. That being said, the failure of the Palestinians does not mean Israel shouldn’t keep trying.

  26. >>Israel has offered a just settlement and it was rejected.<<

    A just settlement is one within the 1967 borders, even forgetting abour returning refugees. Israel never offered that.
    Anything else would be rewarding agression and religious fanaticism.

  27. –Colm–

    "Israel should leave the Palestinian areas, and then say – we no longer occupy or control anyone but our own people. We are within our own borders and no-one has any justification to attack us. It should make absolutely clear that any neighbour who attacks will be hammered and it would have every justification in doing so …"

    Yeah, sure. I bet you were shouting that from the rooftops when katyushas were raining down on Israel from the Gaza Strip 5 minutes after Israel’s withdrawal.

    All this talk of pre-whatever borders and internationally recognised-whatevers is irrelevent flannel. The Palestinians are the most dysfunctional society on the planet. They’ve received billions in aid from the West and with it built a culture wholly dedicated to killing Jews. Unless and until they renounce vilence against Jews and the Jewish State they must be met with force and violence. When they finally decide that sending their children to kill Jewish children is too costly, Israel should only then talk.

  28. >>Palestinians are the most dysfunctional society on the planet.<<

    Wonder has it anything to do with the fact that their land has been taken, that they have second-class status in their own country, have been reduced to poverty while Israeli settlers are aforded every support and the resources of the country, have to live with an alien army of occupation fuelled on religious and racial fanaticism on their backs.

  29. Is it really such a clash of civilisations there that when some characteristic can be assigned to one crowd that means by definition that the other lot doesn’t have it?

  30. Cunningham – not everyone is going to get what they want, that is the compromise. A just offer was in fact made and rejected. The Palestinians would be better served by better leaders.

  31. All this ‘pre-1967’ talk is such nonsense. The Arabs made it quite clear that their intention was to exterminate every last Jew in Israel, yet because they yet again failed in the same objective they have had for sixty years this means Israel should have meekly withdrawn to leave themselves wide open for Genocidal War No.4 (or would it be five, the Arabs have tried som many times I’ve nearly lost count).

    I dont hear your voices raised arguing that occupying Nazi Germany for years after World War 2 after *they* lost a genocidal war of their own was wrong – none of you seem to think the Allies should have ‘withdrawn to pre-1945 borders. These standards, like so many, only seem to apply to Israel.

  32. "Is it really such a clash of civilisations there that when some characteristic can be assigned to one crowd that means by definition that the other lot doesn’t have it?"

    Nope, it just means that accusing the country which held last year’s largest International Gay Pride March of religous fanaticism may be a tiny bit off-base. The Israelis arent religiously fanatical, they are simply fanatical about the preservation of their culture. Being surrounded and outnumbered about 100 to one by genocidal nutters who want to exterminate you will generally produce that effect.

  33. Wonder has it anything to do with the fact that their land has been taken, that they have second-class status in their own country, have been reduced to poverty while Israeli settlers are aforded every support and the resources of the country, have to live with an alien army of occupation fuelled on religious and racial fanaticism on their backs.
    Wednesday, February 21, 2007 at 11:49PM | Cunningham

    But this could easily be written

    >>northern Irish are the most dysfunctional society on the planet.<<

    Wonder has it anything to do with the fact that their land has been taken, that they have second-class status in their own country, have been reduced to poverty while English/Scottish settlers are aforded every support and the resources of the country, have to live with an alien army of occupation fuelled on religious and racial fanaticism on their backs.

Comments are closed.