By Cal Thomas, JewishWorldReview.com
Name one concession Israel has made in recent years that has been reciprocated by its sworn enemies. This is not a trick question. There are none.
That’s why next month’s announced “Middle East Summit” in Annapolis, Md., should be viewed as one more installment payment in the sellout of Israel and of American interests in the Middle East. While the United States continues to struggle to shore up democracy in Iraq, the Bush administration — like administrations before it — proceeds in undermining the likelihood that the region’s first democracy will endure.
At every negotiating session, Israel is pressured into making concessions for “peace” and receives more war in response. Mostly this is because of the wishful thinking in the West that has replaced sound policy. Why should the Palestinians make concessions when they are drawing closer to their objective of eradicating Israel by throwing stones and bombs and stonewalling negotiations?
Continue
I am an Islamophobia-denier, Felix. Muslims can try to interject the word, the concept, and the stigma that goes with it into our society, but there is no such thing as Islamophobia. If they are successful in this PR campaign, people will pander and appease to avoid the fake label. To be a phobia, the fear must be irrational. It must be made known that it would be wise and rational to fear Islam, perhaps a campaign to combat this: “Rational People Fear Islam.” Islam itself–and not just certain spokesmen, but the texts themselves–proclaims loudly the intent to eliminate and replace nonMuslim culture>. Rather, imputing to Islam benign intent despite clear evidence it wants to destroy us–that’s irrational.
As for your mention of Spain hosting the “Islamophobia” conference, perhaps Spain needs a reminder.
Soren
That is a really interesting and valuable observation. I wish we could hit these things right on the head in a propagandist fashion. It is interesting because there has been a major conference underway run by the EU in Cordoba Spain, devoted to fighting what the call “Islamophobia”. This confirms the scientific work of Bat Yeór
Yamit as usual is right on the ball. Israel is different.
Yet he also notes it is the same, with Olmert and the type of politics shown above by Isseroff then no matter how strong you cannot win.
Boils down to leadership.
Where will it come from? I think I know where it has to come from but will it???
Will talk more on this. It is the key issue.
History has shown that there really has been no favorable American Administration to Israel since it was created. Israel has been used to further perceived American interests both positively and negatively.I accept at face value Bushes desire for what ever personal reasons to go along with the Saudi demands or interests. But to accept Martels and Belmans position than one would have to also deduce that every administration since Truman have had similar desires and pressures from the Saudis or others to accomplish the same ends. With Bush it may be the Saudi influence with Clinton and others the same or different influences and reasons. The bottom line is tha America in every case pursues it own perceived interests and in most instances Israel is not at or near the top of Americas list.
Israel for the WORLD and that includes American policy thinking is an expendable commodity, similar to Czechoslovakia in the late 30’s. There are a few major differences, The czechs had no power to prevent their own sellout and we do. While the Czechs had no real friends or support in the World, we still do. I would in any case like to believe that we do?
For what ever reason though Bush is pursuing traditional American policy towards Israel,on the one hand feigning friendship and on the other hand seeking to screw her. I must admit though that the Americans have mostly had a willing and compliant Israel leadership to help them along.
For the same reason the Empire State Building is planning for the end of Ramadan to light up the building green–as in the color of Ali, the standard bearer (green sword flag) for every single battle of Muhammad, Ali the husband of Fatima, the martyr that Shiites everywhere revere, yet whom Sunnis also revere, since he was the first male Muslim and the fourth of the rightly guided Caliphs, Ali the uniter of Muslims both Shia and Sunni, a/k/a “Ali the Warrior”–basically by lighting up the Building green they are staking the green Hamas, PanArabic, and PanIslamic (arabic or not) color into the soil of America and flying it high, declaring USA as taken for Islam, and in New York of all places–basically flying the jihad victory colors as high as one can get now in post-9/11 New York. Why? Ignorance? Naivete?
“Middle East Summit”?–I say, Middle East Submit
The writer has this very interesting paragraph
The key phrase which betrays him is of course where he claims that what is needed is “hard bargaining”.
Now that seems to me to be the crux of the affair.
Immediately I can see that this writer places himself on the opposite side of the barricades from say Francisco Gil White, whose method and historical analysis tend to lead in the revolutionary direction.
No amount of “bargaining” will do other than destroy Israel eventually. It leads straight to defeat because it suggests that the Arabs as we know them today are open to bargain or to reach a deal with.
But if the Arabs are not open for a deal what kind of a struggle then is Israel involved in.
The answer to this question must be found. I have put forward my research on Leon Trotsky. I know for a fact that I have been moved against and attempted to shut up by what I call the Fascist Left and by those who call themselves Trotskyists, but I expected that. But I think that what I said also alarmed many Jewish people too.
Anyways…Seeing the nuances of “peace” in the above writer I thought of Isseroff and quickly looking at google I came by chance upon the article which really caused one hell of a fuss on Israpundit when I came near to calling the writing of Isseroff as antisemitic. That was in my rash days.
But looking at it again I can see exactly what got me so worked up. And in my maturity I really cannot withdraw although Isseroff does have his heart with the Jews.
So let me quote a bit:
That is back in August 2003 (Damn 4 years ago Ted) and the title by Isseroff was “Speaking out for Palestine and Peace”
My word that is one damned strange title for a Jewish man to put forward.
That stuff was so reactionary. Isseroff whatever you call him was lining up against everything good in Judaism.
To go forward, really forward, what was necesary was the harchest fight against everything that Isseroff put forward in the above.
Note he joins the slur on the Jews re Dir Yassin but let me focus on Bernadotte. Those who decided to kill Bernadotte were in revolutionary socialist view absolutely correct and must at all counts be defended and supported. But Isseroff did the exact opposite. he joined the British Imperialist enemy.
I wonder does Isseroff still support the Palestinian state and is now supporting Fatah and with Fatah Al Aqsa, and with that the US training of these antisemites.
As I remember Bernadotte. It went like this.
The Jews started off in 1920 with 100 per cent of Palestine.
Came Churchill and by 1922 it was 22 per cent.
Then later it was about 11 per cent with Resolution 181. Still the Arabs breathed blue murder against the Jews.
That was where Bernadotte came in if my memory is correct. Bernadotte wanted to rework that Resolution 181 and give the Jews less, ie less that 12 per cent while the Arabs were on 88 per cent and with Bernadotte looking for say 95 per cent.
If every there was an insulting and essentially antisemitic bastard it was Bernadotte.
True revolutionary socialists, ie Trotsky except he was eliminated, must have defended the Jews who killed this bastard.
That is what I meant at the time. There was a hell of a fuss because I called this writing above by Isseroff antisemitic.
But whatever about that there must be a real hard militancy entered into the Jewish soul against that sort of pro Arab talking which is really pro enemy supporting.
Where this is going to come from I am not sure. But it is this revolutionary hardness that we need today if the Jews will survive.
Right on, Charles Martel.
Because, as I have written many times here at Israpundit, the goal of the Bush Administration is the same as that of the Saudis, the Europeans, and the UN: to encourage the creation of conditions that will inevitably lead to Israel being eradicated.