While Abbas' not being involved with Hamas apparently absolves him of all responsibility for Palestinian jihad terrorism. "U.S. joins rebuke of Israel," by Nicholas Kralev for the Washington Times (thanks to Ruth King):
PARIS — Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice joined her counterparts in the international "Quartet for Middle East peace" yesterday in a rare formal rebuke of Israel for its plans to expand Jewish settlements in the West Bank.Meeting at a donors conference in Paris that won $7.4 billion in pledges for the Palestinians, the Quartet also warned that the money will help improve the Palestinian economy only if Israel lifts some of the physical and administrative obstacles to Palestinian travel and trade.
The Quartet expressed "concern" over the recent announcement of 300 new housing tenders for an East Jerusalem neighborhood known to Israelis as Har Homa and to Palestinians as Jabal Abu Ghneim.
"The Quartet called on both parties to make progress on their Phase One road-map obligations, including an Israeli freeze on settlements, removal of unauthorized outposts and opening of East Jerusalem institutions," the group said in a joint statement.
On the Palestinian side, it also urged "steps to end violence, terrorism and incitement," for which the West blames the militant group Hamas, and not the government of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, who was in Paris.
Convenient.
Gee, I could've sworn that Jerusalem--including its east section--didn't used to be included in the phrase "the West Bank." Yes, the eastern part of Jerusalem was taken in 1967, but it had been understood not to be negotiable. Is this "West Bank" application to Jerusalem a new usage, or is it just expanding into new sectors of the media, or am I just wrong.
Comrade Rice needs to go take the Hajj and mix elbos with her stampeeding Makkah buds!
Has Condoleeza Rice read the Preamble to the Mandate for Palestine? Is she aware that as far as the "West Bank" goes, the provisions of the League of Nations' Mandate for Palestine are still in force? Is she aware that when the United Nations was created, it accepted, without change, the mandates left over from the League of Nations period? Is she aware that the Mandate for Palestine was set up for one purpose and one purpose only, to create the "Jewish National Home," which would inexorably become a Jewish State, and that in order to make this a reality, the Mandate required the Mandatory Authority to do two things.
The first was to "encourage Jewish immigration" into Mandatory Palestine, where Jews asked for nothing but the right to enter, and then to buy land, at whatever price it was offered (and the Arab, often absentee landlords, offered prices so exorbitant that in 1940 desert acreage was being offered at a price equal to the best Iowa farmland).
The second was to "facilitate close Jewish settlement on the land." That is in the Mandate. She can look it up.
She can also look up, if she cares to, the reports from such legal scholars as the Australian Julius Stone (called by Roscoe Pound the foremost legal scholar of the 20th century), Eugene Rostow (former Dean of the Yale Law School), the practitioner William Brinton and many others, on the legal status of the "West Bank" as an unallocated part of the Mandate for Palestine, to which Israel's claim is clearly superior, as the sole intended creation of the Mandate for Palestine (don't worry, there were mandates galore for the Arabs, who in the event came out of the whole messy twentieth century with 22 members of the Arab League, including the most fabulous natural resources, with Israel existing on far less than one one-thousandth of the total land area ultimatley possessed by the Arabs.
And then there is Resolution 242, and the history of its wording, and how the English and Americans carefully did not permit the Arab delegates to amend the wording to include "all the territories" but kept the wording "the territories" and, modifying or limiting the whole agreement, the requirement that Israel have "secure and defensible borders." What constitutes "secure and defensible borders" is up to Israel, not up to Condoleezza Rice or anyone outside Israel to decide, any more than non-Americans have a right to dictate to us what measures we regard as indispensable to our own security.
Her not very intelligent, almomst dyslexic boss, is greatly impressed with her. He's a child of privilege and at the same time a sentimentalist. He thinks of his "Condi" as quite a find, a black woman with a doctorate. But those of us who do not think in those terms and are so devoid of racism that we have no inhibitions about attacking anyone who deserves it, see her as a mediocre graduate student who simply kept being dutiful. Her idiotic remark about how the Shia' and Sunnis would simply "have to learn to get along" and her amazement at the Hamas victory, and her constant displays of surprise, based on her imperfect, practically non-existent, undersanding of Islam, its texts, its tenets, its attitudes, its atmospherics -- she's had six years to find out about it, after all -- shows how very limited she is.
She should be ignored. She is, however, at this point in authority. In brief authority. The clock is ticking. Let's see how much more of our money can be given away to Muslims, how much more damage can be done, either to Israel, or to other countries also facing Lesser Jihads. Another year of this, and then possibly something better. Or, possibly, something -- hard to believe -- even worse.
Another year of this, and then possibly something better. Or, possibly, something -- hard to believe -- even worse.
Posted by: Hugh at December 18, 2007 7:29 PM
"... something -- hard to believe -- even worse."
Sorry, Hugh, unfortunately not hard at all to believe. If ANY Democrat wins the White House, you get the "even worse" scenario. Can you name any Dem presidential candidate who even remotely "gets" the threat of Islam? I can't. Edwards doesn't believe there is a war on terror (granted this is a misnomer and declares war against a battle tactic). How many millions did the Saudis contribute to Hillary's husband's library? Oh yes, and who is the other prominent Dem, Obama?, the guy who as a kid, attended Muslim schools?
The Republicans to not offer the perfect anti jihad candidate, but NONE of the Republican front runners are anywhere near as seriously compromised in fighting the global jihad as their above mentioned Democratic sounterparts.
"it also urged "steps to end violence, terrorism and incitement," for which the West blames the militant group Hamas,"
Also convenient that the West forgets that the Palis VOTED for Hamas.
memo to Condoleezze Rice:
The next time you get the impulse to publicly flagellate and politically undermine a democratic nation-state like Israel (whose general interests and cultural values are very similar to the United States) while offering assistance to a known enemy of the western democracies like Islam, PLEASE STOP and
instead find the nearest piano, have a seat at the keyboard and serenade somebody.
When you hurt a Judeo-Christian state you hurt America, my friend-- and it's time you understood that!
Attending a Muslim school at the age of ten does not mean one is necessarily a sympathizer with, or apologist for Islam. Obama is intelligent, and if he uses his intelligence rightly, and starts thinking about Islam as a Total Belief-System, learns what is in the Qur'an, Hadith, Sira, and learns about the treatment of non-Muslims after their lands were conquered for Islam -- something neither he nor any of his rivals has done -- then we can judge him. What gives one some hope is his intelligence. What causes one to lose that same hope is that he has been silent on the subject, and the list of those rom whom he has sought foreign-policy advice is as disturbing as the list of those consulted by Edwards or Clinton. It includes, for example, the name of Zbigniew Brzezinski
Among those who attended a Muslim school at the same age as Barack Obama are Wafa Sultan, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and Ibn Warraq. If Obama were very clever, he would not only meet and talk with them, and show that it had made an impression, and make sure the world knew about it.
As for the Republicans, they should be much better informed, and demonstrate that they are much better informed, about Islam than so far any of them have made us believe. One waits, possibly not in vain, for a Republican candidate to describe the war in Iraq as a squandering of men, money, and materiel, and coldbloodedly announces that we have less to gain from remaining than from a withdrawal. No need to expressly declare a grim pleasure in what will happen next -- merely a hint, in a sentence such as "what happens next is entirely up to the Iraqis themselves" and "we have done enough, it is time for them to sort out their own disputes." A leader who will say this, even as he knows full well that the Shi'a will never surrender their new hold on power, and the Sunnis will never accept the new dispensation.
Ah, yes, Condi, head of our state department, the second most famous black female in America, the Russian scholar with the ego so inflated that she doesn't know what the 'freedom fighters' she cares about sooo much in 'palestine' think about her, how they laugh at her behind her back and call her abed, black slave who's not worth killing but is worth raping(according to islam )if they only had the chance.
Condi abed, a slave to her ignorance, the worst days in Birmingham were nothing compared to the racism of the arabs who follow mohammed and his god allah.
I believe
Obama is a dhimmi,
and, if elected,
will become a Jimmy
Carter who will sell
our nation for a bag of arab gold
and later, when the truth is told,
his black separatist beliefs
will cause him great grief
and he will be dishonored
and all black people will hang
their head in shame hearing his name.
Let's just blame the victim, shall we?
Will someone please tell Condi Olmert to shut the hell up already. Or is it Ehud Rice? Either way, that woman needs to shut her face-her blatherings make rational people sick.
"She should be ignored. She is, however, at this point in authority. In brief authority."
--posted by Hugh--
Agreed. Now, the important question is whether the rightful "American Dhimmi of the Year" can make up a 20 percentage point deficit in a few hours?
I hope so. I encourage ALL in the community to "pile on", right about now.
This stinks of Tony Bliar
It matters not that Israel is accused by some of kicking out the Palestinian Arabs or whether they in fact begged them to stay on.
It matters not that Israel treats Palestinian terrorists who have suffered "combat" injuries in their hospitals or if they leave them to perish in Gaza and elsewhere.
Neither does it matter who claims what territories are illegal or legal. All this is hot air for the purpose of subversion and for the ears of the westerners only. Only one thing matters above all this hot air, and it is this- Israel represents the successful national liberation of a Jewish dhimmi civilization originally conquered by the Prophet himself. It is within a stone's throw of Mecca and its existence is a huge insult to Islam who will do whatever it takes to return it to Islam.
Even if it takes centuries.
Israel is no Andalusia conquered by remote islamized Berbers and the like in a period in which the Prophet took no part personally and a land situated far from Mecca and Medina. The return of Israel is therefore far more important than the return of Spain. All the atrocity accounting is aimed squarely at forming a consensus of opinion that Israel has no right to exist outside the control of Islam.
Even if it were proved that Israel had NEVER in its short history committed any atrocities whatsoever, it would not make one iota of difference to the islamists wish to destroy it. Once a region has been conquered for Islam, it is always Islamic and must be re-conquered from the infidel, regardless of the passage of time
"...the Quartet also warned that the money will help improve the Palestinian economy only if Israel lifts some of the physical and administrative obstacles to Palestinian travel and trade."...
....how about the Palestinians doing something positive, like taking the necessary action to stop the daily rocket attacks on Israel, or to stop the constant attacks on Christians, Christian and Non Muslim churches, the ongoing attempts to capture Israeli soldiers, the constant hate speeches given by Islamic radicals and Islamic clerics, stopping the flow of explosives, weapons and other military gear from Egypt, Saudia Arabia, Iran, Yemen, Libya, North Korea, Chins, Russia, JOrdan and other nations that constantly contribute to death and human misery....
....Hey Bwana Condi, what are you demanding the Palestinians do to stop the violence?.....and just why do you seem to believe the violence is caused by the Israelies?.....
"...What causes one to lose that same hope is that he has been silent on the subject,..."
.....so have most of the other candidates....they prefer to bark about Global Warming, taxes, the death penalty, gun ownership rights, socialized medical care, school vouchers, the privitation of social security, drug laws and whether or not churches should be allowed to provide welfare services....
...anything but Islam, Islam...the one issue that should be topping the list of things mostly likely to cause the most conflict in the lives of everyone who lives in a non Muslim country....Islam...which is causing more death than automobile accidents, heart disease, kidney disease, social disease,or cancer combined....Islam...which is slowly removing freedom and individualism from all who do not submit.....Islam ....which is destroying every inch of ground it controls....
.....the candidates talk about much, but little of the one thing they must deal with , if elected....Islam..
....a candidate who will not talk about Islam is not getting my vote...unfortunately those that do talk about Islam will not get elected....
....we live in the twi-light zone....
Ban Muslim Immigration...
As the one candidate with intimate knowledge of Islam Obama should be questioned relentlessly on the pros and cons.
His claim that he does not currently have contact is a flat out lie. What about the family members that are NOW Muslim?
The ones he hides. All the while talking about 'family values'. A very popular Muslim phrase.
His silence on this issue bothers me.
The fact that CAIR felt the need to defend him.
The fact that his denials always come from someone else, NEVER him.
The fact that I have never heard him say 'I AM Christian' only that 'I belong to and attend this church.
Big difference.
If anyone has proof that these statements are wrong, please post them.
His silence on Islam good or bad is deafening.
Who are the other three members of the Quartet?
Does Condi really think that Abbas has any 'real' control over Gaza or the West bank? He is just a figurehead which Hamas allows to live to string along Condi and the rest of the west along the roadkill -er- roadmap which they (the Palistinians) have no intention of fulfilling.
The Palieos have never, *NEVER*, honored any of their agreements. What makes her think they will now?
Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.
I too had the curious idea that Jerusalem, West, East, North, South, and any other direction, is now the capital of the state of Israel. So there's new housing going up. Is this housing going to be limited to Jews, or are the Arab inhabitants of Israel also going to be eligible? If the latter (which I expect is the case), what is Lady Rice complaining about?
"Attending a Muslim school at the age of ten does not mean one is necessarily a sympathizer with, or apologist for Islam."
Posted by: Hugh at December 18, 2007 8:31 PM
Hugh, agreed. But my point is that this information, when applied to a presidential candidate, is a prima facie indication that said candidate is compromised as to his ability to fight the global jihad. Obama has some explaining to do. You yourself admit that he hasn't cleared the air.
Hugh, as exsgtbrown noted so eloquently on this thread, there is an appalling lack of discussion among the top presidential candidates on the global jihad threat.
My point remains this: The Republican response to the global jihad is seriously flawed. The Democrat response to the global jihad is worse than seriously flawed .. the Democrat response is MISSING ALTOGETHER.
We cannot paint the Republican and Democrat response to the global jihad with the same broad brush. With the Republicans, we can try to persuade them to combat the threat more intelligently. With the Democrats, we have to convince them that a threat exists in the first place.
Re. Jerusalem - an old book, but a good one, is James Parkes' "The Story of Jerusalem". It includes a fascinating account of the fighting in and around Jerusalem during 1947-1949.
I am revolted by the Arab Muslims' ahistorical claiming of Jerusalem and eretz Israel as 'Arab', their arrogant denial of the long and deep Jewish presence that far pre-dated the Arab Muslim invasion and occupation (and that endured, a determined remnant clinging on by teeth and toenails, even during that invasion and occupation); precisely as I would be revolted if an Englishman were to claim that Carnarvon, or Edinburgh, or Dublin, 'always were always will be ENGLISH land'.
I am also revolted by the cowardice of non-Muslim nations that will not publicly accept that Jerusalem is the spiritual capital of Judaism, far more important to Jews than to Christians and certainly far more important than it ever was to Muslims, and that it is also the political capital city of the modern Jewish state. I am revolted by the cowardice and wilful ignorance that prevents, say, the Australian government from putting its embassy in Jerusalem rather than in Tel Aviv.
Time for every non-Muslim country in the world to conspicuously shift their embassies, in Israel, to Jerusalem, as an act of defiance to the Ummah, and a flat-out rejection of the aggressive falsehoods and virulent antisemitism of the Arab Imperial Religion.
Russia - if no-one else can muster the courage, how about you do it? Erase forever the curses incurred by the Pogroms: move your embassy to Jerusalem. Italy: do it for the repose of the soul of Oriana Fallaci.
"Attending a Muslim school at the age of ten does not mean one is necessarily a sympathizer with, or apologist for Islam."
Posted by: Hugh at December 18, 2007 8:31 PM
Maybe Obama's refusal to pledge the Oath of Allegiance might have some bearing on his patriotism?
http://img.timeinc.net/time/photoessays/2007/harkin_steak_fry/harkin_steak_fry_08.jpg
Maybe Obama's refusal to pledge the Oath of Allegiance might have some bearing on his patriotism?
Posted by: Mike_W at December 20, 2007 2:37 AM
Point well taken, Mike_W; I forgot about that picture, ... just what you want to see in a presidential candidate, isn't it?
From the standpoint of us JW/DW posters, Obama is seriously compromised. With all due respect to Hugh's purist approach, and conceding attendance at a Muslim school does not necessarily mean he is an Islam apologist/sympathizer, at the very least, Muslim school attendance has to set off alarm bells.