Peace In Our Time: Olmert offers "Palestinians" 98.1% of West Bank

Why is he still in office?

I present to you ' ISLAM vs PEACE: 'Islam Means Peace in Our Time,
my long riff of short takes on the anti-reality check of our time.

98.1% of the West Bank today - 100% of Israel tomorrow.

Olmert is playing right into their long term plan to take over the entire region. Such stupidity.

I can't write STOOOOOPPPIIIIIIDDDD enough times to describe this guy.

Will SOMEONE put SOMEONE in charge that has a clue?!?!?! I mean - crack open a koran - learn their own history with the muslims - do SOMETHING other than what they have already done that has proven to not work!

Anyone can tell me how intelligent the Jews are overall - but they are NOT intelligent when it comes to defending themselves, to getting a clue, etc. Maybe we should start donating the book, 'The Art of War', to them?!?!

NOOOOOOOOOO!!!!! Are you crazy???? What does Bibi think about this?

Or a book called 'The Art of Holy War: Jihad'. All of our terrible war policies are as they are because those who are in charge of the defense of the West are indifferent to truth in general and of Islam in particular. 'Education by Murder', as Daniel Pipes puts it is what it will take. The glove came off on 9/11, and our 'leaders' are waiting for the next attack to do what they should have done right after 9/11.

There should be a law that prevents a President, Prime Minister etc. from conducting negotiations with other countries/entities in the last months of their term. They're often more interested in what is good for their legacy rather than what is good for their country.

'Round here ya don't feed a bear to make it go away.

Islam is a lie and truth is killing it.

Yes, but were that truth told by those in power.

Evil seems to reside in some of the most unexpected places - yeah - I'm talking to you, Olmert, you Islamic pawn, you.

Olmert has also agreed that 5,000 Palestinian refugees would return to Israel - a thousand refugees every year for five years, according to the report.
Abbas allegedly rejected the proposal and was demanding the return of many more refugees.
-from the article

Sounds like the Palestinians are once again preparing to miss an opportunity at the end of an American administration and a new peace process is due to start in about six months.
What did Barak offer - 97% of the West Bank and all of Gaza?
Israel could offer to commit suicide and the Palestinians will turn it down if it doesn't happen fast enough.

"Thus Israel will be bisected."

Isn't this going to happen in any event? The West Bank and Gaza are on opposite sides of Israel and don't meet anywhere. They'll be the new Pakistan, but their India is about ten miles wide.

Oh, my heart hurts so much, I'm hyperventilating.

Isn't there anybody, anybody at all in Israel who could stop Olmert from bringing the end to Israel?????

If the Muslims won, it would have an adverse effect on non Muslims in muslim majority countries; more oppression and persecution!

Olmert doesn't understand that "Land for Peace" has been going on since Muhammad's time. Give up your sovereignty, convert or accept subjugation, and then there will be "peace," (at least in the sense of the absence of open war) and only on the terms of (and at the whim of) the Islamic leadership. Otherwise, there will be war to achieve those ends (Qur'an 9:29).

Einstein's words are highly appropriate:

"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."

Let's not forget the role of C. Rice, Secretary of State, U.S., in this affair. She's been pushing this for years. As though it will help with U.S./ arab relations.........NOT.

Olmert offers PA 98.1% of West Bank

. . .and manages to live to tell about it.

Where is the Israeli survival instinct?

Olmert has also agreed that 5,000 Palestinian refugees would return to Israel - a thousand refugees every year for five years, according to the report.
Can you imagine 5,000 exploding martyrs inside Israel? Like the bad old days before the barrier.

Off Topic: Please echo my voice to: travelinfo@visitbritain.org and at
http://ukinusa.fco.gov.uk/en/feedback
==============================
To our dear cultural parents,

We regret to let you know that we will NOT be traveling to visit you due to your recent decision to tolerate and enforce Islamic Sharia law:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,422661,00.html

We agree with Pat Condell on this matter, and it saddens us more than you could know that the land of the Magna Carta, Shakespeare, and Handel, who defeated the Nazis and Soviet tyrannies at our side, could tolerate this new tyranny. I will listen to the Coronation Anthems tonight and weep, not out of the usual joy they bring, but rather lament the fall of the parents of our civilization.

Our future travels to Europe will not include a trip to Britain.

With Regrets,
T&I S

Holy God, Holy and Mighty, Holy and Immortal, have mercy on us.

I don't get Olmert. I have to wonder if Olmert gets Olmert. Bettin' not.

dumbledoresarmy, I share in your heartfelt plea to the One True God, but please remain strong, dear Sister in Christ, because we both know the happy ending to this story, don't we?

Champ, there may well be a 'happy ending' -- it's the long bit in the middle that's worrying a lot of us!

Me too, jewcat, me too. I don't mean to minimize the path that awaits us at all, because I would rather skip over that part, as I'm sure Jesus would have preferred skipping over the price he paid, too. Take care!

I don't think it really matters, Israel could offer the Palestinians 100% of their "demands" and there would just be a new intifada as with the previous time the Palestinians were offered virtually all of their demands.

I wonder if this has anything to do with the fact that these "demands" are simply a grand grievance theatre to mask their true intentions and desires vis a vis for Israel to disappear...

Judea and Samaria is not his. It is not for him to give it away.

Olmerde be gone!

Look: for the instruction of anyone new here, let's rewrite the article as it might have appeared, had Tovah Lazaroff known what we know and/or been free to say it.

"Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has discussed, with the 'Palestinian' Arabs, transferring to them 98.1 percent of the West Bank, that is, of Judea and Samaria, Channel 2 reported on Sunday evening.

'The report on the ongoing negotiations was broadcast in advance of Tuesday's planned meeting between Olmert and Palestinian [sic] Authority President Mahmoud Abbas. [...]

'According to Channel 2, however, Olmert is considering concessions far beyond land east of the barrier and could transfer 98.1% of Muslim-majority Judea and Samaria, the so-called ' West Bank' to the PA. That is significantly more than the 94% to 96% that had been discussed in previous negotiations.

'The report states that Abbas has asked that Israel cede the Jerusalem area settlements of Ma'aleh Adumim and Givat Ze'ev, but is willing to negotiate the status of the Jerusalem neighborhoods of Gilo and French Hill, which are over the Green Line.

'In the past the local Arab Muslims have demanded that Israel fully withdraw to the pre-1967 borders, including from eastern Jerusalem (which includes the Temple Mount and the historic Jewish quarter of the Old City). Israel has insisted it plans to keep the larger settlements blocs including Ma'aleh Adumim and Givat Ze'ev as well as the Jewish neighborhoods of east Jerusalem. [...]

'Olmert has also agreed that 5,000 'palestinian' Arab 'refugees' would be admitted into Israel proper - a thousand 'refugees' every year for five years, according to the report.

'Abbas allegedly rejected the proposal and was demanding the return of many more 'refugees'.

"According to the report, the local Arabs were also interested in access not only to the Dead Sea but also to the Kinneret, as they claimed they deserved some rights over the water flowing into the lake because the Jordan River runs through territory in which Arab Muslims are a majority [...]

'Speaking in defense of the voluntary evacuation bill at the cabinet meeting, Olmert said that for the 40 years since it acquired the West Bank [sic] during the Six Day War, Israel had been making excuses as to why it could not do anything.

'This, he said, did not help Israel. It was important Israel showed it had taken initiative in the peace process.

"We have to advance the voluntary evacuation compensation bill and to bring it to the cabinet [for a vote]," the prime minister said.

'Olmert said he had not always supported territorial concessions and that he had initially felt that then-prime minister Ehud Barak had offered the Palestinians [sic] too much at Camp David in 2000. "I thought that the land between the Jordan River and the sea was ours," he said.

'In the end, he said he came to the conclusion that we had to reach an agreement with the Palestinians [sic] if we did not want to see Israel become a binational state.

There was no time to waste, Olmert said. adding: "We can argue about every small detail and find that when we are ready for an agreement there is no partner and no international support."

'In the not too distant future, there would come a day when "we will want those same solutions that we are rejecting today," he said.

Israel had to reach a final peace agreement with the Palestinians [sic] and the Syrians. If this happened, then relations with other Arab nations would follow suit, he said."

This is *so* depressing.

We'll reach a point where we won't care if Israel survives. Its own people seem not to care.

And, just to remind ourselves, here is the inimitable Hugh Fitzgerald summarising the nub of the problem, and why this ridiculous 'peace process' means absolutely nothing, why it is indeed a dead end street.

"Neither Israel itself, nor many in the outside world, seem willing to comprehend that there is no solution, one-state or two-state or n-state, to the Jihad.

"There is only the matter of remaining overwhelmingly -- and perceptibly -- more powerful, capable of wreaking great damage on those who would attack.

"No treaty with Infidel states, and Israel is such a state, can conceivably be permanently honored by a Muslim signatory.

"Pacta sunt servanda [Agreements Must Be Kept] is a Western idea.

"In the Muslim world, treaties – if made with Infidels - are not to be obeyed, but to be violated, as soon as the Muslim side feels itself strong enough to press its advantage.

"The model for all time -- see Majid Khadduri, War and Peace in the Law of Islam -- is Muhammad's Treaty with the Meccans in 628 A.D, the Treaty of Hudaybiyya."

Thus spake Hugh Fitzgerald, writing at jihadwatch, 15.8.2006.

[New readers: for a lucid summary of that legendary episode, the 'treaty' that Mohammed feigningly made and then afterwards - as soon as opportunity arose - treacherously broke, see also Mr Spencer's 'The Truth About Muhammad', pp. 136-139.)

In the light of this fact about the textually defined and historically demonstrable nature of Muslim 'treaty' making with Infidels, the statement made by Mr Olmert in the posted article - "Israel had to reach a final peace agreement with the Palestinians and the Syrians" is pure, suicidal nonsense.

The 'Palestinian' Arabs, and the Arabised population of 'Syria', are overwhelmingly Muslim, steeped in Islam for centuries. They therefore make war according to the example of Mohammed; which means that agreements with non-Muslim entities, such as the Jewish state of Israel, will be entered into ONLY if perceived to offer an advantage to the Muslim side, and if that Muslim side is - temporarily - weaker and feels the need for timeout to grow strong; and the agreements will be broken the moment the Muslims feel strong enough to go for the jugular.

The principle stated by Hugh in the lapidary statement that I have re-posted here, is the Rosetta Stone for ALL non-Muslim persons, groups or polities that have to do with Muslim persons, groups or polities.

I know that when I understood it, it was a true 'Aha!' moment.

In that instant all the apparent confusion and go-nowhere stopping and starting of the so-called 'peace process' - and, indeed, EVERYTHING that the Middle Eastern Muslims and their dhimmi Christian janissaries and deluded kafir enablers whether British or European or Russian/ Soviet or American have ever done (right from the moment that substantial numbers of Jews from the exile began reinforcing the remnant dhimmi Jewish communities in the land of Israel, and then insisting on claiming and defending the human rights that the Empire of Islam was adamantly bent on denying to them) - made sense. The actions and statements of the Muslims became - effortlessly, dismally, depressingly - predictable.

Olmert's actions and stupidity only proves what happens to a Western country when they elect a liberal politician.

Here are two recent news stories, one from an Australian journalist in Israel reporting on a Ha'aretz story (which seems, in hindsight, to have been inaccurate...but its implications were terrifying); and the other, from Jerusalem Post, in which Hassan Nasrallah openly states the final goal of all jihadis.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/09/12/2362624.htm?section=justin

US rejects Israeli request for bunker-busters: report

By Middle East Correspondent Ben Knight

Posted 6 hours 15 minutes ago
'An Israeli newspaper is reporting that the US has rejected a request from Israel to provide it with advanced weapons, fearing they could be used against Iran.

'The Ha'aretz report says Israel had asked the US for bunker-busting bombs, mid-air refuelling planes, and clear passage over Iraq for its air force.

'The paper says the Americans have knocked back the request, fearing it would give a green light to an attack on Iran.

'Israel has repeatedly expressed its concern that Iran is developing a nuclear weapon, and refuses to rule out a pre-emptive strike.

'But the report says that the US has agreed to strengthen Israel's defences, extending the range of an American radar facility in the country.

'Israel's Government has declined to comment on the report.'

Meanwhile, as the US dithers over whether or not to give Israel any realistic assistance against the clear and present danger of an atomic Shoah carried out by Muslims, Hassan Nasrallah reiterates the jihad agenda:

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1221115866469&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Sep 11, 2008 11:30 | Updated Sep 11, 2008 17:55
'No peace in Mideast if Israel exists'
By JPOST.COM STAFF

"Hizbullah chief Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah voiced his opinion on Thursday about the various peace processes currently underway in the Middle East, saying that as long as Israel exists, there will never be peace in the region.

"'As long as Israel exists and its eyes are honing in on the territories of other states, the world will not know peace in the Middle East," Nasrallah said during an interview with Iran Broadcasting (IRIB).

'"The region will not see the light of peace and stability," he continued, adding that this was due to the "aggressiveness and the natural militancy of Israel."

"Speaking about the Second Lebanon War, Nasrallah again emphasized that the conflict was a victory for his organization and for Lebanon, but added that Israel still posed a threat.

'"Israel will not cease to try and achieve its goals," the Hizbullah chief said. "It will use every means in order to actualize its ambitions."

"On that point, Nasrallah warned of the dire consequences of any future Israeli attack either against his organization, its host state, or any other state or entity with which he is allied.

'"Any Israeli attack against Lebanon, Iran, Syria, or the Gaza Strip will be answered with a harsh response," he said. "Our position is stronger than it has ever been - from the logistical point of view, militarily and in numbers. Lebanon as a whole is united against one enemy: Israel."'

I feel sick. I feel furious. And meanwhile, a deluded ignorant FOOL in my own country's foreign affairs department coolly told me that the hatred of Jews - the 'anti-Semitic views' - so appallingly expressed by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, did NOT (I quote) "reflect the Islamic faith". AAAARGGGH. The stupidity, it burns! Yeah, he said *that* - 'such [anti-Semitic] views do not reflect the Islamic faith".

What does one do, faced with such invincible blindness?

Some interesting historical information from Bat Yeor's "The Dhimmi" (first published, 1980; revised and enlarged English edition, 1985), pp. 137-138.

“A negative attitude was expressed in 1982 by Algeria’s first president, in a lapidary formula:

‘Ce que nous voulons, nous autres Arabes, c’est *etre*. Or, nous ne pourrons etre que si *l’autre* n’est pas.

- ‘What we want, as Arabs, is to *be*. However, we can only be, if *the other* is not’.” {or, ‘if the other does not exist’}…[note 8: Ben Bella, ‘Tous Contre Israel’, PI [Revue Politique Internationale/ International Political Review] 16 (Paris, 1982).

-Ben Bella openly approved [on p. 107 of the PI article] the assassination of leaders whose policies he disapproves of – a common practice under the Mamluks – and then went on to justify, after the acquisition of nuclear weapons by Arab states, a nuclear war to destroy Israel:

-‘If there is no other solution, then let there be a nuclear war, and that will be the end of it, once and for all.” [PI, p. 108]

"Such a public display of aggressiveness and moral irresponsibility is rooted in a monolithic clear conscience, which has never been affected by any scruples regarding the tragedy of the dhimmis."

One may note that in the article as quoted, Ben Bella might as well have said 'we Muslims' where he said 'we Arabs', and the phrase that reads 'after the acquisition of nuclear weapons by Arab states' could just as well have read 'after the acquisition of nuclear weapons by MUSLIM states'.

In other words - the 'Arabs' (that is, the Arab Muslims, and indeed, the Muslims generally, in thrall to Islam, the Arab Imperial Religion - see, for example of this, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad the Persian Muslim and Mahathir Mohamed the Malay Muslim, replicating exactly the Arab Muslim hatred of Jews) regard themselves as fully entitled to attack and annihilate everything and anything 'other' than themselves. The bare existence of something that is 'other' than their precious selves seems to be viewed as a mortal threat, an unendurable insult.

How sick is *that*?

Unless they are Top Dog, King of the Hill, they seethe and rage; unless all are enslaved to them, or dead, they consider themselves Oppressed and Humiliated. There can be no agreement or compromise possible with a society conditioned to think and behave like *that*; whose 'default' setting appears to be a psychopathic/ sociopathic level of suspicion and aggression.

Olmert likes to talk about those who want to hold onto the territory -- the so-called "West Bank" - that was assigned to the territory of the Mandate for Palestine, that is for the establishment of the Jewish National Home, by the League of Nations --- as "delusional." Why are they "delusional"? Israel's legal, historic and moral rights clearly overwhelm that of the local Arabs. Many of those Arabs descend from those who arrived to take advantage of the economic opportunities that the Zionist pioneeers created, and that continued during the Mandate period, a period when the British made it increasingly difficult for Jews to arrive, at the time of their greatest need and peril, but never did a thing about the far larger Arab immigration, from Iraq, from Egypt, from the Emirate of Transjordan, which is where most of the local Arabs come from, though they have managed to fool the world into ignoring the real demographic and cadastral history of the area, especially of Western Palestine, beginning in the early 19th century.

Olmert takes the position that somehow, he doesn't quite know how, if Israel gives up the territory it needs to defend itself, territory which controls the historic invasion routes from the East, territory which controls the handful of Israel's airports (most of which are within range of handheld weaonry from Qalqilya, at the eight-mile waist that Israel had to endure in the 1949 Armistice Lines, which the Arabs never recognized as permanent borders, and to which Olmert, a man intellectually at the end of his tether, and morally ---- morally, nowhere -- seems to think Israel should return.

No. What the Israelis cannot do is give up one more inch of the "West Bank." They cannot, and are not required by any known morality or law, to give up the territory which, had they simply been able to take and hold it during the 1948-49 war, would have been long ago recognized as much a part of Israel as any other. They should have annexed the entire "West Bank" in June 1967, and were fools not to. They could have massively settled the area, and created conditions that would have disabused the local Arabs of ever thinking they would be able, if they only waited, to wear Israel down, to obtain concession after concession, and then, finally, to do what the Slow Jihadists of Fatah wish to do -- which is ultimately to go in for the kill, but on a different time-table, and using at first different tactics, than the Fast Jihaidsts of Hamas have in mind.

Olmert refuses to learn a thing about Islam. It is all around him, all around and within Israel, in the mosques, in the sermons of imams, in the videocassettes and the audiocassettes; on the broadcasts and in the newspapers in Arab lands. But Olmert will not study Islam. He doesn't have the time. He's too busy making peace, he's too busy with the "peace process." He hasn't time to study the texts. He will not study the tenets. He will not understand that the war against Israel is a Jihad, a war remove from the Arab and Muslim midst an Infidel nation-state. He does not understand this. He will not understand it. He does not understand that no tangible assets must be given up by Israel; he does not understand that no agreement by Muslims with Infidels will be kept, not becuase of the untrustworthiness of this or that leader, but because Islam itself offers the Example of the Perfect Man, Muhammad, al-insan al-kamil, who in his breaching of the treaty he made with the Meccans at Hudaibiyya in 628 A.D..

That's Olmert.

And that's his would-be successor, Tzipi Livni, too. And that's too many Israelis, who think they are being the "realists" and those who want to hold onto the "West Bank" and rely on invocation of Darura, Necessity, by the Arab rulers who may not wish to go to war because, if Israel holds onto the "West Bank" (and this does not mean that the local Arabs need be given Israeli citizenship, it does not mean that "Israel will lose its Jewish character" -- it merely means that Israel will have something much more important, a fighting chance to survive in conditions other than those of maximum peril) -- in other words, Deterrence will keep the peace, as it keeps the peace now with Egypt and Jordan (and not those "peace treaties").

But Olmert thinks he is the "realist." People who want to hold onto the "West Bank" are, he thinks, "delusional."

Study Islam and then decide who here is being "delusional."

Dumbledoresarmy.
Which FOOL in which nation's 'Foreign Affairs Dept'?

Perhaps it's "Willful Blindness"

Bibi, stage a coup, anything, just get back into power.

I think the Jews are just tired of living as they do and are making mistakes to try and end it.

And after the deplorable Olmert is likely to come the only-very-slightly-less-deplorable Zipporah (Tzipi, as all Israeli politicians are known by these undignified and to-me demeaning nicknames) Livni.

She too has her own story, of being the child, like Olmert, of Likud supoprters, even perhaps Revisionists, and like Olmert, she thinks that she has become a "realist" and therefore put away childish things, but her "realism" is the usual, delusionary "realism" of those who ignore the nature of the war -- a Jihad -- being waged on Israel, ignore its permanence and its scope, and think that if they surrender what is rightfully Israel's, tangible assets, the land of the "West Bank" that must be held onto, whatever the Arabs in the Arab-occupied parts may think (and they can, over time, respond to conditions they deem insufficiently favorable and be encouraged to leave, if they know they will never be masters of the place), if Israel is to survive.

Here's a bit more on Livni to accompany the part about Olmert above:

A news item tells us that "Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas is quoted as saying that nine months of peace talks with Israel have failed to bring agreement on any of the core issues. That would include the status of Jerusalem, Palestinian refugees, Jewish settlements and the borders of a future Palestinian state. Mr. Abbas told the Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz that "the gaps between the sides are very wide."

If that news item is true, Israelis can breathe a sigh of relief. But if Olmert is replaced by Livni, then they can expect more of the same. More negotiations over what will continue to be called -- without the government of Israel unmasking the farce -- a peace-process" that will be based on the "core issues" that leave out, that overlook, that deliberately ignore, the fact that none of these "core issues" really matters because they are trivial given what Islam teaches. Because of Islam, because of the immutability of its texts, and the permanence of its tenets, and because there will always be far more primitive Muslims than there will be the kind of suave, advanced ones -- the very ones that Israelis on the left pride themselves as counting among their "friends" and whose personal charm and affability (and that shared mockery of "religious Jews" who are depicted as the true fanatics) get in the way of an unhindered view of things -- it is with an understanding of those Believers, and that Islam, and not some nuanced falling-away from it, that Israeli leaders must base their policies.

Any agreement or treaty that Israel reaches with the Gazan Arabs or the "West Bank" Arabs or both, that is any agreement that a Mahmoud Nobody-Here-But-Us-Accountants Abbas, or someone else (it could be Sari Nuseibeh, it could be Marwan Barghouti, it could be Saeb Erekat -- it doesn't matter for Islam remains the same), will commit the Muslim Arab side to nothing. It has happened again and again, since the Armistice agreements of 1949. No matter what Israel thinks has been settled -- say, the status of the Shebaa Farms, or the Golan Heights (Israel annexed them in 1981, and has no business putting them up on the block yet again) -- for the Arabs nothing is ever settled. For once the Arab Muslim side receives its tangible gains, sooner or later it will renege on its own promises. There are those Israelis who allow themselves to believe that Egypt, and Jordan, can be said to be honoring a "peace treaty" with Israel. This misses the point. Those countries are not at war, in the battlefield sense, with Israel not because they are honoring a treaty, but because they are keeping the "peace" of their truce-treaty, or hudna, for exactly the same reasons that Syria or Saudi Arabia or any other Arab state does, because they have calculated that Israel is in a position to inflict terrible damage, and even, in the case of Egypt, in seizing the Sinai yet again and this time not likely to again surrender it for the sake of "peace."

Once it has pocketed the tangible concessions made by Israel, as always the Muslim side will, sooner or later, breach every single one of its promises. And it will do so not because this or that particular Arab has turned out to be untrustworthy, but because Islam instructs Muslims that they must never reconcile themselves to the permanent existence of Infidel rule anywhere in the world, and above all, or at least first of all, it is crazy to think that Arab Muslims would ever contemplate the continued existence of Israel, an Infidel nation-state, on land once possessed by Muslims (it doesn't matter whom they seized the land from, nor does it matter that in North Africa and the Middle East Muslim Arabs possess lands that together are a thousand times larger than Israel), and not only that, but land that bestrides the very area that links the Maghreb to the Middle East.

No, Livni will not mention this. She will not raise the issue of Islam because, you see, her whole "getting-beyond-my-parents" personal narrative -- child of Likud supporters, who finally "saw the light" because she became a "realist" (what kind of "realist" ignores Islam in attempting to deal with Slow Jihadists and Fast Jihadists? What kind of "realist" thinks that the most important thing is not the physical survival of Israel and the Jews of Israel, but rather whether Israel retains its "Jewish and democratic character" by constantly giving up whatever lands happen to have large numbers of Arabs occupying them, instead of recognizing with grim sobriety that as a matter of national survival -- of border defense, of control of aquifers, of control of invasion routes -- Israel simply cannot give up, and should not be forced to give up, one inch or dunam of what is called, so comically, the "West Bank."

She, Livni, is not a "realist" at all. For having given up the "West Bank," Israel would simply find itself in the same position, but now much reduced in size, and in this dimidiated state much more vulnerable. For the Arabs, who outbreed the Jews, would increase their numbers, and the next place that might have an Arab majority would be the Galilee (where already the Arabs have been attacking Jews with impunity), and along will come Livni, or a later Livni, to say, yet again, that Israel cannot "remain Jewish and democratic" and that, of course, in order to retain its moral purity -- yes, we all know how important that is, don't we? -- it must now give up the Galilee, too. And so on.

For some, for many, for too many, in Israel, there is no understanding of the larger picture, and no attempt to take a longer view. And Islam, the most important force in the Middle East, and the reason why Jews for centuries were treated as dhimmis, or why the Jewish state of Israel will never, ever be truly accepted -- and no amount of supposed intertwining of economic interests of Jews and Arabs, in, say, Jenin or some other "West Bank" town, disproves this, but merely shows that Arabs are perfectly happy to pocket whatever they can get from those hated Jews, but that does not change their deeply-held views, and does not change the texts, and tenets of Islam that no collaborative efforts in exporting fruit or even computers will undo.

Livni is lacking. And so many others are too.

For now, the people of Israel have, it seems, been saved by the bell. Olmert is a crook, and is being hauled off-stage. But what if he had not been a crook? What if he had not had to leave the stage? Think then what permanent and terrible damage he might have done?

Supporters of Israel, the unthinking kind (there are so many of those), the complacent kind who think that if only, if only...then "peace" can be achieved, the kind who do not see what is wrong with the phrase "two-state solution" or "one-state solution" and who cannot get through their thick heads the real nature, and permanence, of the war -- the Jihad -- being waged on Israel, and not only, or mainly, through qitaal, combat, or through what the Arabs consider to be a justified variant of qitaal, the killing of innocents through terrorism -- like to take consolation in that famous phrase from silver-tonqued Abba Eban.

What is that phrase? Oh, it's about how "the Arabs never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity." But what consolation is that? This means that again and again the Israelis have offered grotesquely generous and dangerous concessions, and the Arabs, again and again, have saved the Israels -- just as the people of Israel have been granted a temporary reprieve thanks to Olmert's petty greed (those expensive cigars, for example) and the loose tongue of Morris Talansky.

But this complacent quote -- "the Arabs have never missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity" - shows a terrifying misunderstanding of what this means. It means that eventually the Arabs won't miss that opportunity, and Israel, having agreed foolishly to yield so much, will no longer be saved by the bell - - the bell of corrupt leaders, caught by the police, or the bell of the Arabs who will always manage, so it is fondly believed, not to "miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity."

No, that will stop. And unless common sense breaks in, unless Israel's ruling elite recognizes the permanent threat, the threat that can only be understood if you allow yourself to understand the meaning, and menace, of Islam, some day Israel will not be saved by any bell.

And that will be that.

It is not just wrong, but getting wierd, what Olmert is doing. And the ever dutiful Israeli's sit and watch. We are no better in our actions with Islamic people. Our leaders are signing our death warrant.

It's very sad to see what we're promoting over there.

I can only suggest that people mosey on over to Caroline Glick's blog - she understands most of this - and find out how to give concrete support to a group called The New Guardians of Israel.

And - in our churches, if we are Christians, and to all our politicians, and in letters to the editor, and everywhere else we can, we HAVE to keep making the main point that Hugh is making - that the key to the whole business in the Middle East is Islam, Islam, Islam, the Arab Imperial Religion, that is, the sacralisation and rationalisation of Arab supremacism.

Over and over and over, we have to point out the parallels between the Muslim assault on the Jews of Israel, and the Muslim assault on non-Muslim Filipinos, Thais, and Indians. We can show that the Moros in the Southern Philippines, the Muslims in Southern Thailand (who only came under Thai rule in the first place because their sultan way back when started a jihad against Siam/ Thailand and LOST), and the Muslims in Kashmir are all waging war in precisely the same manner as are the Arab Muslims in and around Israel.

But also, no matter how much people we meet may try to deny it, in relation to the Middle East front of the Third Jihad we have to focus attention, relentlessly, on that extra-special degree of venomous hatred that Islam - Qur'an-Sira-Hadith Islam - inculcates, in Muslims, toward Jews qua Jews. Muslims, many many Muslims, have hated, oppressed, hunted, and repeatedly mass-murdered Jews, in every place where Muslims have dominated, through all the long centuries that preceded the re-foundation of the Jewish state of Israel on what all historically informed people *know* to be Jewish traditional land peppered with all the most important Jewish Sacred Sites.