Hopefully someone should get this woman better information. she is a very smart lady, but l think her own life's struggles has clouded her reasoning with the myth of a peaceful religion called islam.
send Hugh over to the State Department! l would love to be a fly on the wall for that one!

Posted by: ZenaWarriorPrincess at October 29, 2006 7:58 AM

Condi isn't stupid. She is just being "politically prudent". I mean she can't come to them and say: "F... you, terrorist supporters", can she?"

This is a nice little terrorist sing along for people who think it's all about "rights".

Posted by: shlemazl at October 29, 2006 8:06 AM

Condi is being 'prepped' for the next Presidential election. Maybe she's trying to sound 'moderate' to the left so that she has a better chance against OBama? Something is up.

Prediction for next election:

OBama/Clinton

Guliani/Rice or ?/Rice

On another note...Check this out.

http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=20394&Cr=palestin&Cr1=

Posted by: The Goobs at October 29, 2006 8:40 AM

Mother Ecclesiastica, I couldn't agree with you more. Well said.

Posted by: The Goobs at October 29, 2006 8:45 AM

Secretary Rice has no delusions at allabout the Paletinians. She is attempting to appeal to whatever element in Palestinian society that may want peace instead of constant war with Israel whether its 75 Pct. or only 10 Pct of the Palestinians. She knows full well about Hamas and the radical Ideology that drives a large percentage of the Palestinians.

Like the poster above, (shlemazl)states that you just can't come out and call them names and expect to achieve anything with them. Condoleeza Rice is America's chief diplomat and has to somehow make an effort to achieve some stability in the Palestinian community.

Note that after showing sympathy with their plight, and defending the democratic process of an election she goes on to make them aware of their responsibilities within the world community by stating --"the Palestinian people and the international community can hold Hamas accountable. And Hamas now faces a hard choice that it has always sought to avoid: Either you are a peaceful political party, or a violent terrorist group -- but you cannot be both.

Posted by: Mackie at October 29, 2006 8:51 AM

I have begun to read Mr. Spencer's latest work: "The Truth About Muhammad". Secretary Rice should be sent a copy, and it should be required reading in the State Dept's ME Affairs Desk. God help us if we get this wrong! Hopefully, with courageous truth-tellers like Mr. Spencer, we will have a chance.

Posted by: aqvik at October 29, 2006 8:54 AM

Oh, for a candidate that we could support wholeheartedly and not just settle on; someone who would represent our deepest held beliefs of freedom, and liberty and justice for all. Condoleeza Rice will prove to be just another in a long line of mediocre politicians. I wonder what mischief she would create if elected to the highest office in the land?

Her comment that the Palestinians will now be able to hold Hamas accountable is ludicrous. You cannot hold a rattlesnake accountable. It will bite you everytime. There are none so blind as those who will not see.

Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at October 29, 2006 8:57 AM

I don't think the leadership really beleives all this nonsense either. In fact, the bipartisan system in the US has devolved into a smokescreen intended to make the unwashed masses forget that we're being ruled by an oligarchy.

Someone needs to remind the political horsepower that the MSM isn't controlling all the information anymore.

Posted by: Clive at October 29, 2006 8:58 AM

Clive,

We will remind them a week from Tuesday in the U.S., when we'll be voting for senators and congressmen. Unfortunately there isn't much to choose from, but even if we have to vote for the lesser of two evils this will give us a little more time to gather our forces here, educate others and hopefully build an arsenal of intelligent evidence to help people see what it is we are fighting for, and against. The one party may be living a little in lala land while they try to deal with an enemy that wants to kill us, but they won't admit it. But the other party outright hates people like you and me for saying ANYTHING negative about them peace loving Muslims. And them peace loving Muslims are just banking on us voting those folks back into power, since that view of the world helps Islam implement it's longterm goals for our enslavement. So let's not.

Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at October 29, 2006 9:15 AM

I don't think she actually think this, I think she is told to say so because of oil-interests, being more important than the lives of the Jews.

Posted by: DrWolffenstein at October 29, 2006 9:40 AM

Come on Condi! We are sick of sucking up to these terrorist thugs. The palestinians had no state before and since Israel was reconstituted in 1948 (after a couple thousand years of exile from its G-d given land)--the pals decided to play the "we're under occupation" game while the Arab states use them as their proxies to wage war on G-d's people.

The pals will never make peace. I think that eventually this sparating wall solution will be backed by the western nations and we will have the illusion of peace for a short time.

Condi is playing the ostrich, but that is how so much of politics are done--pretend our enemies are really good people and friends. Come on Condi!

Posted by: BB at October 29, 2006 9:50 AM

Isabellathecrusader

I will be working alongside other thinking people on election day, doing my "lesser of the two evils" duty. I simply cannot believe, however, that the greatest seat of intellectual progress in the world, with access to the most advanced intelligence gathering apparatus available, could actually arrive at the kind of misguided conclusions we hear from the current administration. They are being disingenuous with us at some level.

Having said that, the alternative is clearly unacceptable. Also, there may be an ostensibly noble reason for doing so, such as a "we can't have an anti-islamic revolution in this country, so we have to keep the natives in line by skirting the real issue" line of reasoning. In any case, the existence of such a clear disconnect between what is known to be true and what our leadership is saying needs to be clearly and soberly understood.

Posted by: Clive at October 29, 2006 9:57 AM

Walk back the cat.

Walk the cat all the way back to the real problem, which is not the nauseating speech given by Rice, wildly inaccurate and wrong in its every phrase, wrong in its diseased sympathy, wrong in its implied geopolitical calculation.

Whoever crafted this speech with and for her -- was Philip Zelikow now coming into his own? -- and whoever has been bending her ear and making of this dutiful student of Kremlinology, not particularly adept either at Russian history or Russian language (her one attempt to use it in public, while in Russia, led to all kinds of mockery and she won't be repeating that kind of thing), but as far as George Bush is concerned a towering intellect (one understands why he may think that)-- reveals that she still hasn't a clue as to what the immutable geopolitics of Islam are about. Indeed, she has demonstrated not only a belief in various falsehoods -- the entire edifice of the Arab rewriting of the history, cadastral and demographic, of the sliver of territory, that of the Mandate for Palestine, intended by the League of Nations for the sole establishment of the Jewish National Home (without prejudice to the "religious and civil rights" of "other communities" but carefully leaving out the phrase "political rights") -- but in the idea that the local Arabs have in any way, or could in any way, abandon their goal of Jihad against Israel.

Unless this is grasped, unless the difference between Fatah and Hamas is seen only as one of tactics and facade, between those who like Abbas believe, but only out of necessity, in the Slow Jihad, and Hamas that believes, out of ideological firmness, in Fast Jihad, unless the impossibility of Muslims ever accepting an Infidel state continiuing to exist --whatever its size -- on land once possessed by Muslims, then there will no possibility of an intelligent American policy (assuming that the survival of Israel is seen as it should be, as essential to the moral, intellectual, and possibly physical survival of the West) -- nothing will come of this nothing.

Grim recognition of the basis of Muslim jurisprudence in regard to all treaties with Infidel lands would not or should not dishearten. If Rice, or Zelikow, or the others who have exhibited for decades a kind of genius in reverse by avoiding coming to grips with clear Islamic texts and doctrines -- does no one in the State Department have a copy of the Qur'an and Hadith? Does no one have a potted summary of the Life of Muhammad, the Perfect Man? Does no one read the Muslim jurisconsults? Does no one have a CD-Rom of the Encyclopedia of Islam? Does no one have the money -- cannot the American government spring for -- a copy or two of Majid Khadduri's "Law of War and Peace in Islam"? Yes, I know the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan cost a lot, but you can find a copy on Amazon for about $20, so why not give it the old college try, and then once you have the book, skip a reception or photo opportunity or two, or just napping on the damned plane, and actually start to inform yourslves about the one subject you most need to know: the doctrines, the tenets, the attitudes of Islam. And it is not merely a matter of reading, and re-reading, but of making sense of what one reads, of thoroughly assimiliating it, of applying what one reads, or making connections between what one reads, Islamic history, and the present, and the likely future. It means, above all, stopping the grotesque amount of attnetion given to ways to appease Muslims or to pretend that they can be appeased, and to focus instead outside the Middle East, and especially on present and growing threats to the West, through the instruments of Jihad known as Da'wa and dmeographic conquest. What will happen to the armories of the Western countries, what will happen to NATO, in thirty years, or twenty, or even ten, if Muslim populations, if adheretns of Qur'an and Sunna, continue to grow, and grow more powerful and more demanding, and if Muslims are taken into the security services, and the military, and into the inner sanctums of political power? Anything? Nothing?

What someone of Rice's incapacity, aiding and abetting someone of Bush's incapacity, and whisperingly advised by those of similar incapacity, demonstrates in delivering this hideously ill-advised speech, dripping with misconceptions, a farrago of premeditated nonsense, is cause for the greatest alarm. And those who continue to prate, as loyalists to Bush, that "he knows what he is doing" should, at long last, shut up or, still better, distance themselves completely from him and his crew of incapables, beginning but not ending with Rice and her vaporings.

Posted by: Hugh at October 29, 2006 10:09 AM

I was a supporter of ‘Rice for President’ at a family gathering six months ago. Watching her actions recently, I’ve changed my mind. She may be smart, or she may be a product of the system. In either case, it appears that her views on the subject are shaded, perhaps too much, by her own personal struggles and the mindset of today’s Stanford University.

The problem needs to be viewed through the cold prism of history. Leland Stanford would not be praising the Palestinians, for any reason.

Posted by: limes at October 29, 2006 11:02 AM

Miss Rice reminded the activist audience that if she could overcome such tremendous odds to become Secretary of State, Palestinians could achieve their dream of statehood. She based this belief on "the commitment of the Palestinian people to a better future."

Stupid Condi is an embarrassing liability - she should be fired.

[US President Jimmy] "Carter thought Ayatollah Khomeini, a Muslim exile in Paris, would make a fairer Iranian leader than the Shah because he was a religious man. With U.S. support withdrawn, the Shah was overthrown, and the ayatollah returned and promptly proclaimed Iran an Islamic nation. Executions followed. Palestinian hit men were hired to secretly eliminate the opposition so the religious mullahs couldn't be blamed.

Iran's ayatollah then introduced the idea of suicide bombers to the Palestine Liberation Organization and paid $35,000 to PLO families whose young people were brainwashed to attack and kill as many Israeli citizens as possible by blowing themselves up. This inhumane menace has grown unchallenged.

The ayatollah next created and financed with Iran's oil wealth Hezbollah, a terrorist organization that later bombed our barracks in Beirut, killing 241 Marines and sailors. With Iran's encouragement this summer, Hezbollah attacked Israel and started a war that damaged Lebanon and diverted the world's attention from Iran's nuclear bomb program."

~from an editorial, 97 Reasons Democrats Are Weak On Defense And Can't Be Trusted To Govern In Wartime, Investors Business Daily, posted 9/29/06.
http://www.investors.com/editorial/editorialcontent.asp?secid=1501&status=article&id=244423511626964

Posted by: Malinois at October 29, 2006 11:06 AM

What someone of Rice's incapacity, aiding and abetting someone of Bush's incapacity, and whisperingly advised by those of similar incapacity, demonstrates in delivering this hideously ill-advised speech, dripping with misconceptions, a farrago of premeditated nonsense, is cause for the greatest alarm. And those who continue to prate, as loyalists to Bush, that "he knows what he is doing" should, at long last, shut up or, still better, distance themselves completely from him and his crew of incapables, beginning but not ending with Rice and her vaporings.

I love it when you talk dirty Mr. Fitzgerald, and truthfully to the point!

A toast!

Posted by: witness at October 29, 2006 11:17 AM

I can understand where Hugh is coming from on this. He is saying that the urgency of jihad's momentum has thrust upon us and our leadership the necessity of abandoning the smoke and mirrors - the lying - that only keeps us from arresting the Muslim strategy of taqiyya and "divide and conquer."

How can we know for certain that people like Condi do not believe their own words? Some give her the benefit of the doubt because she is credentialled and smart. Or, that she is acting out a scripted role as a diplomat - after all, diplomats are not supposed to cultivate conflict.

I think I give Hugh the benefit of the doubt. I know a fair number of smart people who are completely clueless about what Islam is. They never studied its scriptures and could not be bothered to do so, since the religious motivations of our enemies can't be taken at face value. They learned in college that the conflicts with the West really have to do with economic injustice and "grievances." I accuse such people of laziness and arrogance. I have a bachelors' degree and two masters' degrees, and I was humble enough to know that I did not understand with any honest clarity what Islam is all about. I read articles of Robert's, and then bought his books, and then got myself an English translation of the Qur'an (taking the better part of three years slogging through it).

And yet, to be fair to Condi, I have found that I have to be careful when in discussions about Islam. Why? I have to carefully choose how to respond to people who are very dogmatic and emotional about this topic. If I am too blunt and hard-hitting, I risk ending the conversation and being labelled an intolerant bigot. It is not easy trying to figure out how to nudge people into rethinking some small part of their cherished impressions.

It is not easy trying to find a balance between necessary and critical honesty, on the one hand, and trying to not burn bridges and alienate people, on the other hand. I liken it to the role that the analyst has to play in psychotherapy. The patient has to, at some point, be pried away from denial. The trick is finding the right approach to getting him there, so that he stays on course and is not shocked away until such point is reached when he can deal with the shock.

That is why I still strongly believe that the churches and synagogues in our country is CRITICAL in this process of educating people about what Islam really teaches. In those settings it is o.k. to not relativize or "morally equivalize" and people are used to frankly discussing religious beliefs.

Posted by: FredIsinglass at October 29, 2006 11:33 AM

It just goes to show that almost anyone can get an advanced degree or two in America, unless of course he or she actually thinks for himself or herself. Just parrot whatever nonsense the tenured professors espouse and voila--a PhD. Smarts, which everyone seems to think Condi has in abundance, have absolutely nothing to do with it.

I'd like to ask Condi just one question: Why exactly do you think the Palestinians haven't declared a state already? As Mother Ecclesiastica has pointed out, the Palestinians have been given every opportunity and every conceivable resource to create a prosperous and viable nation-state, so what's stopping them?

If she wants to visit the Middle East, she should ask to be shown what remains of the several greenhouses the Israelis left behind when they departed Gaza. Her struggles as a poor black growing up in Birmingham were no doubt similarly the result of her fellow blacks converting all their resources to bomb-making, leaving nothing for her to eat.

Yeah, she's a genius.

HAID

Posted by: Haid Dasalami at October 29, 2006 11:36 AM

That about ends her hopes of ever becoming the President. I never thought she had a chance anyway. Does she think she is going to score points for comparing Alabamans to
Paleostinians? This woman is considered smart? Wow, that smart guage must have been reengineered at some point. Everything that is going on in the world and this is what is important to her? Hey people in Washington, we Americans care about our kids future first. Don’t like it, then go and live with your pals. I am sick of the people of this country being smeared by Academics, who hand out worthless pieces of paper informing the recipients that they are indeed smart. Shut up Fredo! She now has as good a chance as the average mackerel at winning the Presidency. The world has changed since 9-11 and they haven’t. And that ain’t smart! I can only assume that they want to keep us quiet until America becomes more like France or they want us all to become slaves. Sorry to say it but some people never learn. Hey I have an idea, we are fighting global jihazi who think women are meat, so lets have a woman negotiate with these jihazi, we should get a lot done that way. BTW I am smart so take my idea seriously please.

Posted by: tgusa at October 29, 2006 11:50 AM

Look Rice has no *real* qualifications to be in the position she was placed in by he Boss. I believe it is quite evident that Bush placed her in this vital role because 1)he likes her, 2)his father likes her,3)she is loyal,4) she is a woman and 5)she is black. She was the Provost at Stanford and is an *expert* on Russian 'affair', BFD. She meets all Bush's needs politically (having a black woman in high position), she is loyal to him and he can 'trust' her, whatever that means. She would be better suited in the position she covets,NFL Commisioner. Fact is her boss offered no correction or diagreement to the statements she made on "Palestine" and he is just as decieved in believing his Road Map to Peace , will ever work. Pure insanity driven by the desire to be the "one" who finally brought "peace" to the Middle East. What a legacy that would be, but it will never happen, but that does not stop the futile push of these decieved individuals including 'democracy' in Iraq.

Posted by: CaptainGrevious at October 29, 2006 11:50 AM

I don't have a clue as to what Condi really thinks as opposed to what she says but, I do know something about how background briefing papers are produced.

From what I observed in the federal research organization I worked for, such papers--either a solo product or, more likely, the work of several individuals--are planned out and staffed at one or more meetings, worked and re-worked in consultation with other analysts and researchers and then reviewed by a section head; if the paper is really important it then goes through several additional levels of review and at each stage things that managers find unorthodox or questionable are rejected. The result;inoffensive pablum and left wing pablum at that.

First off, the people who do the actual work are selected to be "reliable" and not "loose cannons" and any individual that management thinks has loose cannon tendencies (translation=an original thinker, a dolt, not politically correct, a Republican or a conservative) is either not tasked to do the work or their work is very carefully monitored and reviewed. From what I saw from working in my particular agency for several decades, thinking outside the box and certainly thinking outside liberal orthodoxy was not acceptable. So, no matter whether the briefing paper is straight factual information or it is analysis, the whole process very often lends itself to the production of lowest common denominator consensus liberal pap.

Posted by: GaryK at October 29, 2006 12:11 PM

FredIsinglass:

I clearly agree with your opinions on this subject. Hugh has some good points as well, but I believe that Secretary Rice as our chief diplomat cannot come in and openly bad mouth these people who are so deeply intrenched in their collective ideology. There still must remain some wiggle room for an open dialogue no matter how disgusting the person on the couch is.

There will be no reaching the possible moderates in the umma if we continue to polarize them on all fronts, after all they do a good enough job of that with out our help.

President Bush is constantly criticized over the Iraq war because many believe that he is making more and more enemies among Muslims, and yet Secretary Rice throws out a little bit of an olive branch to the Palestinians cause while at the same time letting them know in no uncertain terms that they cannot accept the Behavior of the Hamas regime if they want the support of the world community.

It appears that the president can't win for losing on these points for he's damned if he does or if he doesn't.

Posted by: Mackie at October 29, 2006 12:12 PM

Aren't we supposed to prevent the creation of a terrorist state.By backing the Palestinians and Palestinian statehood aren't we creating a terrorist state.

Posted by: RED at October 29, 2006 12:21 PM

Oh my God , ive just been told in a news forum that this site>>>>>
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/
...is a neo-con misinformation site !
How could i have been so blind !

Posted by: aladdinsane57 at October 29, 2006 12:40 PM

We have to worry about polarizing them? How about us, we are feeling damn polarized here. They have had years to moderate, they haven’t they don’t want to. Some may be moderates now but will they change their minds? People do that sometimes. And what is a moderate? An Apostate, a person who doesn’t understand, is not properly following the ideology. Will a moderate tell an extremist to knock it off? I highly doubt it. This moderate battle, if it ever occurs needs to be between them. The Pres gets criticized for Iraq? You bet he does. There are three main groups regarding Iraq, One wants to get out, never wanted to go in the first place. The second thinks the Pres. plan is going to work.
The third is pissed about the conduct of the war and want over whelming force applied to finally bring it to a close and get out. There are also three viewpoints on the bigger issue, islamic jihad. One wants us to lose. Two wants us to spread democracy. Three thinks they are like the snake in the Garden of Eden and cannot be trusted. C’mon we have seen the way they treat women, children, animals, the environment, non-muslims. We understand their beliefs, their laws and how they desire to live. We might as well be from different galaxies, there is absolutely nothing we can agree on can you not see that? There are other points of view but those I listed are the big three. Here are your moderates.
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=23135_American_Couple_Has_Close_Encounter_with_Sharia_in_Malaysia&only

Posted by: tgusa at October 29, 2006 1:37 PM

Mackie--There's no "wiggle room" with the jihad.

Posted by: scaramouoche at October 29, 2006 1:47 PM

We know how their intrenched ideology works, we read about every day,we see it every day, and it probably is not ever going to go away and yes please keep it out and don't ever bring into my neighborhood.

But the fact is that they are there whether we like it or not, we should not appease it on our own home turfs, but we still have to deal with it.

Yes we understand their disgusting Ideology of hate that permeates a great deal of its core not to mention the 36 articles of the Hamas charter that they claim is now locked in stone.

Maybe if there was a Palestinian State then it would make it easier to hold the entire state accountable for all its actions.

Yes they should be castigated at every turn for their ever constant messages of hate and support of any terrorist actions of which Secretary Rice made very clear in her speech to the American Task Force on Palestine.

Posted by: Mackie at October 29, 2006 1:59 PM

scaramouoche:

I know it seems like it sometime but the Islamic World (umma)is not one great big jihad as even Robert Spencer would agree.

Posted by: Mackie at October 29, 2006 2:02 PM

"It is not easy trying to find a balance between necessary and critical honesty, on the one hand, and trying to not burn bridges and alienate people, on the other hand. I liken it to the role that the analyst has to play in psychotherapy. The patient has to, at some point, be pried away from denial. The trick is finding the right approach to getting him there, so that he stays on course and is not shocked away until such point is reached when he can deal with the shock." ~from FredIsinglass' post above

Truth that is given is Truth that cannot be discovered and that makes all the difference.

As a teacher I had to learn to not only access each student's current level of knowledge but also their preferred learning style, before I could develop a strategy that resonated with their interests and values. Among my close group of friends, none are as knowledgeable about Islam as I, which isn't much, ( I place myself somewhere between 1st and 2nd grade, but one sure way to learn a subject is to teach it), but I'm quite comfortable with capitalizing on their biases. With one friend, I focus on the threat to Christianity, with another the threat to western secular values and with another the threat to physical safety. A story here, an example there, a Fitzgerald or Fjordman essay emailed, a book left behind and pretty soon they're reading and coming up the learning curve and discovering the truth for themselves.

Posted by: Malinois at October 29, 2006 2:05 PM

Traditionally, the solons at the State Department have always had their collective heads up where the sun doesn't shine. Infinite faith in the power of diplomacy plus a fuzzy understanding of what motivates other nations is a sure-fire equation for botched foreign policy.

Posted by: prman at October 29, 2006 2:25 PM

Excellent editorial in my Austin, Texas Sunday paper by Kathleen
Parker, The Orlando Sentinel.

Excerpts:

"The Muslims* who wage war against the West are no less certain of their cause than were the Ku Klux Klaners who bombed black churches. . .

It seems that every generation is doomed to test itself or be tested, and evil is ever resourceful. The trick is recognizing evil for what it is, and having the courage to face it down.
Southern white Christians abdicated their moral responsibility and demonstrated their cowardice and complicity by allowing Klansmen to hijack their religion and terrorize blacks in the name of their Jesus. If Muslims want theirs to be taken seriously as the religion of peace they claim it to be, they will have to marginalize and condemn those they insist have hijacked their religion.
Otherwise, history will judge them as we have judged our own. In the final analysis, good people do not turn away."

*The Austin paper used the word Muslims in a bold
subtext box. The linked story here reads: religious fanatics

http://www.gwinnettdailypost.com/index.php?s=&url_channel_id=36&url_article_id=20817&url_subchannel_id=&change_well_id=2

Posted by: Malinois at October 29, 2006 2:32 PM

FIRST, SCHLEMAZL'S "KID'S SING ALONG" VIDEO SHOULD BE REQUIRED WATCHING FOR ALL PEOPLE OF THE WEST. Savage has said well, "KNOW THY ENEMY!" Face it. Like the beheadings, face it.

If you want to understand what is wrong--why this mess exists with "Palestine" and even the entire Israel/Arab world conflict--You have to see that "Palestinian rights" becomes the cause celebre and also the toxic vent that poisons the air. In 1948 when Israel was chartered as a nation again--the surrounding nations told their squatters to leave (there was no NATION of palestine--duh). Of course you all know how many attacks they have launched on Israel so far--only to LOSE every time.

We all must face that Islam ITSELF makes it so ALL Moslem nations will hate Israel due the "Jew hating" doctrines of the quran (puke be upon it)--Don't think they are any different in Egypt--they hate Israel too.

So Condi, when you come back from this fairy tale land of palestinian rights we can get down to business--how to deal with these murderous thugs --yes thugs--their constitution calls for the destruction of Israel and they have popularly elected Hamas--a terror party.

Sucking up Condi--why? Who are you appealing to? Mackie posts:

".... the Palestinian people and the international community can hold Hamas accountable. And Hamas now faces a hard choice that it has always sought to avoid: Either you are a peaceful political party, or a violent terrorist group -- but you cannot be both."

showing Condi's possible "logic."

Well Mackie, by that reasoning, we now set up a summit meeting with Al Queda too. I'm sure we can all get along -- .."we know how rough it is being misunderstood all the time. We feel yo pain."

We all watched that hive of popular Jew haters that dumped Arafat's rotten body in that hole facing toward Jerusalem with his mission fully in tact--NEVER MAKE PEACE--PRETEND, LIE, WHATEVER (HIJACK, KIDNAP, HOMICIDE BOMB...YOU KNOW THE PLAY BOOK FOLKS). You all know he told them to re-bury him in Jerusalem after they retake in the future.

Condi, can we all get along? You really let us down here.

Posted by: BB at October 29, 2006 2:33 PM

I really don't see the comparison to her personal life, and the analogy is a total stretch. There really isn't anything in this woman's rhetoric or actions that indicate to me that she has a clue about the region's history or ideology to warrant any confidence.

An egghead fascination with the Soviet Union does not translate into an effective diplomat for progress in the Middle East. In my mind she is just another PR lackey.

Posted by: amana39 at October 29, 2006 2:55 PM

Frankly, I was very offended by Rice's speech to that Arab group ["palestinian task force" or whatever it's called]. Her speech was a threatening premonition of more bad news to come. It definitely was a pro-terrorist speech in that it tended to whitewash the Hamas. It was something like, If you'll only be good boys from now on, I'm gonna give you some nice goodies to eat and play with. Just please be nice.

Rice's comparison of the Hamas struggle with the Black civil rights movement was especially outrageous. The Hamas, as a branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, does not believe in principle in civil rights or equality for non-Muslims, not for Jews anywhere or for Copts in Egypt, for Hindus in Pakistan, or Swedes in Sweden [unless they convert], etc. Throughout the history of Arab-Muslim rule and political power in the Middle East and North Africa, the Jews were a subject people [dhimmis]. In fact, the position of Jews in Arab-Muslim society grew worse over time, as did the position of the Christian subject peoples. So if there is a parallel to the plight of Blacks in American society before the Civil War and afterwards, when the jimcrow system was imposed, then it is the plight of the dhimmis, including the Jews, including in the Land of Israel, which the Arabs never saw as a separate country under any name. If there is a parallel to the civil rights movement for social equality, then it is Zionism, which, under the bigoted conditions of Muslim society, was and is the only way for Jews to have social equality in the Middle East.

Now, as far as the "palestinian" Arabs wanting a state of their own, that too is false. Just read the PLO Charter. The first article of the Charter is a Pan-Arab statement: The Palestinian Arab people is part of the Arab nation and Palestine is a part of the Great Arab Fatherland [or Homeland, if you like]. That formulation goes back to 1969, if I recall rightly. It indicates that the "palestinians" so-called, at the very beginnings of the PLO, wanted to be part of a Pan-Arab state, not a separate state of "palestinians," since they do not really believe in a separate, distinct "palestinian people." Since 1969, they have moved back, it seems, to their old Pan-Islamic loyalties through their loyalty to Hamas, not that Fatah was really that far away from Islam, except for public relations purposes.

Posted by: Eliyahu at October 29, 2006 3:32 PM

Am disappointed at Condi's latest comments-had high hopes of this lady after her frightful predecessor,the very DIM Albright.In Huntingdon's book,he explains the danger of putting Western values & perceptions on people who don't have 'em [and likely as not NEVER will].Am sure the Black Americans of Birmingham don't blow themselves up & others in order to have their own American State.Regardless of past wrongs these folk are willing to follow American
laws and have FULL INTEGRATED INTO AMERICAN SOCIETY.Some Jews [and I'm not just speaking of the very rich Chomsky who has made a fortune
like Moore of being 'Liberals] have fallen into the same trap of equating themselves with 'Muslim
victims'.It was a Jewish firm who made out Bosnian Muslims were victims of Hitlerlike Genocide by Demon Nazi Serbs-and very successfully too so the world believed the number of Dead in Balkans was 200,000 when in REALITY it is 100,000,A THIRD OF THIS NUMBER SERBS!Also the fact that in WW2, Bosnian Muslims
killed 12,000 Jews there was completely
ignored.As truth often is in the service of Propaganda.

Posted by: Morgane at October 29, 2006 3:33 PM

Mackie--Sigh. With whom do you suggest the Israelis "negotiate"? With Hamas, the Jihadists in Gaza now in the pocket of the Jihadists in Teheran? With Abbas, the "moderate" who has the same goal as Hamas, but who prefers a go-slow approach that would find more favour with (and bamboozle) the "international community"--and who, in any case, has absolutely no clout? With those peace-minded Palestinians--all, what? half dozen of them--who would likely earn a bullet between the eyes or a slashed throat for daring to step forward?

The ummah may not be one solid hotbed of jihad--I never said it was--but it is all more or less united on the issue of Israel. It wants it gone. Period.

Sorry, but despite Condi's good intentions, I can't see any discernable "wiggle room." To me it sounds like more Foggy Bottom blather about "winning hearts and minds" that can never--and will never--be won.

Posted by: scaramouoche at October 29, 2006 3:49 PM

1)I'd like to see some outrage from Israel regarding Rice's constant pro-terrorist statements.

2)Since Rice has experience with the civil rights movement maybe should quit her job and move to Gaza. There she can share her wisdom with those who seem to need it most.

3)Does anybody in Washington have any idea how much the US looks like Pakistan regarding Israel when Rice makes he stupid statements? If I'm Israel I'd have to question the sanity of this woman.

Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at October 29, 2006 4:24 PM

Malinois,

I read Kathleen Parker's article:

Islam needs lesson from the Klan era

http://www.gwinnettdailypost.com/index.php?s=&url_channel_id=36&url_article_id=20817&url_subchannel_id=&change_well_id=2

Well written and provacative, but fundamentally flawed.

Southerners and 'Good Germans' knew that Christianity was being hijacked by the KKK and the Reich. And for many reasons, they allowed that to happen.

Honest Muslims, in cotrast, know that it is they who've hijacking Islam, and that is being retaken by fundamentalists. And they know that they cannot prevent it.

She also asks: "Forget what Jesus would do. What would Allah do?"

Of course, on a comparative basis, the question should be, "What would Muhammad do?"

I believe that he would lead the fundamentalists.

Posted by: PRCS at October 29, 2006 5:01 PM

Comparing the Palestinian cause to her own civil rights struggle growing up...

A mistaken analog, to be sure. Yet, both struggles have resulted in a dependent people always clamoring for prerogative.

610 * 623 * 732 * 1066 * 1215 * 1453 * 1492 * 1683 * 1848 * 1938 * 1948 * 1996 * 2001

... nothing will come of this nothing.

Go easy on Condi, pu-leeze. She's been associated with any number of fancy finishing schools, very prestigious ones, and nowadays that means being a dumbass. This is the program now.

And, even if a dumbass like Condi had read the requisite books, she'd still believe & behave the same, cuz nowadays mgt means effectuating the fictive, and that's a fantastic thing to do.

So Condi's doing great. It'll be the death of us all, but her self-image is just fine.

Posted by: Alarmed Pig Farmer at October 29, 2006 6:18 PM

Condi may be wrong every once in a while, but she's easy on the eyes...

Uhmm, I'm sorry, I got distracted, what was she saying???

http://doctorbulldog.wordpress.com

Posted by: Doctor Bulldog at October 29, 2006 6:27 PM

Mackie writes:

But the fact is that they are there whether we like it or not, we should not appease it on our own home turfs, but we still have to deal with it.

So we (Americans) should not appease Islamic militancy here in the US but rather, for reasons of expediency and realpolitik, force the Israelis -- a tiny and vulnerable population living on a threadwidth strip of land surrounded by 400 million barbarians -- to appease Islamic militancy on their soil.

The Bush administration is not simply paying lip service to the Palestinian Arabs in an effort to reach those mythic moderates who truly want peace. It has -- since Bush's 2002 Rose Garden speech in which he first called for a Palestinian state -- systematically sacrificed Israeli interests, security, and lives to buy the goodwill of the Arab oil states, particularly Saudi Arabia.

The Palestinian Arabs are not like some mildly neurotic patient on a couch requiring just a bit of Eriksonian client-centered therapy to restore their self-esteem so they can quickly return to their "old selves" and build a healthy productive society. They are a deeply disturbed people, mired in a sick, primitive, death-worshipping culture and steeped in violent hatred for Jews and Christians. A psychologically prudent prognosis would be paranoid schizophrenia and an appropriate treatment regimen, the addition of thorazine to the water supply and millions of straightjackets.

The Palestinian Arabs do not need coddling and confidence-building measures, billions of dollars in foreign aid, and pep talks from our Secretary of State comparing their "struggle" to that of America's founding fathers. They need to be frisked -- all of their sharp objects confiscated -- isolated and shunned until normal human conditioning kicks them in the head and they realize that only a dramatic shift in their own behavior will release them from their self-imposed bondage.

Posted by: Charles Martel at October 29, 2006 6:40 PM

Condi's statements strike me as so weird we may as well be in the Twighlight Zone. And if they are honest statements, they can only be a distillation of the utter incompetence of the State Department's groupthink. Part of me wonders, given the patent flattery those remarks convey, if they really believe those statements. It's as if no one at State has ever read the PLO Charter or the past statements made by Islamic terror organizations' regard for the state of Israel. Her statements also ignore the fact that "Palestine" (an artificial construction of the Ummah to begin with)is, ultimately, a meaningless entity as far as dar al Islam is concerned. It's amazing that State does not understand that Islam does recognize the real durability of the concept of the nation state.

In recent months there definitely has been a bizarre quality about the remarks coming from State Department employees and appointees vis-a-vis the Muslim world. Even its statements regarding Iranian intransigence have been very toned down. Something very strange is going on.

Look, if this is a case of State and the President being cagey, flattering, and trying to preserve some behind-the-scenes "alliances" of convenience, then perhaps they are doing their job to delay the long-run, inevitable clash with all of Islam. Indeed, my belief is that "moderate" Islam is a chimera and a euphemism for "cultural Muslims." We are not, at this time, as a people, ready for this titanic struggle, judging by how internally divided we are. I do not believe Islam is compatible with the values of our civilization. As a Christian, I do not recognize "Allah" as being somewhat congruent with our Creator. All of the "tu quoque" arguments of the Left are truly not valid arguments, since a deep examination of each religion's scriptures do not justify the assumptions of those arguments.

We may not be ready at this time for the nitty-gritty of this decisive struggle for the future of humanity, but that does not mean that we will not get there. It takes time to assemble the proper consensus. Obtaining that consensus is going to take more than five years. We have the truth on our side. The Left and the taqiyya-practicing Islamic apologists can only spin falsehood in so many permutations before they run out of credibility and arguments. I believe that Robert Spencer is representative of the tip of the spear of this intellectual effort. It will bear fruit in time.

You can be assured that our enemies, both Islamic and Leftist, will make far more mistakes than we will make. I have seen more faux pas in their apologetics than sucessful and durable argument. The Islamic terrorists themselves can also be relied upon to overplay their hand at every juncture.

There are segments of our population that will never "get it." But there are still many people who are capable of grasping the import of Islamic scripture and doctrine and they only need to be exposed to it. That project is underway. Let's keep the faith.

In the big picture, Condi's patronizing remarks do not obviate the truth. We are never going to know if she really believes what she says or is simply mouthing carefully crafted contrivances.

Posted by: FredIsinglass at October 29, 2006 7:32 PM

FredIsinglass,
In Re:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/013786.php#c292836

Well said.

Condi's remarks do not obviate the truth, as we are all well aware of Islam's ultimate objectives.

However, in my humble opinion, I think that as an official representative to the United States, she must use prudence in her attempt to conciliate the Arab world. And, as such must overlook certain truths about Islam.

While I am not a champion of apotheosizing the Jihazis' political credibility through negotiations, I do understand the necessity of maintaining a visage of cooperation. Else, the United States risks alienating countries that can become allies in the war on terror.

“America's credibility must not be squandered, especially by its leaders” (Henry A. Kissinger)

Now, I don't quite fathom all of the complexities of politics, but this just seems to make the most sense to me...

http://doctorbulldog.wordpress.com

Posted by: Doctor Bulldog at October 29, 2006 8:42 PM

Here are some more comments by author Jerry Gordon on the speech that Secretary Rice gave to the American Task Force on Palestine on October 12th at a Ramadan dinner.

http://www.israpundit.com/2006/?p=2970

Posted by: Mackie at October 29, 2006 9:04 PM

Mackie,

I read what your link revealed and I am not surprised by this. It was one of my suspicions. And it bolsters my view that right now we are still not the strong, united front against jihad that we need to be. We are a divided country that is still dependent, to a certain extent, on Mideast oil. However, if we can erode the general ignorance of Islam in this country and also become less dependent upon Mideast oil I think we might just see less patronizing flatulence coming from Washington.

Posted by: FredIsinglass at October 29, 2006 9:18 PM

"What do the "tremendous odds" she overcame, as a Black-American woman, to become Secretary of State have to with Palestinian statehood?"

Need you really ask? The larger percentage of people don't seem to be able to see beyond melanin-content of people's skin. Basically, she sympathises with them because they are darker than the average Israeli. Therefore, they *must* be the oppressed side and have lots in common with African-Americans.

Posted by: Lili at October 30, 2006 2:04 AM

Lili, I don't believe that Condi's skin color or the average Arab or average Israeli skin color has anything to do with Condi's shameless endorsement of another state for Arabs. Condi is just following the standard State Dept policy that has been in effect for many years, although it has only been revealed to the public in stages, like the stages of the PLO Charter. By the way, in 1992, the Israeli Communist Party which had an overwhelmingly Arab voter base, expounded the notion of "two states for two peoples." That is, the Arabs in Judea, Samaria and Gaza would have a separate state from the Jews. Ten years later, that Communist position was endorsed by the president of the United States, GW Bush. But I'm sure that the State Dept already in 1992 --indeed, in 1982-- was pushing for "two states," until the Arabs would be able to finish us off altogether.

Further, skin color is a red herring in the conflict between Israel and Arabs. I don't what exactly is the average skin hue of either Arabs or Jews. But I can say that there is a broad range of skin colors among both. Many Arabs are no darker than I am; indeed many are lighter. Take that Arab gal on CNN, Hala Gorani. She is clearly paler than I am. Many Jews are quite dark, although that is not what you read in the media that tries to confuse public opinion by masking their pro-Arab, pro-Muslim position behind ostensible support for dark people against light-skinned people. I don't think Condi's position in support of another Arab state to be set up in the Land of Israel differs from George W's position, or fundamentally from William Rogers' position in 1969. As for Condi, when she takes up the cause of Blacks in the Sudan against the Arab-Muslim mass murderers, then I'll believe that she cares about Blacks.

Posted by: Eliyahu at October 30, 2006 7:01 AM

sharp,

re: Cal Thomas, Pamela, Dr. Rice

While I’m sure Cal Thomas and Pamela were grossly unfair to Dr. Rice, she did say,

“SECRETARY RICE: Well, you can look at any opinion poll in the Palestinian territories and 70 percent of the people will say they're perfectly ready to live side by side with Israel because they just want to live in peace.”

Dr. Rice provided no citation of the poll(s) she relied upon for her claim. I am not surprised. No such poll(s) exist. Therefore, Madame Rice was being disingenuous, duplicitous, and/or delusional.

If anyone can cite a poll corroborating Madame Rice, please do.

I will now add Pamela and Cal Thomas to the fast growing list of former Republican icons. At the present rate of burn, soon only the President and his inner circle will be left.

Allen v. True Believers

Posted by: allen at October 30, 2006 10:33 AM

This lady plays a mean classical piano. Why doesn't she go back to that??

Posted by: pythagoras at October 30, 2006 8:21 PM

Charles Martel

Palestinian insanity will keep them doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. What may work is what we in law enforcement call "pain compliance."

Posted by: pismopal at October 30, 2006 11:00 PM