Abu Mazen (Abbas) is consistently put forward as a 'man of peace.' This is the same man with a phd in Holocaust denial as well as his funding of the 1972 Munich massacre. This is why I do not believe it wise to empower such a man.
What I am at a loss over is why people like Khaled Abu Toameh are not empowered by Israel. There *are* good Arab Israelis and Palestinians, and they are marginalized not only by Fatah/Hamas, but also by an Israeli government that does not send aid their way. If there is *any hope* for peace, it is NOT through Fatah or Hamas, it is through men like Khaled Abu Toameh. To that extent, I agree with some of the antizionists which hold that the Palestinians are in the position they are in because of Israel. No, directly, they are not, but Israel did help enable this to happen through a misguided idea that sending guns/weaponry to the worst elements of Palestinian society somehow will make the Palestinians more peaceful or moderate.
The root of the problem is Oslo, which placed power in the worst of the worst, Yassir Arafat. This man was not elected, and prior to Oslo, he was marginalized. Shimon Peres was an architect of Oslo, and he is at his old tricks again today.
There are good Palestinians, and as long as Israel deludes itself into thinking an Arafat or an Abbas are part of the "good" Palestinians, there can never be peace. Thus, if one wants to achieve 'peace' in Israel, the first and most necessary place to start is to STOP favoring one group of terrorists over another, and to START looking at parties who actually are truly moderate, and backing them. If none such parties exist at present, then DO NOTHING. By all means, DO NOT send aid to those who wish to genocide Jews. Let the terrorists duke things out themselves, as their disagreement does not concern Israel. WAIT for a truly moderate party to arise!
Moreover, I had some thoughts earlier today. When Israel gives up land, I believe that the Arab response is to think that NO ONE would willfully just GIVE UP land that was lawfully their's. Thus, not only does giving up land make Israel look weak, it ALSO makes it seem as if the land was illegally held to begin with! (as anyone holding land LEGALLY would NEVER give it up without fighting to the death for it) When Israel gives up terrorists it is holding prisoner, I believe the Arab response is to see this as confirmation that the terrorists were 'political prisoners' to begin with, since surely NO ONE would be willing to let killers out to the streets to kill again.
Thus, all these measures which are supposedly done to further 'peace' are in fact doing the opposite: they ensure there will be perpetual war.
8 comments:
That is SUCH a great point! The problem is, however, that the "international community" and many JEWS actually believe that the land is possessed illegally, having no knowledge of history nor desire to learn.
Irina,
I agree. This is the crux of the problem. We have to clean up our own shop prior to hoping to clean anyone else's.
Very early education is the key. (College ed is only good for people who are open-minded and willing to learn their own history).
RT
You have just explained why the pali prisoners should simply disappear into the limbo of maximum isolation; no one in, and no one out.
And why, for every rocket or bomb that explodes in Israel, a "settlement" should be build in Judea.
Spot on. Why do we never hear this in the media?
Israeli land is legally possessed, and the State itself has a firm basis in morality and internation law; those are not the issues.
The real issue (why there is no peace), is the West's failure to recognize the true goal of the Islamist forces:
the absolute subjugation of non-muslims everywhere.
There can be no "negotiation" with that, as any compromise is inherently unacceptable to the Islamists. It's not "the occupation," or "the Zionist entity" that angers them; it is the mere existence of non-muslim self rule.
The Islamists want to take the Roman military axiom ("Make a solitude, and call it peace") for their own; the only victory possible against that is to make our own solitude.
Anonymous:
we never hear this in the media, because too much of the media is owned by the enemy.
CNN, for example, is mostly owned by the Saudi royal family.
Michael:
The real issue (why there is no peace), is the West's failure to recognize the true goal of the Islamist forces:
the absolute subjugation of non-muslims everywhere.
There can be no "negotiation" with that, as any compromise is inherently unacceptable to the Islamists. It's not "the occupation," or "the Zionist entity" that angers them; it is the mere existence of non-muslim self rule.
So well said! You are always very eloquent.
we never hear this in the media, because too much of the media is owned by the enemy.
CNN, for example, is mostly owned by the Saudi royal family.
What is amazing is this was all prophesized in one of my all-time favorite movies, Network.
Post a Comment