Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Staticidal Zealotry [Condoleezza Rice's desperate bid to launch a Palestinian state]
Town Hall ^ | November 20, 2007 | Frank J. Gaffney, Jr

Posted on 11/20/2007 11:54:02 AM PST by Tolik

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is behaving like a zealot. In her ever-more-rash pursuit of a Palestinian state, she is exhibiting the syndrome defined by the philosopher George Santana, as one who redoubles her efforts upon losing sight of the objective.

Let’s recall: The objective laid out by President Bush, when he decided in June 2002 to support the creation of a homeland for the Palestinian people, was to provide a stable, secure neighbor for Israel, committed to leaving peaceably with the Jewish State.

Mr. Bush explicitly preconditioned such support on:

After the 9/11 attacks, the United States was in the business of eliminating terrorist-sponsoring regimes, not creating them.

Now, however, it is crystal clear that the only outcome from Condi Rice’s idée fixe – namely that she will convene a Middle East peace conference at the U.S. Naval Academy for the purpose of extracting from Israel the territorial concessions needed rapidly to establish a Palestinian state – has nothing to do with the original Bush vision. Under present and foreseeable circumstances, the best that can be hoped for from such a meeting is failure. For success will result in a new safe-haven for terror that is a mortal threat not only for Israel, but for the United States, as well.

Unfortunately, even the failure of Condi’s Folly at Annapolis is likely to be a very bad outcome. To the extent that her actions are raising unwarranted expectations on the part of Palestinians and their Arab friends, past practice suggests it will translate into a pretext for new violence against Israel. That will be especially true if, as is also predictable, the Israelis are blamed for the outcome for not being sufficiently willing – in the face of Palestinian intractability – to make what are euphemistically called “painful” moves for peace. Another way to describe such moves are as reckless concessions that are certain to jeopardize Israel’s security, and quite possibly ours.

After all, it is only reasonable to expect the West Bank to follow the trajectory of the Gaza Strip and, before it, southern Lebanon – both of which Israel abandoned to her foes, only to have those territories become staging grounds for attacks on Israel and secure incubators for terror against us. Among those operating from such areas are Islamofascist terrorist organizations like Hamas, Hezbollah, al Qaeda and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, the newest addition to the State Department’s list of such entities.

Condi Rice is nonetheless demanding that Israel now relinquish the West Bank and East Jerusalem to yet another terrorist organization: Mahmoud Abbas’ Fatah. To be sure, the Secretary of State would have us believe that Fatah is no such thing. In fact, the entire Annapolis house of cards is built on the fraudulent foundation that the Palestinian faction established by Abbas’ mentor, Yasser Arafat, is a reliable partner for peace and effective counterweight to Hamas, which now controls the Gaza Strip.

Only a zealot who has altogether lost any sense of reality could make such an assertion. Treating Fatah as the cornerstone of American diplomacy and demands on Israel is nothing less than perilous and irresponsible. Consider the following sampler of recent counter-indicators:

* Last August, five Fatah operatives assigned to Abbas’ security detail conspired to assassinate Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert during a visit by the latter to meet the Palestinian “president” in the West Bank city of Jericho. After their arrest on information from Israel’s internal intelligence agency, Shin Bet, several of these individuals were released by the Palestinian Authority.

* This is in keeping with past practice. By some estimates, Fatah and its Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade have claimed responsibility for the murder of roughly as many Israelis as has Hamas. In those rare instances when the perpetrators are actually arrested by Palestinian police, they are generally set free in short order. How could Israel possibly entrust physical control of the West Bank – from which virtually the entirety of the Jewish State’s population can be subjected to rocket or even mortar fire – to people with such a record?

* Speaking of the Jewish State, in the run-up to the Annapolis meeting, Abbas and his subordinates have lately become quite brazen in denouncing Israel’s right to exist as such. Their statements not only speak volumes about the degree to which Condi Rice’s desperate bid for a “legacy” is now being clearly read as bullies always do: as evidence of contemptible and exploitable weakness. They also make a mockery of the premise that Abbas and Company are preferable to Hamas because, unlike the latter, they are truly willing to live in peace with their Israeli neighbors.

* In fact, only the most willfully blind could maintain such a pretense in light of the incessant propagandizing and indoctrination about killing Jews and destroying Israel that passes for official or at least officially sanctioned broadcasts, sermons and speeches emanating from Abbas’ rump Palestinian Authority.

The only Palestinian state that can possibly come from Condoleezza Rice’s zealotry is one that will be a dagger pointed at the heart of Israel and a new safe-haven for terror aimed at the United States and other Western nations. Even if a corrupt and politically unrepresentative Olmert government in Israel is prepared to play along, Americans who understand the stakes for the Jewish State as well as our own, must reject her desperate and unacceptable bid to launch a Palestinian one at Annapolis.

Frank Gaffney Jr. is the founder and president of the Center for Security Policy and author of War Footing: 10 Steps America Must Take to Prevail in the War for the Free World .

TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Israel; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: frankgaffney; frankjgaffneyjr; israel; rice
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-32 next last

1 posted on 11/20/2007 11:54:05 AM PST by Tolik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Lando Lincoln; neverdem; quidnunc; .cnI redruM; Valin; King Prout; SJackson; dennisw; ...

Nailed It!
Moral Clarity BUMP !

This ping list is not author-specific for articles I'd like to share. Some for the perfect moral clarity, some for provocative thoughts; or simply interesting articles I'd hate to miss myself. (I don't have to agree with the author all 100% to feel the need to share an article.) I will try not to abuse the ping list and not to annoy you too much, but on some days there is more of the good stuff that is worthy of attention. You can see the list of articles I pinged to lately  on  my page.
You are welcome in or out, just freepmail me (and note which PING list you are talking about). Besides this one, I keep 2 separate PING lists for my favorite authors Victor Davis Hanson and Orson Scott Card.  

2 posted on 11/20/2007 11:54:40 AM PST by Tolik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolik
“behaving like a zealot”

I believe it is more like insanity. Doing the same thing over and over, expecting a different result.

3 posted on 11/20/2007 11:57:31 AM PST by edcoil (Reality doesn't say much - doesn't need too)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolik
There is no chance such a plan can be peacefully implemented. To clear the West Bank Of Jews, to make it Judenrein would require the use of force. Jews are not going to leave their homes voluntarily to make life easier for Secretary Rice or Israeli Prime Minister Olmert.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

4 posted on 11/20/2007 11:57:59 AM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
"There she goes again
She's out on the streets again ....."
5 posted on 11/20/2007 12:10:13 PM PST by Diogenesis (Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Tolik

It’s a Legacy thing. She hasn’t been responsible for anything of note as Sec. State and has been out of the limelight.

She’ll try to persuade a willing Ohlmert to give away the store in return for empty promises.

6 posted on 11/20/2007 12:11:41 PM PST by wildbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
"... is exhibiting the syndrome defined by the philosopher George Santana, as one who redoubles her efforts upon losing sight of the objective

How about looking at the time remaining in their Administration and seeing somebody whose goal is to leave the process further along?

It's human nature for any focused person to bear down with a finish line in sight.

And Ms. Rice fits that description.

7 posted on 11/20/2007 12:12:01 PM PST by DCPatriot ("It aint what you don't know that kills you. It's what you know that aint so" Theodore Sturgeon))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Diogenesis
Et Tu, Diogenesis!

Eating prunes again, I see.

8 posted on 11/20/2007 12:13:31 PM PST by DCPatriot ("It aint what you don't know that kills you. It's what you know that aint so" Theodore Sturgeon))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]


By Boris Shusteff

There is a story in Greek mythology about a Phrygian peasant named Gordius who very skillfully tied an ox yoke to his chariot. The legend said that the man who could loosen the difficult knot would become a ruler of all Asia. Many people tried but none succeeded. Finally Alexander the Great cut the knot with his sword, and declared that he had fulfilled the prophecy.

The time is long overdue for Israel to cut the Gordian knot of the Oslo agreement. The more the Israeli leaders try to stick to this self­invented mantra, the more land they transfer to the Palestinian Arabs ­­ the more they obfuscate the truth. And the truth is very simple: if Americans have the right to America, Canadians to Canada, and Australians to Australia, then the Jews have a hundred times more rights to Palestine.

For almost two thousand years Palestine and the Jews were inseparable in the minds of civilized mankind. Palestine, or, as it was called before, Judea, was known to everybody as the land of the Jews. Lord Lindsay wrote in Letters on Egypt, Edom and the Holy Land, published in London in 1847 that, "the Jewish race may once more obtain possession of their native land The soil of Palestine still enjoys her sabbaths, and only waits for the return of her banished children."

American President John Adams confessed in a letter to Mordechai Noah in 1818: "I really wish the Jews in Judea an independent nation." Abraham Lincoln said in 1863 during his meeting with Canadian Christian Zionist Henry Monk that, "Restoring the Jews to their homeland is a noble dream shared by many Americans." Benjamin Harrison, yet another American President, wrote in 1891 that, "It is impossible for one who has studied all the services of the Hebrew people to avoid the faith that they will one day be restored to their historic national home."

The two millennia of continued Jewish presence in Palestine amidst ruthlessness, discrimination, persecution and massacres have no equal in history. It is this heroic and desperate clinging to the Land that convinced the world community at the beginning of this century to give the mandate to Palestine to Britain in order to facilitate the restoration of the Jewish national home.

Two additional reasons were behind this decision. When, in the year 70 AD the Jews lost their independence, their population in Judea numbered between five and seven million people. In the middle of the nineteenth century according to J. De Haas History of Palestine, the Last Two Thousand Years, the estimated population of the whole of Palestine was between 50,000 and 100,000 people. Thus, the Zionist slogan of the country without the people was not an exaggeration.

Another reason was explained by Sir George Adam Smith who wrote in 1891: "Nor is there any indigenous civilization in Palestine that could take place of the Turkish except that of the Jews who have given to Palestine everything it has ever had of value to the world." The absence of the "indigenous civilization" was confirmed by the prominent Palestinian Arab Professor Rashid Khalidi. In the recently published book Palestinian Identity, he wrote, "So profound a transformation of the sense of self of the Arab population of Palestine, which began during the years immediately before World War I, resulted in the emergence of a Palestinian national identity where a few decades before no such thing had existed."

This "sense of self" was discovered by the Arabs through the Jewish ethos. Khalidi quoted a "remarkable article" written in 1919 by no other than Hajj Amin al­Husayni (later to become the Mufti of Jerusalem), who in "an unmistakable reference to Zionism and Palestine argued that the Arabs should take heart from the experience of a people long dispersed and despised, and who had no homeland to call their own, but did not despair and were getting together after their dispersion to regain their glory after twenty centuries of oppression."

Thus, not just the Europeans and Americans, but the Arabs too were well aware of the unique Jewish ties with Palestine. This is why there were no objections on their part when the Jews were called the "Palestinian settlers," the Jewish newspaper was called "The Palestine Post" and the Jewish symphonic orchestra was called the "Palestinian orchestra." The Arabs were the Arabs, and the Jews were the Palestinians. Because of another well known truth, it is outrageous to actually say that the Jews occupied Palestine. The tiny sliver of territory including the lands of Judea, Samaria and Gaza constitutes only slightly more than 20% of historic Palestine.

For an unbiased view of history it is important to look at events at the time when they were not yet marred by political considerations. Nothing can serve this purpose better than browsing through the pages of old books. The book "The Forgotten Ally" written by Pierre Van Paassen, a Dutch born newspaper correspondent, belongs to this category. It was written in 1943 and published by the Dial Press in New York. The author, who came from a family with a long line of Protestant clergymen on both sides, wrote this book at a time when Israel did not exist. To the contrary, the Jewish people was on the brink of extinction. For this reason, the facts presented in this book deserve even greater attention.

One episode is especially relevant to our theme. In spring of 1927 Van Paassen visited the retired French General Sarrail, who prior to his retirement served as a High Commissioner in Syria. Explaining why it was necessary for Britain to elevate Emir Abdullah "to the throne in a country that was arbitrarily detached from Palestine," General Sarrail said:

"That is the significance of making him Emir of Trans­Jordan. Some day the Arabs in Trans­Jordan and Palestine will clamor for a reunion, or be made to clamor for it, which amounts to the same thing. The two countries, now separated arbitrarily, do in fact belong together. They are both Palestine. It is merely that Jordan divides the country into two parts. When the British Colonial Office thinks they are ripe for reunion, it will set the Arabs yearning for reunion. Their separation will be made unbearable."

The seventy two years that have passed since Sarrails prediction have not changed the facts. Palestine is not occupied by the Jews. It is occupied by the Arabs. Almost 80% of Palestine belongs to the Arabs while the Jews are huddling together on a tiny piece of land that they have miraculously managed to preserve. It is not the Jews but the Arabs that usurped Palestine. As it was during the darkest time in their history the Jews are not permitted to live in four fifths of their historic homeland. Every new transfer of land to the Palestinian Authority makes this forbidden territory bigger.

The Arabs are well on their way to making Sarrails prediction come true. The civilized world the British Colonial Office of our days encourages the "Arabs yearning for reunion." If another Arab state is created in Judea, Samaria and Gaza, then, very soon, the Arabs of this new state, the Israeli Arabs, and the Arabs of Jordan "will clamor for a reunion."

As General Sarrail warned: "What can the Jews say if and when the Arabs of the two countries want to reunite? What argument can they have if England demonstrates to the whole world that the Arab claims are legitimate and that if they don't give in to these aspirations there will be trouble?"

The Gordian knot tied around the neck of the Jewish state strangles its more and more. One cannot untie it. The only way to prevent complete suffocation is by cutting the knot. This can only be done through the abrogation of the Oslo agreement and immediate annexation of Judea, Samaria and Gaza. If one says that nobody expects from Israel these kinds of actions then they should be reminded that the expression cutting the Gordian knot means solving a difficult problem in an unexpected way. [1/14/99]


1.Quotes by Lord Lindsay, John Adams, Abraham Lincoln and Benjamin

Harrison are from Eliyahu Tal's book "Whose Jerusalem?"

2. Quote by Adam Smith is from S. Katz's book "Battleground"


Boris Shusteff is an engineer in upstate New York. He is also a research associate with the Freeman Center for Strategic Studies.

9 posted on 11/20/2007 12:16:34 PM PST by SJackson (seems to me it is entirely proper to start a Zionist State around Jerusalem, T Roosevelt, neocon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCPatriot
FRiend, if Dr. Rice had any real interest in honor, she would change her legacy
from a constant supporter of murderers, terrorists, slavers, who has also been relatively silent as Americans are beheaded,
to something with else. Bet it won't happen.
10 posted on 11/20/2007 12:20:00 PM PST by Diogenesis (Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Tolik

“Let’s recall: The objective laid out by President Bush, when he decided in June 2002 to support the creation of a homeland for the Palestinian people, was to provide a stable, secure neighbor for Israel, committed to leaving[sic] peaceably with the Jewish State.”

Who is the editor, proofreader or idiot copyboy who let this go to press as leaving rather than living?

11 posted on 11/20/2007 12:20:15 PM PST by Old Professer (The critic writes with rapier pen, dips it twice, and writes again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dennisw; Cachelot; Nix 2; veronica; Catspaw; knighthawk; Alouette; Optimist; weikel; Lent; GregB; ..
If you'd like to be on this middle east/political ping list, please FR mail me.

High volume. Articles on Israel can also be found by clicking on the Topic or Keyword Israel, WOT


While I don't agree with the author about annexing the West Bank, only those populated and strategic areas, and Gaza is gone, the article in post 9, written in 1999, makes the point that the peace process is and always has been an Arab fraud.

12 posted on 11/20/2007 12:22:37 PM PST by SJackson (seems to me it is entirely proper to start a Zionist State around Jerusalem, T Roosevelt, neocon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: DCPatriot

My biggest disappointment with Ms. Rice is that I actually used to like her, and most importantly - respected her. I can’t comprehend how somebody so smart can be so stupid.

When we have the same complete mutual incomprehension with the Left - like we are living in the parallel universes - I accept that. Our assumptions and way of thinking are so different. They also think that we are crazy. Its OK. With Rice, it should not have happened because she was on our side (somehow, somewhere). Now, if she indeed thinks the way we see it, she flipped into the Utopian leftism that gladly deludes itself with progressive thinking that is practically removed from reality. How did that happen?

13 posted on 11/20/2007 12:24:28 PM PST by Tolik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Tolik

When ego trumps reality.

14 posted on 11/20/2007 12:33:14 PM PST by sageb1 (This is the Final Crusade. There are only 2 sides. Pick one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Salem; F15Eagle; T.L.Sink; American in Israel; M. Espinola; sheik yerbouty; montag813; ...

Mid-East “legacy” for Condi ping!

15 posted on 11/20/2007 12:35:57 PM PST by Convert from ECUSA (A voter wavering between wanting radical change and burning the damn place down)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Old Professer

My most hilarious spell-checker goof was in the work instruction for the warehouse employees to call them whorehouse employees. I caught it myself in the first reading, before distributing, but could not stop laughing.

16 posted on 11/20/2007 12:39:14 PM PST by Tolik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Tolik
I don't see the evidence you're using as a basis to come to those conclusions.

It seems many FReepers are angry with the direction this Administration has governed.

The's become more partisan IMO. There was a day in here when acute criticism of this President wasn't condoned.

17 posted on 11/20/2007 12:42:12 PM PST by DCPatriot ("It aint what you don't know that kills you. It's what you know that aint so" Theodore Sturgeon))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

Comment #18 Removed by Moderator

To: DCPatriot

I am not quite sure what exactly was not clear. Reading your posts I know we are generally on the same page. let me know, please, if I am off base in the following.

Regardless of the criticism of the Administration and Bush personally from the right, we all basically speak the same language. Conservatives, Republicans can argue and understand the argument even when angry at each other.

When we argue with the Left, on many occasions we like speaking different languages. For example, I can’t understand an argument that we need to try again to deal with people who said openly and proved in action that they don’t want to deal with us. For me its insanity. For the Left its diplomacy.

Bush initial handling of the Arafat and Palestinians was in “our language”: demanding accountability for the actions. What happened to that, and why Rice requires no accountability from one side of the divide now - is the subject of my disappointment.

I understand that most of the above is gross simplification, but anyway. Have I clarified the issue?

19 posted on 11/20/2007 1:00:33 PM PST by Tolik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

Comment #20 Removed by Moderator

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-32 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson