Rage and Unreason--A death cult shuns Trump's Deal of the Century

It is a sudden reaction, as in “road rage.” It is not planned and it is not controlled.

Hence, you cannot plan a day of uncontrolled anger due to a sudden reaction and call it a “Day of Rage.” Mahmoud Abbas of the so-called Palestinian Authority called for a Day of Rage in response to U.S. President Donald Trump's “Deal of the Century” -- which would gradually give Abbas' people a state alongside Israel in as much as 70% of the lands which Israelis term “disputed” and the Palestinians and their supporters term “occupied.”

This was not the first Day of Rage by Abbas. Liat Collins in The Jerusalem Post writes: “Sadly, instead of looking ahead to a brighter future, the Palestinian leadership seems determined to look back in anger, one day of rage after another.”

When such a reaction of rage is done by a child, we often call it a “tantrum.” A tantrum does not help the situation. After the tantrum reaction finishes, it is time to “reason.”

But the Palestinians under Abbas, backed as they are by European and American members of what we might call the “Leftist-Islamist Alliance,” see no reason to reason. With a history of using terrorism against civilians and a position that their goal is not a Palestinian state alongside Israel, but one in place of Israel, with an Islamist ideology that no Jews should live in lands ever controlled by Muslims, they decline negotiations, and decline peace deals, whether proposed by Israelis ranging from Rabin, Olmert and Barak or from the Israeli/American effort proposed by President Trump and his son-in-law Jared Kushner. They see that terrorism has brought them more success in the West whose anti-Semitism appears in the long term to tolerate their maximalist aims.

Yet now even as so-called “progressives” like Bernie Sanders side with the terrorists, empathy for terrorism and incitement of their young to martyrdom through jihadist suicide bombings, is falling away from the least expected quarters: Saudi Arabia, the Emirates and even Egypt have responded with interest to the “Deal of the Century.” In the age of an aggressive Iran carving up the Middle East with its proxies in Iraq, Syria, Yemen, southern Lebanon and Gaza, the Sunni kingdoms and dictatorships are looking entirely differently at Israel, the high-tech, high-culture bastion of western values in a very rough neighborhood. They have more pressing concerns than supporting the latest rage-filled tantrum of the Palestinians. They have chosen reason over rage.

President Trump in several moves has used his deal-making “reason” to change the Mid-East paradigm. Firstly, the assassination of Solemeini demolished the myth of Iranian power to do whatever it wants. Secondly, we have the American withdrawal from the deeply-flawed, Obama-led deal with Iran, which would permit nuclear weapons within a decade or so to a country that has vowed to use them against Israel. Thirdly, in a deal which would provide the framework for a demilitarized Palestinian state which would receive some 70% of historic Jewish lands in Judea and Samaria (the so-called “West Bank”), the Palestinians have four years to apply reason, not rage, and negotiate the terms of their state, which would have a capital in a suburb of Jerusalem. The fact that Israel would be given security guarantees and control of airspace and such can hardly be criticized given the history of Arab-started wars and terrorism against the Jewish State.

Robert Spencer, writing in Frontpage Magazine recently, reminds us of the role that Islam plays in the unreason concerning Jerusalem and rest of the historic Jewish lands:

Abe Greewald writes in Commentary magazine that the refusal of Mahmoud Abbas to participate in this peace plan with its many open-ended provisions to be negotiated by the parties themselves is what gets to the “heart of the matter.” He states:

Abbas pays pensions to the parents of terrorists who have killed Israeli children, and names streets after said terrorists. This is not the result of rage. It is a carefully planned and controlled abuse of his people. American supporters of the Leftist-Islamist alliance must realize that even the Sunni kingdoms understand this, and therefore these “progressives” are not progressive at all; they support the historical abuse of the so-called Palestinians by their own leaders who plan a faux rage as part of their perpetual public relations campaign, which has helped them in the immoral United Nations and European Union, but not a whit among their Muslim neighbors.

It is very significant that the Palestinian people are choosing against their supposed rage. If the people are not buying into their supposed rage, their supposed uncontrolled anger, then the leadership can be seen to be in trouble, as rage and terrorism seem to be the only political action that they undertake. The last two Days of Rage are instructive in this regard.

However, it is important to state that Gaza, under Hamas, is much more successful in staging demonstrations, and we have seen protests turn into riots. I have written about them at FrontPage Magazine.

This could mean that the radical terrorist leadership in Gaza is more successful among the people precisely because it does not pretend to be anything else than leaders of a terrorist army, and is not encumbered with Western support as Abbas is. Abbas, now in his mid-80s, must decide whether his legacy will be that of steering his people to a negotiated state with due compromise or a paving of the way for Hamas to also take over the so-called West Bank once he dies.

Accordingly, in Hamas-ruled Gaza, the Times of Israel reports that thousands of Palestinians protested there just ahead of the release of Trump’s peace plan later in the day.

But as to the so-called West Bank after the release of the plan, Canada’s National Post reports that “few demonstrators actually took to the streets despite Palestinians’ broad rejection of Trump’s proposal, a gap between rhetoric and delivery that exposes the scale of the challenge their leaders face in pressuring the United States and Israel.”

But the leadership under Abbas, in the absence of rage or reason, is opting for a complete shunning of Israel, even dropping its security cooperation between security forces. The Jerusalem Post reports on February 1^st that Abbas announced that he has decided to sever all relations with Israel and the U.S. in protest against President Trump’s plan for Mideast peace.

If Abbas continues his position against negotiating any Palestinian state if it is alongside a Jewish State in Israel, and that he would rather completely shun both Israel and America, he will continue the Palestinian embrace of death and unreason.

“Palestinians” ?
WRONG !
They are "Syrians" ... because that's where they were kick out of.
But Syria couldn't put up with them.
So Syria kicked them out.
Israel had them rounded up in Lebanon and put them on a ship.
But no Arab country would take them.

Remember this ?PALESTINIAN PEOPLE DO NOT EXIST Published: 07/11/2002 " ... So, despite the fact that conventional wisdom has now proclaimed that there is such a thing as the Palestinian people, I’m going to raise those uncomfortable quotations made by Arafat and his henchmen when their public-relations guard was down. Way back on March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview with Palestine Liberation Organization executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here’s what he said: The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct “Palestinian people” to oppose Zionism. For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan. That’s pretty clear, isn’t it ? It’s even more specific than Golda Meir’s statement. It reaffirms what I have written on this subject. And it is hardly the only such statement of its kind. Arafat himself made a very definitive and unequivocal statement along these lines as late as 1993. It demonstrates conclusively that the Palestinian nationhood argument is the real strategic deception – one geared to set up the destruction of Israel. In fact, on the same day Arafat signed the Declaration of Principles on the White House lawn in 1993, he explained his actions on Jordan TV. Here’s what he said: “Since we cannot defeat Israel in war, we do this in stages. We take any and every territory that we can of Palestine, and establish a sovereignty there, and we use it as a springboard to take more. When the time comes, we can get the Arab nations to join us for the final blow against Israel.” ... " And don't forget this article which also documents Zahir Muhsein's statement :ORIGINS OF THE PALESTINIAN NARRATIVE Posted by Timothy Benton, Feb 14, 2019 " ... What is found in the files are four main points: The PLO and the Palestinian Narrative was dreamt up by the KGB, which had a penchant for ‘liberation’ organizations.” — Ion Mihai Pacepa, former chief of the Foreign Intelligence Service of Romania. “First, the KGB destroyed the official records of Arafat’s birth in Cairo, and replaced them with fictitious documents saying that he had been born in Jerusalem and was, therefore, a Palestinian by birth.” — Ion Mihai Pacepa. “[T]he Islamic world was a waiting petri dish in which we could nurture a virulent strain of America-hatred, grown from the bacterium of Marxist-Leninist thought. Islamic anti-Semitism ran deep… We had only to keep repeating our themes — that the United States and Israel were ‘fascist, imperial-Zionist countries’ bankrolled by rich Jews.” — Yuri Andropov, former KGB chairman. As early as 1965, the USSR had formally proposed in the UN a resolution that would condemn Zionism as colonialism and racism. Although the Soviets did not succeed in their first attempt, the UN turned out to be an overwhelmingly grateful recipient of Soviet bigotry and propaganda; in November 1975, Resolution 3379 condemning Zionism as “a form of racism and racial discrimination” was finally passed. ... "

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.