No holds barred Caroline Glick on the US Israeli relationship, spies and all.

Hardball with Washington

[Link: www.jpost.com...]

Is my eye botherinYOUR ELBOW?

Didn't Bush once say "You are either with us or the terrorists"?

It looks like Bush is with the terrorists.

Putting the lame in Lame Duck

le sigh

Well said Charles...

re: #5 Shug

Putting the lame in Lame Duck

HAHAHA

Its the pressure of the office. Bush has lost his freaking marbles.

But old obstacles, mainly disputed West Bank settlements, continue to threaten that prospect.

Were that statement true, Gaza would be an oasis of peace in the Middle East.
No Israeli settlements there!
Not much peace either, now that I think about it...

Yes, the settlements. And the fact that Israel is so damned Jewish.

This is- in practice- the most hostile Administration to Israel, ever.

Bush says he’s confident about creation of Palestinian state.

I don't want to hear about creation any more!

re: #1 song_and_dance_man

As disappointing as he's become I'm sorry to see him go. We're in for a bumpy ride.

lol wowwww. they are a problem. but theyre irrelevant in the face of everything else you mentioned.

re: #14 Killgore Trout

As disappointing as he's become I'm sorry to see him go.

Where I, who once thought he would be a great President, can't any more stand the sight of him.

But He got tough with Abbas and asked him to go outside to smoke

/ crackin' down

I hope they get a state, because you know as a state they'd foolishly declare war on Israel and get annihilated. Peace is guaranteed then.

There is no problem in the middle east that a few nukes couldn't straighten out.

Nice User Profile ya got there BIG.

i blame the Amish

It’s those settlements.

...and the hair-rays. Don't forget the hair-rays.

The Palis have a state already. A state that reflects their character, religion, and morality. A state of madness. A state of hell on Earth manufactured solely by themselves and richly deserved. I say let them stay in their lawless hovel. Wall them in and let them eat each other alive.

Oh, and Israel would get -their- land back.

But old obstacles, mainly disputed West Bank settlements, continue to threaten that prospect.

The article seems to attribute the quoted comment above to Bush. Did Bush actually say this, or is this another MSM editorial inserted into the news and falsely made to look as though they came from the mouth of the US President?

re: #19 Geepers

Nice User Profile ya got there BIG.

Yeah man, why don't you tell us what you really want.

LOL!

Lets face it, if the Israelis weren't there the paleos wouldn't be bothering them with rockets and bombs and rock and words and stuff.
They're people of peace, with a religion of peace.

How can you doubt your own president, and a repub to boot.

Let's just give them more money. And a state!

re: #16 opinionated

You may still be correct. This particular piece of idoicy is not likely to be remembered 50 years hence when the stone carvers are at work.

BRUTUS (#24),

The article seems to attribute the quoted comment above to Bush. Did Bush actually say this, or is this another MSM editorial inserted into the news and falsely made to look as though they came from the mouth of the US President?

Gee, the press would never do that.

re: #1 song_and_dance_man

Bush has become a disappointment.

/where are the reaganites?

Sad to say he merely confirmed my initial misgivings.

Charles Johnson for President

yay

Remember: to the "Palestinians," Tel Aviv is a "settlement." Any Jewish footprint on the Land of Israel is a "settlement."

Accepting "settlements" as the basis of the problem--rather than the vicious Arab bigotry which demands concessions of judenrein territory--is tantamount to agreeing that there is no legitimacy to the State of Israel itself.

re: #13 DesertSage

I don't want to hear about creation any more!

Ok, how about:

Bush says he’s confident about creation intelligent design of Palestinian state.

Better?

hey Geeps

even though he must know it’s never going to happen

Sure it'll happen. To an extent, it's already happened. It's called Gaza. Now, a decent Palestinian State? That's another story.

re: #34 freetoken

Bush says he’s confident about creation intelligent design evolution of Palestinian state.

Fixed it

Those disputed West Bank settlements are the root cause of the word "pogrom".

When Muslims in Pakistan chant Death to Israel, it's because of those disputed West Bank settlements.

Argh. I believe the "Iron Fist rule" applies here. See ya.

re: #13 DesertSage

I don't want to hear about creation any more!

Does that include procreation, or only amateur creation?

Hey ploome.

re: #24 BRUTUS

The article seems to attribute the quoted comment above to Bush. Did Bush actually say this, or is this another MSM editorial inserted into the news and falsely made to look as though they came from the mouth of the US President?

Actually, I don't read it as being attributed to Bush. Rather, it's the journo's own "unbiased" reporting.

Would the Palestinian state look any different than Gaza does now?... probably not ...

But...JEWS live there!

pledging that the contours of a Palestinian state can still be reached before he leaves office

I thought clinton fixed all that

re: #42 E.T.

It will be bigger, with more terrorists, larger sanitation issues.

The Palestinian's already have a State or States:

A State of Confusion

A State of Denial

A State of Discord

A State of Destruction

And, how did the West Bank come to be occupied?

Despite Israel's entreaties to King Hussein to stay out of the [6-day] war, Jordan shelled Jerusalem and Tel Aviv on June 5th [1967] and then occupied the United Nations headquarters in Jerusalem. Israeli forces responded and drove the Jordanian forces out of Jerusalem and the West Bank by June 7th.

The heights between Tel Aviv and Jerusalem are strategically important and can't be abandoned until the Arabs accept the existence of Israel. Until then? No, never.

neighborhood bully indeed

The path to peace for a civilized nation invariably goes over the dead bodies of would-be conquerors and their various supporters. And as far as I'm concerned a Carthaginian peace is better than no peace at all.

re: #19 Geepers

Nice User Profile ya got there BIG.

Why thank you. I think you are the very first to ever comment on it.

Hamas refuses to recognize Israel's right to even exist. Hamas won the last batch of elections held by the Palestinians. Every poll shows that Palestinians agree with Hamas policies.

Fatah can barely hold on to what they control in the West Bank - and it would fall to Hamas in a heartbeat if Israel wasn't around wiping the walls with Hamas thugs every day as they stop terror attack after attack.

Bush is doing the same thing every President since Truman has sought to do in their lame duck session - try to make peace in the ME.

It's a fool's errand in the name of legacy building, and in this particular case, it's odious because Bush supposedly got it when it came to dealing with terrorists. It now appears that the Baker boys have been busy working over his foreign policy so that it's little different from Clinton or Bush I. Force Israel to make concession after concession - get the parties to the table and then watch the Palestinians blow everything up in their collective faces as they simply can't help themselves. Terrorism is what they do, and annihilation of Israel is what they seek.

re: #48 slartybartfast

And, how did the West Bank come to be occupied?

The heights between Tel Aviv and Jerusalem are strategically important and can't be abandoned until the Arabs accept the existence of Israel. Until then? No, never.

That'll never happen. Dar al Islam is in play. Their blood swilling moon god craves real estate.

re: #54 stevieray

That'll never happen. Dar al Islam is in play. Their blood swilling moon god craves real estate.

And human blood.

re: #53 lawhawk

Its almost shamanistic... the belief that some sequence of magic words will unlock a treasure trove of hidden good will.

re: #48 slartybartfast
They should never be relinquished. What good is the word of the Palestinians. I would never believe them or give up the high ground.
They should never be trusted, not in our lifetime, anyway. It seems to me like the fox swearing to stay out of the hen house. The Israelis have paid an enormous Price for a long time. They should never give up the Heights.

Charles;
Stop throwing common sense and logic at these issues. You know the left cannot handle that.

I never realized just how badass Israel was during the Six Day War...

The humiliation of the Islamic armies must be felt deeply even today in the hearts of the supremacists.

Hooray!

re: #58 vmi84

Charles;
Stop throwing common sense and logic at these issues. You know the left cannot handle that.

Goodnight lizzards! Sweet dreams to you all........:)

Yep, don't you know - at the moment those pesky Jews are removed from their homes in Judea, the "West Bank" it will become a peaceful paradise. Like it'd happend in Gaza.

re: #26 bubbalouey

Lets face it, if the Israelis weren't there the paleos wouldn't be bothering them with rockets and bombs and rock and words and stuff.
They're people of peace, with a religion of peace.

How can you doubt your own president, and a repub to boot.

They'd be killing each other like they did in Gaza until Hamas won.
Maybe they should have a state, a walled state, and small arms only. Wait for the shooting to stop.

Not the ongoing rocket attacks, not the suicide bombers, not the indoctrination of children, not the idolization of murderers, not the constant barrage of antisemitic propaganda, not the funding from Saudi Arabia for terrorism, not the jihad clerics preaching genocidal hatred.

The AP reporter and the AP editor have no interest actually in peace. That's why these matters are not mentioned.

The road map calls for, in the first stage, "dismantlement of terrorist capabilities and infrastructure". AP seems to be totally ignorant of this. Or if they know about this, they want to hide this from their readers.

Israel must be the only country that won an unjust war against them - an attempted sneak attack against their very existence - and as a result of that war, they are now possessors of territory that "isn't theirs".

Piss on them. Golan, West Bank, etc. It's theirs, and that's how just defense of your homeland works, and has worked in every successful defense against dishonest aggressor forces since the dawn of state-sponsored war, and even before.

Israel is continually justified to run the filth of Gaza right into the Mediterranean to sink or swim, to force the unlawful occupiers of adjacent lands back to their true homelands, and to secure their borders in whatever ways are seen fit. Since the Arab states have never conceded defeat in the war that they lost should not make any difference about what's going on there.

Terrorism in any fashion should not be coddled by any democratic state, but it's their unique geopolitical situation and the gutless cowardice of their strongest allies that constantly puts them in harm's way.

That is not right.

When will The Palestinians have their very own country?

When pigs fly?
When heck freezes over?
When the Cubbies when the World Series?

How about "No, never!"

But not to worry folks, because they don't even want their own country.

re: #1 song_and_dance_man

Bush has become a disappointment.

/where are the reaganites?

I dunno, on the Middle East, what did Reagan do - but pull out of Lebanon, and egg on both Iraq and Iran? And, um, smile at the attack on the Osiraq reactor. I'm really asking. Let's see, 1980s, I guess we delivered the first F-15s and F-16s, modern helicopters and hellfires.

To get to first causes, including the west bank settlements, you have to go back to 1948, to 1918, the pre-Palestinians murdering Jews even then, the history of the Islamic world, and, OK, to Abraham's parenting skills.

Basically, Israel has ALREADY paid in blood, and the Palis can accept that, or fight it out - and so far, they've not paid much price for fighting, and that, in my humble view, is the problem.

Please pass the barf bag.

re: #48 slartybartfast

The heights between Tel Aviv and Jerusalem are strategically important and can't be abandoned until the Arabs accept the existence of Israel. Until then? No, never.

How many of the settlements are on such a line, or generally west of Jerusalem? Maybe some but I thought not that many.

re: #67 Attaboid

Please pass the barf bag.

Your comment is pretty ad hoc. Maybe you'd be so kind as to translate for the simple-minded around here?

How about a Palestinian state in the Dafur region of Sudan. After all, the Arab muslims have killed most of the black muslims so there should be room for fellow psychopaths.

As 3000 Americans lay dead on 9/11, the Palestinians were celebrating and passing out candy in the streets. It is beyond comprehension that President Bush would seek statehood for a pack of terrorists. This administration has some kind of love affair with 7th century Islamic barbarians while claiming to fight a "global war on terror". We need leadership, not a hypocrite in the White House playing the legacy game at the peril Israel. Hamas is a terrorist organization, and they need to go.

First Bush alienated the Left, not through clarity of thought and expression, but through his idiocy. Now, Bush has alienated those who propelled him into office. It's been a long time, but rational people are finally realizing what a disappointment this guy is. His legacy? I wouldn't be surprised if after he leaves office Bush emulates Dhimmy Carter and starts railing against the Jooish conspiracy.

re: #61 norar

Yep, don't you know - at the moment those pesky Jews are removed from their homes in Judea, the "West Bank" it will become a peaceful paradise. Like it'd happend in Gaza.

Hello Nora. I has been a long time since we conversed. I hope all is well with you and yours.

Yes those settlements such as Jenin and Ramallah are major obstacles to peace.

re: #72 Bubbaman

I was going to write what you wrote.

But thinking about the last part, Bush wouldn't be able to pull it off.

Carter first had to rehabilitate the people's opinion of him with Habitat before his opinion would be taken seriously- for a while at least.

What Bush has done will haunt us for a long time. He has been a near complete failure and some of the consequences of his failures have not even matured yet.

He will leave a mess in both foreign and domestic affairs. And there is no Reagan to follow him and clean things up.

Pity the next President. And pity us.

While Bush basks in Saudi rewards.

I'm with the lefties in looking forward to 1/20/2009. Eight years is a long time for any presidency. Although I have a feeling that with the difficulties that will likely go down in the following four years, that the Bush years will look pretty good in retrospect.

re: #71 Kreuzueber Halbmond

As 3000 Americans lay dead on 9/11, the Palestinians were celebrating and passing out candy in the streets. It is beyond comprehension that President Bush would seek statehood for a pack of terrorists. This administration has some kind of love affair with 7th century Islamic barbarians while claiming to fight a "global war on terror". We need leadership, not a hypocrite in the White House playing the legacy game at the peril Israel. Hamas is a terrorist organization, and they need to go.

Bush has set a very dangerous precedent for those who succeed him. I don't expect much from a Mc Lame or Shrilliary Presidency either. Osama at the helm is beyond frightening.

Currently, Israels figures as much for this administration as an elderly grandmother does for Osama Obama. Is it any coincidence that a "spy" for Israel is suddenly arrested some 20+ years after the alleged activity or that Israel's bombing of the Syrian nuclear reactor a year ago is now on the front pages?

Israel is paying the price for Bush's failures in the region namely Iraq. I fear for Israel and unless they get it together, the future looks bleak.

Yes, no question about it, those pesky Jewish settlements are the root cause of all the world's ills. Close them all down, right now, and all will be well. Make it snappy. No more lolly-gagging around. Hop to it. What's the matter with you, don't you long for peace, once and for all? Hurry up, already. Get with the program. By the way, has anyone seen any morons in the area? Huh?

re: #75 opinionated

I was going to write what you wrote.

But thinking about the last part, Bush wouldn't be able to pull it off.

Carter first had to rehabilitate the people's opinion of him with Habitat before his opinion would be taken seriously- for a while at least.

What Bush has done will haunt us for a long time. He has been a near complete failure and some of the consequences of his failures have not even matured yet.

He will leave a mess in both foreign and domestic affairs. And there is no Reagan to follow him and clean things up.

Pity the next President. And pity us.

While Bush basks in Saudi rewards.

While it is not a popular opinion on this site, I concur in the opinion that Bush's legacy will haunt us for a very long time. The saddest part is that it didn't have to be this way. My belief is that Bush had a window of opportunity to rally the world against the tyranny of Islamofascism and he failed to do so. His inability to articulate, project, and most importantly implement consistent policies in the war on terror has made the world a more dangerous place for a long time to come.

A Churchillian, Bush is not. A Reaganite, not even close. When I look a Churchill's legacy I see a man who maintained a steadfastness during some of the bleakest times facing mankind. His fortitude and vision not only prevented the collapse of western civilization but foretold of the impending dangers of the Soviet Union. While he was bounced out of office after the war, Churchill was nevertheless the right man when history needed him the most.

Looking at Reagan I often wondered why he chose to tuck tail and run after the bombing of our embassy in Beirut. At the time it seemed so out of character that the response was difficult to reconcile. Reagan wasn't the kind of person to shy from a fight and his whole career was predicated on maintaining a clear and well defined course. In fact his resolute dealings with the Soviets was probably one of the greatest foreign policy successes the world has ever witnessed.

It was only after years of research and having spent hours with those close to him that I learned that Reagan probably foresaw the ME and Iran in particular in the context of the Soviet-American struggle and as such was unable to appreciate the potential nidus of Islamofascism. His fear of Iran falling under the sphere of Soviet dominance was so great that any other considerations were secondary.

Sadly, Regan's presidency ended before he could recognize these failings and his successor, Bush Sr. laid the ground work for the disasters we are experiencing at present.

As far as I am concerned there already is a "Palestine" in the former Gaza strip. The Palestinians control is 100%, they control the border to Egypt (sort of). How does recognized Gaza as Palestine work, do we need three UN countries to call it Palestine in a public speech or switch Gaza to the Palestine Facebook group or what?

re: #53 lawhawk

Excellent post. And I doubt he'll be the last president to try this.

I'm sure that was a misprint, and Dubya actually said ' disputed West Bank Semtex mints' were the problem.
Bless his heart, at least what Dubya mangles beyond recognition is generally limited to the lexicon.
The jihadisPals, on the other hand, not so benign.

re: #82 justadot

"It's the Legacy, Stupid"!
/ginormous sarc alert/

The United States effort to start a Palestinian state has been a spectacular failure for more than two decades but no one in Washington thinks to ask why.

The answer is not palatable and not politically correct for those chasing this fantasy of a Palestinian state. The fact is the Palestinians are not interested in a free state; they are only interested in the destruction of Israel.

The Palestinian disease is a symptom of a wider epidemic: militant Islamism. The Palestinians, the jihadis and the mullahs still cling to the hope that they can wear the West and Israel down and impose their world wide caliphate. They still have this hope because they have never been decisively beaten and their ideology crushed and shown to be impotent.

Bush has completely failed to do this. He had a magnificent opportunity at the end of the Iraq war, when the American military was practically invincible and feared by all, to drive into Iran and dispose the mullahocracy. Militant Islamism would have been dealt the coup de grace and the world would be a lot different today. Just the example of the ideological center of militant Islam being crushed would have scared other Muslim countries like Saudi Arabia and Syria straight. We would not be worrying about Iranian nukes, we would have far fewer military men in the Mideast, Lebanon would be free of Syrian interference and the Palestinians would have no hope whatsoever of destroying Israel and would have to come to terms with it. Maybe even start their own state.

Yes in the mixed up world of the Arab-Israel conflict the building of homes of "disputed" land is worse than the murder of innocent civilians, and the indoctrination to murder.

Don't they need to stop blowing their own s___ up first?

I'm disappointed.

This would have been a funny joke.

Are you sure it's not!?

re: #53 lawhawk

It's a fool's errand in the name of legacy building

Exactly correct.
GWB has degenerated into little more than an errand-boy for his scheming jihadist Saudi oil masters. His strategy for the legacy he so desperately seeks has become nothing more than a replay of Neville Chamberlain's "peace in our time" response to Hitler's aggression - selling out one's allies in exchange for empty promises.

What a joke. The palestinians govern themselves already and in essence have a 'state' of sorts. What they have chosen to do with it is remain on the international dole, teach hatred to their children, encourage suicide bombers, launch rocket attacks and refuse to get along with their neighbors. It is very telling even that muslim Egypt refuses to have an open border with them.

If Palestinians really wanted a state, they would have had it many years ago.

Their actions are like a person on a bridge threatening to jump. They demand sympathy from the world for the misery that they themselves cause.

Well at least the AP writer used the word "disputed" instead of "illegal."

George, Be quiet. I'm sure you already have that job with the Saudis- your dad wouldn't keep you out of the family business.

AP, who is disputing the settlements, and trying to paint them as obstacles and threats?

Wikipedia Editing Guidelines: Avoid weasel words:

Weasel words are small phrases attached to the beginning of a statement, such as "some argue that..." or "critics say...", etc.. The problem with weasel-worded statements isn't that they are false; the problem is that they imply something that is difficult to substantiate, because it is too vague, or even possibly intentionally misleading.

One problem with weasel words is that they can imply a statement is true when it may be no truer than its inverse. For example, an editor might preface the statement "Montreal is the best city in the world" with a disclaimer: "some people say that Montreal is the best city in the world". This is true: some people do say that Montreal is the best city in the world. The problem is that the reverse is true as well (some people say Montreal is not the best city in the world, and some go further and say that it is the worst), and it is thus easy to write a misinformative, slanted article composed of nothing but 'facts' like these, using Wikipedia to spread hearsay, personal opinion and propaganda. All it takes is for somebody to add "Critics have asserted that..." to a statement, and there is a danger that the casual reader will take their word for it.

AP is cheaper than Wikipedia. Again.