From Stephen Green, my Guinness benefactor (who, I don’t believe, is in any way responsible for the two days of suffering I’ve undergone as a result of drinking things I can only identify by their reflux acidity):
Hey, just because Arafat is dead doesn’t mean Jimmy Carter can’t still suck up to Palestinian terrorists!
Carter has moved beyond an embarrassment and has actually morphed from an ex-President and would-be statesman to the kind of character one of the Brontë sisters, bless them, would helpfully stuff in an attic with some crackers and gruel, then padlock the thing shut in perpetuity.
Christ, but does the world ever need the Brontë sisters now…
And speaking of Christ and his good works, Terry Hastings sends along this Charles Tannock piece for the WSJ. Tannock is a conservatives foreign affairs spokesman in the European Parliament. From “With Hamas Europe Reaps What It Sowed”:
To say that the outcome of the Palestinian elections has presented the European Union with a thorny problem would be an understatement. But the navel-gazing and bewilderment that Hamas’s victory has caused in Brussels is more than a little melodramatic. It should not have come as a shock.
The EU’s reluctance to confront the rampant venality in Yasser Arafat’s Palestinian Authority—indeed, the way Brussels tacitly encouraged that corruption, maybe hoping the PA could be bribed into a peace deal—is largely what has led to this point. The fact that we knew of Arafat’s cronyism and still funneled rivers of cash into his pockets makes the EU complicit in this corruption and ultimately also in the election of Hamas.
Hamas surged to power thanks in part to the grievances of Palestinians who saw Fatah leaders grow fatter on donor money—including €280 million a year from Brussels alone—while their poverty and misery steadily worsened. Hamas successfully filled the void by providing many charitable services and skillfully using the mosque to push its political agenda. Europe is reaping what it sowed.
Palestinian corruption was the elephant in the room at the European Commission. Indeed, when I and other MEPs pushed for a European Parliament investigation into it three years ago, Chris Patten, then the external relations commissioner, memorably told us he needed such an investigation “like a hole in the head.” The inquiry resulted in a whitewash and MEPs were never allowed to debate its findings. Chris Patten moved on. Many more Israelis died in suicide bombings.
Some argue that making diplomatic relations and aid conditional on Hamas renouncing violence and recognizing Israel’s legitimacy would not achieve the desired effect. They say such tactics might harden Hamas’s position and lose the West influence in Palestine. But what influence did the hundreds of millions of euros Brussels sunk into the PA exactly buy? Did Arafat let up in his terror war or corruption? Fact is, EU money and “good diplomatic contacts” have singularly failed to achieve their aims for the past decade. It’s time to try something new.
[My emphasis]
And may I add an amen?
It is therefore deeply regrettable that Russia, in spite of its own problems with Islamic terrorism, has invited Hamas to Moscow. It is less surprising perhaps that French President Jacques Chirac and Spanish Prime Minister José Luis RodrÃÂguez Zapatero—each playing to his domestic gallery—should endorse this move.
To frame this issue as some kind of terrible moral dilemma is absurd. Of course, we all want peace in the Middle East. Ordinary Israelis and Palestinians want it even more. But to accept Hamas as a legitimate negotiating partner would be to store up still more trouble for the future. I am as appalled as anyone at the poverty and hopelessness that characterizes the lives of so many Palestinians. As a matter of fact, in electing Hamas Palestinians have given vent in part to their own disgust. But if we sent so much as a penny to a PA led by an unreformed Hamas, we would be showing that we have learned absolutely nothing from our mistakes.
We should not kid ourselves that we owe it to the Palestinians to engage with Hamas just because of a democratic election. If Hamas were a political party in the EU, it would have been outlawed years ago. […]
What we do owe to the Palestinian people, though, is to tell them clearly that while we stand by them in their legitimate quest for statehood, we won’t tolerate such a state being run by an Islamist terror regime.
I believe this is the stance the US must take diplomatically. Elections are well and good. But they have consequences.
The Palestinians—raised on anti-Semitic propaganda and false promises of future glories, used by the Arab world as a way to scapegoat Israel and the west, abused by their own leaders (who took monies intended to make the condition in “Palestine” less dire and shuffled it off to various swiss bank accounts or Parisian villas)—were never ready for “democracy” in any important sense. The pre-condition simply weren’t there, which is why the elections themselves—though legitimate—yielded the outcome they did: as Tannock perceptively notes, Hamas’ power is at best an indirect response to the corruption of Fateh and its leadership, a corruption that was enabled by the EU (and previous US administrations) who continued to insist that “engaging” with dissembling, tyrannical, and murderous leaders—and throwing money at them—would ease tensions instead of exascerbate the grievance culture that continues to animate the Palestinian peoples, much to the delight of those who use them as pawns in a game of chess that crosses the entirety of the Arab world.
Everybody did. Including the Israelies who thought it would be smart to support Hamas as an alternative to Fatah. They got their alternative.
Honestly, I am completely unaware of Israeli support for Hamas, even as an alternative to Arafat’s bastard. Perhaps you could shed some light on this support actus?
Actus, have you been rummaging Jeff’s sofa cushions again?
Can’t we just say the CIA created Hamas and get it over with?
Or maybe it was Dick Cheney?
Haaaaaallllllliiiiiiiibbbbbbuuuurrrttttttoooonnnnnn!!
spam word: not. Not!
Is Jimmy effin’ insane or just plain evil? Riddle me that.
On a more serious note, Carter is an idiot. If you waste your time by reading his editorial, he argues that Israel, the US, the UN, etc. should not punish Palistinians by withholding money.
Why is this stupid? Because the Palistinian people aren’t going to get any of that money. It’s going into the pockets of Hamas, who will line their bank accounts, purchase weapons, and perform other acts of evil with it. That’s the same thing that Fatah did with the money when Arafat was still above ground.
As Carter himself notes, the PA is deeply in debt:
What happened to all the money paid to the PA in the past? Stolen, squandered, wasted. Spent on luxury and terrorism.
Withholding money doesn’t punish the Palistinian people. The gov’t they elected will do that on its own.
Dick Cheney – no. CIA – yes.
Hamas uses AK-47s not 28 gauge shotguns. Cheney uses 28 gauge shotguns. Valerie Plame, the CIA’s number one covert agent, was reported as being very good with AK-47s and hand grenades. Do we need any more proof who was behind Hamas? And I bet her little dog Joe Wilson was in on it!
Can’t someone pull Carter’s passport?
A cover story would be necessary – all his Secret Service guys have dysentery or something?
This is the problem with Muslim “charities.” So many are connected to terrorist organizations or have a terrorist wing. The same with the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt (and perhaps elsewhere): they build schools, hospitals, clinics, and provide other needed resources, but at the same time use their mosques, schools, speakers, popularity, popular figures, and politicians to push radical Islam. Funding the hospital would be to fund the radical aspect (whether mosque or terrorist group) of the organization as well.
Which is one reason (among many) I never donate to Muslim charities on principle. Nor should anyone else.
Look into Hamas’ early history. I found a source at UPI, which gives other sources too. I didn’t know it was controversial—in arguments with likudists they’ve defended the tactic as at the time reasonable.
Jimmy Carter is nothing if not consistent. He seems to believe that the choice of peace is always always worth it. He has stated the Revolutionary War was an unnecessary war, and is proud of the fact that the Iranian Hostage crisis ended peacefully and didn’t escalate. His principled stance is to give as much ground as the other side needs.
Could we send Carter hunting with Cheney? Could we get Cheney to stay off the beer so he can shoot straight?
Note: this comment is meant for humorous purposes only. It is not intended to suggest that anyone should be shot, or that a Vice President might decide to shoot someone. Guns are not toys, and should only be used by those who have been trained to handle them. Using a gun under the influence of alcohol is dangerous, and should be avoided. This comment does not suggest in any way that anyone who recently had a hunting accident was in any way under the influence of alcohol. Please, don’t try this at home.
sw: this. This was a public service announcement.
What the hell is with the ex(democritic)preidents(vice, and otherwise)club? Between Algore in Saudi Arabia, Clinton calling for the arrest of cartoonists, and Carter demanding Isreal fund her enemys and the US to break the laws regarding the funding of a terrorist list group, I do believe the left has finally crossed the line from “wacky” to certifiably insane. Seriously, these idiots need to be instatutionalised for their own safety, and ours. Or maybe Gitmo…
You’re a bad read, actus, and I’m damn sure it’s intentional. You said:
The piece you link says nothing of the sort:
They got their alternative?! 35 years ago they were strategically dividing the enemy, not selecting an alternative to anything but hostile monolithic power.
tw: yet another poor showing from actus and his “sources”. Jeff, is that you, you sly dog?
From actus’ link:
Good catch, actus. It appears that the Israelis fucked up, although I expect that they are loathe to admit it publicly. Can’t say as I blame them, given the way anti-Israeli media jump in their shit everyday.
But what you miss is that there is a major difference between America/Israel and the EU responses. The Euroweenies continue to ignore their mistakes, and throw Susan B. Anthony’s down the http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2005-03/09/xin_190302090839453327292.jpg. At least Israel changed their strategy, starting with a sound investment in Hellfire missiles. To counter their counterweight, so to speak.
Israel is reaping what they sow……thanks to the Grim Reaper.
TW: This is your thought of the day.
Rats—messed up a link. Attempt #2:
But what you miss is that there is a major difference between America/Israel and the EU responses. The Euroweenies continue to ignore their mistakes, and throw Susan B. Anthony’s down the toilet. At least Israel changed their strategy, starting with a sound investment in Hellfire missiles. To counter their counterweight, so to speak.
They wanted something other than Fatah. Looks like it backfired. Who will they support now? someone better? I hope so.
Just so we’re clear here who actus is aligning himself with, allow me to point you this fellow over at Wizbang making the same arguments (coincidence? Or is there a directive out from Kos?):
I’m going to point out the obvious elephant in the room and say, precisely, why every attempt Israel has made to negotiate with the “Palestinians” has “backfired”: the Palestinian leadership through the years has wanted nothing more than to drive Israel into the sea. Some are simply more subtle about it.
The only strategy that will prove successful, given the failure of most of the west to side with the middle east’s real historic democracy, is the wall—which Israel is building.
Short of that, it would have taken years of insistence that the “Palestinian” leadership, under Arafat, give up its fantasies of destroying Israel.
But because most of the world decided to play into the oppressed noble savage narrative created and exploited by the Arab world to gin up grievances and give their own disaffected populaces a scapegoat—an outlet for a hatred they are taught and that is still, to this day, fostered in a way that is remniscent of Nazism—Israel’s options really are limited.
That people like actus, who doubtless were supportive of the very measure that allowed the middle east to form in the way it has, now sneer that Israel got what it deserved in Hamas, is astonishing in its own passing of the buck.
I have no further use for actus, frankly. He’s here simply to poke and prod and always burnish his liberal bona fides by pretending to be on the side of the oppressed. But he is only on the side of his own showy self-righteousness. And it sickens me.
Jeff wouldn’t write “likudist,” a breeding-telling social gaffe on a level with saying “Trotskyite” instead of “Trotskyist” or “Marxist” instead of “Marxian.” Just one bumpkin slip like that and you’re outside the velvet rope of Club Lefté for life.
But actus’s lowercase L raises suspicions of satirical shennanigans.
Actus is PW’s pet aporia. (Snuggles.)
6gun and BoZ,
Actually, the truth is that every commentor on this web site is really Jeff. I am. So are you. I’m not sure why he does it. I think its his idea of a practical joke on the lurkers. It probably has something to do with his childhood.
Right on, Jeff (and Jay/me/actus).
actus:
I’m sure if/when they need omniscience THIS time, actus, they’ll consult you.
Correct; that Israel fucked up 35 years ago is besides the point. I believe the issue goes to intent, not outcomes. For perfect outcomes we have actus, Solution Man…
tw: Jeff, now I’m ill.
Jay –
I disagree. I may be a mere Goldstein sock puppet, but you’re obviously your own man.
Who could have guessed that Islamic fundamentalism would be incompatible with Israel?
You have a brilliant way of inciting folks with these most egregious broadsides on reason, Jeff, but now that I understand it’s all a charade designed to drive traffic and prop up the most insane moonbat phantoms, the game is up, I’m afraid.
Still love ya, though, man. You are one brillant SOB.
Sorry, folks, I ain’t buying it.
This “Israel supported Hamas” meme is a deliberate attempt by the LoonieLeft to equate the Israeli attempt to “divide and conquer” Hamas from the PLO with our material support for OBL and the Mudje during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, and our tacit support of SoDamn Insane during the Iran-Iraq war.
When Hamas effs up (and believe me folks, they WILL eff up) and Israel decides it is a true casus belli, the Kossacks (and their parrots in the Lamestream Media) will all of a sudden find all this “evidence” that the Israelis are getting ready to go to war against an enemy that they helped get into power in the first place.
35-year-old blowback.
Jesus. When not just take it back to the Assyrians or Goliath or some such. I mean, why stop in the early 70s, so long as no previous action can ever be overcome by subsequent strategies.
GIVE ME SOME OF THAT SWEET SWEET PAYBACK FOR YAHWEH STICKING HIS BIG HOOKED GOD NOSE WHERE IT DID NOT BELONG!
I think our support for those causes was much more substantial. And also, Hamas was at the time not a militant group. Saddam and the mujaheddin were.
THE JEWS ASKED FOR IT! THEY ASKED FOR IT!
Actus, the routine of making vague references to events devoid of context does not make you appear more knowledgable except in your own mind.
Carter, Dean, Kos, Juan Cole, DU, Actus…
Emily looks up from her writing as Charlotte backs into the study, her face frozen in shock…
CHARLOTTE
(Numbly)
You’re gonna need a bigger attic…
Filthy Jews pay for their own execution in bid for world domination.
Story at 11.
Yeah, Israel supported Hamas years ago, when the PLO was boasting of their intent to drive Israel into the sea and committing outrageous terrorist attacks. So what?
The left always “argues” this way, as if knowledge itself were temporally fungible magic power, an abstract pre-knowledge of history that is always available in sufficient supply for them to be right about everything. I mean, did you ever hear a leftist argue that Saddam had no WMD stockpiles before the war? Of course not; at the time they thought he had weapons too, they just didn’t care. But to hear them now, it was obvious Saddam had no weapons. And of course, it was obvious that supporting the Shah would lead to an Islamist revolution hostile to the US. Just like they will know that the next bad thing that will happen in the world will be America’s fault. The left knows hindsight pretty well; after all, they were born with it.
:peter
Well, they asked for a palestinean state that recognized the Oslo accords. That’s not what they got.
The argument I’m more into is that its obvious we overreacted. Not that there was nothing there, but that our knowledge wasn’t enough to justify what we did.
Everybody did. Including the Israelies who thought it would be smart to support Hamas as an alternative to Fatah. They got their alternative.
(submitted by Actus)
Actus,I’ve as much as admitted I’m too uneducated to post here,but this submission of yours toasts my fucking goat.Your post does NOT say who the Israelis in question ARE,and seems to me that you mean that at least a minority of Israelis were in favor of Hamas..PLEASE quote names and sources as to just who in the REAL Israeli world(not Parliament) was in favor of this???..I know there WAS a whackjob in the knesset who spoke out,But WHO Actus…………I have 3 friends in Israel right now,and THEY sure as hell were shocked
TW…TOO stupid
I see y’all took him down far more capably than I.Please forgive my not scrolling down,was just taken over by anger at that post
TW I’m a COMMON man,but I know what I see
6Guns:
Correct,6Guns. I sit corrected. A better example of a nation well and truly fucking up would be the Soviet Union signing a non-agression pact with the Third Reich.
actus:
actus, on this I call bullshit. The Oslo Accords was a three way agreement, between America, Israel, and what became the Palestinian Authority, i.e., Yassir Arrafat.
Israel didn’t get a Palestinian State that recognized the Oslo Accords because Arrafat pledged his word falsely. Period.
Putting the blame on Israel simply proves what others have asserted above: the new leftard meme is to set Israel up for failure with Hamas.
Jesus. For this level of stupidity, one has to practice. Jeff Goldstein ought to charge you by the pixel for his bandwidth that you sucked up with this imbecilic utterance.
TW: five. The score actus received on his IQ test.
Ok, so Israel “reaped what it sowed” by supporting the formation of Hamas 35 years ago, even though at the time it was, by actus’ own description, “not a militant group”?
You know, the article discussed in the post makes a pretty direct link between Europe’s recent actions and the election. Namely, the corruption of the PA was made possible by European foreign aid the PA got regardless of concerns of corruption. And this corruption was the reason for the electoral upset.
And yet Israel is reaping what it sowed because it supported Hamas 35 years ago to divide Palestinian terrorist groups, and infiltrate and monitor their activities? It helps to ignore a lot of the info in the UPI link that actus provided, that Hamas evolved out of Muslim Brotherhood cells, how Islamic movements surged after the Iranian revolution, the financial support by the Gulf states, etc, etc.
This cheap shot at Israel was relevant to the discussion of the recent Palestinian election, how exactly? As though Hamas would not have existed without limited Israeli support 35 years ago? Or perhaps Israel’s support for Hamas over 3 decades ago influenced 44% of Palestinian voters to vote for Hamas? Instead of peace-loving Fatah (that got 41% of the vote)?
Why I’ve got the sneaking suspicion that comment wasn’t meant to enlighten us on the dynamics of the Palestinian election. Perhaps, just perhaps, it was a knee jerk response of a typical blame America (or her proxy) firster.
The UPI article says that Israel gave money to Hamas when it was non-violent in order to penetrate the group and weed out violent Hamas members. What’s so bad about that? And how can this be portrayed as supporting Hamas violence?
When you’re a leftard, all things are possible.
I read a similar article in our local paper from some idiot LA Times columnist, arguing, essentially, it would be “wrong” to withhold money from the Palestinian government.
Can anybody explain why in the hell we have ANY obligation to support Palestinians ? I don’t want my tax dollars going to them- I don’t want my tax dollars going to any hostile country. I want these hostile countries to try to make it without American handouts.
“Better”. Yes spending the billions we give to Palestinians annually could be better spent helping our poor, rebuilding Iraq, etc.
actus is far more intelligent than that…
The problem America faces is the shameless creeping mendacity that threatens literally every value this country depends on to survive. The problem is the seeping cesspool of intellectual corruption and lies that encroach on plain talk, common sense, history, and principle.
The problem isn’t low intelligence, it’s evil. None of Congress’ east and west coast socialist liars—excepting the egotists Kennedy and Kerry—are idiots. Hillary Clinton is no idiot.
No, this ilk are simply willfully evil. Up is down, black is white. It’s the corruption of power and it should not be given the pass that it’s only just stupid.
The war of ideas will soon become a war for survival. Evil isn’t going to be merely stupid.
… our knowledge wasn’t enough to justify what we did.
Justify to whom? The UN? The Muslim Leaque? The Justice League of America? The Watcher?
Stop driveling, please. It’s annoying, and it’ll make you go blind.
Hmmm.
Sorry but I don’t buy this whole “Israel supported Hamas” nonsense. The simple fact, assuming you accept the UPI story as fact, is that Hamas wasn’t *Hamas* when Israel supported it. At that time it was an organization that was oriented around helping Palestinians and not dedicated to terrorism. When that organization evolved into Hamas, then Israeli supported ended.
The two are not equivalent.
The left knows hindsight pretty well; after all, they were born with it.
And the backseat driver ultimately goes where the person behing the wheel takes him, regardless of the decimal level of his whining and caterwauling. Actus is not so much a troll as a leading indicator.
Hmmmm.
No it’s simply a variation of the same idiot nonsense that gets spouted about how America originally funded Bin Laden. Which is a bunch of bullshit no matter how much it gets bandied about.
There’s an overwhelming desire on the part of the Left to disallow some victims from *being* victims. It has to do with the victimhood psychology of the liberal Left. Since the liberal Left is predicated on victimhood they absolutely must absolve themselves of any potential guilt by preventing any acceptance of victimhood by some actual victims. Otherwise they come to a logical and philosophical impasse.
A prime example is the treatment of conservative blacks. Liberal blacks are treated as eternal victims of white oppression regardless of their circumstances. A useful shield against commentary by the Right. A conservative black however must be prevented from assuming this mantle as it otherwise would be a shield, a defense, against any attacks by liberals.
The same applies to America with regards to terrorism. This is why the liberal Left has campaigned on a significant and constant level to persuade that America deserved what it got. To do otherwise is to risk having America legitimately assume the mantle of an actual victim, and that would again give America a shield against the continual and constant round of attacks by the liberals.
Look at Abu Ghraib the liberals scream. How awful America is. Yet this is only possible because America has been denied legitimate victimhood amongst the liberal Left. To acknowledge America as a victim would remove support for attacks against her. To the liberal Left, a victim has no boundries.
Look at Cindy Sheehan. The most important aspect of her was her status as a victim. As a Gold Star Mother who could assume the mantle of aggrieved victim. Who had then the psychological and philosophical standing to point a finger and scream any sort of idiotic nonsense she wanted without approbation.
Now look at Israel. Why have the liberals worked so hard over the years, and even harder now, to prevent the mantle of victim from descending on Israel?
…
Frankly it all comes down to a belief of mine that is almost a proverb:
Liberals think conservatives are evil.
Conservatives think liberals are crazy.
“Intelligent” is a question begging term, 6Guns. People can be intelligent when it comes to nuclear physics, but are clueless in balancing a checkbook.
No, I look at “intelligence” as being product based. If the long term product is stupid, so is the person pushing it, no matter how intelligent they are here and now.
Evil can be very intelligent, but is generally highly self-centered. In the long run, Evil usually mistakes tactics for strategy, and screws up by the numbers.
But you are correct, we should not underestimate their actual intelligence, else we fall into the trap. It just needs to be tempered with an understanding of their motives.
In the case of actus, he may be intelligent, but he is willfully stupid on many matters. His natural capability is overwhelmed by his own decisions. And if that isn’t stupid, I don’t know what is.
Oh, dammit, did I miss the crazy train departing for Hamas-Is-The-Avatar-of-The-Zionist-Entity-Land? Is it coming around again soon? I heard that the Blood-Libel Ride o’Jewry-Bashing is a two thumbs up banger from Ahmadickwad, Iranian standup commedian and part-time prez of Iran.
Well, let’s see, 35 Years times ~365 = 12775 Days. So Israel (some parts anyways, and that is a specious maybe) supported Hamas for 1/12775 the time that Paleswine has, and Israel has NEVER EVER elected Hamas to leadership.
What does 1/12775 of a shit sandwich look like? Guess who should have to eat it all? Pales*cough*stinians. And guess who is bellying up to the buffet for his own ginormous bite? Actus, of course.
Right around the time of the end of history. Please.
Right, actus. Everyone knows ideas never have any consequences.
You’re right, of course, actus. The war of ideas that includes a psychotic fundamentalist mideast burning half of Europe and threatening the rest of the civilized world with mre 9/11’s simply won’t become a war for survival, either theirs or ours.
It already has.
(And with that said, I leave it to more patient folks than I to deal with this clown further…)
tw: As any reading will show.
And the day they turn into a war for survival? End of history. Bring em on!
Oh wait, did fukuyama just change his mind?
No, but I hear Tojo did just before the Allies hung him. I believe he said ”Urk!”, or something like that. That’s forgivable, it is hard to talk with a rope cranked up tight around your neck.
TW: true. Heh!