Poor Jimmy, There is No Jewish Conspiracy

After the Holocaust, it became unfashionable in the Western world to overtly express anti-Semitic sentiment. Fortunately for the anti-Semites, they were still able to effectively express their anti-Semitism in code, through anti-Zionism.

Often, these people claim they are not against the existence of Israel, but are merely criticizing specific actions taken by Israel. Certainly, since no country is perfect, there is much to criticize about Israel, but these haters overwhelmingly distort Israel's actions and, even in cases where some criticism is justified, ignore or whitewash far more serious transgressions by Israel's enemies.

In recent years, Israel-haters have gotten bolder and crossed the line separating anything that could be considered legitimate criticism from undeniably illegitimate criticism. People generally considered respectable, such as former President Jimmy Carter, John Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago and Stephen Walt of Harvard, have put forth arguments worthy of the infamous "Protocols of the Elders of Zion."

Ignoring all reality and evoking images of a global Jewish conspiracy, they argue the "Israel Lobby" is pervasive and controls American foreign policy.

Much could be written about the double standard they employ. While sometimes using one side of their mouths to acknowledge Jews have the same rights as other Americans to try to influence the government, they try to destroy the ability of Jews, and other supporters of Israel, to use that right. Nothing is said about other Americans trying to influence the government in matters relating to countries they have an affinity for. Nothing is said about the pervasive of Arabists and the corrosive effect they have had both on our foreign policy and the prices we pay for gasoline and other forms of energy.

Much could also be written about the absurdity of the essence of their arguments, that loyal Americans such as the President of the United States and the majority of the House and Senate all put the interests of a foreign nation above the interests of the nation they have solemnly pledged to serve.

On either of those bases alone, their arguments could not be taken seriously by anyone with an open mind and even a modicum of intelligence.

A recent article by Gareth Porter in the Asia Times, published with the misleading headline "Israel urged US to attack Iran - not Iraq," a headline in conflict with the content of the article, demonstrates another critical flaw at the center of those arguments.

The so-called "neocons" are said to follow the bidding of Israel and the "Israel Lobby," ensuring that our elected officials put the interests of Israel ahead of the interests of America.

Exhibit Number One is generally the war in Iraq, which the "neocons" allegedly led us into in order to do Israel's bidding.

It may be that the "neocons" led us into the war in Iraq, but we now all know rather than doing Israel's bidding, they were acting against the desires of the Israeli government.

As revealed by former Bush administration official Lawrence Wilkerson, the Israeli government was pressuring our leaders to not invade Iraq!

Porter reported

The warning against an invasion of Iraq was "pervasive" in Israeli communications with the US administration, Wilkerson recalled. It was conveyed to the administration by a wide range of Israeli sources, including political figures, intelligence, and private citizens.

It wasn't that Israel didn't recognize Iraq as a threat, but they knew Iran was a much greater threat.

Soon after Israeli officials got wind of that planning [for an invasion of Iraq], Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon asked for a meeting with Bush primarily to discuss US intentions to invade Iraq. In the weeks preceding Sharon's meeting with Bush on February 7, 2002, a procession of Israeli officials conveyed the message to the US administration that Iran represented a greater threat, according to a Washington Post report on the eve of the meeting.

In a recent article in the Waterbury Observer (see Overabundance of Sand in the Middle East), another relentless critic of the only democracy in the Middle East complained "its offensive to me and the American people who oppose the war [in Iraq] to be accused of being unpatriotic." How hypocritical to complain like that while effectively accusing American Jews and our Commander in Chief of being unpatriotic!

A message to Jimmy Carter, John Mearsheimer, Stephen Walt, Marilyn Aligata and others who apparently believe in something that doesn't exist: There is no international Jewish conspiracy.

Joe McCarthy's Spirit Alive and Well in Egypt

The McCarthy era was one of the darkest in American history, but it lives on in Egypt.

As reported by the Associated Press, "The chairman of Egypt's Actors' Union said Thursday that the group planned to investigate one of the country's brightest young movie stars for appearing in an upcoming miniseries with an Israeli actor. ... The investigation could have serious ramifications for Waked's career in Egypt, where the majority of his films are still made."

Besides illustrating the reactionary nature of Egypt (generally, the entertainment industry is one of the most liberal and open portions of a society; thus, if the entertainment industry still blacklists any actor who, knowingly or unknowingly has contact with an Israeli, one can imagine how much more reactionary and full of hatred the rest of Egyptian society is), it also gives some insight into the meaning, for Arabs, of peace.

Three decades into a so-called "peace" with Israel, Egyptian society is still being educated that Israel should not exist. One wonders how durable even this minimal "peace" will be after Hosni Mubarak, Egypt's long-time de facto dictator, leaves the scene. One wonders what incentive this gives Israel to make further concessions in the pursuit of peace.

Our Saudi "Friends" Respond to Criticism

It's interesting to note that our so-called "friends" and "allies" in Saudi Arabia are not immune to criticism. They appear to have responded amazingly quickly to criticism from Daniel Pipes in an article "Uniting To Exclude Saudi Arabian Airlines" published in the New York Sun just eight days ago.

Pipes pointed out that "Saudi Arabian Airlines declares on its English-language Web site that the kingdom bans 'Bibles, crucifixes, statues, carvings, items with religious symbols such as the Star of David.'"

As I write this, a Google search still shows that text appearing at www.saudiairlines.com/services/travelguide.jsp, but the web site itself has already been changed so this no longer appears. Nor do the warnings that "items and articles belonging to religions other than Islam" and Korans of non-Saudi origin are banned.

The good news is this shows Saudi Arabia sometimes responds to criticism, although I wouldn't advise trying to bring a crucifix or a Magen David into Saudi Arabia. I doubt the Saudis have actually changed any of their obnoxious policies; they're just not publicizing them on the Saudi Arabian Airlines web site.

Daniel Pipes makes suggestions about pressuring Saudi Arabian Airlines, but the issue is much deeper.

Our government generally treats Saudi Arabia with kid gloves, as if it was a friend and ally. Yet this is the country that produced most of the 9/11 hijackers and supplies many if not most of the non-Iraqis fighting our troops in Iraq, terrorizing Iraqis and generally destabilizing Iraq.

We simultaneously subsidize Saudi Arabia to the tune of countless billions of dollars each year, in the form of outrageous oil prices, and we foolishly transfer massive amounts of advanced weaponry to it.

Besides being a repressive regime rooted in a different millenium, Saudi Arabia is fundamentally unstable. We've had prior experience with our arms winding up in the hands of an unremittingly hostile thugocracy. By arming the Shah of Iran, we wound up arming the mullahs who have been in charge of Iran for the last three decades; by arming the Palestinian Authority, we wound up arming the Hamas terrorists who are now in control of Gaza.

Ultimately, the Saudi royal family will be overthrown by the people it has repressed far more and far longer than the Shah ever repressed the people of Iran. When that happens, those weapons will fall into the hands of fanatical enemies even more dangerous than the Iranian mullahs.

How many times will we repeat the mistake of arming our enemies?

Hamas Places Little Value on Arab Lives

We did not blackmail Israel, and we gave free information to Gilad Shalit's father and his family that Gilad Shalit is still alive. When he asked us to bring him a medical glasses for his sight, we did so as humanitarian duty. We treat Gilad Shalit in a humanitarian way that is in line with the Palestinians' morals.

So said Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal, as quoted by CNN reporter Cal Perry. (Perry's entire story may be viewed at the CNN web site.)

Perry does point out Hamas is not treating Shalit in accordance with the guidelines in the Geneva Convention and Red Cross representatives have yet to be allowed to contact him. Shalit's parents have also insisted they have never been contacted by Hamas.

Perry further noted Ahmed Youssef, an aide to Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh said on Monday that Hamas would consider releasing a videotape of Gilad Shalit if Palestinian Arab prisoners were released by Israel, proving that no shred of information was "freely" given to Israel by Hamas.

Yousef told Israel Radio: "When we released the voice recording of Schalit we expected something from Israel in return, namely, the release of women and children from Israeli jails."

Translation: to Hamas, the freedom of numerous Palestinian Arabs is not even equal to the freedom of one Israeli, being equal only to a voice recording and possibly a videotape. (Yousef also said: "If Israel would have done this we would have published a videotape of Schalit talking about himself.")

Golda Meir has been repeatedly criticized for pointing out peace will not come while the Palestinian Arabs love their children less than they hate Israel; meanwhile, the elected leadership of the Palestinian Arabs repeatedly demonstrates it places a lower value on the lives of its own people than it places on the lives of Israelis.

Palestinian Arabs in Gaza Being Deprived of Health Care

The medical system in Gaza has been paralyzed because of disputes between Hamas and Fatah.

It apparently started when Hamas arrested a prominent physician with ties to Fatah.

The Palestinian Authority being run by Mahmoud Abbas retaliated by ordering physicians to curtail their schedules in Gaza hospitals to three hours a day, forcing patients to go to private clinics.

Hamas retaliated by ordering the clinics to shut down immediately.

Palestinian Authority Information Minister Riad al-Malki said "Hamas is not interested in the quality of medical service." Clearly, neither is the Palestinian Authority.

Thus far, there have been no reports of any criticism from any of the activists who go into tirades every time Israel checks to make sure Palestinian Arab terrorists aren't transporting more bombs by ambulance.

8 Palestinians stopped from attacking Israeli towns

Struck by the abuse of language in the articles about attempted terrorist attacks, Don Morris rewrote the narrative to show how responsible reporting would more accurately portray what occurred.

GAZA CITY, 26 August 2007

“With the help of the morning fog, two armed Palestinians managed to infiltrate Saturday into Israeli territory in the area of the Erez and Netiv Haassarah kibbutzim,” Tal Lev-Ram, an Israeli officer, told AFP.

Communities neighboring the collective farming villages were put on alert and roads were closed to traffic. It was only the second Palestinian operation of its kind since June last year when Gilad Shalit, a young Israeli soldier, was captured by Palestinian armed groups in the Gaza Strip.

Three armed resistance factions, Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, the armed wing of Fatah, Al-Naser Brigades, the armed wing of the Popular Resistance Committees, and the National Resistance Brigades, the armed wing of the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP) have claimed responsibility for the latest “joint attack on Israeli territory.” A joint statement identified the dead as Khader Aokal, 22, a fighter from the Popular Resistance Committees, and Mohammed Saker, 22, from the DFLP.

The Gaza Strip is now run by the Islamist group Hamas, which captured the territory in June from forces loyal to the secular Fatah faction of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. The attack groups boasted that they “managed to infiltrate Israeli territory and reach the Netiv Haassarah settlement where its two martyred fighters fought for three hours with the Israeli Army.” The same groups also claimed responsibility for a joint operation in the northern Gaza Strip on Friday evening in which two Palestinian fighters were killed by Israeli troops.
The incidents marked a surge in clashes with the Israeli Army in both the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

The incidents marked a surge in clashes with the Israeli Army in both the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

In the northern West Bank town of Jenin yesterday, Israeli forces killed one Islamic Jihad fighter wanted by Israel and wounded two others, including one seriously, a Palestinian security official said. A security official later reported that the seriously wounded fighter died of his wounds. This has not however been validated as of this edition.

Two bystanders also sustained bullet wounds in the operation, the official added.The question why they were out in the open during a gunfight remains unanswered. An Israeli Army spokeswoman said troops shot three armed men in a car, considered enroute to attack Israeli citizens. No confirmation regarding their status. A 13-year-old Arab Israeli boy and a fighter from Islamic Jihad were shot dead late Friday when Israeli troops traded fire with fighters in the northern West Bank village of Saida, a Palestinian security source said. It is unclear why a young teenager was standing along side an armed Jihadist while he engaged in a para-military action against the Israeli army.

Palestinians Breach Israeli Border

We comment on excerpts from an article originally published by the Los Angeles Times and reprinted in the Hartford Courant about an infiltration from the Gaza Strip into Israel.

In a rare breach of Israel's border with the Gaza Strip, two heavily armed Palestinians scaled a 25-foot wall Saturday, opened fire on an army outpost and eluded capture for nearly a half-mile before soldiers tracked them down and killed them.

Gaza is totally under the control of the Palestinian Arabs; there is absolutely no rationalization that can be given for launching attacks against Israel and Israelis from Gaza; the only reasons for such attacks are hatred and the desire to destroy Israel and murder innocent Israelis.

The attack also demonstrates the need for barriers to protect Israelis from Arab terrorists. Without the barriers, there would be hundreds, if not thousands, of terrorists infiltrating, rather than just a handful.

The Palestinians carried grenades and automatic weapons.

Clearly, although anti-Israel fanatics rail about the Israel allegedly cutting off access to Gaza, the terrorists certainly have had little difficulty in obtaining weaponry.

Three militant groups, the Popular Resistance Committees, the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine and the Al Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades, claimed responsibility for the attack in a joint statement.

The Al Aqsa Martyrs' Brigade, an arm of Fatah, the supposedly "moderate" faction Palestinian Authority Chair Mahmoud Abbas. We keep hearing that Abbas is committed to peace, but his terrorist group has never eschewed violence.

Israel classifies Hamas as a terrorist group and has stepped up military incursions into the territory this summer to thwart rocket attacks and to search for cross-border tunnels.

There is a good reason why Israel "classifies Hamas as a terrorist group;" the reason is that Hamas is a terrorist group.

Israel is far from alone in recognizing that reality; one wonders why the the Los Angeles Times and Hartford Courant are afraid to simply state that reality, or even recognize that numerous countries, including our own, correctly classify Hamas as a terrorist group.

Routine Child Abuse in the Palestinian Authority

This past Tuesday, immediately after Kassam rockets had been fired from Gaza, two people who were moving towards the launchers, apparently sent to retrieve them, were killed by a tank shell. It turned out the two were nine and twelve year olds.

A source quoted in Ha'aretz <haaretz.com/hasen/spages/896224.html> said "This is a cynical use of children but we are no longer surprised by anything we see. A 14-year-old child has already fired an RPG rocket against an IDF force, a grandmother aged close to 70 fired a light weapon against a Givati [Brigade] force recently in the Strip. What were these children doing there anyway? The militants fled immediately after the launch and then sent the children to collect the launchers."

Such is the nature of the society developed by the Palestinian Authority. As Golda Meir observed, peace is not going to come until the Palestinian Arabs love their children more than they hate Israel.

As long as we accept the deviant behavior which is the norm among Palestinian Arabs and much of the rest of the Arab world, condescendingly believing they are not capable of any better, we only put that day off further into the future.

When Will We Ever Learn?

Do we really expect American training of terrorists will ever turn out any differently?

Fatah Militant: U.S. Training Was Key to Intifada's Success
By Aaron Klein - Special to the Sun
August 21, 2007
www.nysun.com/article/60989

RAMALLAH -- American-run programs that train Fatah militias were instrumental in the "success" of the Palestinian intifada that began in 2000, a senior Fatah militant told The New York Sun.

"I do not think that the operations of the Palestinian resistance would have been so successful and would have killed more than one thousand Israelis since 2000 and defeated the Israelis in Gaza without these [American] trainings," a senior officer of President Abbas's Force 17 Presidential Guard unit, Abu Yousuf, said.

America has longstanding training programs at a base in the West Bank city of Jericho for members of Force 17, which serves as de facto police units in the West Bank, and for another major Fatah security force, the Preventative Security Services.

This weekend diplomatic security officials announced that the State Department will begin training Force 17 again this year in an effort to bolster Mr. Abbas against Hamas, which took over the Gaza Strip in June when the terror group easily defeated American-backed Fatah forces in the territory.

Aksa Martyrs Brigades: We'll no longer honor agreements with Israel — So what else is new?

As reported by the Jerusalem Post:

Fatah's armed wing, the Aksa Martyrs Brigades, on Tuesday announced that it would no longer honor understandings reached with Israel and called on its members to carry weapons to defend themselves against the IDF.

"We call on all our members who had handed over their weapons to the Palestinian security forces to report to their commanders so that they can be issued new weapons," said a leaflet distributed by the group in Ramallah.

So much for the latest exercise in futility.

The Aksa Martyrs Brigades is part of Fatah, the good terrorist gang, as opposed to Hamas, the bad terrorist gang.

The difference is that while Hamas speaks hatred out of both sides of its mouth, on one side of its mouth Fatah feigns an interest in peace, as long as Israel capitulates completely, while on the other side of its mouth it refuses to adhere to any of the agreements it makes and glorifies terrorists.

Israel and the United States are insisting that Hamas agree to adhere to previous agreements before entering into any dialog, but ignores the fact that the Palestinian Authority under Fatah has never adhered to any of those agreements either.

Imbalanced Study: "God's Warriors"

A review (written by Joe Amarante, published in the New Haven Register) of a television series begins "Incisive and as disturbing as it is thoughtprovoking, 'CNN Presents: God's Warriors' shines a spotlight on religious fundamentalism as a global political force. And only one-third of the zealots seen here are Muslim."

Other snippets from the review:

"For one group, that might be sexual permissiveness and Britney Spears; for another, it's abortion and homosexuality; and for a third, it's breaking their covenant with God if they don't control the entire biblical land of milk and honey."

"Part One looks at 'God's Jewish Warriors,' who have worked to settle Jews in the West Bank and other disputed areas, on biblical grounds, despite the fact it infuriates Palestinians."

"Part Two ... centers on 'God's Muslim Warriors,' and we've become increasingly acquainted with them over the past several years."

"Part Three on Christian fundamentalist includes the last TV interview with Jerry Falwell before he died."

This creates a false balance. While I have some problems with Christian fundamentalism, at this time it is hardly in the same class as Islamist fundamentalism. We do not find Christian fundamentalists murdering thousands of innocent people around the world.

And, as for "Part One," consider how one would react to "Part Four looks at "God's Baptist Warriors," who have worked to settle Blacks in cities and suburbs and other segregated areas throughout America, on human rights grounds, despite the fact it infuriates the Klu Klux Klan."

Or consider "Part Five looks at 'God's Islamist Warriors,' who have worked to settle hostile Palestinian Arabs all over Eretz Yisrael, drive out the Jewish population and destroy the Jewish state, on the grounds that 'Palestine is an Islamic Waqf throughout all generations and to the Day of Resurrection,' as explained in the Hamas Charter, despite the fact that it infuriates the innocent Jews they are murdering and trying to wipe off the face of the earth."

The reviewer pointed out "only one-third of the zealots seen here are Muslim," but there is certainly no balance between those Muslim fanatics, Christian fundamentalists and Jews trying to remain in their ancestral homeland. In falsely trying to imply a balance and moral equivalence, CNN is doing a disservice to all.

Overabundance of Sand in the Middle East

The following is part of a response I wrote to a column published in the August, 2007 issue of The Waterbury Observer.

There's an abundance of sand in the Middle East and, with her rambling, uninformed, misleading, illogical and even hypocritical article "Ned Lamont-Where are you?," once again Marilyn Aligata has demonstrated that she has been hiding her head in it.

First the hypocrisy. On the one hand, Aligata complained "its (sic) offensive to me and the American people who oppose the war to be accused of being unpatriotic." On the other hand, she effectively made that very accusation about a United States senator from Connecticut.

As I wrote after a similar accusation was made in the Waterbury Republican-American, impugning the patriotism of that United States senator by asserting he acts "without thinking what is in the best interest of the American people" goes "beyond the line separating legitimate and illegitimate discourse. Abraham Foxman, National Director of the Anti-Defamation League, one of our nation's oldest and most respected civil rights organizations, has pointed out the charge of dual loyalty is 'a classical canard of anti-Semitism.'"

The illogical: Aligata spends a good portion of her column on the danger of nuclear weapons, pointing out how Albert Einstein realized "nuclear weapons were a profound risk to humanity and could bring an end to civilization." She then castigates that same United States senator for his efforts to prevent Iran from acquiring those very weapons, whose acquisition would vastly increase that profound risk to humanity.

The head in the sand: Islamist fundamentalism in general and the particularly virulent strand being spread by the leaders in Iran in particular form a danger to the civilized world. I am not among those who believe there is a basic problem with Islam as a religion. From what I've studied, it appears Islam is far more similar to both Christianity and Judaism than it is different. Still, one has to have one's head in the sand to not recognize a significant number of fanatics, including the president of Iran and the mullahs who are really in charge there, have been perverting Islam to their own sick ends.

Indeed, almost every declared presidential candidate, including Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, has agreed on the critical nature of preventing the Iranian fanatics from getting their hands on nuclear weapons. They too have refused to take the option of using force off the table. Effectively, they have all agreed with the Connecticut senator Aligata has singled out for criticism, although, recognizing it is not an issue likely to win votes, none have been as outspoken.

I do not question Aligata's sincere desire for peace. I do question whether it is any more sincere than that of those she clearly believes are warmongers.

I cannot help but remember how popular Neville Chamberlain was right after appeasing Hitler at Munich and how unpopular Winston Churchill was for supposedly beating the drums for war. I cannot help but wonder how many millions of lives would have been saved had the British listened to Churchill rather than Chamberlain.

Only history, if civilization survives and we still have historians, will determine whether Aligata is a Chamberlain and Lieberman is a Churchill.

I do fear for the future and remember the warning from former CIA Director James Woolsey. He and others have pointed out that during the Cold War mutual assured destruction (MAD) worked because we were dealing with a regime which, ruthless though it was, ultimately wanted its people to live, while for the Iranian mullahs the threat of mutual assured destruction is an incentive rather than a deterrent.

I do fear that, if the Iranian mullahs get their hands on nuclear weapons, both September 11 and the genocide in Darfur will seem like the good old days.

I'd love to join Aligata and put my head in the sand with hers. Unfortunately, my conscience won't let me.

Definition of a Palestinian Arab Moderate

Sometimes the lesser of two evils is still evil.

In the context of what passes for Palestinian Arab society, Hamas is generally described as extremist and Fatah is generally described as "moderate."

Everything is relative.

This week, a school in Tulkarm, under the auspices of the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank, led by the "moderate" Mahmoud Abbas, organized a soccer tournament and named it after Ziyad Da'as.

Da'as was the architect of a 2002 terrorist attack at a Bat Mitzvah in Hadera in which six innocent Israelis were murdered and another thirty were injured. He was also involved in the kidnapping and murder of two Israelis in Tulkarm in 2001.

This is not the first and undoubtedly will not be the last time the "moderate" Palestinian Arabs honor a terrorist they consider "one of the brave people of the Palestinian resistance."

If the Palestinian Arabs stop resisting long enough, they might find the time to establish the state they've simultaneously insisted upon and rejected for more than seventy years.

There once was a time when your word mattered

There once was a time when your word mattered…people were held accountable…seems as though this has disappeared along with the rotary dial phone!

GS Don Morris, Ph.D.

Fatah leader in secret talks with Hamas behind Abbas’ back

August 6, 2007,

DEBKAfile’s Middle East sources reveal that Mahmoud Abbas’ close adviser, Jibril Rajoub, is holding secret talks with the Gazan Hamas government spokesman Ghazi Hamad.

Broad influential circles in Fatah, led by Jibril and Hanni al-Hassan, criticize as shortsighted and destined to be short-lived Abbas’ policy of separating the West Bank from Gaza and boycotting Hamas.

This falling away of support for Abbas in his own movement throws further in doubt the US-Israeli strategy of putting all their Palestinian apples in his West Bank basket, as manifested in American dollars and Israeli concessions on security.

At his meeting with the Israeli prime minister Monday, Abbas planned to demand further gestures of support, such as the release of more Palestinian prisoners, the removal of roadblocks and progress on fundamental issues. Realistically, their positions were too far apart for an agreed agenda.

Olmert faces opposition within his government. Defense minister Ehud Barak has distanced himself from his pro-Fatah Palestinian track. At meetings with US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice last week, the defense minister was noncommittal on this issue, commenting that it was in the prime minister’s hands. Privately, Barak believes Olmert is overplaying his association with Abbas - most of all to shore up his own flagging leadership at home. The minister is therefore biding his time until the tactic breaks down.

The dim view of the process held in the defense ministry and IDF command found expression in the briefing military intelligence research chief Brig. Gen. Yossi Baidatz gave the Knesset foreign affairs and security committee Sunday, Aug. 5. The West Bank was the next Fatah-Hamas arena of conflict, he said, and Fatah has no chance of standing up to Hamas there, any more than it did in Gaza. Abbas’ forces are completely dependent on the Israeli army to keep Hamas in check, he said.

For more : www.debka.com.

Wait, still more news and from America …on August 8, US House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer has warned Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas not to talk to an unreformed Hamas about reentering a unity government ahead of a visit to Israel and the West Bank next week.

"Dealing with Hamas and being in any coalition with Hamas [without Hamas accepting international demands to stop terrorism and recognize Israel] would be something which we would look on with opposition and suspicion," Hoyer (D-Maryland) told The Jerusalem Post in a telephone interview Wednesday. He said such a government would be a "setback" and a "cause for concern."

Hoyer's comments followed a Post report that officials from Abbas's Fatah party have been conducting secret negotiations with Hamas about a possible reconciliation, with the help of mediators from Arab countries.

Let’s put this together. Abbas received President Bush’s support; Rice visits us and brings a delightful package of monies and weapons. Olmert along with our new President Peres (ceremonial job only) support the Saudi plan, tell us we must buoy Abbas in the disputed territories and America’s legislature mandates that Abbas stay away from Hamas. Abbas agrees publicly to “never talk with Hamas” at the same time his own officials have opened a ”secret dialogue” with Hamas. All of this took place in less than a week. Do you see any disconnections, contradictions and outright foolishness?

Assume you know nothing about this region but were only told about this behavior. Tell me, if your own children stood in front of you and lied about staying away from the neighbor’s children while all the while playing with them, what would you believe? What would you do? Can you honestly tell me that you now trust your child to speak the truth? What if anything would you do to discipline your child? Your responses will speak volumes!