ACTING LIKE ITS FOR REAL
When I was acting there was a principle called THE WILLING SUSPENSION OF DISBELIEF - click here for explanation.
I'm not sure if people are suspending reality here to think ANYTHING can actually be accomplished here. Why do we persist in thinking that we can negotiate with the Arabs? Why do we think that these leaders have any of the cajhones to take these people on? We can't - because just look at how they treat their own. Even if (miracle of miracles) we do get some PROMISE of peace (anyone having Oslo deja vu here?) can we trust or even believe them?
What is wrong with people? Am I and some of my politically minded, clear-seeing friends the only ones who see this farce??
Israel wants peace. That's clear - but AT WHAT COST? How bad? Are they so desperate to "get married" they will wed themselves to evil?
How long can we be ostriches? Am I one of the only ones who sees?
Olmert is useless, he's not even listening to his own people! And anyone who's read a couple posts on my teeny blog knows what I have thought of Bush since 2000. Abbas? A snake... just review his relationship with Terror-Fat. This list is endless.
This willing suspension of disbelief can be deadly. It will be deadly if we buy into it for one second. This article below made me sad. Very sad. Annapolis is a dangerous photo-op. Don't buy it!
Let us PRAY! and ACT!
If not Annapolis, then what?
By Haaretz Editorial
Gideon Sa'ar, Likud's most fluent spokesman, believes that after Hamas took over Gaza, Israel should have understood the trap it had fallen into and "run for its life" instead of getting into another round of talks in Annapolis.
The question is, of course, where does Likud want Israel to run to. Likud has no solution to the conflict with the Palestinians and has made do for 40 years with taking the wind out of the sails of every agreement.
From this point of view there is an unsurprising similarity between statements by Sa'ar and Hamas political leader Khaled Meshal. Each sees concessions to the other side as a trap.
Each prefers the status quo to a historic compromise.
Likud never drew the borders of the country as it imagines them. The settlements were intended to blur the previous border and disrupt the placement of a new border. Instead of dividing the land into two states for two peoples, the right proposes waiting for the messiah.
The concern is that the day is not far off when the world will demand that Israel grant civil rights to the residents of the territories it occupies, if Israel is unwilling to withdraw from those territories. The possible solution of one state for two peoples has already been voiced by the European and American left. Those who do not want two states for two peoples may hasten the end of the Jewish state.
At Annapolis, Israel has a partner. It may be weak, it may represent only part of the Palestinian people, but finally there is another side that sees eye to eye with most of the people in Israel, a side that opposes using terror to achieve political goals and is willing to give up some of its original aspirations to reach an agreement.
The refusal to negotiate with Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas and his prime minister, Salam Fayad, is like spitting in the faces of the moderates.
If there is any chance to strengthen the moderates in the Palestinian street, it is only by presenting achievements.
Those who do not make do with Fatah will get more Hamas, and according to the U.S. secretary of state, they will in the end get Al-Qaida in the West Bank.
SOURCE
Comments