John Jay picked up on my two most important posts last week: WAKE UP, WAKE UP and
BLUEPRINT FOR US SURRENDER TO ISLAM: THE US MUSLIM ENGAGEMENT. President Hussein is more than comfortable with this deal with the devil as he seeks to institute an Islamo-Christian ethic, destroying the very foundation of this great country - the Judeo-Christian ethic. Never mind that Muslims go after and annihilate the Christians in every country they finally dominate. This is of no import.
And while John correctly concludes that this report "portends the destruction of israel and the annihilation of her citizens", it further portends the end of America, western civilization and the advent of the next dark age.
Europe's "justification" for its terrible compromise with evil (and the relinquishment of Europe of Islamic domination) was explained by Bat Ye'or here. America only has to look to Europe to see the devastating consequences of what is proposed in the implementation of the US Muslim Engagement. Bat Ye'or wrote:
This choice of a policy based on fear, ransom and surrender, and on the justification of jihad has blinded Europe to its dangers. Allied with the PLO and the Arab League, the EC denied the threat of global jihadism. This denial, fundamental to Eurabian policy, motivated the appeasement and peaceful surrender to jihadists while pretending that Europe’s enemies were American, but above all, Israel’s policies of resistance to jihad. Hence, Europe transferred onto Israel and America the threat of a terrorist war to which it had already capitulated.
John Jay has studied the document on the US Muslim Engagement and picks up where I left off here.
my pronouncements on israel and muslim “engagement” stand as mere bald assertions, without supporting context. so, i suppose there is only to turn to the text of the pamphlet i am discussing, and to see what it has to say about various things, and why i think what is says. and, why I think what it doesn’t say supports my assertions about what it says inferentially.
this pamphlet eschews military intervention as a useful tool of diplomacy in the muslim world, stating that it only makes enemies for the u.s. and causes much resentment. you know the drill. instead, the pamphlet endorses the time tested, traditional device of palaver by which to carry on diplomacy, in short talking things to death in the intervals of “peace in our time” before all hell breaks loose. in a section entitled the “executive summary” the “leadership group on u.s.—muslim engagement” announces its reliance upon diplomacy to cure several of the world’s more prominent sources of tension involving islam, that being the mid east peace process and the aim of preventing iran from attaining nuclear weapons. to do this, the left and obama will:
“1. elevate diplomacy as the primary tool for resolving key conflicts involving muslim countries, engaging both allies and adversaries in dialogue
n engage with iran to explore the potential for agreements that could increase regional security, while seeking iran’s full compliance with its nuclear nonproliferation commitments.
n work intensively for immediate de-escalation of the israeli-palestinian conflict and a viable path to a two-state solution, while ensuring the security of israelis and palestinians
report of the leadership group on u.s.—muslim engagement, “changing course: a new direction for u.s. relations with the muslim world, pub. by the u.s.—muslim engagement project, wash.d.c. & cambridge, ma., page 4. (hereinafter, “report.”)
so, there you have it. “we ain’t gonna make war no more, we ain’t gonna make war no more, we ain’t gonna …. make …. war …. no more!!!”
in short, and in plain english, following this blue print means that the united states will not use military power to prevent iran from building nuclear weapons. in other words, it has now become a cardinal tenet of u.s. foreign policy that we do nothing to prevent iran from attaining the bomb except via diplomacy, … , in the starkest terms possible, the authors of this report concede iran the atomic bomb, and the missile systems necessary to deliver them against israel.
sorry maddie, i will concede you have done right well by yourself career wise, but after having recently finished john bolton’s “surrender is not an option,” simon & schuster, new york, new york, 2007 and the “afterword” thereto, pages 460-473, i am just not very sanguine about the possibilities of palaver and the inducements of diplomacy having much effect upon either iran or north korea to halt their missile and nuclear weapons programs, or to change iran’s chosen course. (this “scenario” has recently been set in motion by barrack obama. get it?) in the context of developing their missiles and nuclear bombs, the north korean and iranians have accepted bribe after economic bribe to stop their programs, have not stopped their programs, and have marched inexorably it would seem in a world full of weaklings with big weapons, to join the ranks. maybe that is the goal of diplomacy, to give them nuclear weapons so that they may magically turn into pissants and poseurs, too, but it seems a dubious strategy to me.
to my thinking if iran has nuclear weapons the drive will be to use them, before israel, her intended victim, simply gives way under the threat of nuclear annihilation and peremptorily destroys them, whether by conventional weapons or her own nukes.
in short, the pamphlet “changing course” would commit to a failed strategy of previous diplomacy to bring a resolution to the issue of the iranian and north korean possession of nuclear weapons, and the facilities to make them. nothing in recent history suggests that either the international atomic energy commission or the united nations general assembly and security council are going to be any more efficient or efficacious in reigning in these rogue states’ nuclear pretensions & ambitions than they ever have been. if the united states is afraid to use military power to do it, as a practical matter there is simply nothing stop iran and north korea from having them, save perhaps stinging insults.
the simple fact is, diplomacy proving unavailing, iran will possess nuclear weapons.
what other tired old shibboleths has this report turned to, to bring an end to the tensions and violence in the world, particularly as it applies to islamic terrorism.
well, the report holds to the view that if only the iraeli and arab dispute over “palestine” can be brought to a peaceful conclusion, then muslim resentments toward the west and the united states will end, and peace will reign in the region, and hence the world. i cannot do the report’s position sufficient justice except to quote it fully, but, you will be forgiven in this camp if all of this sounds depressingly similar to the leftist state department pap that you have been hearing for years. unites states diplomacy will:
“work intensively for immediate de-escalation of the israeli-palistinian conflict and a viable path to a two-state solution. u.s. leadership in resolving the israeli-palestinian conflict is critical not only for israeli’s and palestinians, but also for u.s. relations with muslim countries and people world-wide. it would be hard to overstate the symbolic significance of the conflict, and the u.s. role in it, for muslims in the middle east and around the world. in the view of most muslims, the u.s. has enabled and shielded israel’s occupation of palestinian lands since 1967. when they consider the record of u.s. support for israel, the u.s. decision to deny the legitimacy of hamas following its 2006 electoral victory, they find it easy to reject u.s. calls for democracy in other muslim countries.
helping to de-escalate the israeli-palestinian conflict and put it on a sustainable path to a two-state solution would contribute greatly to u.s. credibility across the muslim world. middle east states that have exploited the conflict to distract attention from their domestic failings might also face greater pressure to accelerate political and economic reforms.
israelis, palestinians, the u.s., and other key players in the region and around the world recognize that the status quo is untenable. israel’s occupation of the west bank and its isolation of gaza, the status of jerusalem, and palestinian terrorist attacks in israel undermine security for all, encouraging extremis and making it nearly impossible for leaders on either side to create a comprehensive peace agreement.
today, the critical question is not whether to sacrifice israel’s security for the sake of muslim public opinion, or vice versa. rather, it is what practical steps the u.s. can take to help palestinians achieve their rights to security and self-determination, while maintaining and enhancing israel’s security.
to build momentum for a broader regional peace, the u.s. should also engage syria in dialogue. moderates in israel, palestine, and lebanon could all gain if dialogue led to a realignment of syrian foreign policy toward peace with israel and full self-determination in lebanon. as a core element of dialogue and diplomacy with syria, the u.s. should help mediate and guarantee a syrian-israeli peace treaty, and seek ways to normalize damascus-washington relations, while encouraging the ongoing restoration of diplomatic relations between syria and lebanon.
to knit these threads together, the u.s. needs a carefully designed, sustained, and energetic strategy. too often in the past, the u.s. commitment has been episodic. the track record of u.s. diplomacy in the region shows the high risk that misunderstanding, mistrust, and the actions of hard-lines and extremists pose to the peace process. on the other hand, high-level and sustained u.s. efforts have helped the parties to achieve substantial agreements, and could do so again.
as the leader of sustained u.s. efforts to achieve a permanent, two state resolution of the israeli-palestinian conflict, the president should appoint a special envoy.
report, pages 41-46.
well. piece of cake. why no one ever thought of such an easy strategy before, well, it is kind of staggering, something of a wonder, isn’t it? peace treaty with syria. get hamas to normalize, abandon its religious zealotry, rewrite its charter, which defines it religious purpose and eschews diplomacy, reform its state security apparatus and reunite with abbas, all the while neutralizing iran as a rogue state, in the mean time convincing the israeli settlers to abandon their land claims and capital improvement on the west bank, and wrap the whole deal up.
all the while this legerdemain is being performed, no one of the parties shall ever mention the role of islam, the arab brotherhood, nor the little ongoing fracas between hamas and abbas, and securing the antiquities at the temple mount and the partition of jerusalem. what, you say, they didn’t mention that?
does all of this sound sort of depressingly similar, and couched with that smug, smarmy, sanctimonious self assurance that only the truly deluded and self centered in the world can summon? real world issues which have led to the deaths of many, are reduced to the level of conceptual “stumbling” blocks in this triumph of hubris and self assuredness over the realities of history and human behavior. it is only to be observed that reality has toppled many a bold scheme.
all of this is as doomed to failure in the future as it has been doomed by failure in the past. and, for the same reasons: human complexities do not bend to formula, especially not very well thought out formula.
now, i am going to say something which is sort of out of step with the wisdom of the age. but, these are the sorts of things that they used to have wars over, little things like national boundaries and rights of occupation. (anyone of you ever heard of the ruhr valley?) when van clausewitz said that war was an extension of foreign policy, this is what he meant. he might very well have added that a war properly brought and fought was also much more efficient that diplomacy, infinitely faster and capable of greater precision in resolution (generally because the winner had the ability to impose his decisions with quite literally life or death immediacy), and quite possibly more availing of and less destructive of human life and property, given the immediacy of resolution of most disputes.
in short, this is the same failed “policy” we have foisted off and forced upon the israelis in return for our protection for the past 15 years or so, the famous “two state” solution. this is a “solution” that almost nobody thinks will be accepted by either side, ever. it will not work. the french, the germans, the english, the israelis, the arabs, know that it will not work. john bolton knows it will not work, and that no one will accept it, which is why he is promoting the re-absorption of the west bank back into jordan (he knows full well the jordanians will kill abbas in far greater number than the israelis ever did, just as they killed more p.l.o. than the israeli’s ever dreamt of), and the integration of gaza back into egypt (where he knows the egyptians will kill hamas in droves, and stack them in sheaves, in biblical proportion.) binyamin netanyahu knows it will not work, because a two state solution whether or not saddled with a muslim “right of re-entry” into “palestine” means the eventual demographic death of israel, something olmert and livni might have accepted, but an eventuality netanyahu will not accept, even if the israeli’s are pressured under the diplomatic “largess” of the united states. and, finally, the two state solution will not happen, because the gazan’s and the palestinians will not accept it, as it just leaves them with the problem of killing each other, instead of being killed by the jordanians and the egyptians and/or the jews. both abbas and hamas both know the incredible bloodletting that will follow upon statehood: they know they will kill each other with greater rapacity than any of their traditional foes have ever killed them. and, they would rather live the subsidized life of ease under the protectorate of the united nations and the eruo union, rather than to have to make their own way in the world. with the status quo, they can do some symbolic fighting from time to time, enjoy a little bloodletting against the israeli’s, and enjoy a life of ease: with statehood, comes work, and serious killing with precious little symbolism or theatre involved in it, and a serious killing that will last years, rather than the desultory week or ten days at a time as against israel.
let us pretend to be democrats, and do some more counting.
there are about 11 or 12 million jews in the world. there are about 5.3 million jews in israel, another 5.3 million jews in the united states, and a smattering here and there around the rest of the world. need it be added that jews are found in liberal to center leaning democracies, champions of free speech in bastions of free speech and liberality, and in uncensored societies and academia, or press towards those values wherever they are. this means that there are roughly 100 muslims for every jew world wide, about 245 muslims for every jew in israel, give or take a few here and there.
israel, as contrasted to the arab states, has no major oil fields, although natural gas deposits were found off the mediterranean coast recently; israel sits across no major land or sea trading routes, nor menaces any by piracy or the threat of nuclear missiles or conventional armed missiles; and israel enjoys political stability and a civil and civilized politics, in spite of having the largest peaceful arab minority community of any country in the world: this, a matter of substantial irony, to say the least, especially given the conclusions arrived at in this paper vis a visa the implications of the “changing course” pamphlet. let it be said that israel’s economy thrives because it is nurtured by hard work, free market economies, highly educated and motivated citizens, and a society which embraces our own values of free speech and due process of law.
did i mention that israel carries on no wars of domestic terror and violence against any nation on earth, or that israel’s arab and druze citizens possess liberties and freedoms other arabs can only imagine. oh, if you are a diehard socialist or comm symp or fellow traveler with the palestinians, i know your position and i know mine, so just keep the insults and dissents short. i would ask only were you of sufficient candor to note that all conflicts with syria, lebanon, jordan and egypt have been conducted by israel in observance of international rules, and were you of sufficient candor to acknowledge that the concept of “palestinian” as applied to those of arabic descent was invented by yasser arafat, who was either egyptian or tunisian, i cannot remember. but, otherwise, is you wish to challenge these assertions, flail away.
need the rest of you be reminded that jesus christ was a jewish rabbi, in all likelihood, long before he “became” christian, and that the values of the torah and the christian bible are so similar and compatible that something called a judeo-christian ethos informs and forms the core values and ethics of both religions, of western civilization, and the core values and ethics and politics of israel and the united states. in short, the heritage of the jewish people, is our heritage, and forms our heritage.
is it such a world that i am constrained to explain that, within this context? sadly, i fear it is.
again, there are about 5.3 million jews in the united states, and about 2-3, or 3-4 million muslims in the united states. those numbers and that relationship will change, as muslim birthrates and immigration will supplant the jewish position as a minority group, and also as muslim influence in politics will supplant jewish influence in politics. the muslims will never equal the jewish contribution in the letters, in the arts, and in political thought and action, but they will pass the jews in numbers and votes, … , and, that my friends is that, and that is where it is at. numbers.
the only interchange and engagement involved in this unholy scheme, will be the infusion of islamic doctrine and perspective into the american ethos. and, the resultant dilution of our faiths, our values, and the questioning of them by their adherents. that is perhaps not so bad, in theory, in a way because were this the competition of values on the open market place, i have no doubt that adherents to the west would far outstrip adherents to the ancient east. but, this engagement does not take place in an open market, because islam is closed, this “engagement”, this “u.s. – muslim” engagement, is strictly a one way street, where the bacillus of islam attacks the organism of western belief.
as to the assumption, not explicitly stated in the report, that islam and the arab world will cease to attack western interests, that islam will settle down and not be violent or extremist if israel is not there to “vex” and “humiliate” them continually. does this hold?
let me ask you this. were israel to disappear tomorrow, what would change about the world? what would change about the middle east? what?
the jewish vote in domestic politics now means nothing, because it means nothing to the democratic party.
the value of the jewish vote is determined just as the value of a stock sold on the stock market. the price of a stock does not reflect actual capital structures; look at g.m.'s stock, which is worth bupkis, even though g.m. is a magnificent company by any standard. the value of the stock is based upon expectation and forecast, and foreseeable profits: g.m. is in the tank because people think it will be in the tank. it is the same with jewish votes and demographics: it is now valueless to the democrats, in terms of any influence over domestic politics or the mid-east peace process, because the democrats have made the estimation that it will be valueless and irrelevant in the future. in the eyes and minds of democrats, leftists, radicals and socialist thinkers, the jews have been replaced by the arabs and muslims as a dependable voting bloc which will always deliver for the democrats: the democrats can afford to give up the jewish numbers now, because they will be replaced by even more arab voters in the not too distant future.
jews are still in considerable number in some places, they are still strong in some places, but, the expectation is they will not be. so, for all intents and purposes, the jews have no political power, right now.
as long as they vote democratic.
doubt this? besides arab and american muslims, who are the most virulently anti-semitic people in the united states of american right now? they are the leftist intelligentsia, at all levels of society and in government, and they represent the authorship and constituency of the report we are discussing, the report that has chosen islam and muslims over the jews.
it is that simple.
jewish power gone, as long as it remains allied to the democrats. friends, the left has sold the jews down the river.
by the time that jewish liberals figure out that they have been had, and had big time, the jewish voting bloc will have been replaced by the muslim voting bloc. it makes no difference that the muslims and the demo's don't agree on anything, just as long as the muslims deliver the votes, the jews will be betrayed in their agendas domestically, and they are tragically betrayed in trying to protect and save israel: friends, the deal is in, israel has been sacrificed for oil and geopolitical considerations. the fix is in.
look at the situation in terms of united states politics, where strength is measured in votes delivered to the voting booth.--
jews. 5.3 million and shrinking. muslims. 3-5 million, who knows, and producing offspring prolifically, like bunny rabbits. the jews will be local powers in new york, connecticut & massachusetts for a few more years., and have scattered influence in county and municipal affairs, , of course power houses in florida, and that's about it. when arab american/muslim population demographics reach figures comparable to the jewish vote, it is all over but the shouting for jews on the national stage, and within the democratic party, save perhaps new york state and new york city. there the jews will be in bitter contests with muslim adversaries, the verbiage and issues of the middle east dominating local american politics.
muslims. they will follow their patterns established in other parts of the world, and will move to every urban center in the united states, and, state capitals. the stealth jihad will continue, if nothing short of revolution stops it, and they will become a national power house very soon, eclipsing the jews on a national basis.
what? what is the point of this, you ask? well, it is a simple point. the jewish political bloc in the united states can no longer protect israel, it has not sufficient perceived power to do so any longer. i know it is somewhat circular in terms of logic, the simple fact is that this is proven because the jewish bloc has not prevented the sell out and betrayal of israel as related in this pamphlet we discuss. the simple fact is that the jewish bloc does not hold intellectual sway over “liberal” democrats, or the “liberal wing” of the democratic any more, as its increasing anti-semitic thought and behavior demonstrates. and, to conclude, the democrats have counted, and they have found the votes they think they need to preserve their hold on power in the united states in the american muslim community, and that is who they have thrown their hats in with, as demonstrated by this pamphlet.
again, tediously if you will, do you see any similar outreach to israel and jews coming from the democrats, from george soros.
my dear jewish friends, it is simply time to walk away from your democratic house, and move to the republican neighborhoods, where you are welcome and sought. come on in, the water in the pool is fine, and the beer is cold and on tap in the ‘fridge. simple as that.
international politics. there are two significant factors in this report. two.
as to the peace process, the policies laid out in the report are a sham.—
the authors of the report know it, and i know it, and you, gentle reader should realize this, too. the authors of the report are not seriously propounding this as a concept that will work, because they know as an historical verity that pursuit of these goals has proven an abject failure, several times over. do you want a reassertion of proof at this point? the first thing condition in the report the authors want met by israel to jump start the talks, once more, is a demand that there be a cessation of jewish settlement and construction of settlement in the west bank. oh, my yes, that is going to be easily achieved, isn’t it? at bayonet point, and the spilling of jewish blood by jewish soldiers, perhaps. just how likely is that?
the language in the report re: the peace process is just verbiage, and idol gesture, and nothing else. it is not intended seriously.
to my mind there are two things in this report that are significant, and to be regarded as cornerstones of democratic policies. one of these things is stated directly, and may be regarded as a statement of present intent on the part of the left. it follows.
1.)the democrats propose to carry on diplomacy with the world, they eschew the military option, and the first place they are going to dialogue with the world is with the iranians, and an attempt to dissuade the iranians from nuclear proliferation and gaining the bomb. they know they shall fail, because diplomacy has failed in every attempt to prevent the development of nuclear weapons by iran and north korea to this point. in short, and in the starkest terms possible, they concede iran the bomb.
(and, in a truly frightening corollary, they concede nuclear proliferation throughout the middle east. do you think syria and iraq have forgotten their nuclear pretensions, and do think saudi arabia and egypt will be far behind their muslim “neighbors” in obtaining nuclear weapons. this is horrible to contemplate, but i go where my mind and reason dictate, and this is inevitable: the obama administration will arm the world with nukes.)
having conceded iran the bomb, this means the iranians will use it, first chance it gets.
the democrats can count. they count 1.3 billion muslims/arabs, 11-12-13 million jews. it is a no brainer of an exercise, really, you can go to any number of statistics sites on the web, and confirm that. the democrats have elected to go with islam, internationally. the democrats have further elected to go with islam in domestic politics, and think that such is their future of the united states. friends, it is all a matter of counting votes, and in this regard, the democrats have chosen to let the tabulations of votes set their course in domestic politics and in foreign policy: do not be surprised to see muslim immigration rise precipitously, as the democrats secure these voting bloc margins. yes, they will do as european politicians have done, which is to sell out their constituencies for perpetuating their power. and, we shall suffer the same ends as they have chosen the same means. so, the jews win nobel prizes. about 180 of 'em, i think. to a politician, that means 13 million jews plus 180 more jews. it makes no difference to the democrats, they have counted to 1.3 billion.
we have seen one thing that is significant in the report. the recourse to diplomacy. is there popping into anyone’s mind, the old 60’s radical mantra, hey, man, there ain’t nothing worth dying for? this repudiation of military force as a viable way of conducting foreign policy, which surely would seem strange to those who considered such matters indistinguishable in days only recently past.
the other significant matter is arrived at solely by inference.--
2.)the second significant thing in this report is the sections dealing with, "why should we care about muslims," in which they count repeatedly to 1.3 billion, and, oh yes, report that arab countries have all the oil, and sit astride the major shipping lanes and lanes of commerce in the world. this is why they count to 1.3 billion, and take about faith interchange and dialogue, and cultural interchange and dialogue, and educational faith and dialogue, and getting along.
now, everybody will take the bullshit stuff, the foreign policy stuff, and they will take it seriously, and learned articles and discourse will flow over this aspect of the report, just as though it meant anything, and was a scholarly effort to resolve the world's problems. it is not, and is not intended to be any effort at resolving problems, it was picking sides: it is intended to be the same old tired bullshit it is, and its sole function is intended to divert attention from the important aspects of the report, which is the fact that the leftists have chosen islam over judaism.
plain and simple, and irrefutable by the application of logic and inference and observation.
now, everybody will take the stuff they think is bullshit, just fluff to make the islamic members of the panel feel good, and they will ignore it, and nothing will be said of it, but that is the oh so very important part of this report: it is key. the most important part of the report is the building of interchange between american scholars, elites, politicians and the like, with their "muslim & arab counterparts" in government, business, commerce, the arts, and in "interfaith exchange," and in the education of identified "elites" and "students." now, this is the visionary part of it, and it comes from the soros/acorn/community activist heritage of the modern virulent left, and it intends to build parallel inroads into islamic society to dovetail with us, and to build inroad into american society so that islam may insinuate itself into our society.
by what seems to me compelling inference, when you put these two things together, in the politics of the middle east and the foreign policy of “engagement” with islam, this report concedes the destruction of israel, either demographically through the arab birthrate, or by the use of nuclear weapons should the iranians ever figure out how to make the bomb and deliver it.
by the emphasis on diplomacy, and eschewing and renouncing the use of the u.s. military to establish diplomatic goals, (except as it pertains to the direct defense of u.s. interests, and you will notice nowhere in this report does it assert a u.s. interest to use the military on behalf of anyone else, especially israel), the u.s. concedes arabic/muslims diplomatic and military goals vis a vis israel.
i do not believe the juxtaposition of the iranian policy with the old two state road map, which everybody agrees is long past its usefulness can mean anything else. this conclusion is buttressed by the clear choice the leftists policy wonks have made for aligned with arab/muslim interests, in advancing policies that call for the integrations of american society and arabic societies, and in the almost complete repudiation or ignoring of any of israel’s legitimate interests.
no, the importance of the report’s proposals for "change" lies only in the genuine change foreseen in muslim demographics as anticipated to take place in the u.s., and in the "building of bridges" between the u.s. society and the muslim societies of the world, on all levels, including the level of faith, commerce, art, politics, philosophy and religion.
everybody will think this part of the report is fluff, and they will gloss over it, and probably not even read it.
this is a crucial mistake.
this is where the action is.
think about it, for a moment. what would be the point of publishing a paper advocating the two state solution, and advocating diplomacy with iran?
what is the damned point of such an exercise?
it is the dogma of the state department. controlled by the left. (why do they need to write a paper telling themselves what they already believe?)
the left does not need to write another paper, saying the same hack kneed stuff that they have been saying for 20 years or more.
but, to publish a paper, and to advance the notions that they do advance in terms of the insinuation of the muslim religion and view into our religious, political and commercial institutions, ... , yes, that is the significance.
and, that is why those portions of the report look like internet billboards for every sort of islamic promotion conceivable.
that, my dear friends, is the significance of this report.
so that we and the muslims will be friends. the leftists have picked sides, and they mean to impose this choice upon the rest of us, and to institutionalize and perpetuate that choice, through the means described in the pamphlet.
even after they have wreaked nuclear devastation upon israel for the temerity to exist and to espouse and be good, as good. because, you see, by then, we shall thoroughly understand the arab position, sufficiently to accept their actions, if not exactly positively endorse it.
yes, that is the other thing we may take from this report.
it portends the destruction of israel and the annihilation of her citizens, about 5.3 million jews.