Fitzgerald: The delusional Olmert

Olmert likes to talk about those who want to hold onto the territory -- the so-called "West Bank" that was assigned to the territory of the Mandate for Palestine, that is, for the establishment of the Jewish National Home, by the League of Nations --- as "delusional." Why are they "delusional"? Israel's legal, historic and moral rights clearly overwhelm those of the local Arabs. Many of those Arabs descend from those who arrived to take advantage of the economic opportunities that the Zionist pioneers created, and that continued during the Mandate period, a period when the British made it increasingly difficult for Jews to arrive at the time of their greatest need and peril, but never did a thing about the far larger Arab immigration from Iraq, from Egypt, from the Emirate of Transjordan. And those places are where most of the local Arabs come from, though they have managed to fool the world into ignoring the real demographic and cadastral history of the area, especially of Western Palestine, beginning in the early 19th century.

Olmert takes the position that somehow, he doesn't quite know how, peace will come if Israel gives up the territory it needs to defend itself. It is territory that controls the historic invasion routes from the East. It is territory that controls the handful of Israel's airports. Most of them are within range of handheld weaponry from Qalqilya, at the eight-mile waist that Israel had to endure in the 1949 Armistice Lines, which the Arabs never recognized as permanent borders, and to which Olmert, a man intellectually at the end of his tether, and morally -- morally, nowhere -- seems to think Israel should return.

No. What the Israelis cannot do is give up one more inch of the "West Bank." They cannot, and are not required by any known morality or law, to give up the territory which, had they simply been able to take and hold during the 1948-49 war, would have been long ago recognized as much a part of Israel as any other. They should have annexed the entire "West Bank" in June 1967, and were fools not to. They could have massively settled the area, and created conditions that would have disabused the local Arabs of ever thinking they would be able, if they only waited, to wear Israel down, to obtain concession after concession, and then, finally, to do what the Slow Jihadists of Fatah wish to do -- which is ultimately to go in for the kill, but on a different timetable, and using at first different tactics, from those the Fast Jihadists of Hamas have in mind.

Olmert refuses to learn a thing about Islam. It is all around him, all around and within Israel, in the mosques, in the sermons of imams, in the videocassettes and the audiocassettes; on the broadcasts and in the newspapers in Arab lands. But Olmert will not study Islam. He doesn't have the time. He's too busy making peace, he's too busy with the "peace process." He hasn't time to study the texts. He will not study the tenets. He will not understand that the war against Israel is a Jihad, a war remove from the Arab and Muslim midst an Infidel nation-state. He does not understand this. He will not understand it. He does not understand that no tangible assets must be given up by Israel; he does not understand that no agreement by Muslims with Infidels will be kept, not because of the untrustworthiness of this or that leader, but because Islam itself offers the Example of the Perfect Man, Muhammad, al-insan al-kamil, who in his breaching of the treaty he made with the Meccans at Hudaibiyya in 628 A.D. set an example for all time.

That's Olmert.

And that's his would-be successor, Tzipi Livni, too. And that's too many Israelis. They think they are being the "realists." Those who want to hold onto the "West Bank" rely on invocation of Darura, Necessity, by the Arab rulers who may not wish to go to war. If Israel holds onto the "West Bank," this does not mean that the local Arabs need be given Israeli citizenship. It does not mean that "Israel will lose its Jewish character" -- it merely means that Israel will have something much more important, a fighting chance to survive in conditions other than those of maximum peril. In other words, Deterrence will keep the peace, as it keeps the peace now with Egypt and Jordan (and not those "peace treaties").

But Olmert thinks he is the "realist." People who want to hold onto the "West Bank" are, he thinks, "delusional."

Study Islam and then decide who here is being "delusional."
Thanks Dhimmi Watch