Under the auspices
of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, the notorious pair, David
Makovsky and Dennis Ross, co-wrote a 16-page document they call “Toward a New
Paradigm for Addressing the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict,” as part of a series
which the Institute calls: “Policy Notes for the Trump Administration.” It was
published in January of 2017.
There is a preamble
at the start of the document called “Executive Summary.” It's a good thing the
writers did this because the paper is a massive, toxic morass of Jewish haggles
that serve to demonstrate why these people haven't advanced an inch in four
thousand years of sordid history. The preamble offers a taste of what's to come
in the rest of the document, allowing the readers to decide if they want to
continue reading the thing or drop it to do something else.
What the summary
does is condense the drivel ahead in two pages. What it says in short, is that
President Trump must not seek a comprehensive settlement pertaining to the
Jewish occupation of Palestine .
But by the time you've read the first paragraph, you realize they are actually
saying he must not try to reach any settlement at all. This being the case,
what are they telling Donald Trump to do? Here is what they are telling him:
“In lieu of seeking
a comprehensive peace, the new administration should focus on reaching an
agreement with Israel on
steps that [would] blunt the delegitimization movement against Israel ; and
provide the administration with leverage to use with the Palestinians, other
Arabs, and Europeans”.
Mind you, this is
not what they suggest Trump should do; it is what they command him to do. He is
to sit with Israel
and reach an agreement to do the things they just enumerated. Do you know what
these things amount to, my friend? The two Jews are telling the President of
the United States he must
put those ideas on paper so that they become a binding promise they can take to
the congress of zombies, and have these creatures pass resolutions that will
sink America and keep Israel afloat.
And when the Jews of
Israel will have the President of the United States on the slippery slope
of that promise, what else will they tell him to do? Here is the answer to that
question: “In line with this approach, the United
States should accept construction in the existing
settlement blocs and East Jerusalem .” Is that
it? America
should accept––meaning green-light––Jewish construction on Palestinian lands.
Is there no demand on Israel
to reciprocate in some fashion?
Oh yes there is
something, the writers assure the readers. But before telling what it is, they
qualify their dictum by articulating two big caveats. The first is that no
demand will be made on Israel
to commit to anything verbally or in writing. What America
will do is simply “ask Israel
to stop building outside those areas … and [simply] ask Netanyahu to
demonstrate commitment to the two-state solution.” The second caveat gives the
Jews the escape hatch they will need to trash even this American request if and
when they so decide … unless –– well, see for yourself unless what:
“Such steps would
not be easy for the Israeli government to take, but U.S.
commitments to produce strategic gains for Israel in response could provide
the political tailwind for the prime minister to sell the moves. The
commitments could include vetoing any UN resolutions opposed to Israel ; resist all pressures on Israel to take
any other steps; promising to gain Arab and European public [PUBLIC]
acknowledgment of the significance of the Israeli moves; commitment from the
Europeans and Palestinians to stop their anti-normalization campaign”. Wow! All
that except the kitchen sink … or maybe it's there too; buried in the 16 pages
that no one will read.
Looking at the
package of demands made by Ross and Makovsky in the name of Israel , and
looking at the package of nothings they are offering in return, you feel
disgusted and you wonder. You begin to understand why humanity – through the
ages and throughout the globe – has wanted to punish these people as harshly as
it did. Unable to find a word that will express the depth of your disgust; you
search the preamble for what they say about their scheme … and find them
calling it a virtue.