My, my. It seems that Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, or Abu Mazen, finally realized that he’s dependent on the US and Israel. If he refuses to talk to them, it’s likely that he’ll lose power quickly. So, what does Abbas do? He plays the victim for a couple of days, cries foul, compares Israel acting in self-defense to the holocaust (this man knows no shame), hoping that the world will feel sorry for him, and that Israel will do some concessions it doesn’t want to do; after which he says that he wants to talk… once again.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice announced on Wednesday that Israel and the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, were resuming the suspended peace talks, one day after Mr. Abbas refused to publicly commit to a resumption.
Mr. Abbas said Wednesday that that he was returning to the negotiations, but was noncommittal about the timing.
Although Ms. Rice did not specify when the talks would resume, she said an American general who was overseeing the effort to carry out the “road map” peace plan would hold his first joint meeting with the Israeli and Palestinian sides next week.
“I have been informed by the parties that they intend” to the peace negotiations Rice said.
The news came shortly after Abbas said that Israel should first talk to Hamas and establish a truce with the terrorist organization. Israel, logically, refused to do so, and Abbas quickly “backed away from that precondition.”
The Times says that “[t]he developments on Wednesday may represent a political breakthrough, but they also underline just how fragile the peace talks are. They may still be vulnerable to further violence.”
Of course anyone with half a brain knows that it is indeed very fragile. And anyone with 3/4 a brain knows that the Palestinians are just playing games.
This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.
Comments are closed.
PoliGazette Comments Policy
PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree.
Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate
these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors.
Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue
publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.
(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly
or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that
respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should
not be posted.
(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.
(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional
reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.
(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not
include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement
the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.
(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements.
Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or
that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat
slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.
Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors
by email only.
