The problem with slapping Condi on the wrist here, Shark, is that we don't really know what is going on. So much of the public pronouncements about this stuff is just propagandistic BS. What is really important is what the US is telling Israel behind the scenes. And your guess is as good as mine.

I reluctantly kinda sorta agree with Roger, but either the mass media or our foreign policy minions - or both - suffer from a mass delusion that equates the Israeli defense with the murderers. It certainly is the same Islamofascist movement in different forms that needs defending against, and it can't be appeased. Would that Ms. Rice wore the same candor that Mr. Rumsfeld does. How can the State Department continue pretending that old original terrorist Arafat is neutralized?

R L Simon,
It's hard to still believe in some grandiose plan by Bush et all. So my guess, hopefully as good as anybody's, is that Condi is pitching in to salvage the ill conceived road map. And I second Shark's suspicion that, as usual, the terror against Jews is considered only half as bad as against the others. No machiavelian plots required to explain Condi's speech.

I think Roger is wrong. Public pronouncements count very much for moral clarity, credibility, and public support. We should articulate a clear policy (we have) and act consistently with it (we have not). To the extent we have not, we undermine our interests.

Well, one of Bush's selling points is that he's plain-spoken: he says what he means and follows through. If Roger's right -- "So much of the public pronouncements about this stuff is just propagandistic BS. What is really important is what the US is telling Israel behind the scenes." -- then either Israel is the exceptional case, or else Bush has become more Clintonesque than his base would like.

You must understand this rhetoric from the administration for the posturing that it is. Bush has to be able to said he gave the Road Map a try, and the Palestinians again missed an opportunity. Once this happens, then the very concept of a Palestinian state as something that Israelis can accept will be put back like a jeanie in the bottle. Jordan, with addition of few West Bank Arab cities, may again become Palestine once again!

Markus,
Hope you're right - but the experience says that Bush will keep on giving Abbas more "last chances" while presesing Israel for new "good will gestures" like freeing prisoners this time around.
Until Israel bites the bullet and declares an end to the "last chances" the low intensity terror and Israel tepid responses will continue and Powell and his ilk will be talking about the cycles of violence.

Yes, maybe all this rhetoric is just a bunch of posturing and that which is said privately is more important than that which is said publicly.

But I still wonder what the value of all this posturing is. There have already been too many months of unnecessary patience and last chances with the Palestinians and what has that produced other than a few more dead Israelis? It should have been obvious from the beginning that Abu Mazen was an empty suit and that the roadmap was destined to fail and that the hudna was a hoax.

Maybe its just me because my family has to ride the buses in Jerusalem and my younger brother in the IDF will be among those who have to put their lives on the line to actually deal with the problem. But I'm not only concerned about the Israelis. As an American I worry about our people around the world and our troops in Iraq who will pay the consequences for our leaders giving the impression that they can be fooled and taken advantage of.

Stefan,
It's not just you. Until end of the hudna, Sharon acted and talked almost like Peres. It appears that since the last horrible bus bombing Sharon had regained some of his old posture. But even now, the response is kind of tepid. Already long time ago I've started to think that the things Bush says in private and in public are just about the same.
I do not believe that Bush and Sharon have some secret plan favoring Israel, and consequently I can't explain Sharon's policy without assuming some heavy pressure from Bush.

Hoping you will read this comment and then by reading the following links that you can explain to this cynic in Israel what the Admin can be saying to Sharon behind our backs :

http://www.weeklystandard.com/content/public/articles/000/000/002/994qvpoj.asp

http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=9562

Really for some long time now the folks here have known of the tunnel smuggling. Unfortunately it does not seem to be in the interests of the "media" to bring it to the attention of the American public. The ISM was in effect trying to prevent demolition of one of the homes used to diguise the tunnel exit!

By any chance did you guys in the States see any coverage from the "Muqata" in Ramallah following Powell's plea to Arafat?
There was the "king" smiling and hand held high with Churchill's V for victory salute.
Give us a break, Something smells in "Hamlet's kitchen"!

I agree with the posters that we must be upset by Bush's public posture. I think one of the things that separated Bush from his critics on the Left was his moral clarity. For him to have his flunkies say one thing in public and another thing in private smacks of confusion and cynicism. When Bush listens to his gut instincts he is correct. When he listens to the appeasers at State, he screws up. It's as simple as that.

How many saw this article "Rogue State Department" by Roger Bedein in Frontpage Magazine 08/25/2003?

http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=9521
Maybe this will provide some insight.
Several of the points made have already been discussed in the prss here, but I doubt if the "big" media paid any attention to anything in the Hebrew media. Well at least they are "balanced" as they don't seem to read what Arafat publishes in his papers.

Perhaps the only good thing that will come out of your Zionist extremism is a binational state with equal rights for all. I know you and the other American Likudniks (or are you a Moledat supporter?) don't like to admit it, but check Haaretz, where it's an active topic of discussion. The "final solution" of "transfer" isn't going to happen, so better you should start playing nice with those who will be your neighbors.

I am always intrigued by the term "Islamofascist." Does it describe something real? Is it redundant? Are "Islamofascists" distinguishable from your run-of-the-mill Islamos? Is its use meant to immunize the user from charges of racism? For instance, I've read (and can surely find the source) that in Northern Nigeria, OBL is the most popular Moslem around; that in France, OBL's face is so popular, one French phone company has it downloadable to cell phones as their background image. I could go on with more details. The point being: has someone done a poll that can distinguish your everyday Islamo from the radical, hatefilled Islamofascists? (Well, they have, in the PA-controlled areas, where terrorism against Israelis, although called something else, is rather popular.)