I just blogged an op-ed about Pipes during the overnight.

http://eclectchap.blogspot.com

I'm tired now. Gotta crash.

Yeah, well Chris Hitchens doesn't think it's a good idea. As he says, "Why would [Pipes] want the job?"

http://slate.msn.com/id/2086844/

Daniel Pipes responded to Hitch's article on his blog. I think that reply pretty much speaks for itself.

Not really a reply so much as an attack on Hitch: This lunatic attacked Bob Hope, Mother Teresa, Kissinger, and ME!

I did read the article that Pipes linked to: pretty much says that the solution is beating the Palestinians into submission, with no delineation for final borders proposed.

I think the U.S. Inst. of Peace is probably a waste of whatever taxpayer monies it spends, but given that it exists, Hitch's point is well taken: do we really have to load up the board with Likudniks? Aren't Feith and the head of AIPAC enough?

We do need to load it up with people who actually understand the Arab-Muslim world, seeing it accurately and telling the truth. You would prefer terror apologist Edward Said, perhaps? No, don't answer that. Speaking for myself, I'm very happy about this appointment.

And perhaps you could stop deliberately misconstruing Pipes' argument long enough to actually read it. To quote:

"Actually, I was not commenting on dispossession at all - typical sloppy Hitchens style to make a faulty assumption and then go on the rampage against it - but on the peculiar and specific United Nations definition of a "Palestinian refugee" that differs from the definition of any other refugee.

That happens to be the topic of my column today, "The Refugee Curse," which I hope Hitchens will keep quiet long enough to read and learn from. (August 19, 2003)"

Yeah, I agree the "refugee" issue is a red herring. Nobody seriously thinks they're going to come back, at least to 1967-borders Israel.

But really, what's Pipes' solution to the currently occupied territories?

Well, if he's hiding one he ought to let the world know, because it sure has everyone else flummoxed. Except most Arabs, of course, who think the solution is to kill all the Jews and Islamicize the country.

If you're hiding a solution of your own to this issue, Klaatu, how about sharing it with us?

It is the conclusion of many serious thinkers that beating the Palestinians "into submission" is a necessary step to getting them to the point of accepting the need for sincere negotiations. By some polls, a majority of Palestinians profess a preference for continuing the war against Israel.

The sticking point in negotiations isn't the viability of borders in fact but the necessity of Palestinians to accept settlement of the issue and the end of victimhood.

As a matter of fact I do have a solution. To propose, that is. Of course every solution has its problems, but I will propose one which has some details:

Israel returns to the 1967 borders, with the exception of East Jerusalem and some MINOR adjustments around the borders, mostly where the "suburbs" of Jerusalem have been built since 1967. The Palis could maybe get some compensation for this along the southern border of the West Bank or somewhere.

For the general outlines of the demographics, download one of the versions of the demographic map on this page:

http://www.peacenow.org.il/English.asp?Redirect=4&ReportID=38

The demographic map shows that continued occupation is untenable, unless you're willing to resort to extreme measures.

Then you build the wall. A high wall. With fences, too.

Of course the USA guarantees Israel's security, even if those air- and sub-launched nukes aren't enough.

The Israelis in places like Hebron or Ariel don't have to leave. They just can't expect to have the Israeli army policing their neighborhood forever, or the Israelis in Tel Aviv to put up with suicide bombing forever for the sake of their wanting to live in some outpost.

Or maybe it's better idea to build the wall first.

Which is essentially what Israel is doing.

No, not a fence. A forty foot high, twenty foot deep, ten foot thick wall, monitored in, above, and below. I'm thinking Escape from New York here. At least that's how I'd be thinking if I was living in Tel Aviv.

I just came back online to discover that I've been Winds-alanched!!

My site meter records this as the highest visiting day to my blog with 146 so far and it's only 5 pm. Most of the visitors are from W of C.

Hey, thanks!

P.S. I have read Thesiger. I wonder if I get a brownie point for that ;-)

Glad you had a great day at your blog!

We prefer the term: "Monsooned by Winds of Change", or "hit with a Winds of Change.NET Monsoon." Strong winds blow your way, and it rains readers, but the climate is warm.

Sometimes our links aren't as effective, and then it's just a Winds of Change.NET Gale blowing in. Hey, nobody's perfect.

If we don't like you, and our post reflects that, it's more like a Winds of Change.NET Thunderstorm (or, if the offending post really draws our readers' ire, a Tornado). Our intelligent cadre of readers in full argument mode is not a thing to be trifled with.

I trust this clarifies. ;-)