Fakeness of Peace Process is Exposed Again The PA envoy to the UN, Riyad Mansour, said the Palestinians are working on three separate tracks - restarting negotiations, completing the institutions for an independent state and gaining additional recognition for a Palestinian state. "If we succeed in opening the door for negotiations, we're not going to stop from attaining what belongs to us as Palestinians in this General Assembly starting on Sept. 20," Mansour told reporters after the Security Council's monthly meeting on the Mideast. "Whether we succeed in the negotiations or we don't, the other two tracks are continuing." (This statement contradicts the long forgotten "spirit of Oslo"! It is time for Israel to open a Jewish "track " - to remove all enemies from Jewish land and to establish peace in Eretz-Israel. Our enemies have never had any intention to establish peace with Jews!)
Food for Thought by Steven Shamrak
Why is there a PA representative of the fake nation in the UN, but there are no representatives for Tibet, the Basques people occupied by France and Spain, of up to 35 millions of people of Kurdistan whose land is occupied by five Muslim countries, and Turkish Armenians who suffered genocide committed by the Turkish government in 1915, which has still not been condemned by 'Useless Nothing'? Anti-Semitic 'Ugly Nazi' (UN) must be disassembled! It has only facilitated genocides, like in Rwanda, and fosters international apathy and corruption! It is an Election Season - Words Mean Nothing
Seeking to reassure Jewish donors amid questions over his support for Israel , President Barack Obama pledged that his administration would "devote all of its creative powers" to trying to bring about Mideast peace. Obama tried to encourage supporters to remember the excitement and promise of 2008 even if he's no longer a fresh face and "people make fun of hope and change"(Change that has never come. His strategy for Mideast peace is pressuring Israel to surrender more of the Jewish homeland!)
Barak is still Delusional and Dangerous for Israel
The Israeli defence minister said, during talks with the French foreign and defence ministers, that despite the upheaval in the Arab world from pro-democracy uprisings, Israel should push forward with negotiations. He said this while disregarding concerns in Israel that the new governments that emerge in the region might be more hostile to the Jewish state than their predecessors.
Not News for Media Bigots
Israel has authorised construction of 1,200 new homes in the Gaza Strip, in what would be one of the largest housing projects in the troubled seaside territory in years. (International press did not care much about this news)
Britain's Ugly Past - Yet to Ask Forgiveness
17 Jews whose bodies were found at the bottom of a medieval well in England were likely victims of persecution. The skeletons date back to the 12th or 13th centuries, at a time when Jewish people were known to having faced persecution throughout Europe . Seven of the skeletons were successfully tested and five of them had a DNA sequence suggesting they were likely to be members of a single Jewish family.
It is Legal to Criticise Islam Now
A court has acquitted the right-wing politician Geert Wilders of hate speech charges. It ruled that his anti-Islam statements always fell within the bounds of legitimate political debate. Judge Marcel van Oosten said that Mr. Wilders's claims that Islam was violent by nature and his calls for a ban on Muslim immigration and the Koran must be seen in a wider context of debate over immigration policy."It is not only victory for me but a victory for freedom of speech. It means it is legal to criticise Islam" Geert Wilders said outside of the court.
No Good Deed Goes Unpunished
The three scientists who planned, designed, built and operated Iran's first nuclear reactor at Bushehr died Tuesday night, June 20, when a Rusaero flight from Moscow crashed at Petrozavodsk in northwest Russia.
Quote of the Week:
"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie." - Goebbels, minister of Propaganda of Nazi Germany - The second sentence is less known, but even more important! Many governments had been using this principle!
Truth about Partition Plan
by Eli E. Hertz
In 1947 the British put the future of western Palestine into the hands of the United Nations, the successor organisation to the League of Nations which had established the "Mandate for Palestine. " A UN Commission recommended partitioning what was left of the original Mandate - western Palestine - into two new states, one Jewish and one Arab.
What resulted was Resolution 181 (known as the 1947 Partition Plan), a non-binding recommendation to partition Palestine, whose implementation hinged on acceptance by both parties - Arabs and Jews. The resolution recognised the need for an immediate Jewish statehood (and a parallel Arab state), but this 'blueprint' for peace became a moot issue when the Arabs refused to accept it. Subsequently, de facto (realities) on the ground in the wake of Arab aggression (and Israel's survival) became the basis for UN efforts to bring peace. Resolution 181 then lost its validity and relevance.
Aware of Arabs' past aggression, Resolution 181, in paragraph C, calls on the Security Council to: "Determine as a threat to the peace, breach of the peace or act of aggression, in accordance with Article 39 of the Charter, any attempt to alter by force the settlement envisaged by this resolution."
The ones who sought to alter by force the settlement envisioned in Resolution 181 were the Arabs who threatened bloodshed if the United Nations was to adopt the Resolution: "The (British) Government of Palestine fear that strife in Palestine will be greatly intensified when the Mandate is terminated, and that the international status of the United Nations Commission will mean little or nothing to the Arabs in Palestine, to whom the killing of Jews now transcends all other considerations. Thus, the Commission will be faced with the problem of how to avert certain bloodshed on a very much wider scale than prevails at present&
The Arabs have made it quite clear and have told the Palestinegovernment that they do not propose to co-operate or to assist the Commission, and that, far from it, they propose to attack and impede its work in every possible way. We have no reason to suppose that they do not mean what they say."
The UN Palestine Commission's February 16, 1948 report (A/AC.21/9) to the Security Council noted that Arab-led hostilities were an effort:
"To prevent the implementation of the (General) Assembly's plan of partition, and to thwart its objectives by threats and acts of violence, including armed incursions into Palestinian territory" (which shows that Arab Palestinian territory referred to Jewish land in Palestine).
By the time armistice agreements were reached in 1949 betweenIsrael and its immediate Arab neighbors (Egypt, Lebanon, Syria and Trans-Jordan) with the assistance of UN Mediator Dr. Ralph Bunche, Resolution 181 had become irrelevant, and the armistice agreements addressed new realities created by the war. Over subsequent years, the UN simply abandoned the recommendations of Resolution 181, as its ideas were drained of all relevance by events. Moreover, the Arabs continued to reject 181 after the war when they themselves controlled the West Bank (1948-1967) whichJordan invaded in the course of the war and annexed illegally...
There were 6,000 Israelis dead as a result of that war, out of a population of 600,000. One percent of the Jewish population was gone. In American terms, the equivalent to more than 3 million American civilians and soldiers killed over an 18-month period. Both(so-called) Palestinians and their Arab brethren in neighbouring countries rendered the plan null and void by their own subsequent aggressive actions (and rejecting the resolution in the first place. Therefore, they have no legal ground, according to international law, to claim Jewish land!)
 Pulitzer Prize-winning author Alice Walker. Photo: Foreign Policy. The 2011 Gaza flotilla organizers have improved upon their formula, posing a greater threat to the Israel Navy than they did during their attempt last year to break Israel's lawfully imposed naval blockade on Gaza. Hamas and its European counterparts are using the flotilla to deliberately delegitimize Israel and its right to defend itself. Organizers of the 2011 Gaza flotilla have a provocation-seeking agenda: Deliberately provoke and humiliate Israeli soldiers. For example, organizers trained boat passengers on how to defiantly rebuff Israel Navy attempts to peacefully board the boats. The 2011 Gaza flotilla, at ten ships, is nearly double the size of last year's (which consisted of six vessels). This factor will make it more challenging for the Israel Navy to board all vessels that attempt to break Israel's lawfully enforced naval blockade. In addition, the size of the 2011 Gaza flotilla does not allow Israel the option of towing the vessels into Israel's Ashdod port. The flotilla is estimated to contain only 3,000 tons of goods and materials--half the daily amount transferred by Israel to the Gaza Strip. While lacking in items, the 2011 Gaza flotilla will carry celebrities and media personalities such as American poet and Pulitzer Prize-winner Alice Walker, Swedish crime writer Henning Mankell and several European parliamentarians.
What Israel has to deal with: - Idiotic 'humanitarian' flotillas where there are no humanitarian needs
- A planned 'fly-in' of activists to Ben-Gurion Airport
- Constant attacks from the UN and NGOs
- A planned "anti-racism" conference by the UN, which supposedly represents the "world community" that will be a hate-Israel event, despite the fact that Israel is one of the least racist countries in the world
- Distortions and outright lies about Israel in perhaps 80% of the world media on a daily basis
- Consistent prejudice in the academic world in most countries — including the 'friendly' US — educating a generation to see Israel as evil and illegitimate
- A concerted effort to rewrite history to make Israel responsible for the conflict and for the failures of the Arab world
- A world-wide double standard that vilifies Israel while keeping silent about horrible genocides and racial-ethnic violence perpetrated by such as Omar al-Bashir
- Attempts at economic, academic and cultural boycotts
- The need for constant vigilance to prevent terrorist attacks, aimed at the most vulnerable members of society — and sometimes the need to heal from successful ones
- Constant pressure from superpowers to give up land and security despite Israel's history of being attacked and its tiny size and lack of strategic depth
- A credible threat of a massive rocket attack from its viciously antisemitic neighbors at any moment
- A country that is both developing nuclear weapons and saying every other day that "Israel will disappear"
That's just off the top of my head. You can probably add to the list. One of the worst parts of it is how all of this negative force has been internalized by many Israelis, who start to believe that maybe they really don't deserve to have a state. Maybe they should all get back on a boat to Poland, despite the fact that about half of them came from the Middle East or Africa. This is apparently the position of Ha'aretz, considered Israel's 'most important' newspaper by many outside of Israel. Although the objective is deadly serious — the destruction of a nation and the death or dispersal of a people — there is nothing that this constellation of behavior resembles more than bullying. Let me quote a definition from Wikipedia: Bullying is abusive treatment, the use of force or coercion to affect others, particularly when habitual and involving an imbalance of power. It may involve verbal harassment, physical assault or coercion and may be directed persistently towards particular victims, perhaps on grounds of race, religion, sex or ability. The "imbalance of power" may be social power and/or physical power. The victim of bullying is sometimes referred to as a "target." Bullying consists of three basic types of abuse – emotional, verbal and physical. It typically involves subtle methods of coercion such as intimidation. Bullying can be defined in many different ways. Although the UK currently has no legal definition of bullying, some U.S. states have laws against it. Bullying ranges from simple one-on-one bullying to more complex bullying in which the bully may have one or more 'lieutenants' who may seem to be willing to assist the primary bully in his bullying activities. Bullying in school and the workplace is also referred to as peer abuse. Robert W. Fuller has analyzed bullying in the context of rankism. Bullying can occur in any context in which human beings interact with each other. This includes school, church, family, the workplace, home and neighborhoods. It is even a common push factor in migration. Bullying can exist between social groups, social classes and even between countries (see jingoism). In fact on an international scale, perceived or real imbalances of power between nations, in both economic systems and in treaty systems, are often cited as some of the primary causes of both World War I and World War II. Bullying behavior has been studied quite a bit by psychologists, as well as related concepts like the lynch mob, scapegoating, blaming the victim, etc. All of this can be related to Israel's treatment as a nation. While childhood bullying often begins spontaneously, the international bullying of the Jewish state was originally orchestrated by its enemies. Once started, though, bullying takes on a life of its own, in which new bullies are attracted to someone that has been marked as a target, much like chickens in a chicken house may swarm an injured bird and peck it to death. The more sophisticated bullies devote considerable ingenuity in developing schemes to humiliate as well as hurt their victims, as well as to recruit new bullies. In the case of Israel, the phenomenon is amplified by the conscious effort of the bully leaders to increase the pressure and the natural tendency of people with 'bully' personalities to sense a victim and attack. Major bullies include left-wing academics, who were probably bullied themselves at school and have a need to strike back, and President Obama, whose statement in his May 19 speech that the world is 'tired' of the endless conflict — intended to be understood as 'the world is tired of Israel', since he blames the lack of a solution on Israel's refusal to make enough concessions — is a classic expression of contempt for the target of bullying. In its particularly vicious way, Hamas' captivity of Gilad Shalit and its escalating demands, the mixture of humiliation with arbitrary violence, is precisely bullying behavior. And Israel's measured responses are interpreted as submission, a trigger for even more bullying. In the case of the child bullied by older or tougher schoolmates, the solution is difficult. But where the target of bullying — as in the case of Israel vs. Hamas or vs. the international activist-bullies — is stronger than than the bullies, there is a clear solution. It is the application of disproportionate force. As innumerable parents have told their children — at least, in my generation they told them this — "stand up and fight. Give them a lesson they won't forget!" In the international arena, this is called maintaining deterrence. More Recent Articles |
I have been writing about the legal right of the Jews to J&S for many years. I agree with everything Auerbach wrote here. The Government of Israel refuses to advance these areguments and instead only talks about our historical rights. Why? Ted Belman
Would the creation of a Palestinian state by vote of the United Nations General Assembly, expected in September, be illegal?
Yes, according to a recent letter to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon. Signed by an array of lawyers, law professors and international law experts, it asks him to block the forthcoming resolution, promoted by the Palestinian Authority, for recognition of a Palestinian state within the 1949 Armistice lines.
The letter was drafted by lawyers affiliated with the Legal Forum for the Land of Israel, a non-profit organization founded in 2004 to find "fair and equitable solutions" for Israelis then about to be evacuated from Gaza.
Among its distinguished signers were Alan Baker, former legal adviser for the Israeli Foreign Ministry and ambassador to Canada, and Meir Rosenne, another former legal adviser for the Foreign Ministry and ambassador to the United States. They claim that UN recognition would be "contrary to international law, UN resolutions and existing agreements."
Their letter, in effect a legal brief, argues that such a resolution would contravene UN Security Council Resolutions adopted after the Six-Day and Yom Kippur wars. It would be "in stark
violation" of existing agreements between Israel and the Palestinians.
Indeed, "the legal basis for the establishment of the State of Israel," they indicate, goes back to 1922 when the League of Nations affirmed "the establishment of a national home for the Jewish People in the historical area of the Land of Israel."
Empowered to enact international law for the new postwar world order, the League conferred on Great Britain a Mandate for Palestine. "Palestine" was defined as the land east and west of the Jordan River, now comprising Jordan, the West Bank and Israel.
But in what became the first partition of Palestine, now long forgotten or ignored (even by Israeli government officials), the British government lopped off all the land east of the Jordan River, three-quarters of the designated Mandatory territory, and bestowed it upon Abdullah, son of the Sharif of Mecca, for his own kingdom of Trans-Jordan.
The entire remainder, west of the Jordan to the Mediterranean, was redefined as "Palestine" and designated for the "Jewish National Home," a phrase borrowed from Lord Balfour's famous letter of November 2, 1917. But the League went beyond that vague and indeterminate assurance. Article 6 of the Palestine Mandate explicitly protected "close settlement by Jews" in the shrunken land to be called Palestine.
That guarantee remains the international legal foundation for Jewish settlements built ever since the Six-Day War returned Israel to its ancient Jewish homeland. It has never been rescinded.
As signers of the Legal Forum letter indicate, any General Assembly attempt to create a Palestinian state in that territory would violate an array of international guarantees. Among them, most crucially, is Article 80 of the UN Charter. It explicitly protected the rights of "any peoples or the terms of existing international instruments to which members of the United Nations may respectively be parties."
Drafted by Jewish representatives (including Prime Minister Netanyahu's father), Article 80 became known as "the Palestine clause." It preserved, under international law, the rights of the Jewish people to "close settlement" in all the land west of the Jordan River, even after the British Mandate had expired and the League of Nations had ceased to exist.
Those rights were flagrantly violated when Jordan invaded the fledgling Jewish state and claimed sovereignty over the West Bank in 1949. But the Jordanian claim had no standing in international law and was never recognized.
After the Six-Day War, Security Council Resolution 242 permitted Israel to administer the West Bank until "a just and lasting peace in the Middle East" was achieved. That, of course, has not yet happened.
Even then, however, Israel would only be required to withdraw its armed forces "from territories" – not from "the territories" or "all the territories" (proposals that were defeated in both the Security Council and the General Assembly).
The absence of "the" – the now famous missing definite article – was neither an accident nor an afterthought.
It resulted from what Yale Law School Professor Eugene W. Rostow, then undersecretary of state for political affairs, described as more than five months of "vehement public diplomacy" to decisively clarify the meaning of Resolution 242.
No prohibition – or even limitation – on Jewish settlement, guaranteed west of the Jordan River under the League of Nations Mandate forty-five years earlier, was adopted.
As the Legal Forum letter indicates, "1967 borders" (so labeled recently by President Obama) "do not exist, and have never existed." Under the terms of the 1949 Armistice Agreements between Israel and the invading Arab states, the newly established "Armistice Demarcation Lines" were "without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines."
Therefore, the letter signers conclude, those borders "cannot be accepted or declared to be the international boundaries of a Palestinian state."
Should the UN General Assembly approve the current Palestinian proposal, the Palestinians would also be in "fundamental breach" of the 1995 Israeli-Palestinian Accord, when the signatories agreed not to attempt to change the status of contested territory before permanent status negotiations were concluded – certainly not before they were even begun.
* * * * *
After the Six-Day War the core Zionist commitment to settling the land of Israel, which had driven state-building efforts since the 1880s, passed from secular to religious Israelis. That transformation surely explains why successive Israeli governments, whether led by Labor or Likud, have either maintained silence – or demonstrated intense hostility – toward Zionist settlers wearing kippot or long skirts.
At best ambivalent – and usually hostile – toward Jews in Judea and Samaria, government officials have resolutely maintained silence about the international guarantees for the "close settlement" of Jews west of the Jordan River.
Joined by a chorus of academic intellectuals, journalists, and cultural luminaries, they have been exceedingly leery of strengthening religious Zionism by authorizing new settlements or enlarging existing ones. The special venom toward settlers displayed by current Defense Minister (and former prime minister) Ehud Barak expresses the deep-rooted hostility of Labor Party and left-wing Zionists toward their despised ideological challengers.
Not all settlers, to be sure, are religious. The majority doubtlessly chose to live in Judea and Samaria because housing prices were lower, and the quality of life better, in their sparkling new communities than where they previously lived.
Perhaps one hundred thousand settlers are religious Zionists who claim the land as Israel's biblical birthright and inheritance. Unlike Tel Avivians, who gaze across the Mediterranean to Los Angeles and the Silicon Valley for their sources of cultural inspiration, these Israelis stand on the bedrock of Jewish history, looking to the past and to sacred texts, not to the West, for inspiration.
Critics from the secular left have been unrelenting in their castigation of settlements. In Lords of the Land (2007), the first comprehensive history of the settlement movement, historian Idith Zertal and Haaretz journalist Akiva Eldar lacerated settlers for their illegal occupation of "Palestinian" land. The "malignancy of occupation," they wrote, "in contravention of international law," has "brought Israel's democracy to the brink of an abyss."
But persistent efforts to undermine the legitimacy of Israeli settlements, wrote international legal expert Julius Stone thirty years ago, have been nothing less than a "subversion of basic international law principles." They still are. Yet the United Nations, with an international constituency that has been relentlessly hostile to Israel ever since it first hallucinated that "Zionism is racism" in 1975, keeps trying.
Catering to international support for Palestinian victimization claims, the International Criminal Court, established by the UN General Assembly in 1998, made Jewish settlement a "war crime." But Israel (like the United States) "unsigned" from the statute of authorization for the Court; furthermore, as international legal scholar Jeremy Rabkin indicates, the Court lacks jurisdiction over "crimes" committed before 2002. By then, virtually all the currently existing Jewish settlements had already been established. That renders any designation of settlements as "war crimes" meaningless ex post facto rhetoric – although not without power to elicit ever more anti-Israel venom.
The question never asked is whether a Palestinian state in the land reserved under international law for "close settlement" by Jews is even legal. The Jewish claim, forged by three thousand years of history in the Land of Israel, including two eras of national sovereignty, reinforced in the modern era by a succession of international legal guarantees, is indisputable.
The Palestinian claim, by contrast, is a contrived recent invention. Palestinians, as Barbara Lerner has written (National Review Online, June 17), "are not a people distinguishable by virtue of their common genes and/or language, religion, culture, history, or form of government."
Devised by Arabs who only recently identified themselves as "Palestinians," it is built on the foundation of perpetual victimization claims, the international determination to delegitimize Israel, and – perhaps most revealing – the pillaging of Jewish and Zionist history.
"Palestine" was so named by the Romans after they crushed the Bar Kochba rebellion in 133 CE. Any ancestors of present-day Palestinians who may have lived in Palestine under Ottoman or British rule were considered by others, and by themselves, to be Arabs. In 1948, without undue protest, they became Jordanians.
Not until the creation of the PLO by Arab states at the Arab League Summit (1964) did they become "Palestinians." It took another decade, which included the stunning victory of Israel in the Six-Day War, before statehood was mentioned on the Palestinian wish list.
The validity of the Palestinian historical claim can be measured by its sources – nearly all of which, revealingly, are Jewish. In a remarkable inversion, a people without an identifiable national identity or history until well into the 20th century has plundered Zionist history to create its own illusory past in a land that was never theirs.
Relying on the Hebrew Bible, Palestinians (like Arabs throughout the Middle East) claim Ishmael, Abraham's son by his servant Hagar, as their founding ancestor. They adopted as their ancient forebears the Canaanites, who, according to the biblical narrative, were displaced by conquering Israelites. (Palestinian history not only invents itself; it anticipates itself.)
Insisting that Jews never had national commonwealths in the Land of Israel many centuries before the birth of Islam, Palestinians reject irrefutable historical and archeological evidence to the contrary.
So, too – like Muslims throughout the Middle East – they resolutely deny that there ever was a Temple in Jerusalem and that the Western Wall has been a Jewish holy site ever since its destruction in 70 CE. Yet triumphant Islam built the Dome of the Rock and Al-Aksa mosque on the Temple Mount precisely because it had been sacred Jewish space.
In Hebron, similarly, Muslim conquerors seizedthe Cave of the Patriarchs and Matriarchs where Jews had already worshipped at the graves of their biblical ancestors for more than ten centuries. Transforming it into a mosque, Muslims barred Jewish "infidels" from entry for seven hundred years – until the Six-Day War forced open the doors.
Even the flotillas to Gaza, beginning with the notorious Mavi Marmara a year ago, are modeled after the rickety refugee ships that tried to bring desperate Jews, fleeing from Nazi terror and extermination, to Palestine before and after World War II. The most famous of these was the Exodus, with thousands of Holocaust survivors on board, turned away by the British government in 1947. Any resemblance is, of course, purely intentional – and patently absurd.
CONTINUE\
Welfare for Middle East dictators
Amin Abou Ibrahim, also known as Amin Abou Rashed, is one of the main organizers of the "Freedom Flotilla 2" and a founder of the ECESG, a central organization participating in the flotilla. Recently, the Dutch daily newspaper De Telegraaf
cited Abou Rashed as the "brain behind the flotilla", and noted that according to a Dutch journalist who had spent time with the flotilla organizers, Abou Rashed's role as the flotilla's main backer was kept secret until the ships all arrived to Greece. Earlier this year, Ma'an
quoted him as simply a "campaigner" in an article about the upcoming flotilla.
Abou Rashed was an active participant in last year's flotilla as well. His name also came up during the prosecution of the Holy Land Foundation by the US government in 2007. The Holy Land Foundation is designated by the
US Treasury as a Specially Designated National and banned by the
EU for its direct financial and material support to Hamas. During the Holy Land Foundation trial, a
letter was shown written by Abou Rashed to Akram Mishaal, a
director of the Holy Land Foundation and a cousin of Hamas leader Khalid Mashaal.
In the
letter found at Holy Land Foundation headquarters and used as a court case exhibit by the US government, Abou Rashed lists the names, addresses, and bank numbers of "charitable organizations working for Palestine in Europe." Abou Rashed was writing as a representative of the Al-Aqsa Foundation, an organization designated by the US Department of Treasury as a
charity financing terror and "a critical part of Hamas' terrorist support infrastructure."
These "charitable organizations" cited in Abou Rashed's document were also later declared by the US Department of Treasury to be
supporters of terrorist organizations, specifically Hamas, and consequently their assets were frozen.
Many Hamas affiliated organizations, as recognized by the US Treasury, were organizations in which Amin Abou Rashed was a very active participant in to say the least. Now, as leader of the current flotilla to Gaza, this raises deeper questions regarding the intentions of the flotilla organizers and their further connections to Hamas.
New gay & friends of gays yahoo group
A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort. ~Herm Albright~
No comments:
Post a Comment