The 'phased plan' is alive and well
After the Yom Kippur War, the Arab states realized that there was no way they were going to be able to destroy Israel militarily in one fell swoop. Therefore, in 1974, the PLO adopted a new plan which is known as the '
Phased Plan.'
The plan in brief:
- Through the "armed struggle" (i.e., terrorism),
to establish an "independent combatant national authority" over any
territory that is "liberated" from Israeli rule. (Article 2)
- To continue the struggle against Israel, using the territory
of the national authority as a base of operations. (Article 4)
- To provoke an all-out war in which Israel's Arab
neighbors destroy it entirely ("liberate all Palestinian territory").
(Article 8)
When I read this piece by Dr. Reuven Berko, all I could think was that after 40 years, the '
phased plan' is alive and well. Oslo, as many of us believed since the beginning, is just phase 1 of the plan.
The
situation is Kafkaesque: While Israeli leaders are busy preparing a deal
that will provide two states for tow peoples, Ali is protesting with
the people of his village just a few meters away from the land he claims
for himself and his friends. He is waging his battle in and against the
Israeli homefront. With Palestinian flags at his back, he defiantly
flashes the Arafat-like "V" sign (all of this is Palestine) toward the
abashed gazes of Beit Hanania's residents, who shamefully swallow their
outrage. Ali stands proud, in all his democratic glory, while voicing
nationalistic Palestinian slogans, including a few "for the Arab lands
of the Negev."
Something strange is
happening in the Jewish state: Abbas is declaring a "territory free of
Jews" but is demanding the release of Arab-Israeli murderers, those who
have killed Jews in the name of the Palestinian problem but who were
never under any form of Palestinian jurisdiction. Arab citizens of
Israel, protesting with Palestinian flags in their hands, are demanding
state lands that never belonged to them within the 1967 borders, and
Arab MKs are telling their youth to refrain from performing any type of
national service. On top of all this, Palestinian leaders continue to
demand a "return" of refugees, to Israel of all places, which they call a
state of Apartheid, oppression and occupation, and not to the
Palestinian state they are seeking to establish.
The strangest
phenomenon is that in Umm al-Fahm of all places, the hotbed of hatred
toward the Jews and the state, residents are rejecting any proposal that
includes "freeing themselves from the occupation" and transferring,
with their lands and property, to the jurisdiction of an independent
Palestinian state, the same one that will be "clean of Jews."
How pathetic it is to
recall that every time peace efforts have failed and it was apparent
that the Palestinians, despite the generous offers they received, were
neither ready "nor able" to reach an agreement and recognize the state
of Israel (fill in the blank here with the unmentionable). The shocked
and dumbstruck Left would gather itself and again blame the Israeli
negotiators for the failure.
A Palestinian friend
used an Arab allegory to tell me bluntly, "Just as you came empty
handed, so you will leave." In the jails for security prisoners, the
murderers know they will go free. Those who planned and carried out
terrorist attacks know in advance that if they are caught, they will be
released and will return to their activities. The refugees are certain
they will return to Palestine, in other words to Jaffa, Acre and Haifa.
Hamas, the "rejectionist organizations" and the refugees continue to
demand their "return" to Palestine.
If the phased plan did not remain in effect, why would the 'Palestinians' regard the 'Israeli Arabs' as their own? And why would so many 'Israeli Arabs' seek to remain in the Jewish state (so that they can undermine it from within) rather than joining their brethren in a 'Palestinian state' should one be created?
Read the whole thing.
Labels: Israeli Arab, Israeli Arabs are a fifth column, Judea and Samaria, Middle East peace process, Palestinian state, phased plan, right of return
Oh joy! Guess who wants to bring us 'peace and security'
Just one week after the European Union announced that they are going to ensure that Israelis who live outside the 1949 armistice lines will no longer benefit from their occasional largesse, EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton is lobbying US Secretary of State John Kerry to allow the continent that spawned Nazism to bring us '
peace and security.'
The revival of negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians "opens
new doors" for developing further European Union contribution to peace
and security in the region," EU Foreign Policy Chief Catherine Ashton
said on Wednesday.
In a statement to the press, Ashton stated that
the EU will be "fully engaged with both parties and will make every
effort, together with our partners, to ensure that negotiations
succeed."
...
She stated: "Both Israel and the Palestinians have a reliable friend and ally in the European Union."
...
Firmly backing the process, Ashton emphasized that she "firmly believes that a final end to this conflict is within reach."
The Europeans have done more than enough to exclude themselves from any role in the 'peace process.' There is no reason Israel should want another cheerleader in the 'Palestinians' corner.
Labels: BDS, Catherine Ashton, European anti-Semitism, European Union, Nazis
The painful concessions American Jews should make
I've featured Northwestern Law Professor Eugene Kontorovich on this blog before. In this piece from the Times of Israel, he blasts American Jewish 'leaders' (perhaps the scare quotes should include the word 'Jewish' as well) who call on Israelis to make '
painful sacrifices for peace' while they sit in their ivory towers in the US.
Aliyah would steer away from the iceberg.
Adding even 150,000 American Jews would be a major boost to Israel. The
creativity and success of American Jews would give a massive boost to
the Israeli economy, and their very arrival would inject optimism and
momentum into the society. To be sure, American Jews would not radically
remake the demographic situation because of their extraordinarily low
fertility rate – the lowest of any ethnic group in the U.S. – but this
only emphasizes that American Jews are not well-positioned to give
demographic advice.
Obviously, one might think such a suggestion
is unrealistic. How can one expect 150,000 American Jews to leave their
lives behind to come to Israel – even if it is in the name of peace?
Sure, aliyah is a wonderful ideal, but for many people, it is just not
practical – they have jobs here, kids are in schools, their lives are
here. Just not practical.
Yes, moving 150,000 people is not reasonable,
realistic, or practical. So American Jewish leaders should not recommend
Israelis make the exact kind of “painful concessions” that they
themselves are unwilling to make.
Whatever one might think of the need “painful
concessions,” or the proper role of the Diaspora in Israeli affairs, on
this issue in particular, American Jews have no right to call for
Israelis to make painful sacrifices for peace – because they are
precisely the kind of sacrifices the former have, by definition, refused to make.
At the very least, one would wonder why
signatories of such letters, concerned as they are about Israel’s
demographics, do not as actively promote aliyah as they do expulsion.
Read it all. For the record, Professor Kontorovich is making aliya this summer.
Labels: aliya, American Jews
They're going to discuss all the issues, but which one will come first?
Anyone want to caption the picture? Saeb is either cross-eyed or has a lazy eye....
I'm sure you'll all be shocked to hear that news of the 'talks' is leaking out despite John Kerry telling the cameras that he would be the only one to discuss them. I'm sure you'll be even more shocked to hear that while the parties have in fact agreed to discuss all the issues, there's a dispute about
the order in which they will be discussed.
Speaking on the Voice of Palestine radio, senior
Palestine Liberation Organization official Yasser Abed Rabbo said the
Palestinians want to talk about borders first, whereas the Israelis want
to talk about all the issues at the same time. He added that the demand
to talk about all the issues at the same time could be seen as an
attempt to thwart a deal.
Abed Rabbo added that the
Palestinian Authority had informed the Americans that Israeli settlement
construction would doom the peace talks.
Israeli officials in Washington said on
Tuesday that the venue for talks from now on will alternate between
Jerusalem and Ramallah. A date for the next meeting has yet to be set,
but once underway, the negotiations are expected to be intensive and
deal with core issues. General outlines will be formulated on each
issue, after which professional teams from both sides will go into the
details. Palestinian sources said talks would focus first on technical
issues. The borders of the future Palestinian state and security
arrangements that Israel is demanding won't be discussed during the
initial stage, these sources said.
Speaking on Israel Radio on Wednesday, Finance
Minister Yair Lapid, who has been briefed on the talks, said Israel's
position is that the talks are about the two state solution, with land
swaps. "We are talking about two states and the settlement blocs. Ariel,
Gush Etzion, Maaleh Adumim are part of Israel and the Palestinians are
going to have to come to terms with that," Lapid said.
It's a funny thing, but I always thought that when we talked about 'settlement blocs' we were also including the area around Modiin, and the area around Givat Zev. As it happens, the larges concentration of Haredim in Judea and Samaria is in Kiryat Sefer, near Modiin. The second largest is Beitar, which is (as far as I know) meant to be included in Gush Etzion. And the third is soon likely to be Givat Zev, which is about five minutes out of Jerusalem. You think they're going to try to expel all those Haredim?
We've only just begun. What could go wrong? Labels: John Kerry, Middle East peace process, Saeb Erekat, Tzipi Livni
Livni: Coalition members have 'collective responsibility' to blindly support 'peace process'
Justice Minister Tzipi Livni, whose party has six of the 68 seats in the coalition, is insisting that the other members of the coalition have a 'collective responsibility' to
blindly support the 'peace process.'
Livni, speaking to Army Radio, appeared to be directing her comments at
Bayit Yehudi Leader Naftali Bennett and former foreign minister and
Israel Beytenu chief Avigdor Liberman's after they inferred Israel's
negotiating partner Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas is an
anti-Semite.
"I know that there are partners in the coalition that are not
interested in a two state solution, but they have a collective
responsibility and as long as they are part of the coalition they must
support negotiations," Bennett said after Abbas said that no Israeli
settlers or border forces could remain in a future Palestinian state and
that Palestinians deem illegal all Jewish settlement building within
the land occupied in the 1967 Six Days War.
“The president of the
Palestinian Authority said he doesn’t want to see any Israelis on his
land. Bad things happen when good people are silent. Good people need to
act,” Bennett said yesterday.
Isn't it amazing how Livni (and the Americans) are giving the racist Abu Mazen a pass? Can you imagine what the reaction would be if an Israeli politician said that we don't want Ethiopians in Tel Aviv or if an American politician said that they don't want blacks in Greenwich, Connecticut (one of the richest cities in the US)? And rightfully so. So why does Abu Mazen get a pass?
Livni's bigger problem is that most of the Likud does not support the 'peace process' and has long since moved on from a 'two-state solution.'
Likud MK Miri Regev told Israel Radio on Wednesday that there was not
majority support in her faction for the idea of a two state solution.
I will tell you where I see this going, and it's not a good place. Livni will come back with a 'deal' that no Israeli can accept. Netanyahu won't even be able to get it through the cabinet, let alone the Knesset (although he'll try). And then we'll have an explosion.
What could go wrong?
Labels: Abu Mazen, apartheid state, Binyamin Netanyahu, Middle East peace process, racism, Tzipi Livni
Some 'Palestinian' terrorists might not want to leave their Israeli prisons
It's happened before in Israel's 5-star
hotels prisons.
Labels: Palestinian terrorists
Martin Indyk, shameless opportunist
Noah Pollak tries to figure out what, if anything,
Martin Indyk believes.
The single most astonishing example of Indyk’s
opportunism is the settlement freeze that Obama demanded of Israel as a
precondition for talks, today widely acknowledged – including by Obama
and Indyk – as having been counterproductive. In 2009, Indyk
endorsed Obama’s demand for the freeze as the only way to get the Palestinians into talks:
There's one Israeli action that may
help move things forward, and Obama was not shy in bringing it up at the
press conference: Israel's Road Map obligation to stop settlements. A
real settlements freeze, and the dismantlement of unauthorised
settlement outposts (another Road Map obligation), would give
Palestinians renewed hope in negotiations…if Netanyahu were willing to
fulfil that commitment, Obama might be able to persuade the Saudis and
other Gulf Arabs to reciprocate by normalising relations with Israel.
In an
April 2010 op-ed for the
New York Times, shortly after Obama used an ill-timed settlement announcement during Vice President Biden’s visit to Israel as
casus belli for
open political warfare on Netanyahu, Indyk castigated the prime
minister for his failure to immediately submit to Obama’s demand for a
freeze on Jewish construction in East Jerusalem:
Netanyahu explained that his presence
at the summit would have prompted some leaders to focus attention on
Israel’s nuclear program. But one suspects the real reason for his
conspicuous absence was that he does not have an answer to President
Obama’s demand that he freeze new building announcements in East
Jerusalem for a few months to give peace negotiations with the
Palestinians a chance to take off.
At no point during the period in which the
administration made an obsession out of settlements did Indyk go on
record uttering a word of caution or criticism about such an approach.
Yet today, he is full of wise criticism. In his 2012 book Bending History,
his criticism of Obama on these issues is scathing. Obama’s approach –
the approach Indyk fully endorsed when it mattered – “created a deeply
problematic context for the showdown that Obama sought over Israeli
settlement activity.” The large number of Israelis living in
settlements, Indyk noted, “render[s] a total freeze unrealistic.” He
continues: “In demanding a complete settlements freeze, Obama failed to
make any distinction, thereby implying that building in east Jerusalem
had to cease, too, and inadvertently encouraging the Palestinians to
insist on that.” Indyk titled an entire section of the book “The
Settlements Freeze Fiasco,” concluding that “Seven months of U.S.
diplomatic effort had been wasted and Obama’s credibility damaged for no
good purpose.”
In a 2012 interview in
Israel, he elaborated further: “[Obama] put Abu Mazen in an impossible
position: he couldn’t have agreed for less than what Obama had demanded.
Obama, Abu Mazen complained, put me on a high horse. I have no way to
get off it.”
After years of encouraging Obama to treat Netanyahu
harshly and pressure Israel for concessions when such advice was
exactly what Obama wanted to hear, Indyk criticized Obama for doing
exactly what he had recommended – only, of course, after it was safe to
do so.
Martin Indyk doesn't seem to believe in anything, except his own career.It's a shame that Kerry and Obama have decided to advance it.
Read the whole thing.
Labels: Barack Hussein Obama, John Kerry, Martin Indyk, Middle East peace process
Shame: 'Palestinian' flag on display at Knesset
The Israeli flag would never willingly be flown by the 'Palestinians' in Ramallah, and that's one reason why the 'Palestinian' flag ought not to be flown at the Knesset.
But it was.
It was not the first time a Palestinian flag flew at the Knesset. In
July 1999, then-Knesset speaker Avraham Burg hosted his Palestinian
counterpart Ahmed Qurei, and there were Palestinian flags all over the
parliament.
The caucus's chairman, Labor MK Hilik Bar, said that
just like he got 30 of the 120 MKs to come to meet the Palestinian
delegation at the Knesset, when the group comes to Ramallah, he expects
one fourth of the Palestinian parliament to greet them. It will be up to
One Voice, a pro-peace lobby at the parliaments in Jerusalem and
Ramallah to work on the Palestinian turn-out.
Besides Madani and
Zananiri, the Palestinian delegation included Prisoners Affairs Minister
Ashraf Al-Ajami, Palestinian Center for Dissemination of Democracy and
Community Development in East Jerusalem director Walid Salem, and
Abdallah Abdallah, a former deputy foreign minister who chairs the
Political Committee of the Palestinian Legislative Council.
The
Knesset members included Shas MK Yitzhak Cohen and ministers Yael German
and Amir Peretz from coalition parties Yesh Atid and Hatnua but no
legislators came from Likud Beytenu or Bayit Yehudi. Speaking in Hebrew,
Al-Ajami called upon the MKs in the caucus to persuade Prime Minister
Binyamin Netanyahu to keep the nascent diplomatic process going until an
agreement is reached that would create a Palestinian state.
"There
has to be pressure from the Knesset and the Israeli public on the
government to go all the way," Al-Ajami said. "Abbas is taking huge risk
by going to peace talks. I don't want to talk about a last chance for
peace, but we're both in trouble if it fails."
I want to see what happens when and if they go to Ramallah. I'd bet on zero turnout from the 'Palestinian parliament' and a riot if the Israelis actually show up. And no flag.
Remember 1993-2000 when we taught our kids about peace and empathizing with 'the other' and they taught their kids to murder Jews?
What could go wrong?
Labels: Israeli Knesset, Palestinian flag
Obama adds a founding father
Yes, Obama really did compare
Ho Chi Minh to Thomas Jefferson.
WND.com reports:
When
President Obama said Ho Chi Minh – the North Vietnamese communist
revolutionary who led the war effort against the U.S. that cost almost
60,000 American lives – was a fan of the U.S. Constitution and Thomas
Jefferson, he was echoing what an influential new book calls one of the
most deadly communist disinformation campaigns in American history.
During
a White House meeting with Vietnam’s President Truong Tan Sang last
Thursday, Obama said he and Sang “discussed the fact that Ho Chi Minh
was actually inspired by the U.S. Declaration of Independence and
Constitution, and the words of Thomas Jefferson.” - See more
at:
http://thepeoplescube.com/peoples-blog/obama-ho-chi-minh-comment-echoes-kgb-disinformation-t11477.html#sthash.fOvQbQNi.dpuf
WND.com reports: When President Obama said Ho Chi Minh – the North
Vietnamese communist revolutionary who led the war effort against the
U.S. that cost almost 60,000 American lives – was a fan of the U.S.
Constitution and Thomas Jefferson, he was echoing what an influential
new book calls one of the most deadly communist disinformation campaigns
in American history.
During a White House meeting with
Vietnam’s President Truong Tan Sang last Thursday, Obama said he and
Sang “discussed the fact that Ho Chi Minh was actually inspired by the
U.S. Declaration of Independence and Constitution, and the words of
Thomas Jefferson.”
More
here.
WND.com reports:
When
President Obama said Ho Chi Minh – the North Vietnamese communist
revolutionary who led the war effort against the U.S. that cost almost
60,000 American lives – was a fan of the U.S. Constitution and Thomas
Jefferson, he was echoing what an influential new book calls one of the
most deadly communist disinformation campaigns in American history.
During
a White House meeting with Vietnam’s President Truong Tan Sang last
Thursday, Obama said he and Sang “discussed the fact that Ho Chi Minh
was actually inspired by the U.S. Declaration of Independence and
Constitution, and the words of Thomas Jefferson.” - See more
at:
http://thepeoplescube.com/peoples-blog/obama-ho-chi-minh-comment-echoes-kgb-disinformation-t11477.html#sthash.fOvQbQNi.dpuf
WND.com reports:
When
President Obama said Ho Chi Minh – the North Vietnamese communist
revolutionary who led the war effort against the U.S. that cost almost
60,000 American lives – was a fan of the U.S. Constitution and Thomas
Jefferson, he was echoing what an influential new book calls one of the
most deadly communist disinformation campaigns in American history.
During
a White House meeting with Vietnam’s President Truong Tan Sang last
Thursday, Obama said he and Sang “discussed the fact that Ho Chi Minh
was actually inspired by the U.S. Declaration of Independence and
Constitution, and the words of Thomas Jefferson.” - See more
at:
http://thepeoplescube.com/peoples-blog/obama-ho-chi-minh-comment-echoes-kgb-disinformation-t11477.html#sthash.fOvQbQNi.dpuf
Labels: Barack Hussein Obama, Communism, humor, Vietnam
When the 'peace talks' inevitably fail, who will be blamed
Like most of the legacy media, the Washington Post is already preparing to
blame the 'settlements' for the inevitable failure of the current 'peace talks' between Israel and the 'Palestinians.'
In the past five years, the population of Jewish settlements in the
West Bank has grown by about 20 percent, and pro-settler politicians
have become major players in Israel’s government.
Here in the
West Bank, which Palestinians claim as a basis of their future state,
settlers have built museums, a full-fledged university, archaeological
parks, shopping malls, heritage sites and wine bars. The
impossible-to-miss message: These settlements are here to stay.
...
[T]he growth of the settlements presents a particularly thorny
challenge. About 340,000 to 360,000 people live in Jewish settlements in
the West Bank, according to Israeli government data. An additional
300,000 Jews live in East Jerusalem, which Palestinians claim as their
future capital.
Although there are still rugged encampments of
tents and trailers on isolated hilltops, manned by youths with extreme
views, many of the settlements in the West Bank have taken on the air of
middle-class permanence: comfortable villas of white stone and red-tile
roofs, landscaped with olive trees and date palms. They are the kind of
gated communities that look more Southern California than Holy Land.
“Settlement
life is a great life,” said Veronica Gareleck, who moved with her
husband and family to the Ofra settlement. She tends to guests who want
to sample some Psagot chardonnay at the Binyamin Regional Council’s
visitor center — a 15-minute drive and only one checkpoint north of
Jerusalem.
...
As he enters negotiations, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu must work within a coalition government that contains many pro-settler politicians.
Economy Minister Naftali Bennett,
the third most powerful member of Netanyahu’s coalition, was formerly
the director general of the Yesha Council, an umbrella organization of
Jewish settlement councils.
“As negotiations get underway, we
will insist on continuing construction in Jerusalem and the West Bank,”
Bennett said at an event in the Shiloh settlement this month. “History
has taught us that building produces life, while dismantling settlements
produces terror.”
Indeed, unlike the last time that the Obama
administration launched Middle East peace talks — a short-lived effort
in 2010 — there is no settlement freeze this time around.
Kerry
announced Monday that veteran diplomat Martin Indyk will run the talks
for the United States. Indyk, who will take a leave from the Brookings
Institution, maintains deep contacts in the region, particularly among
Israeli officials.
In his 2009 memoir of the Clinton-era efforts to win a peace deal, “Innocent Abroad,”
Indyk wrote that “future presidents need to insist that during final
status negotiations all settlement activity be frozen, including in the
settlement blocs, unless it is done in agreement with the Palestinians.”
But most Israelis don't see the 'settlements' as the fundamental issue.
Seth Mandel argues that Prime Minister Netanyahu, who was apparently given a choice of releasing terrorists, agreeing to negotiate based on the 1949 armistice lines or imposing a 'settlement freeze,' should have imposed the 'settlement freeze' because it's the easiest of the three choices to undo when negotiations collapse. He also argues that Netanyahu should not have to have met any preconditions at all.
It’s difficult to argue that freeing murderers is preferable to
freezing settlement building–and I don’t intend to argue it. Indeed, a
simple comparison between the Israeli public’s response to the previous
settlement freeze and its viscerally aggrieved reaction to the prisoner
release makes clear which is the more painful concession to Israeli
society.
But it should at least put in stark relief how silly and
counterproductive it is to have such preconditions in the first place.
It’s fair enough to criticize a prime minister for choosing the worst
among three terrible choices. But what does it say about the peace
process, and the American diplomatic role in these discussions, that
Israel was forced to choose between three terrible options in the first
place?
Freezing settlements as a precondition would be unjustifiable this
time around on its own; it only seems reasonable in light of the
possibility of freeing child murderers instead. But a settlement freeze
has been tried before, and the talks still went nowhere. Employing it as
a precondition yet again would be a cartoonishly impractical
suggestion. It would also predicate the negotiations on a false premise
by elevating settlements as a primary obstacle to peace. What do Western
negotiators think will be the result of talks based on a lie?
That we even have to ask the question is dispiriting enough. That
Netanyahu would be forced by American pressure to choose between freeing
murderers or basing negotiations on a lie that delegitimizes the status
of Jews, most of whom are on land that would be part of Israel in any
final deal, reflects terribly on Secretary of State John Kerry and the
administration he represents. And it only encourages stories like
today’s Washington Post feature that distort the reality of settlements and undermine the chances for true peace.
Benny Weinthal argues that there is a much more fundamental problem:
Israel does not have a partner for peace.
Coinciding
with Kerry’s efforts to jumpstart the negotiating process, Palestinian
president Mahmoud Abbas laid out part of his vision for a future
Palestinian state, before a group of mainly Egyptian journalists in
Cairo:.“In a final resolution, we would not see the presence of a single Israeli — civilian or soldier — on our lands,”the Palestinian leader said.
If
Benjamin Netanyahu declared that the Jewish state plans to evict a
minority religious group from its territories, there would be no
shortage of outrage from the European Union and violence would likely
emerge from pro-Palestinian quarters.
Meanwhile, Abbas gets a free pass for bigotry.
The
incorrigibly reactionary view of Abbas’s is hardly surprising. It is
worth recalling the remarks of Maen Rashid Areikat, the Palestinian
envoy to the United States, back in 2011 in Washington. Commenting about
the presence of Jews in the disputed territories, he said, “Well, I personally still believe that as a first step we need to be totally separated . . .”
...
The persecution of Christians in the West Bank has
intensified under the rule of the Palestinian Authority, too. Dexter Van
Zile, an expert on Christians in the Middle East, brought the case of
the Bethlehem pastor Reverend Naim Khoury and the First Baptist Church
to the fore; the Palestinian government ruled that the church lacks the religious authority to operate.
In short, Israel simply
does not have a meaningful negotiating partner. Palestinian society is
divided between the undemocratic, scandalously corrupt Palestinian Authority and the Muslim Brotherhood and Iranian-backed Hamas organization in Gaza.
Of course 'Palestinian' bigotry against anyone for any reason other than the fact that they are Jewish would not prevent a deal. But when you combine that bigotry with the undemocratic nature of 'Palestinian' society and the fact that a 'Palestinian state' would be sitting on the outskirts of Israel's major cities, one has to wonder why we are starting these 'negotiations' at all.
What could go wrong?
Labels: Abu Mazen, apartheid state, Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria, Judea and Samaria construction, Middle East peace process, settlements, two-state solution
Think tank: Iran to have 'undetected' nuclear capability by mid-2014
A report issued by the Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) on Tuesday warns that Iran will achieve a "critical capability" to produce sufficient weapon-grade uranium by mid-2014, without being detected, simply by carrying out its current plan to use centrifuges at its declared Natanz and Fordow nuclear facilities. ISIS recommended that the IAEA increase inspections, but suggests that is unlikely to help. According to ISIS, if the US and/or Israel don't act before Iran becomes nuclear capable,
Iran will have one or more nuclear weapons.
If the United States and Israel hesitate to strike out of fear of
facing international opposition, the ISIS warned, "Iran could have time
to make enough weapon-grade uranium for one or more nuclear weapons."
According
to the report, breakout times at critical capability would be "so
short" that there would not be enough time to organize an international
diplomatic or military response.
"IAEA inaction or caution could
make an international response all but impossible before Iran has
produced enough weapon-grade uranium for one or more nuclear weapons,"
the ISIS report stated.
...
According to the ISIS, there are reasons to conclude the Iran could
now be building a new centrifuge plant, "based primarily on Iranian
officials’ past statements."
A new plant could produce sufficient weapon-grade uranium relatively quickly if the centrifuges worked well, the ISIS reported.
"The
immediate priority must be limiting the number and type of Iran’s
centrifuges at Natanz, Fordow, or a site not yet finished," the ISIS
stated, calling on the P5+1 negotiators to achieve the suggested
conditions and prevent the progression of the Iranian nuclear program.
But don't hold your breath waiting for Obama to do something. It's going to be up to Netanyahu to act. What could go wrong?
Labels: Iranian nuclear threat, Israeli attack on Iran, Natanz, Qom, uranium enrichment
Indyk: Hard to believe parties can reach agreement
Martin Indyk's moment of candor in January 2012 may yet come back to haunt him.
Indyk was named this week as the Obama administration's representative to the 'peace talks' between Israel and the 'Palestinians.' But in January 2012, Indyk told Army Radio that '
it's hard to believe' that the parties can reach an agreement.
Asked in January 2012 by Army
Radio’s Ido Benbaji whether he was optimistic about the talks, Indyk said he was
not “particularly optimistic, because I think that the heart of the matter is
that the maximum concessions that this government of Israel would be prepared to
make fall far short of the minimum requirements for a Palestinian state that Abu
Mazen [Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas] will insist
on.”
“It may be possible to keep the talks going, which is a good thing,”
Indyk added. “But I find it very hard to believe they will reach an
agreement.”
He was right; those talks fell apart a few months after they
started.
Benbaji asked the State Department in a written query whether
Indyk “changed his views of the matter prior to his new appointment.”
He
received a written response Tuesday stating that Indyk said himself he was
“proud to serve” US President Barack Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry as
the special envoy to the talks, and that “he admires their commitment to test
the possibilities of peace.”
The statement, which danced around the
question whether Indyk had indeed changed his mind regarding the prospect of
reaching an agreements, said that the US understood that the challenges will
“require some tough choices,” and added that “both sides have shown a recent
willingness to make some very difficult decisions in the face of domestic
political opposition.”
The response did not spell out what exactly those
“difficult decisions” were.
So the Obama game plan is to keep the talks going so that they can pretend that there's progress? That makes a lot more sense than actually believing the pipe dream that a deal that could pass a referendum will be reached in nine months.
Labels: Martin Indyk, Middle East peace process
Awesome video: Spy drone can see what you're wearing from 17,500 feet high - and that's not all
A new camera developed by the Pentagon's research arm was highlighted in
a recent special on PBS' "Nova" in an episode called "Rise of the
Drones." It's a camera system so detailed it can discern specific
movements and even what a subject is wearing.
The Defense Advanced
Research Projects Agency's (DARPA's) Autonomous Real-Time Ground
Ubiquitous Surveillance Imaging System (ARGUS) has 1.8 billion pixels
(1.8 gigapixels), making it the world' highest resolution camera. The
sensors on the camera are so precise, PBS stated it is the equivalent to
the capabilities of 100 Predator drones in a medium city.
In the
clip from PBS, it is said this is the first time the government has
allowed information to be shared about these capabilities.
"It is
important for the public to know that some of these capabilities exist,"
Yiannis Antonaides with contractor BAE Systems said in the clip, but
noted the sensor itself cannot be revealed. "Because we are not allowed
to expose some of the pieces that make up this sensor, so you get to
look a pretty plastic curtains."
The technology allows the user
to open up a specific windows of interest in the camera's view while
still keeping up an image of the larger picture (sort of like split
screen). Antonaides explained that the colored boxes in the image show
that the sensor recognized moving objects. "You can see individuals
crossing the street. You can see individuals walking in parking lots.
There's actually enough resolution to see the people waving their arms
or walking around or what kind of clothes they wear," he said. PBS noted
that ARGUS can actually see much more details than just attire. It can
see objects as small as six inches.
At
2:23
in the clip, Antonaides points out that from 17,500 feet, a white
object in the field of view is a bird flying. PBS pointed out that DARPA
put a time crunch on creating the camera, which lead Antonaides to look
into technology that you probably have in your purse or pocket at this
very moment. Taking similar imaging systems used in smartphones and
putting 368 together, is essentially how Antonaides and other engineers
at BAE Systems created ARGUS. It is this "mosaic" of cameras that allows
the system to zoom in on specific sections in extreme detail. As for
data, the system stores up to 1 million terabytes a day. Putting this
into perspective, PBS notes this is equal to 5,000 hours of HD footage.
"You
can go back and say 'I would like to know what happened at this
particular location three days, two hours, four minutes ago' and it
would actually show you what happened as if you were watching it live,"
Antonaides said.
It is still classified information whether ARGUS has been used in the field yet.
"If
we had our choice, we would like ARGUS to be over the same area 24
hours a day, seven days a week. That's not very achievable with manned
platforms. This is where UAVs come in and they're absolutely the perfect
platform," Antonaides said.
Let's go to the videotape.
Labels: high tech, Predator drones, spying
The best Catherine Ashton image evah!
Heh.
Labels: Catherine Ashton
How small is Israel?
This should give you some perspective (Hat Tip:
Jack W).
Now, consider that Israel is surrounded on three sides by (mostly Islamist) enemies and on the fourth by the Mediterranean Sea....
Labels: Israel
Israeli policewoman who was at Camp Koby called to duty at demo against terrorist release
This is an
amazing story by Sherri Mandell, the mother of Koby Mandell HY"D (May God Avenge his blood, pictured).
As we chanted, based on a slogan my sister recommended on Facebook that day: Release will not bring peace.
We also chanted: Murderers belong in jail.
Like the ones who were set free in a previous release though they had
murdered Rachel Weiss, a young mother, and her three children on a bus
as well as the soldier who tried to protect them.
We chanted: We want justice. We chanted: Wake up Israel.
I held a sign that said: I’m glad that my
son’s murderers have not been found. And I am. I wouldn’t be able to
bear their release.
All was going well. The media came to take our
photo and interviewed some of the participants. Passing motorists
honked their horns in support.
And then two young women approached us, one dressed in green, a border guard, the other in dark blue, a regular policewoman.
“Who is in charge?” they asked.
To my surprise, I answered, “me.” This was the first demonstration I’d ever organized.
“Do you have a permit?” she asked. I could see her gun in the holster on her hip.
“No,” I said. My daughter Eliana, who had
researched the rules of demonstrations, said: “But we’re not 50 people.
You only need a permit if you’re more than fifty.”
They conferred.
Then the policewoman looked at me. She took off her sunglasses. She had long eyelashes with a thick coat of dark black mascara.
“I know you,” she said. “Aren’t you from the Koby Mandell Foundation?”
“Yes,” I said. “How do you know?”
She smiled shyly.
I asked her, “Were you a counselor at Camp Koby?”
“No,” she said. “I was…”
I waited.
“I was a camper.”
I couldn’t believe it: “Was somebody killed in your family?” I asked.
“No,” she said. “I was in a terrorist attack.”
Read the whole thing.
Labels: Palestinian terrorists, terror victims
Only in the twilight zone called the United Nations
Only at the UN.... Iran is in line to chair the UN committee that
deals with nuclear disarmament.
Iran is campaigning for a key position on a U.N.
General Assembly committee that deals with disarmament and international
security amid strong criticism from Israel and others who accuse Tehran
of seeking to develop nuclear weapons.
Iran is competing against Kuwait to be the rapporteur of the U.N.
General Assembly's First Committee for its 68th session, which begins in
October, U.N. diplomats said. The rapporteur reports on the proceedings
of the 193-member committee.
A spokesman for Iran's U.N. mission confirmed the country's bid on
Tuesday. Asked why Tehran was interested in the position, he said: "It's
a normal routine by a member state."
The First Committee considers all disarmament and international
security matters, cooperation in the maintenance of international peace
and security, as well as principles governing disarmament and the
regulation of armaments.
The farces at the UN never end. And if you pay US taxes, you're paying for 22% of it. What could go wrong?
Labels: Iranian nuclear threat, United Nations
'Why hunt Nazis and release Muslim Nazis'?
The title to this post was the reaction of
Rabbi Eliezer Weiss upon learning that the Israeli government intends to release the murderers of his wife, three children and unborn child.
A neighbor of Rabbi Weiss, Efraim Holtzberg, recalled the rabbi’s
reaction to the news. “He told me he doesn’t understand why the state of
Israel invests millions in searching for Nazi criminals around the
world,” he told Arutz Sheva.
“Why does the Weisenthal Center track down Nazis who murdered Jews,
while here we have Muslim Nazis who murdered Jews, who spilled blood as
if it were water, who burned a mother and three children and an unborn
baby alive – and they are released? Is there a difference between them
and the Nazis criminals?” he asked, quoting Rabbi Weiss.
Holtzberg burst into tears as he recalled the funeral for Rachel
Weiss and her children. The four were killed when terrorists hurled a
firebomb at a bus full of civilians, setting it on fire.
Three-year-old Netanel and 2-year-old Rafael tried to escape the
flames by hiding under a bus seat. Their mother stayed with them rather
than escape alone.
“The three children hid under the benches. She was nine months
pregnant. The brave soldier David Delarosa grabbed Rachel Weiss’ hand
and told her to leave the burning bus.
“Rachel told the soldier that she knew the bus would burn, but a
mother doesn’t leave her children. And so she rose in flames to heaven
with the children,” Holtzberg related.
“I cried more at her funeral than at my father’s funeral,” he recalled. “What was left of her? Ashes.”
Hashem Yerachem (May God Have mercy)....
Labels: Palestinian terrorists, terror victims
It starts: 'Palestinian' terrorists shoot rocket at western Negev
The 'peace talks' have started and so has the
'Palestinian' rocket fire.
Several hours after Israel and the Palestinians resumed peace talks in Washington,
Gaza's
terror groups sent a message of their own. A Qassam
rocket exploded in an open area at the Sha'ar HaNegev Regional Council
on Tuesday morning. No injuries or damage were reported.
Benny, who resides in the surrounding area, told Ynet, "We know where
we live. For weeks now we've been waiting for something to come from
Gaza's direction. Every time there is talk of negotiations, we get a
present from Gaza."
But just give them a 'state' and they'll police their terrorists and get them to stop shooting rockets at us.
/Fantasyland.
Labels: Gaza, Gaza envelope, Kassam rockets, Palestinian terrorism, rockets
Think tank: Iran using Israeli laser technology to enrich uranium; Israelis fear Iran weeks away from breakout
The Institute for Science and International Security says that Iran may be
enriching uranium using Israeli laser technology, an activity that it previously told the IAEA that it had ceased in 2003. And note the last paragraph of the story....
The institute says Iran is still developing laser technology for
enriching uranium. It notes accelerated construction at a site where
this type of enrichment was once performed, and mentions then-President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s 2010 statement that Iran had the ability to enrich uranium via laser isotope separation.
Based
in part on images from commercial satellites, the institute notes the
expansion of the Lashkar Ab'ad facility, where laser-assisted enrichment
experiments have been done in the past. The facility was exposed in
2003 and later investigated by the International Atomic Energy Agency.
Iran
later announced that it had no intention of enriching uranium using
laser technology, and IAEA agents who visited the facility said laser
technology there was for civilian purposes. In February 2010,
Ahmadinejad said Iran would for the time being enrich uranium using
centrifuges rather than lasers, but the institute says the issue must be
investigated considering Iran’s record of false statements.
The
institute says Iran is taking steps to conceal the connection between
the Lashkar Ab’ad facility and other organizations involved in laser
technology, one of which has been subject to sanctions by the United
States and the European Union.
...
The method of enriching uranium by exposing its vapors to laser beams
was developed in Israel in 1969 by two young scientists: Prof. Menahem
Levin of Tel Aviv University and Prof. Yeshayahu Nebenzahl. The two
sought to patent the invention, but the state forbade them.
...
In any case, Israeli officials have said in recent weeks that the pace
of enrichment in the centrifuges that Iran is now building will let it
skip from 3.5-percent enrichment to above the 90 percent needed for a
nuclear bomb. The fear is that within weeks Iran will overcome the last
obstacle to building a bomb without Western intelligence knowing ahead
of time.
And Obama is doing nothing.... Unless he's holding Israel back.... What could go wrong?
Labels: Iranian nuclear threat, Israeli high tech, uranium enrichment
Poll: 71% of Egyptians don't want the Muslim Brotherhood back
71% of Egyptians have told pollsters that they don't want to see Mohammed Morsy or the Muslim Brotherhood back.
The Egyptian Center for Public Opinion Research-Baseera survey found that 71 percent of Egyptians
opposed the Brotherhood's protests. A year of Morsi and the
Brotherhood's rigid policies and inflexibility that failed to address Egypt's economic crisis has left many Egyptians frustrated.
"The real problem that we're facing right now is from the time of
President's Morsi's taking over, it has been a zero-sum political game.
It is all or none and that is mainly the reason he was pushed out of
power, because he would not share it with anyone else. He would not
succumb to the opposition," Wael Eskandar, an Egyptian blogger with Al Ahram, said in an interview with Russia Today.
"And now that he has been pushed out of power, the same attitude
prevails, that they are not willing to make compromise at all and the
reason is because the organization is bent on dominating and pushing
their way of politics. It is difficult to see any way out of this
without any side compromising."
The poll found that 78 percent of men and 65 percent of women
disapproved of the protests. It also found that younger people are more
sympathetic to the protests then their elders.
"[T]he people right now are disenchanted with the MB that they are
willing to accept anything but the Muslim Brotherhood, which is a sign
of how polarized things are at the moment and how the Muslim Brotherhood
and Morsi made matters inside Egypt," Eskandar said.
So why does the West keep trying to bring him back?
Labels: Egyptian army, Egyptian democracy, Egyptian Revolution, Mohammed Morsy, Muslim Brotherhood
The true apartheid
More
here.
Labels: Israeli apartheid
Who is Abu Mazen?
Six years ago I wrote a letter to then-President Bush in which I attempted to show why
Mahmoud Abbas Abu Mazen is not a '
moderate.'
Abu Mazen is not a man of peace. He is an anti-Semite and at least an accessory to murder. Abu Mazen is a Holocaust denier.
He wrote his doctoral thesis in 1982 at the Moscow Institute for
Oriental Studies. The heading of his doctoral thesis was: "Zionist
leadership and the Nazis." The introduction dealt, among other topics,
with a loaded issue: How many Jews perished in the Holocaust. In the
Soviet period, especially in the anti-Israel institute that Abu Mazen
attended, they often dealt with such questions. The Soviet Union, more
than any other country, was addicted to Holocaust denial. The victims
were not recognized by their origin, but rather by their nationality.
And this is what the diligent researcher Abu Mazen wrote:
World
War Two caused the death of 40 million people from different parts of
the world. Ten million Germans, 20 million Soviets, and more…Rumors at
the end of the war said that 6 million of the world's Jews were among
the victims in the war of extermination that was waged against the
Jewish people and later on against other peoples. The fact is that no
one can confirm this number or deny it. The number could be 6 million,
but it could be much smaller, perhaps even smaller than one million.
"Many researchers who discussed the number reached the unconventional
conclusion that it is no more than several hundred thousand," he wrote.
Later on, Abu Mazen quotes a Holocaust denier who claimed that "at first
the Zionists spoke about 12 million Jews who were killed in the death
camps. They later narrowed the number down to 6 and to 4 million. It is
not possible that the Germans murdered more Jews than existed in the
world at the time." He quotes another Holocaust denier who counted
896,000 Jewish victims in all. Abu Mazen has consistently refused to
distance himself from his thesis.
Mr. President, you are a few years older than I am, but we are from the
same generation. I am sure that you remember as vividly as I do watching
eleven Israeli athletes being held hostage at the Munich Olympic games
in 1972 and their eventual murder by their 'Palestinian' kidnappers. But
perhaps you never knew that Abu Mazen, whom you now call a 'man of
peace' financed that terror attack
and has never expressed any remorse for it. In case you have forgotten,
I am enclosing a picture of one of the terrorists on the balcony
outside the room in the Olympic village where the Israeli athletes were
held. I'm sure you recognize it. It was taken from ABC television's live
coverage of the 'event.'
I know that when you ask Secretary Rice about Abu Mazen's thesis and the Munich Olympics, she's going to tell you that's all ancient history and that you should ask Scowcroft about it. But I'd like to show you a few statements that Abu Mazen has made in the last few months that ought to convince you that he is not a man of peace and should not be invited to any peace conferences.
Read the whole thing.
Matters like Abu Mazen's anti-Semitism are things that Israel's chattering classes prefer to ignore, so they are not often discussed in Israel's media. But on Tuesday, in a rare display of honesty,
they were discussed in the Knesset, and the media had little choice but to report on it.
Jerusalem and Diaspora Minister Naftali Bennett, who is responsible for
the government's efforts to battle anti-Semitism, attended a conference
of a Knesset caucus on the issue, led by MK Shimon Ohayon (Likud
Beytenu), and pointed out that Abbas denied the Holocaust.
"The President of the Palestinian Authority said he doesn't want to see
any Israelis on his land. Bad things happen when good people are silent.
Good people need to act," he stated.
...
Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee chairman Avigdor Liberman
(Likud Beytenu) said he keeps a copy of Abbas' book, which purports to
connect Zionism and Nazism and has a Star of David and a swastika on its
cover, in his office.
"I don't know why, now that we're all so excited about the peace
process, no one remembered to mention it. Abbas never took his words
back or apologized," Liberman stated.
As if an apology would undo all the damage Abu Mazen has done....
Jewish Agency Chairman Natan Sharansky said he read Abbas' dissertation
from the Patrice Lumumba University in Moscow, and explained that it
claims Zionism and Nazism worked together because both wanted to remove
all Jews from Europe.
"To this day, people ask me if I think anti-Semitism is a good thing,
because it brings people to Israel. What ignorance and lies!" Sharansky
said.
"Anti-Semitism is enemy number one of Zionism," he added. "For every one
person who makes aliya because of anti-Semitism, 10 assimilate.
Anti-Semitism and delegitimization of Israel lead Jews to distance
themselves from Judaism and Israel."
Sharansky said anti-Semitism "is reaching new heights" and that the Knesset must put it on its agenda.
And the Knesset can start putting it on the agenda by being honest and calling Abu Mazen what he is: An anti-Semite.
Labels: Abu Mazen, anti-Semitism, Holocaust denial, Munich Olympic massacre
EU's Ashton meets with Morsy
EU foreign policy chief
Catherine Ashton met with deposed Egyptian President Mohammed Morsy on Monday at his Egyptian hideaway.
European Union foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton said on Tuesday
she found that deposed Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi was well and had
access to television and newspapers when she visited him.
Ashton
was speaking to journalists after meeting Morsi at an undisclosed
location on Monday night. "I've tried to make sure that his family know
he is well," said Ashton.
Ashton, who is trying to mediate a resolution to Egypt's political
crisis, added: "I said I wouldn't come unless I could see him (Morsi)."
Asked about a media report that she had offered Morsi a "safe exit", she
replied: "I did nothing of the kind."
European Union foreign
policy chief Catherine Ashton held two hours of "in depth" discussions
with Morsi late on Monday, her spokeswoman Maja Kocijancic said on
Twitter. Kocijancic did not say where the talks had taken place.
A lot better than the Brotherhood treated Mubarak.... And no one was allowed to meet Mubarak.
Labels: Catherine Ashton, Egyptian Revolution, Hosni Mubarak, Mohammed Morsy, Muslim Brotherhood
Jeremy Ben Ami's Jerusalem home is in 'ethnically cleansed' Baka
For those who don't read Hebrew, or are not familiar with the form above, the form is a standard summary from the Israeli Companies Registrar listing the names and addresses of the shareholders of an Israeli company. You can get a form like this for any Israeli company online through the Companies Registrar.
This particular form is for
Ben-Or Communications Ltd., a public relations company which has two classes of shares (Hat Tip:
Lenny B). There are 200 'management shares' (which are usually the shares that control the company's management), outstanding, which are owned by Oriella Ben Zvi of Herzliya. There are 200 ordinary shares (like common stock in the US) outstanding, 170 of which are owned by Ben Zvi, and the other 30 of which are owned by Jeremy Ben Ami, the chairman of J Street. Ben-Or Communications acts as
J Street's public relations firm in Israel.
Ben Zvi's address is given as being in Herzliya, and she gives an Israeli identification number. Ben Ami has an Israeli identification number which indicates that he is not an Israeli citizen (900000000), but curiously gives a Jerusalem address.
What's even more curious is that Ben Ami's Jerusalem address is on Mordechai HaYehudi Street, which is located in Baka, a neighborhood that was
populated by Arabs before the War of Independence.
Baka was established in the late 19th century after the completion of the Jerusalem Railway Station.
The station created the nucleus of a commercial center that eventually
attracted wealthy Arab, Christian and Armenian families from the Old
City who built mansions there in the 1920s. [3] The neighborhood had an agricultural character until the 1950s.
During the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, the neighborhood was left on the Israeli (western) side of the dividing line between West Jerusalem and East Jerusalem. Its population changed, as with many neighborhoods on both sides of the dividing line.
I'd be curious to hear why Ben Ami thinks it's okay to live in a house that was confiscated from Arabs (who probably fled) after the War of Independence, but not okay to live in a house that was built on empty, ownerless land in Judea and Samaria (or on land in Judea and Samaria that was owned by Jews before 1948 and was ethnically cleansed by the illegal Jordanian occupation from 1948-67).
Hmmm.
Labels: J Street, Jeremy Ben Ami, Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria, War of Independence
Burgas terrorist active on Facebook?
The two Hezbullah bomb-makers and the terrorist who carried out the terror attack in Burgas, Bulgaria last summer may have smuggled the bomb parts into Bulgaria
on a train from Poland.
The suspected Hezbollah operatives behind the Burgas attack last July
smuggled a detonator and remote control device from Poland into
Bulgaria.
The Bulgarian daily Trud
reported on Monday that the bomber, who remains unidentified, and the
two additional Hezbollah suspects smuggled the bomb devices on a train
from Warsaw on June 28.
...
According to media reports in June, Poland hesitated to designate
Hezbollah’s military wing as a terrorist organization. It is unclear if
the Polish government was concerned about Hezbollah’s retaliation in
Poland.
The suspects Farah and Hassan used three Eastern European
countries for their terrorist operation. After the men detonated the
bomb, they fled to Romania and escaped to Lebanon.
Hezbollah has
used Europe over the last several years to conduct meetings to plan
terrorist operations. The convicted Hezbollah member , the
Swedish-Lebanese national, Hossam Taleb Yaacoub in Cyprus , used Lyon,
France and Amsterdam in the Netherlands, to hold meetings with his
Hezbollah handlers. A Cypriot court convicted Yaacoub in March for
planning to murder Israelis on the Mediterranean island. The court
sentenced Yaacoub to a four-year prison term.
Meanwhile, Threat Matrix, a blog run by the Long War Journal, reported on Monday that one of the Hezbullah terrorists may be
active on Facebook.
Farah, an Australian national who is believed to have built the bomb
in Bulgaria, may still be active on Facebook as authorities search for
him.
One Facebook account possibly attributable to Farah states that the
user studied at the Lebanese International University (LIU) and lives in
Australia. According to press reports, the printer utilized to create
the forged licenses carried by the Hezbollah cell responsible for the
Burgas terror attack was based at LIU, where the suspects are said to
have studied engineering.
The user of this account, who has 'liked' an array of celebrities and
athletes, including Usher and David Beckham, appears to have used
online chat services, such as Tohla and Omegle, among others. The user
of the account was also involved in online poker via Facebook.
Interestingly, none of the publicly available photos linked to the
account provides a match to the photo released by Bulgarian authorities.
In fact, the user has used photos of Turkish actor Necati Şaşmaz and
Iranian actor Mostafa Zamani as profile pictures. A photo of Zamani is
currently adopted as the user's profile picture.
The last public activity for this account, which has 62 friends, was
today, July 29, when the user became friends with a few women based in
Bulgaria, including at least one in Burgas.
There are two other accounts that may be connected to the bomb-maker.
Read the whole thing.
Labels: Bulgaria, Facebook, Hezbullah, Islamic terrorism
The Hillary Clinton mini-series that's worth seeing
Heh (Hat Tip:
All the Right Snark via
Jack W).
Labels: Hillary Clinton, humor, US presidential campaign 2016
Obama threatened retaliation against Israeli action on Iran if Israel didn't release 'Palestinians'?
In an earlier post, I discussed (and cast doubt on) the claim that
Israel traded 104 terrorist murderers for an American attack on Iran. But what if what happened was that Obama and Kerry told Netanyahu that if we didn't release the 104 terrorist murderers, and return to the table with the 'Palestinians,' when and if Israel bombed Iran, the US would leave us to face the consequences alone? That's what Defense Minister
Moshe "Boogie" Yaalon implied in addressing new IDF inductees at Tel HaShomer on Monday.
Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon referred on Monday to unseen considerations that
are far from the public eye as the main catalyst for Israel’s decision to
release imprisoned Palestinian terrorists.
Speaking at the IDF’s
absorption base for new draftees at Tel Hashomer, Ya’alon said, “Releasing
prisoners came as a result of choosing a bad option over a worse option… We
reached the decision to avoid the worse [option]. Many strategic considerations,
which may be revealed in the future, stood behind this, and hence we must go
forward with a release of pre-Oslo prisoners.”
Some analysts have
suggested that Israel agreed to the release as part of its efforts to secure
American support in a potential military confrontation with Iran over Tehran’s
expanding nuclear program.
Ya’alon said the decision was made “with a
heavy heart.”
“These are murderers,” he said. “This is a challenge to
justice, to law and to bereaved families, and I hear their voices.”
He
added that the release also posed challenges to deterrence and security, but
said those problems could be dealt with.
“We are embarking on this
maneuver responsibly, with good judgement, and we’ll be able to provide an
answer to security aspects… I know who these prisoners are, how many they are,
what they did, [and] when they did it,” Ya’alon said.
The implication is "Obama threatened us." How could Obama threaten us? He can't go to war against us - the American public would never tolerate it, and Obama would never lead a war anyway (see Libya, Syria). He can't threaten not to attack Iran, because no one here believes he
will attack Iran anyway. He can't really threaten to stop us from attacking Iran because the US doesn't control the skies over Iraq anymore, which was the previous basis for that threat.
That leaves a threat to leave Israel exposed to the military and diplomatic consequences of an Israeli attack on Iran, which Obama might do regardless of how many 'Palestinians' we release or what 'settlement' we reach with them.
What could go wrong?
Labels: Barack Hussein Obama, Binyamin Netanyahu, Iranian nuclear threat, Israeli attack on Iran, John Kerry, Moshe Yaalon, Palestinian state, Palestinian terrorists
Abu Mazen's future apartheid 'state': Not one Jew in 'Palestine'
'
Moderate' '
Palestinian' President
Mahmoud Abbas Abu Mazen told reporters in Egypt on Monday that his vision for 'Palestine'
does not include a single Jew.
Abbas said that no Israeli settlers or border forces could remain in a
future Palestinian state and that Palestinians deem illegal all Jewish
settlement building within the land occupied in the 1967 Six Days War.
...
"In a final resolution, we would not see the presence of a single
Israeli - civilian or soldier - on our lands," Abbas said in a briefing
to mostly Egyptian journalists.
"An international, multinational
presence like in Sinai, Lebanon and Syria - we are with that," he said,
referring to United Nations peacekeeping operations in those places.
We Israelis refer to 'Israeli Arabs' but both the 'Palestinians' and many, if not most of the 'Israeli Arabs'
refer to the 'Israeli Arabs' as 'Palestinians.' So when Abu Bluff says 'no Israelis' what he really means is 'no Jews.'
Will anyone call him on it? Don't hold your breath.
Labels: Abu Mazen, apartheid state, Israeli Arab, Palestinian state
Jeremy Ben Ami boycotts 'settlement goods' and still takes money from Soros
None of you should be surprised to hear that J Street head Jeremy Ben Ami boycotts '
settlement goods.' What's more surprising is that he seemed to try to avoid admitting it.
MT: Peter Beinart will be featured prominently
this year at the J Street Conference. He advocates, among other things,
what he calls “Zionist B.D.S.” It’s basically a boycott, as I understand
it, of settlements. That’s not your position. Is that right?
JB: It
would be a very boring conference, it would be a very boring life, if
the only people you ever invited to engage with you were the people you
agree with.
MT: That’s fair, but Beinart
offers a position that is not extreme and is slightly more passionate.
Do you worry that young, liberal American Jews might say, “Well, J
Street, those are my grandparents, so I’m going to go to the Beinart
school, I’m going to be in favor of a partial boycott. I am going to
make sure that if the Park Slope Coop is offering products from the
settlements, I’m not going to buy them”?
JB: I
think probably a lot of people in J Street don’t buy settlement
products. I would hope that the politically strategic young people still
find [our organization] to be the more effective way to have joint,
communal political action. We have the ear of the White House; we have
the ear of a very large segment of Congress at this point; we have very
good relations with top communal leadership in the Jewish community. If
you want to have a voice in those corridors of power, then get involved
with J Street.
MT: Do you buy settlement goods?
JB:
I don’t. I just feel uncomfortable providing personal economic support
to the settlements. But that’s just me. It has nothing to do with
building an organization and a political and communal voice that stands
for a certain set of policies and viewpoints. I’m very comfortable with
that distinction.
Do as I say, not as I do? (J Street claims not to favor BDS).
And by the way, J Street is still being financed by George Soros.
MT: Do you still take money from Soros?
JB: Absolutely. His son is a contributor now, too.
What could go wrong?
Labels: BDS, George Soros, J Street
