How things work.... Jordanian edition....
June 5 was the anniversary of the outbreak of the Six Day War. This year, it coincided with the 28th day of the Jewish month of Iyyar, which is the date on the Jewish calendar on which the Old City of Jerusalem was liberated.
At the time, the Arabs were lying, telling their people that they were winning the war.
But here's a cable from the British Ambassador to Jordan to Britain's Foreign Office that tells a very different story. It was sent 49 years ago today, June 6, 1967.
Labels: Britain, Jerusalem, Jordan's King Hussein, Six Day War
The Lubavitcher Rebbe zt"l's view on the Six Day War and 'land for peace' was more than you have probably heard
Shavua tov from Boston, a good week to everyone.
This evening, I found in my email a pdf from Zvi S with three pages of Joseph Telushkin's new book
Rebbe, a biography of the Lubavitcher Rebbe. In the three pages (275-77), Telushkin discusses the Rebbe's views on the Six Day War and 'land for peace.'
I knew - as I am sure many of you did - that the Rebbe opposed 'land for peace.' He did not believe in it. He even opposed the return of the Sinai as part of the peace treaty with Egypt - which I forgot or may not have known.
But what I really didn't know was that in 1967, he felt Israel should have expelled all the Arabs of Judea and Samaria. He felt that during war time, and given the Arabs' continuing threats to annihilate Israel, such an action would have been understandable (and as I have described many times, the Arabs may even have
expected it).
Makes this Litvak misnaged (non-Hassid) want to go out and buy the book.
Labels: Lubavitch, Six Day War, transfer
The Battle for Ammunition Hill
One of the (if not THE) key battles for Jerusalem in 1967 was the battle for Ammunition Hill. Ammunition Hill, which we pass on our way to the Old City - it's probably a five-minute drive from our house - is a small hilltop which was a system of bunkers filled with weapons. The IDF had to conquer it in order to make it to the Old City of Jerusalem and the eastern part of the city. It sits practically on the green line.
After the war, this song about the battle was written and performed by an IDF choir. I am posting two versions of it, one which has no subtitles, but shows the scenery on the hill and some of the men (really boys) who were killed in the battle. The other has subtitles in both English and Hebrew.
Let's go to the videotapes.
Today, Ammunition Hill is a museum and memorial to those who were killed in the battle for Jerusalem.
From the first time I heard this song, it always bothered me how the commander - apparently knowingly - sent 'Eitan' (whose full name and picture appear in the first video) to his death.... Obviously, he felt that the alternatives were worse....
Labels: Ammunition Hill, East Jerusalem, IDF, Jerusalem, Jordan, overnight music video, Six Day War
Why Jerusalem was liberated
It's widely known that Israel had a deal with Jordan's King Hussein in 1967. Jordan would stay out of the upcoming war with Egypt and Syria, and Israel would not touch Jerusalem and the 'west bank.' The government ministers - principally from the Labor party and (to their eternal shame) the National Religious Party - opposed taking Jerusalem's Old City, saying that they didn't want to rule over the Middle East equivalent of the Vatican.
It's also widely known that Jordan violated the deal and attacked Israel. What's not widely known (and I don't even recall reading an account like this in Michael Oren's seminal book on the war - which I read a few years ago) is why.
Moshe Feiglin tells the story of why Jordan broke the agreement. If you didn't believe until now that God was behind the entire war,
this story ought to convince you.
The story is in Hebrew and there is an English translation. But it loses a lot in translation so if you can, read the Hebrew.
Labels: Egypt, Jordan, Jordan's King Hussein, Moshe Feiglin, Old City of Jerusalem, Six Day War, Temple Mount
Israel's high tech leader... no, it's not Tel Aviv
10 years ago tonight, son # 5, child #8 was born (you may notice a small change to my profile to account for that event).
47 years ago tomorrow night, I sat with my parents z"l (of blessed memory) and my brother watching television reports in Boston that Israel had liberated the Temple Mount and the remainder of Jerusalem. It was a heady time.
Tonight and tomorrow are Jerusalem Day, marking the day on which the 'eastern' part of the city of Jerusalem, including the Temple Mount and the Old City of Jerusalem.
Jerusalem is more than Israel's spiritual capital. It's also the country's
leading high tech center and one of the most optimistic places on earth.
While Israeli hi-tech, so central to the nation's economy, is often
linked to the central coastal region, revenue from the industry in
Jerusalem is in fact nearly 12 billion shekels (around $3.5 billion),
almost as much as the revenue Tel Aviv (6.7 billion shekels) and Haifa
(7 billion shekels) combined.
...
Jerusalem is also leading Israel in attracting olim (new immigrants).
The city absorbed 2,335 new olim in 2013, making 13% of the national
total of olim, and over twice as many as Tel Aviv (1,060) or Haifa
(1,130).
The capital has also been attracting young people, as 30,000 people
young people have moved to the city in the last four years. 51% of those
moving to Jerusalem in 2012 were between the ages of 20 and 34.
While the Central Bureau of Statistics reported 88% of Jerusalemites
are happy, the Municipality figures found 92% of residents are happy
with their lives, as compared to an 88% national average. Tel Aviv came
in at 86% and Haifa at 81%.
Jerusalem residents were also found to be the most optimistic in
Israel: 63% felt their lives would be better in the future, a rate
higher than the national average (59%), Tel Aviv (57%) and Haifa (54%).
Happy Jerusalem Day!
Labels: City of Jerusalem, Jerusalem Day, Six Day War, Temple Mount
1967: Chief Rabbis said Israel should control Temple Mount
Despite the sign above, which stood at the entrance to the Temple Mount for many years (I'm not sure it does anymore), Israel's Chief Rabbinate advocated
Israeli control of the Mount in the aftermath of the 1967 Six Day War.
According to the document, then chief Sephardi Rabbi Yitzhak Nissim
said that Jews should oversee the site – either alone or in cooperation
with other religions – because it belongs to the Jewish people.
Then-chief Ashkenazi Rabbi Isser Yehuda Unterman was quoted as saying,
“the site of the Holy Temple should belong to the rabbinate. As for the
mosque…we will not give up ownership of the land on which the mosque
was built.”
Chief Rabbinical Council member Rabbi Eliezer Goldschmidt suggested
that an honor guard made up of rabbis protect the entrance to the
Temple Mount.
“If supervision of the mosque will be in their [Muslims’] hands, it will mean it belongs to them again,” Goldschmidt said.
The rabbis agreed, however, that the site is too holy for Jews to enter.
What a surprise (not). Too bad Moshe Dayan decided on his own to give control of the Mount to the Wakf. This morning. Israel Radio reports that the Pope was treated to a speech by a Mufti on the Temple Mount who accused 'settlers' of breaking into the mosques and attempting to establish separate prayer times as has been the case in the Machpeila Cave in Hebron for the last 20 years.
Aside from the fact that the Mufti is lying, the hostility toward acknowledging any Jewish claim to the Mount shows that peace is most definitely not at hand.
I wonder if the Pope is sharp enough to realize that if Jews don't have a narrative on the Temple Mount, neither do the Christians (whose narrative presupposes a Jewish Temple on the Mount).
Labels: Chief Rabbinate, Moshe Dayan, Six Day War, Temple Mount
Will the Knesset have the courage to say 'enough'?
Police clashed with 'Palestinians' on the Temple Mount once again Tuesday morning...
as soon as the Mughrabi Gate leading to the Mount was opened.
Police clashed with dozens of Palestinian youths at the Temple Mount in
Jerusalem who threw rocks and fireworks at them following the opening
of the Mughrabi gate. Some of the men wore masks, according to police.
Three young men were arrested, while the rest were dispersed by a stun
grenade thrown by police. According to Palestinian media, several of the
youths were injured. The Israel Police said no Palestinians were
injured.
Two police officers suffered light injuries; one from a firework and the
other from the rocks. They were treated on site before being taken to
Shaare Zekek Medical Center in Jerusalem.
Perhaps the reason for this warm welcome is that, after chickening out last week, the Knesset is due to take up a bill by MK Moshe Feiglin on Tuesday, which attempts to
affirm Israeli sovereignty over the Mount.
The more we lose our sovereignty on the Temple Mount, the more the world
turns against us. When we safeguard our rights, the world respects
that. After the 6 Day War in 1967, Moshe Dayan and the State of Israel
gave religious sovereignty on the Temple Mount to the Moslems, out of
respect for their religious beliefs. But they did not mean to give the
Jordanians actual sovereignty. Israel’s respectful approach was taken
advantage of by the Arabs and today no sign of Israeli sovereignty is
allowed on the Temple Mount. We want Israeli sovereignty on the Temple
Mount to be affirmed in a clear statement by the Knesset this Tuesday.
Every MK who said “If I forget thee o’ Jerusalem, may my right hand lose
its cunning” under his or her chuppah must make it his/her business to
be at this all-important deliberation.
Let's see who shows up.
Labels: Moshe Feiglin, Six Day War, Temple Mount, Wakf
Video: When Israel said no
Every time Israel's interests are in conflict with America's, must
Israel capitulate to American dictates or risk compromising the two
countries' long alliance? A cursory look at recent history reveals that
Israel has consistently rebuffed American pressure when critical
interests were at stake, strengthening the relationship.
Let's go to the videotape.
Labels: David Ben Gurion, Dimona nuclear reactor, Golda Meir, Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, Levi Eshkol, Menachem Begin, Osirak, settlement freeze, Six Day War, White House
Image: Ariel Sharon wears Tefillin at the Kotel (Western Wall) during Six-Day War
Maj General Ariel Sharon, head of IDF Southern Command during the 6 Day War, dons tefillin at Jerusalem's Western Wall.Labels: Ariel Sharon, Six Day War, Western Wall
One for your reading list
The New York Times' Ethan Bronner
reviews Yossi Klein HaLevi's
Like Dreamers. This is from the first link.
Mr. Halevi, an American immigrant who has worked as a journalist and
analyst in Jerusalem for 30 years, has created a textured, beautifully
written narrative by focusing on seven men — and they are all men — Mr.
Porat among them, who served in the paratroop brigade that conquered the
Old City of Jerusalem in the 1967 war. The seven took distinct paths, a
few becoming settler leaders, others active on the left, and in the
arts and music. One sought common cause with Palestinian revolutionaries
and, after a trip to Damascus, ended up in an Israeli prison for 12
years. By accompanying these men across the decades we gain a close
understanding of many of the country’s internal debates.
...
[T]he men Mr. Halevi has chosen are compelling. One is Arik Achmon,
a secular liberal from a kibbutz who helped transform Israel’s failing
statist economy into a thriving capitalist one. Mr. Achmon helped found
the first private domestic airline in Israel. The story of how he stood
down the once-powerful Histadrut trade union federation to keep his
company alive illustrates the enormous changes that Israeli society has
undergone in the past three decades. A second character, Avital Geva,
one of the country’s leading conceptual artists who represented Israel
in the 1993 Venice Biennale with a fully functioning kibbutz greenhouse,
also illustrates a crucial sector of a dynamic society.
But the story’s real strength derives from Mr. Halevi’s portraits of
three settler leaders: Mr. Porat, Yoel Bin-Nun and Yisrael Harel. Their
movement has been central to contemporary Israel, yet little understood
abroad. Settlers are mostly portrayed as two-dimensional caricatures.
Their actions violate the world’s hope for a Palestinian state on the
land they are taking, and their ideology does not lend itself easily to
rational discourse. It is hard to know how to negotiate with someone
like Mr. Bin-Nun who, as described in the book, believed that the “Torah
was a blueprint for God’s relationship with a holy nation living in a
holy land,” or with Mr. Porat, who saw “no contradiction between
conquering the land and creating peace, because the return of the holy
people to the holy land was a precondition for world peace.”
Yet Mr. Halevi, a religiously observant Jew with centrist politics by
the standards of today’s Israel, brings us into these men’s lives and
thoughts, taking us along on their journeys and making of them fully
realized characters. We are with them not only for their internal
meetings and personal struggles but also for their interactions with
Israeli officials, who often claimed to reject settlements while
legitimizing them. It is clear that if the government had wanted to stop
them — if officials had seen the settlement project as an existential
danger rather than as a way to expand narrow borders, send defiant
messages and win close elections — it could have.
I would read this one.
Labels: Hanan Porat, Six Day War, Yom Kippur War
Iran should be careful: Israel has launched long-shot attacks before
Daniel Nisman reminds us of some of the
daring surprise attacks that Israel has undertaken over the years, and tells us why it might happen again in Iran.
In
the face of such choices, forget the intelligence estimates and risk
assessments. It ultimately takes a do-or-die, all-or-nothing mindset to make a
decision which could either bring complete victory, or considerable military
defeat and diplomatic isolation. In this context, Mr. Netanyahu not only views Iran as an
existential threat comparable to the Nazi Holocaust—he also wishes to be
remembered as the one who personally delivered its demise. On this point,
sources close to the prime minister assert that he keeps in his desk drawer
World War II-era letters from the U.S. War Department, which decline requests
by the World Jewish Congress to bomb gas chambers at Auschwitz.
Amid
turmoil now in Egypt, bedlam
in Syria and musings of
reform from Iran's newly
elected President Hassan Rouhani, Mr. Netanyahu now fears that his campaign to
stop Iran
from going nuclear has been put on the international community's back burner. Israel's ambassador to the U.N., Ron Prosor, has
repeatedly warned the Security Council that Iran's nuclear program is racing
forward like an express train, passing diplomatic efforts that lag behind on
the local route. Recent statements by the Netanyahu administration indicate
they believe that Iran's
nuclear train will arrive at its final destination by Nov. 2013 unless the
international community intervenes.
Last
month, Israeli Minister of Strategic Affairs Yuval Steinitz revealed Israel's assessment that Iran is close
to stockpiling 200 kilograms of 20% enriched uranium and repeated that
acquiring 250 kilograms would constitute Mr. Netanyahu's so-called "red
line." His assessment is in line with th International Atomic Energy
Agency's May 2013 report, which alleges that Iran possessed approximately 182
kilograms of 20% enriched uranium. With Iran's
current ability to stockpile roughly 15 kilograms of 20% enriched uranium per
month, Iran
could trigger a preemptive Israeli strike in less than four months.
Meanwhile,
while Mr. Netanyahu may have faced resistance in the past to launching a
preventative strike, current conditions at home and across the region may be
the most optimal he has ever had. Since Jan. 2013, Israel
has provoked Iran and its
allies (at least) three times with airstrikes against weapons convoys destined
to Hezbollah in Syria,
albeit without any reaction. The incidents, which served to reduce fears of a
regional conflagration, have clearly resonated with Israel's
various security chiefs, who have refrained from voicing any concerns about a
strike on Iran,
unlike their predecessors.
On July 14, Mr.
Netanyahu commenced a widespread public and back-channel diplomacy campaign to
re-rally Israel's allies to
commit to both a convincing military threat and additional economic sanctions
against Iran.
His hope is that such a stance by the world community would deter Iran's decision
makers from taking advantage of Mr. Rouhani's transition period to advance the
nuclear program beyond the point of no return. Iranian officials, meanwhile,
have stated that nuclear negotiations with the West should be put on hold until
after Mr. Rouhani's cabinet is inaugurated in August. It is Jerusalem's
fear that by the time Iran
and its negotiating partners agree on a timetable and venue for new talks, it
may be too late.
Many
Israeli pundits, as well as Ambassador Oren himself, have compared Mr.
Netanyahu's diplomatic push to Eshkol's last-ditch efforts to convince Washington of the
existential threats posed by Arab nations in the weeks before June 5, 1967. As
in 1967, this is a conflict that Israel has been anticipating for
years, building previously unused military capability and practicing its
strategy in preparation for another surprise feat, which may ultimately shock
the world once again.
Having
recently announced its willingness to negotiate with President-elect Rouhani,
the Obama administration should heed this history lesson, lest the U.S. and the
international community be caught off guard by another Israeli-induced regional
earthquake.
Read the whole thing.
Labels: Binyamin Netanyahu, Hassan Rohani, Iranian nuclear threat, Israeli attack on Iran, Six Day War
Fatah's true goal remains to reverse 1948
Prominent members of Fatah keep making statements that prove that their intent is not to 'compromise' with Israel and have a state along the indefensible 1949 armistice lines, but rather to reverse the results of the 1948-49 War of Independence by ending the existence of the State of Israel.
I keep pointing out those statements in the hope that each and every person who reads this blog understands the true goal of the 'moderate Palestinians' and that it is no different than the goal of the 'bad' terrorists of Hamas. No 'Palestinian' accepts - or ever will accept - Israel's 'right to exist' and it's long past time for us to begin dealing with the situation accordingly.
Take, for example, Tawfiq Tirawi, who is not just a 'Fatah member' as the headline of
this article calls him, but the former commander of the Palestinian Authority General Intelligence Service in the 'West Bank.' Tirawi is an insider, one of Arafat's and Abbas' boys, and what he says reflects their thinking as well.
[Tirawi] said that the Palestinians have struggled since the Balfour Declaration
and would pursue their struggle "until we achieve our national goals -
the establishment of a Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital
and the right of return for Palestinian refugees. We will pass this goal
from one generation to another."
Tirawi, in an interview with the Palestinian London-based Al-Quds
Al-Arabi daily, said: "To those who consider the settlements of Bet El
and Ma'aleh Adomin to be Israeli, we say to them and to all that Haifa,
Jaffa and Acre are Palestinian and will remain Palestinian."
Tirawi said that Fatah's "political program" has not changed since it was established more than four decades ago.
"Fatah
is a movement that was created to liberate Palestine and establish a
Palestinian state," he explained. "But the Palestinian, Arab and
international objective circumstances have changed, leading to a
recession in positive national achievements. Yet in spite of these
circumstances, Fatah will surprise everyone by showing that it remains
committed to the national project."
Asked about efforts to resume
the peace talks between the PA and Israel, Tirawi said that the
"liberation of Palestine and the establishment of a Palestinian state
have their elements - beginning with the armed and popular struggle led
by Fatah for many years and ending with the negotiations [with Israel]."
The Balfour declaration was made in 1917. Fatah was established in 1965, two years before there was an 'occupation' in the 'West Bank.' Clearly, Tirawi doesn't mean to endorse the 'two-state solution' except possibly as a temporary measure on the way to destroying the Jewish state.
Labels: 1949 armistice lines, Fatah, Six Day War, Tawfik Tirawi, two-state solution, War of Independence
How can you tell the difference between a terror organization and a liberal democracy
Here's Soccer Dad's Middle East Media Sampler for Wednesday, June 12.
1) How can you tell the difference between a terrorist organization and a liberal democracy?
The title is a trick question. In international fora, the terrorist organization gets a lot more respect.
Last week the Ireland led the way to prevent the European Union from designating Hezbollah as a terrorist organization.
Ireland is reportedly blocking efforts inside the European Union to
formally blacklist Hezbollah as a terror organization. Britain recently
initiated procedures to add the Iran-backed terror group to the E.U.
blacklist, after Bulgarian officials linked Hezbollah to the July 2012
Burgas bombing that killed six civilians and a Cypriot court convicted a
confessed Hezbollah member on terrorism-related charges. The U.S. has
repeatedly called upon the E.U. to follow its example and ban the group,
which has established deep roots on the Continent.
Even as Hezbollah's reach is seen in South America and Syria the European Union refuses to sanction the terror group operating within its borders.
But when it comes to Israel, the world is more intent on preparring a
final solution. In the farcically named UN Human Rights Council, 67
nations and organizations heartily approved the report of asylum
escapee, Richard Falk, condemning Israel. In a just world someone like
Falk would issue his statements from behind the walls of an institution,
but in the topsy-turvey world of the UN he is a respected "Special
Rapporteur." Naturally, in this venue he received support from even the world's worst rights abusers. Look at how they piled on.
During the interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur, speakers
condemned Israel’s persistent refusal to cooperate with the Special
Rapporteur and expressed concerns at the persistence of settlement
activities and human rights violations, including restrictions on
movement, arrests and harassment of Palestinians, and the particular
effects on children. They highlighted the need to put an end to impunity
for human rights violations. Speakers regretted the deterioration of
the situation in Gaza due to the ongoing blockade and the loss of
civilian lives. Some delegations echoed the proposal of the Special
Rapporteur to investigate the activities of businesses connected with
Israeli settlement activity. Others complained about the unbalanced
mandate of the Special Rapporteur and the presence of political
considerations in his report. Mr. Falk was accused of being
anti-Semitic.
Speaking in the discussion were Pakistan on behalf of the Organization
of Islamic Cooperation, the European Union, Mauritania, Egypt, South
Africa, Algeria on behalf of the Arab Group, Indonesia, Iceland, Jordan,
Lebanon, Tunisia, Iran on behalf of the Non Aligned Movement, Iraq,
Qatar, Cuba, Ecuador, Angola, Venezuela, Kuwait, Chile, Morocco,
Bahrain, Bangladesh, Saudi Arabia, Djibouti, Syria, Algeria, Turkey,
Iran, Maldives, Zimbabwe, the United Nations Children’s Fund and
Malaysia.
No, you didn't misread. Syria - whose government has killed more than
80,000 over the past two years - and its patron, Iran (of the laughably
named "non-aligned movement) sit in judgment of Israel in this venue. In
the asylum that is the UN, this is hardly remarkable.
There were, however two speeches that weren't anti-Israel and were, instead, indictments of the "human rights" establishment.
.@aliabunimah Thank you for condemning the antisemitism endorsed by #RichardFalk. We quoted you again @un today: blog.unwatch.org/index.php/2013…
— UN Watch (@UNWatch) June 10, 2013
One was by Anne Bayefsky; the other by Hillel Neuer.
Mr. Falk, in the first page of your report, you attack my NGO and ask
this Council to launch an investigation in order to shut us down.
Does your report allege a crime? No, you simply object to our words. We
are the only watchdog at the UN, and we report what you say. In
reprisal, you now seek to muzzle our voice, to avoid being held
accountable.
The real issue is whether your work, conducted under the banner of human
rights, actually exonerates and exculpates the perpetrators of
terrorism.
2) Smacking Friedman down, again
Last week I took issue with Thomas Friedman's Israel lives the Joseph Story.
.@tomfriedman Earlier, Joseph was falsely accused; as Israel is now. Funny that you left that part out.
— David Gerstman (@soccerdhg) June 5, 2013
But I missed a major goof.
And the world for the most part would not begrudge Israel keeping its
forces on the Jordan River — as will be necessary given the instability
beyond — if it ceded most of the West Bank and Arab neighborhoods of
East Jerusalem.
Elder of Ziyon:
Oh, and don't forget Friedman's other "if-then" fallacy here - that the
world would allow Israel to keep the Jordan Valley as a buffer if only
it would offer the Palestinian Arabs a state. Wasn't that already
offered and rejected?
Meryl Yourish:
The bolded phrase contradicts all of the Palestinian statements made
about Israel keeping any soldiers in the West Bank. In point of fact,
the Palestinians absolutely begrudge Israel a force on the Jordan.
My Right Word:
Well, I do not know about the "world" but the Pals. would certainly not agree.
Friedman loves to pose as someone who understands simple truths that
those in power (especially in Israel) fail to appreciate. But here he
shows that he hasn't been paying attention to the past twenty years of
the peace process. Maybe in 1993 an Israeli presence in the Jordan
Valley was an accommodation would have made. It is no longer.
3) Soccer news
Despite efforts of anti-Israel activists to prevent it, Israel hosted
this year's UEFA (European soccer's governing body) under 21
championship. Israel did not advance in the tournament. However, the
Israeli team did win its final match in Jerusalem against England. Ofir Krieff, of the Israeli team, scored the game winning goal.
To score in the capital city, in my home town, in front of my home fans,
is a fantastic feeling. We did a really good job. The credit goes to
the team and not to me even though I scored. It's all thanks to the
great work of the staff and the players.
I think that we had a really good tournament overall. To win four points
against these kind of teams is a big achievement. We had some criticism
and it wasn't always right. This team has a lot of potential and we
proved it today against England which is nothing to take for granted.
When I scored I just thought that we had finally got the win after this
hard work. The credit goes to Guy [Luzon]. It was highly important to
finish with a good taste because of him and I'm happy that we gave him
this goodbye present. "I wanted to run over to him but afterwards I saw
nothing because everybody was all over me".
One of Israel's top players was Taleb Twatha:
This is a 20-year-old, after all, from a world far removed from the one
he now inhabits as a professional footballer. Defender Twatha is from a
Bedouin family, born and brought up in Jisr az-Zarqa, a coastal town in
the north of Israel which did not even have a football pitch when he was
growing up.
"We have only 13,000 people in Jisr," the left-back explained to
UEFA.com. "Jisr is a very poor town and when I was young there was no
football there – not even a football field. I'm the youngest in my
family. My eldest brother studies medicine in Italy. My other brother
does the same but in Germany. My sister finished nursing school in
Jordan. My father is the school principal and my mum is also a teacher.
I'm the only one to have gone into professional sport."
That he ended up playing UEFA Champions League football for Maccabi
Haifa FC aged just 17 was the result, he says, of a serendipitous moment
seven years earlier – namely, a random phone call from a family friend.
"I tried gymnastics, tennis, karate, but only in the fifth grade did I
start playing football. I had some luck because I was in the car with my
dad one day when a friend of his saw a newspaper ad about a football
school and phoned him about it. I interrupted the call and told him I
wanted to go. Just a year later I moved to Maccabi Haifa."
4) Erekat's Latrun gambit
In commemoration of the 46th anniversary of the start of the Six Day
War, the New York Times published a press release for the Palestinian
Authority, On Anniversary of Arab-Israeli War, a Palestinian Plea:
It was here on the wooded slopes of Latrun on Tuesday that Saeb Erekat,
the chief Palestinian negotiator, chose to mark the anniversary of the
outbreak of the 1967 war and to call for an end of Israeli occupation.
“I am sure many of you are asking why is Saeb Erekat bringing you to
this point,” Mr. Erekat said to a group of diplomats and reporters as he
stood against a backdrop of green fields, a reservoir and an Israeli
settlement of red-roofed houses in the valley below.
“It is not because I want to demarcate the maps or finalize the
negotiations,” he said, referring to the intensive efforts of Secretary
of State John Kerry to get the Israelis and Palestinians to return to
peace talks. “I just want to stand here and say, ‘It is 46 years later.’
”
Control of Latrun was critical for control of the road from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem and at the time, Arab forces had been poised to to attack Irael's narrow coastal corridor. Much as Erekat obfuscates the issue, control of Latrun was essential for Israel's survival.
The New York Times continues.
If nothing else, Mr. Erekat’s selection of Latrun spoke to the great
distance between Palestinians and Israelis. Many Israelis consider
Latrun to be an integral part of Israel. Drivers heading to either Tel
Aviv or Jerusalem speed across the unmarked armistice lines along the
main highway, slicing through several miles of West Bank territory and
designated stretches of buffer zone, oblivious to the area’s fraught
history.
The reporter tells us the obvious, but leaves out something else that is
obvious. The Palestinians once again are seeking to "move the
goalposts." Erekat's press conference was apparently the first move in a
new campaign.
Israel Matzav writes:
The 'Palestinians' have responded to US Secretary of State John FN
Kerry's pressure on Israel for concessions... by seeking even more
concessions. The 'Palestinians' are now seeking two of Israel's biggest
tourist attractions: Mini Israel and the Latrun tank museum. In fact,
they're seeking the whole area around Latrun...
A favored Palestinian official gives a press conference and a reporter
for the New York Times dutifully records his statements without
explaining what he is doing. She simply writes, "here's one more
Palestinian that needs to be addressed by Israel," and not "the
Palestinians keep changing their demands."
Jonathan Tobin comments:
Erekat’s candor is in a sense quite commendable. Latrun is a potent
symbol of the nature of the Israel that existed in those halcyon days
before the obstacle to peace was the presence of Jews in the West Bank
and in which a small state with indefensible borders and a capital that
could be isolated with ease stood on the precipice of destruction as
Arab armies began to mass on its borders. Erekat was sending a clear
message to Israelis that if they thought the PA would ever accept the
fact that the world had irrevocably changed in those 46 years they could
just keep dreaming.
As Erekat well knows there now exists a broad consensus within Israel
about the desirable nature of a two-state solution. That consensus
includes Prime Minister Netanyahu and most of the members of his
government. Indeed, even the Israeli right knows that if the
Palestinians ever offered a complete end to the conflict and recognized
the legitimacy of a Jewish state no matter where its borders were drawn
they would find the majority ready to make painful territorial
sacrifices. But by laying down a marker on Latrun—a place that no
Israeli in his right mind would ever consider leaving—Erekat was making
it clear their real priority was not peace but an effort to merely
continue the conflict on more advantageous terms.
Indeed, reminding Israelis of the Israel that existed from 1949 to 1967
is not exactly the way to reassure his ostensible peace partners of the
PA’s good intentions. But of course what else can you expect of a peace
negotiator that has boycotted peace talks for the past four and a half
years?
Israel begged Jordan not to join the war. King Hussein convinced of
Egypt's early success against Israel joined in seeking to cut Israel in
half. western Jerusalem was bombarded. Israel did not decide "we will
dispossess the Palestinians" and seek war. War was forced on them and
they fought to survive. Erekat wishes for the world to forget that.
Elder of Ziyon asks a very important (rhetorical) question:
If the Six Day War hadn't happened... Would there be a Palestinian Arab state today on the West Bank and Gaza?
Perhaps that's something that Erekat ought to consider. If Jordan hadn't
attacked Israel in 1967, would he now be an international celebrity for
promoting Palestinian nationhood?
The rest of the New York Times article is a lament about how both sides
are being unreasonable and how this mutual stubbornness will sink Jonh Kerry's peace plan.
When it's one side that refused to negotiate and then changes the
parameters of negotiations isn't that the side that is uninterested in
peace?
Labels: Anne Bayefsky, BDS, designated terror organization, Hezbullah, Hillel Neuer, Latrun, Middle East Media Sampler, Saeb Erekat, Six Day War, Soccer Dad, Tom Friedman, UEFA
'Palestinians' move the goal line back, seek 'occupied Latrun'
The 'Palestinians' have responded to US Secretary of State John FN Kerry's pressure on Israel for concessions... by seeking even more concessions. The 'Palestinians' are now seeking two of Israel's biggest tourist attractions: Mini Israel and the Latrun tank museum. In fact, they're seeking the whole area around Latrun, which the
main Jerusalem - Tel Aviv highway cuts right through.
“As a result of the 1948 Nakba (catastrophe),” the document read,
“when two-thirds of the Palestinian population were forcibly exiled from their
homes by Zionist militias prior to the creation of the State of Israel, almost half of the valley is now
considered No Man’s Land (NML) an integral part of the Occupied State of
Palestine.”
The Latrun Valley, the document continued, “is well known for
its rich water resources and fertile land.”
According to the paper,
Israel occupied the area during the Six Day War and “ethnically cleansed” three
villages left standing after 1948, before completely wiping them off the map as
well.
The paper said that following the forced displacement of the
Palestinian inhabitants, the Jewish National Fund, in cooperation with Canada,
built Canada Park “over the site of the villages.”
“Preventing
Palestinians from making use of the Latrun area is part of Israel’s systematic
attempt to turn the occupation of Palestinian land into annexation,” the
document read.
“The Latrun Valley holds enormous potential for
Palestinians, including its fertile lands, water resources, archeological sites
and religious shrines. It is a vital and integral part of the State of Palestine
as defined by the 1967 border.”
I actually know someone who is so pro-'Palestinian' that she won't set foot in Judea or Samaria. Even she uses the Jerusalem - Tel Aviv highway. And the Israeli response?
One Israeli official was stunned by the
Palestinian campaign over Latrun, saying it was as if the Palestinians were
moving the goal line backwards.
Referring to US Secretary of State John
Kerry’s push to restart Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, the official said,
“It’s almost as if every time we move forward, or every time there is a prospect
of moving forward, the Palestinians bring up an issue which they know is a game
breaker.”
The Palestinian decision to make this an issue, the official
continued, “raises concerns as to their seriousness.”
He characterized as
“very troubling” the Palestinian bid to bring this issue “out of deep freeze”
now, and said it raised questions about “their attitude to the peace
process.”
All peace plans have always put Latrun inside Israel, the
official said.
“No Israeli government, no Israeli prime minister, can
seriously entertain that this area would be going to the
Palestinians.
Instead of dealing with the very issues that Kerry is
asking the sides to deal with, it appears the Palestinians are playing games and
regressing to hard-line positions that should have been left behind years ago,”
he said.
But this sort of 'negotiating' needs to be met by officials on the record and not by anonymous officials who cannot be identified. Until Israel's government says loud and clear 'ad kan' (until here), this sort of negotiating through the media is going to continue, and the
Arab demands will just increase.
What could go wrong?
Labels: John Kerry, Latrun, Palestinians, Six Day War, two-state solution, War of Independence
Israel retweeting Six-Day War
The IDF is
retweeting the 1967 Six-day War this week as it happened.
Israel's army was Wednesday giving a "live" blow-by-blow account of
the 1967 Six Day War, tweeting each air strike at the exact time it
occurred 46 years ago in an epic replay which began early in the
morning.
@IDF1967 "is an official Israel Defence Forces account that is aimed
at retweeting the events of the Six Day War in live time," an army
spokesman told AFP.
The account was tweeting key events in the battle against the armies
of Egypt, Jordan and Syria that took place from 5 to 10 June 1967, and
includes pictures and videos, the army said.
The tweets are mostly in Hebrew, with some translated into English.
"In response to repeated provocations by Egypt, the State of Israel
and the IDF are going to war. We will not sit idly as the enemy forces
tighten the noose around our necks," the opening tweet said around
8:00am (0500 GMT) when Israel landed its first pre-emptive air strike 46
years ago.
By Wednesday afternoon, @IDF1967 had more than 1,000 followers, its
posts showing pictures of Israeli soldiers and tanks in Sinai, and
various other battle footage.
Sounds like fun.
Labels: IDF, Six Day War
Israelis split on religious lines about 'peace process'
Given that Jerusalem Day was nearly a month ago, it's kind of hard to believe that today is the Gregorian calendar anniversary of the outbreak of the Six Day War in 1967. In honor of the occasion, the JPost is publishing a survey that finds that most Israelis already consider Jerusalem to be a divided city and want a 'two-state solution.' But both those numbers are defined as 'Israelis' and if they are representative of the country's demographics, they include about 20% 'Israeli Arabs.' (In the narrative, JPost refers to the diagram on the right as being 'Israeli Jews,' however, given that the graph came from the pollster, I would go with the pollster that it's 'Israelis').
But the devil is in the details. 74% of Israelis are unwilling to have a 'Palestinian capital' in any part of Jerusalem, implying that they oppose redividing the city, and only 8% of Israelis are willing to go back to the 1949 armistice lines (commonly and inaccurately known as the '1967 borders) as part of a 'peace agreement.'
There are also significant
dividing lines among Israeli Jews.
[A]ccording to the Smith poll, [US Secretary of State John FN] Kerry is
mostly speaking to the converted, as only 33% of Israelis reject the notion of a
two-state solution.
The question facing the other 67% of those polled is
what kind of final-status agreement should they stand behind. Only 8% of
Israelis support a two-state solution based on the pre-1967 lines. Forty percent
said they support a two-state solution in which Israel retained the major
settlement blocs. Another 19% favored the Bayit Yehudi solution in which Israel
annexes most if not all of Area C, so that it is able to retain all the
settlements.
Significant differences were seen between secular and
religious poll respondents on the question of a two-state solution.
A
majority of the secular respondents, 83%, and only a minority of the religious
respondents, 28%, said they supported a two-state solution. Similarly, 72% of
religious respondents and 17% of secular respondents said they opposed a
two-state solution.
What could go wrong?
Labels: Jerusalem is the capital of Israel, Judea and Samaria, Six Day War, two-state solution
This isn't a result of the Six Day War
I meant to post this earlier, but as I am sure you can all tell, I've been rather busy for the last few days. Ruthie Blum reminds us that the Israeli-'Palestinian' (formerly known as Israeli-Arab) conflict
did not start as a result of the outcome of the 1967 War.
Contrary
to widespread belief, based on a concerted propaganda campaign, this
was not the event that created what has come to be called the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict. On the contrary, it was precisely the
pan-Arab attempt to eliminate the "Zionist entity" that sparked the
three-front war in the first place. And it was Israel that liberated
Jerusalem from Jordanian occupation.
This is something that
most Israeli children are not even taught any more, which might explain
why it is so easy to persuade them that if Israel would only make
sacrifices for peace, the so-called Palestinian people could get about
the business of building a state. After all, it is not only the Arabs
born in Israel after 1967 who have been brainwashed by with a false
narrative; so, too, have Jews been sold a bill of goods.
The difference is that
the former are being educated in the art of annihilation, while the
latter are being fed formulas for peace. Most cooperation programs
funded and initiated by left-wing nongovernmental organizations involve
groups of Israelis and Arabs gathering together to blame Israel for
constituting an obstacle to Palestinian statehood. Kumbayah.
...
How shamefully befitting, then,
that singer Achinoam Nini (known internationally as Noa) was asked to
perform at the official Jerusalem Day ceremony. Nini is not only famous
for her voice; she is also a vocal supporter of handing over east
Jerusalem to the Palestinian Authority. Is it any wonder that the Arabs
assume it is only a matter of time before Israel relinquishes its
legitimate claim to the wholeness of its capital?
Read the whole thing.
Labels: Arab-Israeli conflict, Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Jerusalem is the capital of Israel, Six Day War, Temple Mount
Deja vu all over again; 'Return to Palestine' march planned
The 'Palestinians' are planning a '
return to Palestine' march again this year.
But this year it's taking place on
June 7.
The date is meant to coincide with the Gregorian calendar date on which the Old City of Jerusalem was liberated.
Labels: Jerusalem is the capital of Israel, Palestinian refugees, Six Day War
It couldn't happen to a nicer guy
Conductor Daniel Barenboim, who is infamous in Israel for bringing the
music of Richard Wagner (Hitler's favorite composer) to Holocaust survivors, is to play a
piano recital in Qatar on Tuesday evening.
Famous Israeli composer and pianist Daniel Barenboim returns to Qatar
on Tuesday evening for a piano recital at the Katara Cultural Village
after his previous performances were cancelled last year.
The Argentinian-born pianist is known as an opinionated critic of Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian Territories.
The well-known composer founded the
West-Eastern Divan Orchestra with late scholar Edward Said. The pair
were due to perform at the second Katara Music and Dialogue Festival
last April with an orchestra combining both Israeli and Palestinian
musicians.
The performance last year was reportedly cancelled due to pressure from
supporters of a cultural boycott of Israel. The festival organizers
however state that the festival was cancelled due to “current political
developments across the Arab region.”
Israel Radio reports that Barenboim is to be greeted by adoring fans throwing tomatoes and rotten eggs at the 'Zionist' who married at the Western Wall just three days after the Six Day War.
Heh.
Labels: Daniel Barenboim, Qatar, Six Day War, Zionist
Israel negotiating with Syrian rebels for spy Eli Cohen's remains
Israel is negotiating with Syrian rebels to
obtain the remains of Eli Cohen HY"D (May God Avenge his blood), an Israeli spy who was executed in the 1960's. Information provided by Cohen enabled Israel to liberate the Golan Heights in the 1967 Six Day War.
The Pan-Arab daily Al Quds Al Arabi
on Monday published a story on its website claiming that Israel is
having secret contacts with the Syrian rebels in order to search for the
remains of executed Israeli spy Eli Cohen as well as to secure the
Golan Heights.
Eli Cohen is known as one of Israel's greatest
spies, who infiltrated the highest levels of the Syrian government in
the 1960s and was publicly hanged in Damascus in 1965.
Cohen was
sent to Syria disguised as Kamel Amin Thaabet, a Syrian who decided to
return to his homeland after spending many years in Argentina.
Upon
his arrival to Damascus in 1962, Cohen - disguised as Thaabet - quickly
rose to prominence as a tour operator and businessman, gaining the
friendship and trust of many officials in the Syrian elite. Throughout
the next four years, he would regularly correspond with his handlers in
Israel, passing information that contributed to the IDF's victory in the
Six-Day War.
In 1965, Cohen was caught in the act of
transmitting information to Israel. He was tried and found guilty of
espionage, and hanged publicly in May of that year.
According to Al Quds Al Arabi, Israel, with the cooperation of Jordan, also is laying the groundwork for a possible Israeli-American operation in Syria.
In the past, the release of Cohen's remains was discussed as a
goodwill gesture for future negotiations between Israel and Syria, although the Assad regime has claimed that a
shopping mall was built atop Cohen's remains. Israel has also
offered money to secure Cohen's remains' return.
Hmmm.
Labels: confidence building, Eli Cohen, Golan Heights, Six Day War, Syria, Syrian uprising
