88 US Senators sign letter to Obama opposing UN-imposed 'solutions' in the Middle East, 2 of Israel's best friends don't sign
Greetings from Boston's Logan Airport where I am having a travel evening. I'm headed to... Chicago.
88 United States Senators have signed an AIPAC-drafted letter urging President Obama to oppose UN attempts to impose a 'solution' to the Israeli-'Palestinian' conflict. Two of Israel's best friends in the Senate - Marco Rubio (R-Fl) and Ted Cruz (R-Tx) did not sign the letter. Here's why. The letter says
The only way to resolve the conflicts between the two is through direct negotiations that lead to a sustainable two-state solution with a future state of Palestine living in peace and security with Israel. This outcome would provide Israel with greater security and strengthen regional stability. We remain optimistic that, under the right circumstances, Israel and Palestinians can successfully resume productive negotiations toward this goal.
My guess is that Rubio and Cruz don't agree with two-state anymore. I wonder why.
'Most pro-Israel President evah' orders Secretary of State, UN Ambassador to skip Israeli PM's UN speech
President Hussein Obama, the self-proclaimed 'most pro-Israel President evah,' ordered his Secretary of State John Kerry and his Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power to skip Prime Minister Netanyahu's address to the UN General Assembly on Thursday (Hat Tip: Memeorandum).
“Ambassador Power and Secretary Kerry
were unable to attend Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s speech before
the General Assembly because they were called into a meeting with
President Obama, which they participated in via video teleconference,” a
State Department Official told Breitbart News.
Although they were both in New York
for the United Nations General Assembly meetings, the two high-ranking
U.S. officials were notably absent for the entirety of the Israeli Prime
Minister’s speech.
“The United States was represented at
the speech by Ambassador David Pressman, Alternate Representative of
the United States to the United Nations for Special Political Affairs,
Ambassador to Israel Daniel Shapiro, and Ambassador Richard Erdman,
Alternate Representative to the UN General Assembly,” the official
added.
Must see video: UN Ambassador Ron Prosor rips the Europeans some new body parts
This is guaranteed to be the best three minutes you spend today.
Here's Israel's ambassador to the United Nations, Ron Prosor, telling the Europeans to stuff it where the sun don't shine. This is part of the the UN International day of solidarity with the 'Palestinian People' debate.
Let's go to the videotape (Hat Tip: Leah P).
And they consider themselves 'friends.' With 'friends' like this....
In one round of secret balloting at UN Headquarters in New York, the
Assembly elected Albania, Bangladesh, El Salvador, Ghana, Latvia,
Netherlands, Nigeria, Paraguay, Portugal and Qatar.
Bolivia, Botswana, Congo, India and Indonesia, whose terms were due to expire at the end of this year, were re-elected today.
...
Those elected today will be joining in the following States who will
remain on the Council: Algeria (2016); Argentina (2015); Brazil (2015);
China (2016); Côte d’Ivoire (2015); Cuba (2016); Estonia (2015);
Ethiopia (2015); France (2016); Gabon (2015); Germany (2015); Ireland
(2015); Japan (2015); Kazakhstan (2015); Kenya (2015): Maldives (2016):
Mexico (2016): Montenegro (2015); Morocco (2016); Namibia (2016);
Pakistan (2015); Republic of Korea (2015); Russia (2016); Saud Arabia
(2016); Sierra Leone (2015); South Africa (2016); the former Yugoslav
Republic of Macedonia (2016); United Arab Emirates (2015); United
Kingdom (2016); United States (2015); Venezuela (2015); and Viet Nam
(2016).
This could be big - really big. On the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly on Sunday night, Prime Minister Netanyahu met with Indian Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi. This is from Modi's website.
The two leaders reviewed the robust relationship, and rapidly growing
trade. They also discussed how ties could be further expanded. The
Israeli side briefed the Prime Minister on their perception of the
situation in West Asia.
Defence ties and cooperation in the field of computer software, and cyber security were also discussed.
Issues of water management and agriculture in arid areas came up for
discussion, with Israel offering to share its technology in this regard.
The Prime Minister also outlined his vision of waste water management
and solid waste management in 500 towns across India.
The Israeli Prime Minister extended an invitation to Shri Narendra Modi to visit Israel.
A sign of the ties between India and Israel becoming closer is the
refusal of the Modi government to condemn Israel in parliament for its
actions in the Gaza as demanded by the Congress and some other parties.
This led to a walkout from the Lok Sabha by the Congress and two other
parties. Modi has not held meetings with Palestinian or other West Asian
leaders during his visit here.
In discussing defence relations, Modi told Netanyahu about his "Make
in India" program and pointed out that 49 percent investment was
possible in defence industries, Syed Akbaruddin, the External Affairs
Ministry spokesman said. Cooperation in cybersecurity was also
discussed.
Modi made a pitch for Israeli investments and they discussed boosting
bilateral trade that now stands at about 6 billion US dollars.
...
While discussing cooperation in the fields of software and computers,
Netanyahu mentioned that when he had worked in areas relating to
technology he found in California that a large number of workers were
Indians or Israelis.
...
Modi told him - and an earlier delegation of Jewish leaders from the
American Jewish Congress - that India is proud of its tradition of
tolerance towards Jews and and absence of discrimination against them.
Netanyahu and the Jewish leaders acknowledged that anti-Semitism was
never in India.
This could be huge - both economically and politically. As Netanyahu said, the sky's the limit. Keep an eye on this one.
By the way, lately I have noticed that I have several new Twitter followers from India. Hmmm.
If you're an Orthodox Jew like I am, you may have missed President Hussein Obama's speech to the United Nations on Wednesday, the eve of Rosh HaShanna. Here's a recap.
Obama in his remarks offered praise to controversial cleric Sheikh Abdallah Bin Bayyah
and referred to him as a moderate Muslim leader who can help combat the
Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant’s (ISIL or ISIS) radical ideology.
However, Bin Bayyah himself has long been engulfed in controversy for many of his views, including the reported backing of a 2004 fatwa that advocated violent resistance against Americans fighting in Iraq.
...
“The ideology of ISIL or al Qaeda or Boko Haram will wilt and die if
it is consistently exposed, confronted, and refuted in the light of
day,” Obama said before the U.N., according to a White House transcript
of his remarks.
“Look at the new Forum for Promoting Peace in Muslim Societies—Sheikh
bin Bayyah described its purpose: ‘We must declare war on war, so the
outcome will be peace upon peace,’” Obama said, quoting the
controversial cleric.
Concern over the administration’s relationship with Bin Bayyah started as early as 2013, when outrage ensued after he was reported to have met with Obama’s National Security Council staff at the White House.
While Bin Bayyah has condemned the actions of groups such as Boko
Haram and ISIL, he also has taken controversial positions against
Israel.
He issued in 2009 a fatwa “barring ‘all forms of normalization’ with
Israel,” according to a Fox report on the White House meeting.
Additionally, the notorious 2004 fatwa permitting armed resistance
against U.S. military personnel in Iraq reportedly stated that
“resisting occupation troops” is a “duty” for all Muslims, according to reports about the edict.
And then Obama dropped the other shoe. After spending fifteen minutes
blabbering about the glories and wonders of Islam, even as he decried
extremism and sectarianism, Obama proceeded to blame Israel for conflict
in the Middle East:
Leadership
will also be necessary to address the conflict between Palestinians and
Israelis. As bleak as the landscape appears, America will never give up
the pursuit of peace. The situation in Iraq, Syria and Libya should cure
anyone of the illusion that this conflict is the main source of
problems in the region; for far too long, it has been used in part as a
way to distract people from problems at home. And the violence engulfing
the region today has made too many Israelis ready to abandon the hard
work of peace. But let’s be clear: the status quo in the West Bank and
Gaza is not sustainable. We cannot afford to turn away from this effort –
not when rockets are fired at innocent Israelis, or the lives of so
many Palestinian children are taken from us in Gaza. So long as I am
President, we will stand up for the principle that Israelis,
Palestinians, the region, and the world will be more just with two
states living side by side, in peace and security.
The Israelis may not be the “main source of problems in the region,”
but by pressuring Israel before the entire world just weeks after Hamas
continuously fired rockets into Israel and shielded its own rockets with
children, Obama demonstrates his distaste for the Jewish State, and his
desire to cast them as a bleeding abscess leading to more violence. The
moral equivalence here was stunning, unjustifiable, and purely
disgusting.
Over the weekend, my children asked how much longer would be in power. One of the older ones helpfully figured out that the next election is in 2016. I told them that may not help. Hillary Clinton is as bad as Obama, and Elizabeth Warren could be worse.
With the end of the holiday and the Sabbath here in Israel, it's become clear that 'moderate' 'Palestinian' President Mahmoud AbbasAbu Mazen's United Nations General Assembly speech was quite a success... but not quite for the reasons he wanted. Abu Mazen has managed to unite Israeli politicians across the board in blasting him for his hatred.
"Mahmoud Abbas has again proved his only expertise is spreading lies
and incitement against Israel," Communications Minister Gilad Erdan
(Likud) slammed Saturday night. "He has denied the Holocaust in the past and now, in this surreal speech at the UN, he has accused us of 'genocide.'"
"This is not how a 'peace partner' talks, and certainly not anyone
who wants for 'reconciliation between peoples," Erdan continued. "Now it
is clear why he insists on partnering with the Hamas terrorist
organization, with whom he shares the 'struggle against Israel' and will
promote our delegitimization through false propaganda."
"Mahmoud Abbas always finds a soft spot for murderers, rocket
launchers, and our enemies in general," Jewish Home Chairman and
Economics Minister Naftali Bennett added. "We saw missiles launched at
Ben Gurion Airport two months ago, and it's good to know these launchers
are members of Mahmoud Abbas's 'Palestinian state.'"
"Now Israel must find new and creative ways to allow us to just
survive here," Bennett fumed. "A Palestinian state west of the Jordan
River is not one of them."
Even the extreme left took issue with Abbas's speech.
"While Israel has acted harshly in Gaza and made things difficult
[for the Palestinians], you cannot call it 'genocide," Meretz Chairman
Zahava Gal-On stated Saturday. Gal-On - who did not explicitly condemn
Abbas - did add, however, that Abbas's words were "serious and grave." [But see below. CiJ]
"These are false and outrageous statements," MK Eitan Cabel (Labor),
added. "It would have been better if they had not spoken, and these
words are worthy of condemnation from all who truly love peace."
Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon had some more biting remarks.
"Through his speech at the UN, Mahmoud Abbas proves for the umpteenth
time: this is not a leader who wants peace and the advancement of his
people's lives, but a person who distributes lies, incitement, and hate
speech against Israel," Ya'alon stated Saturday. "Mahmoud Abbas is not a
man of peace, and is not really interested in an agreement with Israel,
which means recognition of the Jewish national homeland."
"Time after time, Mahmoud Abbas goes on to deceive the international
community, to throw at Israel false and racist accusations out of the
hope that threats, pressure, and lies will scare us and make us
acquiesce [to his demands]," Ya'alon continued.
Ya'alon implied that Abbas's speech was particularly grave, and may have jettisoned future plans to renew peace talks.
"He has no partner for a political agreement - which is essential to
end the conflict - and we will therefore not compromise the security of
Israeli citizens," Ya'alon said, referencing plans to make a Palestinian
state in Judea and Samaria. "In every situation, we are responsible for
our own destiny and our own security, and we will be in the future."
Ya'alon concluded by blasting Abbas for "not really coming to terms
with our own existence" and added that the claims "are detached from
reality."
Prime Minister Netanyahu is on his way to the United States to counter Abu Mazen's (and Iranian President Hassan Rohani's) 'slander and lies.'
But despite the quotation above, Meretz leader Zehava Gal-On actually backed Abu Mazen.
“Meretz supports Abbas’s international efforts to bring the end of the occupation and to get international recognition as a [Palestinian] state and member of the UN before and as a corridor to reaching peace in bilateral negotiations between equals,” the party leader said.
The speech reflected Abbas’s total distrust of Netanyahu as a partner for peace, Gal-On said.
According to Gal-On, “Netanyahu refused to negotiate for five years and the talks under American sponsorship led nowhere and wild construction continued in the settlements. Now Netanyahu wants to continue ‘managing the conflict’ instead of solving it,” she lamented.
Gal-On proves the prophet Isaiah right once again. Isaiah warned that those who would destroy us would spring forth from among us. What could go wrong?
Shavua tov v'Shana tova u'Gmar Chatima Tova (a good week and a good year and a good seal - i.e. in the book of life).
Senator Ted Cruz (R-Tx) released a statement on Thursday blasting 'moderate' 'Palestinian' President Mahmoud AbbasAbu Mazen's speech to the United Nations General Assembly. This is from the first link.
“Israel's action in Gaza was the just self-defense of a sovereign nation
against relentless attacks by radical Islamic terrorists," Sen. Cruz
said. “The United States would and should do the same under those
circumstances. Rather than bandying baseless accusations against Israel
in the United Nations, the Palestinian Authority would do better to
expose Hamas' vicious use of civilians as human shields, which is an
actual war crime.”
I could not agree more. But then, why would anyone expect the 'Palestinian Authority' to do otherwise?
Jonathan Schanzer warns that with the likely collapse of the current 'negotiations,' the 'Palestinians' have a plan B which consists of seeking recognition from the United Nations and its agencies. And there's little that Israel - or even the United States - can do to stop it. It's a diplomatic intifada.
Even amidst the peace talks, the Palestinians have used the 194
campaign as leverage. In early November, for example, the Palestinian
Monetary Authority announced that it had obtained full membership in the
International Association of Deposit Insurers [16]. Senior Palestinian official Nabil Shaath
[17] also warned that the Palestinians could use the "weapon" of taking
claims against Israel in the International Criminal Court. Shaath
added, "There are organizations that await our application, and ask us
when are we applying."
Abbas himself has threatened
[18], "If we don't obtain our rights through negotiations, we have the
right to go to international institutions." Palestinian official Hanan
Ashrawi also warned that the Palestinian leadership was ready to join sixteen agencies [19] beginning in April 2014. "Everything is in place and will be set in motion," Ashrawi claimed. By late December, Saeb Erekat told Maan News Agency [20] that there were no less than sixty-three member agencies of the UN that the PLO sought to join.
And while the exact strategy has not been released, on January 25, Maan News Agency
[21] reported that a PLO committee had reached an internal agreement on
how to "take the Palestinian plight to the UN and its various bodies."
This included "signing international conventions and joining UN agencies
and different bodies." Among the most important of these bodies was
said to be the International Criminal Court (ICC), "because that will
enable the PA to sue the Israeli occupation over war crimes and crimes
against humanity."
Israeli officials quietly admit that the ICC is only one agency on a
short list of international bodies that they view as red lines. They
include the International Telecommunications Union (ITU), the
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), the International
Maritime Organization (IMO), the World Trade Organization (WTO) and
INTERPOL. The concern for Israel is not that, not only would the
Palestinians gain acceptance as a state through these agencies (and do
so outside of the bilateral peace process), but that the Palestinians
would also try to isolate Israel from these agencies, which are crucial
to Israeli commerce, security and/or diplomacy.
Other Palestinian memberships would simply be insulting. For example,
Palestinians seek to join FIFA and then disqualify Israel from the
international soccer association. Indeed, Israel is growing increasingly
concerned that the Palestine 194 campaign is about to become part of
the larger strategy of Boycott, Divest and Sanctions (BDS). The campaign
has scored some small successes in academia, with a handful of European
businesses joining, too. But should the majority of UN member states
embrace the strategy of shunning Israel from multiple international
organizations, BDS could evolve into a real threat to Israel's
legitimacy.
The Palestinians, for their part, know that if they take new steps in
this direction, it will open up a whole new front in the
Palestinian-Israeli conflict. This explains, in part, why Palestinian
officials have kept a lid on their strategy. However, Palestinian
officials in the past have been quick to point out that they do not view
the Palestine 194 campaign as antithetical to bilateral negotiations
with Israel. Indeed, they see it as a means to enhance their negotiating
position. But now that talks are ongoing, Palestinian officials will
not discuss how this dual-track strategy works, particularly in light of
U.S. opposition to the 194 track. Instead, Palestinian officials
articulate their full-throated support of the Kerry initiative. At least
most of the time [22].
For Washington, there is more at stake here than a Nobel Prize for
Obama, Kerry and Indyk. Washington maintains its laws prohibiting the
funding of UN agencies when the PLO gains membership. That law did not
change following the UNESCO debacle. This, of course, means that the US
could be forced to choose between the State of Palestine and sixty-three
different UN agencies.
Some may not seem like a loss—such as the International Olive Council [23]. However, others, such as the World Health Organization or the International Court of Justice, could be bruising.
There's a lot that the United States could do to fight this using the power of the purse. But with Obama in charge, it's unlikely that the US will do anything to fight it.
Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me
Shame on the Israeli government for falling for this gambit.
Israel agreed to free 104 terrorist murderers (and has already freed 78 of them) in exchange for the 'Palestinians' returning to the conference table and eschewing proceedings to make themselves a 'state' at the United Nations and its various bodies until such time as 'negotiations' are concluded. Now, the 'Palestinians' have decided to return to the United Nations in clear violation of their deal with Israel.
The PLO – the Palestinian terrorist groups' umbrella
organization – has decided to authorize moves to join international
bodies under UN auspices, and to sign international conventions – even
though it had promised last year not to do so, in exchange for the
release of 104 terrorist murderers from Israeli jails.
In a session of the PLO Acting Committee in Ramallah Monday, under
Palestinian Authority (PA) Chairman Mahmoud Abbas, the PLO leadership
instructed the Diplomatic Committee which is subordinate to it, to
immediately begin preparing an action plan in this spirit.
When negotiations between the PA and Israel were renewed in 2013, the
Palestinians committed to freeze all initiatives to turn to
international bodies against Israel, in exchange for the release from
Israeli jails of 104 terrorist prisoners who had committed murderous
attacks.
Israel has stood up to its side of the deal, releasing 78 terrorist
prisoners in three batches to date. The final installment of murderers
is due to be released in about 10 weeks' time.
The PLO issued a statement blaming Israel for the current difficulties in the diplomatic process.
I wonder whether US Secretary of State John FN Kerry will be back here again this winter.
Saudi Arabia's frustration at international inaction over Syria and the
Palestinians led it to cancel its speech at the United Nations General
Assembly for the first time ever this week, a diplomatic source said.
...
By the standards of the world's top oil exporter and birthplace of
Islam, which usually expresses diplomatic concerns only in private, the
decision represented an unprecedented statement of discontent.
"The
Saudi decision... reflects the kingdom's dissatisfaction with the
position of the UN on Arab and Islamic issues, particularly the issue of
Palestine that the UN has not been able to solve in more than 60 years,
as well as the Syrian crisis," said the source.
The conservative Islamic kingdom is one of the main backers of rebels fighting Syrian President Bashar Assad in a civil war that has killed more than 100,000 people in two and a half years.
I'm sure that'll bring a lot of people around to the Saudi point of view....
The election of a member of the Iranian delegation to the sensitive
position in the UN took place despite months-long efforts by
representative of the Zionist regime to prevent Iran’s election.
The Zionist regime representative issued a protest letter urging
members not to let Iran be elected as a member of the commission’s
presiding board.
The election took place in the site of the General Assembly just one
hour after the Zionist regime prime minister vigorously criticized the
attitude of the Iranian government during his remarks.
The remarks were countered by a powerful and well-reasoned response
of the Iranian representative at the UN Khodadad Seifi who stressed the
peaceful nature of Iran’s nuclear program.
I hope there's a world left about which history can be written....
'Moderate' 'Palestinian' President Mahmoud AbbasAbu Mazen addressed the United Nations General Assembly on Thursday (the Israeli delegation was absent due to Simchath Torah). It was more of the same railing against Israel.
He said that he had begun the latest round of negotiations in good
faith and with an open mind, strongly determined to reach a peace accord
within nine months. The negotiations had not started from point zero,
“nor are we lost in a labyrinth without a map, nor do we lack a
compass”. Rather, the foundations of peace were long-standing and
within reach. That overarching goal was embodied in redressing the
“historic, unprecedented injustice” that had befallen the Palestinian
people in 1948. Palestine refused to entertain transitional or interim
agreements that could become “eternalized”, and aimed instead for a
permanent and comprehensive peace treaty, he said. The international
consensus on the terms and parameters of the negotiations were to be
found in the decision to upgrade Palestine’s status, and in countless
resolutions of the General Assembly, the Security Council and other
international organizations.
Noting that 20 years had passed since the Oslo Accords, he recalled
the Palestine National Council’s “extremely difficult decision” to
accept the proposed two-State solution based on the 1967 borders.
Simultaneously, the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) had
committed to peace, repudiating violence and rejecting terrorism.
Despite that dynamism and the hopes and expectations that the agreement
had generated, the picture today appeared “dispiriting and bleak”, with
its goals out of reach, its provisions unimplemented and its deadlines
disregarded. Settlement building continued, compromising the two-State
solution, he said, emphasizing the need for international vigilance
against such actions throughout the resumed negotiations. In that
regard, he welcomed the European Union’s position on products
originating from the settlements.
Wars, occupation, settlements and walls may provide temporary quiet
and momentary domination, but they could not ensure real security, he
warned, pointing out that such policies did not create rights or provide
legitimacy. What was required was heeding the lessons of history,
abandoning force, recognizing the rights of others and dealing on an
equal footing to make peace. Palestine was confident that the Israeli
people wanted peace and supported a two-State solution, which was why it
continued to reach out, trying to build bridges instead of walls, and
to sow the seeds of good neighbourliness. Palestinian refugees were
paying a particularly high price for conflict and instability, and
thousands had abandoned their camps and fled in another exodus.
Meanwhile, Israeli settlement construction continued and Palestinians
were forbidden from cultivating or irrigating their own land, he
continued. The wall and checkpoints continued to tear their lives apart
and to destroy the economy. Settlers had committed 708 terrorist
attacks against mosques and churches. Still, Palestinians worked to
build institutions and internal unity, working for reconciliation
through a return to the ballot box, while opposing occupation and
oppression by peaceful means. Assuring the Assembly that he was working
for a just peace, he warned that the current round of negotiations
seemed like the last chance, and urged the international community to
seize it. “The hour of freedom for the Palestinian people has rung,” he
declared. “The hour of peace has rung.”
A few comments:
1. What are the 'foundations of peace' that Abu Mazen claims long-standing and within reach? Do they include the following (from an open letter I wrote to then-President George W. Bush):
On October 3, 2006, Abu Mazen told al-Arabiya and 'Palestinian' television, "It is not required of Hamas, or of Fatah, or of the Popular Front to recognize Israel." I know that you said last night that "nations
that support a two-state solution, reject violence, recognize Israel's
right to exist, and commit to all previous agreements between the
parties" would be invited to your conference in the fall. If that is the case, how will you invite Abu Mazen? He doesn't recognize Israel's right to exist!
On January 11, 2007, Abu Mazen was reported by the Jerusalem Post to have said, “We have a legitimate right to direct our guns against Israeli occupation ... Our rifles, all our rifles are aimed at The Occupation.” And on February 5, 2007, Abu Mazen said, “We must unite the Hamas and Fatah blood in the struggle against Israel as we did at the beginning of the intifada. We want a political partnership with Hamas.” Is that a 'rejection of violence'?
On
January 11, 2007, referring to the so-called ‘right of return’ of
'Palestinian refugees' and their millions of descendants which, if
implemented would end Israel as a Jewish state, Abu Mazen said, "The issue of the refugees is non-negotiable.” Is that supporting a two-state solution?
You also said that those who want to attend your conference have to commit to all previous agreements between the parties. But those agreements require Abu Mazen to disarm all terrorists and fight terrorism. According to a statement that he made on May 26, 2006, Abu Mazen regards terrorists as heroes and in January 2005 he said that disarming them is "a line that may not be crossed."
2. What “historic, unprecedented injustice” befell the 'Palestinian
people' in 1948? Most of the 'Palestinians' who left Israel's territory in 1948 did so at the behest of their leaders who assured them that if they got out of the way, the Jews would be driven into the sea and they could return to their homes within a few days. Actions have consequences. If the 'Palestinians' in fact suffered an 'unprecedented injustice,' it was brought upon them by their own leadership.
Please note also that he's still talking about 1948 when the entire 'peace process' is based upon the conflict being limited to 1967.
3. Abu Mazen continues to complain about 'settlement building' but in the Oslo Accords, Israel did not commit to - in fact it explicitly refused to commit to - stopping 'settlement building.' The fact remains that Israel has not built any new 'settlements' since the Oslo Accords were signed - it has only built additional housing within existing 'settlements.'
4. How many 'Palestinians' were killed in the 708 alleged 'terrorist attacks' against mosques and churches (not that Abu Mazen could care less about Christians within his territory - their population continues to sink as it does throughout the entire region except for Israel)? How many Jews have been murdered in terror attacks since the Oslo Accords were signed?
Abu Mazen ended his speech with the usual threat that the current round of 'negotiations' seems like the 'last chance.' Same old, same old....
As new Iranian President Hassan Rohani heads to the United Nations for his charm offensive, and a possible meeting with American President Hussein Obama, it is worth recalling just who Rohani is.
As
Ambassador John Bolton had said at an EMET seminar on August 28th, in
the years between 2003 and 2005, Mr. Rouhani was in charge of the Iran's
nuclear negotiations, he offered the Europeans a diplomatic opening,
and has subsequently boasted on how he played them:
Hassan Rouhani says, in his own words,
"The day that we invited the three European ministers [to the talks],
only 10 centrifuges were spinning at [the Iranian nuclear facility of]
Natanz... We could not produce one gram of U4 or U6 [uranium
hexafluoride]... We did not have the heavy-water production. We could
not produce yellow cake. Our total production of centrifuges inside the
country was 150."
Rouhani
continues: "We wanted to complete all of these -- we needed time." He
actually called the Europeans "human shields" against American efforts
to halt the Iranian nuclear program. He then boasted that after he took
responsibility for negotiations, the nuclear project grew to 1700
centrifuges, and that "We did not stop (negotiations), until we
completed the project."
Leopards
do not change their spots. Mr. Rouhani had been a strong confidant and
devotee of Ayatollah Khomeini, and true believer of the Iranian
revolution. He is using the old ruse of playing the West over our desire
to negotiate, which he has developed into an advanced art form.
“Unfortunately, because of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Israel
has been weighed down by criticism and suffered from bias and sometimes
even discrimination,” UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon admitted during
his visit to Jerusalem, according to the European Jewish Press (EJP).
Addressing students participating in the Rishon Lezion College of
Management’s Model UN program at the UN headquarters in Jerusalem, Ban
said Israel should be treated equal to all the other 192 UN member
states.
The comments came in response to complaints by the students that
Israel receives more criticism than any other member country in the
world body.
At a press "encounter" at the UN Headquarters in New York on Monday, a
reporter for Israel Radio pressed Ban about his comments last Friday
while meeting with students at the UN headquarters in Jerusalem.
Ban simply said, "I don't think there is discrimination against Israel at the United Nations."
He
continued, "The Israeli government maybe raised this issue that there's
some bias against Israel, but Israel is one of the 193 member states.
Thus, Israel should have equal rights and opportunities without having
any bias, any discrimination. That's a fundamental principle of the
United Nations charter. And thus, Israel should be fully given such
rights."
Really? What other country has a permanent agenda item at the 'human rights council'? Not Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia, China, Sudan, etc. Only Israel. How many resolutions at the 'human rights council' deal with Israel every year and how many deal with other countries?
How many resolutions in the Security Council deal with Israel every year and how many deal with other countries?
How many resolutions in the General Assembly deal with Israel every year and how many deal with other countries?
That very disproportion tells you all you need to know. Yes, the United Nations is biased against Israel.
So was Ban high on drugs when he said there was no bias or when he said there is bias? Idiot.
Okay, somehow I missed this one (it's been a crazy week), but earlier this week the Washington Post actually editorialized that the US owes a 'thank you' to Prime Minister Netanyahu.
In essence, the international coalition is offering Iran a partial lifting of sanctions
in exchange for a freeze on the production of medium-enriched uranium,
while Iran wants a complete lifting of sanctions in exchange for token
steps that would leave its nuclear work unfettered.\
The meetings left the diplomatic process in limbo; the Obama
administration and its allies rightly refused Iranian requests to
schedule further meetings. Yet for now, at least, there is no crisis:
Neither Israel nor the United States is under pressure to consider
immediate military action against Iran, and there is time to wait and
see if Iran’s position will soften following a presidential election
scheduled for June.
For that, proponents of diplomacy over war with Iran can thank a
man they have often ridiculed or reviled: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Mr.
Netanyahu’s government is not a participant in the talks with Iran, of
course; Iran won’t parley with a nation it aspires to “wipe off the
map.” But the Israeli leader’s explicit setting of a “red line” for the
Iranian nuclear program in a speech to the U.N. General Assembly in
September appears to have accomplished what neither negotiations nor
sanctions have yielded: concrete Iranian action to limit its enrichment.
A
host of commentators both in the United States and Israel scoffed at
what they called Mr. Netanyahu’s “cartoonish” picture of a bomb and the
line he drew across it. The prime minister said Iran could not be
allowed to accumulate enough 20 percent enriched uranium to produce a
bomb with further processing, adding that at the rate its centrifuges
were spinning, Tehran would cross that line by the middle of 2013.
Iran,
too, dismissed what its U.N. ambassador called “an unfounded and
imaginary graph.” But then a funny thing happened: The regime began
diverting more of its stockpile to the manufacture of fuel plates for a
research reactor. According to the most recent report of international
inspectors, in February, it had converted 40 percent of its 20 percent
uranium to fuel assemblies or the oxide form needed to produce them. As a
result, Iran has remained distinctly below the Israeli red line, and it
probably postponed the earliest moment when it could cross that line by
several months.
Mr. Netanyahu’s red line is only a partial and
temporary check on the Iranian threat. The ongoing installation of a new
generation of faster centrifuges could soon make it obsolete by
providing a new means for Iran to quickly produce bomb-grade uranium.
But the lesson here is twofold: The credible threat of military action
has to be part of any strategy for preventing an Iranian nuclear weapon,
and clear red lines can help create the “time and space for diplomacy”
that President Obama seeks. Mr. Obama, who last year stiffly resisted
pressure from Mr. Netanyahu to spell out U.S. red lines, ought to
reconsider.
I'm sure everyone else who hasn't discussed this editorial missed it too.... Surely you don't think they'd want to deny Bibi credit or admit that Iran will not be stopped without a credible military threat... do you?
Kerry seeks to unblock $700 million for 'Palestinians'
US Secretary of State John FN Kerry is seeking to unblock $700 million in US foreign aid that has been withheld from the 'Palestinian Authority' as a result of their stunt at the United Nations last fall (Hat Tip: Herb G).
"The secretary feels extremely strongly that it is time
now to get this support to the Palestinian Authority," State Department
spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said.
The department was working with Congress "to get
appropriated money released for the Palestinian Authority because we
think it's very, very important that they remain effective in supporting
the needs of the Palestinian people."
Some $495.7 million was set aside for the Palestinian
Authority in the fiscal year 2012 which ended on October 1, while
another $200 million for this fiscal year was notified to Congress last
week.
The money is earmarked for specific things in the Palestinian budget such as security as well as administrative costs.
However, an additional $100 million has been released, but can only be used on narcotics and law enforcement.
Money is fungible.
The United States is $16 trillion in debt and it's going to free up $700 million for a group of terrorists that defied it in the United Nations? That's really going to teach them a lesson, isn't it?
One of the 22 anti-Israel resolutions passed in the recent United Nations General Assembly session called on Israel to return the Golan Heights to Syria. The Arab Druze residents of the Golan have a different view. Over the last year and a half, they've been accepting Israeli citizenship in droves.
One resolution, for instance, slams Israel’s 1981 annexation of the
“occupied Syrian Golan” and demands that Israel “rescind forthwith its
decision.” Given what’s happening across the border in Syria, where the
ongoing civil war has killed over 44,000 people and created over 500,000
refugees, I suspect most of the 20,000 Syrian Druze on the Golan are
thanking their lucky stars to be living safely under Israel’s
“occupation.” But you needn’t take my word for it: According to the Hebrew dailyMaariv, whose report was subsequently picked up the Winnipeg Jewish Review,
Israeli government statistics show that the number of Golan Druze
applying for Israeli citizenship (for which the annexation made them
eligible) has risen by hundreds of percent since the Syrian civil war
erupted, after 30 years in which very few did so.
“More and more people comprehend that
this [Israel] is a well-managed country and it’s possible to live and
raise children here,” one Druze who acquired Israeli citizenship
explained.
“In Syria there is mass murder, and if [the Druze are] under
Syrian control they would likely be turned into the victims of these
atrocities. People see murdered children and refugees fleeing to Jordan
and Turkey, lacking everything, and ask themselves: Where do I want to
raise my children. The answer is clear–in Israel and not Syria.”
But what the Golan’s own residents want, of course, is of no interest
to the UN: It would rather Israel return the area, and its Druze, to
the Syrian hellhole “forthwith.”
I am an Orthodox Jew - some would even call me 'ultra-Orthodox.' Born in Boston, I was a corporate and securities attorney in New York City for seven years before making aliya to Israel in 1991 (I don't look it but I really am that old :-). I have been happily married to the same woman for thirty-five years, and we have eight children (bli ayin hara) ranging in age from 13 to 33 years and nine grandchildren. Four of our children are married! Before I started blogging I was a heavy contributor on a number of email lists and ran an email list called the Matzav from 2000-2004. You can contact me at: IsraelMatzav at gmail dot com
