Sunday, 20 September 2009

Israel Matzav: Goldstone: Lazy, lying

Goldstone: Lazy, lying

CAMERA catches the Goldstone Commission in a bald-faced lie.

In discussing that prior Israeli report on the Gaza conflict, The Operation in Gaza: Factual and Legal Aspects, Goldstone and his colleagues reproduce a passage that the Israeli report had quoted from the magazine Newsweek, which included this sentence:

In the Tal-al Hawa neighborhood nearby, however, Talal Safadi, an official in the leftist Palestinian People's Party, said that resistance fighters were firing from positions all around the hospital.

The Goldstone report then comments on this, questioning the evidence presented by Israel:

While the Israeli Government does not comment further on the specific attack, it would appear to invoke these comments to justify the strikes on the hospital and surrounding area.

612. The Mission understands that the Israeli Government may consider relying on journalists’ reporting as likely to be treated as more impartial than reliance on its own intelligence information. The Mission is nonetheless struck by the lack of any suggestion in Israel’s report of July 2009 that there were members of armed groups present in the hospital at the time.

One should note first that, of course, Israel did have intelligence information that armed groups were present in the hospital. That’s why they fired back at them.

But more importantly, the UN’s claim here is a breathtaking distortion of what the Israeli report said, for immediately after the quote from Newsweek, the Israeli report presented exactly what the Goldstone report charged was lacking:

174. A report from Corriere della Sera confirms that the grounds, ambulances and uniforms of the al-Quds hospital had been hijacked by terrorist operatives:

Magah al Rachmah, aged 25, residing a few dozen meters from the four large buildings of the now seriously damaged health complex, says about this fact: “The men of Hamas took refuge mainly in the building that houses the administrative offices of al Quds. They used the ambulances and forced ambulance drivers and nurses to take off their uniforms with the paramedic symbols, so they could blend in better and elude Israeli snipers.”

The Goldstone Commission had reached its conclusions before it started 'investigating' the facts. It then tried to distort the facts to fit its conclusions.

The question is whether that is obvious enough yet to convince the West to consign this report to the dustbin of history where it belongs.

Israel Matzav: Goldstone: Lazy, lying

Israel Matzav: See no evil, hear no evil but speak evil

See no evil, hear no evil but speak evil

In the Jerusalem Post blogs, Alan Dershowitz rips the Goldstone Commission Report:

The lowest blow and the worst canard contained in this lie-laden report is that the Israeli judicial system is incapable of conducting investigations and bringing about compliance with international law.

It claims that the Israeli judicial system "has major structural flaws that make the system inconsistent with international standards," and that "there is little potential for accountability for serious violations of international humanitarian and human rights law through domestic institutions in Israel."

This is a direct attack on the Israeli Supreme Court by a lawyer who knows full well that there is no country in the world that has a judicial system that demands more accountability than the Israeli system does. There is no judicial system in the world - not in the United States, not in Great Britain, not in South Africa, not in France - that takes more seriously its responsibility to bring its military into compliance with international law.

The long-term president of the Israeli Supreme Court, Professor Aharon Barak, opened the Supreme Court of Israel to all claims of law violation. Cases that would be rejected by the courts of other nations have been pursued by the Israeli Supreme Court. This part of this infamous report has literally turned black to white and white to black. It has condemned the most responsive judicial system in the world, without even bothering to compare it to other systems. In doing so, they have made a mockery of international human rights and turned into a weapon that targets only Israel.

Another Orwellian "newspeak" conclusion is that "the international community has been largely silent" about alleged Israeli abuses in the Gaza and the West Bank. Didn't the investigators even read the reports of the Human Rights Council, as well as so many other organizations of the international community, that obsess over Israeli imperfections, to the exclusion of other real human rights abusers?

No country in the world has been subjected to more criticism than Israel. Yet on Planet Goldstone, "The international community has been largely silent" about Israel. This statement could only have been written by a variation of the three monkeys with hands covering their eyes and ears, but not their mouths. After reading these perverse falsities, I fully expected the report to end by parroting the Sweedish tabloid that accused Israeli soldiers of killing Palestinian children in order to sell their orgains. Shades of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion!

Every serious student of human rights should be appalled at this anti-human rights and highly politicized report. Judge Richard Goldstone should be ashamed of himself.

Israel Matzav: See no evil, hear no evil but speak evil

Love of the Land: The Biggest Jewish Settlement

Jonathan Tobin
18 September 09

At the center of the recent controversy about the participation of Israeli artists at the Toronto Film Festival was the fact that the event highlighted the city of Tel Aviv’s centennial. To the signatories of a letter of protest, a group that included Danny Glover, Wallace Shawn, and Jane Fonda, it was the notion of celebrating Tel Aviv that was the real problem. It was, they said, founded on violence and the “suffering of thousands of former residents and descendants.”

The anti-Israel protesters have their facts wrong. Tel Aviv was founded not on the site of former homes of Palestinian Arabs who were dispossessed by the Jews but on empty sand dunes outside the city Jaffa. The village that was founded there a century ago grew large as a result of Jews fleeing anti-Jewish riots in Jaffa in 1921. The city has grown to be the nation’s largest city and is as cosmopolitan … and liberal as any in the world today.

So it is no small irony that those seeking to boycott Israel and brand it as illegitimate are willing to claim that Tel Aviv, of all places, is just another illegal Jewish settlement. As pressure grows on Israel to “freeze” building in the Jewish suburbs of Jerusalem, as well as in parts of that city itself, it is interesting to reflect on the fact that to those who wish to destroy the Jewish state, every house in every town in the country is an illegal settlement.

Many in Israel (especially in Tel Aviv), as well as many friends of Israel in the United States, like to think of the West Bank settlements as being bizarre places where crazy, violent people live and that have nothing to do with the “real” Israel inside the 1967 borders. What these anti–Tel Aviv protesters tell us is that for much of the rest of the world, this is a false distinction. And, in a sense, they are right—just as once Tel Aviv was another empty place where intrepid Jews bravely attempted to put down roots and build homes. Today it may be a booming, bustling city, but to Hamas and Fatah—as well as Glover, Shawn, and Fonda—it is just a part of hated Israel and no more legitimate than any hilltop settlement deep in the West Bank.

Those Americans who think there is nothing wrong with the Obama administration’s decision to press for more Israeli concessions and building freezes in Jerusalem and elsewhere should think about the significance of the Tel Aviv bashers. Some may argue that the settlements, even those in and around Jerusalem, must go to save Israel. But to those whom Obama wishes to appease by this pressure policy, there is no difference between them and the biggest Jewish settlement of them all in Tel Aviv.

Related: Fond Jane and Mr.Braun

Love of the Land: The Biggest Jewish Settlement

Love of the Land: Another Tack: Fond Jane and Mr. Braun

Sarah Honig
17 September 09

We're all familiar with holier-than-thou anti-Semites whose much-touted "best friends" invariably are Jews. Well, the good news is that Jane Fonda is awfully fond of us. She says so in her blog. Given all that fondness, Fonda feels persecuted for no fault of her own. She cannot fathom why she must "wake up in the morning to a barrage of e-mails" about "a petition protesting the Toronto International Film Festival's decision to feature a celebratory 'spotlight' on Tel Aviv... By doing this the festival has become, whether knowingly or not, a participant in a cynical PR campaign to improve Israel's image, make her appear less warlike."

Fonda is so fond of us that she insists our face remain as dirty, demonic and denigrated as she and her avidly mud-slinging chums (like Danny Glover, presumably our friend by association) deem appropriate for us. Truth may be detrimental to their ends, which obviously justify any and all means.

FOR THESE ends Israel needs to remain besmirched and blackened. And that was why fond Fonda, comrade Glover and more than 50 other petition signatories (among them various indispensable useful-fool Israelis) had such a bone to pick with the Toronto festival, itself hardly a Lovers-of-Zion shindig by any measure.

It featured a bunch of films about Tel Aviv, many of which conform to the popular Israeli genre of self-deprecating, pro-Arab flicks scripted for the explicit purpose of winning acceptance and accolades from Fonda and her ideological likes overseas. Sucking up to the Fondas of this world, it's widely believed in our provincial backwoods, is the only way for an ambitious Israeli academic/artiste/author/moviemaker to carve out a career and bask in the ambiance of moneyed Israel-bashing liberal patrons.

How deliciously ironic then that Fonda - albeit indirectly and inadvertently - punishes precisely those Israeli producers who obsequiously fawn to please just her sorts. Their radicalism and/or brownnosing make no difference. This effectively parallels two millennia of Jewish experience with assorted Judeophobes - including those who had cut no slack for urbane "Germans of the Mosaic persuasion."

Toronto's festival, according to the Jane-brand of spurious historiography, omitted to stress that "Tel Aviv is built on destroyed Palestinian villages, and that the city of Jaffa, Palestine's main cultural hub until 1948, was annexed to Tel Aviv after the mass exiling of the Palestinian population. This program ignores the suffering of thousands of former residents and descendants of the Tel Aviv/Jaffa area who currently live in refugee camps."

Uncool as it may be, according to George Orwell "speaking the truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act." Fonda should appreciate revolutionary acts. In her younger years, when she bombastically boosted Huey Newton and the Black Panthers, she insisted that "revolution is an act of love. We are the children of revolution, born to be rebels. It runs in our blood."

So let's get on with the revolutionary act of telling the truth. Habitual knee-jerk detractors, who disdain historical references, please note that Fonda and crew were those who launched us on this foray into that past.

RECENTLY I wrote of almost forgotten Tel Aviv founder Yosef-Eliahu Chelouche, a native of Jaffa, scion of a Jewish family from North Africa (kosher presumably for Third World ennoblers) and a notable political dove till Arab bloodlust disillusioned him. In his 1931 memoirs, long before Tel Aviv became the vast Zionist empire's icon, Yosef-Eliahu described those 12 desolate windswept acres of wasteland purchased for a hefty sum in 1909 for Ahuzat Bayit (as the embryonic city was called). They were hardly occupied by Arab villages as Fonda and friends aver.

Yosef-Eliahu recalled them as "a sea of sand, a barren desert with powdery yellow mountains and hills, where jackals howled." Beyond Jaffa's decaying narrow alleyways stretched an undulating shadeless wilderness. It was a horrendous, almost impassable and seemingly interminable tract, without landmarks or signs of habitation.

From its inception Ahuzat Bayit was traversed by a boulevard - not because it was a preplanned aesthetic feature. Tel Aviv would rise on pyramidal mounds with unstable continuously shifting slipfaces. These were pronounced unsuitable for construction. To level off the area, teams of pioneers used wheelbarrows to move tons of sand from the highest points and deposit them in the gullies bellow. The deepest ditch cut across Ahuzat Bayit exactly where Sderot Rothschild now stretches. Filled with so much soft sand, it was judged unsafe to support structures. Instead it was covered with topsoil and lined with trees. If anything, Tel Aviv was reclaimed from an empty strip of desert.

Elementary intellectual integrity should oblige Fonda and her retinue of our "best friends" to recall that Jaffa was also a pivotal early 20th-century Jewish hub. If anyone was forcibly dislodged therefrom, Jaffa's Jews were; 1921's unprovoked five-day Jaffa-generated Arab riots, in which 49 Jews were massacred (among them leading Jewish literati, including left-wing Yosef Haim Brenner) and more than 150 wounded, effectively brought down the curtain on Jaffa's Jewish community and boosted adjacent Tel Aviv as a separate, independent, viable, modern and thriving alternative entity.

The carnage filled 12-year-old Tel Aviv with tents and makeshift sheds to shelter Jewish refugees fleeing the Jaffa bloodbath before even self-proclaimed anti-imperialists of the Fonda-mold could conjure up supposed Jewish provocation for Arab butchery.

As to the 1948 escapades of Jaffans on the eve of Israeli independence, I will summon my own mother's testimony. The minaret of Jaffa's Turkish-constructed Hassan Bek Mosque, for instance, was used by Arab snipers to take frequent potshots at passersby on the adjacent streets of Tel Aviv. For Jane's attention, that was before we could conceivably be accused of becoming conquistador ogres.

My mother often recalled the mortal risk entailed in crossing the street to the corner grocery. She was nearly shot on her way to the dentist. One afternoon, her landlord, Mr. Braun, buttonholed her at the entrance to his apartment house on 7 Rehov Aharonson. Standing in the doorway he lectured her sternly about the foolhardiness of her sorties outdoors. Just then a bullet whistled by. Mr. Braun fell dead at my mother's feet.

Odds are Jane doesn't know about Mr. Braun. But she should educate herself about Hassan Bek's snipers, who didn't care about the identity of their numerous random victims. It helps Jane's predatory propaganda not to mention them, to pretend that Jaffa didn't aggressively and continuously attack Tel Aviv, that peaceable Jaffans were dispossessed arbitrarily in villainous circumstances devoid of context.

In a world of cosmopolitan detachment, Jane's propaganda works. Toronto Festival codirector Cameron Bailey half-apologetically conceded "that Tel Aviv is not a simple choice and the city remains contested ground." But if even Tel Aviv is "contested ground," if even its legitimacy is questionable, what are we to say about Israel as a whole?

So much for all those insincerely avowed two-state syrupy sentiments.

Love of the Land: Another Tack: Fond Jane and Mr. Braun

Love of the Land: The Syrian paradox: playing the spoiler to stay relevant

Michael Young
The National
16 September 09

It wasn’t a coincidence that the firing of two rockets from southern Lebanon into Israel last Friday was meant to coincide with the anniversary of the September 11 attacks. Nor was it a coincidence that the unknown group claiming responsibility was named the Ziad al Jarrah division of the Abdullah Azzam Brigades, which is allegedly linked to al Qa’eda.

The point was to create a red herring. In all likelihood, and given the constraints on the ground in Lebanon’s border area, the party really behind the attack was Syria, employing pro-Syrian Palestinians. There are several reasons to presume so. Damascus has often used similar incidents in the south to get its messages across, despite the pro forma veneer of deniability it has put up. Only Syria has the latitude to set up rockets in an area tightly controlled by Hizbollah. And it has been a recurring feature of Syrian conduct to shift blame for its own breaches of security on to Sunni Islamists, both to tarnish its Sunni Lebanese foes, principally Saad Hariri, and to suggest that only Syria can contain “Sunni extremism”.

There were regional and domestic implications to what happened. While many Lebanese focused on the latter – pointing out that the attack was linked to the political crisis in Beirut, particularly Mr Hariri’s inability to form a government – Syria’s calculations outside the country may have been more important. The president Bashar Assad is displeased with the fact that the Syrian track appears to be far less of an Obama administration priority than the Palestinian track, even as Washington wants Damascus to engage in direct negotiations with Israel when the Syrians would prefer to work through the Turkish government.

By ordering rockets to be fired into Israel, the Syrians reminded the Americans that their isolation by Washington could push them to provoke a conflict between Lebanon and Israel. Implicit was a warning that it is not Iran and Hizbollah alone who can raise tension in the border area. In some respects this is similar to the policy that Syria is pursuing in Iraq, where they have also tried to accumulate political capital by manipulating the security situation. But ultimately where does such an approach lead?

That question, or rather the absence of an obvious answer to the question, is at the heart of the structural difficulties plaguing the Syrian-American relationship. Syria has yet to resolve a paradox in its political behaviour. For it to engage the United States effectively, the Assad regime believes it must accumulate leverage regionally. But its only means of doing so is by destabilising its surroundings, adding to the obstacles preventing better ties with Washington. This is a recurring problem that Syria has faced with most of its interlocutors: it seeks political chips to remain politically relevant, but will rarely cash in these chips because it fears that doing so would only make it more irrelevant.

Take the situation in Iraq. The Obama administration has been eager in recent months to bring Syria into broader US efforts to pacify Iraq, as a preparatory step toward a military withdrawal from the country. Indeed, the Americans recently angered the Iraqi prime minister Nouri al Maliki by discussing border security with Syria when the Iraqis felt that this should be their own prerogative. Following the simultaneous bombings in Baghdad in late August, the US initially took an equivocal position towards the violence, arguing that Iraq and Syria should resolve their differences through dialogue, while sources in Washington leaked that it was not Iraqi Baathists run out of Syria, but al Qa’eda, that had carried out the bombings. Mr Maliki’s idea of setting up a United Nations tribunal to investigate the incident aroused no American sympathy.

And yet the United States seemed to be intentionally missing the point. The Assad regime continues to allow foreign jihadists to enter Iraq through its border. If such jihadists planned and executed the Baghdad bombings, there was a pretty good chance they travelled through Syria. However, as eager as some US officials are to make the relationship with Syria work in Iraq, the reality is that the Syrians have every intention of maintaining a spoiler role there, whether to strengthen themselves with respect to Washington in the future or with respect to Iraq and the Arab world.

That is not likely to change at a time when the United States, along with the other permanent members of the UN Security Council and Germany, is preparing to begin a dialogue with Iran. Nothing worries Syria more than the prospect of a breakthrough in the Middle East between Washington and Tehran. And while the probability may not be high, the Syrians don’t like processes of which they are not a part. That will only make them more reluctant to be conciliatory – in Iraq, but also in Lebanon and on the Palestinian front. A more imaginative policy might be for Syria to initiate a serious process of its own, perhaps through negotiations with Israel, one that pushes it towards centre stage in diplomatic importance, but that’s not part of the Assad regime’s DNA, which naturally gravitates towards obstruction.

What Mr Assad does not realise is that the Obama administration is as close as he will get to a willing American partner. The US has decided to send an ambassador back to Damascus, to lift some sanctions on Syria, to engage it over Iraq and to avoid clashes over Syria’s support for Hamas and its actions in Lebanon, where Mr Assad’s intransigence is a major factor in blocking the formation of a new government. Despite all this, the Syrians are no closer to getting something tangible out of the relationship.

American tolerance has its limits: Syria has often succeeded in forcing other governments to take it to the river, before then refusing to drink. To finally get somewhere, Mr Assad may one day have to risk a sip.

Michael Young is opinion editor of the Daily Star newspaper in Lebanon

Love of the Land: The Syrian paradox: playing the spoiler to stay relevant

Love of the Land: Celebrating 60 years of perpetuating the Palestinian refugee problem:

World leaders pay tribute to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency

Dr. Aaron Lerner
18 September 09

[Dr. Aaron Lerner - IMRA: The international community typically aids in
solving refugee problems on a humanitarian basis by assisting in absorbing the refugees in host countries. But the welfare of Palestinian refugees and their progeny of several generations has taken second place to their role as pawns in the ongoing struggle against the Zionist identity (aka Jewish state, aka Israel).

And that's where UNRWA comes in, helping to feed, cloth, educate, etc. these political pawns (with a payment system designed to encourage one of the highest birth rates in the world to help increase the number of Palestinian pawns) .

From an institutional standpoint its a win-win situation. After all, if the refugees, their children, grandchildren and now great grandchildren were formally absorbed then the folks making a career working for UNRWA would be unemployed.. ]

Press Release
UNRWA, New York
18 Sept 2009

EMBARGOED UNTIL 14h30 GMT / 17h30 Jerusalem time

World leaders pay tribute
To the United Nations Relief and Works Agency
On its sixtieth anniversary

United Nations, 18 September 2009: The United Nations Relief and Works Agency, UNRWA, has announced a week-long series of events beginning in New York next week to mark the 60th anniversary of its creation. These include the unveiling of a commemorative banner that will adorn the façade of the iconic UN General Assembly building by the President of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, and the Deputy Secretary General, Asha-Rose Migiro.

The centrepiece of the week is a Ministerial Level Event on September 24 at which governments will pledge support for UNRWA and pay tribute to six decades of achievement and service to the world's largest and longest standing refugee population and to the Palestine refugees themselves.

In addition, there will be academic conferences at Columbia University and the Princeton Club on UNRWA's humanitarian role in current peace efforts and an assessment of the Agency's contribution to human capital in the Middle East.

The Secretary General, Ban Ki-Moon, commended UNRWA as a "symbol of the international community's determination to end the state of limbo the Palestine refugees endure", and praised the Agency's staff for its "dedication and courage". He is expected to warn of "painful" cuts in UNRWA services and call on the General Assembly to "look again" at its responsibilities and put the Agency on a firm financial foundation.

Looking forward to the High Level Event, UNRWA Commissioner-General, Karen AbuZayd said, "This is an occasion for reflection on why after sixty years of exile and dispossession, millions of Palestine refugees remains stateless. With increasing talk about an emerging peace deal, let us all recommit ourselves to finding a peaceful solution in which the tragic situation of the refugees will be resolved". "This week is also an opportunity for UNRWA to tell the world about its achievements. The war in
Gaza and our continued presence side by side with the people there may have raised some headlines. During this coming week we want to remind the world of the less-publicised work we do day in and day out for a refugee population larger than the populations of over a third of the UN's member states," said AbuZayd. "That is UNRWA's lasting contribution to peace".

UNRWA has published a commemorative book in which nearly one hundred statesmen and women pay tribute to its work. President Mahmoud Abbas praises the Agency for its role as a "stabilizing force" and commends UNRWA for "ameliorating the plight of the Palestine refugees by giving them "protection, hope and a sense of human dignity". The US Secretary of State, Hilary Rodham Clinton, gives her support to the Agency, which has been confronting "difficult and challenging circumstances", working "tirelessly to ensure the dignity and human development of those they serve". Her
Majesty Queen Rania Al Abdullah of Jordan says, "We owe so much to UNRWA. Their selflessness and perseverance in the face of indescribable adversity have kept Palestine refugees alive for sixty years: healing their wounds, sustaining their bodies, nourishing their minds and giving them hope in their darkest hours".

UNRWA provides education to half a million children in approximately 650 schools across the Middle East and maintains 138 health centres in Gaza, the West Bank, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria. In addition, it runs extensive relief, social services and microfinance programmes in the region.

Love of the Land: Celebrating 60 years of perpetuating the Palestinian refugee problem:

Israel Matzav: A smoking gun on Iranian terror in Argentina

A smoking gun on Iranian terror in Argentina

This is a description of a book called To Kill Without a Trace. The book (pictured) has been published in Spanish and shows how Iran was behind the suicide bombing at the AMIA Jewish Community Center in Argentina in 1994.
On July 18, 1994, the worst anti-Jewish attack in the post world war era occurred: the site of the center of the Jewish community in Buenos Aires was obliterated, leaving 85 dead and hundreds injured.

A short time later, a web was spun to provide cover for those responsible for the attack, which included red herrings, blackmailing, bribery, intimidation of witnesses and diverse methods of obstructing the investigation.

This cover-up network was instigated by government functionaries, intelligence agents, judges and leaders of the Jewish community. It would have succeeded had it not been for the herculean work of Alberto Nisman, who in 1997 was nominated to be a State Prosecutor of the AMIA case with the intention of rubber stamping this network of falsifications.

At the heart of this novel is the gradual unraveling of this web of lies.
Read the whole thing.

I find it especially curious to hear that the Jewish community was involved in the coverup, and look forward to the book being published in English

Israel Matzav: A smoking gun on Iranian terror in Argentina

Israel Matzav: UN should hold Obama to same standard as Israel

UN should hold Obama to same standard as Israel

Writing in Haaretz, Ari Shavit has a clever idea.
Some two weeks ago American airplanes fired on two oil tankers in northern Afghanistan. It was a German officer who'd asked the U.S. air force to attack the tankers in the middle of the night, in a populated area. The attack was successful - the two tankers were hit, went up in flames and were destroyed. But the overwhelming American-German air attack killed some 70 people. Some of those brought to hospitals were severely injured - with mutilated faces, burned hands and charred bodies.

It is not clear to this day if most of those who burned to death were Taliban warriors, as NATO first claimed, or innocent civilians who wanted to bring home a bit of oil. One way or another, it's clear that the United States and Germany are responsible for an extremely brutal attack. Britain, France, Spain, the Netherlands, Belgium and Norway also bear responsibility for the massacre as NATO members.

If the international community is committed to international law and universal ethics - which do not discriminate between one sort of killing and another - then it should investigate this villainous assault. If the United States, Germany and NATO refuse to cooperate with investigators, the UN should consider transferring the case to the International Court of Justice in The Hague. It is possible that at the end of the process it would be necessary to put U.S. President Barack Obama, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and the leaders of Britain, France, Spain, the Netherlands, Belgium and Norway on trial for their role in committing a severe war crime that did not distinguish between civilians and combatants.

Obama would probably be the principal defendant in this case. He was the one who believed in the war in Afghanistan and intensified it. As U.S. commander-in-chief, he bears direct responsibility not only for the deaths of those who were burned with the tankers, but the death of many hundreds of innocent Afghan civilians.

If there are is such a thing as an international community, international law and universal ethics, they must seriously consider putting Obama on trial for his responsibility for severe war crimes.

Continue reading here.

Yes, of course it's absurd. But so is the Goldstone Report and the standards to which the World is attempting to hold Israel.
Israel Matzav: UN should hold Obama to same standard as Israel

Israel Matzav: Obama to host Netanyahu and Abu Mazen in New York this week

Obama to host Netanyahu and Abu Mazen in New York this week

President Obama will host a 'summit' with Prime Minister Netanyahu and 'moderate' 'Palestinian' President Mahmoud Abbas Abu Mazen on the sidelines of the General Assembly meeting in New York this coming week. The announcement came on Saturday, the first day of Rosh HaShana. The 'Palestinians' had said previously that they would not agree to a meeting unless Israel agreed to stop all 'settlement activity.'
Nir Hefetz, who heads the public relations desk in the Prime Minister's Office, said in response to the announcement that, "Prime Minister Netanyahu warmly accepts the invitation extended by the U.S. administration for a meeting with the U.S. president, and for a trilateral meeting with the president and with the president of the Palestinian Authority."

A senior Netanyahu aide added: "The meeting will be held without preconditions, as the prime minister had always wanted."

Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat confirmed Abbas would attend the meeting and said he hopes the meeting will renew talks.

The Palestinian leader held talks with Netanyahu's predecessor, Ehud Olmert, for over a year without achieving an agreement.

On Friday, the possibility of a three-way meeting had been in doubt because Mitchell failed to bridge wide gaps between Israelis and Palestinians.

Obama has set the renewal of Israeli-Palestinian peace talks as a major goal of his young presidency, and dispatched Mitchell as a White House envoy to soften the ground on both sides.

Over four days, Mitchell met twice with Abbas and four times with Netanyahu, including twice on Friday before Mitchell left the Middle East.
The meeting will follow individual meetings between Obama and each of Netanyahu and Abu Mazen. Expectations are apparently quite low.

The reality is that there isn't going to be a deal because the 'Palestinians' and their Arab Muslim patrons aren't willing to accept the existence of a Jewish state in the Middle East, and most Israelis have woken up and smelled the coffee in time to avoid committing suicide.

Israel Matzav: Obama to host Netanyahu and Abu Mazen in New York this week

Israel Matzav: Rally against Ahmadinejad Thursday in New York

Israel Matzav: Rally against Ahmadinejad Thursday in New York
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...