Love of the Land: Obama ensures that terror has no consequences

Obama ensures that terror has no consequences

Elder of Ziyon
26 March '10

From YNet:

The Obama Administration is demanding that Israel hand over more West Bank land to exclusive PA control, including the Abu-Dis area adjacent to Jerusalem, Palestinian sources told Ynet Thursday.
According to the US vision, the move will take place as part of reverting to the state that prevailed in the West Bank before the outbreak of the last Intifada.

"The most significant demand is to restore the situation to what it was on the eve of the Intifada," one source said.

Because what could possibly be wrong with turning back the clock to the day before a war began that killed a thousand Israeli civilians?
Starting and losing a war has consequences in every part of the world except for one. Since 1967, the world - and "international law" as interpreted by most - is fixated on the idea that the Arabs can start all the wars they want against Israel. If they lose, international pressure will ensure that the previous status quo can be returned to, so there are no consequences for losing.

We have seen Egypt, Syria, the PLO, the PLO again, Hezbollah and Hamas start wars with Israel, secure in the knowledge that they will not lose anything of consequence if they lose the war. Just expendable people who are less important than "The Struggle" and perhaps a few years of negotiations and pressure.

(Read full post)

Love of the Land: Obama ensures that terror has no consequences

Love of the Land: A reality too terrible to admit

A reality too terrible to admit

Jonathan Spyer
Haaretz
26 March '10

Jonathan Spyer is a senior research fellow at the Global Research in International Affairs Center at the Interdisciplinary Center, Herzliya.

The Obama administration's approach to the Middle East is characterized by an apparent desire to revive the sunny illusions of the 1990s peace process - in an era that is far more uncertain and dangerous. This is particularly noticeable in the Israeli-Palestinian arena, in which the United States, the dominant world power, sets the parameters of debate. As a result, international discussion of the conflict is now more detached from reality than at any time in the past 40 years.

There are two layers to the edifice of unreality in which mainstream debate on the Israeli-Palestinian issue is now taking place. The first and most obvious one concerns the Hamas enclave in Gaza. It is now over four years since the movement's victory in elections to the Palestine Legislative Council, and nearly three years since the Hamas coup in Gaza. It is therefore past time to acknowledge that a single, united Palestinian national movement no longer exists.

Since this is, apparently, a reality too terrible to be admitted, the U.S. and the Europeans have chosen, in public at least, to ignore it. The fiction that the West Bank Palestinian Authority speaks in the name of all Palestinians is politely maintained. Behind the scenes, however, the reality is widely acknowledged. The intended means for coping with it constitutes the second layer of illusion.

The inability of even mainstream Fatah-style Palestinian nationalism to accept partition as the final outcome of the conflict has prevented its resolution twice - in 2000 and 2008. This type of nationalism understands the conflict as one that pits a colonial project against a native, authentic nationalism.

From such a perspective, partition of the land means admitting defeat. But Palestinian nationalism does not feel defeated. It is characterized, rather, by a deep strategic optimism. From its point of view, it is therefore not imperative to immediately conclude the struggle - but it is forbidden to end it. Hence the endless reasons why the partition deal somehow can never be inked.

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: A reality too terrible to admit

Love of the Land: Hillary Clinton's unfortunate mistake

Hillary Clinton's unfortunate mistake

Itamar Marcus, Nan Jacques Zilberdik
and Barbara Crook
Palestinian Media Watch (PMW)
23 March '10

Someone in the State Department is giving Secretary of State Hillary Clinton imprecise information about Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas.

In her speech to AIPAC yesterday, Clinton condemned Hamas for renaming "a square after a terrorist who murdered innocent Israelis," saying it was "wrong and must be condemned." On the other hand, Clinton "commended" PA Chairman Abbas.

Clinton's condemnation of Hamas alone, because the municipality that named the square after the terrorist is run by Hamas, was erroneous. In fact, it has been the Palestinian Authority and Mahmoud Abbas, not Hamas, who have been leading the Palestinians in glorifying Dalal Mughrabi, the terrorist bus hijacker who was responsible for the killing of 37 civilians, whom Clinton accurately called the "terrorist who murdered innocent Israelis."

Palestinian Media Watch has documented the continuous Mughrabi veneration by Abbas and the Palestinian Authority in recent years, both in connection to the square near Ramallah on the West Bank and in many other contexts. The following are 15 examples of the glorification of this one particular terrorist, Dalal Mughrabi. Five by Abbas himself, five by the Palestinian Authority or its leaders, and five by Fatah or its leaders:

1) It was Abbas himself who defended the naming of the square after Mughrabi: "I do not deny it. Of course we want to name a square after her." [Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Jan. 17, 2010]

2)It was Abbas himself who on December 31, 2009 honored that same terrorist Mughrabi by sponsoring a celebration of her birthday. [PA TV (Fatah) News, Dec. 29, 2009]
It was Abbas's Fatah youth movement who prepared the Mughrabi square for the ceremony. [Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, March 8, 2010]

3)It was Abbas himself who funded a computer center after that same terrorist. "Present at the event were President Mahmoud Abbas's advisor... inaugurating the [Dalal Mughrabi] center, funded by a contribution from the President's [Abbas's] Office." [Al-Ayyam, May 5, 2009]

(Read full report)

Love of the Land: Hillary Clinton's unfortunate mistake

Love of the Land: Should People Reconsider Support for the Infrastructure of an Entity at War with the State and People of Israel?

Should People Reconsider Support for the Infrastructure of an Entity at War with the State and People of Israel?

David Bedein
Israel Resource Review
22 March '10

Now and then, people remind me of my passionate advocacy for a Palestinian State more than thirty years ago.In a position paper delivered at a Weiss’s Farm Retreat in 1978, I spoke of a Palestinian entity that would comprise Palestinian Arabs whom we knew at the time, who would cast of the yoke of the PLO and engage in genuine coexistence with Israel.

The hope then as that a Palestinian leadership would emerge that would emulate Anwar Sadat, and preach the language of peace and reconciliation to the Palestinian people, in the Arabic language, and that we would be able to build a trust in a new grass roots Palestinian leadership.

However, the potential Palestinian leaders whom were dealing with at the time were replaced by a leadership that will not preach peace and reconciliation to their own people. Instead, the nascent Palestinian entity that has emerged has fostered a draconian system on which they plan their future Palestinian State

Selling land to a Jew would be a capital crime in a state of Palestinian

Perusing the new Palestinian school books, the official Palestinian school curriculum, which was supposed to be a harbinger of peace, inculcates the next generation to make war on the Jews.

Most Recently, journalist academic Dr. Arnon Groiss, who translated the new Palestinian school books, made presentations for American congressional staffers in DC and for European diplomats in Brussels which showed how PA textbooks, instead of educating for peace with Israel, promote the violent struggle for liberation against Israel. From these textbooks, Groiss showed that the PA curriculum teaches the following fundamentals:

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: Should People Reconsider Support for the Infrastructure of an Entity at War with the State and People of Israel?

Love of the Land: Moral blindness -- and truth and justice betrayed

Moral blindness -- and truth and justice betrayed

Melanie Phillips
The Spectator
23 March '10

How utterly extraordinary. Hillary Clinton made a big speech today to the US Jewish lobby group AIPAC – a speech of no small importance given the crisis in relations between the Obama administration and Israel. But in this speech, as Israel Matzav notes, she committed an astounding howler. Referring to the recent Palestinian naming of a square in Ramallah in honour of terrorist Dalal al Mughrabi, she said:

When a Hamas-controlled municipality glorifies violence and renames a square after a terrorist who murdered innocent Israelis, it insults the families on both sides who have lost loves ones in this conflict.

But Ramallah is not a Hamas-controlled municipality. Hamas controls Gaza. Ramallah is in the West Bank and is controlled by Fatah. The naming of the square was a Fatah event glorifying a Fatah terrorist. Does Clinton not know this? Of course she does. What this whopper tells us is that she – and the benighted Obama administration that wrote her lamentable speech – cannot and will not acknowledge that Fatah is a terrorist organisation that glorifies a terrorist who murdered not only dozens of Israelis but also the niece of an American Democratic senator.

Clinton and the Obamites cannot and will not acknowledge this because their whole Middle East strategy revolves around forcing Israel to give a state to Fatah -- because they ‘deserve’ it as moderate peaceful statesmen-in-waiting. As if. The fact that the Obamites are actually bullying Israel into accepting a Fatah-run terrorist state was unfortunately all-too graphically demonstrated when Fatah named its square after Mughrabi. So Clinton, purporting to attack the glorification of terrorist violence, turned the instigators into Hamas instead.

Her message to renounce violence, recognise Israel and abide by previous signed agreements (this from an administration that has torn up America’s own agreements with Israel) was addressed solely to Hamas. To Fatah, whose leaders declare they will never accept a Jewish state, whose armed wing continues to commit acts of terror and who have gone back on countless agreements, not one word of criticism.

The rest of Clinton’s speech was as bad if not worse.

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: Moral blindness -- and truth and justice betrayed

Love of the Land: Fayyad’s toy gun

Fayyad’s toy gun

If Arafat did not dare divide the land, will a technocrat bereft of charisma and leadership take such an audacious step?


Israel Harel
Opinion/JPost
23 March '10

With the Oslo wind in his sails reanimating his international legitimacy even after he had become a political corpse – and with his Israeli partners anxious to prove that Oslo, despite endless murderous terror, was not a fatal mistake – Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat announced that on May 4, 1999 he would unilaterally declare the establishment of a Palestinian state. The political world was in turmoil. Except for the United States and its European allies, there was a supportive anticipation that Arafat would make good on his vision/threat and realize the dream of generations of Palestinians. Israel was bewildered.

So excited was the international political scene that its most veteran research institute decided to alleviate the tension by holding a simulation exercise: Will he or will he not declare independence? Participants arrived from all over the globe. All eyes were on the Palestinian delegates, none of whom moved (even though every participant represented only himself) without consulting Arafat who reportedly attached tremendous importance to the outcome.

Most of the Israeli and non-Arab observers believed Arafat would not dare declare independence, fearing Israeli military pressure and Israel’s withdrawal from the Oslo process, since he would be violating one of Oslo’s fundamental rules: No side would take unilateral measures.

I also believed Arafat would not make the declaration, but for an entirely different reason. His threat was directed at an objective that I don’t fully understand, I said, but was definitely not the realization of the dream of generations. The Palestinians, I argued at that simulation and believe to this day, do not want a state of their own alongside Israel. Accordingly, Arafat would make a show of yielding to the counsel of the Arab states and avoid declaring independence. And so it was, even though few if any agreed then with my thinking.

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: Fayyad’s toy gun

Love of the Land: PM Netanyahu corrects Secretary of State Clinton at AIPAC

PM Netanyahu corrects Secretary of State Clinton at AIPAC

Dr. Aaron Lerner
IMRA
23 March '10

Secretary of State Clinton sent a clear message to Israel in her AIPAC address that she and the Obama administration intend to continue with the "automatic pass" policy vis-a-vis official Palestinian compliance. That's "official" Palestinian compliance, since the verbiage can flow about "Palestinians" in general - while taking great care never to associate the criticism with the ruling Palestinian Fatah/PA leadership, this keeping Mahmoud Abbas and the rest of his team squeaky clean.

This dangerously destructive policy, that encourages Palestinian noncompliance, has a profound impact on the efficacy of third party supervision.

Simply put, since we already know that the United States has a "automatic pass" policy when it comes to official Palestinian compliance, it would be reckless and irresponsible to agree to an arrangement that hinged on the compliance assessment of the United States rather than leaving this ultimately up to the sovereign State of Israel itself.

So here is the line in Secretary of State Clinton's address to AIPAC, in which she bent over backwards to avoid criticizing the PA for an incident that the PA postponed during VP Biden's recent visit to avoid a PR fiasco. That's PA-Fatah postponed - not Hamas. But Mrs. Clinton's heavy blinders shield her from this truth:

"When a Hamas-controlled municipality glorifies violence and renames a square after a terrorist who murdered innocent Israelis, it insults the families on both sides who have lost loves ones over the years in this conflict."

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton
AIPAC Conference March 22, 2010
www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2010/03/138722.htm
==================================================

And here is how Prime Minister Netanyahu responded:

"Regrettably, the Palestinian Authority has also continued incitement against Israel.

A few days ago, a public square near Ramallah was named after a terrorist who murdered 37 Israeli civilians, including 13 children. The Palestinian Authority did nothing to prevent it."

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu
AIPAC Conference March 22, 2010
www.pmo.gov.il/PMOEng/Communication/PMSpeaks/speechaipac220310.htm
==============================================================

If anything, Mr. Netanyahu was generous in understating the involvement of Fatah-PA. Its not that they did nothing to prevent it, they promoted it and were intimately involved in it.

So now we come to an interesting challenge for friends of Israel - and organizations that are friends of Israel.

Do they accept Mrs. Clinton's heavy blinders wording - and in turn the "see no evil hear no evil speak no evil" approach towards the PA.

Or do they reject such obfuscation and call for Washington to put an end to its "automatic pass" approach with the PA.

Love of the Land: PM Netanyahu corrects Secretary of State Clinton at AIPAC

Love of the Land: [Includes barefaced lie covering up PA] Secretary of State Clinton's Remarks at the 2010 AIPAC Policy Conference

[Includes barefaced lie covering up PA] Secretary of State Clinton's Remarks at the 2010 AIPAC Policy Conference

Dr. Aaron Lerner
IMRA
23 March '10

[Dr. Aaron Lerner - IMRA:

"When a Hamas-controlled municipality glorifies violence and renames a square after a terrorist who murdered innocent Israelis, it insults the families on both sides who have lost loves ones over the years in this conflict."

Pop quiz.

What square was recently renamed after a terrorist who murdered innocent Israelis?

Answer: A square in Ramallah was named after the terrorist Dalal Mughrabi.

And who controls the Ramallah municipality?

Answer: Fatah.

Bonus question: Why does Clinton attribute the incident to Hamas?

Answer:: How do you spell cognitive dissonance?]

==============================

(Applause.)

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State
Washington Convention Center

Washington, DC

March 22, 2010
www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2010/03/138722.htm

Thank you. Thank you for that welcome. And it is wonderful to be back at AIPAC with so many good friends. I saw a number of them backstage before coming out, and I can assure you that I received a lot of advice.(Laughter.) I know I always do when I see my friends from AIPAC. And I want to thank Lee Rosenberg for that introduction. And congratulations, Rosy; you're going to be a terrific president. (Applause.

(Read full speech)

Love of the Land: [Includes barefaced lie covering up PA] Secretary of State Clinton's Remarks at the 2010 AIPAC Policy Conference

Love of the Land: On PA television for kids, Israel is only a fairy tale

On PA television for kids, Israel is only a fairy tale

Program teaches children about different areas of Palestine, using a map that includes all of Israel but is simply labeled "Palestine."


Ben Hartman
Palestinian Media Watch (PMW)
First published in JPost
18 March '10

Palestinian Authority television is broadcasting a new children's show that shows a map of "Palestine" that covers the entire territory of the State of Israel, the group Palestinian Media Watch reported on Tuesday.

According to PMW, the program Chicks features a recurring segment that teaches children about different areas of Palestine, using a map that includes all of Israel but is simply labeled "Palestine."

Next to the map is written in English and Arabic "Explore Your Country."

Founder and director of Palestinian Media Watch, Itamar Marcus, said the PMW report was released as part of a campaign to highlight the reinforcement of such messages of delegitimization of Israel that are endemic to Palestinian Authority broadcasting.

Marcus said the maps used by official PA bodies are no different from those used by terror groups, saying "if you look at Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Aksa Martyrs Brigades, all of these terror groups use the exact same maps as the PA. The only difference is the PA map doesn't have rifles on it."

(Read full post)

Love of the Land: On PA television for kids, Israel is only a fairy tale

Love of the Land: The Folly of America Training the Palestinian Army

The Folly of America Training the Palestinian Army

JINSA Report #: 974
19 March '10

Fairly authoritative sources have noted that Lt. Gen. Keith Dayton, the U.S. Army general responsible for training Abu Mazen's Palestinian security force/army, has become increasingly marginalized by the Fatah government. Last summer his staff was reportedly no longer directly involved in training or planning and had been "expelled" from the Palestinian Authority (PA) "Strategic Planning Department." Then came news that American DynCorp International's contract for training and mentoring Palestinian forces had not been renewed. Now, another shoe has dropped.

According to Janes' Defence Weekly as reported by wire services, the PA has drafted a plan to end American training and supervision of the force entirely. "Dayton's role would be limited to bringing money and equipment for the security forces. He would not deal with PA operations or deployment," a Palestinian official was reported to have said. "Officials said the PA leadership...determined that U.S. intervention was hampering security force development and undermining the legitimacy of the regime."

We suspect that Lt. Gen. Dayton would retire rather than be in that position, but that would suit the PA as well. He has already done the job they wanted done. He's built their army and now they want to use it as they see fit.

(Read full report)

Related: America's Shiny New Palestinian Militia

Love of the Land: The Folly of America Training the Palestinian Army

Love of the Land: Why glorify the murderers?

Why glorify the murderers?

By Ron Kehrmann, Yossi Mendelevich and Yossi Zur
Los Angeles Times
17 March '10
Posted before Shabbat

Vice President Joe Biden took umbrage last week when Israel announced during his visit that it had approved new housing construction in East Jerusalem. But another contentious incident that took place during Biden's visit got far less scrutiny.

March 11 marked the 32nd anniversary of the deadliest terrorist attack in Israel's history, and this year the Palestinian Authority decided to honor the 19-year-old leader of the attack, Dalal Mughrabi, by naming a square in a town outside Ramallah after her. The commemoration was scheduled for the anniversary.

The official ceremony was ultimately canceled to avoid antagonizing Biden during his visit, but the square was nevertheless named for Mughrabi, and several dozen Palestinian students from President Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah movement gathered in her honor for an unofficial dedication.

So what was the deed that deserved this commemoration? On a Saturday in March 1978, the squad of Palestinian terrorists led by Mughrabi entered Israel by boat from Lebanon and made their way to the main road between Haifa and Tel Aviv. By day's end, they had murdered 38 innocent men, women and children.

The first person Mughrabi and her gang of terrorists encountered was Gale Rubin, an American photojournalist taking photos of birds near the beach. They killed her and continued on their deadly path.

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: Why glorify the murderers?

Love of the Land: Little tommy's big plans

Little tommy's big plans

Soccer Dad
17 March '10
Posted before Shabbat

Thomas Friedman in 1996

Arafat, belatedly, came to understand that Israel could never keep up the momentum of peace without Palestinians making a 100 percent effort to guarantee Israeli security, and Mr. Peres came to understand that Mr. Arafat could never guarantee security unless the peace process continued its momentum. Because they agreed on the big issues, and had forged a strategic partnership, the little issues never led to massive blowups. The violence that did occur was the Israeli and Palestinian extremes against the Israeli and Palestinian mainstreams.

Thomas Friedman today:

Fayyad is the most interesting new force on the Arab political stage. A former World Bank economist, he is pursuing the exact opposite strategy from Yasir Arafat. Arafat espoused a blend of violence and politics; his plan was to first gain international recognition for a Palestinian state and then build its institutions. Fayyad calls for the opposite -- for a nonviolent struggle, for building noncorrupt transparent institutions and effective police and paramilitary units, which even the Israeli Army says are doing a good job; and then, once they are all up and running, declare a Palestinian state in the West Bank by 2011.

Is Friedman implicitly acknowledging that Arafat never truly gave up terror? All the years when he berated Israel, he never truly acknowledged that Arafat hadn't changed. Now is he acknowledging the truth only to foist another mirage on us.

Fayyad sounds great. Really. Here's more:

(Read full post)

Love of the Land: Little tommy's big plans

Love of the Land: How Obama created the Biden incident

How Obama created the Biden incident

Charles Krauthammer
Washington Post
19 March '10

Why did President Obama choose to turn a gaffe into a crisis in U.S.-Israeli relations?

And a gaffe it was: the announcement by a bureaucrat in Israel's Interior Ministry of a housing expansion in a Jewish neighborhood in north Jerusalem. The timing could not have been worse: Vice President Biden was visiting, Jerusalem is a touchy subject, and you don't bring up touchy subjects that might embarrass an honored guest.

But it was no more than a gaffe. It was certainly not a policy change, let alone a betrayal. The neighborhood is in Jerusalem, and the 2009 Netanyahu-Obama agreement was for a 10-month freeze on West Bank settlements excluding Jerusalem.

Nor was the offense intentional. Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu did not know about this move -- step four in a seven-step approval process for construction that, at best, will not even start for two to three years.

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: How Obama created the Biden incident

Love of the Land: A Middle East Without American Influence?

A Middle East Without American Influence?

That's the logical outcome of the Obama administration's current policies.


Lee Smith
Slate
17 March '10

Last week, one of Syria's government news organs riffed on the title of my book The Strong Horse; Power, Politics, and the Clash of Arab Civilizations. "The American president," Al Tharwa wrote, "was betting on the sick horse." Instead of siding with Syria's Hamas allies, Obama was backing the Palestinian Authority and its leader, Fatah's Mahmoud Abbas. From Damascus' perspective, the description also applies to the United States' other Arab allies, like Saudi Arabia and the Gulf sheikhdoms, as well as to Egypt and Jordan. These states are ready to be put out to pasture, while it is Iran's "axis of resistance," including Hezbollah and Hamas, as well as Syria itself, that represents the rising power.

OK, maybe the regime in Damascus hasn't actually read my book. I lifted the title from Osama Bin Laden, anyway. "When people see a strong horse and a weak horse," said Bin Laden, "by nature, they will like the strong horse." But the Syrian appraisal confirms my thesis—in the Middle East, political power is the prerogative of those who take it and maintain it by both the appearance and application of force. In this instance, unfortunately, what's good for my book is very bad for U.S. interests and allies—and for American citizens.

Related: Strong Horse Politics

As it turns out, the Syrians have a point. Saudi Arabia has the world's largest known oil reserves, and Egypt is the most populous Arab state, but they are no longer regional powerhouses, at least in the way the Arabic-speaking Middle East has typically registered power over the last 60-plus years—that is, as willingness to fight Israel. Cairo and Amman have peace treaties with Israel, the Palestinian Authority is involved in an on-again-off-again peace process, while Riyadh has opted to remain on the sidelines. This collective weakness is just the way that Washington ordained it four decades ago.

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: A Middle East Without American Influence?

Love of the Land: Obama’s Israel Crisis

Obama’s Israel Crisis

P. David Hornik
Frontpagemag.com
16 March '10

Israel Apartheid Week hadn’t yet run its course when Israel came in for a barrage of hostile characterizations also from the Obama administration. In the same brief time span there was also Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad—“The Zionist regime is the most hated regime in the world…. with Allah’s help, this regime will be annihilated.” All this came hard on the heels of a wave of international outrage, and violent attacks by Palestinians, over Israel adding shrines in Hebron and Bethlehem to a list of national heritage sites.

If it seems like a lot of negative attention for one small, constantly pressured country, it is. Reacting to an announcement by the Israeli Interior Ministry on plans to build 1600 housing units—for Jews (if they had been for Arabs, no one would have protested)—in Jerusalem, Vice-President Joe Biden, who was in Israel for a visit, reportedly told Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, “This is starting to get dangerous for us. What you’re doing here undermines the security of our troops who are fighting in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. That endangers us and it endangers regional peace.”

Netanyahu apologized and, by Thursday last week when Biden’s visit ended, apparently thought the matter had been handled. But on Friday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called Netanyahu and gave him a 45-minute harangue in which she told him, as State Department spokesman P. J. Crowley put it, that “the United States considered the announcement a deeply negative signal about Israel’s approach to the bilateral relationship,” that “this action had undermined trust and confidence in the peace process and in America’s interests,” and that “she could not understand how this happened, particularly in light of the United States’ strong commitment to Israel’s security.”

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: Obama’s Israel Crisis

Love of the Land: How Many Lives Is Biden’s Pride Worth?

How Many Lives Is Biden’s Pride Worth?

Jonathan Tobin
Contentions/Commentary
16 March '10

What prompted this morning’s violence in Jerusalem’s Old City? Though the stone-throwing and disruptions resulted in only eight Israeli security personnel being wounded and a similar number of Palestinian casualties, the context of the American diplomatic offensive against the Jewish state must be seen as an incentive for the Palestinians to do their own part to ratchet up the pressure. While the Obama administration is using its hurt feelings about the announcement of building homes in a Jewish neighborhood of Jerusalem to put the screws to the Netanyahu government, the Palestinians have their own game to play here. And since Washington has decided to go all out to falsely portray the Israelis as the primary obstacle to peace, it should be expected that the supposed victims of the new housing — Palestinians who are in no way harmed by the building of new apartments — will seek to keep events churning.



The rumors filtering through the Islamic world about supposed “threats” to the Al-Aqsa Mosque on the Temple Mount are clearly efforts to foment violence — reminiscent of the bloody 1929 riots which led to Arab pogroms against Jews living in Jerusalem and Hebron and of the fake controversy over Ariel Sharon’s walk on the Temple Mount, which Yasir Arafat used as cover for launching the second intifada. The Jerusalem Post reports that busloads of Arabs are heading to the capital to “protect” the Temple Mount against mythical Jewish attempts to undermine the mosque’s foundations. They appear to be referring to this week’s rededication of the Hurva Synagogue in the Jewish Quarter of the Old City, whose destruction by Jordan’s Arab Legion in 1948 was a symbol of the expulsion of Jews from the Old City. The mere act of reasserting the Jewish presence there is viewed as an affront by a Muslim world that still refuses to accept Israel’s legitimacy.



The point here is that while the Obama administration’s huffing and puffing about the insult given by Vice President Joe Biden last week may be about an effort to undermine the Netanyahu government, their decision to brand all Jewish building in the city as illegal and as reason for American rage means something very different to the Palestinians. The ultimatum delivered to Netanyahu by Secretary of State Clinton, in which she demanded that the housing plan be rescinded, is viewed by many Palestinians as American support — not only for their ambitions for a redivided city but also for the expulsion of the Jews from all of East Jerusalem.

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: How Many Lives Is Biden’s Pride Worth?

Love of the Land: America's Shiny New Palestinian Militia

America's Shiny New Palestinian Militia

Daniel Pipes
National Review Online
March 16, 2010

"The stupidest program the U.S. government has ever undertaken" – last year that's what I called American efforts to improve the Palestinian Authority (PA) military force. Slightly hyperbolic, yes, but the description fits because those efforts enhance the fighting power of enemies of the United States and its Israeli ally.

First, a primer about the program, drawing on a recent Center of Near East Policy Research by David Bedein and Arlene Kushner:

Shortly after Yasir Arafat died in late 2004, the U.S. government established the Office of the U.S. Security Coordinator to reform, recruit, train, and equip the PA militia (called the National Security Forces or Quwwat al-Amn al-Watani) and make them politically accountable. For nearly all of its existence, the office has been headed by Lt. Gen. Keith Dayton. Since 2007, American taxpayers have funded it to the tune of US$100 million a year. Many agencies of the U.S. government have been involved in the program, including the State Department's Bureau of Diplomatic Security, the Secret Service, and branches of the military.

The PA militia has in total about 30,000 troops, of which four battalions comprising 2,100 troops have passed scrutiny for lack of criminal or terrorist ties and undergone 1,400 hours of training at an American facility in Jordan. There they study subjects ranging from small-unit tactics and crime-scene investigations to first aid and human rights law.

With Israeli permission, these troops have deployed in areas of Hebron, Jenin, and Nablus. So far, this experiment has gone well, prompting widespread praise. Senator John Kerry (Democrat of Massachusetts) calls the program "extremely encouraging" and Thomas Friedman of the New York Times discerns in the U.S.-trained troops a possible "Palestinian peace partner for Israel" taking shape.

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: America's Shiny New Palestinian Militia

Love of the Land: Behind Obama's Dangerous Overreaction on Israel

Behind Obama's Dangerous Overreaction on Israel

Anne Bayefsky
Eye on the U.N.
Special to nydailynews.com
15 March '10

Bayefsky is a Professor at Touro College and a senior fellow with the Hudson Institute.

The Obama administration's hysterical response to Israel's announcement that it will continue to build new homes for its expanding population in disputed territory ought to evoke one response: Methinks thou doth protest too much.

Given that the United States is supposed to be committed to the parties determining ultimate legal ownership of the land in final status negotiations, what is going on?

The Palestinian Authority is the only side refusing to sit across the table from its interlocutor without preconditions. Recent reports indicate that Mamhoud Abbas and company are still inculcating the next generation of budding terrorists in the abc's of antisemitism, refusing to put Israel on the map in their authorized school books and fanning the flames of Islamic extremists at the Temple Mount in Jerusalem - all of which is incitement and a gross violation of the Roadmap. As for Hamas, the other Palestinian authority running Gaza, it is just openly dedicated to Israel's annihilation.

None of that is preventing the Obama administration from insisting that Israel negotiate with one half of the Palestinian split personality.

In fact, the words of Vice President Biden, Secretary of State Clinton, and top advisor David Axelrod in the last few days suggest, instead, that what really concerns the human rights gurus in the White House is preserving the option of apartheid Palestine. After all, the purpose of denying the ability of a Jew to build a house on land that theoretically may one day change hands, is to ensure that a Jew-free Palestinian state can come into existence unimpeded.

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: Behind Obama's Dangerous Overreaction on Israel

Love of the Land: PA TV honors anniversary of terror attack with interview of terrorist's sister

PA TV honors anniversary of terror attack with interview of terrorist's sister

Itamar Marcus/Nan Jacques Zilberdik
Palestinian Media Watch (PMW)
13 March '10

(Clinton called [xxxxxxx] “to make clear the United States considered the announcement a deeply negative signal about [xxxxxxx] approach to the bilateral relationship and counter to the spirit of the vice president’s trip,” Crowley said. Clinton, he said, emphasized that “this action had undermined trust and confidence in the peace process and in America’s interests.”)

If you guessed that the call was to Abbas and the "deeply negative signal" was this event, you would be incorrect. Also, you are not a member of the Obama administration. Y.



March 11th, 1978 was the date of the worst terror attack in Israel's history, when 37 people were murdered in a bus hijacking known as the "Coastal Road Massacre." Official Palestinian Authority TV opened its broadcasting last week on the 32nd anniversary of the terror attack by praising it as:

"A glorious chapter in the history of the Palestinian people... [near Tel Aviv] in the heart of the occupation state. The operation shocked the occupation entity."

PA TV's praise of the attack was part of the introduction to an interview with Rashida Mughrabi, sister of terrorist Dalal Mughrabi, who commanded the attack. She also praised the attack and called for further terror against Israel, to whom she referred as "the Zionist enemy":

"This is a day of glory and pride for our Palestinian people and a blow to the Zionists... we must unite, and our rifles must unite, against the enemy who steals our land."

The following is from the PA TV interview with Rashida Mughrabi:

Host: "Now, dear viewers, we move on to a glorious chapter in the history of the Palestinian people. On this day in 1978, the Shahida (Martyr) Dalal Mughrabi prepared to meet her God by carrying out a self-sacrifice operation of Martyrdom-seeking [near Tel Aviv] in the heart of the occupation state. The operation shocked the occupation entity at the time and has left its mark until today and for years to come. Dalal Mughrabi, the Palestinian Shahida (Martyr), has become a symbol and model of resistance, sacrifice, and Martyrdom-seeking; a model of giving and of redemption of the homeland."

Rashida Mughrabi, sister of terrorist Dalal Mughrabi: "This is a day of glory and pride for our Palestinian people and a blow to the Zionists, who view it as a day of blood for them. It is a day of pride for us, just as the day which they see as [Israeli] Independence Day, is our day of catastrophe...

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: PA TV honors anniversary of terror attack with interview of terrorist's sister

Love of the Land: The rationale behind censorship: “Moderate” Palestinian leadership honours mass terrorism as Joe Biden leaves town. And the BBC’s response is?

The rationale behind censorship: “Moderate” Palestinian leadership honours mass terrorism as Joe Biden leaves town. And the BBC’s response is?

Robin Shepherd
robinshepherdonline.com
14 March '10

So, let’s just accept that Israel’s handling of the Ramat Shlomo settlements announcement during US vice-president Joe Biden’s recent visit was cack handed and self-defeating. Prime Minister Netanyahu has admitted as much by apologising. It was a diplomatic faux pas, and it provoked a torrent of protest from the State Department to the Palestinian Authority. It also received saturation coverage in every major outlet in the western media. Hold that thought.

Now consider the response to the Palestinian Authority’s decision last week to celebrate the worst terrorist atrocity ever perpetrated inside Israel (the 1978 bus massacres which left 38 dead including 13 children) by naming a central square in Ramallah after its perpetrator, Dalal Mughrabi. That was a statement of values and intent, glorifying mass terrorism and signalling to Israel and the world that the Palestinians can never be trusted to abide by civilised norms. It tells you everything you really need to know about Israel’s conflict with the Palestinians and why peace with them has proved elusive for more than six decades. What follows is a list of the western news outlets that have covered what, I repeat, is an immensely significant and illustrative story:

1. The New York Times. 2. Nobody… That’s right, every other major media outlet in the western world has effectively censored it. Apart from the New York Times (and I am grateful to Tom Gross
for pointing that out) the story has been ignored.

If you really want to understand the reason why Israel faces such appalling demonisation and defamation across the western world, stop and think about this for a moment.

(Read full post)

Love of the Land: The rationale behind censorship: “Moderate” Palestinian leadership honours mass terrorism as Joe Biden leaves town. And the BBC’s response is?