Israel Matzav: Freeze would be ethnic cleansing

Freeze would be ethnic cleansing

Remember how angry Prime Minister Netanyahu was when Deputy Prime Minister Moshe "Boogie" Yaalon aligned himself with Moshe Feiglin? Well, it may be on its way to happening again.

Speaking to a packed audience at Jerusalem’s Great Synagogue, Ya’alon referred indirectly to a Haaretz report that Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is willing to freeze all construction on government land in West Bank settlements if Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas resumes direct diplomatic negotiations.

“The demand for territory without Jews anywhere else would be called ethnic cleansing,” Ya’alon said. “We cannot accept a demand for ethnic cleansing in the land of Israel.”

Ya’alon said that Israel was under pressure from people who incorrectly believe the cause of the Middle East conflict is the building of homes in Judea and Samaria. He denounced that theory as “a corrupt way of thinking” and explained why the true cause of Middle East instability was the Islamic fundamentalism emanating from Iran.

He spoke about other topics too - read the whole thing. Finally an honest politician? I hope to hear soon what Feiglin thinks.

Israel Matzav: Freeze would be ethnic cleansing

Love of the Land: Israel Policy Makers Should Assume a Two Term Obama Presidency

Israel Policy Makers Should Assume a Two Term Obama Presidency

Dr. Aaron Lerner
IMRA
Weekly Commentary
25 March '10

When Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu sits with his "seven ministers' forum" tomorrow (this) afternoon they should analyze Israel options based on the working assumption that U.S. President Obama will ultimately serve two terms rather than that President Obama will already find himself seriously weakened as we approach the November congressional elections and perhaps even essentially relegated to lame duck status for the balance of his term after those elections give expression to a massive shift against Mr. Obama.

The second scenario might justify a policy of concessions to buy time with the expectation that they can be contained as Israel finds itself in a much stronger position vis-à-vis Obama in a few months. That was part of the logic for the housing construction freeze in Judea and Samaria that was set to expire just as the congressional campaigns will be heating up in the U.S..

But there's no guaranty that this is how it will play out. And it could turn out to be a devastating mistake to rely on it.

Assuming a two term Obama presidency radically changes the ramifications and consequences of the concessions Israel makes today.

Let's not kid ourselves.

(Read full post)

Love of the Land: Israel Policy Makers Should Assume a Two Term Obama Presidency

Love of the Land: Mitchell fails to understand Palestinian goals

Mitchell fails to understand Palestinian goals

FresnoZionism
09 January '10

Quoted in Steve Rosen’s blog, a snippet from an interview with US Mideast envoy George Mitchell:

George Mitchell: …Israel annexed Jerusalem in 1980….for the Israelis, what they’re building in, is in part of Israel. Now, the others don’t see it that way. So you have these widely divergent perspectives on the subject. …The Israelis are not going to stop settlements in or construction in East Jerusalem. They don’t regard that as a settlement because they think it’s part of Israel….

Charlie Rose: So you’re going to let them go ahead even though no one recognized the annexation.

GM: When you say let them go ahead, it’s what they regard as their country. They don’t regard — they don’t say they’re letting us go ahead when we build in Manhattan or in the Bronx or –

CR: But don’t the international rules have something to do with what somebody can do to define as their country?

GM: There are disputed legal issues. .. And we could spend the next 14 years arguing over disputed legal issues or we can try to get a negotiation to resolve them in a manner that meets the aspirations of both societies. [my emphasis]

This is remarkable, both because Mitchell appears to understand and appreciate the Israeli position, and because he doesn’t spout the usual rubbish about ’settlements are illegitimate’ that we’ve heard from both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

(Read full post)

Love of the Land: Mitchell fails to understand Palestinian goals

Love of the Land: Interesting George Mitchell Interview

Interesting George Mitchell Interview

Steve Rosen
Middle East Forum (MEF)
07 January '10

Mideast Envoy George Mitchell made some interesting observations in an interview with Charlie Rose.

Obama's Demand for a Settlement Freeze

Charlie Rose: The New York Times editorial [says] that the past year has not been successful because the administration stressed a settlement freeze....By focusing on a settlement freeze, which Israelis were unlikely to agree to, you created disappointment from the beginning, because it was an unachievable objective.

George Mitchell: If you want to get 60 percent, do you begin by asking for 60 percent?

Charlie Rose: No. You ask for a hundred.

George Mitchell: Oh, there you go, Charlie. You've already figured out negotiations. So what we got was -- what we got was a moratorium, ten months, far less than what was requested, but more significant than any action taken by any previous government of Israel for the 40 years that the settlement enterprise has existed, ten months of no new starts in the West Bank, less than what we asked, much, much greater than any prior government has done. And we think over time it's going to make a significant difference on the ground.

Getting Talks Started

Charlie Rose: You hope to accomplish this in two years. The moratorium is for ten months....That gives you an incentive to say to the parties ...better get something done before the moratorium ends because I don't know if we can get it again.

George Mitchell: Charlie, will you come with me on my next visit and make that little spiel? Because it might sound better coming from you. I have made it several times....We have suggested to the Israelis .. a series of steps and actions that they could take that would encourage President Abbas to enter the—

Charlie Rose: So why can't you tell me what they are, that's my question.

George Mitchell: Well because I want to discuss it with them before I discuss it you.

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: Interesting George Mitchell Interview

Love of the Land: The political insanity of the settlement freeze

The political insanity of the settlement freeze

FresnoZionism.org
20 December 09

News item:

The military plans to use “paralyzing power” to demolish illegal settler construction where building has continued in defiance of the 10-month freeze on such activity, according to an IDF document obtained by The Jerusalem Post on Saturday night…

Under the moratorium, settlers and contractors working on projects in which the foundations had not been finished must stop work for 10 months. But many settlers have vowed to continue building, anyway.

The IDF, therefore, is planning a second phase of enforcing the freeze, which will involve entering settlements to demolish all illegal construction work…

Physical force would have to be used against the settlers, since it is assumed they would not peacefully stop work and evacuate construction sites when ordered to do so, the document states.

The settlers believe the moratorium is the start of a second disengagement and will do everything possible to prevent the demolitions, the document said. There is no concrete information that the settlers intend to take up arms, said the document, but it added that anything was possible.

The document goes into great detail, outlining different scenarios that could occur. It also distinguishes between “moderate” and “violent” settlements, such as Yitzhar.

Initially, the IDF would try to come to a verbal resolution with the settlers, but if that fails, they would surprise the settlers with what the army termed “paralyzing force.”

The air force is expected to get involved by doing reconnaissance flights over the area. The IDF plans to shut down cellular phone services during the enforcement operation and to ban reporters from the scene.

Somebody has lost his mind.

Israel faces an existential threat from Iran and her proxies, a war which could affect every inch of Israel more severely than any since 1948 could break out at any time, and this is what the government wants the IDF to do?

(Full article)

Love of the Land: The political insanity of the settlement freeze

Love of the Land: Suspend your Zionism

Suspend your Zionism

Yisrael Medad
Opinion/JPost
08 December 09


I won't keep you in suspension, nor in suspense. I will be very clear: While I can comprehend Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's concern for what he considers more primary national interests than keeping his electoral platform promises to those who voted for him regarding the continuation of the Jewish return to the national homeland, his recent decisions are quite incomprehensible. To think that even the opposition leader, Kadima chairwoman MK Tzipi Livni, can justifiably criticize him from a right-wing perspective says much about Netanyahu's policies.


A settler looks on as Palestinian construction workers build a synagogue in Kedumim, in the northern West Bank last week.
Photo: AP
On the Likud Web site, which oddly appears as netanyahu.org.il, as if a personal plaything, one can read the aims of the Likud which include: advocating the integrity of the Jewish homeland, bringing together the Jewish people in the Land of Israel, cultivating love of the country, safeguarding the right of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel as an eternal, inalienable right while working diligently to settle and develop all parts of the land of Israel, and extending national sovereignty to them. All admirable missions, well-steeped in the tradition of the nationalist camp of Zionism.

And yet, on November 25, Netanyahu told his security cabinet that international circumstances dictate that for the promotion of Israel's broad national interests, a moratorium on construction across the Green Line will be adopted over the next 10 months. And its purpose? To convey the message that the government wants to enter into negotiations with the Palestinians.

That's it? His Bar-Ilan speech was insufficient? His running off to meet US President Barack Obama at the UN wasn't enough? His subsequent White House late-night powwow didn't make things understandable?

IN THE fashion of literary criticism, let's deconstruct Netanyahu's words. Obviously, "international circumstances" mean that Obama can't mobilize Europe and Russia and is going independent - with Iran, with North Korea Korea and other hot spots.

(Continue full article)

The writer, who resides in Shiloh, serves as a spokesperson for the Yesha Council of Jewish Communities, was director of Israel's Media Watch and was a political aide to Members of Knesset, 1981-1994. He is also secretary of the To the Temple Mount advocacy group. He blogs at www.myrightword.blogspot.com

Love of the Land: Suspend your Zionism

Love of the Land: A Question

A Question

According to the MEMRI Iranian Media Blog:

"Iranian expatriate human rights activists report that 4,000 students demonstrated in Tehran to mark Students Day today, shouting "Death to (Iranian Supreme Leader Ali) Khamenei " and "Khamenei is a Murderer and His Religious Authority Is Null and Void," as well as "Death to the Government That Deceives the People."

At Amir Kabir University in Tehran, 1,500 students shouted for the "coup government" to step down, and chanted "Death to the Dictator" (referring to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad)." -more

To see a video of this week's Iranian student anti-Ahmadinejad demonstrations click on Tehran Video

Love of the Land: A Question

Love of the Land: Freeze of Jewish Construction in Judea and Samaria: Peace or Appeasement Enhancer?

Freeze of Jewish Construction in Judea and Samaria: Peace or Appeasement Enhancer?

Yoram Ettinger
The Ettinger Report
December 09

Freeze of Jewish construction in Judea & Samaria is based on a series of erroneous assumptions:

1. A Freeze will not soften – but will intensify - President Obama's criticism of "settlements" in particular and Israeli policy in general. For instance, Prime Minister Netanyahu's June 14, 2009 Two-State-Solution-speech triggered exacerbated pressure by Obama. Moreover, Netanyahu's willingness to exchange hundreds of Palestinian terrorists for Gilad Shalit was followed by US pressure to release more terrorists.

2. A Freeze will not moderate – but will whet the appetite of - the PLO (Abu Mazen) or Hamas (Haniye'); it will radicalize their demands and fuel their terrorism. Former Prime Minister Barak's sweeping concessions, offered to Arafat and Abu Mazen in October 2000, were greeted by the PLO-engineered Second Intifada'. Furthermore, Prime Minister Olmert's unprecedented offer of concessions (including the return of some 1948 refugees) was rebuffed by Abu Mazen.

3. A Freeze re-entrenches the misperception of Jewish presence in Judea & Samaria as a/the obstacle to peace. It diverts attention and resources from the crucial threat to peace: Abu Mazen-engineered hate education - the manufacturing line of terrorists - and Arab rejection of the existence – and not just the size – of the Jewish State.

4. A Freeze and the adherence to Presidential dictate will not transform the White House position on Iran-related matters. Besides, a Freeze and the adherence to Presidential dictate do not constitute a prerequisite to maintaining constructive strategic relations with the USA (e.g. supply of critical military systems and crucial strategic cooperation). In fact, a Freeze and a serial submission to Presidential pressure – just like any other form of retreat - erode Israel's strategic posture in Washington and in the Middle East. Such an attitude ignores the role and power of Congress – especially when it comes to the Jewish State - at the dire expense of Israel's national security.

Is Jewish construction in Judea & Samaria an/the obstacle to peace?

1. In September 2005, Israel uprooted 25 Jewish communities from Gaza and Samaria. Gaza became Judenrein. It paved the road to the meteoric rise of Hamas, and induced more smuggling, manufacturing and launching of missiles at Jewish communities in Southern Israel.

2. President Obama defines Jewish presence in Judea & Samaria as a root cause of Arab hostility toward the Israel. However, Jewish communities were first established in Judea and Samaria after the Six Day War of 1967, long after the 1956 and 1948 wars, the 1949-1967 campaign of Arab terrorism, the 1964 establishment of the PLO, the 1929 slaughter of the Hebron Jewish community and the 1929 expulsion of the Gaza Jewish community, the 1920s, 1930s and 1940s slaughter of the Jewish community of Gush Etzion, etc.

(Continue reading...)

Love of the Land: Freeze of Jewish Construction in Judea and Samaria: Peace or Appeasement Enhancer?

Love of the Land: The freeze

The freeze

FresnoZionism.org

04 December 09

Some thoughts about the settlement freeze:

1. It’s 100% clear that the freeze will not cause the Palestinian Authority (PA) to ‘come to the table’. They have already said that it is insufficient because it doesn’t include Jerusalem, doesn’t include construction already under way, etc.
2. However, once the principle is accepted that Israeli concessions without reciprocity from the Palestinians or other Arab nations are appropriate, pressure will increase for Israel to take the next step, and the next…
3. I don’t know if Obama Administration officials realized thedegree and depth of opposition that Israel’s government would face from residents of Judea and Samaria. If they did, the imposition of the pointless freeze is a deliberate attempt to produce civil strife within the state of Israel — an act of aggression as blatant and more dangerous than a Qassam rocket. If they didn’t understand, why didn’t Netanyahu tell them?
4. If the freeze won’t bring negotiations closer — and anyway we know negotiations with the hard-line PA today would be fruitless — and it will create strife in Israel, is there any good it could do? Only improve the administration’s image in the Arab world. But even this won’t happen, because the Arabs see the ‘incomplete’ freeze as Obama being soft on Israel.
5. As I have written before, Judea and Samaria are not ‘Palestinian land’. They are at most ‘disputed territory’. So a building freeze that affects Jews and not Arabs is discriminatory.
6. The Roadmap calls for a settlement freeze as part of Phase I. It also calls for the Palestinians to stop incitement of hatred and terrorism against Israel, and for them to “[begin] sustained, targeted, and effective operations aimed at confronting all those engaged in terror and dismantlement of terrorist capabilities and infrastructure.” Only after Phase I is complete can there be movement to Phases II and III. Perhaps it’s time to ask why the PA hasn’t met its responsibilities?
7. The justification for the freeze is that construction in the territories ‘prejudges’ the final outcome. But the freeze suggests an acceptance of the Palestinian demand for “every centimeter” of the area occupied by Jordan in 1949, something that even the Obama administration has opposed.

Love of the Land: The freeze

Love of the Land: For Israel, the moment of truth is now

For Israel, the moment of truth is now

Ted Belman
Israpundit
05 December 09

This analysis ignores the possibility that the choice exercised by Netanyahu with the agreement of Yaalon and Begin is the best short term policy. They are privy to much that we are totally unaware of.

According to David Horovitz, editor of JPOST, The Battle of Wills has begun. He is referring of course to the will of the settlers to resist the freeze and the will of the international community to impose it.

Although Netanyahu was at pains to assure the settlers that after the ten months are over, construction will resume as before. Begin went so far as to emphasize that the amount of construction would return to what it was before Olmert instituted a defacto freeze last summer. But no one is buying it.

To modify the old Cat Stevens song, the first halt is the hardest. Ten months from now, Iran will likely be a more urgent threat; internal Palestinian rivalries will be still more acute, possibly following Hamas electoral successes; the international community will probably be yet more critical of Israel and still more supportive of unilateral Palestinian moves to statehood; and American pressure for positive Israeli measures will be even more intense. For all Netanyahu’s protestations to the contrary, it is hard to conceive that, 10 months from now, the man who gave us 2009’s West Bank Moratorium would resist 2010’s Moratorium II.

Netanyahu argues that this painful decision was in the “wider national interest”. That’s the rational. But he doesn’t tell us in what way. Perhaps he is referring to international resolve to prevent Iran from getting the bomb. Although Obama is now talking about stronger sanctions in January, that’s a far cry from bombing Iran while there is still time. Or perhaps he is thinking of avoiding the Tools of Persuasion that could be applied.

He also argues that this freeze was necessary to get Abbas to return to negotiations. This doesn’t make sense. He could have said as soon as Abbas returns to negotiations we will institute a 10 month freeze. That would make mores sense but in either case why would Abbas return to negotiations? With the current freeze he could stay away for nine months letting Israel suffer and then return to negotiations with the conditions that so long as negotiations are ongoing, the freeze must continue. In the latter situation he would not return to negotiation that are certain to end in ten months.

(Continue article)

Love of the Land: For Israel, the moment of truth is now

Love of the Land: Netanyahu is positioning himself left of Rabin

Netanyahu is positioning himself left of Rabin

Ari Shavit
Haaretz
04 December 09

(Those familiar with Ari Shavit will know which parts to discount, but there is definitely what to take notice of here.)

Benjamin Netanyahu made history twice. The first time was when he adopted the two-state solution in his Bar-Ilan speech, and the second was when he decided last week to freeze settlement construction. The Palestinians dismiss his steps and the Europeans say they're not enough. The skeptics are skeptical and the cynics are cynical. But the truth is that Netanyahu circa 2009 is situating himself to the left of Yitzhak Rabin circa 1995.

Unlike Rabin, Netanyahu now accepts the establishment of a demilitarized Palestinian state. Unlike Rabin, he is issuing orders prohibiting construction throughout the Jewish West Bank. Netanyahu has crossed the Rubicon, on both ideological and practical levels, and reinvented himself as a centrist.

At the beginning of this decade, Ariel Sharon underwent a similar process, with the road map his equivalent of Netanyahu's Bar-Ilan speech. The road map expressed his support for the two-state concept, while insisting that essential basic conditions be fulfilled before the establishment of a Palestinian state.
Advertisement
But a short time after accepting the road map, Sharon revealed that its trails led to a dead end. No Palestinians met the basic conditions, no Palestinians were capable of signing a final-status agreement, no Palestinians had the power to implement peace. When the father of the settlements finally came out in favor of dividing the land, it turned out that there were no Palestinian leaders likewise committed to dividing the land.

Thus was the disengagement born. Although Sharon was aware of its flaws, he realized that disengagement was the only plan of action a centrist Israeli leader could advance without a real partner for real peace.

Six years later, Netanyahu has reached the exact same point. He accepts the principle of two states, and receives no response. He suspends construction in the settlements, and is rejected. He courts Mahmoud Abbas, and is disparaged. The son of Ze'ev Jabotinsky's personal secretary wants a historic reconciliation with the Palestinians, and the Palestinians are slamming the door. He is offering the Palestinian national movement negotiations over the establishment of a Palestinian nation-state, and has found that there's no one to talk to and nothing to talk about. Zilch. A brick wall.

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: Netanyahu is positioning himself left of Rabin

Love of the Land: Regime Change of the PA Via Annexation

Regime Change of the PA Via Annexation

Prof. Alan Friedlander
Jerusalem Defender
02 December 09

Were I a member of the Netanyahu Administration I would have voted against the building freeze in the territories. They are sending a confusing message of negotiating against their own position even before the PA regime returns to the negotiation table with them. This was only to placate a foreign power, not in pursuance of good policy for their people. The destructively self effacing courtship of friendship from the anti Jewish PA must cease so that Israel’s penchant for kindness and patience no longer be used against it by anyone. Fair play begins with being willing to play by the rules.

The Israeli government’s blunder, however, has a silver lining that is found in their special treatment of East Jerusalem in the face of Western linkage of East Jerusalem with Judea and Samaria. It illustrates that they believe that the State of Israel, at least potentially, has absolute authority over the lands conquered in the defensive Six Day War, otherwise how could they assume that their annexation of East Jerusalem is valid? Thus the silver lining in the dark cloud that the Netanyahu Administration performed is that they have incidentally taken a real step in disputing those who erroneously say that U.N. resolutions 242 and 338 make lands conquered in defensive wars barred from annexation by the defensive conquerors. One of the leading foundations in the conflict over the territories is this very dispute.

(To full article)

Love of the Land: Regime Change of the PA Via Annexation

Love of the Land: How to beat the freeze!

How to beat the freeze!

David Wilder

The Wilder Way
14 Kislev 5770

Yesterday one of my daughters committed a crime. She intentionally circumvented the new building freeze declared by Barak, Netanyahu, King Hussein and the others.

What did she do?

She gave birth to twins - a boy (top) and a girl (bottom).

Why is this so illegal? Quite simply, there is no 'building' stronger or more eternal, than children. And two at a time - what Chutzpah!

So, I can only wish all of you the same - you should all be so blessed with children that 1) live in Judea or Samaria, here in Israel, and 2) have children, 3) even if only one at a time.

Mazal Tov!!!

Love of the Land: How to beat the freeze!

Love of the Land: Painting Israel into a corner

Painting Israel into a corner

Moshe Dann
Israel Opinion/Ynet
02 December 09

Israel is being duped into a classic negotiating trap – and, it seems, quite willingly.

Forcing Israel to negotiate over Jerusalem neighborhoods, like Gilo, and dithering about threats from Iran, sets up Israel for strategic concessions. Moreover, temporarily freezing Jewish building in Judea and Samaria accomplishes nothing.

This bartering is calculated to divert Israel's attention away from the dangers of a second Arab Palestinian state and the obstacles that prevent that from happening.

By making it seem that Israel is getting something, e.g. reducing pressure against building in Jerusalem, the US is leveraging against Israeli interests elsewhere.

PM Netanyahu knows this game well, but is faced with a difficult choice: alienating an openly hostile American president, or turning against his own constituency. Tying to achieve some balance, he wants to appear that he is gaining something, and, that he is the victim of American pressure. In the end, he satisfies no one.

Agreeing to freeze Jewish building in Judea and Samaria, even temporarily, simply to get the PA to resume negotiations sets a dangerous precedent, one that will make it harder to withstand opposition to resume building after the time has elapsed.

Meanwhile, hilltops north of Ramallah are covered by new Arab housing projects, funded by the Overseas Private Investment Corp (OPIC), a US government agency, and the Middle East Investment Initiative (MEII), a project of the Aspen Institute, which has put up half the money (about a half billion dollars), and the Palestinian Authority's Investment Fund, International Finance Corp (World Bank) and local banks putting up the rest.

The Aspen Institute, World Bank, and other forums bring together political and economic elites at the highest levels, pursuing policies behind the scenes, for example, the two-state delusion. They were the active elements (along with Peres, Beilin, etc. on a local level) behind the Oslo Accords, the withdrawal from Gaza, etc.

(Continue reading ...)

Love of the Land: Painting Israel into a corner

Love of the Land: Wooing the Israeli Center

Wooing the Israeli Center

Evelyn Gordon
Contentions/Commentary
30 November 09

(Interesting insights and well written, as can be expected from Evelyn Gordon. She also shares many of the doubts and worries as the rest of us. Time will tell)

The 10-month settlement freeze announced by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu last week entails obvious risks, from the danger of being perceived as vulnerable to pressure to the time bomb of what happens when the 10 months end. And if the goal is to placate the Palestinians, Arab states, Europe, or the U.S., it also entails few rewards: all have already declared it insufficient (though some deemed it a “positive” first step).

But the freeze, like Netanyahu’s speech last June outlining his principles for a two-state solution, is probably aimed first and foremost at a domestic audience. And on this level, it may be sound tactics.

One lesson Netanyahu learned from both his first term as prime minister and his time in Ariel Sharon’s government was the importance of keeping the Israeli Center behind him. He currently faces two major problems — a nonexistent peace process and a likely need to order military action against Iran — that are liable to result in widespread international condemnation, escalated anti-Israel terror, pressure for potentially dangerous concessions, and perhaps even sanctions. To withstand this, he will need solid domestic support, which means he must convince the Israeli majority that neither problem is his fault: that he truly tried to restart peace talks and thereby also spur international action on Iran, given the West’s claim that such action would be easier if peace talks were progressing.

Faced with similar circumstances — a stalled peace process, a looming Iranian threat, growing international pressure, and consequent eroding domestic support — Sharon decided to unilaterally withdraw from Gaza. That achieved its goal: it got the Israeli Center behind him. But the price, in terms of both security and Israel’s image (as January’s Gaza war showed), was horrific.

(Continue article)

Love of the Land: Wooing the Israeli Center

Love of the Land: Just Say No

Just Say No

Marc Prowisor
Yesha Views
29 November 09

The Israeli media is flooded with Bibi’s “10 month Settlement Freeze”. Jackals from every side of the political spectrum are racing towards this fresh road kill to get whatever piece of flesh they can before the carcass is picked clean.

The Left is discreetly declaring a victory, making sure their shouts of joy are not over heard by too many, less it endanger Bibi and cause him to bare his soul. Barak has rarely smiled as much, and now is seeking a small army to enforce his will of destruction against the residents of Yehuda and Shomron. Like vultures, they hover, waiting for opportunity to gorge and fill themselves on others misery.

The Right on the other hand is in a frenzy, bolting every which way attempting to find the proper tool to dislodge this boulder that has fallen, blocking the highway of continued presence in our heartland.

Each side has been making emergency meetings, drawing new lines of confrontation as Bibi and his minstrals take a breather and enjoy the confusion they have caused in the political arena in Israel, the Obama administration, and lets not forget, our “not peace” partners, the Palestinian Authority.

I question Bibi’s loyalty to Israel, who is he serving? There is nobody benefitting from this latest “effort” to restart the negotiations with the Arabs.

Bibi was elected to serve Israel’s interest, and Israel’s interest alone. I don’t recall seeing his name on any US electoral list. While we do not see what goes on behind the closed doors of the White House, we can be sure that Israel’s well being is no longer on the US agenda. There latest requests prove this, among them, releasing more terrorists, passing over more key security points to Dayton’s Army, sorry, I meant to say the Palestinian Security Force, and of course more “Land for Peace” with Jerusalem as the main course. I understand this, as the US President believes his future and the US wellbeing lies in the Arab and Muslim world. It is his job to look out for the US as best as he can and to his best understanding. The fact that this present administration in the US will probably cause more damage to the US and it’s citizens will only be realized in the soon to be future, but that is another subject.

Bibi is hurting us, and us alone. He claims his intentions are noble, yet forgive me as I must join the others from all sides condemning him, his strategy, and his lack of strength when confronting the world. Many Jews around the world took pride in his words during some of his past speeches, of course many understood that this was just empty rhetoric, something needed to fill dead air, a pity, maybe his speech writers should be members of the Knesset.

(Continue reading...)

Love of the Land: Just Say No

Love of the Land: Bibi Versus The Iceman

Bibi Versus The Iceman

I thought that I'd draw Obama and Bibi Netanyahu as battling SuperHeroes, but they came out looking like a pair of phony costumed TV wrestlers putting on a show!

* * *

The Arab-Israeli conflict will end when the Arab states accept the existence of a Jewish State in the region as natural. Political correctness requires that we ignore this obvious truth and pretend that the problem is simply a border dispute between "Palestinians" and Israelis.

Love of the Land: Bibi Versus The Iceman

Love of the Land: Bibi's bad week

Bibi's bad week

Caroline Glick
carolineglick.com
27 November 09

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu weakened Israel this week. And he did so for no good reason.

Thursday's headlines told the tale. The day after Netanyahu bowed to US pressure and announced a total freeze on Jewish construction in Judea and Samaria for ten months, Yediot Aharonot reported that the Obama administration now wants Israel to release a thousand Fatah terrorists from prison.

The Americans also want Israel to allow US-trained, terror-supporting Fatah paramilitary forces to deploy in areas that are currently under Israeli military control. Moreover, the Americans are demanding that Israel surrender land in the strategically crucial Jordan Valley to Fatah.

And these are just American preconditions for starting negotiations with the Palestinians. According to Yediot, if those talks ever begin, the White House will demand that Israel accept a Palestinian state in Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria and Gaza and agree to ethnically cleanse all the areas of Jews.

So far from winning American support or at least causing the White House to ease its bullying, US President Barack Obama sees Netanyahu's decision to implement a militarily irrational, bigoted policy of prohibiting Jews from building in Israel's heartland as a drop in the bucket.

THE TRUTH is that Israel should not be in the business of negotiating the right of Israeli cities and villages to exist and prosper. The notion that it is acceptable to demand that Jews not be permitted to live in Judea and Samaria - or anywhere else in the world - is not a notion that Israel should countenance.

That being said, putting the so-called "settlements" genie back in the bottle is a tall order. After all, Israel agreed to place it on the table in the 1993 Oslo agreements and made its willingness to dry out Jewish communities explicit with its acceptance of the so-called road map in 2004. To take Israeli communities off the agenda it would be necessary to repudiate these deals.

Given what it will take to remove Jewish communities from the negotiations chopping block, it makes sense that Netanyahu has not moved in that direction since taking office. But willingness to discuss these communities is not the same as giving them away for nothing. In discussing the dispositions of these towns and villages, at a minimum Netanyahu should have taken advantage of the fact that the Americans, the Europeans and the Arabs all consider the so-called "settlements" to be the most important obstacle to peace.

(Continue to full article)

Love of the Land: Bibi's bad week

Love of the Land: An Empty Gesture

An Empty Gesture

Ira Sharkansky
The Shark Blog
26 November 09

Reading the announcements of government officials is more of an art than a science. It is appropriate to weigh the use of certain words rather than others, and take note of what a statement does not say. No one, including those involved in its preparation, can claim certainty as to how it should be read, much less what it can lead to as one statement provokes others from allies and antagonists.

Consider Prime Minister Netanyahu's announcement that his government has agreed to a freeze of new housing construction in the West Bank (excluding Jerusalem) for a period of 10 months in an effort to persuade the Palestinians to begin negotiations toward a peace agreement.

While members of the government trumpeted the announcement as a gesture that should move the Palestinians, It did not take long for commentators to declare it a dead letter. Sure enough, within a day ranking Palestinians reiterated their new position that they would only start negotiations when there was a total freeze of construction (homes and other facilities), including the post-1967 neighborhoods of Jerusalem.

What does all this mean?

One interpretation is that it reflects the teething problems of the American president. When he and his secretary of state emphasized the need to freeze settlements, and included Jerusalem in the mandate, they brought the Palestinians to assert a demand they had not made before during 17 years of negotiations.

Another interpretation, not altogether different, is that the talk of negotiations is a game without end played by numerous governments. If officials are wise and have noticed what has happened since Oslo, they should realize that negotiations go nowhere as long as the Palestinians adhere to their mantras of refugee rights and 1967 borders. Since Gaza fell into the hands of Hamas, the chances of an agreement are even less. The Fatah party of Mahmoud Abbas is barely holding on to the West Bank, propped up by Americans, Israelis and others. Should Abbas dare to show flexibility, his hold on power would be even more tenuous.

Even though wise leaders may recognize that reality, they cannot admit it, and give up the quest for peace. Who could do that when the future of the Holy Land is at stake? Moreover, there are unwise leaders in the bunch who may really believe in fairies and other delights, like peace between Israel and Palestine. With them beating the drums, and especially if they are the powerful Americans with a popular leader (who no other leader can publicly call naive), then the chorus joins in the pursuit of peace.

(Continue reading)

Love of the Land: An Empty Gesture

Love of the Land: Bad ideas and where they come from

Bad ideas and where they come from

FresnoZionism.org
26 November 09

Israel’s Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu declared a 10-month settlement freeze in Judea and Samaria Wednesday, in order to “encourage resumption of peace talks with our Palestinian neighbors.”

Predictably, the Palestinian Authority (PA) rejected it, because it allows Israel to finish buildings under construction and does not include Jerusalem, which PM Netanyahu correctly said “is not a settlement”.

Right-wing parties then attacked Netanyahu for “spitting in the face of those who were promised only a year ago that he would lead a change from the expulsion policies of [former Prime Minister Ariel] Sharon.” (MK Yakov Katz of the National Union party).

Certainly Netanyahu could have predicted both of these outcomes. So why did he do it? And why did his cabinet approve it?

Here’s another item:

In an effort to bolster Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas in the face of a potential mass prisoner swap with Hamas, the Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency) “pardoned” over 90 wanted Fatah militiamen on Thursday on condition they refrain from engaging in terrorist activity.

Under the deal, the 92 fugitives – all members of Al-Aksa Martyrs Brigades, Fatah’s military wing – will be allowed to move freely throughout Palestinian cities within Area A of the West Bank. One of the fugitives included in the deal is Ala Sankara, who was the Al-Aksa commander in the Balata refugee camp near Nablus…

Israel is concerned that a massive prisoner deal with Hamas would undermine Abbas and boost Hamas’s popularity on the Palestinian street ahead of general elections.

In other words, if Hamas gets more terrorists on the street than Fatah, then it will be more popular. And the government wants to support Fatah. It’s hard to see how this will help, considering that Hamas will probably get hundreds, possibly more than a thousand freed, including convicted murderers, in the coming exchange for kidnapped soldier Gilad Shalit. And they can claim that they did by means of ‘resistance’, not collaboration, always a plus in Palestinian circles.

(Continue reading...)

.


Love of the Land: Bad ideas and where they come from