Obama must write out a statement that he’s willing to deliver on TV. It should criticize Netanyahu sharply and say something that will shock the Israeli people: If the prime minister is going to behave this outrageously, America can no longer guarantee that it will stand by Israel’s side at the United Nations. It can no longer guarantee that it will veto Security Council resolutions that declare West Bank settlements in violation of international law.











According to former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Bibi Netanyahu has delivered “the worst possible slap in the face” to President Obama. Olmert was referring, of course, to Netanyahu’s announcement that Israel will proceed with a settlement project that, the New York Times reported, “has long been condemned by Washington as effectively dooming any prospect of a two-state solution.” (An article in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz seconds Washington’s assessment–see headline above.)

Olmert may be overstating things, but not by much. Certainly Netanyahu’s settlement surprise isn’t the show of gratitude Obama had reason to expect after the US voted with Israel against Palestine’s bid for nonmember observer status at the UN–a bid so reasonable and innocuous that Israel and the US, in opposing it, were in a minority of 9 out of 147 voting nations. And some of those 9 were on our side only because of American arm twisting. (Olmert himself thought it was a mistake for Israel to oppose the resolution.)

In a way this was more than a slap at Obama. It was a slap at the United States. Terrorism is one of America’s main national security threats, and the hatred of America by some Arabs and Muslims is the most valuable asset terrorist recruiters have. So stoking that hatred by voting to thwart the legitimate aspirations of Palestinians makes America less secure. To put a finer point on it: Stoking that hatred makes our children more likely to die a violent death 5, 10, 15 years from now.

I’m not saying this UN vote alone increased the chances of terrorism by much. In fact, it increased them by only a very tiny bit. But that’s more than zero, and every increment matters. And, however tiny the increment, it was only increased when Netanyahu then turned around and announced an epically indefensible settlement project; America, especially after its display of loyalty to Israel at the UN, is naturally seen as complicit in things like that. (And, no, toothless diplomatic protests by the US don’t do much to change that perception.)

So Obama needs to stop this settlement project–not just to save face, but to protect Americans. He needs to show Arabs and Muslims–and everybody else–that no nation, including Israel, can take America’s support completely for granted; that America won’t stand by impotently as Israel embarks on a project that shows contempt for the Palestinian people and for world opinion.

Obama’s leverage with Netanyahu is limited, because Congress has so much influence over purse strings. But the president has enough leverage to do what needs to be done. Here’s how he should proceed:

[1] Write out a statement that he’s willing to deliver on TV. It should criticize Netanyahu sharply and say something that will shock the Israeli people: If the prime minister is going to behave this outrageously, America can no longer guarantee that it will stand by Israel’s side at the United Nations. It can no longer guarantee that it will veto Security Council resolutions that declare West Bank settlements in violation of international law. Indeed, America may now introduce such a resolution–that’s how outrageous this latest settlement project is.

[2] Call Netanyahu, read him the statement, and tell him that if the settlement plans haven’t been reversed within 48 hours, Obama will deliver the statement on TV.

And Obama has to mean it. He has to be ready to deliver the statement–because then Netanyahu will sense that he means it, in which case Obama won’t have to deliver the statement.

The Israeli people care very much about their relationship with the United States–especially when so much of the world is rejecting their policies toward the Palestinians. So Netanyahu doesn’t want to head into the coming election as the prime minister who has done more to jeopardize that special relationship than any Israeli leader in memory. He’ll cave.

He’ll hate caving, because he’ll look foolish, and the whole episode will have hurt him politically. But it won’t hurt him as much as something approaching an actual breach with the United States.

And if for some reason he doesn’t cave, and Obama has to deliver his statement, I predict that Obama will find–to the surprise of many–that he pays no significant political price (or, at most, a price that a second-term president can easily tolerate). The reason is that pretty much everyone who’s paying attention to this issue realizes how indefensible Netanyahu’s behavior has been. Most people will realize, too, that Obama is acting in Israel’s best interests by trying to strongarm it into limiting its alienation of the world.

Even if Netanyahu doesn’t cave, Obama will have strengthened America’s national security, because he will have shown the world that America will actively and forcefully oppose at least some unjust and illegal encroachments on Palestinian territory. Terrorist recruiters will be very disappointed to hear this.

I’m not suggesting that we should always do whatever minimizes hatred of America. There are principles worth fighting for, and there are principles whose defense will require increasing our exposure to terrorism. But Israel’s freedom to build more settlements on occupied territory–in violation of international law and of the world’s sense of decency–isn’t one of those principles. Obama would be helping both Israel and America by making that clear.

[Postscript: I hope it's clear that I'm not saying Obama will take this approach; obviously, it would be out of character for him to be so bold. I'm just saying that if he did take this approach it would work. I'm also saying that if he doesn't do something to rein Netanyahu in, he's not doing his duty as president.]
Share on facebookShare on twitterShare on emailShare on printMore Sharing Services
http://www.veteransnewsnow.com/2012/12/06/how-obama-could-stop-those-israeli-settlements/

He could show them his pitchfork.
Just not the pink one.

Like that hat willing2! (Not being sarcastic, I'm from New Mexico)

All the years of everyone pissing on Israel when they tried honestly to do the right thing and nothing they do whether or not it is to meet terms of an agreement like removing settlements from contested lands or Unequal prisoner exchanges stops the violence.

You know screw the UN and screw Palestine. Israel has EVERY right to exist like any other nation like TIBET. Considering that Palestine allows and hosts attacks on Israel I question THEIR right to exist at all considering how many times THEY broke the terms of a cease fire with SUICIDE BOMBINGS, SNIPER ATTACKS, CAR BOMBINGS, JIHADI MILITANT ATTACKS, and of course the newest thing ROCKET ATTACKS!

And years of peace with Egypt is now being tested thanks to, DRUM ROLL, The Islamic Brotherhood.

The UN dropped the ball way too many times and pissed on Israel's kitchen floor way too much. This is a great way for Israel to re-compensate themselves for what they put up with. So what, Palestine is pissed they cannot hold the high ground to launch attacks on Israel any more?

Obama can't do anything and I doubt he could suck a dick right! The only thing he gets right is selling us out, blaming everyone else for his mistakes and bad judgement, and entitling poor people to just be poor (...ignorant ghetto and trailer park trash). (<---yep, I did go there, didn't I?)

And it is so easy for a politician like Obama to go back on alliances and treaties... So who cares is Israel gets nuked, right? AS long as it is just the Jews who get killed? I am sure that the sentiment is there in your mind!

You clearly know nothing of the Arab culture or its language. one word can mean six different things and that is why translating it is such a Bytch! I have seen up to twelve or more annotations pertaining to certain passages because depending on how the position of a certain word in a sentence can make it mean more than one thing! There are enough passages that spell out a Holy War or to find a more contemporary comparator a KAMPH or Struggle NAZI style on the world.

If you look in Egypt the EXACT SAME THING HAPPENED IN GERMANY 1926. Hitler was ascending power and managed to make edicts and decrees no one opposed and it led to the near extermination of not only the Jews but the Roma (Gypsies) and a social purge on Homosexuals and political dissidents. Giftgas was not just for bugs and Jews! The difference is that unlike Germany the Christians and everyone else not buying Islam's Theocratic totalitarianism know if they don't fight now they ARE fucqed later. A Dictator and murderer in disguise is just that. Hitler had the exact same conviction as Moresi and his rhetoric spells it out. He is not about peace with Israel. He is in this for ISLAM, Not EGYPT OR DEMOCRACY! And he tried to use religious leverage to get the "Majority" vote because of 'Hope' from a "brutal Dictator" (Mubarak) who didn't let Islam do what it wanted when he ruled (presided).

One dictator is ousted for another RIGHT ON ISRAEL'S BACK DOOR! And one who IS a threat to them to boot!

So now what? We weaken Israel just to make an enemy stronger because you hate Jews?

What do you really have against them? Money? Banking? Corruption? REALLY???

The head of the snake is the English Royal family and the English Bankers! you know the Islamic money trail leads right to them as well don't you? Who is Bank of Islam??? And a Bank is a Bank is a Bank. They all work together.

And you want to haterate on Israel to what end? Does it make you feel warm and safe at night? YOU DON'T EVEN LIVE THERE! What have you got against Israel's right to exist as well?

Uh, such a guarantee hasn't existed since January 20, 2009.

There are strong legal arguments that the Palestinian lands are
completely in dispute and have never been resolved status since
the days of the British Mandate during which Jews were recognized
as having a legal right to settlement anywhere within the British
Mandate including the part which is now Jordan but particularly
anywhere West of the Jordan river including what is now called
the West Bank and Gaza.

Here are some supporting analyses.

Dore Gold, PhD, former Israeli Ambassador to the United Nations, in a Jan. 16, 2002 Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs editorial titled "From 'Occupied Territories' to 'Disputed Territories,'" wrote:

"Israel possesses legal rights with respect to the West Bank and Gaza Strip that appear to be ignored by those international observers who repeat the term 'occupied territories' without any awareness of Israeli territorial claims. Even if Israel only seeks 'secure boundaries' that cover part of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, there is a world of difference between a situation in which Israel approaches the international community as a 'foreign occupier' with no territorial rights, and one in which Israel has strong historical rights to the land that were recognized by the main bodies serving as the source of international legitimacy in the previous century."

Jan. 16, 2002 - Dore Gold, PhD

Eugene W. Rostow, JD, former US Undersecretary of State for political affairs, in an Oct. 21, 1991 New Republic commentary titled "Resolved: Are the Settlements legal? Israeli West Bank Policies,":

"The British Mandate recognized the right of the Jewish people to 'close settlement' in the whole of the Mandated territory. It was provided that local conditions might require Great Britain to 'postpone' or 'withhold' Jewish settlement in what is now Jordan. This was done in 1922. But the Jewish right of settlement in Palestine west of the Jordan river, that is, in Israel, the West Bank, Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip, was made unassailable. That right has never been terminated and cannot be terminated except by a recognized peace between Israel and its neighbors."

Oct. 21, 1991 - Eugene W. Rostow, JD

The Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA), in a 2001 document titled "Israeli Settlements and International Law,":

"The settlements themselves are not intended to displace Arab inhabitants, nor do they do so in practice. Repeated charges regarding the illegality of Israeli settlements must therefore be regarded as politically motivated, without foundation in international law... Politically, the West Bank and Gaza Strip is best regarded as territory over which there are competing claims which should be resolved in peace process negotiations."

2001 - Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs

So, Obama rightfully recognizes that although continuation of the
plans to develop the E1 area are going to irritate the Palestinians
and make a more difficult environment for the peace negotiations
he is not saying that what the Israelis are doing is illegal.

Moreover, the Palestinians are refusing to recognize the right
of Israel to exist at all in peace and instead just went to the UN
(which is a very anti-Israel body on the whole due in large part to
the Islamic dominated states and their allies). The atmosphere for
peace negotiations were already poisoned by the Palestinian actions
and the attitude of Israel is likely to be that the atmosphere for
negotiations are not going to be any worse with the E1 planning
proceeding as expected.

and look what anti-semite-Site put out that trashy Article!
The Settlements are being built in Areas which wouldn't be a part of a Palestinian State anyway
But any Witch-Hunt against Israel welcomes any Lies!

Netanyahu: Jerusalem is Ours, Not Up for Debate
PM Netanyahu has flatly rejected an American demand to stop Jewish construction in parts of the capital city.
By Maayana Miskin
First Publish: 7/19/2009, 12:33 PM



Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu issued a sharp response Sunday to United States pressure to stop Jews from building in parts of Jerusalem claimed by the Palestinian Authority. Israel's sovereignty in Jerusalem is “not up for debate,” Netanyahu said, and Jews are permitted to build in any part of the capital city, as are Arabs.

Netanyahu implied that the U.S. request was racist, saying before the weekly Cabinet meeting, “Imagine what would happen if Jews were forbidden to live or to buy apartments in certain parts of London, New York, Paris or Rome. There would be an international outcry."

"All the more, we cannot to a decree like this regarding Jerusalem,” he said.

Over the weekend, the U.S. State Department summoned Israeli envoy Michael Oren and demanded that Israel halt construction of Jewish homes in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood, near the ancient grave of Shimon HaTzaddik (Simon the Just). The property on which the homes are to be built has been owned by Jewish activist Dr. Irving Moskowitz for more than 20 years.

Oren told U.S. officials that Israel would not agree to stop building in the area.

Israel annexed Sheikh Jarrah and other Jerusalem neighborhoods following the Six Day War, in which the city was reunified after 19 years of Jordanian rule in the eastern half of the city. While Israel has maintained sovereignty in the capital city for more than 40 years, the Palestinian Authority continues to demand all areas controlled by Jordan in the 1950s.

The United States, along with most of the world, has refused to recognize Israeli sovereignty in Jerusalem in deference to the PA. The American embassy is located in Tel Aviv, not Jerusalem, and American citizens born in Jerusalem may not list “Israel” as their country of birth on their American documents.

Israeli Muslim Children told Jerusalem Occupied, Raise Millions for Al Aksa
While Israeli leaders proclaim Jerusalem to be the unified capital of Israel, Israeli Muslim leaders teach their children that Jerusalem is rightfully Arab and Muslim. On Saturday, the Islamic Movement bussed thousands of Israeli Arab Muslim children to the Al Aksa Mosque on the Temple Mount, where they heard speeches referring to the Temple Mount and Jerusalem as areas “occupied” by Israel.

"We must remove the occupying forces from the mosque, and from all of Jerusalem,” said Sheikh Khamel Khatib, a senior Islamic Movement leader.

The children brought money which they had gathered throughout the year on behalf of the Islamic Movement. Donations came to roughly 3 million shekels, which Islamic Movement leaders said would be used for the Al Aksa Mosque and Islamic Movement institutions.

Like buying more Rockets and Mortarrounds and Semtex!

http://www.frumforum.com/obama-falls-for-abbas-bluff/

Mahmoud Abbas must be a very good poker player.

Or else Barack Obama must be a very bad one.

Holding the geopolitical equivalent of a pair of twos and a pair of threes, the Palestinian Authority President has bluffed and bullied the President of the United States into an awkward predicament.

Abbas has threatened Obama: If you do not step up your pressure on Israel, I will go to the United Nations in September and ask the General Assembly to recognize Palestine as a sovereign state.

In his speech to the pro-Israel American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) last Sunday, Obama cited Abbas’ threat as reason to press now for a peace agreement based on the 1967 lines: “But the march to isolate Israel internationally — and the impulse of the Palestinians to abandon negotiations — will continue to gain momentum in the absence of a credible peace process and alternative. And for us to have leverage with the Palestinians, to have leverage with the Arab states and with the international community, the basis for negotiations has to hold out the prospect of success.”

In other words: “Hey AIPAC: Don’t blame me. I have no choice. If I don’t move against Israel now, Abbas will act on his awesome threat to isolate Israel internationally, and then where will any of us be?”

Well here’s one possible choice Obama had.

He could answer Abbas’ threat: “Oh really?” And then remind the PA president of some elementary facts, like:

(1) The UN General Assembly has already voted to recognize Palestine as a sovereign state, back in 1988. What’s the big deal about a second vote?

(2) The economy of your declared state depends abjectly on foreign aid: $675 per person per year. (For comparison: Sub-Saharan Africa receives $48 per person per year.)

A May 27 BBC report describes the importance of this aid: ” ‘Over the last 15 years, 50% of the Palestinian Authority budget has come from foreign aid,’ says Nasser Abdul Karim, an economist at the West Bank’s Bir Zeit University. ‘But it’s charity and the growth is unsustainable,’ he says wryly. So what would happen if the funding stopped? ‘Salaries would not be paid. Employees would stop spending. People could not pay rent or bank loans or electricity bills,’ says Mr Abdul Karim. ‘The domino effect would play a major role in crippling the whole economy.’ “

(3) The United States provides more than half this money, either directly to the Palestinian Authority or indirectly, via the UN agency for Palestinian refugees. So who exactly has leverage over who here?

(4) Beyond cash, the United States provides equipment and training for the security forces of the Palestinian Authority. Without that assistance, those forces would fall below even their current standards of effectiveness.

(5) PA electricity, water, and customs revenues all depend on Israeli co-operation. The Palestinian economy will collapse without Israel — and only the United States has leverage over Israel.

The PA mind trick over the September declaration is only a sub-set of a larger mind trick that Abbas has exercised over Obama.

The Obama team’s strategy is based on leaving two issues to the very end of a future Israeli-Palestinian negotiation: Jerusalem and refugees. The idea is that these issues excite the most intense emotions and should be left until all other issues are settled.

By postponing Jerusalem and refugees, the Obama strategy establishes a dynamic leading up to a final exchange: the Palestinians surrender their claimed “right of return”; Israel surrenders its sovereignty over historic Jerusalem.

If that’s indeed what the President has in mind, it would be quite a one-sided deal: Israel would yield something real and precious in exchange for the Palestinians yielding a claim they could never enforce.

It would be like the Americans yielding the White House to Mexico in exchange for Mexico promising not to try to take back Texas and California by force.

The real analogy to the Palestinian “right of return” is the long-abandoned Zionist claim to the East Bank of the Jordan River: the two fantasies could cancel each other out.

Indeed, since the admission of millions of Palestinians into Israel would be tantamount to the destruction of Israel, you might think that abandoning the refugee claim would be a first step toward negotiations.

Yet somehow Abbas has convinced Obama to allow him to stake this grandiose pretension against Israel’s most cherished possession. If this were poker, Obama would have been wiped out already. Or more exactly: not Obama, but the people with whose lives and security Obama is playing.

Originally published in the National Post.

http://freepressonline.com/main.asp?SectionID=50&SubSectionID=72&ArticleID=23449
Mac Deford: Israel and Palestine; When Military Strength Is Not Enough
by Thomas McAdams Deford
Well, that's it. That's the final blow.
Don't worry: I'm not talking about the fiscal cliff. No, what I'm talking about is much worse, long-term - the deathknell of the two-statesolution for Israel and the Palestinians.
Ever since President Obama leaped into the Middle East with his eloquent, naive Cairo speech in the spring of 2009, and then misread the adulation from the Arab World as an unstoppable train bearing down on Israel's expansionist settlement policies inthe West Bank, only to be stopped dead in his tracks, derailedactually, by Prime Minister Netanyahu - ever since then, analysts have been proclaiming the two-state solution onthin ice, on life support, near death.
And now, the ice just broke, the plugs were pulled, the two-state solution is dead. Who to blame?Who cares. A year ago, the Palestinian Authority proposed seeking an expandedform of recognition at the UN. Obama persuaded them to slow down; they did, expecting a boost from Washington, perhaps an extended Israeli settlement freeze, a resumption of the peace talks on the basis of the 1967 borders, a crust of stale bread, whatever.
Well, it was election year, that virtually permanent state of affairs, at least when it comes to putting pressure on Israel or doing other things that might benefit the US long-term - and Israel as well - but lose a vote or two in the meantime. So the year passed by, wasted, and once again, the PalestinianAuthority was seeking greater UN recognition, and this year they weren't to be put off with vaguepromises.
And while it was no longer election year, it's always election year, for the president or for Congress, when it comes to putting pressure on Israel. Sothe US vetoed the measure, allying itself with Israel, and Canada, the Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, and Palau, and watching as no nation in Europe, with the exception ofthe Czech Republic (why? I have no idea)voted with Israel.
Israel's Netanyahu was apparently caught off-guard by the surprising European support forPalestine. And anyway, it's an election year there, so Netanyahu upped the ante and announced he would build 3,000 new housing units in the West Bank just east of Jerusalem in an area that would effectively split the West Bank in two. Alea iacta est.
Secretary of State Clinton did some perfunctory tut-tutting, but nothing substantive, nothing that would upset Netanyahu's American supporters (after all, she's got her own election year down the road). In Europe, by contrast, five nations called in their ambassadors from Israel and read them the riot act. And rightly so. The death of the two-state solution is no small thing.
Israel's supporters blame the Palestinians for provoking Netanyahu with theirUN move. Palestine's supporters blame Netanyahu for setting impossible pre-conditions for renewed peace talks. He said/she said: par for the course in the Middle East. And irrelevant.
What is relevant is where all this is heading. Netanyahu will be re-elected, Israel's right-wing in his pocket, its left-wing non-existent. Palestinian President Abbas is increasingly a non-entity, upstaged by Hamas and done no favors by Israel. He'll want to regain some credibility, perhaps eventually, with Palestine's new status at the UN, bringing Israel before the International Criminal Court, what it fears most. In the meantime, the heating up of the Arab Spring continues, and with it, the de-secularization of the Arab World.
In Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood, despitestrong opposition, seems headed for a victory in its referendum next week that will formally Islamicize the Egyptian revolution. In the haze of civil war, predicting who will ultimately replace Syria's secular Assad regime is impossible, but it's clear the next government will be more Islamic. Lebanon's balance of power is currently in Hezbollah's hands. And while Iraq's Shiite government may not be under mullah control, it is strongly influenced by Iran. Jordan, under King Abdullah, remains relatively secular. For how long?
And if Israel's religious parties are hardly equal in strength to their Muslim counterparts in the rest of the Middle East, the religious right is stronger in Israel than it's ever been. Even so, nothing dramatic will happen. Certainly, no Arab country, or any coalition of Arab countries, will dare challenge the military might of Israel. Rockets from Gaza will continue sporadically, but theywill lead to few casualties along with an occasional overwhelming response from Israel.
But if there's no drama, no sudden defining moment, what is happening, gradually, ineluctably, is the international isolation of Israel. Another UN General Assembly vote earlierthis week, demanding that Israel join the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and open its nuclear program to international inspection, found Israel with but five supporters, the US and Canada, again joined by that dynamic trio of Micronesia, the Marshall Islands and Palau.
Two weeks ago, I wrote, in a wishful vein - well, after all, itwas Thanksgiving - that what was needed was for Obama to coordinate an imposed solution. Wishful thinking indeed. Obama isn't up to it.
For the foreseeable future, the US, drivenby strong lobbying from AIPAC and otherpro-Israel groups, will continue to vote with Israel, with the result, counter-productive for both countries, of an ever-harder-line Israel and the ever-diminishing influence of the US inthe Middle East. With Israel's international support limited to the US while the ArabWorld continues in turmoil, Israel will grow more defiant, more nationalistic, further isolating itself. Even Israeli trade with Europe will gradually be affected. And, eventually, boycotting of those companies involved with the occupation will become a serioustool.
There will be no exit for Israel, no way outif it continues to morph into a Mediterranean version of Cuba - militaristic, the self-proclaimed "only democracy" in the region (if you don't count the 4 million Palestinians under itsharsh colonial thumb), and isolated,with the US acting in its supporting role as the old Soviet Union. Israel will have its own boat people, intellectuals, secular liberals, even its entrepreneurs. UnlikeCubans, they will emigrate freely, traveling comfortablyto the US or Europe, but, as Israel's isolation grows, leave they will.
How will it all end? And when? Who knows. But unless Israel can produce its own Sadat, a leader who can rise up, breaking free from Israel's extreme rightward projection,and offer a fair peaceto the Palestinians, Israel's future is bleak. They can win the military battles, but the key battle they're facing, the ultimate one down the road - that of worldwide public opinion - is one they are starting to lose.
Reader Comments
Posted: Thursday, December 06, 2012
Article comment by: Mary Wilson
It isn't enough to say"When will it end? Who knows?" Israel'sability to occupy and oppress the Palestinians is dependent on the money and arms we send them. Until we, including readers of the Free Press, direct our votes and our campaign contributions away from Israel's supporters (or rather,employees) in the U. S. Congress, we ourselves are responsible. Don't just sit there reading.Write to your Representative.
Posted: Thursday, December 06, 2012
Article comment by: MBen Faivol
I love know-it-alls. You should run for Israeli Prime Minister because you know better what is good for the benefit if the majority of Israelis. Or maybe you don't but you want to be a closet dictator so youcan tell Israelis and Israel what to do. Too bad you don't aspire to be the Prime Minister of the Pakestinian Authoritythen we can see what you think whenyou tewll YOUR PEOPLE not to stop firing rockets at Israel, not to continue to teach death to the Jews in your UN paid for schools, not to keep even one of the covenants you have made in any agreement with stupid Israel which foolishly thinks you will cease being barbaric savages of an ignorant stone age country and people. Fair, Balance and Honest are not issues you will ever have to consider, but being a propagandistis something of a reputation you will continue to earn and I hope when you eventually die, you may have regrets for being one.
MBen Faivol, Berverly Hills, CA

ZOA: ABBAS” FATAH “HAMAS NEED NOT STOP MURDERING JEWS OR RECOGNIZE ISRAEL “

By Ruth King on June 22nd, 2010

ABBAS’ FATAH: HAMAS NEED NOT STOP MURDERING JEWS OR RECOGNIZE ISRAEL

Senior Fatah leader, Nabil Shaath – considered a “moderate” – speaking on behalf of Mahmoud Abbas’ Fatah, which controls the Palestinian Authority (PA) last week said that Hamas, the genocide-seeking terrorist group that has controlled Gaza since violently seizing the territory in 2007, need not recognize Israel, nor stop murdering Jews in Israel, nor meet any other demands laid down by the Quartet (the U.S., European Union, Russia and the United Nations).

Hamas calls in its Charter to the destruction of Israel (Article 15) and the murder of Jews (Article 7) and has murdered over 600 Israelis in nearly a decade of suicide bombing, roadside bomb, sniping and rocket attacks. Yet the Quartet has demanded only the meager conditions that in order to be accepted as a legitimate party to negotiations, Hamas must recognize Israel, renounce the use of terrorism and accepting the existing Oslo agreements signed by the PA. Already in 2007, the ZOA argued that these conditions, even in the unlikely event that they were accepted by Hamas, are inadequate, as real change in Hamas could only be said to have occurred once it explicitly renounces its Charter, disarms terrorists, ends incitement to hatred and murder against Israel and ceases all violence for at least a year.

Asked in the Jordanian publication, Al-Dustour, to comment on claims by Hamas that the PA was demanding that the Islamist movement recognize Israel’s right to exist as a condition for achieving reconciliation between the two parties, Shaath said, “This is completely untrue. We have never asked Hamas to recognize Israel’s right to exist. Nor have we demanded that they accept the conditions of the Quartet … We want the proposed unity government to be committed to the PLO’s political program, as was the case with the unity government under Ismail Haniyeh … The peace negotiations will be conducted by the PLO. That’s all we’re demanding.” Shaath said that he has been urging European governments to drop their demand that Hamas accept the Quartet’s three conditions, saying, “All the Arab and Islamic states that don’t recognize Israel have agreed to the Arab Peace Initiative … Acceptance of the initiative and a cease-fire [with Israel] is therefore sufficient” (Khaled Abu Toameh, ‘Fatah: No need to end violence,’ Jerusalem Post, June 17, 2010).

In recent days, Shaath has also emphasized that terrorism against Israel is perfectly legitimate:

* “MP Dr. Nabil Shaath, member Fatah Central Committee and Commissioner of Foreign Relations… emphasized that the Fatah’s stated strategy for the struggle is to adopt the growing popular and ‘non-violent’ struggle against Israel, because of the inability to engage in the armed struggle, which has become undesirable now, although it is the right of the Palestinian people, which all international treaties and resolutions have guaranteed” (PA daily, Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, May 20, 2010).

* “The current distancing from the armed struggle does not mean its absolute rejection… He noted that the difficulty of the conflict required the Palestinian people to diversify its activities of struggle – along with an emphasis on the importance of the armed struggle, which laid the basis for the existence of the state and contributed to maintaining the right and presenting it to the world – especially since the armed struggle at the present time is not possible, or is not effective, because of to the difficulties with which the Palestinian people contends” (Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, May 21, 2010, translation courtesy of Itamar Marcus & Nan Jacques Zilberdik, ‘Abbas not truthful to Obama; denies PA incitement,’ Palestinian Media Watch Bulletin, June 10, 2010).

Mahmoud Abbas’ Fatah also does not recognize Israel as a Jewish state, supports terrorism, incites the Palestinian population against Israel and Shaath’s latest statements mirror others by Abbas and other senior Fatah officials:

* Mahmoud Abbas, PA president and Fatah chairman: “I say this clearly: I do not accept the Jewish State, call it what you will.” (Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook, ‘Mahmoud Abbas: “I do not accept the Jewish State, call it what you will,” Palestinian Media Watch, April 28, 2009).

* Abbas: “The Palestinians do not accept the formula that the state of Israel is a Jewish state.” (David Bedein, ‘Olmert reports to Israel Cabinet Meeting,’ Bulletin [Philadelphia], December 3, 2007).

* Abbas: “It is not required of Hamas, or of Fatah, or of the Popular Front to recognize Israel” (Al-Arabiya [Dubai] and PA TV, October 3, 2006, Itamar Marcus & Barbara Crook, ‘Abbas dupes US: “Recognition” is functional, not inherent,’ Palestinian Media Watch, October 5, 2006).

* Abbas: “[W]ith the will and determination of its sons, Fatah has and will continue. We will not give up our principles and we have said that rifles should be directed against the occupation…. We have a legitimate right to direct our guns against Israeli occupation” (Khaled Abu Toameh, ‘Abbas: Aim guns against occupation,’ Jerusalem Post, January 11, 2007).

* Kifah Radaydeh, senior Fatah official: “Fatah is facing a challenge, because [Fatah] says that we perceive peace as one of the strategies, but we say that all forms of the struggle exist, and we do not rule out the possibility of the armed struggle or any other struggle. The struggle exists in all its forms, on the basis of what we are capable of at a given time, and according to what seems right” [PA TV July 7, 2009, translation courtesy of Itamar Marcus and Nan Jacques Zilberdik, ‘Fatah official: ‘Our goal has never been peace. Peace is a means; the goal is Palestine,’ Palestinian Media Watch Bulletin, July 12, 2009).

* Rafik al-Natsheh, senior Fatah official: “We will maintain the resistance [i.e. terrorism] option in all its forms and we will not recognize Israel …Not only don’t we demand that anyone recognize Israel; we don’t recognize Israel ourselves. However, the Palestinian Authority government is required to do it, or else it will not be able to serve the Palestinian people. I am certain that we will hinder all the traitors who wish to remove the resistance option from the movement’s charter” (Ali Waked, ‘Senior Fatah official: We won’t recognize Israel. Fatah official: Movement to display commitment to armed struggle in upcoming convention,’ Yediot Ahronot, July 22, 2009).

* Muhammad Dahlan, former commander of Fatah forces in Gaza: “We do not demand that the Hamas movement recognize Israel. On the contrary, we demand of the Hamas movement not to recognize Israel, because the Fatah movement does not recognize Israel, even today” (Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook, ‘Western funders misled: Fatah still refuses to recognize Israel, PA’s “recognition” only to receive international aid,’ Palestinian Media Watch, March 17, 2009).

* Abu Ahmed, Fatah commander: ‘“The base of our Fatah movement keeps dreaming of Tel Aviv, Haifa, Jaffa and Acco. …There is no change in our official position. Fatah as a movement never recognized Israel” (David Bedein, ‘The American Sanitizing of a Terrorist Group,’ Israel National News, October 5, 2006).

* PLO foreign minister Farouk Kaddoumi: “The Palestinian national charter has not been amended until now … It was said that some articles are no longer effective, but they were not changed. I’m one of those who didn’t agree to any changes” (Khaled Abu Toameh, ‘Kaddoumi: PLO charter was never changed,’ Jerusalem Post, April 22, 2004).

ZOA National President Morton A. Klein said, “Nabil Shaath’s latest statements underscore the fraudulence of Fatah’s claims in the West to being moderates and peace-seekers. It perfectly clear that Fatah itself does not accept Israel as a Jewish state, has not renounced terrorism or accepted the idea of a peaceful Palestinian state alongside Israel. Unsurprisingly, it does not expect Hamas to act differently. However now it is demanding explicitly of the Quartet that Hamas be accepted as it is without even its acceptance of the weak requirements of the Quartet.

“The Obama Administration should act on this irrefutable evidence of Fatah’s fraudulent peace pretensions by immediately condemning Abbas’ Fatah-controlled PA and cutting off U.S. aid to it until and unless Fatah renounces its own Constitution calling for Israel’s destruction and the use of terrorism as an indispensable element in the campaign to achieve that goal; arrest and jail terrorists; and end incitement to hatred and murder against Israel in its mosques, media, schools and youth camps.”

http://www.ruthfullyyours.com/2010/06/22/zoa-abbas-fatah-hamas-need-not-stop-murdering-jews-or-recognize-israel/

Oh my, another Israel-bashing thread. How odd!

yep,ain't it?

Gordon Duff,along with Jim Fetzer,purveyors of Conspiracy-Theories and Hate!
What you doing on a known Hatesite like that?

Like I asked before of the OP. What have you got against Jews?


ANY person harboring this much animosity for Jews and Israel for the lack of reason or for the biased reasons cited here in this topic and many others is a liar and or a hypocrite if they claim to NOT BE RACIST!

Again time and time again over the years Israel has tried to adhere to the peace process and all they got for their good faith is attacked.


I love how people claim to not be racist yet here they are posting their hatred for Israel and how the Jews are exclusively evil.

Our eduction dollars are wasted on some!

kind of curious why isreal cant defend itself from incoming rockets an such

but

the united states can invade two sovereign nations with no proven links to the...

...few terrorist that stole a few planes and use them destructively


maybe we should worry about policing the united states rather than policing isreal


not to mention what those invasions cost this countries economy (are we sure the terrorist did not succeed in their mission)

just a thought put hey what do i know

Why the hell do you think Eisenhower warned us of the Military Industrial Complex? You don't make money in that industry without war!

When a society can place a dollar value on human life, $25,000 per head, you think I am kidding? Look it up, then you have problems. First of all it speaks of the moral fiber of the nation. And sadly our leadership has no moral fiber.

We make money sticking our noses as a nation in the business of other nations. We are the Lapdogs of Globalist business and we are being used to enforce their will. Israel can take care of their own business. But it keeps our foot in the door for the area stinking it up with hypocritical and backwards and reversible policies. Egypt damn near got nuked in the Seven Day War. The Israelis were minuets away from pushing the button when Egypt got the memo from us as well as all those neat pictures of Israel setting up to launch thanks to our areal recon!

On top of that Afghanistan is the heart of the Opium market and if we control that we control China with their drug problems. It goes back to the days of England using Opium to hold sway over the Chinese. Yeah, they hate pot but love Opium. Go figure... China does not admit to the national monkey on their back!

Its all about money and where does the money trail lead?

I'm not the OP... But I'll gladly answer.

1) Israel is a expansionist entity that encroaches on Arab land by military means and settlement activity... This is NOT internationally recognized nor legal.

2) The Israeli economy is based on War... Industries & population donate extreme amounts of money to the cause. A booming economy in a financially desperate area of the globe. Sound normal? plz don't give me BS that Israelis are real hard workers Yea I'll call them "ROGUE" if they refuse to sign the NPT.

3) The military style expulsion of civilians is unacceptable... The Jews know this first hand.

4) The unrelenting Israeli lobby in the US has taken over. Much of US foreign policies aren't even decided in the states Until Obama?

5) They are just as fanatically religious as their adversaries... Don't kid yourself.

6) The Jews had militias in the past... Why do they call resistance>>> Terrorist now? Their spy agency "Mossad" thinks nothing of assassinating people abroad... This fact, makes us all a potential target to the whims of the Israeli military.




As a side note... The land allocated to Israeli settlements should not have been in an area where fighting has been going on for thousands of years... over the same chit over and over.
North Dakota would have been more suitable I say!


Nothing against the Jews... Everything against Israel. 39 governments since It's birth... Do the math, there can NEVER be stability there!

EDIT*

No not North Dakota!!!!.... We're gonna need a buffer zone so South Dakota then!

ironic is it not that invading forces attack isreal

and

when they lose the war (thus territory they invaded from)

then after the thing ends they want the land back


sounds like kids in the united states (they do not expect consequences
for their action*)


*well not all kids put some adults as well


maybe they should have fired that nuk in 67 then the land wouldnt be
worth fighting over

just a thought but hey what do i know