Surprise! Palestinian Center for Human Rights stops aiding Gaza patient transfers to Israel, preferring they die - by Elder of Ziyon

How much more evidence is needed that Palestinians – even Palestinian human rights groups – prefer to use sick and dying Palestinians as pawns rather than doing everything they can to save their lives? Their message to Israel is “submit to our demands to allow Gazans, including terrorists, to freely enter Israel without permits, or else we will allow our people to die and blame you.” It is an astonishingly cynical message from the PA, but doubly so from a supposed human rights group.

Elder of Ziyon..
29 June '20..

The words “human rights” means something much different to Palestinians than to the rest of the world.

For years, the Palestinian Center for Human Rights in Gaza Legal Aid department has worked with Israeli authorities to facilitate medical treatment of Gazans in Israel, the West Bank or abroad. According to the group, it has helped transfer some 700 patients in 2019 alone.

On May 19, the Palestinian Authority decided to stop all coordination with Israel, including cooperation on transferring patients to Israeli and foreign hospitals. Mahmoud Abbas has made the supremely cynical decision that this political act is more important than Palestinian lives. As a result, at least two babies have died so far because they could not travel outside Gaza, even though Israeli authorities are trying to help.

Israel, which does not want to see Gaza patients die, has been looking for alternative ways to help these patients. Israeli human rights groups are scrambling to find ways to coordinate patient transfers.

Someone in Israel suggested that the PCHR would be a good choice to take over the PA’s role in facilitating life-saving transfers, since they already know the system and they have been helping patients work with Israeli authorities on the legal front.

One would think that a human rights group would welcome such an opportunity to save human lives.

But that isn’t what happened.

(Continue to Full Post)

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work.  

Actually, there is only one Palestinian Authority message, and Israel must learn to speak 'Palestinese' - by Itamar Marcus

For 27 years the names of the terrorists filling up our jails keep changing, but the few puppeteers pulling their strings remain untouched by justice, traveling through Israel with VIP cards. If Israelis and world leaders want to know what the PA is planning, who is behind the terror, and who must be punished, it’s about time they mastered Palestinese.

Itamar Marcus..
Palestinian Media Watch/JPost..
28 June '20..
Link: https://palwatch.org/page/18005

We are hearing reports from Israeli officials and media that the PA is telling them it is against armed terror in response to Israel’s expected application of Israeli law in parts of Judea, Samaria and the Jordan Valley. However, Palestinian Media Watch has been reporting that the PA messages to its people are openly promoting a terror campaign. Which of these two contradictory PA messages represents the current PA strategy?

The answer is that there is only one PA message and the problem is that Israeli leaders, the media and the international community have not mastered the Palestinian language – “Palestinese.”

First, the signs and messages that the PA wants Palestinian terror to accompany the Israeli announcement are sent daily and in key places. The controlled official PA TV stations are broadcasting extreme terror promotion since the Israeli coalition agreement on April 20, promising annexation. The videos and language resemble the PA TV terror promotion during the PA terror campaign 2000 to 2005, in which over 1000 Israelis were murdered.

There have been calls for suicide bombings: “Strap on the explosive belt, Detonate the first in Haifa and the second in Atlit (both Israeli cities) ... Strap on the belt, O daughter of my land, and detonate it in front of the enemies. How sweet is the taste of Martyrdom, I have found none like it.” This was broadcast on a PA TV station 4 times in the 2 weeks following the coalition agreement.

Other repeating messages on the PA TV stations make it clear that terror is exactly what the PA wants:

“... This great people fights with daggers, knives and cannon shells... ”

“Where is the Arab blood?... Allah is with us. He is stronger and greater than the Children of Zion… My red blood waters the greenery… We are the victors... My chest is a machine gun’s magazine.”

“By Allah, I will redeem Jerusalem with my children.”

“O Arabs, Al-Aqsa has a request, light the fire of rage, this obligation is necessary... The Zionists have become arrogant… The Sons of Zion are in my land violating my honor today. O people of Allah, respond!… O Al-Aqsa, our blood is your torch... ”

“Al-Aqsa has called, and its call is precious, for its sake, life is insignificant... God, grant us Martyrdom there.” These words were followed by pictures of Wafa Idris – the first female suicide bomber– and Ayyat Al-Akhras – the youngest female suicide bomber – a 17-year-old girl.

One recurring song is particularly significant: “The oppressors have gone too far, therefore Jihad is necessary.” These words were broadcast by the PA immediately as it launched its terror campaign in 2000, and now the PA is broadcasting the exact same song again, at least 7 times in June.

The statements by the PA Foreign Minister are another terror indicator. Twice recently, Al-Malki repeated the libel that Israel plans “to destroy the Al-Aqsa Mosque and build the alleged Temple,” in its place. This lie has proven to be the most potent libel that the PA has used to incite lethal Palestinian terror waves. There is no reason for a PA leader to twice express that lie again right now – unless the PA is interested in creating the kind of fear and religious anger that sparks individual Palestinians to terror.

So how can we explain the contradiction between the terror promotion the PA is feeding its people and the insistence by some Israelis leaders and media that the PA does not want terror?

The answer is that unfortunately many Israelis don’t understand the Palestinian language. Senior Fatah leader Jibril Rajoub last week announced exactly what the PA was planning: “Today we are calling a ‘peaceful popular uprising’… This is the unanimous decision of the Fatah Central Committee.”

Block the Road, Get Arrested - Even Former Israeli Air Force Generals ... by Dr. Aaron Lerner

The people complaining about the treatment of Haskel aren't promoting democracy. They are supporting anarchy.

Dr. Aaron Lerner..
IMRA Weekly Commentary..
27 June '20..
Link: http://www.imra.org.il/story.php?id=73689..

Last Friday former Israel Air Force General Amir Haskel was for blocking the street by the Prime Minister's Residence in Jerusalem.

Again. Haskel was engaged in civil disobedience. He broke the law blocking a street in protest.

Since then there is an uproar that he was arrested for breaking the law.

This reflects a profound misunderstanding of the principle of civil disobedience: those who engage in civil disobedience believe so strongly in whatever it is that they are protesting that they are willing to pay the consequences of violating the law in protest.

The people complaining about the treatment of Haskel aren't promoting democracy. They are supporting anarchy.

________________________________________
IMRA - Independent Media Review and Analysis: Since 1992 providing news and analysis on the Middle East with a focus on Arab-Israeli relations

Website: www.imra.org.il


If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work. 

When Will a Stand Be Taken Against the Promotion of Murder? - by Dr. Manfred Gerstenfeld

In civilized societies action should be taken against anyone who expresses the desire to commit murder. The Iranian government, Hamas, Hezbollah, various clerics, and other influential figures within the Muslim world, as well as neo-Nazis and other extreme rightists, openly proclaim their desire to commit murder or even genocide against Jews and Israel. Many in the Western world either refuse to heed these statements or actively support them. Many others relentlessly criticize Israel and remain completely silent about Palestinian promotion of the killing of Jews.

Dr. Manfred Gerstenfeld..
BESA Center Perspectives Paper No. 1,615..
25 June "20..
Link: https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/promotion-of-murder/

Civilized societies should not be silent when people state their intention to murder even a single person, let alone commit genocide. Many Western politicians and other prominent members of society do not seem to agree with this fundamental truth.

In the non-Western world, many people have no inhibitions about saying, directly or indirectly, that they approve of murder in some cases and would personally commit it if the occasion arose. This is most easily seen when the potential victims are Jews. The leaders of Iran, for example, have spent four decades frequently and explicitly expressing their zeal to commit mass murder via the total destruction of the State of Israel.

Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has used familiar language to state this desire. Earlier this year he employed the phrase “final solution” on his website in yet another call for Israel’s destruction. Perhaps reminded of the phrase’s genocidal origin as the Nazi euphemism for the extermination of European Jewry, Khamenei later invoked a classic antisemitic trope by claiming that the extermination of the predominantly Jewish population of Israel would have nothing to do with Jews. “Eliminating the Zionist regime doesn’t mean eliminating Jews,” he said. “We aren’t against Jews. It means abolishing the imposed regime…Muslim, Christian, and Jewish Palestinians [would] choose their own government and expel thugs like [PM Benjamin] Netanyahu.”

This Western-friendly waffling notwithstanding, Khamenei has made no attempt to conceal his true feelings. He has spoken of Israel as a cancer that must be forcibly cut out. In 2018 he tweeted: “Israel is a malignant cancerous tumor in the West Asian region that has to be removed and eradicated: it is possible and it will happen.” Other leading Iranian figures have spoken out in favor of the destruction of Israel, some explicitly mentioning the leveling of Israeli cities.

Yet Iran is allowed to remain an unhindered member of the United Nations.

The Palestinian terrorist organization Hamas—elected as the majority party by the Palestinians in 2006—also openly and frequently discusses its desire to commit genocide against the Jews. This aspiration is clearly stated in its charter, which states: “Hamas looks forward to implementing Allah’s promise however long it might take. The prophet, prayer and peace be upon him, said: ‘The [Day of Judgment] will not come until Muslims will fight the Jews (and kill them); until the Jews hide behind rocks and trees, which will cry: O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, come and kill him!’”

Senior Hamas officials occasionally call publicly for the murder of Jews. In 2019, Fathi Hammad, a member of the Hamas Politburo, urged members of the Palestinian diaspora to kill Jews around the world. Hammad said: “You have Jews everywhere and we must attack every Jew on the globe by way of slaughter and killing if God permits.”

Wow! Reuters’ World Refugee Day story from Gaza is a masterpiece of propaganda without technically lying - by Elder of Ziyon

For World Refugee Day, Reuters decided to use its platform to create anti-Israel propaganda with highly selective facts that conveniently are all exactly the same as the narrative that Hamas and the PLO tells the world. Reuters can point to the story and swear there is nothing incorrect, but there is a huge difference between being not lying and being accurate. This story is not even close to accurate.

Elder of Ziyon..
23 June '20..

Reuters published a story ahead of World Refugee Day last Friday about Palestinian “refugees” in Gaza.

It is a typical mainstream news story – meaning it is an outrageous story that makes no attempt to put any context around the anti-Israel points it wants to make.

On the United Nations’ World Refugee Day on Saturday, Marwan Kuwaik, a 70-year-old Palestinian in Gaza, will be focused on trying to eke out a living by selling snack food on the street.

In Gaza, Kuwaik earns about 30 shekels ($8.50) a day selling lupin beans from his bicycle. He is among 1.4 million Palestinians U.N.-registered refugees in the impoverished and crowded enclave, whose economy has suffered from years of Israeli and Egyptian blockades.

Because Hamas and other terror groups have used Gaza as a literal launching pad for rockets and other terror attacks. Reuters doesn’t mention this.

(Continue to Full Post)

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work. 

The great hokum of Israeli annexation - by Alex Traiman

The Jewish state is not about to march across any border or claim even an inch of new territory. To the contrary, its footprint in Judea and Samaria will remain exactly the same.

Alex Traiman..
JNS.org..
23 June '20..

For the last several weeks, habitual critics of Israeli policies, dubious self-described Israel supporters and even some longtime friends have come out against Israeli plans to “annex” parts of the West Bank.

Here are their arguments: The Palestinian Authority will collapse; Israel will effectively kill the two-state solution and eventually become a minority within its own binational state; the peace treaty with Jordan will be rescinded; normalization with Arab Gulf states will halt; European nations will apply sanctions on Israel; Democrats will distance themselves even further; and the Trump administration will be angered.

Sounds pretty bad. As David Horovitz of The Times of Israel summarized, such a move “not only damages the way we are perceived around the world, it remakes the way we present and see ourselves.”

The statement is reminiscent of the infamous argument of inferiority made by 10 of the 12 Jewish spies who gave a negative report to Moses and the Jewish people, just as the young nation was getting set to enter the Promised Land for the first time: “ … We were like grasshoppers in our eyes, and so we were in their eyes.” That report, which commentators consider a fundamental Jewish error, led to the Israelites having to wander the desert for 40 years. And the date of the spies’ report — the ninth day of Jewish calendar month of Av, Tisha B’Av—has been a day of Jewish mourning for centuries.

In rehashing the same unfounded biblical fears, what is clear is that modern critics are hyper-concerned with the optics of an Israeli administrative move, despite the simple fact that Israel’s action would not change any facts on the ground.

Changing status, applying Israeli law

Many of today’s critics specifically call Israel’s upcoming move an “annexation” because the politically charged term falsely implies that Israel will be marching across a line and taking over property it has no rights to and does not currently control. Yet what Israel is about to do is alter its own governing structure and formally apply Israeli law to the 400,000 Jewish citizens who already live in the strategic lands the Jewish state has controlled for decades.

(Continue to Full Column)

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work. 

Envisioning how Israeli sovereignty in Judea and Samaria would work on a practical level - by Samuel H. Solomon

Israeli sovereignty in Judea and Samaria, and cooperation with hamulot, is the best, most viable and least risky approach. It is certainly worth considering.

Samuel H. Solomon..
JNS.org..
22 June '20..

As I speak with well-intentioned and informed supporters of Israel, I often hear of their difficulty in envisioning how Israeli sovereignty in Judea and Samaria would work on a practical level. Behind this comment is really the question of what will become of the Arabs living there. It has become a core issue of debate, as the Israeli government grapples with even limited application of Israeli law to the area, as part of U.S. President Donald Trump’s “Peace to Prosperity” plan.

The concern is completely understandable. In spite of Israel’s historic, legal and security rights to Judea and Samaria as the heartland of the Jewish people and state, fears of a demographic onslaught, international judgement and Western discomfort—and even denial of the reality of Middle Eastern culture, corruption and violence—create heightened worry about any movement towards Israeli sovereignty, including within the areas of current Israeli settlement where few Arabs reside today.

However, the lack of sovereignty creates numerous debilitating consequences for Jewish Israelis living in Judea and Samaria in towns and villages built by successive Israeli governments as part of official policy. They are, in many respects, second-class citizens in comparison to their counterparts inside the “Green Line,” the border determined in the 1949 Armistice Agreements between Israel and its Arab neighbors after the 1948 War of Independence.

This is clearly untenable.

How, then, will sovereignty work, and why is it superior—regardless of international preference and pressure on Israel—to a so-called “two-state solution”?

To answer the question, one first must assess the risks and returns for each approach in the broader context of the Middle East. Doing so is better than relying on “belief”—as it is usually articulated—in a two-state solution. Indeed, no course of action should be based on blind faith, particularly when pertaining to decisions that involve severe strategic consequences in the event of failure.

(Continue to Full Column)

Samuel H. Solomon is the Chairman of Hetz.org and may be reached at sam@arizal.biz. A more detailed analysis may be found at: https://tinyurl.com/yaedddkd and https://tinyurl.com/ycphwc9l

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work. 

New York Review of Books Looks to 1947 Partition Plan to Determine Palestinian Territories - by Tamar Sternthal

According to the reckoning of the erudite New York Review of Books, the southern Israeli city of Beersheba is Palestinian territory. Displaying the same intellectual rigorousness, editors argue that an Israeli Education Ministry app reflects Israeli policy better than Israeli policy reflects Israeli policy.

Tamar Sternthal..
CAMERA..
22 June '20..

According to the profound reckoning of the erudite New York Review of Books, the southern Israeli city of Beersheba is Palestinian territory. By the editors’ logic, the same goes for the central Israeli cities of Ramle, Lod, Modiin (home of this Israeli researcher and over more than 90,000 other Israelis), as well as Ben-Gurion International Airport. The ruling by Review of Books editors from their lofty perch in Manhattan also places Nahariya, Acco, Nazareth in Palestinian territory.

The intellectual giants at the elite literary journal have made clear that, for them, it is the 1947 United Nations Partition Plan – categorically rejected by Palestinian Arabs and surrounding Arab states at the time – which is the basis for now determining what is Palestinian territory.

Thus, while The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, Voice of America, Deutsche Presse-Agentur have all commendably corrected erroneous assertions that the disputed West Bank, and in particular areas in which Israeli settlements are located, are Palestinian territory, The Review of Book outliers have preferred to redraw the map entirely. When challenged about the designation of disputed West Bank land as “Palestinian,” NYRB editors cited the United Nations Partition Plan – a proposal roundly rejected by the Palestinian Arab leadership over seven decades ago – insisting that the West Bank is Palestinian territory. The natural conclusion about other areas also designated as part of the Arab state under the plan that the Arabs never accepted – Beersheba, Ramla, Lod, Modiin, Bet Shemesh, Acco, Nahariya, the airport, and more – is that they, too, are Palestinian territory. (On the other hand, under the 1947 Partition Plan, Palestinians have no right to Jerusalem, as it was intended to be an international corpus separatum, under United Nations administration.)

(Continue to Full Article)

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work. 

Aljazeera on the Ahlam Tamimi extradition: Our commentary - by Arnold Roth

We look forward to seeing much more coverage on the Aljazeera site of ongoing US efforts to bring Tamimi to justice in a Washington court. And we're ready to help them get their facts less wrong every time they ask.

Arnold/Frimet Roth..
This Ongoing War..
19 June '20..

It's an intense time for us on multiple fronts. We've been doing a lot of tweeting and ZOOMing and Whatsapping. But somehow not much - and not enough - blogging. Time to do some catching up.

Over at Aljazeera, an English-language piece, "'Close the file': Jordan king urged to deny US extradition demand" by Ali Younes takes an inevitably sympathetic look at the efforts currently being made by a fugitive terrorist, Ahlam Tamimi, the most wanted female terrorist in the world (Fox News) to stop certain pesky efforts by US law enforcement to call her to account. And to escape being incarcerated in a US Federal prison for a very long time.

To the writer's credit, he offered Arnold Roth an opportunity to be heard on an issue that, it goes without saying, is at the very heart of our deepest concerns. In the end, and we'll get to this below, the article deals far more with viewpoints we don't like and think are lacking in accuracy and logic than with ours.

Quote: Al-Tamimi - a Jordanian citizen who was convicted in Israel and sentenced to multiple life sentences after 15 people, including two Israeli-Americans, were killed in the blast - was released to Jordan in a prisoner swap between Hamas and Israel in 2011.
Comment: The "multiple" in that sentence is 16. Sixteen. Six. Teen. One for each of her victims. Think back to the last time you heard about a prison sentence anywhere as large as that. But note that the "including two Israeli-Americans" isn't right. Two of the murdered were females with American citizenship: our daughter Malki, an Israeli citizen as well as a US citizen, who was 15 and had lived here in Jerusalem since she was two years old. And Shoshana Hayman Greenbaum, a beloved school teacher living in New Jersey, her parents' only child and pregnant for the first time. Shoshana wasn't an Israeli-American; she was simply an American who was visiting Israel. A tourist who is now buried a short walk away from our Malki. A third American female living in Israel, the mother of a two year-old child who was with her in the pizzeria but survived uninjured, has remained in a vegetative coma through all the years since the massacre. Tamimi doesn''t mention her. Nor do most news reports about how many people were murdered there that day. Because that young mother - whose daughter is now a mother herself - is alive. Only she's comatose. The tragedy of the human losses inflicted by Tamimi's evil get very little attention generally and especially in Aljazeera's stories.

(Continue to Full Post)

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work.  

Is the Palestinian issue the crux of the Arab-Israeli conflict? - by Yoram Ettinger

Erroneous assumptions produce self-destruct erroneous policies, as evidenced by the litany of Western peace proposals, which were based on the fallacious conventional wisdom that the Palestinian issue was the crux of the Arab-Israeli conflict and a crown-jewel of Arab policy makers. Will the Western foreign policy establishment learn from history by avoiding – or repeating – past errors?!

Yoram Ettinger..
The Ettinger Report..
17 June '20..
Link: http://theettingerreport.com/the-palestinian-issue-the-crux-of-the-arab-israeli-conflict-2/

In 2020, Morocco, Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and other pro-US Arab countries base their national security policy on issues which substantially transcend the Palestinian issue. These issues include lethal threats posed by Iran’s Ayatollahs, the Muslim Brotherhood, ISIS, Turkey’s Erdogan, the spillover of the civil wars in Libya, Syria, Iraq and Yemen, the potential implosion of all Arab countries, etc.

In 2020, these countries view Israel’s posture of deterrence as a most valuable asset in the face of the aforementioned lethal threats. They value Israel as a most productive resource to diversify their economy and enhance their standard of living.

At the same time, they consider the proposed Palestinian state a potential rogue regime, which would add fuel to the Middle East fire. Therefore, they are expanding their defense and commercial ties with Israel in an unprecedented manner, in defiance of Palestinian protests and irrespective of the paralysis of the Palestinian issue.

In 1979 and 1994, Egypt and Jordan concluded peace accords with Israel, in order to advance their national security – not as a gesture toward Israel – regardless of Palestinian threats and protests. Notwithstanding occasional anti-Israel Jordanian talk, the Hashemite Kingdom’s walk (militarily and commercially) reflects a realization that Israel makes an irreplaceable and critical contribution to the survival of the Kingdom in the face of domestic and external clear and present threats. Against the backdrop of these threats, the establishment of the proposed Palestinian state would be the straw that breaks the Hashemite camel’s back.

Arab countries have showered Palestinians with a cuddling talk accompanied by a cold/negative walk, which has reflected Arab concern about the Palestinian systematic track record of association with rogue elements and engagement in .

Therefore, Arab countries have never flexed their military muscle – and barely their financial muscle – on behalf of the Palestinians.

Nor did Arab countries assist the Palestinians during the latter’s military confrontations with Israel (e.g., the 1982/83 War in Lebanon, the first and second Intifadas and the three wars in Gaza). Never did the Arabs fight Israel on behalf of the Palestinians.

For example:

Question. Will The New York Times Apply New Op-ed Standards to Israel? - by Mitchell Bard

I wonder if the Times’ newfound interest in standards and facts will apply to future submissions related to Jews and Israel?

Mitchell Bard..
Algemeiner..
17 June '20..

An internal revolt at The New York Times over the publication of an op-ed by Senator Tom Cotton (R-AK) calling for unleashing the US military on the American people to quell unrest led to the resignation of editor James Bennet. After initially defending the op-ed, the paper disowned it, criticizing the “incendiary” headline, and saying the article “did not meet our standards,” while promising to improve their review of such pieces.

Many of us have long wondered what, if any, standards the op-ed page applies, given the Times’ willingness to publish pieces on Israel by murderers, serial liars, and antisemites, which clearly were not fact-checked; yet none of them prompted the resignation of the page’s editor. Here are just a few examples:

Where were the fact checkers when Yasser Arafat offered “The Palestinian Vision of Peace” in 2002, in which the instigator of the Second Intifada said he condemned terror attacks on Israeli civilians, and that the terrorists didn’t represent the Palestinian people? Did they remember that in 1996, long after signing the Oslo Accords, Arafat called for a jihad against Israel (reported by the Times). Just two years after rejecting a Palestinian state in 97% of the West Bank and all of Gaza, he contradicted President Clinton by claiming, “Palestinians are ready to end the conflict.”

In 2006, Ahmed Yousef of Hamas merited space (“Pause for Peace”) to explain the desire for a truce (“hudna”) with Israel. He said the concept “obliges the parties to use the period to seek a permanent, nonviolent resolution to their differences.” But the ceasefire was designed to give the terrorists a respite from Israeli operations to rebuild their strength in order to implement the Hamas charter’s objective of engaging in a jihad to destroy Israel. Rather than identify him as a member of a terrorist organization, or even of Hamas, Yousef was described as “a senior adviser to the Palestinian prime minister, Ismail Haniya.”

(Continue to Full Column)

Mitchell Bard is a foreign policy analyst and authority on US-Israel relations.

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work.  

Mahmoud Abbas Threatens To Abrogate Agreements He Never Kept Anyway - by PreOccupied Territory (Satire)

“Oh, I think he means it this time,” insisted Haaretz columnist Gidon Levy. “He’s an honest man, always lives up to his commitments. If he says he’s going to revoke the Oslo Accords, we better believe him and do as he says. Giving into such pressure has never been a bad idea.”

PreOccupied Territory..
16 June '20..

Analysts differ on whether this eighty-fifth threat will prove as effective as the previous eighty-four.

MuqataaRamallah, June 16 – This de facto Palestinian capital city once again felt political and diplomatic waves after the Palestinian Authority president warned for the eighty-fifth time in fifteen years that if Israel continues to refuse to hand over control of territory that was never before under autonomous Palestinian Arab rule, he will revoke the accords that established Palestinian self-rule, accords to which his administration and the one before it did not adhere in the first place.

Mahmoud Abbas threatened again Tuesday to abrogate the Palestine Liberation Organization’s 1993 agreements with Israel that provided for Palestinian governmental autonomy in certain majority-Palestinian areas of territory Israel took from Jordanian occupation in 1967. The Oslo Accords set up the Palestinian National Authority, part of whose obligations include coordination of security functions with the Israeli military to prevent attacks on Israelis, but in practice those obligations have become token as Abbas’s political clout has waned and only Israeli military might keeps him in power. Even before Abbas succeeded Yasser Arafat as head of both the PLO and the PA, Palestinian leadership engaged in incitement to murder Israelis and played a prominent role in the Second Intifada, a 2000-2005 campaign of terrorism that left more than a thousand Israelis dead.

(Continue to Full Post)

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work. 

Are You Confused about Sovereignty? Here’s a FAQ for You - by R. Uri Pilichowski

The irony is that for the first time a feasible plan for the establishment of Palestinian state exists and it’s Palestinian advocates that are laughing it off. Palestinian advocates admitting that Palestinians can’t manage a functioning state speaks volumes about the true nature of current Palestinian culture.

R. Uri Pilichowski..
TOI Blog..
15 June '20..

I’ve spent the last three weeks living Israel’s plan to extend sovereignty to the Jewish areas of Judea and Samaria (what the world calls “Annexing the West Bank”) and have given media interviews, participated in debates, and spoken to some of the key people involved on all sides. I’m not the world’s expert on this issue, but I’d say I’ve reached expert level. Although I’m a strong advocate for Israel extending sovereignty as soon as they can, in this FAQ I’m going to wear my educator’s hat (it’s how I make my living and the call I answer to) and commit to present each side fairly and stick to the facts. I’ll only inject my opinion when I think the facts present themselves incorrectly. Important to note, I am only addressing Israel’s plans for this summer, I am not addressing the entire Trump plan.

1) What is Israel planning to do on July 1st?

The plan – as it is currently understood – is for Israel to extend sovereignty or annex 30% of Judea and Samaria (The West Bank). This area covers mostly areas where Jews live or the areas geographically closest to their towns (settlements). This part of the plan is supposed to be just one stage of multiple stages of the “Trump Peace Plan.” It is uncertain if Israel will initiate the plan on July 1st. There are rumors that Israel might only extend sovereignty to smaller, more limited territories of Judea and Samaria, or extend sovereignty in stages. As these are rumors, it isn’t worth examining each media report. For the rest of the document I will simply use the term, “Israel’s planned actions.”

2) How did Israel’s plan come about?

While there’s a lot of history that led to this point, in April and then again in September 2019 Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced his intention to extend Israeli sovereignty to the Jordan Valley. In January 2020 President Trump released his Peace Plan which said that America would support Israel extending its sovereignty to 30% of Judea and Samaria as long as it agreed to meet certain conditions. Prime Minister Netanyahu agreed to the conditions immediately and after forming a government in April 2020, announced that he planned on implementing the plan on July 1st, 2020.

(Continue to Full Post)

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work.  

‘Annexation’ and moral double standards at the Financial Times - by Adam Levick

...the editorial’s failure to hold Palestinians and their leaders responsible for behavior an decisions that are inimical to peace and co-existence, whilst focusing almost entirely on Israel, represents a pattern of bias and moral double standards that continues to compromise their coverage of the region.

Adam Levick..
CAMERA UK..
14 June '20..

An official Financial Times editorial (FT View: World should not be silent on Israeli annexation, June 11) begins thusly:

Nine years ago, Ehud Barak, then Israel’s defence minister, warned that the Jewish state faced a “diplomatic tsunami” if it did not come up with an initiative to move the Arab-Israeli peace process forward.

It’s telling that editors decided to start the peace clock nine years ago, in 2011, as it allowed them to omit Mahmoud Abbbas’s rejection three years earlier of Ehud Olmert’s peace offer – a plan which would have given them a state in nearly all the West Bank, all of Gaza and a capital in east Jerusalem.

Indeed, characteristically, in their 658 word editorial there were only eight words (part of a longer, unrelated sentence) critical of PA leaders, asserting vaguely that Palestinians are “poorly served by their leaders”.

The Financial Times editorial further argued that on “Benjamin Netanyahu’s 11-year watch”, he has “successfully buried mainstream Israeli debate about the concept of land for peace“, a grossly misleading – and confusing – claim. It’s confusing because it’s less than clear how, in their view, Israel’s prime minister “buried” debate about “land for peace”, a strategy, they argue, “that has all but destroyed Palestinian hopes of a two-state solution”.

But, even just taking the words at face value, editors clearly don’t understand Israeli society.

Though the importance of the two-states debate amongst most of Israelis has indeed ebbed significantly over the years, it has little to do with the government’s decisions – and in fact, the Israeli media remains as free and confrontational as ever.

(Continue to Full Post)

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work. 

The Unseen Opportunity: Reconciliation and National Consensus - by Nadav Shragai

National consensus is as important as sovereignty itself. If we can get past the 53-year-long dispute that has torn us apart, we can redirect our energies to the serious domestic issues that require our attention.

Nadav Shragai..
Israel Hayom..
12 June '20..
Link: https://www.israelhayom.com/2020/06/12/the-unseen-opportunity/

Like two boxers who keep pummeling each other after the bell, the Right and Left are keeping up the debate over sovereignty because of their existing ritual rivalry without seeing that something fundamental has changed. The true, critical, and narrow window of opportunity that history is opening for us is not just the rare American backing for Israeli sovereignty in 30% of Judea and Samaria, but the one that allows us, for the first time, to reach a consensus amongst ourselves on an issue that has torn us apart for 53 years.

The tragedy is that the sides debating the future of the "territories" are so invested in what they have been doing for the last 50 years – fighting their political rivals until they bleed – that they can't see the real issue.

"The god of surprises," as poet Tirza Atar once called him, has thrown us all, from the Right to the Zionist Left, a rare chance to end the bitter dispute that has burdened our lives for the past 50 or so years. This is a dispute between the "Land of Israel" people and the "peace camp" people, between those who saw the result of the 1967 Six-Day War as a return to the land of our forefathers and those who always saw the territories as a bargaining chip to be used in future peace talks, between those prepared to take enormous risks for something that pretended to be peace and those who always predicted the security and defense fiasco that would follow the Oslo Accords.

Now we have a chance not only for sovereignty, but also a chance for reconciliation and agreement amongst ourselves. Reconciliation is at least as important as the declaration of sovereignty itself. All the good and bad energy, all the talents and time that both sides have invested in the dispute in recent years can now be channeled elsewhere. This needs to happen both so that the poisons can fade away and so that the energy can be directed toward the serious domestic issues we are facing – social, religious, and ethnic rifts, or rebuilding the health care and school systems.

Not ‘annexation’ or ‘occupied territory’: Israeli sovereignty in Judea and Samaria - by Yechiel M. Leiter

Critics of Israel’s anticipated sovereignty move claim that it contravenes international law and will spark violence, destabilize the region and cost Israel European and Democratic support. A calmer and more accurate assessment indicates otherwise.

Yechiel M. Leiter..
JNS.org..
11 June '20..

Public castigations of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu by American Jewish leaders of the “anyone-but-Bibi” crowd are nothing new, but it appears that the promise of imminent “annexation” has thrown them into an unprecedented frenzy. There has been a cascade of articles issuing dire warnings about the consequences should Israel’s elected government follow through on Netanyahu’s campaign promise to apply Israeli law in parts of Judea and Samaria.

Criticisms of the anticipated decision come in different forms, and when taken in the aggregate, paint a very bleak picture: the move contravenes international law; the Palestinians will erupt in violence; it will destabilize Jordan and the entire region; Israel will lose the support of Europe; the Democrats will abandon Israel; Netanyahu doesn’t have the mandate to act unilaterally.


A calmer, and most importantly more accurate assessment of the facts is in order.

Extension of Israeli law in Israel’s heartland: Not ‘annexation’ or ‘occupied territory’

For language to be meaningful, terminology must be precise. According to international law, “occupied territory” is a term that refers to an area that was sovereign in one state and occupied by another state; applying state sovereignty in order to make the occupation permanent would be “annexation.” This is decidedly not the case with regard to Israel’s presence in Judea and Samaria and hence these terms are irrelevant.

The Jewish people are the only people in fact who have a recognized legal right over Judea and Samaria. This legal affirmation was enshrined in the mandate drafted and approved by 51 principle members of the League of Nations guaranteeing the “right of Jewish people to reconstitute their national home” in the Land of Israel (1922), thereby recognizing a preexisting historical right. This was ratified by the United Nations upon its establishment and that section of the U.N. Charter has never been altered by any state. Judea and Samaria have never been under the sovereignty of any other country than the State of Israel. Jordan’s invasion of the territory in 1948 and its subsequent attempt to annex them in 1950 was opposed internationally with the exception of Britain, Iraq and Pakistan.

The internationally recognized doctrine of boundaries in the post-colonial era (Uti Possidetis Juris) states that the boundaries of a new state are identical to those of the administrative entity that preceded it. Because the administrative entity that preceded the State of Israel was the British Mandate, in whose hands the League of Nations placed the responsibility of fulfilling the mission of Jewish statehood, the recognized boundaries of the State of Israel are those inherited from the British Mandate.

(Continue to Full Column)

Yechiel M. Leiter, Ph.D., is a scholar at the Kohelet Policy Forum and heads the international department of the Shiloh Forum. He has served in a number of government positions, and as an adviser to Benjamin Netanyahu and Ariel Sharon. His book, “John Locke’s Political Theory and the Hebrew Bible” was recently published by Cambridge University Press.

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work.  

The Gaza They Don't Want You to See - by Bassam Tawil

How can Hamas and its supporters around the world continue to complain about poverty and misery when new shopping malls and supermarkets filled with clothes, and various types of luxury goods are being opened every few weeks in the Gaza Strip?

Bassam Tawil..
Gatestone Institute..
10 June '20..

The Palestinian terror group Hamas has warned Palestinians in the Gaza Strip not to publish photos from the Gaza Strip on social media platforms.

In a June 9 statement, the Hamas-controlled Ministry of Interior claimed that "Israeli intelligence agencies have been asking residents of the Gaza Strip -- through social media -- to use their mobile phones to take pictures of various places in the Gaza Strip."

Hamas warned Palestinians against complying with the alleged Israeli request and claimed that Israel was using social media accounts to "recruit collaborators and obtain information."

Hamas added that its security forces were monitoring Israeli and Palestinian social media accounts and would take "legal measures" against Palestinians who interacted with the purported Israeli intelligence agencies.

Is Hamas actually worried that the Israeli security authorities would use the photos to "recruit" informants or that Palestinians might take pictures of its tunnels and rockets? Not exactly.

Hamas is worried that the photos and videos taken by Palestinians would reveal to the world a different reality of the situation in the Gaza Strip -- a reality that runs contrary to all the stories and images of "poverty," "misery" and "suffering" of Palestinians there.

What Hamas seeks to conceal from the world are the shopping malls, supermarkets, fancy restaurants, sleek coffee shops and modern clothing stores that have sprung up in the Gaza Strip in recent years.

(Read Full Post)

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work. 

Surprise! The Palestinian Authority threats are cries for help, but no help is coming - by James Sinkinson

The Palestinians are sinking ever deeper into economic, political and social desperation, but none of the nations ostensibly concerned with their welfare is stepping up.

James Sinkinson..
FLAME/JNS.org..
09 June '20..

We all know the fable of the foolish child who threatens that if he doesn’t get what he wants, he will hold his breath until he dies.

This is the level of desperation—and immaturity—to which the Palestinian Authority has sunk (and not for the first time).

Once again, 85-year-old P.A. leader Mahmoud Abbas—now in the 16th year of a five-year term—has refused to accept a transfer of tax revenues collected by Israel on the P.A.’s behalf.

In addition, Abbas has announced a cessation of all agreements with Israel, most notably cooperation between the Palestinian and Israeli security forces in Palestinian-controlled regions of Judea-Samaria (aka the West Bank).

Both these measures are essentially suicide threats—or as psychologists would term them, “cries for help.” The question is, who can help, how, and how quickly?

Financially, the Palestinian economy has been in shambles for years. Its internal commercial engines fall far short in generating tax revenues to support the society. Despite billions in international aid over the decades, the P.A. has failed to apply these funds effectively to develop sustainable industries.

(Continue to Full Column)

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work.  

Words matter: Annexation vs. sovereignty - by Richard Kemp and Arsen Ostrovsky

It is factually incorrect to assert that Israel intends to “annex” territory to which it has legitimate claim and that never has been part of a “state of Palestine.”

Richard Kemp/Arsen Ostrovsky..
JNS.org..
08 June '20..

Words matter. They drive narratives. They influence policy. And they shape people’s perceptions.

The current debate over whether Israel’s proposed actions in Judea and Samaria (the West Bank)—in accordance with U.S President Donald Trump’s “peace to prosperity” plan—amount to “annexation” or the “application of sovereignty” is a prime example.


Much of the international community, NGO world and foreign press, even some in the Jewish community, have been referring to this aspect of the plan as “annexation.”

This is partly a function of naiveté and a lack of understanding about what the term “annexation” actually connotes. But there are those who know the distinction—and its implications—very well, and are using it to create a dangerous perception: that Israel has no entitlement to Judea and Samaria, and therefore would be committing some illegal act under international law.

In essence, annexation means one state imposing legal authority over the territory of another state acquired by force or aggression, normally during war.

The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court defines “annexation by the use of force of the territory of another State of part thereof” as “constituting the grave Crime of Aggression.”

Russia’s annexation of Crimea and Turkey’s invasion of Cyprus are prime examples of such cases.

U.N. Security Council Resolution 242—which, since 1967, when Israel regained control of Judea and Samaria in the Six-Day War, has been a bedrock of negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians—makes explicitly clear the “inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war.”

The U.N. Charter also prohibits the annexation of another state’s territory by force.

Those who use the above rulings to argue against Israel’s plan to “annex” parts of Judea and Samaria omit three crucial points, however.

(Continue to Full Column)

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work. 

Question. Why the uproar over sovereignty? - by Moshe Dann

A symbol of integrity, extending Israeli sovereignty is not motivated by nationalism or conquest, but expresses the connection between the Jewish people and its ancient homeland, a resounding statement of Zionism’s meaning and purpose.

Moshe Dann..
JPost.Opinion..
06 June '20..
Link: https://www.jpost.com/opinion/why-the-uproar-over-sovereignty-630551

Predictably, on cue, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s announcement that he intends to extend Israeli law and sovereignty to Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria (the “West Bank”) has elicited a tsunami of opposition, fears of dire consequences, threats of sanctions by the EU and threats by Jordanian and PLO leaders to abrogate treaties and agreements.

Why, however, is this so controversial and upsetting?In Jerusalem, Hebron and other areas, there have been Jewish communities since the First and Second Temple periods. After the destruction by the Romans, they rebuilt.

In Hebron, a Jewish community was reestablished in the Byzantine period, and then reconstituted in the 16th century. It was destroyed in August 1929, when 67 Jewish residents were murdered.

Jewish communities such as Gush Etzion, built in Judea and Samaria during the 1920s and 1930s, were destroyed during the 1947-1949 war and were rebuilt and expanded since the 1967 Six Day War. About half a million Jews live in 121 “settlements” in Judea and Samaria.

PLO leaders and the international community recognized Israel’s claims to these areas (in Area C) in the Oslo agreements in return for creating a Palestinian National Authority under the PLO.

Why, then, do plans to extend Israeli law and sovereignty provoke such extreme responses? It seems to be nothing more than confirming what already exists and has been agreed upon.

For starters, it shatters the delusion that Jews will be forced out of their homes and communities as was done, for example, in Yamit (Sinai), the Gaza Strip and several communities in northern Samaria, and in Amona. It refutes PLO/PA demands for a state along the 1949 armistice lines. But it is even more devastating.

It denies arguments that “settlements are illegal,” that “Jews have stolen Palestinian land” and that Jews are “occupying Palestinian territory.” In short, it destroys the false narratives and propaganda that fuel hatred of Israel and Jews. If Israeli sovereignty in Judea and Samaria is acceptable, promoting a PLO state and its agenda is not.

Accepting Israeli sovereignty, therefore, is not only an admission of defeat for Israel’s enemies; it is the recognition that Israel’s claims are legitimate. It is the admission that anti-Israel campaigns are based on lies and are motivated by bigotry.

Why Western Media Promotes Anti-Israel Propaganda - by Bassam Tawil

What does Hamad's continued employment by the AP (for two decades) tell us about the stories, photos and videos he produced all those years?

Bassam Tawil..
Gatestone Institute..
04 June '20..

When Palestinian journalist Eyad Hamad criticized Israel, his employers at the Associated Press (AP) summoned him for a hearing, which ended only with a warning.

When Hamad criticized the Palestinian Authority, however, he received a letter from the AP informing him that "your employment has been terminated."

The dismissal of the 63-year-old Hamad from the AP -- an act that enraged Palestinian journalists as well as human rights and media groups in the West Bank and Gaza Strip -- did not surprise those familiar with the way the foreign media has been covering the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Many foreign journalists seem to see the conflict along the lines of "good guys (Palestinians) versus bad guys (Israel)." They wake up every morning and search for any story that reflects badly on Israel. The foreign correspondents then hire Palestinians to assist them in spreading lies about Israel. Many of these Palestinians are not real journalists, but political activists who serve as propagandists for the PLO, Hamas and other Palestinian terrorist groups.

What is particularly disturbing about the dismissal of Hamad is that the AP knew one of its Palestinian workers was engaged in anti-Israel activities, but failed to stop him. Hamad even ignored repeated warnings from his employers against pursuing political activities.

"We have been forced to take this action due to your repeated violations of our policies governing social media, political activity and workplace conduct, even after numerous warnings and despite your undertakings in the past not to repeat such activities and violations," Josef Federman, News Director at the AP Bureau in Jerusalem, wrote to the Palestinian cameraman on May 27.

In his letter, Federman pointed out that Hamad, a Palestinian, had participated in anti-Israel protests while he was still working for AP.

"On November 17, 2019, you [Hamad] took part in a protest in support of a colleague who was injured by Israeli troops and then gave an interview to Al-Arabiya TV," the AP bureau chief wrote. "Neither the protest nor the interview was authorized by us, and you did not seek our permission, violating the AP's policies and previous undertakings."

The international news agency is openly admitting that one of its workers was engaged in anti-Israel activities. What did AP do to stop the worker? Hamad received several "warnings" -- which did not deter him from pursuing his anti-Israel activities.

A few weeks after that, on December 12, 2019, Hamad was invited for another meeting at the AP Jerusalem office and again warned that he had violated the news agency's policies on political activity. When Hamad was told that senior managers in New York would be involved, he insisted that he had done nothing wrong. "I don't care," he said.

Despite Hamad's determination to pursue political activities, he was nevertheless permitted to continue working for AP for 20 years. Palestinians are proud of Hamad because he used the AP for many years as a platform to spread lies about Israel.

(Continue to Full Post)

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work.  

Right now Israel is facing a momentous decision to do something that is practically nothing. - by Victor Rosenthal

You annex foreign land, not your own country. – Menachem Begin

Victor Rosenthal..
Abu Yehuda..
04 June '20..
Link: http://abuyehuda.com/2020/06/timidity-is-no-virtue/

Right now Israel is facing a momentous decision to do something that is practically nothing.

That is to extend Israeli civilian law to some parts of Judea and Samaria, specifically the Jordan Valley and other areas where Jewish communities are located.

Why do I say it is practically nothing? Because the official position of our government, although it often does a rotten job of explaining it, is that those areas are already part of Israel. Nothing is being “annexed” as the EU insists (here is why). And while the areas are currently governed by a military government, little will change in most practical legal matters.

Of course it is a big deal for the Palestinians, for the Europeans, and indeed for anyone who wishes that the Jews did not have a sovereign state. This is because it symbolizes the end of the pretense that was so dear to them, that the “West Bank” (as they prefer to call it) is not part of Israel and ultimately will need to pass into Arab hands. It means that any “two-state solution” that could happen in the future will happen according to a map more like the map found in the Trump Plan – one that is consistent with UNSC 242 that called for “secure and recognized boundaries” – rather than the very insecure boundaries that would result from basing them on the 1949 armistice lines, as previous US administrations wished to do.

It is also a big deal for us, for the same reason. It is a recognition that justice is on our side. It is a repudiation of the idea that we are holding onto something that belongs to someone else. It is an affirmation that Eretz Yisrael is the land of the Jewish people.

Let me dismiss the objection that the Palestinians will react violently. What else is new? The Palestinians will always be as violent as they think they can get away with. If they see that we’re prepared, they will content themselves with verbal complaints.

And King Abdullah of Jordan won’t abrogate his treaty with us. He can’t afford to, and in addition he probably would prefer not to have a border with any future Palestinian entity.