The 10 most insane UN anti-Israel actions of 2017 (there could've been more) - by Hillel Neuer

The list you’ve all been waiting for. While there were a myriad of other bona fide anti-Israel resolutions, reports and statements produced in 2017 by U.N. agencies and officials, I regret that I could only include ten.

Hillel Neuer..
Times of Israel..
21 December '17..

10. The U.N.’s Beirut-based agency of 18 Arab states published a report accusing Israel of “Apartheid.”

In response, UN Watch executive director Hillel Neuer took the floor to ask Algeria, Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Libya, Lebanon, Yemen, and the others, a simple question: “Where are your Jews?” For once, the room was silenced. UN Watch’s speech went viral on the Internet, with the video viewed 5 million times worldwide.

9. The U.N. women’s rights commission condemned Israel as the world’s only violator of women’s rights. Real abusers of women’s rights, such as Iran, Yemen, and Afghanistan, were ignored.

The next month, UN Watch exposed the U.N.’s election of Saudi Arabia to this same women’s rights commission—and the fact that at least five EU states voted for the Saudis. The story went viral, and created a major scandal in Belgium, where the prime minister eventually admitted their vote and apologized, and sparked controversies in Ireland, Norway and Sweden.

(Continue to Full Post)

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. 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? At the U.N., Only Israel Is an ‘Occupying Power’ - by Eugene Kontorovich/Penny Grunseid

...Our findings don’t merely quantify the U.N.’s double standard. The evidence shows that the organization’s claim to represent the interest of international justice is hollow, because the U.N. has no interest in battling injustice unless Israel is the country accused.

Eugene Kontorovich/Penny Grunseid..
Wall St. Journal..
13 September '16..
Link: http://www.wsj.com/articles/at-the-u-n-only-israel-is-an-occupying-power-1473808544

The United Nations began its annual session this week, and Israel will be prominent on the agenda. Many fear the Security Council may consider a resolution setting definite territorial parameters, and a deadline, for the creation of a Palestinian state.

President Obama has hinted that in the final months of his term, he may reverse the traditional U.S. policy of vetoing such resolutions. The General Assembly, meanwhile, is likely to act as the chorus in this drama, reciting its yearly litany of resolutions criticizing Israel.

If Mr. Obama is seeking to leave his mark on the Israeli-Arab conflict—and outside the negotiated peace process that began in Oslo—there is no worse place to do it than the U.N. New research we have conducted shows that the U.N.’s focus on Israel not only undermines the organization’s legitimacy regarding the Jewish state. It also has apparently made the U.N. blind to the world’s many situations of occupation and settlements.

Our research shows that the U.N. uses an entirely different rhetoric and set of legal concepts when dealing with Israel compared with situations of occupation or settlements world-wide. For example, Israel is referred to as the “Occupying Power” 530 times in General Assembly resolutions. Yet in seven major instances of past or present prolonged military occupation—Indonesia in East Timor, Turkey in northern Cyprus, Russia in areas of Georgia, Morocco in Western Sahara, Vietnam in Cambodia, Armenia in areas of Azerbaijan, and Russia in Ukraine’s Crimea—the number is zero. The U.N. has not called any of these countries an “Occupying Power.” Not even once.

Accomplices in hate: An obsessional and deranged hatred of Israel - by Melanie Phillips

...The UN was created out of the experience of World War II to defend life, liberty and human rights. Yet now it is providing a global platform for a further demonization and dehumanization of the Jewish people, and the willed extinction of their right to their own homeland.

Melanie Phillips..
As I See It/JPost..
01 September '16..
Link: http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/As-I-see-it-Accomplices-in-hate-466682

People in the West are beginning to wake up to the fact that they are inadvertently helping fund Islamic terrorism.

There was widespread shock last month when Israel arrested the director of the Gaza branch of the giant aid agency World Vision.

He was accused of using humanitarian donations by Western governments such as Britain and the US to fund Hamas terrorism.

In Britain, newspaper articles have begun to ask why taxpayers are helping fund Palestinian terrorism and incitement through EU payments to the Palestinian Authority, which pays terrorists’ families and brainwashes Arab children to hate and murder Jews and Israelis.

This growing awareness, however, only scratches the surface of the free world’s complicity with evil. Western governments are effectively subsidizing epidemic, global Jew-hatred through that holy of progressive holies, the UN.

A report published this week by the UN watchdog Human Rights Voices and the Touro Institute on Human Rights and the Holocaust exposes the extent to which the UN sponsors Jew-hatred and incitement to violence through accredited nongovernmental organizations.

As noted by the report’s authors, Anne Bayefsky and Sarah Willig, the UN hands more than 6,150 NGOs a coveted global megaphone by giving them access to international diplomacy and its associated media platforms.

To qualify for accreditation, NGOS are required to operate in conformity with the UN Charter. They must affirm “faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small.”

Yet many NGOs brazenly flout these principles.

Backed up by screenshots, the report lists scores of statements by UN-accredited organizations which incite anti-Semitism, condone or justify violence and terrorism, and demonize and delegitimize Israel. Israel is quite literally wiped off their maps of “Palestine,” which is depicted as all of Israel in addition to Gaza and the West Bank.

Here are a few examples cited by the report of hate-mongering NGO lies and blood-libels which are being given a UN platform.

According to the UN, Who is the Top Violator Of Women's Rights Around The World?

...It is impossible to add this all up and conclude that the UN's treatment of Israel is anything but wildly discriminatory. In the twisted language of UN rights, the means is the verbiage of equality, while the end game is prejudice. The Obama administration has an answer to this dilemma. Vote against the resolutions, while paying the fees to run the bodies that adopt them. Join and legitimize the institution, while consoling the delegitimized that it feels their pain.

Anne Bayefsky..
Human Rights Voices..
19 March '15..

Guess who is the number one violator of women's rights in the world today? Israel. Violating the rights of Palestinian women.

At least that is the view of the UN's top women's rights body, the Commission on the Status of Women (CSW). CSW ends its annual meeting on Friday, March 20 by condemning only one of the 193 UN member states for violating women's rights – Israel.

Not Syria. Where government forces routinely employ rape and other sexual violence and torture against women as a tactic of war. Where in 2014 the Assad regime starved, tortured and killed at least 24,000 civilians, and three million people – mostly women and children – are refugees.

Not Saudi Arabia. Where women are physically punished if not wearing compulsory clothing, are almost entirely excluded from political life, cannot drive, cannot travel without a male relative, receive half the inheritance of their brothers, and where their testimony counts for half that of a man's.

Not Sudan. Where domestic violence is not prohibited. There is no minimum age for "consensual" sex. The legal age of marriage for girls is ten. 88% of women under 50 have undergone female genital mutilation. And women are denied equal rights in marriage, inheritance and divorce.

Not Iran. Where every woman who registered as a presidential candidate in the last election was disqualified. "Adultery" is punishable by death by stoning. Women who fight back against rapists and kill their attackers are executed. The constitution bars female judges. And women must obtain the consent of their husbands to work outside the home.

In fact, not only is there no possibility that the UN Commission on the Status of Women will criticize Iran, Iran is an elected member of CSW. Sudan – whose president has been indicted for genocide and crimes against humanity – is currently a CSW Vice-Chair.

The 2015 CSW resolution on Israel will repeat, as it does every year, that "the Israeli occupation remains the major obstacle for Palestinian women with regard to their advancement, self-reliance and integration in the development of their society..."

Not Palestinian men. Not religious edicts and traditions. Not a culture of violence. Not an educational system steeped in rejection of peaceful coexistence and of tolerance.

(Update) Gaza cement being diverted to black market - and taxed by Hamas

...These articles also make clear that cement that is supposed to be earmarked for specific projects have already been diverted, as they talk about cement traders and private buyers who are selling and buying cement. The UN mechanism to control the distribution of cement is clearly failing.

Elder of Ziyon..
03 December '14..

You know how all the cement that is being imported to Gaza is supposed to be used only for specific international projects? How the UN says it created a mechanism ensuring that the cement will not be diverted?

Yesterday, Gaza journalist Hazem Balousha tweeted this:

Yesterday, 600 tons of cement were sent into Gaza. Assuming that Balousha is telling the truth, here's where some of it ended up.

(Continue)

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. 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 as well as a big vote to follow our good friend Kay Wilson on Twitter, 
.

(Video) Amb. Ron Prosor at UN General Assembly Debate on Syria

Israel in UN..
04 August '12..

Ambassador Ron Prosor addressed the UN General Assembly Debate on Syria on 3rd August 2012



Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. 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.
.
.

Fresnozionism - UN: Church of the Nativity not ‘Palestinian’

Fresnozionism.org..
15 June '12..







News item:

The secretariat of UNESCO’s World Heritage Committee has come out against a bid by the Palestinian Authority to use an emergency procedure to register Bethlehem’s Church of the Nativity under the country of “Palestine” as a World Heritage site.

“At the UN, where the General Assembly each year adopts more resolutions criticizing Israel than on the rest of the world combined, this is a spectacle as rare as Halley’s Comet,” UN Watch executive director Hillel Neuer said…

“This is the first time in recent memory that a draft resolution circulated by the United Nations – let alone by UNESCO, which recently elected Assad’s Syria to its human rights committee – openly rejected a Palestinian claim or position,” Neuer said. His Geneva-based nonprofit group monitors UN activity.

Actually, this is not in the least surprising.

The Christian world understands quite well what would be likely to happen to its holy places under Muslim rule. While it is unlikely that the PA would immediately flatten the church and build a mosque on the site — although one wonders how long it would take Hamas to do so — even the relatively moderate Jordanians severely limited access by Christians between 1948 and 1967, and of course totally excluded Christians who were Israeli nationals. Israel, on the other hand, has gone to great lengths to protect and provide access to Christian (and Muslim) sites.

In Egypt, Muslim extremists have attacked and destroyed churches and murdered Christians, who are 12% of the population. If the Muslim Brotherhood should take power, Christians may officially be declared dhimmis and forced to pay a special tax:

When asked what he thought about many Christian Copts coming out to vote for his secular opponent, Ahmed Shafiq, [Muslim Brotherhood presidential candidate Mohammed] Morsi reportedly said, “They need to know that conquest is coming, and Egypt will be Islamic, and that they must pay jizya or emigrate.”

I’m certain that the 2002 invasion of the Church of the Nativity hasn’t been forgotten. I’ll quote at length from an account by David Raab (see link for sources):

…”More than 100 Palestinian gunmen…[including] soldiers and policemen, entered the Church of the Nativity on Tuesday, as Israeli troops swept into Bethlehem in an attempt to quell violence by Palestinian suicide bombers and militias.”34 The actual number of terrorists was between 150 and 180, among them prominent members of the Fatah Tanzim. As the New York Times put it, “Palestinian gunmen have frequently used the area around the church as a refuge, with the expectation that Israel would try to avoid fighting near the shrine” [emphasis added].35

And in fact this was the case. The commander of the Israeli forces in the area asserted that the IDF would not break into the church itself and would not harm this site holy to Christianity. Israel also deployed more mature and more reserved reserve-duty soldiers in this sensitive situation that militarily called for more agile, standing-army soldiers.36

On the other hand, the Palestinians did not treat it the same way. Not only did they take their weapons with them into the Church of the Nativity and fire, on occasion, from the church, but also reportedly booby-trapped the entrance to the church.37

On April 7, “one of the few priests evacuated from the church told Israeli television yesterday that gunmen had shot their way in, and that the priests, monks and nuns were essentially hostages….The priest declined to call the clergy ‘hostages,’ but repeatedly said in fluent English: ‘We have absolutely no choice. They have guns, we do not.’”38

Christians clearly saw the takeover as a violation of the sanctity of the church. In an interview with CWNews, Archbishop Jean-Louis Tauran, the Vatican’s Undersecretary of State and the top foreign-policy official, asserted that “The Palestinians have entered into bilateral agreements [with the Holy See] in which they undertake to maintain and respect the status quo regarding the Christian holy places and the rights of Christian communities. To explain the gravity of the current situation, let me begin with the fact that the occupation of the holy places by armed men is a violation of a long tradition of law that dates back to the Ottoman era. Never before have they been occupied – for such a lengthy time – by armed men.”39 On April 14, he reiterated his position in an interview on Vatican Radio.40

On April 24, the Jerusalem Post reported on the damage that the PA forces were causing:

Three Armenian monks, who had been held hostage by the Palestinian gunmen inside Bethlehem’s Church of the Nativity, managed to flee the church area via a side gate yesterday morning. They immediately thanked the soldiers for rescuing them.

They told army officers the gunmen had stolen gold and other property, including crucifixes and prayer books, and had caused damage….

One of the monks, Narkiss Korasian, later told reporters: “They stole everything, they opened the doors one by one and stole everything….They stole our prayer books and four crosses…they didn’t leave anything. Thank you for your help, we will never forget it.”

Israeli officials said the monks said the gunmen had also begun beating and attacking clergymen.41

When the siege finally ended, the PA soldiers left the church in terrible condition:

The Palestinian gunmen holed up in the Church of the Nativity seized church stockpiles of food and “ate like greedy monsters” until the food ran out, while more than 150 civilians went hungry. They also guzzled beer, wine, and Johnnie Walker scotch that they found in priests’ quarters, undeterred by the Islamic ban on drinking alcohol. The indulgence lasted for about two weeks into the 39-day siege, when the food and drink ran out, according to an account by four Greek Orthodox priests who were trapped inside for the entire ordeal….

The Orthodox priests and a number of civilians have said the gunmen created a regime of fear.

Even in the Roman Catholic areas of the complex there was evidence of disregard for religious norms. Catholic priests said that some Bibles were torn up for toilet paper, and many valuable sacramental objects were removed. “Palestinians took candelabra, icons and anything that looked like gold,” said a Franciscan, the Rev. Nicholas Marquez from Mexico.42

Please explain again why Christians might be nervous about the church being in ‘Palestine’!

Link: http://fresnozionism.org/2012/06/un-church-of-the-nativity-not-palestinian/

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. 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.
.

NGO Monitor - UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Repeats False NGO Claims in Latest Attack on Israel

NGO Monitor
April 30, 2012





JERUSALEM - In response to UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay including Israel among countries she alleges “curtail the freedom of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and other civil society actors to operate independently and effectively,” Jerusalem-based NGO Monitor today released the following statement:

The inclusion of Israel on this list is an absurd decision that demonstrates UN Human Rights Commissioner Navi Pillay’s limited knowledge of Israel and reflects the powerful lobby of Israeli political advocacy NGOs in European and UN frameworks. In her statement, Pillay references what she calls a “recently adopted Foreign Funding Law.” Legislation regarding foreign funding was proposed last year but was rejected in the democratic process and never reached the floor of the Knesset. Based on remarks, Pillay also appeared to be referencing the “NGO Funding Transparency Law,” which passed the Knesset in February 2011. This law simply adopts financial reporting requirements for non-profits and contains absolutely no restrictions on NGO operations. Mirroring legislation in the United States, Canada, and other European countries, the legislation is intended to promote the democratic principles of financial transparency and the public’s right to know. Commissioner Pillay is either confused or is regurgitating false information from self-interested political NGOs, or both.

On the heels of Israel’s social protests last summer, in which numerous NGOs freely and openly organized massive demonstrations across the country, Pillay’s comments show that the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) is again guilty of blatantly ignoring facts in order to isolate and demonize Israel. As has been repeatedly demonstrated, the UN Human Rights Council and OHCHR have a long and shameful history of exploiting human rights in order to single out Israel and make false accusations.

Commissioner Pillay, who heads one of the least transparent and closed international institutions, should embrace transparency and public accountability, rather than repeat these false claims. She has the moral obligation to correct the record immediately and issue a clear and public apology.

Link: http://www.ngo-monitor.org/article/un_high_human_rights_commissioner_repeats_false_ngo_claims_in_latest_attack_on_israel

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. 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 
.

Hyams - Blood Libel 2.0

Joe Hyams..
Times of Israel..
20 March '12..

Jews kill babies for Passover matzah. It’s one of the most heinous hallmarks of incitement known better to our grandparents as a blood Libel.

Surely, the advent of mass media sunshine would see its demise?

Unfortunately not. In fact, technology has delivered into the hands of Jew-haters the world over the most powerful of social media tools, equal in reach and influence to broadcast and print news of earlier years.

The paradox of this Wild West of digital communication platforms is that everyone has the power to speak loud and clear, but few, if any, have a responsibility to answer for their messaging.

So what happens when an individual uses the soapbox of social media to level Blood Libel 2.0 at Israel?

UN Watch - Pressed by Media, Evasive UN Pledges to Answer UN Watch Challenge on Labeling Gaza "Occupied"

UN Watch Briefing..
Vol. 337..
Jan. 10, 2012..



As shown in the video and transcript below, the spokesman of UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon was asked by journalists on Friday to respond to UN Watch's challenge as to why the world body continues to label the Gaza Strip “occupied” by Israel, despite a Hamas leader last week stating the opposite.

After initially seeking to dodge the question, the spokesman promised the UN would look into it and respond. We're waiting.

Over the past week, UN Watch created an international buzz on the story with op-eds placed in Canada's National Post and the Jerusalem Post, which in turn were featured in the Mideast Mirror, the PLO-linked American Task Force on Palestine, the Daily Alert and Jewish Ideas Daily.



Transcript of UN daily press briefing, Jan. 6, 2012, with Martin Nesirky, Spokesperson for UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon:

Journalist #1: I have a report which I got this morning, apparently it came out yesterday from UN Watch in Geneva, which quotes one of the senior officials of Hamas saying that the Gaza Strip, specifically the Gaza Strip only, is no longer Israeli-occupied territory and it refers, however, to some comments that Farhan made when he must have been doing the daily briefing two and a half or three years ago, saying that it is still the UN policy that the Gaza Strip is part of the Israel-occupied territory.

And a 22 September 2011 report put out by the Office of the Secretary-General speaks of a UN mission’s visit to the “Occupied Palestinian Territory, specifically the Gaza Strip”. Do you have any comment on that, or does the UN still seriously believe that the Gaza Strip is occupied territory?

UN Spokesperson: I think we can discuss this after. I don’t think I am going to get into a long back-and-forth on this right now. But I will certainly speak to you afterwards about it. Yes, okay. Yes?

Journalist #2: Can we get someone in to brief about that from the UN, Martin? It would be very helpful as this whole Palestinian statehood issue is being reviewed and things like that…

UN: I’ll ask.

Journalist #2: …because it has come up in the past and there should be some UN clarification about the UN position on it. And it has been historically the UN saying it is occupied territory; my understanding is because the Israelis control the border crossing; I don’t know.

UN Spokesperson: I’ll ask. I am sure there is a fairly clear response to it. I need to check, and then I’ll come back to you. All right, okay, have a good afternoon. Thanks very much.

Link: http://www.unwatch.org/cms.asp?id=2844458&campaign_id=63111

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.
.

CAMERA - UN Shows Its Bias Again, on Shalit Prisoner Exchange

RH
CAMERA/Snapshots
19 October '11

http://blog.camera.org/archives/2011/10/un_shows_its_bias_again_on_sha.html

Gilad Shalit, the Israeli soldier who was kidnapped and held in isolation for five years by Hamas terrorists, was finally released in exchange for over 1000 brutal terrorists, many of whom are guilty of the most barbaric slaughter of Israelis. The young captive arrived in Egypt, gaunt, pale and nervous, but before being released to his nation and family, the Egyptian intermediaries and terrorist captors subjected him to yet more stress, barraging him with questions in a television inteview as masked Hamas terrorists stood by. Gilad was obviously uncomfortable, struggling for breath as he must have feared that one wrong answer could undermine the entire deal and land him back with his cruel captors.

Did this concern UN representatives? Unsurprisingly not. The only concern voiced was that some Palestinian terrorists who were released in the prisoner exchange may have been deprived of their rights by not having been given a choice on where to go. Navi Pillay, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, made that clear.

“It was with a sense of great relief that we have received news of the agreement to exchange prisoners. We do however have concerns regarding reports that hundreds of Palestinian prisoners from the West Bank may be released to the Gaza Strip or abroad,” Pillay’s spokesman Rupert Colville told Reuters in response to a query. “If in some cases this has been without the free and informed consent of the concerned individuals, this may constitute forced transfer or deportation under international law,” he added. “We are not sure to what extent they consented to this.”

Considering the barbaric crimes for which these terrorists had been incarcerated, their complete lack of repetance, and the Palestinian reception of the prisoners, which include calls for kidnapping "a new Gilad Shalit" and shouts of "Khaybar, Khaybar ya Yahud" (inovked as a reference the ethnic cleansing of Jews by Islamists), the concern of the UN human rights council is truly ludicrous and twisted, raising questions about the council's true goals and motives. Clearly, there is no concern about the human rights or well-being of Israeli victims and captives. The concern is limited to the terrorists' rights. The right to recidivism? Ensurance that the terrorists have full freedom to return to their previous comfortable and familiar bases of operation? Ensuring that the terrorists' ability to attack Israelis remains unimpeded?

No wonder the UN and its so-called "human rights council" has lost any relevancy and has become such a hideous joke.

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.
.

Zahran - The Real Reasons Abbas Went to the U.N.

Mudar Zahran
Hudson New York
26 September '11

http://www.hudson-ny.org/2453/abbas-un

The world held its breath last September 26th as Palestinian "President" Mahmoud Abbas made his case for statehood before the United Nations General Assembly. The Israeli establishment still stands disturbed by the Palestinian Authority's [PA] move, to the point that Ehud Barak, Israel's defense minister, described it as "a very dangerous situation" that "requires action." Nonetheless, amid this storm; Israel might have an opportunity of a lifetime on which to capitalize.

Whatever Abbas was doing, and whatever the outcome might be, Abbas was reinforcing Palestinian victimhood, the fuel that keeps the PLO financed by the world, even though it comes at a heavy price for the Palestinian people. PA officials have already confirmed that even if a Palestinian State will be declared by the UN, Palestinian refugees will not be returning to it, including those who already live in areas under the PA's control. The PA claims that these people should return only to Israel -- a statement that shows either that the PA has its sights set on taking control of all of Israel , or is simply trying to keep the Palestinian suffering ongoing in order to get more international sympathy and especially more international funding.

Abbas has been persistent about going to the UN, even though the United States announced it would veto a UN decision to recognize Palestine as an independent state. This announcement by itself is a premature death for Abbas's quest. Why then did Abbas insist on pursuing the statehood bid despite the definite American veto?

Today Abbas is an illegitimate "president," who has overstayed his term two years by refusing to hold free elections; unable to enforce his government's authority on the Gaza Strip, or even to return to his own house there which was seized by Hamas when it took over the Gaza Strip in 2005, forcing out Abbas's Palestinian Liberation Organization [PLO] in a matter of days. Hamas has since consolidated its rule over the Gaza strip, with no sign of Abbas and his fellow PLO leaders being able to restore their authority there. Hamas has consistently shown carelessness, to say the least, toward any "reconciliation" with Abbas, and has not offered any concessions whatever in that regard.

Rennert - Abbas arrives at the UN with a bang, leaves NY with a whimper

Leo Rennert
American Thinker
25 September '11

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/09/abbas_arrives_at_the_un_with_a_bang_leaves_ny_with_a_whimper.html

(While the actual scenario leaves much to be desired, Leo Rennert gives a good accounting of what seems to have occurred over the last week, and the current positions of the parties involved. Y.)

Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas arrived in New York with supreme confidence that the United Nations would approve Palestinian statehood and give Israel a black eye. But a funny thing happened on the East Side that sidetracked Abbas's agenda, leaving him sputtering against a joint move by the most potent international players who confronted him with a starkly different course that Israel readily embraced.

To parse what actually happened in New York, one has to recognize that, in delving again into the morass of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, there actually were two proceedings going on.

While the cameras were focused on Abbas strutting to the podium of the UN General Assembly, there were more significant, behind-the-scenes meetings of the Quartet -- the United States, the European Union, Russia and the UN. And the Quartet, instead of endorsing Palestinian statehood, put all its influence behind a quite different move to get Abbas to sit down with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and resume serious negotiations --- something Netanyahu repeatedly advocated for the last year.

And here was the real rub: The Quartet's statement called for resumption of bilateral talks "without conditions" -- a slap at Abbas, who kept demanding that Israel freeze Jewish construction in East Jerusalem and the West Bank, and agree to borders along the 1967 lines before talks could even get under way.

No wonder that the Palestinians, suddenly on the defensive, slammed the Quatet's communique, while Israel signaled its acceptance.

In its call for unconditional talks between Israel and the Palestinians, the Quartet set a tight deadline -- a start of negotiations in one month, comprehensive proposals by each side on borders and security in three months, substantial agreement in six months, and a final two-state peace deal before the end of 2012. And since the Quartet wants the two sides to grapple early on with borders, this means that Jerusalem would be in immediate play. Because if you're going to chart a border between Israel and Palestine, Jerusalem has got to be located somewhere -- whether split in two as Abbas wants or united, as Bibi wants.

Kushner - From Israel: Let's Get Real

Arlene Kushner
Arlene from Israel
September '11




Well, I still cannot tell you exactly what's going to happen tomorrow, after Netanyahu and Abbas address the UN. But the focus has sharpened considerably. And I can certainly look at what's happened so far.

~~~~~~~~~~~

Yesterday, President Obama did two things of significance with regard to this whole drama.

First, he met with Abbas, and told him that he indeed will veto the PA bid in the Security Council, if it comes to that.

I cannot tell you what Abbas said privately to Obama. But publicly the stance of the PA was defiant. They will go on, its representatives declared, and submit the request for full membership for a Palestinian state to the Security Council.

Nabil Sha'ath, however, indicated that tomorrow Abbas would submit his letter to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon but that it might then be held before it is passed on to the Security Council.

And so here we have one possibility for what may transpire tomorrow. It's a solid possibility -- a stalling tactic. Another stalling tactic would involve giving the request to the Security Council, which would decide it needed to deliberate -- maybe for months, maybe for a year.

The idea, quite obviously, is to buy time, in the hope that the situation will somehow change. Hope does spring eternal, does it not?

~~~~~~~~~~

It seems to be the case, as I write, that a sufficient number of nations who are on the SC have come on board with regard to the effort to block the Palestinian bid via abstentions so that Obama may not have to give that order to veto. Remember that nine nations must vote for it, or it does not pass.

I will add here that apparently behind-the-scenes work -- effective lobbying -- by Israel is as responsible for this achievement as anything the US has done.

~~~~~~~~~~~

In his address to the UN yesterday, French President Nicholas Sarkozy (whom I believe will abstain) put forth a most unacceptable proposition:

One month to resume negotiations, six months to reach an agreement on borders and security, and one year to reach a definitive agreement. In the interim the Palestinians would have observer state status.

This is a dangerous proposal without viability. Aside from anything else, timetables like this are disastrous. Not to mention that the PA would parlay observer state status into a tool for legal leveraging against Israel.

Of course, part of what Sarkozy is advancing is an opportunity for France to get involved: "Who still believes that the peace process can succeed without Europe?"

I, for one. Europe is finished, with regard to moral authority or competent leadership. The nations of Europe are on the edge of economic and political bankruptcy.

Explained Sarkozy, "A democratic, viable and peaceful Palestinian state would, for Israel, be its best guarantee of its security."

Does he/can he possibly believe that a Palestinian state would be as he describes? A dangerous proposal, but also a dangerous man.

Kushner - From Israel: Imminent Now?

Arlene Kushner
Arlene from Israel
21 September '11

The various projected doings at the UN are, perhaps, almost upon us. But here I want to provide some significant background regarding the issues surrounding a Palestinian Arab state.

Earlier this week, I attended a conference sponsored by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs and the World Jewish Congress on the subject of "The Rights of Israel as the Nation-State of the Jewish People in International Diplomacy."

Participants (in no particular order) included:

- Ambassador Dore Gold, who heads the JCPA
- Minister for Strategic Affairs Moshe Ya'alon
- Dan Diker, Secretary-General of the World Jewish Congress
- Professor Ruth Lapidoth, Professor Emeritus of International Law, Hebrew University
- Ambassador Alan Baker, former legal adviser to the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs
- Advocate Irit Kohn, President of the International Association of Jewish lawyers and Jurists
- Professor Nicholas Rostow, Distinguished Research Professor, US National Defense University

There was overlap in the various presentations, certainly -- as well as consideration of topics I've touched on many times here. I will summarize by subject matter, noting sources as relevant, and limiting myself to the more significant facts and insights. There is considerable value to the material offered here.

~~~~~~~~~~

Dore Gold opened by sharing the fact that in private communication with a Palestinian Arab involved in current proceedings, he was told that the PA goal is to change perceptions, more than it is to change the law: There is an attempt to do away with ideas about Jewish rights. The PA wants the world to see Judea and Samaria as automatically Palestinian land, rather than disputed territory to which Israel has the most solid claim. Etc.

Thus, nothing is more important than our emphasizing both our historical and legal rights.

To that end, the JCPA and World Jewish Congress have collaborated in producing a book that is an authoritative exposition of "The Rights of Israel," as explored by several key experts. You can see it here:

http://jcpa.org/text/israel-rights/index.html

And you will be able to order it, hard copy. For anyone wishing to be solidly informed in order to defend Israel, this is an invaluable resource.

~~~~~~~~~~

Moshe Ya'alon says that with regard to our dispute with the PA, we have the claim to moral, legal, historical, and security justice. The problem is that so many are oblivious to this. When he talks about how pervasive PA influence has been internationally -- so that even some Jews have bought the Palestinian Arab line -- he hits upon a very important issue:

THE BEGINNING IS OUR BELIEVING IN OURSELVES. Do not fall into the trap of thinking that right in our conflict is determined by an international poll. And so, for example, just because a great many people -- and the influential NY Times -- firmly believe that we are "occupiers" in Judea and Samaria, does not make it so. We are not.

Among the PA lies that Ya'alon discussed are:

- That the conflict is territorial, when in fact it is existential.
- That Israel in intransigent, when in fact it is the PA.
- That Israel exaggerates her security requirements -- which can be resolved via a third party, when in fact we have experienced 1,000 deaths by terror in return for concessions we've already made, and have had only bitter experience with third party forces who don't protect Israel.
- That Israel should be more "flexible," when in fact what is demanded of Israel disregards legitimate security requirements.
- That settlements are illegal and illegitimate, when in fact Israel is not an occupier and has built legally on disputed land (more on this below).
- That the Israeli-Palestinian Arab conflict is the reason for unrest in the ME and Arab hostility to the West, when in fact historically there are multiple conflicts in the area -- Sunni/Shia, attacks against the Alawites and the Kurds, etc.

~~~~~~~~~~

Ya'alon pointed out that Netanyahu is the first prime minister who has specifically demanded that the PA recognize Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people. In light of the PA position, this is actually critically important. As Ruth Lapidoth observed, this would run counter to a theme that is central to the Palestinian Arab narrative.

Fresnozionism - Palestine no refuge for Palestinians

Jewish refugees,
Czechoslovakia, 1946.
Israel made room
for them.

Fresnozionism.org
16 September '11

http://fresnozionism.org/2011/09/palestine-no-refuge-for-palestinians/

The very first thing Israel did as a state was to do its absolute best to bring Jewish refugees everywhere home.

European refugees from the Holocaust, Jews expelled from Arab countries with little more than the clothes on their backs, Jews in danger in Ethiopia — every Jew who needed a home was given one, despite the enormous cost, the lack of food and housing, and the precarious existence of the Jewish state.

Now that the Palestinian Arabs are, or think they are, on the verge of statehood, what do they plan to do for the 4.5 million or so people who claim Palestinian refugee status?

After all, statehood is supposed to provide a solution for the “plight of the Palestinians” and part of their plight has always been said to be the horrible circumstances of the ‘refugees.’ So surely one would expect that a top priority for the new state of ‘Palestine’ would be to help these people: give them citizenship, homes, education, jobs, etc. Get them out of camps and help restore their self-respect.

But in keeping with the Fundamental Axiom of Arab Priorities™ which says that “Hurting Jews is Always More Important than Helping Arabs,” that is not the case.

Thanks to Elder of Ziyon for bringing this to our attention:

BEIRUT: Palestinian refugees will not become citizens of a new Palestinian state, according to Palestine’s ambassador to Lebanon.

From behind a desk topped by a miniature model of Palestine’s hoped-for blue United Nations chair, Ambassador Abdullah Abdullah spoke to The Daily Star Wednesday about Palestine’s upcoming bid for U.N. statehood.

The ambassador unequivocally says that Palestinian refugees would not become citizens of the sought for U.N.-recognized Palestinian state, an issue that has been much discussed. “They are Palestinians, that’s their identity,” he says. “But … they are not automatically citizens.”

This would not only apply to refugees in countries such as Lebanon, Egypt, Syria and Jordan or the other 132 countries where Abdullah says Palestinians reside. Abdullah said that “even Palestinian refugees who are living in [refugee camps] inside the [Palestinian] state, they are still refugees. They will not be considered citizens.”

Abdullah said that the new Palestinian state would “absolutely not” be issuing Palestinian passports to refugees.

Neither this definitional status nor U.N. statehood, Abdullah says, would affect the eventual return of refugees to Palestine. “How the issue of the right of return will be solved I don’t know, it’s too early [to say], but it is a sacred right that has to be dealt with and solved [with] the acceptance of all.” He says statehood “will never affect the right of return for Palestinian refugees.” – Daily Star, Lebanon

In other words, the refugees will continue to be stateless, living on the UN (mostly US) dole, in ‘refugee camps’, as they have for the past three generations, until they can finally fulfill their purpose — to overrun the Jewish state.

So not only will ‘Palestine’ be a racist, antisemitic, apartheid state, it will not lift a finger to help its own people. They want a ‘right of return’ to Israel, but they will not get one to Palestine!

Tell me again why the UN will vote for Palestinian statehood, please.

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.
.

Glick - Cliche-based foreign policy

Caroline Glick
carolineglick.com
02 September '11

http://www.carolineglick.com/e/2011/09/cliche-based-foreign-policy.php


US Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, the chairwoman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, kicked up a political storm this week. On Tuesday, Ros-Lehtinen introduced the United Nations Transparency, Accountability and Reform Act. If passed into law it would place stringent restrictions on US funding of the UN's budget.

The US currently funds 22 percent of the UN's general budget. That budget is passed by the General Assembly with no oversight by the US. America's 22% share of the budget is nonvoluntary, meaning the US may exert no influence over how its taxpayers' funds are spent.

If Ros-Lehtinen's act is passed into law, the UN will have two years to enact budgetary reforms that would render a minimum of 80% of its budget financing voluntary. If the UN does not make the required reforms, the US government will be enjoined to withhold 50% of its nonvoluntary UN budget allocations.

Beyond this overarching demand for UN budgetary reform, the act contains several specific actions that are directed against UN institutions that advance anti-American and anti-Israel agendas.

Ros-Lehtinen's act would defund the UN Human Rights Committee until such time as it repeals its permanent anti-Israel resolution, and prohibits countries that support terror and are under UN Security Council sanctions from serving as its members. It would also prohibit the US from serving as a member of the UNHRC until such reforms are enacted.

Ros-Lehtinen's bill defunds all UN activities related to the libelous Goldstone Report, and the anti-Semitic Durban process. It vastly curtails and conditions US funding of UNRWA, the Palestinian refugee agency permeated by members of terrorist organizations. UNRWA's facilities are routinely used to plan, execute and incite terrorism against Israel and to indoctrinate Palestinians to seek Israel's destruction.

The bill pays special attention to the Palestinian Authority's plan to have the UN Security Council and General Assembly vote in favor of Palestinian statehood later this month. The bill would cut off US funding to any UN agency or organization that upgrades the Palestinian mission to the UN in any way in the aftermath of a General Assembly vote in favor of such an upgrade in representation.

Ros-Lehtinen's bill, which has 57 co-sponsors, provides detailed explanations for how the targeted UN agencies and activities harm US interests. It notes that the US's membership since 2009 in the UN Human Rights Council has had no impact whatsoever on the UNHRC's anti-Israel and anti-American agenda. The US has been unable to temper in any way the UNHRC's actions and resolutions, including its decisions to form the Goldstone Commission and to endorse the findings of the Goldstone Report, and its continued support and organization of the anti-Semitic Durban conferences in which Israel is attacked and libeled as an illegitimate, racist state.

The bill notes that despite US efforts to extend oversight over UNRWA's hiring process, UNRWA continues to hire members of terrorist organizations. The bill provides a long list of UNRWA employees who have perpetrated terrorist attacks.

Ignoring its fact-based assessment of UN failings, the Obama administration has rejected the Ros-Lehtinen bill out of hand. Speaking to Politico, an administration source panned the bill, claiming, "This draft legislation is dated, tired and frankly unresponsive to the positive role being played by the UN."

Can the Palestinians Create a Peace-Loving State?

Eli E. Hertz
www.mythsandfacts.org
31 May '11

http://www.mythsandfacts.org/article_view.asp?articleID=207

The first paragraph of Article 4 of the United Nations Charter reads:

"Membership in the United Nations is open to all other peace-loving states which accept the obligations contained in the present UN Charter and, in the judgment of the Organization, are able and willing to carry out these obligations." (emphasis added)

Article 2 of the UN Charter calls in paragraph 3:

"All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered."

The same article calls in Paragraph 4:

"All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations."

Security Council Resolution 1377 demands of members states to:

"Reaffirms its unequivocal condemnation of all acts, methods and practices of terrorism as criminal and unjustifiable, regardless of their motivation, in all their forms and manifestations, wherever and by whomever committed.


"Stresses that acts of international terrorism are contrary to the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, and that the financing, planning and preparation of as well as any other form of support for acts of international terrorism are similarly contrary to the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations," (emphasis added)

The Palestinian Authority (PA) is emerging as a union of Hamas and Fatah, two groups that have proven to promote terror and thwart any chance for genuine peace. A minimum requirement to join the United Nations Family of Nations is to first and foremost be a "peace-loving state." Can the Palestinian Arabs achieve it? Can they reverse decades of horrendous act of terror in just three short months?

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.
.

The UN Vote on A Palestinian State

Herbert I. London
Hudson New York
19 May '11

http://www.hudson-ny.org/2131/un-vote-palestinian-state

The United Nations this September will attempt to create a Palestinian state through political mandate. This, as is par for the UN, is not merely an attempt to justify the political aspirations of Palestinians, but rather to punish Israel.

This initiative should be seen against a backdrop of Muslim imperial ambitions.

Israel lies directly on the fault line of Islam's territorial aims. This tiny nation of six million is the bulwark in the war with jihadists. Facing close to 300 million enemies in nations nearby, Israel stands between the survival or the defeat of the West. Those Israeli eighteen year olds who are sent into battle allow parents in the United States to sleep safely in their beds at night as their eighteen year olds go off to college while Israeli eighteen year old go off to war. Israel is the defender of our interests, the first line of defense in our "long war."

Israel, of course, is a thin reed on which to rest a civilization, but it is a steel reed that time and again has demonstrated its mettle. Many in Europe and a growing population in the United States contend that Israel should be abandoned to "redress" Muslim grievances, whether caused by Israel or by their own neglectful and corrupt governance. But should abandoning Israel gain traction, it would not bring solace to the West. A world without Israel would not be a safer place; it would usher in a tide of aggression as Islamists saw the West bend to their will. If Israel goes, the fragility of the West will appear as provocatively apparent.

As a consequence, it is time for a wake up call. Liberty is in the cross-hairs and the defender of that liberty, of our liberty, are the children of Israel. They are our chosen people sacrificing their blood so we may remain immune to the incursions of Islamic imperialism.

Islam is more than a religion; it is a religion qua political movement. Through sharia law, there are rules for the society and for the behavior of every individual. As presently constituted, Islam is not compatible with democracy. The pillars of democratic capitalism – individual rights, the rule of law, the preservation of private property, equality of women – are not part of Islamic tradition; they actually run counter to it.

Like many other religions, Islam conceives of the world through the lens of good and evil. Islamic theology has two spheres in perpetual conflict: the House of Islam and the House of War. The House of Islam (dar al-Islam) embraces territory where sharia is the law of the land, while the House of War (dar al-harb) comprises the rest of the world. According to the Koran, the House of Islam is enjoined by Allah to make war upon the House of War until the House of War is permanently assimilated into the House of Islam. While this war is sometimes hot and sometimes cold, it is, according to Islam, timeless and permanent until sharia reigns over the globe.

This is what Samuel Huntington understood to mean the "clash of civilizations." Most religions, of course, distinguish between believers and non believers, but Islam goes further, drawing a distinction between political and legal regimes: those in submission to Islam and those in rebellion. As the West is largely in rebellion, it is the challenge to be overcome.

That UN vote in September should be understood in this setting. Here is a systematic effort to vanquish Western civilization, using the Palestinian question as a tactical instrument. Fifty-seven Muslim nations have raised the stakes in this ongoing struggle, and if there were ever a time for the Western nations to mobilize their influence and assert the Judeo-Christian tradition that is the foundation stone of our way of life, this is it. Israel may be on the front-line in this struggle, but what is in question involves every person in the West.

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.
.

Hebron First

David Wilder
www.hebron.com
30 March '11

As the weather changes, as winter moves into spring and summer, as the meteorological temperature rises, so too, the geopolitical climate is ascending at a rapid pace.

It wasn’t too many weeks ago that rumors of Bibi’s intended US speech, declaring intentions to immediately recognize a ‘palestinian state’ within temporary borders, abounded. Commentators expected such an announcement, perhaps in the Premier’s address before Congress in May.

Then disaster struck. The Fogel butchery in Itamar seemed to throw a wrench into the mechanics of Bibi’s seemingly well-oiled machinery. Photographs of a baby stabbed in the heart and a father with his throat cut are not conducive to peace plans.

Then, again, Arab terror struck in the heart of Jerusalem, adjacent to the Central Bus station. Again, murder, targeted at the body and soul of every Jew in Israel, only because they are Jews, in Israel. It makes no difference that the one fatality was a non-Jew from England. Terror is terror is terror. Suddenly Bibi’s new ‘piece’ initiative seemed to get stuck.

Our Arab neighbors, not wanting to get pulled deep into Netanyahu’s suggested quicksand, totally rejecting any form of ‘temporary statehood,’ began pushing for a unilateral declaration of ‘palestinian statehood.’ Building upon anti-Israel sentiment in South America, several countries announced their recognition of a ‘palestinian state’ in pre-1967 Judea and Samaria, part of which is presently partially controlled by the ‘palestinian authority.’ The winds of the new ‘state’ are quickly transforming into a political tornado, picking up speed and international support. The time and place seem to be September at the United Nations, when the UN will be asked to recognize ‘palestine’ as a full-fledged member of the world community.

It must be clear without mincing any words. Nothing has changed within the Arab thought process. Abu Mazen has not repented. He still denies the Holocaust. He has not apologized for his role, planning terror attacks against Jews for decades, including his financing of the 1972 Munich Olympics massacre. He continues to honor terrorists. This month his advisor Sabri Saidam, exclaimed that palestinian weapons must be turned towards Israel. Under his auspices, a town square in El-Birah was named in honor of terrorist Dalal Mughrabi, who participated in the 1978 Coast Road massacre. The ‘palestinian authority, continuing to incite against Israel and Jews, is nothing less than a PTA – a ‘palestinian terror organization.’

This has not prevented UN secretary general Ban from castigating Israel, labeling Israel’s presence in Judea and Samaria as ‘occupation,’ and ‘morally, politically, unsustainable.’

As Ban speaks, Arabs are killing Arabs in Libya and Syria, while other Arab tyrants are cranking up their killing machines in order to deflect any attempts to dethrone them. Yet, it is the ‘Israeli occupation’ that occupies the United Nations leadership.

Israeli politicians and other public figures have started reacting to the September Accords. This morning Infrastructure Minister Uzi Landau, a well-known, veteran right-wing leader, suggested that Israel annex parts of Judea and Samaria in reaction to declaration of a ‘palestinian state.’ Landau isn’t the first to make such a declaration. However, Landau’s solution is partial and lacking, in that he proclaimed that the ‘large settlement blocks within the national consensus’ should be made part of sovereign Israel.

And so I ask, what about Hebron?

Actually, there is no doubt in my mind that all of Judea and Samaria are part of Israel, and as such, should be officially annexed. However, if the state of Israel, for whatever reason, prefers to establish an annexation process, declaring statehood in Judea and Samaria little by little, what better a place to begin than Hebron?!

Recently Education minister Saar announced that all Israeli schoolchildren should and would visit Hebron and Ma’arat HaMachpela. In a survey conducted amongst high school teachers, over seventy eight percent supported this decision. As reported on Kol Yisrael radio on March 21, the head of the teacher’s union, Ron Erez, commented that “this result proves that educators are not only teaching with an aim of achievement, rather they are also looking at the roots of our state, our education, and deepening those roots, bond them to Eretz Yisrael.”

David began his rule in Hebron, and remained here for over seven years, thereby immersing himself, not as an individual, but as King of Israel, in the sanctity of our Patriarchs and Matriarchs, prior to moving up to Jerusalem, the eternal capital of Israel. Following in the footsteps of David, it would seem natural that still today, Hebron is the place to start.

Jewish Hebron is, in the eyes of the world, a seeming question mark. How can Israel dare allow Jews to live in the first Jewish city in Israel? Hebron is, in their opinion, the epitome of Israeli intransigence and foreign occupation.

The time has come to put an end to any such question marks. Hebron, the roots of our people, is, always was, and always will be, a Jewish, Israeli city. The fact that Arabs too live here, so what! That cannot and does not erase the core significance of Hebron, throughout the generations, to the Jewish people.

For seven hundred years Jews were forcibly prevented from accessing building atop the caves of Machpela, the 2nd holiest site in the world. Yet Jews did not forget their roots, yearning for the day when they could return to visit, worship and identify at this sacred monument.

As such, nothing could be more fitting than a declaration of “Hebron First.” On the day that the UN declares acceptance of a ‘palestinian state’ the Knesset should vote to extend full Israeli sovereignty on the city of Hebron, again declaring the Jewish people’s allegiance to our age-old heritage. This historic event will open the eyes of the world-at-large, proving to them that we, the Jewish people in the State of Israel, will never, ever, abandon our ancient homeland.

And they will know: Hebron First is only the beginning.

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.
.