Wilder - Killing Asher Palmer Twice

אשר ויונתן פלמר

David Wilder
hebron.com
25 September '11

http://www.hebron.com/english/article.php?id=734



The Palmer family is very special. I don’t know many people whose ‘mesirut nefesh’ for Eretz Yisrael is greater than theirs. They came to Israel about 30 years ago. They moved because they wanted their children to grow up in a Jewish environment. Moshe, the father of the family, has a special expertise and despite numerous, numerous attempts, was never able to find suitable employment in Israel. As a result, he works in the United States, coming home to his family in Kiryat Arba several times a year, celebrating with them various Jewish holidays and events.

Molly Palmer brought up her children with much love and care for Eretz Yisrael. She has worked for many years teaching English in Kiryat Arba and the Southern Hebron Hills region. I also seem to recall that she’s an excellent cook and baker. In the past she sold various pastries, of which I remember enjoying immensely.

On Friday afternoon Molly Palmer and her family were stunned, as were all that know them, by the terrible news that her 25 year old son Asher, together with his year old son, were killed in a ‘traffic accident.’ Police reported that as a result of speeding, he had lost control of his car not too far outside of Kiryat Arba. The car flipped over twice in the air, being totally destroyed as it crash landed.

Immediately, even before the victims were identified, the army released a statement that soldiers stationed in the area hadn ‘t witnessed any rock-throwing, or any Arabs fleeing from the area of the ‘accident.’

This past Friday was one of those times when no one had any idea what the day would bring. As a rule, when Arabs want to protest, Friday, after their prayers, is the time. Following Obama’s rejection of a UN-declared palestinian state, together with Abu-Mazen’s speech scheduled for Friday, tension was high. Bolstered security forces were stationed throughout Judea and Samaria, prepared for the worst.

Those fears were a double-edged sword. Media account over the past few weeks centered not so much on Arab violence, rather on Israel responses, and most particularly, those of ‘radical settlers.’ Normal, everyday Jews are so being labeled. For example, New York Times Bureau chief Ethan Bronner, in an article posted Friday, writes, “…Bat Ayin, a fenceless settlement near Bethlehem known for its radicalism.’ Known by whom? Bat Ayin, a community of Hassidic Jews in the Gush Eztion area, is far from ‘radical’ as I would define the word.

The police/security establishment has one fear, and one fear alone. It is not dead Jews. It is dead Arabs. They are petrified of the thought that Arabs will attack Jews, on the roads or in communities, and that the Jews will respond, causing Arab casualties, resulting in Arab propaganda campaigns, similar to those following the Marmara debacle, leading to massive foreign pressure on Israel.

The area of the accident is quite prone to rock attacks. Cars are stoned daily, many times in areas known from their vulnerability. Unfortunately, very little, if anything, is done to prevent these attacks. Very high ranking officers, during instructions to lower-level commanders, have been quoted as saying that ‘rock attacks are sufferable.’ In other words, the IDF really doesn’t have any responsibility to stop such attacks or apprehend the terrorists hurling the rocks. The ‘settlers’ can and will just have to live with this reality.

Rubin - To Those Always Wrong About the Middle East and Who Never Lose A Gram of Arrogance or A Moment of Sleep Over the Tragedies They Create

Barry Rubin
Rubin Reports
25 September '11



http://pajamasmedia.com/barryrubin/2011/09/25/to-those-always-wrong-about-the-middle-east-and-who-never-lose-an-ounce-of-arrogance/

On the occasion of your supporting Palestinian unilateral independence despite the dangers this presents for Israel while simultaneously criticizing Israel for not giving massive concessions in exchange for nothing. On the occasion of the world groveling before Mahmoud Abbas, a ruler of a mere one million people who is in partnership with an explicity genocidal terrorist group, is dependent on Western hand-out, refuses to negotiate or compromise, and has cancelled elections at a time when democracy is supposedly the big thing in the Middle East.

On the occasion of your ignoring the fact that Turkey is ruled by an Islamist party engaged in massive repression and the transformation of the country into a dictatorship, holding that regime up as a model for other Muslim-majority states as it arrests dissidents on a massive scale and keeps them under lock and key while threatening war with Israel. The U.S. government chooses this regime as its co-director in the most important new international counter-terrorist initiative and as its manager of the political transition in Syria.

On the occasion of your whitewashing revolutionary Islamism andglorifying anti-Western forces that will yield a harvest of bloodshed and misery in future.

And most of all on the occasion of your ridiculing, censoring, or ignoring far more accurate assessments of the situation.

Here’s the record

1970s

You were wrong about Iran’s revolution.

You were wrong about Saddam not invading Iran.

Fresnozionism - Palestinian program: to end the Jewish state

Mahmoud Abbas speaks
 at Fatah convention
in 2009 in front of an
 image of his mentor,
Yasser Arafat

Fresnozionism.org
24 September '11

http://fresnozionism.org/2011/09/palestinian-program-to-end-the-jewish-state/


In my last post, I discussed President Obama’s speech at the UN. Today I want to quote a few snippets from the speech of Palestinian ‘president’ Mahmoud Abbas to the same body and elucidate the meaning therein:

I confirm, on behalf of the Palestine Liberation Organization, the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people, which will remain so until the end of the conflict in all its aspects and until the resolution of all final status issues, the following:

Whatever the significance of the ‘reconciliation’ between Fatah and Hamas, Hamas is not a member of the PLO. Hence it is possible for the PLO to maintain its distance from a group which is generally recognized in the West as terrorist and racist, and with which Israel and many other nations will not negotiate. Although the PLO is also a terrorist and racist organization, it has officially denied this and its denials have been (foolishly) accepted by Israel and others.

1. The goal of the Palestinian people is the realization of their inalienable national rights in their independent State of Palestine, with East Jerusalem as its capital, on all the land of the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip, which Israel occupied in the June 1967 war, in conformity with the resolutions of international legitimacy and with the achievement of a just and agreed upon solution to the Palestine refugee issue in accordance with resolution 194, as stipulated in the Arab Peace Initiative which presented the consensus Arab vision to resolve the core the Arab-Israeli conflict and to achieve a just and comprehensive peace. To this we adhere and this is what we are working to achieve. Achieving this desired peace also requires the release of political prisoners and detainees in Israeli prisons without delay.

The Palestinians as well as all the Arab states have always interpreted resolution 194 as calling for the ‘return’ of all Arab refugees and their descendants to ‘their original homes’ in Israel. It is important to realize that this is an inseparable part of their demand for statehood. It is one of the primary reasons — if not the primary reason that previous Israeli offers of as much as 97% of Judea/Samaria and large parts of Jerusalem were not accepted in 2000, 2001 and 2008.

Abbas implies that everyone of Palestinian descent has ‘rights’ to live in Israel, even those who are presently living in Judea, Samaria or Gaza:

Amrousi - We waited 2,000 years, and more ...

Emily Amrousi
Israel Hayom
23 September '11

http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_opinion.php?id=538

On the day the Palestinians began to celebrate their announcement of statehood, hours before the opening U.N. session, I took my eldest son up to the Temple Mount. The area of the mount is disputed, and for the first time, I am entering the inner-most circle.

On the radio, I heard things that sounded like the end of Zionism. But what is Zionism, if not Zion? And what is Zion, if not the Temple Mount? Before the country's borders, before the West Bank, and before Jerusalem, forever and ever, our right to this land is derived from a single rock. A rock of contention, a rock of our existence - you must visit it sometime. Very few Israelis visit it. Even fewer religious Israelis.

We are excited when we visit Rachel's Tomb, celebrate at Meron, fight for our right to the Cave of the Patriarchs; but the Temple Mount is reserved for psychos....

Moses prayed to be allowed to visit this place, and his prayer was not answered. The eyes of Jews throughout the generations have been trained on this site, and we, who simply have to present our identity cards at the entrance, crowd into the backyard instead. It is said that upon liberation of the mount in 1967, soldiers ran to it, searching instead for the Western Wall.

I consider myself to be a rational person, but when someone pointed out the location of the Holy of Holies [the inner chamber of the ancient temple, which housed the Ark of the Covenant], I immediately felt the need to kneel on the ground. In three weeks, if we were prepared for it, the High Priest would enter that chamber on the Day of Atonement and our sins would be forgiven. But we are not yet ready for that, we are not prepared, and instead, Japanese tourists are inside the Holy of Holies, clicking away with their cameras.

I went up to the Jewish people's most sacred place, the foundation of the world, where Abraham was told to sacrifice Isaac, the place from where the Divine Spirit departed, and I felt a need to offer a double blessing - one for he "who has kept us alive, sustained us and brought us to this time," and one for "the true judge of all." I understood this as a time when happiness mingles with humiliation. A Jew is not permitted inside the Temple Mount wearing a talit (religious prayer shawl), a Jew can't pray or sing there, and a Jew can't even cry there.

Near the X-ray scanner, I was asked if I had a siddur (Jewish prayer book) in my bag. The tour of the mount was accompanied by stern-looking police officers and representatives of the Waqf (an Islamic body with authority over the Temple Mount). When someone raised their hands in the air, the officials jumped on her. When someone moved her lips in silent prayer, the officials threatened to remove her from the grounds. I bent down to photograph my son, and when I straightened up again I realized I had defeated the officials by kneeling at the holy site.

The Waqf has removed every sign of ancient Jewish presence at the site. At the entrance, a Waqf sign says "The Al-Aqsa Mosque courtyard and everything in it is Islamic property." The Al-Aqsa Mosque was built on the ruins of historical temple gates. In Solomon's Stables, there is no longer any trace of archeological artifacts. Beside the locked Gate of Mercy, wooden pillars that archeologists have dated to the First Temple era are strewn about among piles of garbage.

A group of tourists passed by, and they said they were from Baghdad. The policemen with us, Mario and Hussein, conversed with them in Arabic. Young Muslim children played soccer nearby. Men with the Koran opened in front of them swayed back and forth, just like yeshiva students do when studying their texts.

So close, yet so far. Opposite the temple, at a spot close to the Foundation Stone, where one is permitted to stand according to Jewish law, I hear the prophet Haggai shouting "So is now the time for you to be living in your own paneled houses, while this house lies in ruins?" I take a step back, and, with my lips closed, whisper the prayers of all Jewish generations, under the watchful eye of the Waqf official.

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.
.

Sherman - Into the Fray: 'Ground Control to Major Tom (Friedman)’

Martin Sherman
Opinion Columnist/JPost
22 September '11

http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Article.aspx?id=239097

‘New York Times’ columnist Tom Friedman emerging as disingenuous charlatan whose blatant anti-Israeli bias is increasingly detached from reality.

Ground control to Major Tom, your circuits dead,
there’s something wrong
Can you hear me, Major Tom?
Can you hear me, Major Tom?
Can you...

– Radio transmission to a fictional astronaut as he drifts into space, losing contact with Planet Earth... and his grasp on reality – Lyrics from David Bowie’s song “Space Oddity”

In many ways, Barack Obama’s UN address on Wednesday was a catastrophic blow to Tom Friedman’s credibility as an authoritative, well-informed political commentator. Indeed it is difficult to imagine how anything could make it look more like he was caught in an alternative universe, detached from earthly events, than the US president’s resounding endorsement of Israel’s position against the Palestinians’ unilateral attempt at statehood.

It demonstrated that Friedman either gravely underestimated Binyamin Netanyahu or misconstrued Obama – or both.

Over the weekend, Friedman reverted to his old anti-Israel rant-mode. After a welcome break of several weeks in which he was distracted by the Arab Spring, the Syrian bloodbath, the Euro-debt crisis, US-deficit problem and so on, the New York Times superstar has relapsed into his derogatory diatribes, condemning Israel – or more precisely the Netanyahu government – for every conceivable woe besetting the Obama administration in the Mideast.

Baseless Bibi-bashing

Friedman is a journalist of undoubted talent. He has produced numerous thought-provoking columns on both US domestic politics and on international affairs.

Regrettably, when it comes to Israel – and particularly the Israel-Palestinian question – his writing morphs from the lucid to the ludicrous. Given his wide readership and considerable influence, it is important not to allow his penchant for baseless Bibi-bashing to go unchallenged or to masquerade as insightful analysis of international affairs.

Since the beginning of the Obama administration in early 2009, Friedman has sallied forth with series of articles that have not only been harshly critical of Israel, but also decidedly haughty and hostile. But as irritating as his condescending and contemptuous style may be, what is far more troubling is how the substance of his writings has become so divorced from reality and/or so devoid of context.

Sadly, it appears that the passage of time only exacerbated these flaws – for Friedman’s vision of reality seems increasingly blurred and his views increasingly incoherent.

Elder - Fisking Abbas' speech at the UN

Elder of Ziyon
23 September '11






How many lies can fit into one speech?

We entered those negotiations [in 2010] with open hearts and attentive ears and sincere intentions, and we were ready with our documents, papers and proposals. But the negotiations broke down just weeks after their launch.

They entered them kicking and screaming after 9 months of a 10-month settlement freeze.

After this, we did not give up and did not cease our efforts for initiatives and contacts. Over the past year we did not leave a door to be knocked or channel to be tested or path to be taken and we did not ignore any formal or informal party of influence and stature to be addressed.

Except for Israel.

The core issue here is that the Israeli government refuses to commit to terms of reference for the negotiations that are based on international law and United Nations resolutions, and that it frantically continues to intensify building of settlements on the territory of the State of Palestine

The settlements have not expanded in years. The core issue is that Abbas refuses to compromise - on borders, on Jerusalem, on "refugees." And he bragged about his intransigence, in Arabic, less than two months after he broke off the talks.

(Read full "Fisking Abbas' speech at the UN")

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.
.

(Video) PM Netanyahu/Mahmoud Abbas Addressess at U.N. 23 September '11

Love of the Land
24 September '11




(As there may be a number of posts addressing what was said in their respective speeches at the U.N., here are both the videos, as well as the links to the full text of each speech. Yosef)

Remarks by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to the U.N. General Assembly

United Nations Headquarters, New York City, New York
Friday, September 23, 2011 (Click here for full text)



Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas addressed the United Nations General Assembly.

United Nations Headquarters, New York City, New York
Friday, September 23, 2011 (Click here for full text)



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.
.

Ya'alon - The false Palestinian narrative

Moshe (Bogey) Ya'alon
Israel Hayom
23 September '11

http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_opinion.php?id=532

The Palestinians have succeeded in making us believe a series of false assumptions, and on the basis of these false assumptions, they have submitted a series of false claims. Our problem with them is not where the borders will be, but rather with their refusal to recognize that this is the Jewish national home.

Public discourse in Israel about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict over the past several months, particularly in light of the meeting of the U.N. General Assembly and the Palestinians’ intention to ask for recognition as a state has been full of erroneous perceptions that need to be eradicated. This is necessary not only because these perceptions mislead many Israelis and cause confusion, but also because that same confusion radiates outward, leading many international leaders in the West to adopt them.

The source of these perceptions is the false Palestinian narrative. Precisely because this is happening, it is important to state that there is nothing more just than the Jewish people’s right to return to live in their ancestral homeland. This is moral, historical, legal, political, security-related, national and religious justice.

On the other hand, the false perceptions have been presented very well in Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas' various speeches over the years, and recently with even greater force. This is the place to refute them.

1. According to the first perception, the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians is territorial in essence, and its solution is well known and could be accomplished in a short time if both sides would only show a great deal more flexibility.

The truth is that even though the conflict has a strong territorial component, since two peoples see the same piece of land as their homeland, the heart of the conflict is existential, and centers on the Palestinians’ refusal to recognize the Jews’ right to build their national home, whatever its borders may be, in this land. This is why the Palestinians refuse to accept Israel as the national home of the Jewish people. The false perception is that of the two sides, Israel is the one who refuses to resume the talks about the arrangement, and therefore pressure must be applied to it so that it will change its policy.

Actually, the Palestinians are the ones who consistently oppose the resumption of talks and set preconditions for entering them. Israel has made every effort to resume the talks, even freezing construction in Judea and Samaria for 10 months in order to make it possible.

Tobin - Obama’s Next Step: Push Israel to the Brink

Jonathan S. Tobin
Commentary/Contentions
23 September '11

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/09/23/obama-netanyahu-palestinians-un/#more-769070

The circus at the United Nations this week has been frustrating for the Obama administration. As the president indicated in his speech to the world body, peace between the Arabs and the Israelis has been his top foreign policy priority since the day he took office. Yet his decision to distance the U.S. from Israel and to tilt the diplomatic playing field in the direction of the Palestinians wasn’t enough to convince the latter to return to the table. Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas’ effort to evade negotiations by asking the UN to give him a state without recognizing Israel is forcing Obama to use his veto to preserve what is left of the U.S.-sponsored peace process. That Obama will earn the jeers of international public opinion by acting in defense of American interests far more than those of Israel is no consolation to a man who came into office convinced the world would fall at his feet.

But the veto will only be the first page of the next chapter of American Middle East diplomacy. What follows will undoubtedly be a new campaign of U.S. pressure on Israel that may eclipse the squabbles that has defined the relationship between the two countries during Obama’s time in the White House.


Despite the abundant evidence to the contrary, the president is still convinced the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the key to solving all of America’s problems in the Middle East. And, though his own bitter experiences with Abbas should have taught him the PA is still unwilling to make the necessary historic compromises to make peace, Obama may answer his international critics with a new effort to re-launch the negotiations that will center on brutal American pressure on Israel.

Having earned the applause of Israelis for his speech at the UN and the prospect of a veto of the Palestinian resolution, the president will likely present a bill for services rendered to Prime Minister Netanyahu in the coming days and weeks. It will come in the form of further demands for Israel to make unilateral concessions in order to entice Abbas to return to negotiations. Netanyahu’s offer of talks without preconditions will be ignored. Instead, we will again hear of the need for Israel to accept the 1967 lines as the starting point for negotiations and for it to freeze building not only in the West Bank but in Jerusalem as well. As in his May speech, it is doubtful these demands will be accompanied by an American call for the Palestinians to give up the right of return and to recognize the legitimacy of Israel as a Jewish state.

(Video) John Bolton On The UN &The Statehood Vote

Daphne Anson
23 September '11

http://daphneanson.blogspot.com/2011/09/john-bolton-on-un-statehood-vote.html

The UK's former ambassador to the UN, Sir Jeremy Greenstock (who not so long ago depicted Hamas in an apologetic light) has been saying harsh things about Israel in the lead-up to the Palestinian statehood vote, but the USA's former ambassador to the UN, John Bolton, sees things rather differently:



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.
.

Shragai - Is the Temple Mount in their hands?

Nadav Shragai
Israel Hayom
23 September '11

http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_article.php?id=1236

Capture of would-be suicide bomber at Al-Aqsa Mosque no surprise to Israel Security Agency • Still lots of attacks from Hamas in Jerusalem and all over the South • Syrian Hamas headquarters perceived as natural source and no one is talking about the one in Turkey.

The capture of would-be suicide bomber Said Qawasmeh in the Al-Aqsa Mosque came as no surprise to officials of the Israel Security Agency, otherwise known as the Shin Bet. They had captured terrorists inside the Temple Mount compound before. However, the fragile political situation gives rise to suspicions that terror attacks by Hamas in the Jerusalem region and in Judea and Samaria, which had subsided a little over the past several years, will resume at full strength with support from Hamas in Gaza and the organization’s headquarters in Turkey, Syria and Saudi Arabia.

“Hamas’ interest in perpetrating attacks stems not only from its conflict with the Palestinian Authority, but also from its rivalry with extremist organizations,” a high-ranking security official warned. September is about to reach the boiling point.

Sunday, Aug. 21, was a tough day for the communities on the Gaza periphery. Sirens sounded in Ashkelon and Beersheba as well. Grad and Qassam rockets left destruction and traumatized people in their wake, and residents were told to remain in protected areas. While most of the media attention was directed southward, at the same time, police and soldiers in Jerusalem were in a race against time, trying to capture Qawasmeh, 20, a would-be suicide terrorist from Hebron who, according to intelligence, was on his way to Pisgat Zeev.

The bomb that Qawasmeh was supposed to use had been captured 24 hours earlier. It comprised a sprinkler filled with 6 kilograms of explosives, with ball bearings glued around it. Azhak Arrafa, a resident of east Jerusalem who was supposed to transport Qawasme to his destination, was the one who led the police officers and the security services to the bomb, which had been hidden near his home in the Ras al-Amud neighborhood.

Security officials did not know whether Qawasme was carrying additional explosives on his person. A nerve-wracking 24 hours passed. It seemed that the earth had swallowed Qawasmeh. In the end, one long-time detective guessed that Qawasme was hiding inside a mosque, perhaps even the Al-Aqsa Mosque on the Temple Mount. He based his guess on past experience: Over the years, there had been several incidents in which mosques in general, and the mosques on the Temple Mount in particular, have served as hideouts in which terrorists who had perpetrated attacks, or were about to carry them out, met, organized or hid.

Fresnozionism - Obama’s pro-Israel speech

Mahmoud Abbas reacts
to President Obama's UN
speech. What could he
have been expecting?

Fresnozionism.org
22 September '11

http://fresnozionism.org/2011/09/obamas-pro-israel-speech/


When I read the part of President Obama’s speech to the UN yesterday (May 21, 2011) that dealt with Israel and the Palestinians — which, by the way, was only a small part of it — I was surprised.

I had read Palestinian and Israeli reactions to it first, and judging from them, I would have thought it represented a major tilt toward Israel. But what I saw in the text was more or less a reiteration of prior positions. So why was Mahmoud Abbas covering his eyes, and why did Israeli PM Netanyahu thank Obama so effusively? Let’s look at what Obama said — and didn’t say.

One year ago, I stood at this podium and I called for an independent Palestine. I believed then, and I believe now, that the Palestinian people deserve a state of their own. But what I also said is that a genuine peace can only be realized between the Israelis and the Palestinians themselves. One year later, despite extensive efforts by America and others, the parties have not bridged their differences. Faced with this stalemate, I put forward a new basis for negotiations in May of this year. That basis is clear. It’s well known to all of us here. Israelis must know that any agreement provides assurances for their security. Palestinians deserve to know the territorial basis of their state.

Well, Abbas should have liked that. Obama emphasized his commitment to a Palestinian state and reaffirmed the plan that he put forward in May, pre-1967 lines plus swaps — and everything else in that plan, which I and many others felt represented a sharp pro-Palestinian shift in the US position.

Now, I know that many are frustrated by the lack of progress. I assure you, so am I. But the question isn’t the goal that we seek — the question is how do we reach that goal. And I am convinced that there is no short cut to the end of a conflict that has endured for decades. Peace is hard work. Peace will not come through statements and resolutions at the United Nations — if it were that easy, it would have been accomplished by now. Ultimately, it is the Israelis and the Palestinians who must live side by side. Ultimately, it is the Israelis and the Palestinians — not us –- who must reach agreement on the issues that divide them: on borders and on security, on refugees and Jerusalem.

Abbas has known for months that the US opposed a unilateral declaration of statehood at the UN. There is nothing new here. Did Abbas harbor a secret hope that Obama would finally hand him Israel on a silver platter, with no compromises required? If so, where did he get that idea? Certainly not from the public statements of the President, which — no matter how pro-Palestinian they may have been — always called for an agreement between the parties.

Honig - From bakshish to Khaybar

Sarah Honig
Another Tack
22 September '11

http://sarahhonig.com/2011/09/22/another-tack-from-bakshish-to-khaybar/

In many ways Egypt-present isn’t like Egypt-past. In many ways nothing in Egypt has changed at all.

Herein prevails the paradox. Egypt is a bedeviling composite of the mutating and the immutable.

I described its immutability years ago, when recalling my first work assignment to Egypt. In those days peace with Israel hadn’t yet been thoroughly delegitimized among the broad lower strata of Egyptian society (as distinct from the razor-thin so-called intelligentsia).

Yet it was a frustrating (pre-Internet) time. The Jerusalem Post’s then-editors wouldn’t hear of footing the bill for long-distance telephone communications. Reporters from other Israeli papers weren’t likewise impeded. I had to travel by cab alone each night – over an hour each way – from our well-secured hotel to Cairo’s Reuters headquarters to file my copy by telex.

However, it soon transpired that the Cairo phones rarely worked. That being the woeful case, my alternative prearrangements made me a sudden star among my colleagues, who in no time appointed me their pool-writer. The upside was that I had company on those long, forbidding after-dark taxi adventures.

But a rude culture shock awaited us at the end of the ride. Reuters’ Egyptian teletype-operators were a nonchalant bunch. There was no hostility, just no rush. We explained that we were up against deadlines, to which the inevitable reply was a shrug and the word “ma’alesh.” We soon learned that it denoted something approximating “Who cares? What’s the big deal? So what? Don’t take it too seriously.”

After I detailed what must be done and by when, the man in charge, chewing on some late-night nourishment, nodded and uttered “inshallah” – God willing. His task, I thought, was straightforward enough to be attempted without divine intervention.

Glick - Israel at the U.N.: A Sucker’s Game

Caroline Glick
National Review Online
22 September '11



http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/278030/israel-un-sucker-s-game-caroline-glick

This week’s Palestinian-statehood extravaganza at the U.N. is being billed as something of a modern-day showdown at the O.K. Corral. If the Palestinians gain recognition of their state, then Israel is the big loser. And if the Palestinians fail to gain U.N. recognition of “Palestine” as a member state, then Israel is the big winner.

But the situation is more complex. By going to the U.N., the Palestinians have shown their absolute bad faith in previous negotiations with Israel, and indeed exposed the entire peace process as a lie. The peace process was based on the assumption that a Palestinians state could emerge only at the end of a comprehensive peace settlement between Israel and the Palestinians. That is, such a state would be at peace with Israel.

By bypassing negotiations, the Palestinians seek to gain a state that will be born in a state of war with Israel.

The U.S. and European response to this initiative has been utterly shocking. The Europeans, led by French president Nicolas Sarkozy, have given their enthusiastic support to the Palestinians.

As for the U.S., by rejecting a cutoff of financial assistance and political support to the Palestinians in the face of their rejection of peace with Israel, the Obama administration has signaled to the Palestinians that there is no price to be paid for their aggressive bad faith.

In short, the EU and the U.S. are rewarding the Palestinians for abandoning the centerpiece of European and U.S. Middle East policy for the past generation — the Palestinian-Israeli peace process.

Given this situation, even if their bid for U.N. membership fails, the Palestinians will have won.

Tobin - The Terrorist State in Gaza Looms Over Abbas and the UN Debate

Jonathan S. Tobin
Commentary/Contentions
22 September '11

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/09/22/abbas-palestinians-un-hamas/

Palestinian Authority chief Mahmoud Abbas is apparently enjoying a brief moment of popularity at home as he attempts to get the United Nations to grant his request for statehood without first being required to make peace with Israel. But as today’s generally flattering front page feature in the New York Times reveals, Abbas may have set in motion a chain of events that may lead to his undoing.

Though the Times gives him undeserved credit for promoting a culture of non-violence among Palestinians, it is candid enough to reveal most Palestinians have a very different view than their unelected leader of the meaning of the diplomatic circus unfolding in New York this week. While Abbas claims, somewhat disingenuously, his UN gambit is intended to revive peace talks with Israel, the vast majority of Palestinians see it as more than a symbolic gesture. They want to couple this demand with efforts to impose Palestinian sovereignty over all of the West Bank and parts of Jerusalem. And they seem willing to do so even if it means a violent confrontation with the Israeli army and the hundreds of thousands of Jews who live in communities the Palestinians say must be part of a Jew-free Palestinian state. The disconnect between their expectations and the fact Abbas’ New York adventure will change nothing on the ground is bound to lead to both violence and a dramatic downturn in Abbas’ popularity.

Though he is routinely lauded as a man of peace, Abbas has actually done nothing to change the nature of Palestinian politics. He comes across as a low-key leader in a business suit as opposed to his flamboyant terrorist predecessor Yasir Arafat, but Abbas has done nothing to stifle the incitement of hatred against Israelis and Jews that flows from his official media. Nor has he done a thing to convince Palestinians they must accept the legitimacy of a Jewish state, no matter where its borders would be drawn, or to give up on the hope of swamping Israel with the descendants of Arab refugees via the so-called right of return.

IMRA - Ask Abbas at UN if he will release Shalit after unification

Dr. Aaron Lerner
IMRA
Weekly Commentary
22 September '11


Palestinian terrorists kidnap and hold Israelis as hostages.

A legitimate Palestinian governing body doesn’t.

This is nothing new.

Even at the most strained points of relations, the Ramallah PA never traded Israelis.

That’s not to say that they didn’t murder Israelis. But it was never an official policy that they openly adopted and implemented.

That’s why I was frankly stunned last 25 May when Senior Palestinian (Fatah/PA) official Nabil Sha'ath told me in a telephone interview [ http://youtu.be/ppziLJTuaCA for the audio ] that after unification the PA will be responsible for GIlad Shalit and will continue negotiating a trade with Israel. In fact, he didn’t expect the PA to be any easier in its demands than Hamas has been to date.

Mahmoud Abbas apparently hasn’t taken an official position on this issue yet.

It is time to put him on the spot.

Because the response to this question regarding Shalit serves is a simple intuitive litmus test of the true nature and intentions of the respondent.

There are scores – if not hundreds - of journalists who will have the opportunity in the coming hours and days in New York to ask Mahmoud Abbas if he intends to free Shalit if he succeeds in unifying PA authority in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

And they even have Nabil Sha’ath’s response to the same question available at the click of a mouse for background.

This is a story available on a silver platter.

Will there be any takers?

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.
.

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.

Singer - Palestine: Telling The UN Six Home Truths

David Singer
International Analyst Network
22 September '11

http://www.analyst-network.com/article.php?art_id=3847

Israel’s Prime Minister - Benjamin Netanyahu - has announced his intention to address the United Nations General Assembly in New York this week in connection with the proposed application by the PLO for recognition of a Palestinian Arab State along the 1949 armistice lines.

The terms of the proposed resolution remain a closely guarded secret. There still appears to be disagreement between Palestinian Arab leaders as to its final terms.

However notwithstanding such uncertainty Mr Netanyahu announced at a press conference with visiting Czech Prime Minister Petr Nečas, that he will at the United Nations

"speak the truth to those who want to hear it"

There are at least six basic truths that need to be conveyed to the delegates of the 193 member states present who are charged with voting on any proposed resolution :

1. Mr Netanyahu needs to repeat the following statement he made to the UN General Assembly on 11 December 1984 :

“Clearly, in Eastern and Western Palestine, there are only two peoples, the Arabs and the Jews. Just as clearly, there are only two states in that area, Jordan and Israel. The Arab State of Jordan, containing some three million Arabs, does not allow a single Jew to live there. It also contains 4/5 of the territory originally allocated by this body’s predecessor, the League of Nations, for the Jewish National Home. The other State, Israel, has a population of over four million, of which one sixth is Arab. It contains less than 1/5 of the territory originally allocated to the Jews under the Mandate…. It cannot be said, therefore, that the Arabs of Palestine are lacking a state of their own. The demand for a second Palestinian Arab State in Western Palestine, and a 22nd Arab State in the world, is merely the latest attempt to push Israel back into the hopelessly vulnerable armistice lines of 1949.”

This still remains the strategy behind the current PLO application to the UN.

The Palestinian Arabs could have had their State in more than 90% of the territory situated within the 1949 armistice lines had they accepted either of the offers made by Israel in 2001 or 2008. They want 100% to deny Israel the security it needs - as was recognized by the UN in Resolution 242

This message needs to be repeated - especially for the 34 member States who were not members of the UN when Mr Netanyahu made this speech.

Dann - Negotiating for what?

Moshe Dann
Israel Opinion
21 September '11

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4125645,00.html

Op-ed: Peace talks can achieve nothing at this time, so why not consider other options?

Insisting that the Palestinian Authority engage in negotiations rather than appeal to the United Nations for recognition is based on the belief that an agreement that will end the conflict is possible. However, both sides know that Israel cannot offer anything that will satisfy Palestinian demands and that the Palestinians refuse to agree to minimal Israeli requests.

Why then pretend they will? If the emperor has no clothes, why call for a fashion designer?

The idea that creating a second Arab Palestinian state will solve the problem not only defies reality, it prevents other options and undermines Israel's legitimate claims.

Why not consider other options? Because anything less than a Palestinian state and full sovereignty negates the Arab resistance movement that has sought Israel's destruction for the last 63 years.

Variations of a "two-state solution" – "land for peace,” which produced the Oslo Accords and fueled Palestinian demands for statehood - assumed the conflict was over territory ("the occupation"), not Israel's existence. And both Israeli and Arab negotiators at the time were careful to avoid core issues, which would have blocked an agreement and since then have remained to haunt and destroy.

After Israel broke the terrorist infrastructure, allowing modest cooperation, despite ongoing terrorism - and with Arafat no longer around - there seemed to be hope. But Hamas’ rise, a massive campaign of de-legitimization financed by Arabs and many European countries, a hostile US Administration, and spreading unrest throughout the Arab world have radically shifted the balance against Israel. Nothing can be taken for granted any more - even solemn peace treaties and international agreements.

The lid is off and the pot is boiling over.

The belief that Palestinian Arabs deserve a state is a powerful idea; if so, why not give it to them? And if negotiations will not lead to that state, why engage in them? For Israel, the illusion of negotiations buys time in the hope for recognition and acceptance; for the Arabs, negotiations only postpone their goal – Palestinian statehood and Israel’s elimination.

CAMERA - NYT Bolsters Extinct Palestinian State Myth

TS
CAMERA/Snapshots
22 September '11

http://blog.camera.org/archives/2011/09/nyt_bolsters_extinct_palestini.html

Earlier we noted that Palestinians and sympathetic media falsely present the unprecedented acquisition of national trappings, such as a Palestinian-controlled border crosssing and the Palestinian pound, as reinstating assets which existed prior to Israel's founding in 1948. The implication, of course, is that a Palestinian state was in existence until Israel came along 63 years ago.

Today, the New York Times promotes the extinct Palestinian state myth, by quoting without challenge a young Palestinian:

“We never thought of him as having his finger on the pulse of the Palestinian people the way Arafat did,” said Sandra Tannouf, a 17-year-old student at a West Bank rally supporting the United Nations move. “He never filled the gap left by him, but I fully support this step. Maybe we will get our country back.”

While it's perfectly reasonable to quote Tannouf on this point, it is not reasonable to do so without providing readers with the historically accurate corrective -- that never before has there been a Palestinian state.

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.
.