Doc's Talk: Weekly Commentary: Some quick observations regarding President Obama's Cairo Address Today

Friday, June 05, 2009

Weekly Commentary: Some quick observations regarding President Obama's Cairo Address Today

Dr. Aaron Lerner Date: 4 June 2009

#1 Obama's insult to Saudi Arabia?

After visiting Saudi Arabia, where it is against the law for Christians to
worship freely, Obama says the following in Cairo:

"The fifth issue that we must address together is religious freedom. Islam
has a proud tradition of tolerance.I saw it firsthand as a child in
Indonesia, where devout Christians worshiped freely in an overwhelmingly
Muslim country." #2. Absence of pluralism in thought on Arab-Israeli affairs

When President Obama ponders every and any other issue in the world there is
the traditional pluralistic approach that entertains the possibility that
one doesn't have a monopoly on wisdom. But when it come to the "two state
solution" religion, there is no place and no space to consider alternative
views that do not embrace this dogma.

the only resolution is for the aspirations of both sides to be met through
two states, where Israelis and Palestinians each live in peace and security.
It is time for us to act on what everyone knows to be true. "

"Everyone"?

Is Mr. Obama asserting that Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is a figment
of our imagination?

#3. Equivalence of rights to exit

"At the same time, Israelis must acknowledge that just as Israel's right to
exist cannot be denied, neither can Palestine's. "

And what if they are mutually exclusive? Oops.

And where is it etched in stone that a Palestinian "autonomous state", where
Palestinians enjoy self rule but are denied the means to destroy the Jewish
state is not acceptable?

#4 The big lie - settlements violate agreements and undermine peace process

". Israeli settlements. This construction violates previous agreements and
undermines efforts to achieve peace."

Palestinian complaints about settlement activity cite Article XXXI Paragraph
7 of the Interim Agreement: "Neither side shall initiate or take any step
that will change the status of the West Bank and Gaza Strip pending the
outcome of the permanent status negotiations."

The meaning of "status" means "legal status". A violation of the agreement
would take place if Israel annexed part of the West Bank or Gaza Strip or
the PA declared an independent state in the area before the negotiations
were concluded. Israeli settlement activity is no more a violation of the
Agreement than Palestinian construction. Many Palestinian officials
recognize this and instead argue that the settlements are not "in the spirit
of Oslo". But the agreements are legal documents, and as legal documents
what counts is what is written - not some amorphous "spirit".

Israeli settlement activity is the only action from the Israeli side which
threatens the Palestinians with the prospect that the deal they may refuse
today may be considerably better than the deal that Israel will be able or
willing to offer tomorrow. Even if the negotiations are bogged down due to
Palestinian intransigence and Israeli redeployments are postponed, all of
this is temporary in nature. A short blip in the century old Arab-Israeli
conflict. But settlement activity is quite another story. Growing
settlements define areas which the Israeli national consensus will never
support returning. Settlements stretching on key roads turn the tables on
future possible solutions, ending the isolation of Israeli settlements and,
in turn, isolating Arab villages.

Besides encouraging the Palestinians to lower their demands and
expectations, settlement activity, if properly packaged, can be used as a
prime tool in the battle against terror. Historically, settlements were
considered the "Zionist response to terror." A look at the map of modern
Israel finds it sprinkled with the names of settlements named in memory of
the victims of various Arab attacks. Today's terrorists are popular folk
heroes in Palestinian society. The cost to the Palestinians of terror, in
the form of restrictions on movement and commerce, may be painful, but the
pain is temporary in nature. Large terrorist attacks may postpone Israeli
redeployments and talks, but, again, these are temporary setbacks.

Terrorist attacks may, in fact, be viewed in the long run by the
Palestinians as serving their interests by softening Israel's resolve. When
one well known Israeli Leftist declared in an interview on Israel Radio
after the bus bombings in Jerusalem that "we celebrated the day that the
wall dividing Jerusalem was torn down in 1967 and we will celebrate the day
it is erected again" this was not lost on the Palestinians.

But what if the Netanyahu Administration returns to the "Zionist response to
terror"? Sure, the Palestinians won't be pleased to learn that the "Shchunat
Munk" neighborhood is being built in the memory of the Munk family recently
murdered in a drive-by shooting. But will the murderers still be the same
heroes they were before their action lead to the building of yet more Jewish
homes?

The "Zionist response to terror" has another benefit. Besides deterring Arab
terror, it would serve to bolster the morale of the Israeli public by
offering it a positive emotional outlet through which to respond to Arab
terror. By establishing living memorials, Israel would be effectively
saying: "We are on the map. Terror will not vanquish."

It is said that the Arabs decided to make peace with Israel when they came
to the conclusion that they could not destroy the Jewish State on the
battlefield. By the same token, settlement activity today may very well
convince the Palestinians that they must compromise now or face the
prospects of a considerably worse deal in the future.

5. The Pope was sorry Israel needed security measures - Obama just wants
them dropped

Consider this contrast:

The Pope recognizes that Israel needs to carry out security measures:

"One of the saddest sights for me during my visit to these lands was the
wall. As I passed alongside it, I prayed for a future in which the peoples
of the Holy Land can live together in peace and harmony without the need for
such instruments of security and separation"
The Pope's deporting remarks - 15 May 2009

President Obama doesn't mention Israel's security needs:

"Israel must also live up to its obligations to ensure that Palestinians can
live, and work, and develop their society. "

So Israel should let the trucks carrying cement and rebar into Gaza so that
Hamas can build more reinforced positions for its war against the Jewish
State? Roadblocks should be dropped even if it means dead Israelis from
terror attacks?

6. Obama's vision of open Jerusalem is here today - not under other
arrangements

"when Jerusalem is a secure and lasting home for Jews and Christians and
Muslims, and a place for all of the children of Abraham to mingle peacefully
together."

Mr. Obama describes the situation today in Jerusalem. The only restrictions
on access are security related. The more solid the "calm" the broader the
access to all.

Only those who are profoundly blinded by an ideological-religious commitment
to removing Israeli sovereignty from Jerusalem can argue that some
house-of-cards arrangement can replace Israeli sovereignty and still have
Jerusalem as "a place for all of the children of Abraham" - including
Jews - " to mingle peacefully together."

It takes absolutely no imagination to come up with a score of scenarios in
which the various "solutions" proposed lead to restrictions and ultimately a
ban on Jewish prayer at places also held holy by other faiths.

It should be noted that the true model of "a place for all of the children
of Abraham to mingle peacefully together" is the Tomb of the Patriarchs (aka
Ibrahim Mosque) in Hebron where not only do Jews and Moslems pray within
close proximity, there are even arrangements to enable each faith to use the
entire facility on their special holidays.

Dr. Aaron Lerner, Director IMRA (Independent Media Review & Analysis)
(Mail POB 982 Kfar Sava)
Tel 972-9-7604719/Fax 972-3-7255730
INTERNET ADDRESS: imra@netvision.net.il
Website: http://www.imra.org.il

No comments:

The IDF’s Minorities in Numbers and Pictures

In honor of IDF Diversity Week, we present diversity through numbers and pictures. Each year, more and more Muslims, Christians, Druze, Bedouin and immigrants from around the world take on the responsibility of defending Israel.

MUSLIMS:

Muslim Arab Israelis are not required to draft in the IDF, but there are many who volunteer. In 2013, there were over 200 Muslims serving in the IDF and over 300 in the reserves.

Bedouins:

Bedouins are nomadic Muslims who were in Israel when modern borders were set in place and are now considered Israeli citizens. They are not required to draft but a growing number choose to enlist. In 2012, there were over 1,400 Bedouin Muslim soldiers doing regular IDF service and almost 1,500 in the reserves.

Read more:http://www.idfblog.com/2014/02/27/truth-idf-numbers-pictures/#more-34027

Are you aware that in 2013, Middle class taxes go up-significantly?

In January of next year, the federal income tax rate for middle-class taxpayers is scheduled to rise from 25 percent to 28 percent, and the payroll tax is scheduled to rise from 13.3 percent to 15.3 percent… This drives the marginal tax rate based on the aforementioned three taxes to 48.12 percent. Add in state and local property, corporate, excise, and other state and local taxes, and the percentage of each additional dollar that is taxed hovers around 50 percent… When half of each additional dollar earned is taxed away, taxpayers experience a disincentive to start businesses or expand existing ones. This leads to fewer jobs being created.

Why is HAMAS Inside Tampa Schools?

Clare Lopez

Kelly Miliziano, who teaches history classes at Steinbrenner High School in the Tampa, Florida area apparently thinks it’s perfectly OK to invite a senior official of a HAMAS-affiliated organization into her classroom to discuss Islam with her students. According to local media reports, not only has this been going on for years, but in spite of the civil and criminal proceedings that could result from such reckless negligence, the Hillsborough County school superintendent, Mary Ellen Elia, and the chairman of the school board, Candy Olson, also expressed approval for students under their responsibility to be exposed repeatedly to guest speaker, Hassan Shibly, who is the Executive Director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in the Tampa area.
More...

Did You Know... Ignoring the Call to Islam will Bring Jihad

‘Conquest through Da’wa [proselytizing] that is what we hope for. We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through sword but through Da’wa.’
-- Yousef al-Qaradawi , Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader The Arabic word ‘Da’wa’ means the “call to Islam.” But do not think that Da’wa is the same thing as an invitation to an optional holiday event. The classical Islamic doctrine of jihad mandates that enemies must be given the opportunity to convert to Islam or pay the jizya tax before it is permissible to attack them.
Clare M. Lopez

Who is being discriminated-facts tell the truth

Religious bias

Hate crimes motivated by religious bias accounted for 1,409 offenses reported by law enforcement. A breakdown of the bias motivation of religious-bias offenses showed:

65.4 percent were anti-Jewish.
13.2 percent were anti-Islamic.
9.5 percent were anti-other religion, i.e., those not specified.
4.3 percent were anti-Catholic.
3.8 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
3.3 percent were anti-Protestant.
0.5 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses.

On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview

with PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

In March 1977, Zahir Muhsein, a PLO executive, said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism."

"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

The Arab Apartheid

Ben-Dror Yemini
In 1948, the Arab countries refused to accept the UN partition proposal and they launched a war of annihilation against the State of Israel which had barely been established. All precedents in this matter showed that the party that starts the war - and with a declaration of annihilation, yet - pays a price for it. Between 550,000 and 710,000 Arabs fled because of the war and a larger number of 850,000 Jews were expelled or fled from Arab countries (the "Jewish nakba").
Population exchanges and expulsions were the norm at that time, occurring in dozens of other conflict points and affecting about 52 million people. In all the population exchange precedents that occurred during or at the end of an armed conflict, there was no return of refugees to the previous region, which had turned into a new national state.
Only the Arab states acted completely differently from the rest of the world. Instead of assimilating the refugees, they crushed them despite the fact that they were their coreligionists and members of the Arab nation - instituting a regime of apartheid. So the "nakba" was not caused by the actual dispossession, which had also been experienced by tens of millions of others. The "nakba" is the story of the apartheid, oppression, abuse and denial of rights suffered by the Arab refugees at the hands of the Arab countries. (Maariv)

International Law and Military Operations in Practice - Col. Richard Kemp

"Islamist fighting groups study the international laws of armed conflict carefully and they understand it well. They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy's main weaknesses. Their very modus operandi is built on the correct assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules, while these insurgents employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law. "

Lost Historical Moments

What Rabin’s last Knesset speech really said:repudiation of a Palestinian state

Rabin ruled out a fully sovereign Palestinian state :

“We view the permanent solution in the framework of State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. We would like this to be an entity which is less than a state, and which will independently run the lives of the Palestinians under its authority.”

Rabin ruled out a total withdrawal from Judea and Samaria and thus a return to the pre-June 1967 borders :

“The borders of the State of Israel, during the permanent solution, will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.”

Rabin ruled out withdrawing form the Jordan Valley:

“The security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term.”

Rabin ruled out uprooting settlement blocs, like the Gush Katif bloc in Gaza (which was subsequently uprooted by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon):

“The establishment of blocs of settlements in Judea and Samaria, like the one in Gush Katif.

AND

Rabin ruled out removing any settlement before coming to a full peace agreement with the Palestinians:

“I want to remind you: we committed ourselves, that is, we came to an agreement, and committed ourselves before the Knesset, not to uproot a single settlement in the framework of the interim agreement, and not to hinder building for natural growth.”

Rabin insisted on Israel retaining full security control of the borders with Egypt and Jordan, contrary to Israel’s relinquishment of the Philadelphia Corridor on the border with Egypt:

“The responsibility for external security along the borders with Egypt and Jordan, as well as control over the airspace above all of the territories and Gaza Strip maritime zone, remains in our hands.”

Correcting Oslo Myths-Part 2

3) Kuttab laments that the post-1993 Oslo process resulted in a Palestinian Authority "whose ministers and legislators are not guaranteed passage between Gaza and the West Bank ...."

Before free passage or other perquisites, PA leaders were obligated, among other things, to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, end anti-Israeli, antisemitic incitement in schools, mosques, and communications media, and resolve all outstanding issues through peaceful negotiations. They met none of these commitments, sometimes bolstering terrorism and greatly increasing incitement.

4) Kuttab complains that under Oslo the PA got "lightly armed police ---- but no real sovereignty over the land or contiguity between our communities in Gaza and the West Bank."

Oslo agreements repeatedly were revised, regardless of Palestinian non-compliance, until the authorized number of police grew from 8,000 to 40,000. Though they were to be the only armed forces in the territories, Israeli estimates early in the second intifada put the number of gunmen - police, "security services," terrorists, and armed gangs - at 85,000. Their armament reportedly included not only heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, but also anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

Sovereignty was to be negotiated in the envisioned 1998 "final status" talks - after a five-year period of confidence-building. Palestinian leadership chronically undermined the process. Palestinian terrorism made the 1993 - 1998 Oslo period more deadly for Israelis than the 15 years preceding it.

The United States doesn't have contiguity between the lower 48 states and Alaska and Hawaii; territorial contiguity between the West Bank and Gaza Strip - that is, through the 20 miles of Israeli territory between them - was never promised and would destroy Israeli contiguity.

5) "Palestinians have been made to endure hundreds of checkpoints in the West Bank, an eight-foot wall deep in our territories, and tight Israeli control over borders."

The security barrier is not "deep in Palestinian territories," but rather encompasses less than 8 percent of Judea and Samaria, and is mostly a fence, rarely a wall; the land in question is not "our [Palestinian] territories" but disputed territory to which, according to the authors of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, Jews as well as Arabs have claims; and there are no international borders, only the 1949 armistice lines with Jordan. Under 242, borders remain to be negotiated. As for checkpoints - like the security barrier and "tight Israeli control" - Palestinian Arabs precipitated these measures themselves. No terrorism and there would be no fence or tight Israeli control and few checkpoints - like before the first intifada.

Correcting Some Oslo Myths

1) In Oslo "Israeli, Palestinian and other world leaders promised that ... Palestinian sovereignty would be solidified."

No, they didn't. The 1993 Declaration of Principles and subsequent Oslo agreements outlined a process by which final status negotiations about the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be reached. The process required an end to anti-Israel terrorism and incitement and a commitment to peaceful negotiations. The PA, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and other terrorist groups, sabotaged the process from the start.

2) "The reality is that, in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which states that it is inadmissible to occupy land by force, Palestinian territories are still under foreign military occupation."
Wrong again. Resolution 242 (1967) does note "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." It also affirms the right of every state in the area "to live in peace with secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." There were no "Palestinian territories." Jordan occupied the West Bank, Egypt controlled Gaza. Israel did not have "secure and recognized boundaries," so retention of some of those territories was possible under 242. Israel is not a "foreign" military occupier in the West Bank but, pending final negotiations, the lawful military administrator as a result of a successful war of self-defense.

Doc's Talk