Doc's Talk: "Disgusting"

Thursday, July 02, 2009

"Disgusting"

Arlene Kushner

This is not a time for niceties. And "disgusting" is simply a very fitting word to describe what Congressman Robert Wexler (D-FL) -- a senior member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee -- is saying. Wexler, who is (was?) here, met with Netanyahu yesterday and then gave an interview to Herb Keinon of The Jerusalem Post -- which appeared today. . I was immediately struck by the oxymoronic tone of Keinon's description of Wexler: "a close political ally of US President Barack Obama and a stalwart Israel supporter." Nah, I doubt that there is any such animal today. I'm sure Wexler describes himself in these terms. But anyone who is close to Obama, and not challenging his stance on Israel, is suspect in terms of alleged support for Israel. I spoke the other day about how even J Street describes itself as pro-Israel. I'm not saying Wexler is necessarily where J Street is, but terms must be defined. Wexler, it happens, served as a Mid-East advisor to Obama during the presidential campaign.

~~~~~~~~~~

At any rate, Wexler says:

"A request for a moratorium or freeze in settlement activity that can be mutually agreed upon by the US and Israel in the next several weeks is a tiny, tiny gesture and down payment to make when you look at potentially what is on the other side of the equation."

A "tiny, tiny gesture," huh?

How kind of him to diminish the importance to us of what's going on here. Freezing settlement construction means relinquishing, up front, our right to be in Judea and Samaria. It means negating both our heritage and our legal rights, because this is what a lying Obama -- who denies we had an agreement with the Bush administration -- wants of us.

So maybe an even better word to describe what Wexler is saying is "enraging." Methinks that Wexler, a Jew, posing as a "friend," came here at Obama's behest to soften us up.

~~~~~~~~~~

What is it that is on the other side of the equation, according to Wexler?

"...22 Arab countries being urged by the US to take significant steps now towards normalization with Israel."

Gasp! Can it be? Is he really suggesting that "significant steps toward normalization" would be made by the Arabs if we froze settlement construction?

Yes, he actually says that an Israeli moratorium on settlements would go a long way toward moving the "normalization" process ahead. Either he's a fool, or he thinks we are fools. And I strongly suspect it's the latter.

Apparently Wexler missed the article by David Ignatius in the Washington Post that I referred to two days ago. Ignatius (according to the Jerusalem Post) said that an Arab diplomat told him that the Arab demand is not a settlement freeze, but an imposed settlement.

~~~~~~~~~~

There's so much to critique in Wexler's words that it's difficult to know how to continue.

The "normalization" process he refers to includes such things as fly-over rights and cultural exchanges. That's all very nice -- but these are no more than peripheral perks. What I observe is that there is no mention of the fundamentals such as recognizing our right to exist as a Jewish nation and declaring an end to hostilities (Saudi Arabia, for example, having never signed an armistice agreement with us is technically still at war with us). Or how about a cessation of official government anti-Semitism?

We relinquish our right to natural growth in Judea and Samaria and get the chance to do a cultural exchange with some Arab countries in return. Sounds like a great deal. We can send them some of our singers and maybe they'll send some dance troops.

~~~~~~~~~~

Keinon writes that:

"Wexler bewailed that while the US demands on Israel were highlighted in the Israeli press, Washington's demands on the Arab world were not gaining similar attention.

"According to Wexler, the Obama administration was making 'equal, if not greater, demands on the Arab world in the context of starting the process and negotiations.'"

This man is shameless. Only a moron would believe this after Obama's Cairo speech, in which he came down on Israel, and ONLY Israel, with regard to the settlements, while kissing up to the Muslims.

~~~~~~~~~~

But it gets even worse, for Wexler says:

"The president of the US does not have a view, or an opinion, or either a tactical or strategic posture on the government of Israel. The idea that the president, or anyone in any position of responsibility in Washington, is designing a process to undermine the policy or position or standing of the government of Israel is absurd."

When you pick yourself up from the floor, where you've undoubtedly collapsed with laughter, you can continue to read...

~~~~~~~~~~

When Keinon asked why the Arab states don't make some gesture of normalization before we agree to a settlement moratorium, Wexler said this was "childish."

"I want to call their bluff," he said. "I want to see, if Israel makes substantial movement toward a credible peace process, whether they are willing to do it. And if they are not, better that we should find out five or six months into the process, before Israel is actually asked to compromise any significant position."

Please note that the onus is entirely on us in his scenario. He is asking for "substantial movement" on our part without any balanced reciprocity -- just as a "test."

Then, too, he contradicts himself, because he speaks at one and the same time about "substantial movement" and says this would be before we are asked to "compromise any significant position." Now what does he have in mind? Maybe the "substantial movement" would be dismantling some major settlements, but we wouldn't be asked to "compromise any significant position," such as giving the Arabs half of Jerusalem, until later?

~~~~~~~~~~

Wexler declares himself to be confident that our government will agree to this moratorium on building in the settlements:

"I don't see an equation where it is in Israel's interest to say no, so I believe Israel will say yes, under a certain set of qualifications that Israel will agree to. This is one hundred percent in Israel's national security interest."

My friends, I can hear the voice of Barack Hussein, saying "Bob, old buddy, we go back a long way. Now, take yourself to Israel and do what you can for the cause."

Since Wexler is one hundred percent wrong about what's in our security interest, let us hope and pray (pray, please!) that he's also wrong about Israel saying yes.

But, better, let's help make certain that he's wrong. Presumably at this point you're as furious as I am.

I suggested yesterday that Prime Minister Netanyahu needs to be contacted on this issue. Now I implore everyone to do this. He needs to receive a barrage of calls and faxes (faxes are good!) and e-mails on the subject.

Please, act while you remember to do this, or post a reminder! And then share this with others and urge them to contact Netanyahu as well.

Fax: 02-670-5369 (From the US: 011-972-2-670-5369)

Phone: 03-610-9898 (From the US: 011-972-3-610-9898)

E-mail: pm_eng2@it.pmo.gov.il (underscore after pm)

Urge him not to cave on this issue!

Communication to our prime minister from outside the country cannot hurt. But most significant are messages from Israeli citizens. If you are an Israeli citizen, please identify yourself as such when sending your message, and pass this to other citizens.

~~~~~~~~~~

I will not make this posting unwieldy by providing the contact information for other members of the government.

Instead, I advise you to go here:

http://www.knesset.gov.il/mk/eng/MKIndex_Current_eng.asp?view=1

and cull that contact information yourself. All MKs are listed with phone numbers and e-mails. Most also have fax numbers.

Be in touch with those who have clout or reputation in Likud: Yaalon, Begin, Danon, Edelstein, Hotovely Sa'ar, Steinitz, Y. Katz. Contact, as well, Yishai (Shas), Hershkovitz (Habayit Hayehudi). And Foreign Minister Lieberman (Yisrael Beitenu).

~~~~~~~~~~

A light-hearted break here (because smiling keeps us sane):

I had seen the cartoon below from Yaakov Kirschen, who does the delightfully on-the-mark Dry Bones cartoons, several times. Finally, today, I decided that I would share it with everyone. It is so in line with what I've been writing about. (Thanks, Roberta)

With respect to this particular cartoon, Kirschen writes:

"During the Hillary Clinton / Barack Obama primary battle, Hillary famously asked whether we'd feel safe with a President Obama answering a crisis phone call at 3AM.

"What she was questioning was his sense of judgment. Well, it seems to me that it's 3AM, the phone is ringing, and I'm afraid that for a lot of us it's a wake-up call."

http://drybonesblog.blogspot.com/2009/06/obamas-3am-phone-call.html

Obama's 3AM Phone Call : Dry Bones cartoon.

~~~~~~~~~~

And then a couple of links also relevant to the topic at hand:

See an article by David Wilder, spokesman for the Hevron Jewish community, "In the footsteps of the Mufti" -- a painful but important look at the vilification of "settlers."

It's perhaps the height of irony that Jews living in the ancient Jewish city of Hevron, the second holiest of cities for Jews, which connects to the time of our father Avraham, are today called "settlers," as if they are usurpers.

http://www.jpost.com /servlet/Satellite?cid=1246443695553&pagename=JPArticle%2FShowFull

~~~~~~~~~~

Then an informative posting by one Rachel Abrams on the Weekly Standard blog, "Among the settlers," written about Kfar Adumim in Judea. (Thanks, Micki L.)

A couple of sentences in particular struck me:

"Across the wadi is Mitzpeh Hagit, an 'illegal outpost' named for a daughter of Kfar Adumim murdered by a Bedouin terrorist as she hiked in the crevice ten years ago. 'This is a response of settlers to terror murders,' says our host, one of the original 18 settlers of Kfar Adumim. 'We don’t rush out to seek revenge by murdering in return. We respond to it and honor the murdered by establishing outposts in their names.'"

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Weblogs/TWSFP/TWSFPView_more.asp

Many is the time that I have written about an "unauthorized outpost" (such as Maoz Esther outside of Kochav Hashachar) and explained, it was named for such and such, who was killed in a terrorist attack. But never have I made the point this clearly -- that we honor the murdered by building, rather than seeking revenge. Something greatly to be proud of.

The flip side: More than once I have felt heart-sick that the Israeli government has deemed it necessary to take down a tent, or a few houses, erected to honor the memory of a murdered Israeli. That these memorials are immediately rebuilt is also something to be proud of. Blessed are the builders.

~~~~~~~~~~

Let me turn for a few moments here to the concept of "reciprocity" in our dealings with the PA -- a concept to which Netanyahu at least gives lip service. Whether it's more than lip service will soon be tested. The failure to truly honor such a concept is part of what infuriates me so very much about Wexler's (and Obama's) approach.

One of the commitments that the PA has -- via Oslo and the Road Map -- is the elimination of all official incitement. Obama has spoken about this, but it isn't real and there is no intention of holding Palestinian feet to the fire on this subject.

Easy to say, "And the Palestinians must eliminate official incitement." But what does this mean in real terms? Let's talk tachlis here (i.e., get down to serious stuff). The PA-produced textbooks lack maps of the area that have "Israel" delineated -- it's all "Palestine." The message that is being delivered to school kids via these maps is not exactly what we might expect if there were sincerity about "peace," with two states for two people living side by side...

How about if new maps had to be introduced in all grades that did denote the existence of Israel? In truth the books should be re-printed, as there's a great deal more wrong with them than the maps. But we can deal with that later. Issuing maps now would be easier, cheaper, and achieved far more quickly. It could be a start -- a concrete act that would show good faith. The PA version, in Wexler's words, of a "tiny, tiny gesture."

Americans -- how about raising this issue with your government in very concrete terms? How about insisting that your government start demanding real signs of commitment to peace from the PA?

The place to go with this is to Congress. So I repeat here the sites for locating your representatives. Please, contact them, and share this with others who will do the same. (If your representative is Wexler, let him know what you think.)

For your Congresspersons:

http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW_by_State.shtml

For your Senators:

http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

In fact, while you are at it, how about writing letters to the editor proposing this demand of the PA.

~~~~~~~~~~

Before I leave the subject of incitement, I want to touch about one other issue -- courtesy of the Palestinian Media Watch, As Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook have written:

"US law prohibits the funding of Palestinian structures that use any portion of their budget to promote terror or honor terrorists. But $200 million of the US's proposed $900m. aid package is earmarked to go directly to the Abbas government, which regularly uses its budget to honor terrorists."

In fact...

"The PA chose to name its latest computer center 'after the martyr Dalal Mughrabi,' who led the most deadly terror attack in the country's history. Her 1978 bus hijacking killed 37 civilians, 12 of them children, including American photographer Gail Rubin. The new center is funded by Abbas's office, which is bolstered by Western aid money. (Al-Ayyam, May 5, 2009)

"Last summer the PA sponsored 'the Dalal Mughrabi football championship' for kids, and a 'summer camp named for martyr Dalal Mughrabi... out of honor and admiration for the martyr.' It also held a party to honor exemplary students, also named 'for the martyr Dalal Mughrabi,' under the auspices of Abbas and at which Abbas's representative 'reviewed the heroic life of the martyr [Mughrabi].' (Al-Hayat al-Jadida, July 23, 24 and August 8, 2008). All these PA-funded activities were to teach kids that a killer of women and children is a role model."

http://www.pmw.org.il/Bulletins_May2009.htm#b270509

Don't close your eyes the way the government does, my friends. Scream long and loud about this, and demand accountability.

~~~~~~~~~~

A bad sign: As of tomorrow, the checkpoint at Hawara, near Shechem in Samaria, will no longer check Arabs who are passing through on foot, only cars will be checked. But over the years Hawara has caught many an intended-terrorist who was on foot, carrying a long knife, or wearing an explosive belt. I myself over time have noted that when I reported a terrorist caught, very often it was at this one site.

This, of course, is one more "good faith gesture" /concession. Are they crazy?

~~~~~~~~~~

This link, which ends this posting on an upbeat note, is a highly unusual version of Hatikva ("The Hope") -- our national anthem. I would not have thought that I would like it, but I really did. Maybe you will too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Czcqw0gUma4

~~~~~~~~~~

see my website www.arlenefromisrael.info

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