Doc's Talk: Mubarak the Peacemaker?

Thursday, September 02, 2010

Mubarak the Peacemaker?

Ashraf Ramelah

Today, Hosni Mubarak, the Egyptian dictator, will arrive in Washington, D.C. for the purpose of participating in the Middle East Peace Summit planned by U.S. President Barack Obama. There he will discuss the Palestinian-Israeli issue, along with Israel's Prime Minister Netanyahu and Palestinian Authority leader Abbas. According to the Egyptian media, Mubarak will be giving a speech aiming to explain Egypt's interest, along with all other Arab countries from the area, in promoting serious peace talks between the Arabs and Israelis. The prospect of Mr. Mubarak sitting down to broker or somehow facilitate peace between the Arabs living in Gaza and the state of Israel is laughable. Despite the signed peace treaty of 1979 between Egypt and Israel, during his twenty-nine years ruling Egypt, Mr. Mubarak has never once paid a visit to his neighbor, Israel, because he does not recognize Jerusalem as the capital of their country.

Within Mubarak's country, Arab-Muslim leaders and Egyptian media commonly refer to their Israeli neighbors as Kafirs (unbelievers), and everyone in the West by now knows the ramifications of being a Kafir in the eyes of Islam. This alone is enough to question Mr. Mubarak's integrity and intentions as he sits down at the table in Washington this coming week.

But if his attitude alone isn't proof enough that he is just playing a phony peacemaker game here in his current visit to America, look at Mubarak's record until now. As peacemaker, he allows the excavation of at least four hundred tunnels between the Egyptian borders in Sinai through Gaza. The purpose of the tunnels is to smuggle weapons to terrorists who fight against the only democratic country in the region. Does Mubarak expect the West to actually believe he does not know about these gun runs, or does he believe his brand of peacekeeping is perfectly acceptable to us? The West doesn't seem to mind either way because we are convinced that Egypt is a free and peaceful society aspiring to live among other democratic nations.

In the last couple of weeks, Egyptian, Israeli, and some Western media have reported that the Egyptian police arrested a few terrorists in Sinai launching missiles at an Israeli port. Within a few days of that arrest, the Egyptian police seized war weapons en route to Gaza. In the entire twenty-nine years of Mubarak's rule, there has never been even one arrest or weapons seizure prior to these recent actions. On the eve of his visit to Washington, this allows Mr. Mubarak to go to Washington as a hero. He can now report his strong record of halting terrorist activity. It is up to us to know that this is the Arab mentality at work creating propaganda for the West; it is certainly not longevity of conviction to stop terrorism and not a reversal of policy after years of complacency.

Allow me, Mr. Mubarak, to ask a question of you. I promise to keep your answer confidential. What are you planning to do with those arrested, the so-called Fydaeen? There is no news concerning any trial -- are you planning to free them when you return from Washington, or are they already free?

If this isn't enough argument for Mubarak as peace-faker, shall we look at how this prompter of peace keeps peace within his own borders, where the so-called government overlooks the trend in minority killings and unsolved murders as they relate to the non-Muslim minority? The country's economy is supported by Western aid and is managed with a fascist Wahhabi-type police system. Shall we in the West ignore all this as Mr. Mubarak contributes his thoughts to these very important peace talks this week?

What about the Coptic minority population of Egypt, whose members begs for fairness under the law but find themselves instead needing protection from it? Mubarak would have the West believe that the repeated acts of violence against this minority group are merely accidental or random when there is a very clear pattern of abuse, and because the Mubarak regime does nothing to stop this, the regime is complicit. If Mubarak is in fact, as he himself has claimed, the president of all Egyptians, then he is indeed the protector of all violence against Copts.

Copts, for example, appealed to Mubarak on various occasions, looking for protection and fair treatment, but this president of all Egyptians chose to follow his law of the desert, Arab-Islamic law, and use it against them. The following is just a sampling of what has occurred in recent times:

* 1990: Six Copts were murdered and fifty wounded (Manfaut-Upper Egypt) -- Burning of Coptic agriculture land due to rumors of Copts' intention to build a church (Bolak El Dakror, Cairo) -- Attack on Copts (Abu Matamer-Behera, North of Cairo), where six Copts, including one priest were killed, with various injured.
* 1991: Thirteen Copts were killed by Muslims mobs in Imbaba - Cairo.
* 1992: Fourteen Copts were massacred in El Manshia - Assyout, Upper Egypt.
* 1994: Islamic attack on the Virgin Mary Monastery (Al Kossia), where five monks were killed with machine guns.
* 1997: Nine Copts were massacred in front of St. George Church in Abu Kurkas, Upper Egypt -- thirteen Copts killed and other six wounded in Takla town - Bahgura, Upper Egypt.
* 1998: Two Copts were killed in Kosheh 1; the aggressors took their bodies out of the town. This attack was followed by a second one known as Kosheh II, where Muslim mobs attacked Copts leaving their church on Sunday New Year 2000, killing nineteen, burning Copts homes and businesses, and looting Copts' belongings.
* 2002: Muslims attacked St. Mary Church in El Menea, Upper Egypt.
* 2003: A Coptic woman was murdered with a police gun.
* 2005: Attack by Muslims in various Coptic churches in Alexandria; same attacks occurred in 2006 -- the assassination of a Coptic attorney and the throwing of his body from a window.
* 2006: Forcing fifteen Coptic families to leave their homes and business in Kena, Upper Egypt.

The entire list is too numerous to include here. I chose a few facts in a few years to illustrate the point that Mubarak, who is the leader of a supposedly civil country, is very definitely allowing this destructive trend involving massacres of a portion of his citizenry to continue. Shall we now take him seriously as he comes to Washington offering his mediation to generate peace?

This year, once again, Mubarak will come to Washington masquerading as a genuine peace-loving leader of a real democratic republic who seeks to keep peace within his own borders and beyond using principles of fairness and equality, freedom of speech, and especially freedom of religion. The Western leadership reaches out and warmly receives him -- like-minded statesmen, one to another. How long will we allow this charade to go on?

Ashraf Ramelah is founder and president of Voice of the Copts, a human rights organization working to free the oppressed and persecuted Coptic Christians of Egypt. Dr. Ramelah is a Copt who was born and raised in Egypt.

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