Doc's Talk: Why Does The White House Say it Is Unaware of Saeb Erakat Incitement?‏

Saturday, November 13, 2010

Why Does The White House Say it Is Unaware of Saeb Erakat Incitement?‏

Nurit Greenger

`Gentlemen, I find this appalling!

How conveniently is it for team Obama to claim to be unaware of Erakat praising a Palestinian killer f a Jew? How conveniently is it for team Obama to always point fingers at Israel while mollycoddling the Palarabs beyond all comprehension.

Saeb Erakat is making an excuse for this particular incitement case. The Palarabs' leadership policy justifies killing Jews. Now time for action, to put the blame where it belongs.

How about all the American Jewish organizations making a point of "informing" the White House on this incitement and from here on making sure to inform the administration every time there is documentation on Palestinian incitement - which goes on constantly, with impunity. The Palestinian incitement is totally contrary to the Obama's Administration's "Palrabas, stop the incitement" Policy.

If the Jewish leaders FINALLY do their job and EACH and EVERY TIME there is documentation on incitement they stick the information in the White House's face, the White House would not be able to play dumb as they always do when they have to put the blame on anyone else but Israel.

Obama has shouted all the way from a podium Indonesia, which was an incitement on its own – about Israel's plan to build 1300 units in Jerusalem. How about he, finally, calling on the Moslem world in general, and the Palestinian Authority in particular, to end all the incitement against Jews and Israel AND the West?!

How about some leadership from the White House rather than obnoxiously and constantly attacking Israel which is Obama's obsession?

Given the fact that the Jewish Organizations and the Obama Administration have been giving the Palestinian Authority (PA)/Fatah/Mahmud Abbas-Salem Fayyad-Saeb Erakat Team a pass on the issue of their political/media incitement rhetoric, their curriculum of hate and violence and their ongoing delegitimization of the Jewish State of Israel, is it clear that the leadership – White House, US Administration and Jewish - deliberately or not, is totally misinformed or clueless and the reality on the ground.

To be better informed and up-to-speed, please begin with following all of Palestinian Media Watch (PMW) (http://www.palwatch.org/) bulletins.

Even in the Wall Street Journal op-ed of 11-10-10, 'From Jakarta to Jerusalem' (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704635704575604720195910014.html) there was no mention of Erakat praising a killer of an Israeli Government Minister. However, Obama chastising Israel for building homes for its citizens resonated all the way from Jakarta. This matter should have been brought up in a conference call to the White House immediately.

Wake up American Jewish leadership. It is time to see the "moderate" Palarab (aka (Palestinian) leadership for the stealth jihadists they are. It is time to realize that Team Abbas' ideology of Islamic supremacy is THE reason there is no peace!

Take action and put the blame where the blame belongs.

Nurit Greenger

Los Angeles, California, USA
***
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1110/White_House_Not_seeking_Bibi_confrontation.html

November 12, 2010

By Ben Smith
Categories:

* Middle East

White House: Not seeking Bibi confrontation

On a conference call with American Jewish leaders today, a White House official said the administration hadn't sought a confrontation with the Israelis over a new construction announcement.

President Barack Obama answered a question at a press conference on the subject straightforwardly but hadn't specifically planned to make a statement criticizing new Israeli building, National Security Council official Dan Shapiro said on the call, according to a participant.

The White House prefers not to litigate its differences with Israel in public, Shapiro told the group.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had a marathon seven-hour meeting yesterday with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that produced a noncommittal statement.

One note on the call that left participants dissatisfied: The official said he wasn't aware of a recent letter from chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erakat to a Palestinian convicted in the assassination of an Israeli cabinet minister.

Erekat described the letter as "humanitarian" and said it wasn't a gesture of support for the deed.

----

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/news.aspx/140503

11/07/10
PA 'Moderate' Erekat Praised Ze'evi Assassination Mastermind
by Gil Ronen

Saeb Erekat, a Palestinian Authority negotiator whom Israeli leftists often depict as a moderate voice, recently sent a letter of praise to the terrorist who planned the assassination of Israeli minister Rechavam Ze'evi in 2001.
Channel 10 television reported Sunday that Erekat warmly addressed Sa'adat, the head of the PFLP terror group who is serving a 30 year sentence in an Israeli jail, as “my dear brother,” adding that he was writing him “in order to express the strongest emotions of solidarity and brotherhood.”

“The occupation is carrying out a policy of defeat and humiliation towards you [prisoners] by canceling your accomplishments,” Erekat went on. “You exhibited steadfast resistance that has become the stuff of legend, during which many martyrs fell.”

"Our beloved one, the darkness of the jail will come to an end. We believe that we will meet soon and celebrate the victory and the liberation and freedom, for all prisoners.”

Erekat responded to the Channel 10 report by saying: “My letter is not political but humanitarian. I did not praise his deeds. Just as people in Israel care about Jonathan Pollard, we care for our prisoners. The Israeli should keep their noses out of matters that are not their business.”

In September, Erekat distanced himself from an ad campaign that was being conducted by the Geneva Initiative, a leftist Israeli group. The campaign portrayed Erekat as reaching out to Israelis, addressing them by saying “Hello Israel. I know you are disappointed in us. I know we failed to arrive at an agreement during 19 years of talks.” The ad attempts to portray Erekat's words as a sort of apology for PA intransigence.

But in a statement, Erekat said that his intention was completely different than that portrayed by the organizers of the Geneva Initiative sponsors. What he meant, the statement said, was that even though the PA has been blamed for failing to make a deal, it was still possible to arrive at a resolution of the conflict. “Unfortunately, some people misinterpreted my words as an apology to Israelis in the name of the Palestinians, and this is actually the opposite of what I intended and what I believe.” The PA Arabs were the ones suffering at the hands of Israel, he said, and if anyone needed to apologize, it was Israel, he added.

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