Doc's Talk: Explosive Karsenty interview‏

Tuesday, February 14, 2012

Explosive Karsenty interview‏

Translation by Google

In an interview published on JSSNews on February 8, Philippe Karsenty, legislative candidate in the 8th district of French nationals abroad, sharply criticized the foreign policy of the President of the Republic. This interview, taken by a number of websites and blogs, has raised the ire of the head of the minority group in UMP council of Neuilly-sur-Seine. Karsenty back on this incident, recalls in detail the foreign policy of Nicolas Sarkozy, and comments on the President's speech at the dinner of the CRIF.
http://jssnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/skk.png
JSSNews: Mr. Karsenty's interview published last week, it seems, caused some waves. Can you tell us more?
Philippe Karsenty - Indeed, the opposition UMP City Council Neuilly attempted to make a political coup by asking the mayor to condemn my remarks, which were, in their view, undermine the policy of France and President of the Republic . This is a ridiculous controversy, entirely foreign to municipal politics. I said that it is not as deputy mayor of Neuilly-sur-Seine that I speak on various topics of national or international interest, but as a free citizen of his word, an independent politician, candidate for national representation. In France, the word is free. Free speech is a constitutional freedom, it is not subject to question, to sanctify thinking - or lack of thought - a Past President. http://jssnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/umpapascontent.png

JSSNews: Basically, can you illustrate your critique of presidential foreign policy by a few specific facts?
Dr. K. - The foreign policy of Nicolas Sarkozy is a fiasco. Was it not preposterous to invite the dictator Gaddafi in December 2007 for the bombing in 2011? Was it not scandalous to invite a Hezbollah delegation in Paris, as did Nicolas Sarkozy in July 2007 when the terrorist group is responsible for the assassination of France's ambassador to Lebanon, Louis Delamare in 1981, and the death of fifty-eight French soldiers killed in the suicide truck attack against the Drakkar, headquarters of the French forces in Beirut, October 23, 1983? Was it not shameful to have the official guest at the parade on July 14, 2008, the tyrant Bashar Assad, major sponsor of international terrorism and mass murderer of his people?
Do we have the right to say that the Union for the Mediterranean was an absurd project that has failed completely? Do we have the right to say that the admission of non-State of Palestine to UNESCO, admission supported by Nicolas Sarkozy, was a tragic mistake? Recall that the said Palestinian Authority supports and glorifies terrorism and spreading anti-Semitism in its press, its branches, its textbooks. Is it not true that the president's entourage is largely composed of persons incompetent, and some are infréquentables? May I remind in passing that one of two co-editors of presidential speeches, Camille Pascal, said something outrageous against me, accusing me of acting wrongly, in the Al-Dura , on behalf of "Israeli intelligence" charge that was never earned any penalty? [To listen to the words of Camille Pascal, click here] Is it conceivable that Nicolas Sarkozy has been awarded the Legion of Honour to Charles Enderlin, author of the report which led to the worst anti-Semitic propaganda of modern times?
JSSNews: What is your reading of the presidential address at the dinner of the CRIF?
Dr. K. - This speech was generally appalling. There are platitudes: "The drama of a military conflict would solve nothing and would complicate any" untruths "The Europeans have had the crazy idea of the Shoah, France and Germany" or " This will mad, genocidal, was born this miracle, a democracy: Israel. " No, Israel is not born of the genocide of the Jewish people, born of a history and doctrine trimillénaire political Zionism. Still found in the speech of false parallels: about the release of Gilad Shalit - which, against all evidence, he claims to have helped - the President speaks of the exchange "for a thousand," when it s is done in reality the exchange of a martyred soldier for a thousand bloodthirsty terrorists. Another parallelism, which shows a total ignorance of the Middle Eastern reality: the comparison made between the President Franco-German relations in the past and the Arab-Israeli relations today. These remarks echo those, unspeakable, that Sarkozy delivered December 5, 2007 in Constantine: "I appeal to the people of Israel to not impose on the Palestinian people the same injustice that he himself has suffered for so many centuries. "From Stéphane Hessel early.
In addition, the Israelis have been entitled at the time of paternalism ridiculous: "Israel has earned the respect and fear. Do you do not believe that he came, the time to reflect on how Israel will now bring the love, devotion, admiration, consideration? "This is to ignore the hatred and war initiated by Israel's neighbors since its creation, and especially the thousands of anti-Semitism, which did not wait for the resurrection of the State of Israel to express themselves. Moreover, the speech of Nicolas Sarkozy contradicts its action: "The military solution is never, he says about Iran, the solution is political": how to understand, therefore, the wars in Libya, Afghanistan? I would like to acknowledge an obvious fact: those who, on the spot, politely applauded this speech do not represent the general opinion of the Jewish community in France. Overall, this discourse has generated a lot of irritation, sometimes indignation.
Finally, it is important to note that this speech was not written, so he fully appreciates Sarkozy's positions on issues he mentioned.
JSSNews: Does this mean that you call to vote for another right-wing candidate in the presidential election?
Dr. K. - Every person will vote according to their preferences, however, the vote is secret. I have not yet decided who I will vote for. The vote Sarkozy, for many of our countrymen, will be determined by economic interests, not an endorsement of presidential choices about hegemony, choices that fit into what the "Arab policy of France", a real policy humiliation of France, produced the worst in recent decades. What seems certain is that voting Sarkozy in the first round would help lose the right at the second, as if Nicolas Sarkozy was in the second round, Francois Hollande would beat him for sure. Perhaps he is right, an alternative to Nicolas Sarkozy, Bayrou would be called? Indeed, the center-right candidate seems to be the only one who can prevent the accession of the Left to power in 2012. Remind anyone planning to vote Sarkozy on April 22 that their choice leads naturally to elect Francis Holland May 6, 2012. Perhaps is it the cynical calculation of certain right-wing leaders present who wish to get rid of Sarkozy without daring to say really?
Interview by Sandro Thomassin - JSS News

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