Doc's Talk: As Peace Talks Wane, Bennett Advising Livni to Negotiate with Aliens

Wednesday, January 01, 2014

As Peace Talks Wane, Bennett Advising Livni to Negotiate with Aliens

Yori Yanover

To our readers who might be alarmed by the possibility that the Earth, or Israel alone, has been negotiating with creatures from outer space, let me assure you that this was merely a quip by Minister Naftali Bennett, and not a report about an admittedly shocking situation. Also, those readers who object to satirical material on our website, seeing as the headline of this report could be considered somewhat spoofish, let me assure you that every bit of it is absolutely, honest to goodness sober and real.

Now that the bus full of murderous, bestial, horrible Palestinians with Jewish blood of women and children on their hands (feel free to add your own adjective, but it won’t stop anything)…
and the government ministerial committee on legislation has approved 8-3 a kind of annexation of the Jordan valley (to the great relief of the Jordanian king who refuses to have those crazy Palestinians at his border)…

and Chief PLO negotiator Saeb Erekat had his say (“the decision destroys all efforts for peace with Israel, showing the Israeli government’s indifference toward international law,” which it isn’t), we are officially in the next phase.
It’s the phase where the two opposing sides are attempting to galvanize their own public support, while making the other side look greedy, foolish, nearsighted, dangerous.
The two opposing sides, of course, are Justice Minister and Chief Negotiator Tzipi Livni vs. Jewish Home Chairman and Economy Minister Naftali Bennett. Because, frankly, there’s very little daylight between Tzipi and Erekat, or Tzipi and Kerry, but there’s a blast of Sahara desert sun between Tzipi and Naftali.
On Monday, Livni talked about the viability of the “peace negotiations,” saying “I’m not saying it’s easy, and I have issues with the Palestinians, too”—remember the daylight thing?—but the right’s glee over the fact that the Palestinians are not proving to be an honest partner for peace seems to her to be a fool’s delight, and an excuse.
“The question is not whether or not there’s a partner – we need to mark a target and take action.”
Very good advise to mortgage bankers, by the way: it makes no difference whether or not the borrower can pay it back – he’s over there, give him the money…
“My partner is Zionism,” Livni declared – I’m not making this up. “Today’s negotiation is not being conducted only with the Palestinians, but also with the world, through the United States, which is not merely the go between but an ally, with whom we share common interests.”
And then she added: “We can still reach a deal with the Palestinians and with the world and recruit them to our interests.”
If you feel that this phrase is bizarre, about recruiting the Palestinians and the world to our interests – it sounds just as bizarre in Hebrew.
Naftali Bennett, on his Facebook page, responded quickly: “If there’s no Palestinian partner, we’ll seek a treaty with aliens.”
Which makes for the fantastic image above, posted by Shahaf Pelovitz on Rotter.net.
Livni is livid at the Miri Regev bill to annex, for the first time in almost half a century, yet another part of the land of Israel, the valley alongside the Jordan River.
There isn’t a single reputable military expert who doesn’t say that without control over the eastern border with Jordan, Israel might as well give back the keys and try a different location—I hear the Fiji Islands are nice year round. Here’s why:
Netanya, where I live, like Tel Aviv, is smack in the middle of the country, where the vast majority of Israelis live, where our industry and commerce are, it’s about as “green line” as they come.
Netanya is also about 6 or 7 miles from the same “green line,” which is nothing but the spot where the Jewish and Arab armies stopped fighting in 1949.
(It has no geographic significance and, for that matter, no legal significance, other than marking a vast no man’s land nicknamed “The West Bank,” which was ceded by its last legal sovereign, the British Mandate in Palestine, back in 1948. The Hashemite Kingdom was never officially recognized as its sovereign—except for the Brits, no one else in the world thought they owned it, and in 1988 it gave up whatever claim it had had over it. When it was conquered by the IDF in 1967, the IDF became its legal sovereign according to international law. Not its occupier, but its sovereign. But that’s a lot of water under the Jordan River bridge.)
If a Palestinian State should come into being, God forbid, we can expect that the Hamas will take it over in a short time, and due to its new status as a state, Israel will not be able to do bubkas about it.
That’s awful enough, ask the Jewish settlements next to that other Hamas controlled Palestinian state in Gaza.
But Israel is able to control the violence emanating from Gaza, and now, with the new regime in place in Egypt, the terror government of Hamas is limited with what it can do to us before we retaliate fiercely. We should be able to survive a “West Bank” Palestinian state as well—as long as we’re able to monitor directly the Palestinian state’s eastern border, to prevent the traffic of military hardware from Jordan—which is 80 percent Palestinian.
Take away our ability to control the eastern border and yours truly, here in Netanya, will be filing his reports from his bomb shelter, which, in our building, is also a parking garage and our Internet connection is terrible down there.
Take away our Jordan Valley and watch the same fate that befell our brothers and sisters near the Gaza Strip—a couple hundred thousands of them, give or take—become the plight of about 3 million Israelis.
That’s the fate Tzipi Livni is planning for us, and she’s becoming angrier and angrier when we refuse to lay down our necks in the nice hole below the guillotine.
Finally: The Jewish Press website is running a poll that asks “Who do you think was the most dangerous person to the Jews in 2013?” My initial response was to look for the name Benjamin Netanyahu. but, alas, for reasons of niceties and politics, our staff preferred not to insult the man quite so openly. This is why we omitted President Shimon Peres as well, in his case strictly out of respect for the title.
But the truth is that Netanyahu, or rather his choice regarding the Jordan Valley bill, when it comes up for a Knesset vote, will decide the fate of Israel for a long time. If Bibi kills the Regev bill through parliamentary maneuvering, I propose that he should be handed his spot on the list of most dangerous to the Jews, right above Obama 9who’s leading right now, with Kerry and Rouhani tied for second place).
Livni is aware that once the Regev bill passes, it could mean the end of the negotiations. the Palestinians will walk. As it is they’re having a hard time explaining to their people why the Jews should be allowed to live, never mind hold on to some of their conquered territories.
So Livni will, indeed, meet with aliens: Vulcans, Klingons, Ferengi, whatever it takes, to find a way around the fact that the vast majority of Israelis, including many who support the “2-state solution” will never give up the Jordan Valley.
Live long and prosper, Tzipora Livni.

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