web analytics
November 30, 2015 / 18 Kislev, 5776
At a Glance

Posts Tagged ‘Arafat’

Abbas Wins a Flag but Backs Off from ‘Bomb’ at Half-Empty United Nations

Wednesday, September 30th, 2015

Mahmoud Abbas informed the United Nations General Assembly Wednesday that he has submitted a request to the Security Council for recognizing the Palestinian Authority as an independent country based on its territorial demands with its capital in Jerusalem.

He also conditioned the Palestinian Authority’s abiding by agreements on Israel’s doing the same, which in his view means agreeing to all demands for a new state based on the Arab world’s terms.

However, the fact that the General Assembly was half-empty symbolizes the decreasing interest in the “Israeli-Palestinian” struggle and is a follow-up to President Barack Obama’s speech earlier this week in which he totally ignored the issue.

Abbas did not drop his threatened “bombshell,” perhaps a direct cancellation of all agreements, after a warning from U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry to keep his cool. Instead, he spun the yarn that the Palestinian Authority honors all agreements but that Israel does not..

His favorite point was “illegal settlements.” There is no agreement with the Palestinian Authority that Israel will not retain a Jewish presence in Judea and Samaria, unless negotiations conclude otherwise. But Abbas is relying on U.N. resolutions as “agreements.”

Since he has the support of most of the United Nations and foreign media, he can get away with the semantic trickery.

Abbas referred to Israel as an “occupying power” five times in his 40-minute speech, and he played on theme of the “Holy Land” six times, alleging that the “occupying power” prevents Muslims from worshipping at the Al Aqsa mosque on the Temple Mount.

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is expected to tell the General Assembly in his speech that the Palestinian Authority is behind vicious incitement on the Temple Mount in an effort to change the status quo and prohibit Jews from the holy site.

Abbas’ speech was filled to the brim with accusations against Israel, which afterwards called the address one of “incitement,” while he acted as the eternal peacemaker.

He rewrote history for a receptive audience and media, stating in part:

We entered those negotiations with open hearts and attentive ears and sincere intentions, and we were ready with our documents, papers and proposals. But the negotiations broke down just weeks after their launch…..

Sincere efforts and endeavors undertaken by international parties were repeatedly wrecked by the positions of the Israeli government, which quickly dashed the hopes raised by the launch of negotiations last September.

Unsurprisingly, Abbas weighed into “settlements.” an issue on which he has the full backing of the Obama administration. He told the United Nations:

Settlement activities embody the core of the policy of colonial military occupation of the land of the Palestinian people and all of the brutality of aggression and racial discrimination against our people that this policy entails.

This policy, which constitutes a breach of international humanitarian law and United Nations resolutions, is the primary cause for the failure of the peace process, the collapse of dozens of opportunities, and the burial of the great hopes that arose from the signing of the Declaration of Principles in 1993 between the Palestine Liberation Organization and Israel to achieve a just peace that would begin a new era for our region.

He repeated what has become an Arab mantra, totally unsubstantiated by facts, that Israel is conducting “excavations that threaten our holy places, and its military checkpoints prevent our citizens from getting access to their mosques and churches.”

Abbas managed to bring Israeli Arabs under his umbrella, warning that the Israeli government is imposing “new conditions…that will transform the raging conflict in our inflamed region into a religious conflict and a threat to the future of a million and a half Christian and Muslim Palestinians, citizens of Israel.”

His speech exposed the Palestinian Authority strategy of using the original peace agreement with Israel as a basis to demand that all its conditions be met under “negotiations,” which in essence have left nothing to be negotiated.

Abbas recalled that in 1988, “We agreed to establish the State of Palestine on only 22% of the territory of historical Palestine – on all the Palestinian Territory occupied by Israel in 1967.”

Report: With Little to Show for his Long Career, Abbas Told Jordan’s King He Plans to Resign

Tuesday, September 1st, 2015

(JNi.media) The Saudi newspaper Okaz reported on Monday that Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas had told Jordanian King Abdullah II that he wishes to resign because of the impasse in the peace process. The two met last Wednesday in Amman. Gaza sources have told the newspaper that Abbas plans to make a “surprising” speech in the coming days, notifying Palestinians about his resignation and retirement from political life.

On August 27, Abbas announced that he, along with a few others, will resign from the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) Executive Committee.

“Mahmoud Abbas last received the approval of Palestinian voters in the Occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip more than a decade ago,” writes Ben White in the Middle East Eye. “He is now 80 years old, with no vice president, no publicly anointed successor, and no prospect of new elections any time soon.”

Syndicated columnist Ramzy Baroud has suggested that, at the age of 80, Abbas is concerned about his legacy, a fact Baroud consideres “hardly encouraging.” The Unity deal Abbas’ Fatah signed with Hamas included the restructuring of the PLO and the inclusion of Hamas and the Islamic Jihad in one unifying, representative Palestinian government. But Hamas is furious with Abbas for not living up to his commitments. In fact, Hamas is now seeking its own alternatives to breaking the Gaza siege through “indirect talks” with Israel, using the good services of former British Prime Minister Tony Blair.

“There is no doubt that the moment when Abbas exits the scene has arrived,” writes Baroud, adding, “That could either become a transition into yet another sorry legacy of an undemocratic Palestinian leadership or it could serve as an opportunity for Palestinians, fed up with the endemic corruption, political tribalism and across-the-board failure, to step forward and challenge the moral collapse of the Palestinian Authority and the charade of self-serving ‘democracy’ of factions and individuals.”

French Town to Name New Road after Yasser Arafat

Thursday, June 4th, 2015

A small town in southern France has deiced to name a new road after Yasser Arafat, the arch-terrorist whose gun and holster on his hip earned him the Nobel Peace Prize for signing the Oslo Accords that morphed into the Oslo War in 2000.

Several people opposed the move and complained that Arafat was a “terrorist,” according to the Nice Matin newspaper, but La Seyne-sur-Mer Mayor Marc Vuillemot told the newspaper:

There is also a Yitzhak Rabin-street in the district. To my knowledge, the two men received the Nobel Peace Prize together.

Perhaps a different recognition could be calling a trench “Arafat Ditch,” but opposing the naming of a street after a Nobel Peace winner indeed would be absurd, almost absurd as the entire Noble Peace Price industry.

President Barack Obama received the Peace Prize in 2009, less than a year after having seen elected as President.  The Nobel Prize committee explained it granted him the honor for his “extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between people” and for promoting nuclear non-proliferation and a “new climate” reaching out to Muslims.

It is amazing how much he accomplished while sitting in the White House for eight months.

The five people who the Nobel Committee that decides who wins the price are appointed by the Norwegian parliament, which says everything you need to about the agenda of the organization based in Oslo, the home of the “peace” agreement that Arafat signed and eventually scuttled to launch what is popularly called the Second Intifada but also is known as the Oslo War.

Israeli Court: Facebook Posts Can Kill, Sends JM Fatah Leader to Jail

Wednesday, May 13th, 2015

By Michael Zeff

In a precedential ruling yesterday, Justice of the Peace Eitan Kornhauser sentenced Omar Shalabi, 44, a Jerusalem resident, to a nine-month prison term. Shalabi was found guilty before a civil court in Jerusalem on one count of incitement to terrorism and violence, and two counts of supporting a terrorist organization.

Shalabi was charged by the Jerusalem District Attorney (JDA) with using social media to laud the death of Jewish civilians at the hands of Arab and Palestinian terrorists and calling for more violent deeds.

“We are pleased that the court accepted the position of the State. Whereby those convicted of violent incitement through Facebook must face active prison sentences.” Said Attorney Oshrat Shoham, of the JDA prosecution team to Tazpit News Agency, adding “This decision is a precedent, clarifying that those abuse free speech via Facebook – whose exposure and influence is great – to call for violence and terrorism, belong behind bars.”

Shalabi posted his calls to violence and support of terrorists during last summer’s abduction of three Israeli teenagers, operation Protective Edge in Gaza and large-scale rioting and murders in Jerusalem.

“[Arab] Children of Jerusalem! Anger and carry on the path of desperation and discord which will rage and purify Jerusalem and Al Aqsa from the filth of Jewish bastards” Shalabi wrote on his Facebook page.

In his ruling, Kornhauser said that “we are not talking about a new type of crime, never before seen in court. But only a new means of carrying out the crime, utilizing technological advancement”

Shalabi, who headed a Fatah office in Jerusalem, reached over 5,000 followers on Facebook, according to the prosecution.

This is the first time in Israel that a person has been charged and sentenced over incitement and support of terrorism carried out over social media.

In a statement to the press, Shalabi’s attorney said “The punishment is exaggerated. Jews who incited violence were not even interrogated”.

Sara Haetzni-Cohen, chairperson of the My Israel Organization and social media activist related her satisfaction with the verdict to Tazpit News Agency.

She said “I congratulate the court for this important decision. In the recent past there have been events of physical harm against Jews following radical statements on social media. If stopped at an early stage it could have prevented the harm. Today’s precedent is important and can save lives in the future.”

Collective Guilt / Collective Punishment

Sunday, October 19th, 2014

{Originally posted on author’s site, FirstOne Through}

The town of Sayreville, New Jersey is in mourning.

The superintendent of the town shut the high school’s football program for the rest of the year due to reports of sexual assaults made by upper classmen of the football team against the junior classmen. According to initial reports, the incidents have been commonplace for many years.

The town outcry has not been limited to the assaults on the teenagers. People in the town have been vocal and angry about the cancellation of the year’s games and the number of people they feel are unfairly impacted. One resident said: “I don’t think the whole team should be punished. I feel like only two or more students are involved, and they are the ones that should be kicked off.“

The investigation into the hazing is in early stages, but it is fair to conclude that many people that did not participate in the crime will be impacted by the cancellation of the team’s football season. Impacted parties will range from team players, coaches and cheerleaders to business people that rely on the games to generate traffic into their stores.

Debates over collective guilt and collective punishment are not new. In many instances, the guilty parties do not squarely overlap with those impacted by the punishment. Oftentimes –as made clear by the Sayreville superintendent- the punishment serves to protect the assaulted parties in an absolute fashion while penalizing the broader collective in a relatively minor fashion.

Should the investigation yield certain results, people would certainly reconsider the broader community culpability in the crime. Imagine the following:

The form of hazing was written as part of the team manual The team acquired lots of equipment that was specifically used for hazing rituals The team had a statue of one of the seniors who successfully led the most hazings The name of the stadium where the team played was of an acknowledged child molester The coach was seen in various YouTube videos extolling the virtues of hazing to get the desired results from his players The town democratically elected the coach knowing of his support for hazing

This sounds too crazy to remotely resemble reality. If it were true, people would conclude that the entire team, coaching staff, school and town were culpable in the terrible deeds done to the teenagers. The state and country would demand more than just cancelling the season, but a dismantling of the entire institution. The town would be blacklisted by every organization in the country and effectively shut down, as the collective guilt would be seen as wide and deep.

The list above does not relate to Sayreville, NJ; they are the actions taken by Palestinians and their elected leadership.

The Hamas Charter calls on all Arabs to kill Jews everywhere The Palestinian Authority routinely praises murderers of innocent Jewish civilians and names squares and tournaments after the killers Hamas used the cement it requested as “aid”, not for building schools or homes, but for digging tunnels into Israel to attack, abduct and kill Israeli civilians and soldiers The tunnel network from Gaza started in homes of many Palestinians Hamas launched thousands of rockets targeting Israeli cities The head of Hamas called for deliberate bombings of Israeli cities to the cries of support from thousands of Palestinians Hamas was democratically elected by Palestinians in January 2006, winning 58% of the parliament Polls in August 2014 have Hamas winning 61% of the vote

What was the “punishment” that Israel enforced against the rabid anti-Semites that sought to kill its citizens and wipe out the country? Israel enforced a blockade of Gaza in 2007 after Hamas took control of the area. Yet it continued to allow electricity, food and supplies into Gaza despite the repeated Hamas statements that it sought to destroy Israel. The goal of the blockade was not a punishment, but a means to stop the flow of arms into Gaza which would be used to attack Israel.

Update: UN Forgot to Announce Ban Ki-Moon to Visit Negev Rocket Victims

Monday, October 13th, 2014

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon will visit communities battered by Hamas missiles and meet with relatives of victims after his visit to Gaza, his press secretary told The Jewish Press Tuesday evening.

An earlier story entitled “Ban Ki-Moon Skips Sderot on Way to ‘Stand with the People of Gaza’ was based on official United Nations press releases that Ban said he will “listen directly to the people of Gaza.” A visit to southern Israel was not mentioned.

The omission of any reference to his itinerary in southern Israel was an “unfortunate error” that will be investigated, his press secretary Stefan Dujarric said.

Fresh from a visit to Libya, another hotspot where the United Nations has been a colossal failure, Ban’s speech at the “Donors Conference” in Cairo to make Hamas safe from the world marked another step towards the international body’s becoming an instrument for insanity.

It turns out, according to Ban, the “root causes” of the war are not Hamas’ stated aim of destroying Israel. “We must not lose sight of the root causes of the recent hostilities: a restrictive occupation that has lasted almost half a century, the continued denial of Palestinian rights, and the lack of tangible progress in peace negotiations,” Ban said.

It’s all because of the “occupation,” meaning the Israeli presence in Judea and Samaria following the Jordanian army’s retreat in 1967 after joining half a dozen other Arab countries that tried and failed to annihilate Israel.

It’s because of the “occupation” – not the occupation by Jordan of Judea and Samaria after it and the Arab world refused to accept the U.N. recognition of Israel and the partition plan that would have left Israel a defenseless nation and without Jerusalem.

It’s because of the “occupation” when Israel took over Gaza from Egypt, which was happy to get rid of it in the war and allow Israel to breathe life into that had been a hapless and hopeless society.

It’s because of the occupation – but not the occupation of the political vacuum by Yasser Arafat, who led the destruction of the Arab economy and religious and social freedoms.

Not only is the “occupation” the reason that Hamas attacked Israel again and again and again.

One of the root causes also is the “denial of Palestinian rights,” rights they never had under Jordanian and Egyptian role. Ban did not refer to other rights, such as free speech, a fair trial and the freedom to be a Christian. It would be too much to suggest that Jews be free to be Jews because that is what the Hamas attacks were about.

Ban says otherwise.

The war was because of “the lack of tangible progress in peace negotiations,” the euphemism for creating a Palestinian Authority state according to its own definitions, including ridding the United Nations of the burden of “refugees,” who would flood Israel to rid the world of a Jewish nation.

Ban is to meet with Israeli leaders Monday. The earlier Jewish Press article, based on U.N. press releases, stated that “Ban will reserve for Arabs in Gaza the privilege of talking with him.”

“I believe it is important to be on the ground,” he told journalists in Cairo. “That is why I am announcing today that I will visit Gaza on Tuesday to listen directly to the people of Gaza, survey the situation for myself.”

The official UN News Center removed any doubt that the United Nations is a front for the United Anti-Israel Nations.

Press Secretary Dujarric phoned The Jewish Press to correct the official press releases’ omissions and said, Ban “will go to Kibbutz HaShlosha near and will meet with inhabitants of the kibbutz and with families impacted by the rockets and relatives of people who lost loved ones, and he will meet with them privately.”

However, Ban’s speech in Cairo and the official U.N. News Center hardly mentioned Hamas attacks on Israel.

“During the recent 51-day conflict, dozens of schools, hospitals and clinics were destroyed or damaged in Gaza. UN facilities sheltering women and children were hit, resulting in many casualties. Eleven staff members of the UN were killed in the course of the conflict,” the U.N. News Center stated.

No mention was made of Israeli casualties, No mention was made of damage in Israel. No mention was made that Israel did not raise a finger at Gaza until Hamas attacked.

The United Nations continues to act as a propaganda organ for the Palestinian Authority, which now officially includes Hamas, and the “unfortunate error” only highlights its agenda.

“Given that 70 percent of Gazans are refugees, we have a huge responsibility to rebuild homes and improve the situation in the refugee camps,” said UNRWA spokesperson Chris Gunness speaking with UN radio from Jerusalem this afternoon.

A Pundit’s Prophetic Words

Thursday, August 21st, 2014

Last week The Jewish Press carried an op-ed column by Charles Krauthammer titled “Israel and Hamas: Does No One Remember Anything?” The piece was a study in penetrating clarity; in other words, typical Krauthammer.

It’s little wonder his book Things That Matter: Three Decades of Passions, Pastimes and Politics (Crown Forum) topped the nonfiction bestseller lists for several months in late 2013 and early 2014 – a highly unusual feat for a collection of previously published newspaper and magazine columns.

Probably my favorite piece of writing from Krauthammer appeared as the cover story of the November 9, 1998 issue of The Weekly Standard and was titled “The Coming Palestinian State.”

As I noted several years back in one of my Monitor columns, the article, which unfortunately is not included in Things That Matter, fairly shouted crystal ball. (Note to Monitor readers: I hope to resume the column in the near future on at least an occasional basis.)

Krauthammer began “The Coming Palestinian State” with a defense of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s performance at the Wye River summit (this was, of course, Netanyahu’s first go-round in the prime minister’s chair), which had been derided by critics on both the left and the right.

Netanyahu, Krauthammer wrote, had by the time of his election in 1996 come to accept Oslo as a fait accompli – had in fact campaigned not on a platform of abrogating the treaty but of insisting on Palestinian compliance and reciprocity.

“The point,” argued Krauthammer, “is that Netanyahu never was a zealot. He has long believed that a solution to the Palestinian question would require some territorial compromise. He was never a ‘Land of Israel’ ideologue. He would, of course, have preferred to hold on to every inch for security reasons. But he understands realities.”

Netanyahu’s primary goals were to halt the one-sided nature of the negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority and to somehow safely steer the country through, if not completely around, the interim territorial withdrawals agreed to by the previous Israeli government.

Yasir Arafat had been under the impression that even before the start of “final status” negotiations Israel would hand over approximately a third of the disputed land in each of three redeployments – in effect leaving Israel with no bargaining chips just as the key issues of Jerusalem and Palestinian statehood were placed on the table.

“Netanyahu’s entire strategy for the last two years,” Krauthammer explained in that 1998 article, “undertaken at huge diplomatic and personal political cost, has been to reduce Arafat’s expectations. He had to make Arafat realize that whatever the provocations, whatever the diplomatic damage, however sour Israeli relations with the Arabs, however damaged Israeli relations with the United States, however many rock-throwing and tear-gas incidents this would provoke on the West Bank, Arafat was simply not going to get 90 percent of the land in the interim phase.

“On this he won. Wye ratifies the victory. Arafat had 27 percent of the territories when Netanyahu came to power. Wye gives him 13 percent more. Oslo’s interim phase will end with Israel having given up 40 percent of the land.

“From the Israeli point of view, this is an extraordinary achievement. It leaves Israel with a serious chunk of territory on the West Bank to bargain with.”

It was when he turned his attention to the specifics of what Arafat received at Wye that Krauthammer’s tone took a darker turn. That additional 13 percent of land promised to Arafat, he pointed out, was crucial not so much for its size as for the isolated pockets of Palestinian-controlled territory that would now be linked. And with Gaza and the West Bank connected by two special roads, the land under Arafat’s jurisdiction suddenly appeared more than ever like a real state.

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/opinions/a-pundits-prophetic-words/2014/08/21/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: