web analytics
December 8, 2016 / 8 Kislev, 5777

Posts Tagged ‘bibis’

Why Abbas Won’t Accept Bibi’s Offer

Sunday, June 26th, 2016

{Originally posted to the Commentary Magazine website}

During his address to the United Nations General Assembly that seemed largely a challenge to the organization’s legitimacy—he described its organs as s a “moral farce,” a “disgrace,” a “joke” and a “circus”—Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu slipped in a clever invitation. He asked Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas to come to Jerusalem to address the Israeli people at the Knesset. Abbas’s answer to the offer so far has been silence. But since he has repeatedly rejected every past invitation for a one-on-one meeting with the Israeli in recent years—just as he has repeatedly rejected Israeli offers of peace and statehood—there is little likelihood that the answer will be different this time.

If Abbas were serious about peace, going to Jerusalem in that manner would completely change the dynamic of both the stalled peace process and Israeli public opinion about the conflict no matter what the Palestinian said in his remarks. The spectacle of Abbas at the Knesset would undermine the arguments of the majority of Israelis who agree with the prime minister that the Palestinians don’t want peace. It would create what would likely be intolerable pressure on Netanyahu to give in to more of the PA’s demands on territory and other issues. If the generous terms of peace previously offered by Israel were really inadequate, such a stunt is the best and perhaps the only way for the Palestinians to do better.

So rather than just toss this aside as a meaningless gesture, as Netanyahu’s critics are doing, it’s worth asking why Abbas won’t even consider doing something that is so obviously in the interests of his people? The answer is painfully obvious. He can’t do it because his objective isn’t really a two-state solution that would end the conflict forever.

Going to the Knesset wouldn’t just revive echoes of Anwar Sadat’s dramatic 1977 gesture that led to peace between Israel and Egypt. More than anything either he or his predecessor Yasir Arafat has done, it would signal that the century-long Palestinian war on Zionism is over. Speaking there would mean that the Palestinians are acknowledging the legitimacy of the Jewish state and that the only obstacles to peace are details about borders and guarantees against future violence.

But Abbas won’t do that because that isn’t what he is after. As his own speech illustrated, Abbas’s view of the conflict is still fatally mired in a miasma of historical grievances and religious hate. Abbas used the UN GA rostrum to demand Britain apologize for the Balfour Declaration that set in motion international recognition for the right to the Jewish homeland. Just as bad, he recycled the lies he and his official media have been circulating about Israel’s intentions to harm the Temple Mount mosques that have served as the principle source of incitement to terrorism during the current “stabbing intifada.”

While he said that the PA’s implicit recognition of Israel in the 1993 Oslo Accords remained “in force,” he made it clear that it was conditional in nature and could be rescinded if the Israelis didn’t bow to all of his demands. The Palestinians have flouted their Oslo commitments over the last 23 years. More to the point, the entire focus of his current campaign at the UN is to abandon the bilateral negotiations to which the accords committed the PA in favor of unilateral steps that don’t so much sidestep peace as discard it altogether.

Abbas at the Knesset won’t happen because the political culture of the Palestinians is still rooted in the same rejection of Balfour that helped forge their sense of national identity in the last century. It’s easy for American liberals to condemn Netanyahu as insincere, but if Abbas were truly searching for a path to peace and independence for his people, the smartest thing he could do would be to say yes to the prime minister’s invitation. The fact that we all know he’d never even consider doing it tells us all we need to know about Palestinian intentions.

Jonathan S. Tobin

Shiloh Musings: Bibi’s Among USA’s Top Ten Admired Men

Tuesday, May 10th, 2016

Yesterday I blogged wondering if Donald Trump has a chance to win the United States Presidency. American polls keep saying that he hasn’t, but in the latest UK-based YouGov Most Admired Men in the USA Poll, Trump is #8

Barack Obama 10.3% Michelle Obama 7.5%
Pope Francis 8.2% Hillary Clinton 6.0%
Bill Gates 6.5% Ellen DeGeneres 5.9%
Stephen Hawking 5.2% Malala Yousafzai 5.6%
Billy Graham 5.2% Condoleeza Rice 5.4%
Bernie Sanders 5.0% Sandra Bullock 4.9%
Jimmy Carter 4.4% Barbara Bush 4.5%
Donald Trump 4.1% Laura Bush 4.3%
Dalai Lama 3.7% Elizabeth Warren 4.3%
Benjamin Netanyahu 3.7% Angelina Jolie 4.0%
George W Bush 3.5% Oprah Winfrey 3.6%
Johnny Depp 3.4% Meryl Streep 3.3%
Bill Clinton 3.3% Queen Elizabeth II 3.3%
Ben Carson 3.1% Kate Middleton 3.2%
Warren Buffett 2.9% Sarah Palin 2.8%
Jon Stewart 2.3% Taylor Swift 2.7%
Brad Pitt 2.2% Celine Dion 2.6%
Ted Cruz 2.0% Carly Fiorina 2.3%
Mark Zuckerberg 1.9% Emma Watson 2.2%
Mitt Romney 1.9% Jennifer Lawrence 2.0%

And take a look at who is two places under Trump, it’s our very own Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu!

Do you remember not that long ago when Netanyahu was invited by the Republicans to speak to Congress and the Democrats had fits? Obama and his cronies fear Bibi, because Bibi has points that POTUS and staff can’t or don’t want to answer.  You may very well know that I don’t agree with everything Netanyahu says or does, but he’s certainly much better than the American President. And Netanyahu’s knowledge of World History etc is unbeatable.

It’s interesting that, with the exception of Trump, all the other Republicans are less popular than Bibi is. This poll does show that the American Left is strong. Obama, Sanders and even Jimmy Carter are ahead of Trump.

Yes, for good or for bad, it is just a poll. Don’t forget that. Still food for thought….

Batya Medad

NYT Upset at Bibi – but They Won’t Say the Real Reason Why

Wednesday, October 2nd, 2013

The New York Times is not happy with Bibi:

Mr. Netanyahu has legitimate reasons to be wary of any Iranian overtures, as do the United States and the four other major powers involved in negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program. But it could be disastrous if Mr. Netanyahu and his supporters in Congress were so blinded by distrust of Iran that they exaggerate the threat, block President Obama from taking advantage of new diplomatic openings and sabotage the best chance to establish a new relationship since the 1979 Iranian revolution sent American-Iranian relations into the deep freeze.

Even though the Times admits that pretty much every fact Netanyahu brought up is accurate!

Mr. Rouhani and the Iranian foreign minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif, have insisted repeatedly that Iran wants only to develop nuclear energy and that obtaining a nuclear weapon would harm the country’s security.

Even so, Iran hid its nuclear program from United Nations inspectors for nearly 20 years, and the country is enriching uranium to a level that would make it possible to produce bomb-grade nuclear material more quickly. It has also pursued other activities, like developing high-voltage detonators and building missiles that experts believe could only have nuclear weapons-related uses.

These facts make it hard not to view the upcoming American-brokered negotiations skeptically. But Mr. Netanyahu has hinted so often of taking military action to keep Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon that he seems eager for a fight.

Actually, the main thrust of Bibi’s speech was to not to start a war, but a warning against loosening sanctions in exchange for smiles and empty promises:

I have argued for many years, including on this podium, that the only way to peacefully prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons is to combine tough sanctions with a credible military threat. And that policy is today bearing fruit. Thanks to the effort of many countries, many represented here, and under the leadership of the United States, tough sanctions have taken a big bite out of Iran’s economy. Oil revenues have fallen. The currency has plummeted. Banks are hard pressed to transfer money. So as a result, the regime is under intense pressure from the Iranian people to get the sanctions removed. That’s why Rouhani got elected in the first place. That’s why he launched his charm offensive. He definitely wants to get the sanctions lifted, I guarantee you that, but he doesn’t want to give up Iran’s nuclear weapons program in return.

Now, here’s the strategy to achieve this:

First, smile a lot. Smiling never hurts. Second, pay lip service to peace, democracy and tolerance. Third, offer meaningless concessions in exchange for lifting sanctions. And fourth, and the most important, ensure that Iran retains sufficient nuclear material and sufficient nuclear infrastructure to race to the bomb at a time that it chooses to do so. You know why Rouhani thinks he can get away with this?…Because he’s gotten away with it before. 

The NYT cannot find any holes in Netanyahu’s logic. It cannot find any concrete concession that Rouhani is offering. Yet, against all known facts, it still insists that Rouhani is the moderate who must be given concessions to, and Bibi is the warmonger.

There is nothing wrong with speaking to and negotiating with Iran, but there is a great deal wrong with loosening sanctions in response to a smile.

So if the Times cannot find anything actually wrong with Bibi’s words, why are they so upset at him? The reason seems to be because he called them out for doing the exact same thing with North Korea:

Like Iran, North Korea also said its nuclear program was for peaceful purposes. Like Iran, North Korea also offered meaningless concessions and empty promises in return for sanctions relief. In 2005, North Korea agreed to a deal that was celebrated the world over by many well-meaning people. Here is what the New York Times editorial had to say about it: “For years now, foreign policy insiders have pointed to North Korea as the ultimate nightmare… a closed, hostile and paranoid dictatorship with an aggressive nuclear weapons program.

Very few could envision a successful outcome.

And yet North Korea agreed in principle this week to dismantle its nuclear weapons program, return to the NPT, abide by the treaty’s safeguards and admit international inspectors….Diplomacy, it seems, does work after all.”

A year later, North Korea exploded its first nuclear weapons device.

That’s the real reason the “Paper of Record” is so miffed – because Bibi mentioned its record of believing dictators on the threshold of nuclear weapons capability.

The truth hurts, so the NYT – instead of admitting its very real role in pressuring Washington to believe North Korea’s empty promises – is lashing out at the person who pointed it out.

This is behavior one would expect from a teenager who was caught in a lie, not from a newspaper whose entire reputation is dependent on accuracy.

The NYT’s choosing to ignore that part of Bibi’s speech explains a great deal about its nonsensical editorial that is at odds with facts.

Visit Elder of Ziyon.

Elder of Ziyon

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/blogs/elder-of-ziyon/nyt-upset-at-bibi-but-they-wont-say-the-real-reason-why/2013/10/02/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: