Sunday, July 24, 2011

  • Sunday, July 24, 2011
  • Elder of Ziyon
How's that Arab Spring coming along?

From Al Masry al Youm:
At least 143 peoplewere injured in Cairo’s Abbasseya district on Saturday when thousands of demonstrators fought opponents with stones after marching to the Defense Ministry to urge their military rulers to speed up reforms, the Health Ministry said.

Central Security and military forces cordoned protesters in Abbasseya, while residents threw stones and molotov cocktails at them.

About 5000 people marched from Tahrir Square to the Ministry of Defense headquarters in Abbasseya to demand the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF), which has been ruling the country since February, set up a clear timetable for handing power to an elected civilian government.

A protester told Al-Masry Al-Youm that at least two activists, Amr Gharbeia and Alya el-Husseiny, were kidnapped by a group of thugs.

“We heard that the thugs are going to hand in the two activists to a police station near Abbasseya,” he said. Al-Masry Al-Youm could not independently verify the claims.

Military forces fired shots in the air to disperse protesters as they reached the area. People in the area threw stones at protesters, which injured scores of them.
The number of injured rose to 231 later in the evening.

Meanwhile, an imam called all Egyptian secularists to leave the country:
Arguments broke out between Jama'a al-Islamiya members, Salafis and others at the Fateh Mosque on Friday over the shape of the future Egyptian state.

Jama'a al-Islamiya members drove those defending a secular state out of the mosque at the end of the argument.

Abdallah Darwish, the mosque's imam, criticized proponents of the secular state, saying they should leave the country if they do not want it to be an Islamic one that adopts Islamic law. “Grow that secular seed outside Egypt. Since we were young, we have learned that this is an Islamic state.”

Saturday, July 23, 2011

  • Saturday, July 23, 2011
  • Elder of Ziyon
Haven't had one for a while, so...here it is.

Friday, July 22, 2011

AP has an article on an archaeological dig in Shechem (Nablus):
Archaeologists unearthing a biblical ruin inside a Palestinian city in the West Bank are writing the latest chapter in a 100-year-old excavation that has been interrupted by two world wars and numerous rounds of Mideast upheaval.

Working on an urban lot that long served residents of Nablus as an unofficial dump for garbage and old car parts, Dutch and Palestinian archaeologists are learning more about the ancient city of Shekhem, and are preparing to open the site to the public as an archaeological park next year.

The project, carried out under the auspices of the Palestinian Department of Antiquities, also aims to introduce the Palestinians of Nablus, who have been beset for much of the past decade by bloodshed and isolation, to the wealth of antiquities in the middle of their city.
Then comes the good part:
In Israel, archaeology, and especially biblical archaeology, has long been a hallowed national pursuit traditionally focused on uncovering the depth of Jewish roots in the land. For the Palestinians, whose Department of Antiquities was founded only 15 years ago, the dig demonstrates a growing interest in uncovering the ancient past.

The department now has 130 workers and carries out several dozen rescue excavations every year on the sites of planned building projects in areas administered by the Palestinian Authority, said Hamdan Taha, the department's director. Ten ongoing research excavations are being conducted with foreign cooperation.

All of the periods in local history, including that of the biblical Israelites, are part of Palestinian history, Taha said.
"Palestinian history" predates "Palestinians?" How can it be considered "Palestinian history" if the residents of the lands were not related to today's Palestinian Arabs? Do Jews claim that uncovering pre-Biblical treasures is part of the history of Israel? It's important, to be sure, but Israeli archaeology - despite the claims of its detractors - is populated by people who are dedicated to uncovering the truth, whether it seems to support or  go against the biblical narrative. To call any ancient findings "Palestinian history" is to grotesquely mangle the meaning of the word.

This is an obvious attempt to minimize real history, and especially Jewish history, in the land and instead push a narrative of an ancient "Palestinian people" who never existed.

But don't take my word for it:
Digs like the one in Nablus, he said, "give Palestinians the opportunity to participate in writing or rewriting the history of Palestine from its primary sources."
Ah, archaeology gives today's Palestinian Arabs the opportunity to rewrite history. Got it.

(h/t Dan)
  • Friday, July 22, 2011
  • Elder of Ziyon
Nice:

Despite only being 64 years old, and constantly in a state of political turmoil, Israel is fast becoming known in technology circles, as the world’s second Silicon Valley and as a ‘start up nation’ – now also the title of a successful book by Dan Senor and Saul Singer, charting the country’s successful and often unknown tech story.

This prowess in technology has resulted in leaders and high profile figures from around the world to make regular visits to the small embattled state to see the start up nation in action. Earlier this month for instance, the Lord Mayor of the City of London, Alderman Michael Bear,flew into Israel in order to promote the UK’s capital as the best place for Israeli’s to list their companies and to find out about opportunities for UK based fund managers to invest in Israeli technology businesses.
Seeing the start up nation in action, so soon after returning from Palo Alto – the home of the original Silicon Valley, I was impressed by the same high levels of innovation, concentrated into one small area and a similar set of cash rich and investment-hungry venture capital firms waiting on the sidelines for the next golden egg.
Company after company presented to us, a small band of international journalists, many showing a different solution to a problem people often don’t yet know they need solving.
Stand out technology companies included: Waze – a mobile navigation app updated in real-time, Playcast – an on demand gaming service delivered via TVs without a games console, and JustAd TV, an advertising service which allows adverts to be dropped into time-shifted viewing.
However, where the Israeli ‘Silicon Valley’ differs to the original Californian version, is in the amount of consumer technology products being created.
I saw a lot of middleware and chip companies while on my tech tour, which definitely all fell into the business to business category.
According to Yonatan Sela, vice president of marketing of Tvinci, a pay TV on-demand platform, because of Israel’s small size, (7.7 million) and it’s rather unique inability to do business with its direct neighbours for political reasons, it’s difficult to grow a consumer technology business in Israel.
“Building a consumer brand is much harder to do outside of a big market like the US. It’s definitely very difficult to do in Israel as the population is so small that growing and scaling a consumer brand is tough. Plus we can’t rely upon the brand then to catch on with our immediate neighbours. This is why business to business solutions we can provide via technology and then sell aboard, is more commonplace."
However, Gilad Japhet, the founder and chief executive of MyHeritage, a popular social networking site for families and is a rare example of an Israeli consumer web company, thinks the focus on technology solutions for businesses is indicative of the country’s culture and expertise.
“Israelis are incredibly good at problem solving. They are trained to never accept barriers and always try and solve an issue – no matter how difficult it is. This makes Israel very strong in technology. However, Israelis are typically not good when it comes to finesse and creating slick user interfaces for the normal consumer. This leaves a shortage of business to consumer start ups in Israel as people here usually like to solve digital issues for businesses but not the consumer…I think Israelis are drawn more to algorithms and the back end stuff.”
There is also a trend happening across the country's technology start ups which is helping to create a more stable and dependable business sector. Entrepreneurs are slowly moving away from the ‘fast exit’ which Israeli founders of technology companies had become known for. Increasingly these technology businesses are being built for the long term, hoping to ape and eventually rival the giants of Silicon Valley.
  • Friday, July 22, 2011
  • Elder of Ziyon
  • Friday, July 22, 2011
  • Elder of Ziyon
Syria just isn't in the news as much as it was a couple of months ago - but the protests against the Assad regime keep getting bigger.

Today, in Hama, hundreds of thousands making a huge human Syrian flag:


Thousands in Latakia:


Thousands in Edleb:


Deir az-Zour:


Homs:



There are protests in dozens of Syrian cities today. And people are getting killed.

This is not the time for the media and politicians to lay off - it is time to step up.
  • Friday, July 22, 2011
  • Elder of Ziyon
A South Cairo court has ruled to keep Ilan Grapel in jail for an additional 45 days as the Egyptian government continues to look for evidence that the openly Israeli tourist was really a secret Mossad agent.

Grapel has already been in custody for some five weeks. Efforts by the US to free him have not been successful.

Meanwhile, Hamas leader Mahmoud Zahar announced that Egypt has nothing to fear from Hamas - but rather from Israeli spies like Grapel. He says that the reports that Hamas helped spring prisoners during the uprising were false and said that "we do not interfere in the affairs of Arab countries at all."
  • Friday, July 22, 2011
  • Elder of Ziyon
Amazing:
Archaeologists have unearthed what they believe to be a golden bell belonging to the High Priest from the period of the Second Temple.
While conducting an archaeological dig in Jerusalem's City of David, members of the Israel Antiquities Authority were astonished to find a rare golden bell with a small loop at its end.

Archaeologists Eli Shukron and Professor Ronny Reich of Haifa University, who are leading the excavation, said: “The bell looks as if it was sewn on the garment worn by a man of high authority in Jerusalem at the end of the Second Temple period [1st Century B.C.E.]."

That man of high authority is assumed to be none other than the High Priest. Archaeologists have surmised that the bell may have fallen while he walked through Jerusalem's main street, near Robinson's Arch [an ancient entrance to the Temple Mount]. They believe the bell may have fallen into the drainage canal below.

The bell was discovered in the city’s main drainage canal from that period, unearthed between layers of dirt that had piled up on the floor of the channel. The drainage canal was built and hewn west to the Western Wall of the Temple Mount, carrying rainfall from different parts of the city, through the City of David and the Shiloah Pool to the Kidron Valley.

Jewish sources say that the high priests who served in Jerusalem's Holy Temple did indeed hang golden bells on the edges of their coats. The book of Exodus, for example, describes the coat of Aaron, the high priest, as containing “bells of gold.”

Exodus 28:31-34:
And thou shalt make the robe of the ephod all of blue. And it shall have a hole for the head in the midst thereof; it shall have a binding of woven work round about the hole of it, as it were the hole of a coat of mail that it be not rent. And upon the skirts of it thou shalt make pomegranates of blue, and of purple, and of scarlet, round about the skirts thereof; and bells of gold between them round about: a golden bell and a pomegranate, a golden bell and a pomegranate, upon the skirts of the robe round about.
  • Friday, July 22, 2011
  • Elder of Ziyon
From CRI:
A United Nations agency taking care of Palestinian refugees threatened Thursday to suspend all its activities in the Gaza Strip if people did not end a series of protests against the organization.

"We are thinking to stop our operations completely in a week" if the protests against the UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) continued, said Chris Gunness, spokesman for the UNRWA.

Dozens of people have blocked gates of the UNRWA headquarters in Gaza City for the second day because the agency suspended some of its relief programs.

Gunness stressed that it is unacceptable for the protests to develop in this way.

The UNRWA says their basic services, mainly health and education, are still being offered normally, and the suspension targeted other programs such as temporary employment.

The UNRWA attributes the crisis to a lack of funding, noting that the donor countries did not meet their obligations.

The protests are sponsored by Hamas, the Islamic movement that controls Gaza. Hamas refused the UNRWA's threats to stop the operations and called on the protestors to continue their sit-in around the agency's headquarters.
Comments at Palestine Press Agency are defiant, saying that the UN could "go to hell" because it is a Zionist agency anyway.

Hey, if UNRWA doesn't want to be there, and Gazans don't want it to be there....
Yesterday, J-Street came out with a poll saying that Jews are still more pro-Obama than leaning towards Republican candidates, even though that support has eroded.

The general outline of that result is probably mostly true, but another of the survey questions - regarding J-Street itself - shows how the wording of a question can influence the answer.

Here is how the press release described the poll result that J-Street clearly wanted to uncover:
Efforts to prevent Jewish critics of Israeli government policy from participating in Jewish community events directly contradict the beliefs and values of most American Jews. When asked if groups like the JCC or Jewish Federations should allow Jewish organizations that publicly criticize certain Israeli government policies to participate in events sponsored by the Jewish community, 79 percent responded that they should allow these groups to participate.

This belief holds steady (77 percent) when presented with J Street’s perspective about  opposing policies like settlement expansion in the West Bank and with J Street’s critics’ perspective that J Street’s criticism undermines Israeli security and that “just calling itself pro Israel does not make J Street pro-Israel.” Notably, these results are very similar among Jews who belong to a synagogue (74 percent think J Street should be allowed to participate) and Jews who do not belong to a synagogue (79 percent think J Street should be allowed to participate).
Do 77% of Jews believe that J-Street belongs inside the "big tent" of Jewish organizations?

Here's how the general question was phrased:

Do you think Jewish community organizations such as local Jewish Federations and JCCs should allow or not allow Jewish organizations that publicly criticize some Israeli government policies to participate in events sponsored by Jewish community organizations?

Should allow 79%
Should not allow 21%
It is a generic question, designed to appeal to Jewish sense of fairness. Of course everyone supports multiple viewpoints and of course it is possible to be critical of specific Israeli policies while remaining inside the mainstream of the American Jewish community. But at some point, "criticism" goes beyond the pale - and the survey question does not attempt to identify where that line is.

On J-Street specifically, the question bias is stark:
As you may know, there is a Jewish organization called J Street which calls itself the political home for pro-Israel, pro-peace Americans.

J Street supports Israel and its right to defend itself, and believes that it is acceptable to criticize some Israeli government policies, such as expansion of Jewish settlement in the West Bank.

Opponents of J Street say that an organization which criticizes Israeli policy undermines Israeli security, and that just calling itself pro-Israel does not make J Street pro-Israel.

Do you think Jewish community organizations such as local Jewish Federations and JCCs should allow or not allow J Street to participate in events sponsored by Jewish community organizations?

Should allow 77%
Should not allow 23%
Keep in mind that most American Jews are not so involved in politics to have ever heard of J-Street, or to care too much about it. So the first sentence subconsciously defines J-Street for them by saying it is "pro-Israel, pro-peace" - concepts that everyone agrees with. That sentence frames the next two sentences.

The next sentence states, as a fact, that J-Street supports Israel and its right to defend itself - without defining what that means. They mention one specific Israeli policy they disagree with, but don't say (for example) that they support the US cutting aid to Israel based on that position.

The third sentence does not state anything as a fact - but as a claim. Opponents say something, but it is not established as fact the way the previous sentence described J-Street. So while J-Street is defined by the question itself as being pro-Israel, it says that its opponents only say that it is not.

Not only that,  the characterization of what J-Street's opponents believe is framed as a generic attack against any organization that is even mildly critical of Israel, subtly putting J-Street in a broad category of a group of organizations that criticize some specific aspects of Israeli policy while inherently being broadly supportive of Israeli policy.

Now that the question has thoroughly defined the parameters, the person being surveyed is primed to answer the way J-Street desires.

To make it clearer, here is another way the question could have been phrased:
As you may know, there is a Jewish political organization called J-Street.

J-Street claims to support Israel and its right to defend itself and says that it only criticizes some Israeli government policies. It would like the US to reduce aid to Israel unless Israel adheres to this American political organization's concept of what Israel should do.

Opponents of J-Street note that J-Street has lobbied for the US not to veto anti-Israel UN resolutions, and that both the Israeli public and government are overwhelmingly against J-Street's political positions as being dangerous to Israeli security.

Do you think Jewish community organizations such as local Jewish Federations and JCCs should allow or not allow J-Street to participate in events sponsored by Jewish community organizations?

How do you think that American Jews would answer that question?

J-Street's biased question could even be used to describe "Jewish" groups that support boycotting Israel. Which shows even more starkly how badly that question was written, and how you cannot believe survey results based on press releases by the organizations that issued the survey to begin with.

Thursday, July 21, 2011

  • Thursday, July 21, 2011
  • Elder of Ziyon
I ran across this from JerusalemOnlineU; it is well done:

  • Thursday, July 21, 2011
  • Elder of Ziyon
Sultan Knish offers Outraged Protest Tours of Israel!

CiFWatch observes their favorite reporter trying her damnedest to spin Israeli actions in Gaza to her tastes.

Raed Salah is putting more fake gravestones in Jerusalem, in their ongoing attempt to grab land.

Al Qaeda is working on a cartoon to recruit kids to terror.

Is Assad now trying to inflame sectarian tensions to keep in power?

Israelis aren't happy that a McDonald's opened at Masada. (I made a point to eat at a kosher Israeli McDonalds once, and it was perhaps the worst burger I ever ate.)

A former pro-Palestinian Arab activist starts to see the light.

Malaysia's Utustan newspaper gets called out for its anti-semitism.

Walter Russell Mead gives a good definition of anti-semitism.

Victor Shikhman has two excellent pieces about BDS and Israel.

The ridiculous "Mossad spy" story from New Zealand.

60,000 tourists expected in Israel this year who are Arabs from the territories!

Muslim taxi driver in England shouts "All Jewish children must die." Outside a Jewish school.

Marty Peretz on the fashionable hostility towards Israel.

Challah Hu Akbar notes that Israel is the worst genocidal state ever!

Heavy metal and belly dancers - as improbable a pair as Israelis and Arabs.

Here's an IDF video (in French!) that seems designed to make heads of Israel haters explode into tiny little fragments, much like the suicide bombers they support: Worth sending to everyone who was pro-flotilla.


(h.t DWM, deegee, Israel Muse, Yoel, Firouz, Serious Black, jzaik, JW, Silke, DG)
  • Thursday, July 21, 2011
  • Elder of Ziyon
The latest Pew poll on global attitudes mirrors what we have seen in the past.

Ratings of Jews are dismal in the seven predominantly Muslim nations surveyed. About one-in-ten (9%) Muslims in Indonesia, and even fewer in Turkey (4%), the Palestinian territories (4%), Lebanon (3%), Jordan (2%), Egypt (2%) and Pakistan (2%) express favorable opinions of Jews.

Arab nations also overwhelmingly believe that Judaism is a violent religion:
In the Arab countries surveyed, large majorities of Muslims who say some religions are more prone to violence consider Judaism to be the most violent religion; 97% in Jordan, 93% in Egypt, 88% in the Palestinian territories and 77% in Lebanon share this view.

Outside of the Arab world, more than half of Muslims in Indonesia and Pakistan who say some religions are more violent also cite Judaism as the most violent (56% and 54%, respectively). In Turkey, however, slightly more say Christianity is the most violent religion than name Judaism (45% vs. 41%); in 2005, when the question was last asked, more than twice as many Turkish Muslims named Christianity as the most violent religion as named Judaism (46% vs. 20%).

And, as time passes, fewer and fewer Muslims believe that 9/11 was done by Arabs!

When asked about the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon, few among the Muslim publics surveyed believe these acts were carried out by groups of Arabs. The highest percentage who believe that Arabs were culpable for the 9/11 attacks is found in Lebanon, where 28% of Muslims believe this to be true, with roughly comparable numbers of Sunni (31%) and Shia (26%) agreeing on this point. A similar proportion of Israeli Muslims (27%) also say groups of Arabs conducted the attacks.

In the other predominantly Muslim countries surveyed, fewer than one-in-four Muslims accept that Arabs conducted the attacks on New York and Washington 10 years ago. Pakistanis and Turks are the most skeptical, with just 12% and 9%, respectively, saying that groups of Arabs carried out the 9/11 terrorist acts.

In several of the Muslim nations for which there are trends, skepticism has grown since 2006. Among Jordanians, the percentage of Muslims who believe Arabs were responsible for the terrorist acts has fallen 17 percentage points, compared with five years ago. Over the same period, the percentage of Muslims in Egypt who accept that groups of Arabs carried out the attacks has declined 11 points, while in Turkey it has shrunk by 7 percentage points. In the case of Indonesia and Pakistan, opinions on the matter have changed little since 2006.
(h/t CHA, Zach N)
  • Thursday, July 21, 2011
  • Elder of Ziyon
Yesterday we looked at the opening of the new Andalusia Mall in Gaza City. But we didn't get a good idea of the kinds of goods one could buy there.

So, thanks to Palestine Times and Demotix, here are some of the goods that you can pick up the next time you are in Gaza:







I am always astonished at how Gaza businessmen can invest so much in products that everyone knows nobody can afford. And somehow they not only stay in business - they keep opening up more stores!
  • Thursday, July 21, 2011
  • Elder of Ziyon
The State Department just released a 1278-page document of meetings and memos relating to the Middle East from 1969-1976, many of which center on events leading up to, during and following the Yom Kippur War.

It is a really fascinating historical record.

To whet your appetite, here are some of the jokes mentioned in the archive.

May 7, 1973 - meeting between Brezhnev, Gromyko and Kissinger in Zavidovo, Russia.

Brezhnev: Let us turn to an easy question now, the Middle East. Let us send Dr. Kissinger to the Middle East for two weeks.

Gromyko: President Nixon and I will write out a brief lucid instruction, and it is done with.

Kissinger: You know the story of the scorpion whowanted to cross the Suez Canal. He asked a camel if he could ride on his back. The camel said, “If I do and you sting me, I will be dead.” The scorpion said, “I will drown also, so you have every guarantee.” So the camel took the scorpion on his back and they started across. In the middle of the Canal the scorpion stung the camel and as they drowned the camel asked, “what did you do this for?” The scorpion said, “you forgot this is the Middle East.” [Laughter]

Gromyko: Very good.

Brezhnev: I have heard a different version, a scorpion—on the back of a frog. And the frog said, “That is just my nature!”

Kissinger: There is a story about an Arab lying in his tent trying to take an afternoon sleep. There were a lot of children making a lot of noise. So he told the children, “In the village they are giving away free grapes and you should go there.” So the children went away to the village. It got very quiet. Just as he was falling asleep he said to himself, “You idiot, what are you doing here if they are giving away free grapes?” So he went to the village. [Laughter]
So I think it would take three weeks.

Brezhnev: Three! Since this is the evening of jokes, I will tell you one.

Kissinger: I was hoping to trigger you—you are much better at it.

Brezhnev: Sometimes in our negotiations something happens that applies to Jackson. Two Jews meet. One asks, “Abraham, why are you not going to Israel? You applied for a permit and everything seemed to be settled.” The other replied, “Some goddamn fool wrote an anonymous letter on me alleging I am not a Jew.” [Laughter]

So with the communique´ we still have time, and Mr. Nixon can still take a look at it. The experience of the Moscow Summit shows it can be done.

Sonnenfeldt: Kornienko and I spent all night on it.

Brezhnev: Is not that a pleasant way? Let me tell you another story: Two Jews meet: One asks, “Abraham, did you hear that Isaac’s dacha burned down?” Abraham says, “So what, it is none of my business.” “It is really none of my business either,” the first one says, “but it is pleasant nonetheless.”

San Clemente, June 23, 1973 (minutes of meeting)

Dr. Kissinger noted that paragraphs 5 and 6 were agreed. At this point, he called attention to the fact that a paragraph from the May 1972 principles had been dropped. It was the one which read, “The agreements should lead to an end of a state of belligerency and to the establishment
of peace.” He explained that we had dropped it because there was reference to “final peace” in the new paragraph 1. We felt that it was not needed.

Foreign Minister Gromyko said he would like to keep that paragraph. It was more favorable to Israel. It might facilitate negotiation. The Foreign Minister asked whether he was being “too pro-Israel.”

Dr. Kissinger joked that this was because of the large Jewish population in the Soviet Union. The Foreign Minister acknowledged the quip.

Damascus, December 15, 1973 - Kissinger and Assad

Assad: If we are to suppose there are such secure borders, history shows we are in the need of secure borders if anyone. Why should secure borders be at the expense of Syria. Let secure borders be at Galilee if anywhere. Under what logic should secure borders be at the expense of the population of Golan. Why should the line of danger be closer to Damascus than Tel Aviv? The distance from the ’67 border to Damascus is 80 kilometers; the distance from the ’67 border to Tel Aviv is 135 kilometers.

So why should they want secure borders. If the idea behind it is to keep danger away from both capitals, why not?

Kissinger: You will be in trouble if they move their capital to Haifa.

Assad: In that case we will move our capital to Koneitra. As to Egypt, we have to take into account its rate of population and that it will soon be 50 million.

Kissinger: I am not condemning it. I made a joke.

Jerusalem, December 16, 1973: Kissinger, Golda Meir, Moshe Dayan and others:
Dr. Kissinger: Asad I thought would be difficult.2 We were reviewing the text of the draft letter to Waldheim on the convening of the Conference. I told him we wanted the date changed; he said, “Fine.” I said the Israelis had problems with the phrase about “the timing of the participation of others.” We discussed it a while, and then he agreed. I said, “Mr. President, I had been told you would be difficult to deal with. But you’re not.” Then he said there was one sentence in the letter he objected to—the sentence that said Syria agreed to come. [Laughter]
I said to him, “In other words, you don’t care about the date of the Conference because it doesn’t make any difference whether you don’t show up on the 18th or you don’t show up on the 21st?” He said, “That’s right.” [Laughter]

Prime Minister Meir: On that we agree with Asad.

Dr. Kissinger: No, he will come.

Mr. Sisco: They are briefing a delegation already to come.

Minister Eban: There are no Aluwites or Baath members in the delegation—so if he has to execute them, there will be no loss of party membership!

Jerusalem, December 17, 1973: Kissinger, Golda Meir, Moshe Dayan, Abbas Eban and more

Dayan: Have you got a concept about the U.N. forces? Because now it’s something provisional. When you go seriously into a permanent arrangement, the questions of guarantees and security zones come up. Who stands behind the Poles and the Finns? You can’t really rely on them. It is one thing if we have observers. Right now there is no difference between U.N. forces and U.N. observers. If one side violates it, they observe and send a note. It is very useful, but not quite enough.

Something very funny, the other day the Egyptians asked the U.N. forces to move a little out of the way so they could fire on us. The U.N. forces wouldn’t, so the Egyptians moved a little away. [Laughter]

They exercise functions like checking convoys, but otherwise they’re really only observing. If they are to be really a solid buffer, there has to be more agreement on permanence.

Geneva, December 22, 1973, Kissinger and Gromyko

Secretary Kissinger: The Arab world is very new to me, Mr. Foreign Minister. I’ve no experience with it.

Minister Gromyko: You never dealt with them before?

Secretary Kissinger: I have never been in an Arab country and never had much dealings with them. I frankly thought I could get through my term of office and let someone else do it. To be honest. Now that I have started, I will finish it and with enthusiasm.

Minister Gromyko: It is an extremely complicated world.

Secretary Kissinger: Extremely. And you can’t count on every word they say. [Laughter]

AddToAny

Printfriendly

EoZTV Podcast

Podcast URL

Subscribe in podnovaSubscribe with FeedlyAdd to netvibes
addtomyyahoo4Subscribe with SubToMe

search eoz

comments

Speaking

translate

E-Book

For $18 donation








Sample Text

EoZ's Most Popular Posts in recent years

Search2

Hasbys!

Elder of Ziyon - حـكـيـم صـهـيـون



This blog may be a labor of love for me, but it takes a lot of effort, time and money. For 20 years and 40,000 articles I have been providing accurate, original news that would have remained unnoticed. I've written hundreds of scoops and sometimes my reporting ends up making a real difference. I appreciate any donations you can give to keep this blog going.

Donate!

Donate to fight for Israel!

Monthly subscription:
Payment options


One time donation:

Follow EoZ on Twitter!

Interesting Blogs

Blog Archive