Presidential spokesman Nabil Abu Rudeineh said Tuesday that what Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had said at the US Congress is not going to lead to peace.
“What Netanyahu had said does not lead to peace,” he said, accusing the Israeli premier of “putting more obstacles in the way of the peace process.”
“Peace for us means a Palestinian state on the 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as its capital,” said Abu Rudeineh. “We will not accept any Israeli presence inside the Palestinian state, particularly on the River Jordan.”
The presidential spokesman said that “peace should be based on international resolutions and negotiations, and not by putting preconditions and more obstacles in the way of the peace process.”
1967 lines, Jerusalem and the eastern border aren't preconditions and obstacles?
Fatah-leaning Palestine Press Agency called the US Congress "stupid" for applauding Netanyahu:
It is strange that every sentence Netanyahu said was met with applause from members of Congress; apparently they are stupidly ignorant of the true meaning to the suffering of the Palestinian people under occupation.
From the Israeli Prime Minister Facebook page: I am deeply honored by your warm welcome. And I am deeply honored that you have given me the opportunity to address Congress a second time.
Mr. Vice President, do you remember the time we were the new kids in town?
And I do see a lot of old friends here. And I do see a lot of new friends of Israel here. Democrats and Republicans alike.
Israel has no better friend than America. And America has no better friend than Israel. We stand together to defend democracy. We stand together to advance peace. We stand together to fight terrorism. Congratulations America, Congratulations, Mr. President. You got bin Laden. Good riddance!
In an unstable Middle East, Israel is the one anchor of stability. In a region of shifting alliances, Israel is America’s unwavering ally. Israel has always been pro-American. Israel will always be pro-American.
My friends, you don’t need to do nation building in Israel. We’re already built. You don’t need to export democracy to Israel. We’ve already got it. You don’t need to send American troops to defend Israel. We defend ourselves. You’ve been very generous in giving us tools to do the job of defending Israel on our own. Thank you all, and thank you President Obama, for your steadfast commitment to Israel’s security. I know economic times are tough. I deeply appreciate this.
Support for Israel’s security is a wise investment in our common future. For an epic battle is now unfolding in the Middle East, between tyranny and freedom. A great convulsion is shaking the earth from the Khyber Pass to the Straits of Gibraltar. The tremors have shattered states and toppled governments. And we can all see that the ground is still shifting. Now this historic moment holds the promise of a new dawn of freedom and opportunity. Millions of young people are determined to change their future. We all look at them. They muster courage. They risk their lives. They demand dignity. They desire liberty.
These extraordinary scenes in Tunis and Cairo, evoke those of Berlin and Prague in 1989. Yet as we share their hopes, but we also must also remember that those hopes could be snuffed out as they were in Tehran in 1979. You remember what happened then. The brief democratic spring in Iran was cut short by a ferocious and unforgiving tyranny. This same tyranny smothered Lebanon’s democratic Cedar Revolution, and inflicted on that long-suffering country, the medieval rule of Hezbollah.
So today, the Middle East stands at a fateful crossroads. Like all of you, I pray that the peoples of the region choose the path less traveled, the path of liberty. No one knows what this path consists of better than you. This path is not paved by elections alone. It is paved when governments permit protests in town squares, when limits are placed on the powers of rulers, when judges are beholden to laws and not men, and when human rights cannot be crushed by tribal loyalties or mob rule.
Israel has always embraced this path, in the Middle East has long rejected it. In a region where women are stoned, gays are hanged, Christians are persecuted, Israel stands out. It is different.
As the great English writer George Eliot predicted over a century ago, that once established, the Jewish state will "shine like a bright star of freedom amid the despotisms of the East.” Well, she was right. We have a free press, independent courts, an open economy, rambunctious parliamentary debates. You think you guys are tough on one another in Congress? Come spend a day in the Knesset. Be my guest.
Courageous Arab protesters, are now struggling to secure these very same rights for their peoples, for their societies. We're proud that over one million Arab citizens of Israel have been enjoying these rights for decades. Of the 300 million Arabs in the Middle East and North Africa, only Israel’s Arab citizens enjoy real democratic rights. I want you to stop for a second and think about that. Of those 300 million Arabs, less than one-half of one-percent are truly free, and they're all citizens of Israel!
This startling fact reveals a basic truth: Israel is not what is wrong about the Middle East. Israel is what is right about the Middle East.
Israel fully supports the desire of Arab peoples in our region to live freely. We long for the day when Israel will be one of many real democracies in the Middle East.
Fifteen years ago, I stood at this very podium, and said that democracy must start to take root in the Arab World. Well, it's begun to take root. This beginning holds the promise of a brilliant future of peace and prosperity. For I believe that a Middle East that is genuinely democratic will be a Middle East truly at peace.
But while we hope and work for the best, we must also recognize that powerful forces oppose this future. They oppose modernity. They oppose democracy. They oppose peace.
Foremost among these forces is Iran. The tyranny in Tehran brutalizes its own people. It supports attacks against American troops in Afghanistan and Iraq. It subjugates Lebanon and Gaza. It sponsors terror worldwide.
When I last stood here, I spoke of the dire consequences of Iran developing nuclear weapons. Now time is running out, and the hinge of history may soon turn. For the greatest danger facing humanity could soon be upon us: A militant Islamic regime armed with nuclear weapons.
Militant Islam threatens the world. It threatens Islam. I have no doubt that it will ultimately be defeated. It will eventually succumb to the forces of freedom and progress. But like other fanaticisms that were doomed to fail, militant Islam could exact a horrific price from all of us before its inevitable demise.
A nuclear-armed Iran would ignite a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. It would give terrorists a nuclear umbrella. It would make the nightmare of nuclear terrorism a clear and present danger throughout the world. I want you to understand what this means. They could put the bomb anywhere. They could put it on a missile. It could be on a container ship in a port, or in a suitcase on a subway.
Now the threat to my country cannot be overstated. Those who dismiss it are sticking their heads in the sand. Less than seven decades after six million Jews were murdered, Iran's leaders deny the Holocaust of the Jewish people, while calling for the annihilation of the Jewish state.
Leaders who spew such venom, should be banned from every respectable forum on the planet. But there is something that makes the outrage even greater: The lack of outrage. In much of the international community, the calls for our destruction are met with utter silence. It is even worse because there are many who rush to condemn Israel for defending itself against Iran’s terror proxies.
But not you. Not America. You have acted differently. You've condemned the Iranian regime for its genocidal aims. You’ve passed tough sanctions against Iran. History will salute you America.
President Obama has said that the United States is determined to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. He successfully led the Security Council to adopt sanctions against Iran. You in Congress passed even tougher sanctions. These words and deeds are vitally important.
Yet the Ayatollah regime briefly suspended its nuclear program only once, in 2003, when it feared the possibility of military action. That same year, Muammar Qadaffi gave up his nuclear weapons program, and for the same reason. The more Iran believes that all options are on the table, the less the chance of confrontation. This is why I ask you to continue to send an unequivocal message: That America will never permit Iran to develop nuclear weapons.
As for Israel, if history has taught the Jewish people anything, it is that we must take calls for our destruction seriously. We are a nation that rose from the ashes of the Holocaust. When we say never again, we mean never again. Israel always reserves the right to defend itself.
My friends, while Israel will be ever vigilant in its defense, we will never give up on our quest for peace. I guess we’ll give it up when we achieve it. Israel wants peace. Israel needs peace. We've achieved historic peace agreements with Egypt and Jordan that have held up for decades.
I remember what it was like before we had peace. I was nearly killed in a firefight inside the Suez Canal. I mean that literally. I battled terrorists along both banks of the Jordan River. Too many Israelis have lost loved ones. I know their grief. I lost my brother.
So no one in Israel wants a return to those terrible days. The peace with Egypt and Jordan has long served as an anchor of stability and peace in the heart of the Middle East.
This peace should be bolstered by economic and political support to all those who remain committed to peace.
The peace agreements with Egypt and Jordan are vital. But they're not enough. We must also find a way to forge a lasting peace with the Palestinians. Two years ago, I publicly committed to a solution of two states for two peoples: A Palestinian state alongside the Jewish state.
I am willing to make painful compromises to achieve this historic peace. As the leader of Israel, it is my responsibility to lead my people to peace.
This is not easy for me. I recognize that in a genuine peace, we will be required to give up parts of the Jewish homeland. In Judea and Samaria, the Jewish people are not foreign occupiers. We are not the British in India. We are not the Belgians in the Congo.
This is the land of our forefathers, the Land of Israel, to which Abraham brought the idea of one God, where David set out to confront Goliath, and where Isaiah saw a vision of eternal peace. No distortion of history can deny the four thousand year old bond, between the Jewish people and the Jewish land.
But there is another truth: The Palestinians share this small land with us. We seek a peace in which they will be neither Israel’s subjects nor its citizens. They should enjoy a national life of dignity as a free, viable and independent people in their own state. They should enjoy a prosperous economy, where their creativity and initiative can flourish.
We've already seen the beginnings of what is possible. In the last two years, the Palestinians have begun to build a better life for themselves. Prime Minister Fayad has led this effort. I wish him a speedy recovery from his recent operation.
We've helped the Palestinian economy by removing hundreds of barriers and roadblocks to the free flow of goods and people. The results have been nothing short of remarkable. The Palestinian economy is booming. It's growing by more than 10% a year.
Palestinian cities look very different today than they did just a few years ago. They have shopping malls, movie theaters, restaurants, banks. They even have e-businesses. This is all happening without peace. Imagine what could happen with peace. Peace would herald a new day for both peoples. It would make the dream of a broader Arab-Israeli peace a realistic possibility.
So now here is the question. You have to ask it. If the benefits of peace with the Palestinians are so clear, why has peace eluded us? Because all six Israeli Prime Ministers since the signing of Oslo accords agreed to establish a Palestinian state. Myself included. So why has peace not been achieved? Because so far, the Palestinians have been unwilling to accept a Palestinian state, if it meant accepting a Jewish state alongside it.
You see, our conflict has never been about the establishment of a Palestinian state. It has always been about the existence of the Jewish state. This is what this conflict is about. In 1947, the United Nations voted to partition the land into a Jewish state and an Arab state. The Jews said yes. The Palestinians said no. In recent years, the Palestinians twice refused generous offers by Israeli Prime Ministers, to establish a Palestinian state on virtually all the territory won by Israel in the Six Day War.
They were simply unwilling to end the conflict. And I regret to say this: They continue to educate their children to hate. They continue to name public squares after terrorists. And worst of all, they continue to perpetuate the fantasy that Israel will one day be flooded by the descendants of Palestinian refugees.
My friends, this must come to an end. President Abbas must do what I have done. I stood before my people, and I told you it wasn’t easy for me, and I said… "I will accept a Palestinian state." It is time for President Abbas to stand before his people and say… "I will accept a Jewish state."
Those six words will change history. They will make clear to the Palestinians that this conflict must come to an end. That they are not building a state to continue the conflict with Israel, but to end it. They will convince the people of Israel that they have a true partner for peace. With such a partner, the people of Israel will be prepared to make a far reaching compromise. I will be prepared to make a far reaching compromise.
This compromise must reflect the dramatic demographic changes that have occurred since 1967. The vast majority of the 650,000 Israelis who live beyond the 1967 lines, reside in neighborhoods and suburbs of Jerusalem and Greater Tel Aviv.
These areas are densely populated but geographically quite small. Under any realistic peace agreement, these areas, as well as other places of critical strategic and national importance, will be incorporated into the final borders of Israel.
The status of the settlements will be decided only in negotiations. But we must also be honest. So I am saying today something that should be said publicly by anyone serious about peace. In any peace agreement that ends the conflict, some settlements will end up beyond Israel’s borders. The precise delineation of those borders must be negotiated. We will be very generous on the size of a future Palestinian state. But as President Obama said, the border will be different than the one that existed on June 4, 1967. Israel will not return to the indefensible lines of 1967.
We recognize that a Palestinian state must be big enough to be viable, independent and prosperous. President Obama rightly referred to Israel as the homeland of the Jewish people, just as he referred to the future Palestinian state as the homeland of the Palestinian people. Jews from around the world have a right to immigrate to the Jewish state. Palestinians from around the world should have a right to immigrate, if they so choose, to a Palestinian state. This means that the Palestinian refugee problem will be resolved outside the borders of Israel.
As for Jerusalem, only a democratic Israel has protected freedom of worship for all faiths in the city. Jerusalem must never again be divided. Jerusalem must remain the united capital of Israel. I know that this is a difficult issue for Palestinians. But I believe with creativity and goodwill a solution can be found.
This is the peace I plan to forge with a Palestinian partner committed to peace. But you know very well, that in the Middle East, the only peace that will hold is a peace you can defend.
So peace must be anchored in security. In recent years, Israel withdrew from South Lebanon and Gaza. But we didn't get peace. Instead, we got 12,000 thousand rockets fired from those areas on our cities, on our children, by Hezbollah and Hamas. The UN peacekeepers in Lebanon failed to prevent the smuggling of this weaponry. The European observers in Gaza evaporated overnight. So if Israel simply walked out of the territories, the flow of weapons into a future Palestinian state would be unchecked. Missiles fired from it could reach virtually every home in Israel in less than a minute. I want you to think about that too. Imagine that right now we all had less than 60 seconds to find shelter from an incoming rocket. Would you live that way? Would anyone live that way? Well, we aren’t going to live that way either.
The truth is that Israel needs unique security arrangements because of its unique size. Israel is one of the smallest countries in the world. Mr. Vice President, I'll grant you this. It’s bigger than Delaware. It’s even bigger than Rhode Island. But that’s about it. Israel on the 1967 lines would be half the width of the Washington Beltway.
Now here’s a bit of nostalgia. I first came to Washington thirty years ago as a young diplomat. It took me a while, but I finally figured it out: There is an America beyond the Beltway. But Israel on the 1967 lines would be only nine miles wide. So much for strategic depth.
So it is therefore absolutely vital for Israel’s security that a Palestinian state be fully demilitarized. And it is vital that Israel maintain a long-term military presence along the Jordan River. Solid security arrangements on the ground are necessary not only to protect the peace, they are necessary to protect Israel in case the peace unravels. For in our unstable region, no one can guarantee that our peace partners today will be there tomorrow.
And when I say tomorrow, I don't mean some distant time in the future. I mean -- tomorrow. Peace can be achieved only around the negotiating table. The Palestinian attempt to impose a settlement through the United Nations will not bring peace. It should be forcefully opposed by all those who want to see this conflict end.
I appreciate the President’s clear position on this issue. Peace cannot be imposed. It must be negotiated. But it can only be negotiated with partners committed to peace.
And Hamas is not a partner for peace. Hamas remains committed to Israel's destruction and to terrorism. They have a charter. That charter not only calls for the obliteration of Israel, but says ‘kill the Jews wherever you find them’. Hamas’ leader condemned the killing of Osama bin Laden and praised him as a holy warrior. Now again I want to make this clear. Israel is prepared to sit down today and negotiate peace with the Palestinian Authority. I believe we can fashion a brilliant future of peace for our children. But Israel will not negotiate with a Palestinian government backed by the Palestinian version of Al Qaeda.
So I say to President Abbas: Tear up your pact with Hamas! Sit down and negotiate! Make peace with the Jewish state! And if you do, I promise you this. Israel will not be the last country to welcome a Palestinian state as a new member of the United Nations. It will be the first to do so.
My friends, the momentous trials of the last century, and the unfolding events of this century, attest to the decisive role of the United States in advancing peace and defending freedom. Providence entrusted the United States to be the guardian of liberty. All peoples who cherish freedom owe a profound debt of gratitude to your great nation. Among the most grateful nations is my nation, the people of Israel, who have fought for their liberty and survival against impossible odds, in ancient and modern times alike.
I speak on behalf of the Jewish people and the Jewish state when I say to you, representatives of America, Thank you. Thank you for your unwavering support for Israel. Thank you for ensuring that the flame of freedom burns bright throughout the world. May God bless all of you. And may God forever bless the United States of America.
The Al Quds newspaper (Arabic) has an editorial urging Hamas not to give in to Western pressure to recognize Israel.
It notes that President Obama and Turkish President Gul have urged Hamas to give up its core principle of rejecting Israel's existence.
These statements can only be explained as a concerted pressure campaign to push the Hamas movement to abandon the most important point in its Charter, which is the refusal to recognize Israel, under the pretext of advancing the peace process based on the two-state solution going forward.
We do not know how well Hamas can face these pressures. Publicly, the movement rejected in all its literature and the statements of its officials any recognition of Israel and its occupation of historic Palestine and its holy sites, but the same time offered a truce could last for thirty years in the event of a independent Palestinian state on the 1967 borders and the return of Palestinian refugees.
The Palestine Liberation Organization came under similar pressure which led eventually to the Oslo accords and the recognition of the State of Israel and renunciation of terrorism or armed struggle and the adoption of two-state solution and peaceful negotiations as the only way to get to an independent Palestinian state.
...After about 18 years of negotiations on the basis of two-state solution, a Palestinian state is still elusive, and more dangerously, the encroachment of settlements in the West Bank did not stop.
Non-recognition of Israel is the most important point in the Charter of the movement 'Hamas.' Do not give it away for free in response to U.S. pressure, in order to sit down with some U.S. or European officials. It's a trap had been carefully prepared to dump the backbone ideology of the movement, which brought her the basic respect for the Palestinian people and win in the last legislative elections, especially that any non-recognition has been deepened by upholding the option of resistance and practical application on the ground.
...We hope that the 'Hamas' can learn from the lessons of the degrading treatment suffered by the PLO before being dragged or falling into the trap of not only recognizing Israel, but also of Israel being a Jewish state.
Palestine Today reports that George Galloway, along with other members of Viva Palestina like Kevin Ovenden, met with Islamic Jihad leader Abu Imad Rifai in his office in Beirut.
Galloway praised the Arabs who marched towards Israel on May 15th.
Rifal thanked Galloway for his help in the battle against the Zionist enemy and emphasized the "right" of Palestinian Arabs to "return" to Israel. He also slammed President Obama for supposedly creating a conspiracy where Palestinian Arabs would be naturalized in the countries of their birth like Lebanon and Syria instead of being kept in stateless misery for the upcoming decades as he evidently prefers.
Here is the happy couple:
I cannot find a single news story or blog entry that mentions that Galloway is even in Lebanon, let alone meeting with and supporting terrorist leaders. But this photo was indeed taken today.
Other Gazans are building with more imagination. Here are photos of a resort that was partially built out of sandbags:
Not a house - a resort.
And this photo is almost more interesting for its caption:
Palestinians watch a new car that Israel recently allowed into Gaza, at a showroom in Gaza City, on May 23, 2011. Luxury cars with Libyan plates are becoming a common sight in the Gaza Strip, in a surprising side-effect of the unrest in the north African state.
The biggest Palestinian shopping mall is scheduled to open in the Gaza Strip in mid-June.
This will be the second shopping mall to open in the Gaza Strip in a year. Last July, Palestinians opened a two-story mall that includes a supermarket, international clothing stores, a food court, beauty products, a children’s playground and a restaurant.
The modern three-story complex is the first of its kind in the Palestinian territories, said Ehab al-Issawi, executive director of the Al-Hayat Tureed Company that owns the mall.
He said that the 3,000 squaremeter shopping mall is located near the Haidar Abdel Shafi Square west of Gaza City.
Issawi told the Palestinian news agency Safa that construction work at the new mall was almost complete. He said that Palestinian engineers and architects have been working on the project since August last year.
Issawi added that despite the shortage of building materials caused by the blockade on the Gaza Strip, the work at the site continued without disruption.
Issawi explained that the first floor would house a huge supermarket that would consist of various departments offering food and household items as well as stationary.
The second floor would have many clothes and gift shops, while the third floor would become home to a large restaurant, a modern coffee shop, a cinema and entertainment sites for children.
The Safa article mentions that it includes a movie theatre that can play 3-D movies, and that the mall will be importing goods from Europe, Turkey and China, while keeping competitive prices.
The mall will have a website to enable shopping from home as well as to make reservations at the cinema and restaurants.
Here is what it looks like while it is under construction:
This is much bigger than the Gaza mall I lamented over last year in my most popular YouTube video:
Ala’adin from Al-Bireh used to greet new foreign arrivals to Palestine with a cheerful, “So you’re here to save my country too?” He was fond of mocking good intentions.
Still it’s fair to say that most international visitors to Palestine, particularly those in relief or activism campaigns, do so at least partly out of conscience. In Britain, and I daresay most of Europe, Palestinian liberation is widely seen as a “good” cause. While many Palestinians feel abandoned by the international community, surely Egypt has taught us not to confuse a nation’s rulers with its population.
In London, where I grew up, this conflict was a “red-line” topic. If you took the wrong position on Palestine-Israel, it was as bad as supporting the death penalty, or liking Margaret Thatcher, and you would be considered the devil incarnate. As I overheard at a Kensington dinner party: “You cannot be a good person if you think the Occupation is okay.”
...While the vast majority of ex-pats living here genuinely believe in the cause of liberation, it is far from the only reason for our mass invasion. Since the International Solidarity Movement was established in 2001, over 200 NGOs have sprung up in the West Bank and Gaza. Their presence is proof of how favourable Palestinian conditions have become.
“Palestine is the best-kept secret in the aid industry,” I am told by Emily Williams, an American project manager at a medical NGO. “People need field experience and Palestine sounds cool and dangerous because it can be described as a war zone, but in reality it’s quite safe and has all the comforts that internationals want. Quality of life here is so much higher than somewhere like Afghanistan, but we don’t tell anyone so that we are not replaced or reassigned.”
That quality of life is becoming rapidly more apparent in the “A” areas. In cities like Ramallah and Nablus, expensive restaurants and high-powered financial institutions are common now. Nightlife and entertainment is expanding to cater for international tastes.
At times these tastes sit uneasily with local values. More than once I’ve heard the fear voiced that our influence will damage the traditions of Palestinian society. Most internationals at least attempt to be culturally sensitive, but our differences can be striking. I can only imagine how West Bankers feel to see us breezing over to Jerusalem or even Tel Aviv, but these trips have an allure to visitors from the West, who can be somewhere more like home just half an hour away. In my experience, these guilty pleasures are also popular among young Palestinians with the necessary ID.
It is no coincidence that a rise in the number of international visitors here coincides with economic downturn in the West and a shrinking jobs market. With the proliferation of NGOs, the degrees that were just paper back home entitle us to prominent positions in growth industries.
For media professionals, there is a wealth of material to be uncovered here, along with the experience of working on such a major issue. Palestine has been a reliable source of news stories since the conflict began, and it receives forensic, albeit often misguided, analysis across the world. For Western students, Arabic language skills are becoming increasingly desirable and many English universities now arrange placements in exchange for volunteer work. Throw in a warmer climate, Palestine’s natural wonders and holy sites, lower crime rates, and a preposterously welcoming host population, and it’s little wonder that Bi’lin resembles a model United Nations on a Friday morning.
Here we see the truth. Being "pro-Palestinian" (which means, of course, anti-Israel) is trendy and cool. Going there establishes one as a daredevil, willing to risk one's life. Thousands of young, faux-humanitarians go there to find a use for their useless degrees, and get paid by hundreds of NGOs that pop up to accommodate them, who can always be counted upon to raise all the money needed to keep the Palestinian Arab NGO industry going. But these same Israel haters will happily travel to Tel Aviv to enjoy the comforts of home.
And the NGOs, flush with cash from Westerners who feel that this is the holiest cause on Earth, dutifully churn out reports about how horrible the conditions are, as they live it up in this "war zone." Those reports, filled with lies and exaggerations, are used to raise more money so that these fake adventurers can continue to live it up.
Money that could be used to actually help people in need is instead diverted to help young people live it up and write anti-Israel reports.
This article raises the curtain, only a little, on an entire industry dedicated to demonizing Israel.
It is an entire financial and social ecosystem where everyone knows they are part of a game but they do not want to let the world in on the truth, because it would risk them losing their comfort, stature and prestige - not to mention their salaries. They raise money by claiming life in the territories is terrible and dangerous while they happily flock to live there because it is so safe and comfortable.
It is a scandal - but the only people who can expose it are the ones who are profiting from it, so it remains a dirty little secret.
Here is a report of day two of the AIPAC conference by Bruce:
In an only slightly less dramatic day at the jam packedAIPACconference, another leading Democrat, soft spokenHarry Reid, broke ranks withPresident Obamaand criticized his party's leader on his feud withIsrael. Senator Reidstated:
The parties that should lead those negotiations must be the parties at the center of this conflict – and no one else. The place where negotiating will happen must be the negotiating table – and nowhere else. Those negotiations will not happen – and their terms will not be set – through speeches.
The crowd at Monday night's Gala dinner again roared approval in another stirring standing ovation.
Protesters were slightly more bold today, but their paltry numbers were in stark contrast to an AIPAC Gala Dinner that could not fit all of their 10,000 plus delegates in the same room! A separate room was set up to accomodate the spill over. An AIPAC representative told the crowd that [paraphrasing] "we have grown so large that no venue in Washington, DC can accomdate us."
The highlight of the day wasPrime Minister Netanyahu, who was warmly greeted by enthusiastic delegates and also interrupted several times by protestors who managed to get inside. This year, however, the crowd around the protesters wisely stood to block the media's view and chanted "Bibi, Bibi..." to drown out the protesters. Netanyahu himself noted "do you think they have these protests in Gaza?" Hispolished speechwas notable for it's noble, statesmanly character, and his emphasis that Israel is not the central problem in the MidEast. No trace of the confrontations of the last few days. He stated: "Israel's not what’s wrong with the Middle East. Israel is what’s right about the Middle East." He plans to hammer home that point tomorrow in his speech to Congress.
I just gave a speech in East Brunswick, NJ, at Middlesex County Torah Links, an adult education program. The room was full. And only a few of those who attended had ever read my blog!
The topic was "How to be a media-savvy advocate for Israel."
Luckily for you listening, my projector didn't work so there is nothing that you are missing visually.
UPDATE: For those who are here for voting in the Pro-Israel Blog Off Finals, the first five minutes or so of the speech are just me introducing myself and saying some of what I've done, to an audience who mostly never heard of me. If you want to jump right into the meat of the talk, skip to the 4:30 mark.
A Malaysian aid ship attempting to land in Gaza after being warned off by Israeli naval forces last week has been forced to abort its mission after engine trouble, activists said.
Matthias Chang, who is heading the mission for the Perdana Global Peace Foundation, told AFP on Monday that the MV Finch was now stuck six nautical miles from Egypt's El-Arish port.
"At about 5:30pm local time (0330 GMT), our vessel developed engine trouble and we lost our steering capability, so we had to stop our attempt to reach Gaza by sea," he said.
"However, the Egyptian foreign minister has given his assurance that we will be allowed to unload our humanitarian cargo and that it will be taken by the United Nations Relief and Works Agency into Gaza," Chang said, adding that Egypt is bound by international law to lead the vessel to safety.
"Although we were not able to reach Gaza by sea, we have achieved our aim of breaking the Israeli embargo by breaching their protection zone last Monday and if the Egyptians deliver on their promise, we will have also achieved our aim of delivering aid to Gaza," Chang said.
Perdana Foundation officials said the MV Finch left Greece on May 11, carrying plastic pipes to help restore the sewage system in Gaza.
However, Israeli naval forces fired warning shots at the vessel when it was in Israeli waters, about 400 metres (yards) from Gaza, and forced the ship into Egyptian waters.
Chang said the 12 activists and crew onboard the ship, had on Monday told Egyptian authorities to either allow the vessel to dock and unload its aid or they would carry on to Gaza by sea.
As the Egyptians did not respond to the ultimatum, Chang said the ship left the waters off El-Arish, heading towards Israeli waters.
Malaysian journalist Alang Bendahara, who was also aboard the vessel, told AFP the aid ship was escorted by an Egyptian navy patrol vessel, which cautioned that Israel's naval forces could attack if they entered Israeli waters.
"The mood onboard the ship was very subdued as we were contemplating what would happen but it was clear that everyone was determined to continue so that we could get this much needed aid to Gaza," he said.
Keep in mind the timeline - the ship was not allowed to dock at El Arish for days before its crew decided to try for Gaza again.
Yet no one is blaming Egypt for not letting them unload their precious cargo. Even though Egypt claims that it has/will open Rafah.
“National reconciliation [between Hamas and Fatah] is required in order to face Israel and Netanyahu. We say to him [Netanyahu], when he claims – that they [Jews] have a historical right dating back to 3000 years BCE – we say that the nation of Palestine upon the land of Canaan had a 7000 year history BCE. This is the truth, which must be understood and we have to note it, in order to say: 'Netanyahu, you [i.e., Israel] are incidental in history. We are the people of history. We are the owners of history.'”
That's funny. I wonder why they don't call the land "Canaan," then.
From The Times of London, May 17th (not available online):
An Israeli human rights group has warned Lloyd's of London that it may be liable for massive damages if it insures ships that are used by suspected terrorist organisations to sail to the Gaza Strip.
The legal warning, sent to.Lloyd's and all the other main maritime insurance companies in the world, asserted that under international law Lloyd's would be open to charges of aiding and abetting terrorism jf it contributed in any way to the passage of ships to Gaza, which is controlled by Hamas, an Islamist movement designated by the United States, Israel and the European Union as a terrorist group.
Lloyd's is the biggest insurance market in the world.
The announcement, issued by Shurat Din, a legal centre in Tel Aviv, came on the day that the Israeli navy fired warning shots at a Malaysian chartered ship carrying sewerage pipes to Gaza from the Egyptian port of al Arish, forcing it to turn back.
The Malaysian aid group that organised the delivery said that the ship was a few hundred yards off the Gaza coast when the Israeli naval vessel forced it back.
Nitsana Darshan Leitner,the founder of the Israeli law centre, said that the point of the legal threat was to prevent a flotilla of aid ships from approaching Gaza this month to mark the first anniversary of a raid by Israeli naval commandos on a Turkish ferry heading for the blockaded enclave.
Lloyd's said that it would refuse to underwrite a vessel backed by terrorist or related organisations on any trip that would be in breach of sanctions.
The insurance market said: "Hamas is subject to UK and EU terrorist financing sanctions.As such, any vessel identified as being owned or controlled by that organisation would not be permitted to be insured by Lloyd's, or any other EU insurer."
It declined to address the veiled legal threat in the letter directly.
Any shipowner planning to send vessels into Gaza would have to notify the Lloyd's of London market in advance, 'providing details of the cargo, because Israel is designated a war risk for the purposes of providing cover.
Lloyd's indicated that if its members had been deceived about the true purpose of a trip the insurance cover would instantly be invalid.
Darshan Leitner, an Israeli lawyer who specialises in cases involving victims of terrorist attacks, said: "Before Israel gets into another mess with the navy and the flotilla, we don't want bloodshed on the sea again. This is a way that the private sector can help the Government prevent terrorism."
She said that under international law no link had to be established between a specific terrorism attack and a particular ship heading into Gaza: "That's the beauty of this. It doesn't have to link directly. The law in the US and Israel and maybe in other countries is that when it comes to terrorism, it is very strict that anyone aiding and abetting a designated terrorist organisation, the liability is on you for any terrorist attack that that organisation carries out," she told The Times.
Netanyahu's words at the White House were positively obsequious compared to Menachem Begin's reaction to what he characterized as US "punishment" of Israel for the Osirak attack, Golan Heights law and Lebanon invasion, in December 1981.
In an unprecedented move, Mr. Begin summoned the United States ambassador to Israel, and read to him the following statement. It was later read to the cabinet and issued to the public. Mr. Begin complained that the U.S. had punished Israel three times in the past six months. Israel was no. "vassal state" or a "banana republic." He also hinted of anti-Semitic overtones in some of the punitive measures taken by the United States. Text:
Three times during the past six months, the U.S. Government has "punished" Israel.
On June 7 we destroyed the Iraqi nuclear reactor "Osirak" near Baghdad. I don't want to mention to you today from whom we received the final information that this reactor was going to produce atomic bombs. We had no doubt about that: therefore our action was an act of salvation, an act of national self-defense in the most lofty sense of the concept. We saved the lives of hundreds of thousands of civilians, including tens of thousands of children.
Nonetheless, you announced that you were punishing us - and you left unfilled a signed and sealed contract that included specific dates for the supply of (war) planes.
Not long after, in a defensive act - after a slaughter was committed against our people leaving three dead (including an Auschwitz survivor) and 29 were injured we bombed the PLO headquarters in Beirut.
You have no moral right to preach to us about civilian casualties. We have read the history of World War Two and we know what happened to civilians when you took action against an enemy. We have also read the history of the Vietnam war and your phrase "body-count". We always make efforts to avoid hitting civilian populations, but sometimes it is unavoidable - as was the case in our bombing of the PLO headquarters.
We sometimes risk the lives of our soldiers to avoid civilian casualties.
Nonetheless, you punished us: you suspended delivery of F-15 planes.
A week ago, at the instance of the Government, the Knesset passed on all three readings by an overwhelming majority of two-thirds, the "Golan Heights Law."
Now you once again declare that you are punishing Israel.
What kind of expression is this - "punishing Israel"? Are we a vassal state of yours? Are we a banana republic? Are we youths of fourteen who, if they don't behave properly, are slapped across the fingers?
Let me tell you who this government is composed of. It is composed of people whose lives were spent in resistance, in fighting and in suffering. You will not frighten us with "punishments". He who threatens us will find us deaf to his threats. We are only prepared to listen to rational arguments.
You have no right to "punish" Israel - and I protest at the very use of this term.
You have announced that you are suspending consultations on the implementation of the memorandum of understanding on strategic cooperation, and that your return to these consultations in the future will depend on progress achieved in the autonomy talks and on the situation in Lebanon.
You want to make Israel a hostage of the memorandum of understanding.
I regard your announcement suspending the consultations on the memorandum of as the abrogation (by you) of the memorandum. No "sword of Damocles" is going to hang over our head. So we duly take note of the fact that you have abrogated the memorandum of understanding.
The people of Israel has lived 3,700 years without a memorandum of understanding with America - and it will continue to live for another 3,700. In our eyes it (i.e., the U.S. suspension) is an abrogation of the memorandum.
We will not agree that you should demand of us to allow the Arabs of East Jerusalem to take part in the autonomy elections - and threaten us that if we don't consent you will suspend the memorandum.
You have imposed upon us financial punishments - and have (thereby) violated the word of the President. When Secretary Haig was here he read from a written document the words of President Reagan that you would purchase 200 million dollars worth of Israel arms and other equipment. Now you say it will not be so.
This is therefore a violation of the President's word. Is it customary? Is it proper?
You cancelled an additional 100 million dollars. What did you want to do - to "hit us in our pocket"?
In 1946 there lived in this house a British general by the name of Barker. Today I live here. When we fought him, you called us "terrorists" - and we carried on fighting. After we attacked his headquarters in the requisitioned building of the King David Hotel, Barker said: "This race will only be influenced by being hit in the pocket" - and he ordered his soldiers to stop patronizing Jewish cafes.
To hit us in the pocket - this is the philosophy of Barker. Now I understand why the whole great effort in the Senate to obtain a majority for the arms deal with Saudi Arabia was accompanied by an ugly campaign of anti-Semitism.
First, the slogan was sounded "Begin or Reagan?" - and that meant that whoever opposes the deal is supporting a foreign prime minister and is not loyal to the President of the United States. And thus Senators like Jackson, Kennedy, Packwood and of course Boschwitz are not loyal citizens.
Then the slogan was sounded "We should not let the Jews determine the foreign policy of the United States." What was the meaning of this slogan? The Greek minority in the U.S. did much to determine the Senate decision to withhold weapons from Turkey after it invaded Cyprus. No one will frighten the great and free Jewish community of the U.S., no one will succeed in cowing them with anti-Semitic propaganda. They will stand by our side. This is the land of their forefathers - and they have a right and a duty to support it.
Some say we must "rescind" the law passed by the Knesset. "To rescind" is a concept from the days of the Inquisition. Our forefathers went to the stake rather than "rescind" their faith.
We are not going to the stake. Thank God. We have enough strength to defend our independence and to defend our rights.
If it were up to me (alone) I would say we should not rescind the law. But as far as I can judge there is in fact no one on earth who can persuade the Knesset to rescind the law which it passed by a two-thirds majority.
Mr. Weinberger - and later Mr. Haig - said that the law adversely affects UN Resolution 242. Whoever says that has either not read the Resolution or has forgotten it, or has not understood it.
The essence of the Resolution is negotiation to determine agreed and recognized borders. Syria has announced that it will not conduct negotiations with us, that it does not and will not recognize us - and thus removed from Resolution 242 its essence. How, therefore, could we adversely affect 242?
As regards the future, please be kind enough to inform the Secretary of, State that the Golan Heights Law will remain valid. There is no force on earth that can bring about its rescission.
As for the contention that we surprised you, the truth is that we did not want to embarrass you. We knew your difficulties. You come to Riyadh and Damascus. It was President Reagan who said that Mr. Begin was right - that had Israel told the U.S. about the law (in advance) the U.S. would have said no. We did not want you to say no - and then go ahead and apply Israeli law to the Golan Heights.
Our intention was not to embarrass you.
As regards Lebanon, I have asked that the Secretary of State be informed that we will not attack, but if we are attacked, we will counterattack.
Somehow, Israel survived this verbal attack on its ally.
A two-year old article that compares Begin with how Netanyahu had been acting in the face of American pressure can be found here.
Prime Minister Marouf Bakhit on Sunday stressed the importance of the right of return for all Palestinian refugees, which is a top priority for Jordan.
During a meeting with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in Amman yesterday, Bakhit said Jordan is concerned about recognition of the right of return before discussions on the mechanisms to implement it.
During His Majesty King Abdullah’s meeting with US President Barack Obama recently in Washington, the King underlined the firm Arab stance regarding Palestinians’ legitimate rights and that reaching a solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict should be at the top of the global political agenda, Bakhit said.
Abbas voiced appreciation for the King’s supportive stances towards the Palestinian people in international forums, stressing that King Abdullah’s positions are in line with the Palestinian national principled stands.
Abbas underlined the importance of Israel’s recognition of the Palestinian refugees’ right of return and compensation, adding that it should also recognise Jerusalem as part of the occupied Arab territories.
Is Jordan really keen on the rights of Palestinian Arabs to "return" to their homes?
In Jordan, in the town of Jerash, is a "refugee" camp that is mostly made up of Gazans who fled in 1967. It is even known as the "Gaza camp." Some 24,000 people live there.
The homes that the Jerash Palestinians want to return to are not in Israel, but in Gaza. Moreover, Gazans in Jordan do not enjoy the benefits of citizenship so they are living in really wretched conditions with very few human rights.
If Jordan is so interested in the "right to return," then why aren't they insisting that the Jerash camp be dismantled and the people go back to Gaza? Right now, there is nothing stopping Jordan from arranging safe passage through Egypt to Gaza. They can go back and claim their old homes, just like the other "refugees" want to do in Israel.
So why is there no Arab demand that Jerash residents go to Gaza?
The same UNRWA money being used to maintain the camp in Jordan can be redirected to Gaza. No doubt there would be plenty of international support for building new shelters if necessary. Free Gaza and the IHH would contribute all the money needed, as would Arab nations who are interested in the "right to return."
After all, these people lost their homes and want to go back. This is the essence of "return."
It is a consensus position among Arabs. Israel can't stop them at the Rafah border. So what's the problem?
The Jerash residents themselves clearly want to go back to Gaza. From 2005:
As children in the street chanted "Gaza is liberated," 65-year-old Ayed Suleiman Abu-Hashish broke into tears.
"I can't wait to go back," he said. "I bet it has changed a lot since I left nearly 40 years ago."
For many in this squalid refugee camp, Israel's pullout from the Gaza Strip (search), which began Monday, revived hopes they could return to homes they fled in the 1967 Middle East War.
Could it be that Arab idea of "return" is only to parts of "historic Palestine" and not to others? And those parts all happen to be Israeli?
The fact that Jerash exists today, six years after Israel left Gaza, without anyone calling for it to be dismantled, shows that the Arab demand for "return" has nothing to do with their feelings towards their Palestinian brethren - and has everything to do with destroying Israel.
This blog may be a labor of love for me, but it takes a lot of effort, time and money. For over 19 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.
The Jewish Cordoba
-
I have blogged multiple times here on what I see as a parallel between the
conflict between Catholics and Moslems over the Cordoba Cathedral and that
of ...
Hamas in America
-
[image: Dry Bones cartoon, Biden, Pro-Palestinian demonstrations, Hamas,
Bibi, Jewish, Israel, Oct 7, Jews, Israel, Rafah, Gaza,]
We should have seen it c...
Biden’s “Ironclad” Commitments to the World
-
Biden recently visited the Holocaust Museum and delivered a speech in which
he pledged an “ironclad” commitment to the “security of Israel”.
On Wednesda...
Jonathan Sacks – Faith After the Holocaust
-
Jonathan Sacks – Faith After the Holocaust IsraelSeen.com
Jonathan Sacks – Faith After the Holocaust Faith After the Holocaust Rabbi
Sacks responds to the ...
Yom Hashoah 5784 – 2024
-
Israel’s Yom Hashoah began at sundown this evening with the annual ceremony
at Yad Vashem with torches lit in memory of the 6 million Jewish victims of
the...
The Palestinian “Two-State” Plan: Duping the West
-
One of the great unsolved mysteries of the 21st century is why, given what
a catastrophe it proved to be, anyone, much less a whole phalanx of
politicians,...
Closing Jews Down Under Website
-
With a heavyish heart I am closing down the website after ten years.
It is and it isn’t an easy decision after 10 years of constant work. The
past...
‘Test & Trace’ is a mirage
-
Lockdown II thoughts: Day 1 Opposition politicians have been banging on
about the need for a ‘working’ Test & Trace system even more loudly than
the govern...
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
Elder of Ziyon
