In thinking about the Exodus from Egypt or Mitzriyeem, as it is called in Hebrew, I've thought about the hard hearted Pharoah who didn't want to release the 600,000 Jews from bondage but in the end did when his son died as well as the first born males of all families. He then renigged and had his soldiers chase after them before they crossed the Red Sea to bring them back, breaking his promise of freedom.
This fear must be in our minds as we try to talk to the Palestinians whose Fatah group is the only one to recognize our right to a Jewish state and that being finalized in 1988 when they proclaimed their Palestinian State in Judea-Samaria, so called the "West Bank." We've spent the past 62 years fighting to survive, a time much longer than it took to convince Pharoah to let us go. We still have the Hamas terrorists who have vowed to drive us into the sea.
The Hamas have hardened their hearts to us by their backing of the other Arab nationals and their constant education of hatred for Jews. I wonder what it will take to change their minds? Even the deaths of their children do not phase them. They seem to glory in their sacrifice if it causes our downfall in the eyes of the world.
President Obama is attending a seder at the White House this year. I wonder what he will think as he hears the Hagadah being read with the words, "Next Year in Jerusalem." He's pressing our Moses, Netanyahu, to give up our share of East Jerusalem populated with many Jews as well as other areas in Jerusalem that have never been on the sacrificial altar. Will he have a revelation and change of his hardened heart as he hears the words? His religious upbringing has not been that considerate of Jews. I think he is ambivalent towards us being at least one of his reverends has been most anti-semitic in his teachings. Saying he didn't hear the homilies or wasn't there when this man has spoken out against us so often isn't swaying me. His decisions today speak for themselves.
In the end, our ancestors crossed the sea and many Egyptians died in the act of chasing us. We managed to get into our land of milk and honey. May we have a good ending to our present day tribulations in keeping Jerusalem and all of our Israel.
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Saturday, March 27, 2010
Other World Occupied Lands in Dispute
In most international situations of war, the territory is returned. After being attacked in an all out war of 6 days in 1967, Israel gained territories. In this case as with other situations in the world, the land remained under control of Israel. Most often land is not militarily occupied, but since belligerence continued from terrorists, the military had to step in often.
There are other unsolved occupations in the world, but all pressure is on Israel and not the other sites.
1. Tibet. The area is still claimed by the Republic of China. Tibet lies on the west side of China and is between China and India. Their empire was created in the 8th century and fell apart 100 years later. In the 13th century it became a part of a Mongol-ruled Chinese empire. In the 17th century the Manchu-ruled Qing Dynasty incorporated it into China. In 1914 the Dalai Lama (13th) signed a treaty granting Chinese suzerainty "rule" over Inner Tibet and Outer Tibet meaning they had rule over the inner part and left the outer autonomous. In 1945 China's sovereignty over Tibet was not questioned by the United Nations. Tibetans are Buddhists and are a non violent people. There is still discontent over this.
2. Western Sahara. this is disputed between Morocco and the Polisario Front who consider it to be occupied. Morocco has occupied Western Sahara since 1975 in violation of resolutions by the UN Security Council and a decision by the International Court of Justice.
The United States has provided military, economic, and diplomatic support for Morocco’s war effort.
A cease-fire and proposed referendum bring promise for peace in the territory, but U.S. leadership is thought to be needed to insure its implementation.
3.Lower Kuril Islands. Kunashir/Kunashiri, Iturup/Etorofu, Shikotan, Habomai was annexed by the USSR in 1945 which considers the matter non-negotiable. It is a dispute between Japan and Russia over sovereignty over the South Kuril Islands. The disputed islands, which were occupied by Soviet forces during the Manchurian Strategic Offensive Operation at the end of World War II , are under Russian administration as South Kuril District of the Sakhalin Oblast , but are claimed by Japan, which refers to them as the Northern Territories.
4. Southern Cameroons. Their organization declares that the occupation of southern Cameroons is a military occupation by Cameroon and had infringed on the right of self-determination of the Southern Cameroons by forcibly occupying the territory since 1961 without the backing of any internationally recognized legal instrument.
5. Kashmir and Jammu. Parts are occupied by India and Pakistan calls it "Indian occupied Kashmir. There was occupation of parts of Jammu and Kashmir by Pakistan in 1947.
The disputed territory of Kashmir shares borders with India, Pakistan, Afghanistan and China. Kashmir was partitioned as a result of the Indian Independence Act of 1947. About 65% of the territory is administered by India, the remaining 35% by Pakistan. Jammu Kashmir is the predominately Muslim state within India, which is mainly Hindu.
This conflict, between two of the world's most populous countries, both with nuclear capability has the ominous potential to escalate into theater nuclear war, or beyond.
Tensions between India and Pakistan increased after a series of nuclear tests in mid 1998, as both states sought to demonstrate military power. In May 1999 hostilities flared when India launched military strikes against Kashmiri insurgents.
6. Aksai Chin. This is occupied by China. It is a disputed region located in the northwestern region of the Tibetan Plateau north of the western Kunlun Mountains. It is entirely administered by the People's Republic of China as a part of Hotan County in the Hotan Prefecture of Xinjiang Autonomous Region. It is, however, claimed by India as a part of its state of Jammu and Kashmir.
7. Macedonia. This had been called Yugoslavia but has gone back to the original name. Southern part has been occupied by Greece since 1913. . It lies north of Greece and between Albania and Bulgaria. See"Treaty of Bucharest".
Eastern part by Bulgaria since 1913
Small part of Western part "Prespa area" by Albania since 1913.
On October 8, 1912, the First Balkan War begun. Montenegro, Serbia, Bulgaria, and Greece attacked the European positions of the Ottoman Empire. More than 100,000 Macedonians also took active part and contributed in driving the Turks out of Macedonia. Turkey capitulated soon, but Macedonia did not free itself. The victorious Balkan kingdoms convened in Bucharest in August 1913 to divide the spoils. Their fight with Greece is over the name, Macedonia because there is also a Macedonia in Greece, and Greece feels that Macedonia has plans to take over. "Macedonia will keep on being friendly with all of its neighbors, especially towards Greece," Milososki said.
8. Cyprus. Northern part by Turkey who invaded it in 1974. The Turkish invasion of Cyprus launched on 20 July 1974, was a Turkish military operation in response to a Greek military junta backed coup in Cyprus which had been staged by the Cypriot National Guard whose leaders deposed the Cypriot president and archbishop Makarios III and installed Nikos Sampson in his place. The Turkish invasion took place in two stages and ended in August 1974, when Turkish troops occupied 37% of the island's territory, which was followed by the establishment of the de facto Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus that only Turkey recognizes, in contradiction of the terms of the 1960 Treaty of Guarantee. Both the United States and NATO possibly supported the idea of a Turkish military intervention. Intercommunal strife that preceded the invasion had brought Greece and Turkey, two NATO allies, to the brink of total war in a number of occasions between 1963 and 1974; the most serious clash was prevented through the last minute mediation of the U.S. President Lyndon B. Johnson on June 5, 1964. The Greeks have blamed the U.S. administration of President Richard Nixon, and in particular Henry Kissinger for supporting Turkey before and during the Turkish military invasion, following a decision by the U.S. National Security Council in May 1974 to put an end to the Cyprus problem. I note that Jews were expulsed from Cyprus in 115 CE.
9. Mexico. Occupied by Spain. IN 1821, AFTER ENDURING 300 years of Spanish occupation, Mexico gained her independence. She desperately needed time to consolidate her population of some 6 million, but the U.S. pushed against her most vulnerable region, the northwest. Stephan Austin was among the first to found a settlement in Texas-San Felipe de Austin-in 1821, the very year Mexico won her independence from Spain:
10. California, New Mexico, Utah and Texas. By USA. In 1846 the United States claimed as its territory the land between the Nueces River and the Rio Grande, by virtue of prior claim by the newly-annexed Republic of Texas. By the same token, so too did it maintain that the annexation of Texas gave the U.S. title to what is now the eastern half of present-day New Mexico. ONE HUNDRED FIFTY YEARS AGO, President Polk declared that it was his purpose "to ac-quire for the United States-California, New Mexico and some other of the Northern Provinces." This vision of North America as a "continent allotted by Providence" as the "Manifest Destiny" of the United States was widespread. The Congressional Globe declared, "We must march from ocean to ocean . . . . It is the destiny of the white race; it is the destiny of the Anglo-Saxon race." The American Review contended that Mexicans would be "yielding to a superior population . . . out-living, out-trading, and exterminating [Mexico's] weaker blood."
In these ten cases, the people who are occupied do not continue to fight and harrass their occupiers. as the terrorists have done to Israel. Israel did everything possible to allow the Palestinians living in these places to have a good life, but they chose to be terrorists instead. They continued to be a part of the arsonal against Israel. In all this time since 1967 they have not worked but live off of the donations from the United Nations and receive more from them than any other group in the world. This allows them time to use their talents for bomb-making and terrorizing.
In Israel's case, land retaken was originally in Jewish hands centuries ago. Nothing is "new land." In this time of the rebirth of Israel with the Ingathering of it's peoples, something prophecized thousands of years ago of something happening at the end of times, it is a blessing to have inherited the land lost and now regained as if by a miracle. the Jewish people patiently waited for 2,000 years to regain their country after 2,000 years of inconceivable bloodshed, loss of life and hardships. They became the scapegoat of the world and suffered from anti-semitism so much that they were driven to the decision to return and to make something out of a barren desert that no one wanted . Now that it's blossoming like the people living there, the terrorists want it. Why didn't they do something with it before Jewish people returned? It's because they didn't want it. The land was waiting for its own people to take care of it.
Coveting is one of the commandments that we are told to not do. The Palestinians are coveting our land, a state that was officially created and blessed by the United Nations.
They made that decision but have not lived up to respecting the state and standing up for it when attacked. There was no proviso that they could be a state if they could live long enough. Yet they back the very terrorists who have attacked Israel with rockets, guns, knives, and whatever they can find to use against Jews. There still is no justice for Israel. There is no fairness in the U.N.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_occupation
There are other unsolved occupations in the world, but all pressure is on Israel and not the other sites.
1. Tibet. The area is still claimed by the Republic of China. Tibet lies on the west side of China and is between China and India. Their empire was created in the 8th century and fell apart 100 years later. In the 13th century it became a part of a Mongol-ruled Chinese empire. In the 17th century the Manchu-ruled Qing Dynasty incorporated it into China. In 1914 the Dalai Lama (13th) signed a treaty granting Chinese suzerainty "rule" over Inner Tibet and Outer Tibet meaning they had rule over the inner part and left the outer autonomous. In 1945 China's sovereignty over Tibet was not questioned by the United Nations. Tibetans are Buddhists and are a non violent people. There is still discontent over this.
2. Western Sahara. this is disputed between Morocco and the Polisario Front who consider it to be occupied. Morocco has occupied Western Sahara since 1975 in violation of resolutions by the UN Security Council and a decision by the International Court of Justice.
The United States has provided military, economic, and diplomatic support for Morocco’s war effort.
A cease-fire and proposed referendum bring promise for peace in the territory, but U.S. leadership is thought to be needed to insure its implementation.
3.Lower Kuril Islands. Kunashir/Kunashiri, Iturup/Etorofu, Shikotan, Habomai was annexed by the USSR in 1945 which considers the matter non-negotiable. It is a dispute between Japan and Russia over sovereignty over the South Kuril Islands. The disputed islands, which were occupied by Soviet forces during the Manchurian Strategic Offensive Operation at the end of World War II , are under Russian administration as South Kuril District of the Sakhalin Oblast , but are claimed by Japan, which refers to them as the Northern Territories.
4. Southern Cameroons. Their organization declares that the occupation of southern Cameroons is a military occupation by Cameroon and had infringed on the right of self-determination of the Southern Cameroons by forcibly occupying the territory since 1961 without the backing of any internationally recognized legal instrument.
5. Kashmir and Jammu. Parts are occupied by India and Pakistan calls it "Indian occupied Kashmir. There was occupation of parts of Jammu and Kashmir by Pakistan in 1947.
The disputed territory of Kashmir shares borders with India, Pakistan, Afghanistan and China. Kashmir was partitioned as a result of the Indian Independence Act of 1947. About 65% of the territory is administered by India, the remaining 35% by Pakistan. Jammu Kashmir is the predominately Muslim state within India, which is mainly Hindu.
This conflict, between two of the world's most populous countries, both with nuclear capability has the ominous potential to escalate into theater nuclear war, or beyond.
Tensions between India and Pakistan increased after a series of nuclear tests in mid 1998, as both states sought to demonstrate military power. In May 1999 hostilities flared when India launched military strikes against Kashmiri insurgents.
6. Aksai Chin. This is occupied by China. It is a disputed region located in the northwestern region of the Tibetan Plateau north of the western Kunlun Mountains. It is entirely administered by the People's Republic of China as a part of Hotan County in the Hotan Prefecture of Xinjiang Autonomous Region. It is, however, claimed by India as a part of its state of Jammu and Kashmir.
7. Macedonia. This had been called Yugoslavia but has gone back to the original name. Southern part has been occupied by Greece since 1913. . It lies north of Greece and between Albania and Bulgaria. See"Treaty of Bucharest".
Eastern part by Bulgaria since 1913
Small part of Western part "Prespa area" by Albania since 1913.
On October 8, 1912, the First Balkan War begun. Montenegro, Serbia, Bulgaria, and Greece attacked the European positions of the Ottoman Empire. More than 100,000 Macedonians also took active part and contributed in driving the Turks out of Macedonia. Turkey capitulated soon, but Macedonia did not free itself. The victorious Balkan kingdoms convened in Bucharest in August 1913 to divide the spoils. Their fight with Greece is over the name, Macedonia because there is also a Macedonia in Greece, and Greece feels that Macedonia has plans to take over. "Macedonia will keep on being friendly with all of its neighbors, especially towards Greece," Milososki said.
8. Cyprus. Northern part by Turkey who invaded it in 1974. The Turkish invasion of Cyprus launched on 20 July 1974, was a Turkish military operation in response to a Greek military junta backed coup in Cyprus which had been staged by the Cypriot National Guard whose leaders deposed the Cypriot president and archbishop Makarios III and installed Nikos Sampson in his place. The Turkish invasion took place in two stages and ended in August 1974, when Turkish troops occupied 37% of the island's territory, which was followed by the establishment of the de facto Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus that only Turkey recognizes, in contradiction of the terms of the 1960 Treaty of Guarantee. Both the United States and NATO possibly supported the idea of a Turkish military intervention. Intercommunal strife that preceded the invasion had brought Greece and Turkey, two NATO allies, to the brink of total war in a number of occasions between 1963 and 1974; the most serious clash was prevented through the last minute mediation of the U.S. President Lyndon B. Johnson on June 5, 1964. The Greeks have blamed the U.S. administration of President Richard Nixon, and in particular Henry Kissinger for supporting Turkey before and during the Turkish military invasion, following a decision by the U.S. National Security Council in May 1974 to put an end to the Cyprus problem. I note that Jews were expulsed from Cyprus in 115 CE.
9. Mexico. Occupied by Spain. IN 1821, AFTER ENDURING 300 years of Spanish occupation, Mexico gained her independence. She desperately needed time to consolidate her population of some 6 million, but the U.S. pushed against her most vulnerable region, the northwest. Stephan Austin was among the first to found a settlement in Texas-San Felipe de Austin-in 1821, the very year Mexico won her independence from Spain:
10. California, New Mexico, Utah and Texas. By USA. In 1846 the United States claimed as its territory the land between the Nueces River and the Rio Grande, by virtue of prior claim by the newly-annexed Republic of Texas. By the same token, so too did it maintain that the annexation of Texas gave the U.S. title to what is now the eastern half of present-day New Mexico. ONE HUNDRED FIFTY YEARS AGO, President Polk declared that it was his purpose "to ac-quire for the United States-California, New Mexico and some other of the Northern Provinces." This vision of North America as a "continent allotted by Providence" as the "Manifest Destiny" of the United States was widespread. The Congressional Globe declared, "We must march from ocean to ocean . . . . It is the destiny of the white race; it is the destiny of the Anglo-Saxon race." The American Review contended that Mexicans would be "yielding to a superior population . . . out-living, out-trading, and exterminating [Mexico's] weaker blood."
In these ten cases, the people who are occupied do not continue to fight and harrass their occupiers. as the terrorists have done to Israel. Israel did everything possible to allow the Palestinians living in these places to have a good life, but they chose to be terrorists instead. They continued to be a part of the arsonal against Israel. In all this time since 1967 they have not worked but live off of the donations from the United Nations and receive more from them than any other group in the world. This allows them time to use their talents for bomb-making and terrorizing.
In Israel's case, land retaken was originally in Jewish hands centuries ago. Nothing is "new land." In this time of the rebirth of Israel with the Ingathering of it's peoples, something prophecized thousands of years ago of something happening at the end of times, it is a blessing to have inherited the land lost and now regained as if by a miracle. the Jewish people patiently waited for 2,000 years to regain their country after 2,000 years of inconceivable bloodshed, loss of life and hardships. They became the scapegoat of the world and suffered from anti-semitism so much that they were driven to the decision to return and to make something out of a barren desert that no one wanted . Now that it's blossoming like the people living there, the terrorists want it. Why didn't they do something with it before Jewish people returned? It's because they didn't want it. The land was waiting for its own people to take care of it.
Coveting is one of the commandments that we are told to not do. The Palestinians are coveting our land, a state that was officially created and blessed by the United Nations.
They made that decision but have not lived up to respecting the state and standing up for it when attacked. There was no proviso that they could be a state if they could live long enough. Yet they back the very terrorists who have attacked Israel with rockets, guns, knives, and whatever they can find to use against Jews. There still is no justice for Israel. There is no fairness in the U.N.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_occupation
Friday, March 26, 2010
Israel and Obama's Set of Facts Over Jerusalem
by Nadene Goldfoot and Victor Sharpe
Israel and Obama are not following the same set of facts.
Between 1949 and 1967 Jordan occupied Eastern Jerusalem and forcibly expelled all the Jews FROM THE OLD CITY.
In this place was the City of David, the Temple Mount and Western Wall, Hebrew U and the original Hadassah Hospital which sits on Mt. Scopus-which in eastern Jerusalem. ONLY MOUNT SCOPUS WAS WITHIN JORDANIAN OCCUPIED TERRITORY AND ISRAELI CONVOYS HAD TO PASS THROUGH ARAB CHECKPOINTS TO GO THERE AND BACK.
Before 1865 all of the Jerusalemites lived in the Old City which would be considered today as part of the eastern part of the city. Both Jews and Arabs began to build in new areas later. SINCE 1841 Jews formed the largest community in Jerusalem.
Israel LIBERATED East Jerusalem from Jordan in the 1967 War and immediately annexed it. This was not recognized internationally. Now they have announced building 1,600 units in the suburb of Ramat Shlomo which is located north of Jerusalem and not in East Jerusalem. It is already a community of 16,000 Orthodox Jews and expected to stay a part of Israel’s capital in any peace agreement. This is not disrupting the lives of Palestinian Arabs. Israel recently announced that 20 new Jewish homes will be built in Jerusalem. This angered President Obama though it seems he was intent on manufacturing a fraudulent dispute.
Netanyahu reminded Obama that this is not a change in Israeli policy, which is how Obama chose to view it. The Palestinians want to divide Jerusalem and create for the first time in history an Arab capital in the Holy city. The Obama administration has lurched alarmingly towards the Palestinian Arabs to the extent that it is now parroting the Arab claims that Jews have no right to the city – even though it has been a Jewish capital for 3,000 years since King David moved from Hebron and made it his capital city. Evidently the USA could annex parts of Mexico but Israel cannot exist in every part of its ancient capital. What kind of international law allows for such discrimination and assault against 3,000 years of Jewish history?
About 300,000 Israelis live in western suburbs of Jerusalem and about 200,000 more live in areas north, south and east, which were liberated from Jordanian occupation and which the Palestinian Authority now demands for itself.
When Prime Minister Ehud Barak was Prime Minister during President Clinton’s administration, he offered to create a Palestinian state in 97% of Judea and Samaria, the so-called West Bank as well as give away east-Jerusalem to the Arabs. The Palestinians rejected that offer. Two years ago, a similar IMMENSE CONCESSION WAS also rejected PROVING THAT THE Arabs do not want a state alongside Israel but a state instead of Israel. The Jewish state has continually offered breathtaking compromises and concession in the interest of peace only to receive endless rejections.
Israel withdrew completely from Gaza and other places but it has brought the opposite of peace. Israel has suffered 1,000 citizens killed since it accepted the Oslo ‘peace’ accords, which is now called the Oslo War.
After Gaza, it is apparent that Israel can expect nothing other than Islamic ‘holy’ war. Meanwhile, the US Administration has not once told the Palestinians that they must cease terrorism, stop inculcating their children with hate and end their campaign of demonization of the embattled Jewish state. Instead, the Obama administration is doing one thing only: savagely pressuring Israel.
I find it completely outrageous that the Obama Administration is so biased against its greatest ally, Israel or that the Palestinians have the impression that they need only to let Obama do their dirty work for them. Israel is busy developing its own capital while the Arab and Muslim world wants to ethnically cleanse Jerusalem of its Jewish patrimony and destroy every vestige of historical and spiritual Jewish life in the eternal Jewish capital city.
Reference: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100326/ap_on_re_mii_ea/ml_israel_palestinians/print 3/26/10Mitchell Bard M&F #357Britannica Blog: Open Letter from Bibi to Barack by Mitchell Bard
Victor Sharpe
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Money Between Israel and USA
One of the first things I hear from people in the states is that Israel costs Americans money and our tax dollars shouldn't go to Israel.
From 1989, the former Soviet Union allowed more than 400,000 Jews to emigrate to Israel. Absorption of these new immigrants was of the highest priority in Israel and of course cost them money, about $50 billion over five years.
By 1972 Congress had funds to help resettle them, and by 1990 lawmakers aproved $400 million in loan guarantees to house them in Israel. These were not grants. Not one penny of US government funds were transferred to Israel. The US just cosigned loans for Israel that allowed it to get better financing from private American banks. They had no effect on domestic programs or guarantees and no impact on taxpayers. Israel has never defaulted on its loans.
Also, much of the money Irael borrows usually is spent in the USA to buy American goods. Each year Israel gives a full detailed report on the expenditure of all US assistance and provides written assurances that it would not direct or settle Soviet Jews in Judea or Samaria. There is no problem with this as the Russian Jews I met all wanted to live in Tel Aviv where the theater or symphonies were playing. They were used to such things in Russia. In 1991 only 1.2 % of Soviet Jews wanted to move to a rural area such as this. Mostly, it's the orthodox or religious Jews who chose to live in these places.
Resource: Myths and Facts by Mitchell Bard, page 243-244.
From 1989, the former Soviet Union allowed more than 400,000 Jews to emigrate to Israel. Absorption of these new immigrants was of the highest priority in Israel and of course cost them money, about $50 billion over five years.
By 1972 Congress had funds to help resettle them, and by 1990 lawmakers aproved $400 million in loan guarantees to house them in Israel. These were not grants. Not one penny of US government funds were transferred to Israel. The US just cosigned loans for Israel that allowed it to get better financing from private American banks. They had no effect on domestic programs or guarantees and no impact on taxpayers. Israel has never defaulted on its loans.
Also, much of the money Irael borrows usually is spent in the USA to buy American goods. Each year Israel gives a full detailed report on the expenditure of all US assistance and provides written assurances that it would not direct or settle Soviet Jews in Judea or Samaria. There is no problem with this as the Russian Jews I met all wanted to live in Tel Aviv where the theater or symphonies were playing. They were used to such things in Russia. In 1991 only 1.2 % of Soviet Jews wanted to move to a rural area such as this. Mostly, it's the orthodox or religious Jews who chose to live in these places.
Resource: Myths and Facts by Mitchell Bard, page 243-244.
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Is This Called Criticism? Clinton VS Netanyahu
Criticism is when somebody like your mother tells you that your shirt is dirty and that you should get another one to wear. Mom shouldn't do this in front of company. Teachers are told to do it in privacy with a student because the last thing you want to do is embarrass that student in front of his peers. The dictionary lists such synonyms as reprehend, blame, censure, reprobate, denounce. Criticize implies finding fault, especially with methods or policies or intentions.
Netanyahu was chewed out by Biden and somehow everyone knew about it. The next thing was that Hillary Clinton did it again for about a half hour, as I have heard the story, and the Palestinians certainly heard about it. This was followed by more rioting in Jerusalem by Arabs. Everybody was getting in on the act.
In defense at the AIPAC dinner, Clinton said that criticism was necessary between friends, but I remind people in defense of Netanyahu, that it depends on how it should be done.
As I hear the story, she was not only criticizing but listing things that Netanyahu must now do and of course not do-build in Jerusalem. Then the follow-up was that Clinton told the media that the move was an "insult" to America and seemingly questioned Israel's commitment to peace and relationship with the US. Do you do this to friends?
She's told AIPAC that the Israel-Palestinian status quo was unsustainable and evidently she is standing as firm as Netanyahu about how the USA feels about our building in our Jerusalem section now. We have no say. She did acknowledge that the final status of Jerusalem is to be settled at the negotiating table, but I feel that somebody other than Israel is laying down a foundation of appeasement to the Palestinians who are eyeing this fair city much too eagerly.
The USA feels that even having a Palestine next door to Israel is not going to change Iran's intentions with their nucleur weapons, but that they will use it as a pretext if it is not happening.
AIPAC director Howard Kohr stated that Jerusalem was not a settlement. Everyone gave him a standing ovation for that. He continued by calling on the US and Israel to move past their recent row.
A mountain had been created out of a mole hill's blundering announcement, and I wonder if this was an intentional move in preparation for Mitchell's talk with the Palestinians. We didn't need this detour in the road to a peaceful meeting. So far the record for peace talks is batting 100% against the Palestinians ever accepting an offer. Something always comes up.
In the meantime last night, a Kassam rocket fell in a field outside of Ashkelon fired by Palestinian terrorists from Gaza. Why isn't America getting on their shirttails about this which is endangering the peace process? Is it just whatever Israel does that is criticized? It sure seems so. It's an insult to Israel.
Reference: http://www.jpost.com/LandedPages/Printarticle.aspx?id=171589
Netanyahu was chewed out by Biden and somehow everyone knew about it. The next thing was that Hillary Clinton did it again for about a half hour, as I have heard the story, and the Palestinians certainly heard about it. This was followed by more rioting in Jerusalem by Arabs. Everybody was getting in on the act.
In defense at the AIPAC dinner, Clinton said that criticism was necessary between friends, but I remind people in defense of Netanyahu, that it depends on how it should be done.
As I hear the story, she was not only criticizing but listing things that Netanyahu must now do and of course not do-build in Jerusalem. Then the follow-up was that Clinton told the media that the move was an "insult" to America and seemingly questioned Israel's commitment to peace and relationship with the US. Do you do this to friends?
She's told AIPAC that the Israel-Palestinian status quo was unsustainable and evidently she is standing as firm as Netanyahu about how the USA feels about our building in our Jerusalem section now. We have no say. She did acknowledge that the final status of Jerusalem is to be settled at the negotiating table, but I feel that somebody other than Israel is laying down a foundation of appeasement to the Palestinians who are eyeing this fair city much too eagerly.
The USA feels that even having a Palestine next door to Israel is not going to change Iran's intentions with their nucleur weapons, but that they will use it as a pretext if it is not happening.
AIPAC director Howard Kohr stated that Jerusalem was not a settlement. Everyone gave him a standing ovation for that. He continued by calling on the US and Israel to move past their recent row.
A mountain had been created out of a mole hill's blundering announcement, and I wonder if this was an intentional move in preparation for Mitchell's talk with the Palestinians. We didn't need this detour in the road to a peaceful meeting. So far the record for peace talks is batting 100% against the Palestinians ever accepting an offer. Something always comes up.
In the meantime last night, a Kassam rocket fell in a field outside of Ashkelon fired by Palestinian terrorists from Gaza. Why isn't America getting on their shirttails about this which is endangering the peace process? Is it just whatever Israel does that is criticized? It sure seems so. It's an insult to Israel.
Reference: http://www.jpost.com/LandedPages/Printarticle.aspx?id=171589
Sunday, March 21, 2010
Clinton's Emasculation of Netanyahu
I am shocked over Hillary Clinton's dressing down of Netanyahu over the apartments to be built in Jerusalem. He is known for what he stands for, the right to do this very thing in Israel's own capital and on a side they already have.
I'm thinking of how she had addressed Jewish groups in the states telling them of how she was all for Israel, etc. saying this just to get votes. How transparent she is in her beliefs. How little she has studied the issue is certainly being demonstrated to me at this point in time.
What hurts me is that is shows she did not wonder at first about this announcement and come up-quickly-with scenarios as to why. It must have been a gut reaction, and that is scary, no , not scary, but realistic as to how she for one really feels, and this realism is very disappointing but not surprising at all.
Of course I realize that this is also how Obama sees the situation, and she is following party line of her boss. However, she fell into raising the rioting factor, and shows that she is simply just an extension and is not thinking in a different mode at all.
Right now Netanyahu is standing up for Israel and its rights, which is quite a feat considering this attack. He's being a mench as far as I'm concerned and not cow-towing. Israel is not going to go through 60 years beating the odds of surviving against so many who want to see it being beaten into the sea and then cave into an angry woman. This new "let's go for change administration" of ours evidently would like to see a change-from helping Israel to helping its destroyers, and must stop to smell the oranges growing in Israel and know that these things weren't happening before 1948.
If Clinton wants to do something worthwhile she could use her charms on the Palestinians who only teach hatred and the goal of not accepting Israel. Tell them to put up or shut up. Why doesn't she go over to Hamas and the other terrorists and tell them to follow Abbas? Don't keep screaming at Israel as to what to give up to have peace. We've done our share already.
I'm thinking of how she had addressed Jewish groups in the states telling them of how she was all for Israel, etc. saying this just to get votes. How transparent she is in her beliefs. How little she has studied the issue is certainly being demonstrated to me at this point in time.
What hurts me is that is shows she did not wonder at first about this announcement and come up-quickly-with scenarios as to why. It must have been a gut reaction, and that is scary, no , not scary, but realistic as to how she for one really feels, and this realism is very disappointing but not surprising at all.
Of course I realize that this is also how Obama sees the situation, and she is following party line of her boss. However, she fell into raising the rioting factor, and shows that she is simply just an extension and is not thinking in a different mode at all.
Right now Netanyahu is standing up for Israel and its rights, which is quite a feat considering this attack. He's being a mench as far as I'm concerned and not cow-towing. Israel is not going to go through 60 years beating the odds of surviving against so many who want to see it being beaten into the sea and then cave into an angry woman. This new "let's go for change administration" of ours evidently would like to see a change-from helping Israel to helping its destroyers, and must stop to smell the oranges growing in Israel and know that these things weren't happening before 1948.
If Clinton wants to do something worthwhile she could use her charms on the Palestinians who only teach hatred and the goal of not accepting Israel. Tell them to put up or shut up. Why doesn't she go over to Hamas and the other terrorists and tell them to follow Abbas? Don't keep screaming at Israel as to what to give up to have peace. We've done our share already.
Saturday, March 20, 2010
American Funding for Palestinian Militia
"Arafat died in late 2004,and the U.S. government established the Office of the U.S. Security Coordinator to reform, recruit, train, and equip the PA militia (called the National Security Forces or Quwwat al-Amn al-Watani) and make them politically accountable. For nearly all of its existence, the office has been headed by Lt. Gen. Keith Dayton.
Since 2007, American taxpayers have funded it to the tune of US$100 million a year. Many agencies of the U.S. government have been involved in the program, including the State Department's Bureau of Diplomatic Security, the Secret Service, and branches of the military".
Daniel Pipe's article rightly points out that the Palestinians are still holding onto their goal of wiping out Israel. He feels this needs to be stopped. I second the idea wholeheartedly.
Reference: http://www.israelunitycoalition.org/news/?p=5261 by Daniel Pipes.
Since 2007, American taxpayers have funded it to the tune of US$100 million a year. Many agencies of the U.S. government have been involved in the program, including the State Department's Bureau of Diplomatic Security, the Secret Service, and branches of the military".
Daniel Pipe's article rightly points out that the Palestinians are still holding onto their goal of wiping out Israel. He feels this needs to be stopped. I second the idea wholeheartedly.
Reference: http://www.israelunitycoalition.org/news/?p=5261 by Daniel Pipes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
