Israel to the UN: The Jewish People Are Not Foreign Conquerors in the Land of Israel
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told the UN General Assembly on September 24, 2009:
* Nearly 62 years ago, the United Nations recognized the right of the Jews, an ancient people 3,500-years-old, to a state of their own in their ancestral homeland. Yesterday, the man [Ahmadinejad] who calls the Holocaust a lie spoke from this podium. To those who refused to come here and to those who left this room in protest, I commend you. You stood up for moral clarity and you brought honor to your countries.
* The Iranian regime is fueled by an extreme fundamentalism that burst onto the world scene three decades ago. The struggle against this fanaticism pits civilization against barbarism, the 21st century against the 9th century, those who sanctify life against those who glorify death. If the most primitive fanaticism can acquire the most deadly weapons, the march of history could be reversed. The greatest threat facing the world today is the marriage between religious fanaticism and the weapons of mass destruction, and the most urgent challenge facing this body is to prevent the tyrants of Tehran from acquiring nuclear weapons.
* A recent UN report on Gaza falsely equated the terrorists with those they targeted. For eight long years, Hamas fired from Gaza thousands of missiles, mortars and rockets on nearby Israeli cities while not a single UN resolution was passed condemning those criminal attacks. In 2005, hoping to advance peace, Israel unilaterally withdrew from every inch of Gaza. We didn't get peace. Instead we got an Iranian-backed terror base fifty miles from Tel Aviv. Life in Israeli towns and cities next to Gaza became a nightmare.
* All of Israel wants peace. If the Palestinians truly want peace, I and my government, and the people of Israel, will make peace. But we want a genuine peace, a defensible peace, a permanent peace. In 1947, this body voted to establish two states for two peoples - a Jewish state and an Arab state. The Jews accepted that resolution. The Arabs rejected it. We ask the Palestinians to finally do what they have refused to do for 62 years: Say yes to a Jewish state. The Jewish people are not foreign conquerors in the Land of Israel. This is the land of our forefathers.
* We recognize that the Palestinians also live there and want a home of their own. We want to live side by side with them, two free peoples living in peace, prosperity and dignity. But we don't want another Gaza, another Iranian-backed terror base, abutting Jerusalem and perched on the hills a few kilometers from Tel Aviv. The Palestinians should have all the powers to govern themselves except those handful of powers that could endanger Israel.
Saturday, September 26, 2009
Palestinian Leaders Deny Jerusalem's Past
By BARI WEISS, Opinion Editorial, Wall Street Journal, September 25, 2009
Jews have no history in the city of Jerusalem: They have never lived there, the Temple never existed, and Israeli archaeologists have admitted as much. Those who deny this are simply liars. Or so says Sheik Tayseer Rajab Tamimi, chief Islamic judge of the Palestinian Authority.
His claims, made last month, would be laughable if they weren't so common among Palestinians. Sheik Tamimi is only the latest to insist that, in his words, Jerusalem is solely "an Arab and Islamic city and it has always been so." His comments come on the heels of those by Shamekh Alawneh, a lecturer in modern history at Al Quds University. On an Aug. 11 PA television program, "Jerusalem—History and Culture," Mr. Alawneh argued that the Jews invented their connection to Jerusalem. "It has no historical roots," he said, adding that the Jews are engaging in "an attack on history, theft of culture, falsification of facts, erasure of the truth, and Judaization of the place."
[weiss] Associated Press
The Western Wall and the Dome of the Rock
As President Barack Obama and his foreign-policy team gear up to propose yet another plan for Israeli-Arab peace, they would do well to focus less on important but secondary issues like settlement growth, and instead notice that top Palestinian intellectual and political leaders deny basic truths about the region's most important city.
For the record: Jerusalem is the holiest city in Judaism, mentioned more than 600 times in the Hebrew Bible. Three times a day, religious Jews face eastward toward the city when they pray. At Jewish weddings, the couple's joy is diminished as they shatter a glass to acknowledge Jerusalem's still unfulfilled redemption. It is a widespread custom then to recite the 137th psalm ("If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, let my right hand wither, let my tongue cleave to my palate. . ." ).
According to Jewish tradition, Jerusalem's designation as Judaism's most sacred city made it the obvious place for King Solomon to build the Holy Temple following the death of his father, King David. After the temple's destruction by the Babylonians, it was rebuilt by King Herod before being destroyed by the Romans in A.D. 70.
Earlier this month, archaeologists with the Israeli Antiquities Authority discovered a 3,700-year-old Jerusalem wall—the oldest and biggest ever uncovered in the region—that they believe was built by the Canaanites before the First Temple period. It's true: there is scant archaeological evidence of the First Temple. But not so for the Second Temple, which is accepted as historical fact by most archaeologists. From the Herodian period, aside from dozens of Jewish ritual baths surrounding the temple that have been uncovered, one retaining wall of the temple, the Western Wall, still stands.
But Sheik Tamimi doesn't need to take the Jews' word for any of this, or that of legions of world-class scholars. For proof of the Jewish connection to Jerusalem, he need only look at writings from his own religious tradition.
The Koran, which references many biblical stories and claims figures like Abraham as Islamic prophets, also acknowledges the existence of the Jewish temples. The historian Karen Armstrong has written that the Koran refers to Solomon's Temple as a "great place of prayer" and that the first Muslims referred to Jerusalem as the "City of the Temple." Martin Kramer, a historian who has combed through Koranic references to the temples in Arabic, notes surra 34, verse 13, which discusses Solomon's building process: "They [jinn/spirits] worked for him as he desired, (making) arches, images, basins large as wells, and (cooking) cauldrons fixed (in their places)."
There is still more recent official Muslim acknowledgment of Jerusalem's Jewish history—a booklet put out in 1924 by the Supreme Muslim Council called "A brief guide to al-haram al-sharif." Al-haram al-sharif, the Arabic name for the Temple Mount, is currently the site of the Dome of the Rock and Al Aqsa mosque. It is, according to Islamic tradition, where Muhammad ascended to heaven.
Yet it is also, according to the council's booklet, a site of uncontested importance for the Jews. "The site is one of the oldest in the world. Its sanctity dates from the earliest (perhaps from pre-historic) times. Its identity with the site of Solomon's Temple is beyond dispute." And the booklet quotes the book of Samuel: "This, too, is the spot, according to the universal belief, on which 'David built there an altar unto the Lord, and offered burnt offering and peace offerings.'" Later, the booklet says the underground structure known as King Solomon's Stables probably dates "as far back as the construction of Solomon's Temple." Citing the historian Flavius Josephus, it claims the stables were likely used as a "place of refuge by the Jews at the time of the conquest of Jerusalem by Titus in the year 70 A.D."
So why do those like Mr. Tamimi deny what their predecessors acknowledged? To undermine Israel, which earned statehood in 1948 and captured the Old City of Jerusalem during the Six Day War of 1967. Since then, Palestinian leaders have fought to erase any Jewish connection to sacred places, particularly the Temple Mount.
While Israel has never hesitated to acknowledge Jerusalem's holiness in Islam—albeit saying that it has less importance than Mecca—Palestinian leaders insist that Jews are transplants in the region, nothing more than white European colonialists. This denial has formed the foundation for their argument that Jerusalem should become Palestine's capital. This is why the previous mufti of the Palestinian Authority, Sheik Ikrama Sabri, dismisses the Western Wall as "just a fence." Yasser Arafat classified it, bizarrely, as "a Muslim shrine." As Saeb Erekat, Arafat's chief negotiator, said to President Clinton at Camp David in 2000: "I don't believe there was a temple on top of the Haram [holy site], I really don't."
These sentiments are echoed in Palestinian primary-school textbooks, preached at mosques, and printed in official newspapers. The Palestinian leadership isn't bellyaching over borders—it is stating, in full voice, that Israel has no right to its most basic historical and religious legacy.
This is no foundation for "peace talks."
—Ms. Weiss is an assistant editorial features editor at the Journal.
By BARI WEISS, Opinion Editorial, Wall Street Journal, September 25, 2009
Jews have no history in the city of Jerusalem: They have never lived there, the Temple never existed, and Israeli archaeologists have admitted as much. Those who deny this are simply liars. Or so says Sheik Tayseer Rajab Tamimi, chief Islamic judge of the Palestinian Authority.
His claims, made last month, would be laughable if they weren't so common among Palestinians. Sheik Tamimi is only the latest to insist that, in his words, Jerusalem is solely "an Arab and Islamic city and it has always been so." His comments come on the heels of those by Shamekh Alawneh, a lecturer in modern history at Al Quds University. On an Aug. 11 PA television program, "Jerusalem—History and Culture," Mr. Alawneh argued that the Jews invented their connection to Jerusalem. "It has no historical roots," he said, adding that the Jews are engaging in "an attack on history, theft of culture, falsification of facts, erasure of the truth, and Judaization of the place."
[weiss] Associated Press
The Western Wall and the Dome of the Rock
As President Barack Obama and his foreign-policy team gear up to propose yet another plan for Israeli-Arab peace, they would do well to focus less on important but secondary issues like settlement growth, and instead notice that top Palestinian intellectual and political leaders deny basic truths about the region's most important city.
For the record: Jerusalem is the holiest city in Judaism, mentioned more than 600 times in the Hebrew Bible. Three times a day, religious Jews face eastward toward the city when they pray. At Jewish weddings, the couple's joy is diminished as they shatter a glass to acknowledge Jerusalem's still unfulfilled redemption. It is a widespread custom then to recite the 137th psalm ("If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, let my right hand wither, let my tongue cleave to my palate. . ." ).
According to Jewish tradition, Jerusalem's designation as Judaism's most sacred city made it the obvious place for King Solomon to build the Holy Temple following the death of his father, King David. After the temple's destruction by the Babylonians, it was rebuilt by King Herod before being destroyed by the Romans in A.D. 70.
Earlier this month, archaeologists with the Israeli Antiquities Authority discovered a 3,700-year-old Jerusalem wall—the oldest and biggest ever uncovered in the region—that they believe was built by the Canaanites before the First Temple period. It's true: there is scant archaeological evidence of the First Temple. But not so for the Second Temple, which is accepted as historical fact by most archaeologists. From the Herodian period, aside from dozens of Jewish ritual baths surrounding the temple that have been uncovered, one retaining wall of the temple, the Western Wall, still stands.
But Sheik Tamimi doesn't need to take the Jews' word for any of this, or that of legions of world-class scholars. For proof of the Jewish connection to Jerusalem, he need only look at writings from his own religious tradition.
The Koran, which references many biblical stories and claims figures like Abraham as Islamic prophets, also acknowledges the existence of the Jewish temples. The historian Karen Armstrong has written that the Koran refers to Solomon's Temple as a "great place of prayer" and that the first Muslims referred to Jerusalem as the "City of the Temple." Martin Kramer, a historian who has combed through Koranic references to the temples in Arabic, notes surra 34, verse 13, which discusses Solomon's building process: "They [jinn/spirits] worked for him as he desired, (making) arches, images, basins large as wells, and (cooking) cauldrons fixed (in their places)."
There is still more recent official Muslim acknowledgment of Jerusalem's Jewish history—a booklet put out in 1924 by the Supreme Muslim Council called "A brief guide to al-haram al-sharif." Al-haram al-sharif, the Arabic name for the Temple Mount, is currently the site of the Dome of the Rock and Al Aqsa mosque. It is, according to Islamic tradition, where Muhammad ascended to heaven.
Yet it is also, according to the council's booklet, a site of uncontested importance for the Jews. "The site is one of the oldest in the world. Its sanctity dates from the earliest (perhaps from pre-historic) times. Its identity with the site of Solomon's Temple is beyond dispute." And the booklet quotes the book of Samuel: "This, too, is the spot, according to the universal belief, on which 'David built there an altar unto the Lord, and offered burnt offering and peace offerings.'" Later, the booklet says the underground structure known as King Solomon's Stables probably dates "as far back as the construction of Solomon's Temple." Citing the historian Flavius Josephus, it claims the stables were likely used as a "place of refuge by the Jews at the time of the conquest of Jerusalem by Titus in the year 70 A.D."
So why do those like Mr. Tamimi deny what their predecessors acknowledged? To undermine Israel, which earned statehood in 1948 and captured the Old City of Jerusalem during the Six Day War of 1967. Since then, Palestinian leaders have fought to erase any Jewish connection to sacred places, particularly the Temple Mount.
While Israel has never hesitated to acknowledge Jerusalem's holiness in Islam—albeit saying that it has less importance than Mecca—Palestinian leaders insist that Jews are transplants in the region, nothing more than white European colonialists. This denial has formed the foundation for their argument that Jerusalem should become Palestine's capital. This is why the previous mufti of the Palestinian Authority, Sheik Ikrama Sabri, dismisses the Western Wall as "just a fence." Yasser Arafat classified it, bizarrely, as "a Muslim shrine." As Saeb Erekat, Arafat's chief negotiator, said to President Clinton at Camp David in 2000: "I don't believe there was a temple on top of the Haram [holy site], I really don't."
These sentiments are echoed in Palestinian primary-school textbooks, preached at mosques, and printed in official newspapers. The Palestinian leadership isn't bellyaching over borders—it is stating, in full voice, that Israel has no right to its most basic historical and religious legacy.
This is no foundation for "peace talks."
—Ms. Weiss is an assistant editorial features editor at the Journal.
Thursday, September 24, 2009
Illinois divests $133 million in anti-nuclear Iran initiative
By Jane CHARNEY, Staff Writer Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago, 9/24/09
Illinois State Sen. Jeff Schoenberg and Rep. Lou Lang announced Sept. 24 the results of a significant state-level effort to curb Iran’s nuclear threat: the divestment of $133 million in state pension funds from foreign companies doing business with Iran’s energy sector.
Illinois has been at the forefront of efforts to stop Iran’s nuclear program. In fact, the state passed the nation’s second divestment bill in 2007. The Illinois bill also was the first to require foreign companies seeking business with the state to indicate if they are doing business with Iran’s energy sector.
“The law declares simply the state’s readiness not just to speak out against Iran’s recklessness but to act to curb it as well,” Shoenberg said at a press conference announcing the results of divestment (watch the video of the event). “As long as the Iranian leadership continues to pursue nuclear weapons in defiance of international law, we are absolutely compelled to withhold our public investments from this rogue country.”
State Reps. Will Davis, Linda Chapa LaVia, and Sid Mathias, all of whom co-sponsored the original bill in 2007, again showed their support for the anti-Iran initiative by attending the press conference.
JUF’s Jewish Community Relations Council and its Government Affairs Office in Springfield played a key role in securing support for the legislation. They also worked with business associations generally opposed to divestment to remain neutral on the Illinois law and with the state pension boards’ compliance and general counsel officers on implementation and reporting.
“While others are calling for action and talking about what to do, Illinois already has acted and has emerged as a leader in this area,” said JUF Executive Vice President Michael Kotzin, who also spoke at the press conference. Read his entire remarks.
Preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons has been the top focus of lobbying efforts by Jewish organizations nationwide. In early September, 20 Chicagoans joined about 300 Jewish community leaders from around the country to urge lawmakers on Capitol Hill to take a tougher stance on Iran as part of the National Jewish Leadership Advocacy Day on Iran, coordinated by the National Inter-Agency Task Force on Iran. Rallies also took place Sept. 24 in New York and several other cities in solidarity with Iran’s opposition movement, which stood up against President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s rule.
Jewish and non-Jewish lay leaders, students, and JUF staff met with Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin and Illinois Reps. Jerry Costello, Danny K. Davis, Luis Gutierrez, Bill Foster, Phil Hare, Debbie Halvorson, Jesse Jackson, Jr., Mark Kirk, Donald Manzullo, Mike Quigley, Peter Roskam, Aaron Schock and Jan Schakowsky to discuss upcoming House bills connected to Iran. Chicagoans comprised one of the largest groups at the fly-in.
The Illinois congressional delegation has been supportive of anti-nuclear Iran efforts. In particular, the entire delegation signed on as co-sponsors of the Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act of 2009, which would strengthen the President’s authority to impose sanctions on any entity providing Iran with refined petroleum resources. Illinois legislators also are co-sponsoring the Iran Sanctions Enabling Act of 2009, which requires federal support for local and state governments’ and educational institutions’ divestment from entities investing more than $20 million in Iran’s energy sector.
By Jane CHARNEY, Staff Writer Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago, 9/24/09
Illinois State Sen. Jeff Schoenberg and Rep. Lou Lang announced Sept. 24 the results of a significant state-level effort to curb Iran’s nuclear threat: the divestment of $133 million in state pension funds from foreign companies doing business with Iran’s energy sector.
Illinois has been at the forefront of efforts to stop Iran’s nuclear program. In fact, the state passed the nation’s second divestment bill in 2007. The Illinois bill also was the first to require foreign companies seeking business with the state to indicate if they are doing business with Iran’s energy sector.
“The law declares simply the state’s readiness not just to speak out against Iran’s recklessness but to act to curb it as well,” Shoenberg said at a press conference announcing the results of divestment (watch the video of the event). “As long as the Iranian leadership continues to pursue nuclear weapons in defiance of international law, we are absolutely compelled to withhold our public investments from this rogue country.”
State Reps. Will Davis, Linda Chapa LaVia, and Sid Mathias, all of whom co-sponsored the original bill in 2007, again showed their support for the anti-Iran initiative by attending the press conference.
JUF’s Jewish Community Relations Council and its Government Affairs Office in Springfield played a key role in securing support for the legislation. They also worked with business associations generally opposed to divestment to remain neutral on the Illinois law and with the state pension boards’ compliance and general counsel officers on implementation and reporting.
“While others are calling for action and talking about what to do, Illinois already has acted and has emerged as a leader in this area,” said JUF Executive Vice President Michael Kotzin, who also spoke at the press conference. Read his entire remarks.
Preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons has been the top focus of lobbying efforts by Jewish organizations nationwide. In early September, 20 Chicagoans joined about 300 Jewish community leaders from around the country to urge lawmakers on Capitol Hill to take a tougher stance on Iran as part of the National Jewish Leadership Advocacy Day on Iran, coordinated by the National Inter-Agency Task Force on Iran. Rallies also took place Sept. 24 in New York and several other cities in solidarity with Iran’s opposition movement, which stood up against President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s rule.
Jewish and non-Jewish lay leaders, students, and JUF staff met with Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin and Illinois Reps. Jerry Costello, Danny K. Davis, Luis Gutierrez, Bill Foster, Phil Hare, Debbie Halvorson, Jesse Jackson, Jr., Mark Kirk, Donald Manzullo, Mike Quigley, Peter Roskam, Aaron Schock and Jan Schakowsky to discuss upcoming House bills connected to Iran. Chicagoans comprised one of the largest groups at the fly-in.
The Illinois congressional delegation has been supportive of anti-nuclear Iran efforts. In particular, the entire delegation signed on as co-sponsors of the Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act of 2009, which would strengthen the President’s authority to impose sanctions on any entity providing Iran with refined petroleum resources. Illinois legislators also are co-sponsoring the Iran Sanctions Enabling Act of 2009, which requires federal support for local and state governments’ and educational institutions’ divestment from entities investing more than $20 million in Iran’s energy sector.
President Obama: "The time has come to re-launch negotiations without preconditions that address the permanent status issues: security for Israelis and Palestinians, borders, refugees, and Jerusalem. And the goal is clear: Two states living side by side in peace and security - a Jewish state of Israel, with true security for all Israelis; and a viable, independent Palestinian state with contiguous territory that ends the occupation that began in 1967, and realizes the potential of the Palestinian people." September 23, 2009, UN Speech
The lesson of Oslo, Camp David and Annapolis is clear-cut: Even the most moderate Palestinian leadership is not prepared to accept Israel's most far-reaching peace proposal. In 16 years of a painstaking and exhausting peace process, the Palestinians never agreed to a single concession on a core issue. Their refusal to recognize Israel as a Jewish state, to agree to demilitarize a Palestinian state or to give up their demand for the return of refugees to Israel has blocked peace in the past, is blocking peace in the present and will continue doing so for the foreseeable future. As of now, there is no genuine Palestinian partner for the partition of the country. Obama's Palestinian problem can't be swept under a carpet of words. -- Avi Shavit , September 24, 2009 Ha'aretz
The lesson of Oslo, Camp David and Annapolis is clear-cut: Even the most moderate Palestinian leadership is not prepared to accept Israel's most far-reaching peace proposal. In 16 years of a painstaking and exhausting peace process, the Palestinians never agreed to a single concession on a core issue. Their refusal to recognize Israel as a Jewish state, to agree to demilitarize a Palestinian state or to give up their demand for the return of refugees to Israel has blocked peace in the past, is blocking peace in the present and will continue doing so for the foreseeable future. As of now, there is no genuine Palestinian partner for the partition of the country. Obama's Palestinian problem can't be swept under a carpet of words. -- Avi Shavit , September 24, 2009 Ha'aretz
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Netanyahu on prospects for peace
If the leader of the Palestinian Authority genuinely steps forward and says, "We recognize the State of Israel, we're willing to make peace with the Jewish state, and it will be a peace of the recognition and security," then my government will make peace.
-- Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu, September 22, 2009 CNN Interview
-- Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu, September 22, 2009 CNN Interview
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
To move forward prospects for peace this week at the UN, President Obama will have the tall order of slaying pernicious “one-state” fantasies while advancing a truly even-handed approach that not only opposes new West Bank settlements but pressures Palestinians and the Arab and Muslim world to end anti-Israel incitement, accepts Israel’s “Jewish character,” and provides the Israeli people with the confidence that they'll never have to face another Yom Kippur War.
-- Cooper and Brackman, Simon Wiesenthal Center September 22, 2009
Friday, September 18, 2009
Suspect in alleged NYC bomb plot admits ties to terrorism
Sept 18, 2009 2:44 pm US/Mountain
Zazi Admits Ties To Terrorism [reportedly Al Qaeda]
DENVER (CBS4/AP) ―
CBS News has learned that Najibullah Zazi, the man questioned by the FBI in a terrorism probe in New York and Colorado, has provided a partial confession to investigators. He has admitted ties to terrorism, but downplayed his involvement in any terrorist plot.
Zazi Admits Ties To Terrorism [reportedly Al Qaeda]
DENVER (CBS4/AP) ―
CBS News has learned that Najibullah Zazi, the man questioned by the FBI in a terrorism probe in New York and Colorado, has provided a partial confession to investigators. He has admitted ties to terrorism, but downplayed his involvement in any terrorist plot.
Jewish Groups to Political Parties: “Move Iowa Caucuses” - Planned Date Forces Jewish Voters to Choose Between Faith, Civic Duty
Posted September 18, 2009 by Jewish Council for Public Affairs (JCPA)online at www.jewishpublicaffairs.org .
NEW YORK – Unless rescheduled, the planned 2010 Iowa Caucuses will disenfranchise Jewish voters, says a coalition of 18 Jewish organizations organized by The Jewish Council for Public Affairs (JCPA).
The Republican and Democratic Iowa Caucuses are currently planned for Saturday, January 23, 2010. The Jewish community recognizes Saturday as its Sabbath - a day set aside for rest, prayer and reflection. The 2010 caucuses would be the first time the Iowa Caucuses would be held on the Sabbath.
The Jewish coalition opposed to holding the Iowa Caucuses on the Sabbath notes that the decision to move the Iowa political party caucuses to Saturday “effectively disenfranchises members of the Jewish community” because it would “force members of the Iowa Jewish community to choose between their faith and civic duties.” Additionally, the Jewish organizations point out that if the caucuses are held on the currently scheduled date, observant Jews “would be unable to work on caucus day to support their candidates of choice.”
Calling the decision “utterly inconsistent with the values of our pluralistic democracy,” the Jewish community’s statement, included in its entirety below, calls on Republican and Democratic Party Chairs in Iowa to “reverse this ill-considered move.”
“Dear Mr. Kiernan and Mr. Strawn:
“A central premise of American politics is the enfranchisement of every citizen. The Jewish community has actively campaigned for fair and equal representation for the voices of majority and minorities alike, the protection of civil rights of all people and unencumbered access for all to the processes that choose our elected leaders. Our nation has thrived because of the tremendous opportunities afforded to people from diverse racial, ethnic, religious and other backgrounds. For this reason, we are distressed to learn that the Democratic and Republican parties of Iowa have decided to hold their 2010 caucuses on a Saturday.
“The decision to move the Iowa political party caucuses to a Saturday effectively disenfranchises members of the Jewish community. Jews who observe the Sabbath could not work on caucus day to support their candidates of choice. Worse, since caucuses do not allow for absentee voting, there would be essentially no opportunity to participate in this important process. This is utterly inconsistent with the values of our pluralistic democracy.
“Voting and participation in the electoral process is a cornerstone of any democracy. It is the highest civic duty most people ever undertake. Saturday caucuses will force members of the Iowa Jewish community to choose between their faith and their civic duties.
“Given the important role Iowa has in our nation’s electoral contests and their leadership position in serving as a role model to other states, we respectfully ask and hope the Democratic and Republican parties to reverse this ill‐considered this move.”
The statement was endorsed by The Jewish Council for Public Affairs (JCPA); American Jewish Committee; American Jewish Congress; Anti-Defamation League; B’nai B’rith International; Central Conference of American Rabbis; Hadassah: The Women’s Zionist Organization of America; Jewish Labor Committee; Jewish Reconstructionist Federation; Jewish War Veterans; National Council of Jewish Women; National Jewish Democratic Council; ORT America; Orthodox Union; Rabbinical Assembly; Republican Jewish Coalition; Union for Reform Judaism; and United Synagogues of Conservative Judaism.
The Jewish community coalition was organized by The JCPA, which unsuccessfully advocated to Nevada’s Democratic and Republican party leaders to reschedule its 2007 caucus meetings from the Sabbath.
JCPA is committed to ensuring Jewish and other minority voters across the country, regardless of their political affiliation, are given every opportunity to participate in the electoral process.
Source: http://engage.jewishpublicaffairs.org/t/1686/blog/comments.jsp?key=89&blog_entry_KEY=490&t=
Posted September 18, 2009 by Jewish Council for Public Affairs (JCPA)online at www.jewishpublicaffairs.org .
Through JCPA, 18 national Jewish organizations request that the Iowa Democratic and Republican parties reverse the "ill‐considered move" of scheduling the 2010 caucuses on a Saturday. JCPA letter supportive of JCRC/Des Moines Jewish Federation's position.
NEW YORK – Unless rescheduled, the planned 2010 Iowa Caucuses will disenfranchise Jewish voters, says a coalition of 18 Jewish organizations organized by The Jewish Council for Public Affairs (JCPA).
The Republican and Democratic Iowa Caucuses are currently planned for Saturday, January 23, 2010. The Jewish community recognizes Saturday as its Sabbath - a day set aside for rest, prayer and reflection. The 2010 caucuses would be the first time the Iowa Caucuses would be held on the Sabbath.
The Jewish coalition opposed to holding the Iowa Caucuses on the Sabbath notes that the decision to move the Iowa political party caucuses to Saturday “effectively disenfranchises members of the Jewish community” because it would “force members of the Iowa Jewish community to choose between their faith and civic duties.” Additionally, the Jewish organizations point out that if the caucuses are held on the currently scheduled date, observant Jews “would be unable to work on caucus day to support their candidates of choice.”
Calling the decision “utterly inconsistent with the values of our pluralistic democracy,” the Jewish community’s statement, included in its entirety below, calls on Republican and Democratic Party Chairs in Iowa to “reverse this ill-considered move.”
“Dear Mr. Kiernan and Mr. Strawn:
“A central premise of American politics is the enfranchisement of every citizen. The Jewish community has actively campaigned for fair and equal representation for the voices of majority and minorities alike, the protection of civil rights of all people and unencumbered access for all to the processes that choose our elected leaders. Our nation has thrived because of the tremendous opportunities afforded to people from diverse racial, ethnic, religious and other backgrounds. For this reason, we are distressed to learn that the Democratic and Republican parties of Iowa have decided to hold their 2010 caucuses on a Saturday.
“The decision to move the Iowa political party caucuses to a Saturday effectively disenfranchises members of the Jewish community. Jews who observe the Sabbath could not work on caucus day to support their candidates of choice. Worse, since caucuses do not allow for absentee voting, there would be essentially no opportunity to participate in this important process. This is utterly inconsistent with the values of our pluralistic democracy.
“Voting and participation in the electoral process is a cornerstone of any democracy. It is the highest civic duty most people ever undertake. Saturday caucuses will force members of the Iowa Jewish community to choose between their faith and their civic duties.
“Given the important role Iowa has in our nation’s electoral contests and their leadership position in serving as a role model to other states, we respectfully ask and hope the Democratic and Republican parties to reverse this ill‐considered this move.”
The statement was endorsed by The Jewish Council for Public Affairs (JCPA); American Jewish Committee; American Jewish Congress; Anti-Defamation League; B’nai B’rith International; Central Conference of American Rabbis; Hadassah: The Women’s Zionist Organization of America; Jewish Labor Committee; Jewish Reconstructionist Federation; Jewish War Veterans; National Council of Jewish Women; National Jewish Democratic Council; ORT America; Orthodox Union; Rabbinical Assembly; Republican Jewish Coalition; Union for Reform Judaism; and United Synagogues of Conservative Judaism.
The Jewish community coalition was organized by The JCPA, which unsuccessfully advocated to Nevada’s Democratic and Republican party leaders to reschedule its 2007 caucus meetings from the Sabbath.
JCPA is committed to ensuring Jewish and other minority voters across the country, regardless of their political affiliation, are given every opportunity to participate in the electoral process.
Source: http://engage.jewishpublicaffairs.org/t/1686/blog/comments.jsp?key=89&blog_entry_KEY=490&t=
Ahmadinejad: Confronting Israel is a national [and religious] duty
By The Associated Press and Reuters September 18, 2009
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Friday the Holocaust was a "lie" and a pretext to create a Jewish state that Iranians had a religious duty to confront.
"The pretext (Holocaust) for the creation of the Zionist regime (Israel) is false ... It is a lie based on an unprovable and mythical claim," he told worshippers at Tehran University at the end of annual anti-Israel Quds Day rally.
"Confronting the Zionist regime is a national and religious duty," the Iranian president said.
By The Associated Press and Reuters September 18, 2009
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Friday the Holocaust was a "lie" and a pretext to create a Jewish state that Iranians had a religious duty to confront.
"The pretext (Holocaust) for the creation of the Zionist regime (Israel) is false ... It is a lie based on an unprovable and mythical claim," he told worshippers at Tehran University at the end of annual anti-Israel Quds Day rally.
"Confronting the Zionist regime is a national and religious duty," the Iranian president said.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
What the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is really about (14)
" The real problem lies in the fact in the Arab and Islamic worlds there are
still too many people who have not come to terms with Israel’s existence in this part of the world. They continue to consider Israel an alien body or a cancer that needs to be removed for once and for all.
And that’s basically why there still isn’t peace in the Middle East."
Khaled Abu Toameh, September 15, 2009 Hudson New York
Who is Obstructing Middle East Peace?
The US Administration is in the final stages of preparing a new initiative that would, according to recent reports in the media, require Arabs and Muslims to embark on a process of normalization with Israel once the government of Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu freezes construction in West Bank settlements.
However, even if Netanyahu were to announce tomorrow morning that he is suspending all construction in the settlements, it is highly unlikely that the Arab and Islamic countries would rush to normalize relations with Israel.
Many Arab and Islamic countries have already made it crystal-clear that even if Israel would stop the construction, they would not take such a step.
still too many people who have not come to terms with Israel’s existence in this part of the world. They continue to consider Israel an alien body or a cancer that needs to be removed for once and for all.
And that’s basically why there still isn’t peace in the Middle East."
Khaled Abu Toameh, September 15, 2009 Hudson New York
Who is Obstructing Middle East Peace?
The US Administration is in the final stages of preparing a new initiative that would, according to recent reports in the media, require Arabs and Muslims to embark on a process of normalization with Israel once the government of Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu freezes construction in West Bank settlements.
However, even if Netanyahu were to announce tomorrow morning that he is suspending all construction in the settlements, it is highly unlikely that the Arab and Islamic countries would rush to normalize relations with Israel.
Many Arab and Islamic countries have already made it crystal-clear that even if Israel would stop the construction, they would not take such a step.
Sunday, September 13, 2009
Lebanon"s top Shiite cleric: Sharia prohibits normalizing relations w Israel
Lebanon's top Shiite cleric Ayatollah Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah on Sunday [ September 13, 2009] issued a fatwa, or religious ruling, banning the normalization of ties with Israel.
"Normalization with the Zionist enemy in any form is prohibited by Sharia (Islamic law)," Fadlallah said in [a] statement.
"We confirm that the fatwa against normalization applies to every Muslim," he stressed.
"Normalization with the Zionist enemy in any form is prohibited by Sharia (Islamic law)," Fadlallah said in [a] statement.
"We confirm that the fatwa against normalization applies to every Muslim," he stressed.
What the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is really about (13)
"Peace in the Middle East does not hinge on settlements. And in Israel, a country governed by democracy and rule of law, a country that has made and will still make sacrifices for peace, settlements are no obstacle to progress.
What the Palestinians need now is leadership that is brave enough to establish an independent Palestinian state alongside Israel, the nation-state of the Jewish people."
-- Asaf Shariv, Israeli consul general in New York. September 13, 2009
What the Palestinians need now is leadership that is brave enough to establish an independent Palestinian state alongside Israel, the nation-state of the Jewish people."
-- Asaf Shariv, Israeli consul general in New York. September 13, 2009
Friday, September 11, 2009
2 Katyusha rockets from Lebanon land near Nahariya
September 11, 2009Large forces of police, firefighters and Magen David Adom paramedics were dispatched on Friday afternoon, as two Katyusha rockets fired from southern Lebanon
landed in open areas in the western Galilee.
No casualties or damage were reported in the incident, which marked the fourth such attack this year.
Police spokesman Micky Rosenfeld said that one of the rockets was located near Nahariya, and the IDF said that the rockets were apparently 122 millimeters in diameter.
A senior Lebanese military official said that the rockets were fired from the town of Qlaileh, near the Lebanese port city of Tyre.
Lebanese security officials said IDF troops promptly fired at least two rockets back, which landed near Qlaileh. Lebanon's state-run National News Agency reported that nine Israeli artillery shells fell near the town, but there were no reports of casualties or damage.
The IDF said it fired artillery at the source of rocket fire. The military "views this incident very severely and we hold the government of Lebanon responsible," a statement said.
No group took immediate responsibility for the cross-border attack, which came after recent exchanges of threats between
Remembering 9-11-2001 -- accurately
Eight years ago, hijacked passenger jets destroyed the World Trade Center. -- A.G. Sulzberger, New York Times. 9-11-2009
Eight years ago, we were visited by the furies of Arab lands. -- Fouad Ajami, WSJ 9-11-2009
[There is indeed] a correct reading of the wellsprings of Islamist radicalism. Those ...who had struck American soil on 9/11 . . . were Arabs. Their terrorism came out of the pathologies of Arab political life. Their financiers were Arabs, and so were those crowds in Cairo and Nablus and Amman that had winked at the terror and had seen those attacks as America getting its comeuppance on that terrible day.
Ajami is a professor at Johns Hopkins University's School of Advanced International Studies and an adjunct fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution
Thursday, September 10, 2009
What the Israel-Palestinian conflict is really about (12)
What Is Peace?
By YOSSI ALPHER, Op Ed, New York Times, September 10, 2009 excerpt. Yossi Alpher, former director of the Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies at Tel Aviv University, co-edits bitterlemons.org.
Israelis ... perceive ... a deep-seated Arab and Muslim rejection of Israel’s legitimacy as a Jewish state.
That was not an obstacle to a “cold peace” with Israel’s neighbors, with whom the borders were clear. But when the Palestinians’ quarrel with Israel touches on fundamental issues of ownership, whether in the claims of 1948 refugees or in the competing claims to the Temple Mount, the question of legitimacy comes to the fore.
This is how even moderate Israelis view the public rejection by the Palestinian leader, Mahmoud Abbas, of former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert’s peace offer in 2008 — a set of proposals that Israelis deemed extraordinarily generous.
By YOSSI ALPHER, Op Ed, New York Times, September 10, 2009 excerpt. Yossi Alpher, former director of the Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies at Tel Aviv University, co-edits bitterlemons.org.
Israelis ... perceive ... a deep-seated Arab and Muslim rejection of Israel’s legitimacy as a Jewish state.
That was not an obstacle to a “cold peace” with Israel’s neighbors, with whom the borders were clear. But when the Palestinians’ quarrel with Israel touches on fundamental issues of ownership, whether in the claims of 1948 refugees or in the competing claims to the Temple Mount, the question of legitimacy comes to the fore.
This is how even moderate Israelis view the public rejection by the Palestinian leader, Mahmoud Abbas, of former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert’s peace offer in 2008 — a set of proposals that Israelis deemed extraordinarily generous.
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
French Jewish school firebombed
September 9, 2009
PARIS (JTA) -- A Jewish school in southern France was firebombed.
No one was injured in the Tuesday morning attack on the ORT Bramson Jewish school in Marseille.
About 66 feet of cypress hedges were set afire, and four parked cars in front of the building were burned by homemade aerosol bombs, according to French reports.
Three bombs were found on the premises, according to The Associated Press.
During the incident, the 400 students at the school were not aware there had been an attack because the targeted area was not near any classrooms, school director Maurice Cohen-Zagouri told the Le Metro daily.
No suspects have been identified, but security cameras on the site were handed over to police for investigation.
The local police chief, Philippe Klayman, said his force would pay “particular attention” to Jewish institutions during the upcoming holidays.
September 9, 2009
PARIS (JTA) -- A Jewish school in southern France was firebombed.
No one was injured in the Tuesday morning attack on the ORT Bramson Jewish school in Marseille.
About 66 feet of cypress hedges were set afire, and four parked cars in front of the building were burned by homemade aerosol bombs, according to French reports.
Three bombs were found on the premises, according to The Associated Press.
During the incident, the 400 students at the school were not aware there had been an attack because the targeted area was not near any classrooms, school director Maurice Cohen-Zagouri told the Le Metro daily.
No suspects have been identified, but security cameras on the site were handed over to police for investigation.
The local police chief, Philippe Klayman, said his force would pay “particular attention” to Jewish institutions during the upcoming holidays.
Monday, September 7, 2009
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
Three British Muslims have been convicted in England of planning a series of co-ordinated suicide bomb attacks on transatlantic airliners, which could have killed up to 10,000 people.
The plot was detected in August 2006, within days, it is believed of its implementation. The flights to be commandeered all departed within 2 hours and 35 minutes of each other, to Chicago, Montreal, Toronto, San Francisco, Washington and New York and police believed there would have been no chance of stopping the attacks once all the aircraft were in the air.
What the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is really about (11)
What prevents peace?
From Arab perspective, Jewish sovereignty, self-determination are anathema
Moshe Dann, Ynewnews.com September 7, 2009 excerpts
The real issue is Zionism and the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948 as a Jewish state.
No "peace plan" - even the most extreme which requires Israel to withdraw from all territory conquered in 1967 - will solve the Arab-Muslim problem of allowing a nominally Jewish state to exist in any form.
The struggle is not over dividing territory, but whether Israel deserves to exist at all.
The author, a former assistant professor of History (CUNY) is a journalist and writer living in Jerusalem
From Arab perspective, Jewish sovereignty, self-determination are anathema
Moshe Dann, Ynewnews.com September 7, 2009 excerpts
The real issue is Zionism and the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948 as a Jewish state.
No "peace plan" - even the most extreme which requires Israel to withdraw from all territory conquered in 1967 - will solve the Arab-Muslim problem of allowing a nominally Jewish state to exist in any form.
The struggle is not over dividing territory, but whether Israel deserves to exist at all.
The author, a former assistant professor of History (CUNY) is a journalist and writer living in Jerusalem
Ahmadinejad: discussion over Iran's nuclear issue is over
Ahmadinejad: Iran 'Will Never Negotiate' Over Nuclear 'Rights'
Monday , September 07, 2009 AP
TEHRAN, Iran — President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Monday Iran will neither halt uranium enrichment nor negotiate over its nuclear rights but is ready to sit and talk with world powers over "global challenges."
His statements came as the international nuclear watchdog warned of a "stalemate" over Iran's nuclear program. Members of the U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency began meetings in Vienna that could set the stage for a toughening of sanctions against Iran.
Ahmadinejad also said Iran will present a package of proposals for talks to the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council plus Germany but rejected any deadline for such talks.
He said the package would "identify challenges facing humanity ... and resolve global concerns."
But he said that "from our point of view, Iran's nuclear issue is over. We continue our work within the framework of global regulations and in close interaction with the International Atomic Energy Agency." But "we will never negotiate over obvious rights of the Iranian nation," he said.
He said the only two aspects of the nuclear file he was willing to discuss were "creating peaceful nuclear energy for all countries" and a mechanism to prevent proliferation of nuclear weapons and encourage global nuclear disarmament.
President Barack Obama and European allies have given Iran until the end of September to take up an offer of nuclear talks with six world powers and trade incentives should it suspend uranium enrichment activities. If not, Iran could face harsher punitive sanctions.
The U.S. and some of its allies accuse Iran of using its civilian nuclear program as a cover to develop nuclear weapons. Iran has denied the charges, saying its nuclear program is aimed at generating electricity, not a bomb.
Iran has repeatedly vowed it will never suspend enrichment work, saying it has every right under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty to enrich uranium and produce nuclear fuel. The enrichment process can produce either fuel for a reactor or the material for a warhead.
"It is very clear that this (deadline) is incompatible with the Iranian nation's needs and direction today," Ahmadinejad told a press conference Monday. "Resolving global issues requires constructive interaction on the basis of justice and respect."
Ahmadinejad said Iran will continue to cooperate with the IAEA over regulations on safeguards on its nuclear sites, "but we will resist if the agency is influenced by political pressures."
The agency's chief Mohamed ElBaradei, however, said Monday that the situation over Iran's nuclear program has reached a "stalemate."
He said Iran has not suspended uranium enrichment and not cleared up other lingering questions about possible military dimensions of its atomic activities, and he urged Tehran to "substantively re-engage" with the IAEA.
Iran says allegations of nuclear weapons studies by Tehran is based on forged documents but the U.S. and its European allies want to draw Iran back into negotiations over such concerns.
"The proposals we have prepared seeks to identify challenges facing humanity and basic directions for a durable solution to those challenges ... we are ready, within a logical and just framework, to sit and talk with all those ... who can make contribution to reform global affairs," Ahmadinejad told reporters.
The five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council — the U.S., France, Britain, Russia and China — plus Germany offered Iran a modified package of economic incentives June last year in return for suspending its uranium enrichment activities or face harsher sanctions.
Iran has said the incentives package has some "common ground" with Tehran's own proposals for a resolution to the standoff.
Germany and France — both important trade partners with Iran — have recently become far more forceful in their threats of possible sanctions.
Ahmadinejad did not directly address Obama's calls for a U.S.-Iran dialogue, and instead renewed an offer he has made in the past to hold a public debate with the U.S. president.
"Once again, I announce that I'm ready for debate and dialogue in front of global media on global issues," he said.
Monday , September 07, 2009 AP
TEHRAN, Iran — President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Monday Iran will neither halt uranium enrichment nor negotiate over its nuclear rights but is ready to sit and talk with world powers over "global challenges."
His statements came as the international nuclear watchdog warned of a "stalemate" over Iran's nuclear program. Members of the U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency began meetings in Vienna that could set the stage for a toughening of sanctions against Iran.
Ahmadinejad also said Iran will present a package of proposals for talks to the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council plus Germany but rejected any deadline for such talks.
He said the package would "identify challenges facing humanity ... and resolve global concerns."
But he said that "from our point of view, Iran's nuclear issue is over. We continue our work within the framework of global regulations and in close interaction with the International Atomic Energy Agency." But "we will never negotiate over obvious rights of the Iranian nation," he said.
He said the only two aspects of the nuclear file he was willing to discuss were "creating peaceful nuclear energy for all countries" and a mechanism to prevent proliferation of nuclear weapons and encourage global nuclear disarmament.
President Barack Obama and European allies have given Iran until the end of September to take up an offer of nuclear talks with six world powers and trade incentives should it suspend uranium enrichment activities. If not, Iran could face harsher punitive sanctions.
The U.S. and some of its allies accuse Iran of using its civilian nuclear program as a cover to develop nuclear weapons. Iran has denied the charges, saying its nuclear program is aimed at generating electricity, not a bomb.
Iran has repeatedly vowed it will never suspend enrichment work, saying it has every right under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty to enrich uranium and produce nuclear fuel. The enrichment process can produce either fuel for a reactor or the material for a warhead.
"It is very clear that this (deadline) is incompatible with the Iranian nation's needs and direction today," Ahmadinejad told a press conference Monday. "Resolving global issues requires constructive interaction on the basis of justice and respect."
Ahmadinejad said Iran will continue to cooperate with the IAEA over regulations on safeguards on its nuclear sites, "but we will resist if the agency is influenced by political pressures."
The agency's chief Mohamed ElBaradei, however, said Monday that the situation over Iran's nuclear program has reached a "stalemate."
He said Iran has not suspended uranium enrichment and not cleared up other lingering questions about possible military dimensions of its atomic activities, and he urged Tehran to "substantively re-engage" with the IAEA.
Iran says allegations of nuclear weapons studies by Tehran is based on forged documents but the U.S. and its European allies want to draw Iran back into negotiations over such concerns.
"The proposals we have prepared seeks to identify challenges facing humanity and basic directions for a durable solution to those challenges ... we are ready, within a logical and just framework, to sit and talk with all those ... who can make contribution to reform global affairs," Ahmadinejad told reporters.
The five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council — the U.S., France, Britain, Russia and China — plus Germany offered Iran a modified package of economic incentives June last year in return for suspending its uranium enrichment activities or face harsher sanctions.
Iran has said the incentives package has some "common ground" with Tehran's own proposals for a resolution to the standoff.
Germany and France — both important trade partners with Iran — have recently become far more forceful in their threats of possible sanctions.
Ahmadinejad did not directly address Obama's calls for a U.S.-Iran dialogue, and instead renewed an offer he has made in the past to hold a public debate with the U.S. president.
"Once again, I announce that I'm ready for debate and dialogue in front of global media on global issues," he said.
Sunday, September 6, 2009
What the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is really about (10)
Alex Grobman, an historian and author, has written an article entitled, Is Anyone Listening to What The Arabs Are Saying About Israel? Dated 9/07/2009, it is found online at www.hnn.us/articles/112782.html.
In it Grobman argues that the chief impediment to Israeli-Arab peace is the Arab refusal to accept Israel as a Jewish state. Why? Because, according to Grobman, "[T]he Arabs regard themselves as the only 'legitimate repository of national self-determination' in the Middle East."
In making his case, Grobman discusses the prevalence of pan-Arabism, which he asserts, "For historical, cultural and religious reasons, ... resonates among all segments of Arab society."
Although not cited specifically by Grobman, the following by Khalil Nakhleh, a Palestinian anthropologist, independent development and educational consultant and writer,[resident in Ramallah] exemplifies the mindset and perspective pertinent to Grobman's argument. Nakhleh's document, dated August 2008, is available online at www.kanaanonline.org/articles/01633.pdf, and is worth reading.
As Grobman asserts, the pan-Arabist considers Palestine (subsuming Israel)part of the whole Arab Homeland.
From Nakhleh ( page 2): The overall objectives of our collective national struggle, to which I am committed, seek to achieve the legitimate historical Palestinian rights, which, as used here, are the right of all Palestinians to live free and independent in their historical land, understood to be an integral part of the whole Arab Homeland (Watan)...
As Grobman asserts, "[T]he Arabs regard themselves as the only 'legitimate repository of national self-determination' in the Middle East."
From Nakhleh (page 5): If they [non-Zionist Jews] chose to live with us [in a single state], they will have the guaranteed right to exercise their cultural and religious values and customs,with freedom and respect, like any other minority with different religious beliefs and values. But they are not eligible to claim a “right of self determination”, as if they constitute a “national” group.
And also, on Nakhleh, page 5, the following -- a denial of Jewish history: Populations of Jewish faith existing in other parts of the world are an integral part of the countries in which they exist; they have no historical or religious claim over the land of Palestine, as if they were part of a “disbursed people”. The “historical disbursal” of the “Jews” from the land of Palestine is equally mythical; their “coerced” claim, so far, has been putative and fabricated. [end]
Grobman's is another voice in the collective and disparate body of voices now asserting that -- for the conflict to end in an honorable two state solution-- the Palestinian leadership ( and Arab governments ) must unambiguously and explicitly recognize Israel as the state of the Jews. Not to imply that Israel need not make important concessions for peace, but there is simply too much history of dogmatic Arab rejectionism and too much obvious verbal avoidance by Palestinian leadership of the specific words indicating recognition of the Jewish state of Israel to subordinate the demand.
-- Mark Finkelstein Send comments to jcrc@dmjfed.org
In it Grobman argues that the chief impediment to Israeli-Arab peace is the Arab refusal to accept Israel as a Jewish state. Why? Because, according to Grobman, "[T]he Arabs regard themselves as the only 'legitimate repository of national self-determination' in the Middle East."
In making his case, Grobman discusses the prevalence of pan-Arabism, which he asserts, "For historical, cultural and religious reasons, ... resonates among all segments of Arab society."
Although not cited specifically by Grobman, the following by Khalil Nakhleh, a Palestinian anthropologist, independent development and educational consultant and writer,[resident in Ramallah] exemplifies the mindset and perspective pertinent to Grobman's argument. Nakhleh's document, dated August 2008, is available online at www.kanaanonline.org/articles/01633.pdf, and is worth reading.
As Grobman asserts, the pan-Arabist considers Palestine (subsuming Israel)part of the whole Arab Homeland.
From Nakhleh ( page 2): The overall objectives of our collective national struggle, to which I am committed, seek to achieve the legitimate historical Palestinian rights, which, as used here, are the right of all Palestinians to live free and independent in their historical land, understood to be an integral part of the whole Arab Homeland (Watan)...
As Grobman asserts, "[T]he Arabs regard themselves as the only 'legitimate repository of national self-determination' in the Middle East."
From Nakhleh (page 5): If they [non-Zionist Jews] chose to live with us [in a single state], they will have the guaranteed right to exercise their cultural and religious values and customs,with freedom and respect, like any other minority with different religious beliefs and values. But they are not eligible to claim a “right of self determination”, as if they constitute a “national” group.
And also, on Nakhleh, page 5, the following -- a denial of Jewish history: Populations of Jewish faith existing in other parts of the world are an integral part of the countries in which they exist; they have no historical or religious claim over the land of Palestine, as if they were part of a “disbursed people”. The “historical disbursal” of the “Jews” from the land of Palestine is equally mythical; their “coerced” claim, so far, has been putative and fabricated. [end]
Grobman's is another voice in the collective and disparate body of voices now asserting that -- for the conflict to end in an honorable two state solution-- the Palestinian leadership ( and Arab governments ) must unambiguously and explicitly recognize Israel as the state of the Jews. Not to imply that Israel need not make important concessions for peace, but there is simply too much history of dogmatic Arab rejectionism and too much obvious verbal avoidance by Palestinian leadership of the specific words indicating recognition of the Jewish state of Israel to subordinate the demand.
-- Mark Finkelstein Send comments to jcrc@dmjfed.org
What the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is really about (9)
"[The core of the conflict is] the Arabs' total-denial approach to Israel... [The Palestinian leadership] are bothered by Jewish settlement in Israel in general.
It's enough to browse through the books of the "moderate" Palestinian Authority to see that Haifa, Jaffa and even Tel Aviv are considered Palestinian cities, while Hamas believes the Wakf land of all Palestine should be expropriated from the Jewish state, which doesn't have the right to land on either side of the Green Line."
-- Raphael Israeli The author is a professor of Islamic, Middle Eastern and Chinese history at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. September 6, 2009 Ha'aretz
It's enough to browse through the books of the "moderate" Palestinian Authority to see that Haifa, Jaffa and even Tel Aviv are considered Palestinian cities, while Hamas believes the Wakf land of all Palestine should be expropriated from the Jewish state, which doesn't have the right to land on either side of the Green Line."
-- Raphael Israeli The author is a professor of Islamic, Middle Eastern and Chinese history at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. September 6, 2009 Ha'aretz
Friday, September 4, 2009
What the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is really about (8)
If it is to be successful, a Palestinian-Israeli permanent status agreement will end all claims that each national group has on the other. If it is indeed to end all claims, once and for all, it will have to address not just issues raised by the 1967 war, but issues left unaddressed from the 1948 war.
The first and foremost is recognition of what the relevant UN resolutions repeatedly called "the Jewish state." Without an unambiguous statement of recognition [of Israel as 'the Jewish state,"] it is difficult to imagine that any agreement will indeed have ended all claims.
It is not surprising that an Israeli government has made this demand a sine qua non of a permanent status agreement. What is surprising is that no Israeli government has made this a sine qua non until now.
The U.S. voted for the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine 62 years ago. The U.S. should not be indifferent to Israel's request that endorsing its status as the Jewish state be enshrined in a permanent status agreement designed finally to end the conflict over Palestine, once and for all.
-- Robert Satloff, Executive Director of The Washington Institute for Near East Policy and member of MESH, Middle East Strategy at Harvard. Comments. August 30, 2009
Prior installments of this series are archived on the sidebar of jcommunitynews.blogspot.com
The first and foremost is recognition of what the relevant UN resolutions repeatedly called "the Jewish state." Without an unambiguous statement of recognition [of Israel as 'the Jewish state,"] it is difficult to imagine that any agreement will indeed have ended all claims.
It is not surprising that an Israeli government has made this demand a sine qua non of a permanent status agreement. What is surprising is that no Israeli government has made this a sine qua non until now.
The U.S. voted for the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine 62 years ago. The U.S. should not be indifferent to Israel's request that endorsing its status as the Jewish state be enshrined in a permanent status agreement designed finally to end the conflict over Palestine, once and for all.
-- Robert Satloff, Executive Director of The Washington Institute for Near East Policy and member of MESH, Middle East Strategy at Harvard. Comments. August 30, 2009
Prior installments of this series are archived on the sidebar of jcommunitynews.blogspot.com
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
The Israeli Left: its perspective and its current decline
Although the Israeli Left gets a lot of media and political attention in the U.S., its position within Israeli politics is not as pronounced as one would suppose. In the following opinion piece, Carlo Strenger empathetically takes on the topic, Why Israel's left has disappeared.
Following Strenger's piece is a retort penned by an Israeli, "Amichai." Amichai's explanation for why the Israeli Left is at present a non-factor is " because it has failed to understand that the conflict is based squarely on the Palestinian and Arab "[refusal] to accept Israel`s right to be, to exist as the nation-state of the Jewish people."
[In accord with the premise identified by Amichai, Why recognition of Israel as a Jewish state is a prime requirement for Israel-Palestinian peace is explained by Barry Rubin.] //Mark Finkelstein
Why Israel's left has disappeared
Ha'aretz August 17, 2009
By Carlo Strenger The writer teaches at the psychology department of Tel Aviv University and is a member of the Permanent Monitoring Panel on Terrorism of the World Federation of Scientists.
Israel's left has disappeared; it has nearly no parliamentary representation and remarkably little public presence. At first glance, this is a paradox, because the left's program has, in many ways, won, as Yossi Sarid said when he left the Knesset for good. The idea of a Palestinian state, anathema in Israeli society a few decades ago, is now accepted by the mainstream.
The left has dissipated because it has failed to provide a realistic picture of the conflict with the Palestinians. Its ideological foundation was based on a simple prediction: If we offer the Palestinians a state in the territories occupied in 1967, there will be "peace now."
Then things started to go wrong. After the Oslo process began, the newly formed Palestinian Authority educated its children with violently anti-Israeli and often straightforwardly anti-Semitic textbooks. The suicide bombings of 1996 were not prevented by Arafat (some say they were supported). What brought the left down completely were the failures of Camp David in 2000 and Taba in 2001, as well as the onset of the second intifada.
On the face of it, Israel's left should have said "we were wrong in our predictions. We underestimated the complexity of the situation. We didn't see that the Palestinians were not ready to renounce the right of return and we underestimated how much murderous rage there was against Israel. We still believe that we need to end the occupation as quickly as possible, but we need to face reality."
Instead of admitting that it had been partially wrong, the left tried to explain away all the facts that didn't square with its theory by putting the onus of responsibility for Palestinian actions exclusively on Israel's policies. The left argued that the bombings in 1996 happened because the Oslo process was too slow and the Palestinians wanted to avenge the targeted killing of Yihye Ayash; Camp David failed because prime minister Ehud Barak's offers were insufficient. The second intifada started because of Ariel Sharon's visit to the Temple Mount in September 2000. Hamas came to power because we turned Fatah into collaborators with the Zionists, and so on.
The Israeli left's thinking is governed by what I call SLES (Standard Left Explanatory System). This intellectual construct gained popularity in Europe and the United States in the 1960s after the demise of European colonialism. The basic principle of SLES is simple: Always support the underdog, particularly when non-Western, and always accuse Western powers, preferably the United States and its allies, for what the underdog does. Anything aggressive or destructive a non-Western group says or does must be explained by Western dominance or oppression. This ranges from the emergence of Al-Qaida, which is blamed on the United States' dropping of its support for the Mujahideen in Afghanistan after the Soviets were expelled, to corruption and violence in Africa, which is blamed on the aftereffects of European colonialism.
SLES is built on very questionable psychology: It assumes that if you are nice to people, all conflicts will disappear. It simply disregards the human desire for dominance, power and a belief system that gives them self-respect. As a result, SLES, under the guise of humanitarianism, assumes that non-Western groups don't have a will of their own; that all they do, feel or want is purely reactive to the West. It is also devoid of respect for non-Western groups: It assumes that they are not responsible for their deeds, and that all they do must be explained by victimization by the West.
If you listen to the left's explanations of Palestinian behavior, you might easily conclude that Israel is omnipotent and that Palestinians have no self will. In conversations with Palestinians I have heard more than once that they feel that the right wing respects them more than the left because the left always presumes to know what the Palestinians really want. [end of citation]
---------------------
Comment from Amihai City: Jerusalem State: Israel
The Left is gone because it has failed to understand that the conflict is not an Israeli-Palestinian one but rather an Israeli-Arab conflict, one between Israel and the entire Muslim-Arab world and civilization that has refused to accept Israel`s right to be, to exist as the nation-state of the Jewish people.
In its attempt to resolve the conflict whose nature the left has misunderstood it has come to blame Israel and even Zionism for standing firm and demanding recognition of right of the Arab side.
And when that demand has not been met, indeed when Barak offered peace for such recognition and the end of conflict and received a war-of-attrition-through-terror that lasted for years, the Left, instead of siding with Barak`s loyalty to his people and his state, left him and became closer to Arafat and Bargouti.
It has now paid the price.
Following Strenger's piece is a retort penned by an Israeli, "Amichai." Amichai's explanation for why the Israeli Left is at present a non-factor is " because it has failed to understand that the conflict is based squarely on the Palestinian and Arab "[refusal] to accept Israel`s right to be, to exist as the nation-state of the Jewish people."
[In accord with the premise identified by Amichai, Why recognition of Israel as a Jewish state is a prime requirement for Israel-Palestinian peace is explained by Barry Rubin.] //Mark Finkelstein
Why Israel's left has disappeared
Ha'aretz August 17, 2009
By Carlo Strenger The writer teaches at the psychology department of Tel Aviv University and is a member of the Permanent Monitoring Panel on Terrorism of the World Federation of Scientists.
Israel's left has disappeared; it has nearly no parliamentary representation and remarkably little public presence. At first glance, this is a paradox, because the left's program has, in many ways, won, as Yossi Sarid said when he left the Knesset for good. The idea of a Palestinian state, anathema in Israeli society a few decades ago, is now accepted by the mainstream.
The left has dissipated because it has failed to provide a realistic picture of the conflict with the Palestinians. Its ideological foundation was based on a simple prediction: If we offer the Palestinians a state in the territories occupied in 1967, there will be "peace now."
Then things started to go wrong. After the Oslo process began, the newly formed Palestinian Authority educated its children with violently anti-Israeli and often straightforwardly anti-Semitic textbooks. The suicide bombings of 1996 were not prevented by Arafat (some say they were supported). What brought the left down completely were the failures of Camp David in 2000 and Taba in 2001, as well as the onset of the second intifada.
On the face of it, Israel's left should have said "we were wrong in our predictions. We underestimated the complexity of the situation. We didn't see that the Palestinians were not ready to renounce the right of return and we underestimated how much murderous rage there was against Israel. We still believe that we need to end the occupation as quickly as possible, but we need to face reality."
Instead of admitting that it had been partially wrong, the left tried to explain away all the facts that didn't square with its theory by putting the onus of responsibility for Palestinian actions exclusively on Israel's policies. The left argued that the bombings in 1996 happened because the Oslo process was too slow and the Palestinians wanted to avenge the targeted killing of Yihye Ayash; Camp David failed because prime minister Ehud Barak's offers were insufficient. The second intifada started because of Ariel Sharon's visit to the Temple Mount in September 2000. Hamas came to power because we turned Fatah into collaborators with the Zionists, and so on.
The Israeli left's thinking is governed by what I call SLES (Standard Left Explanatory System). This intellectual construct gained popularity in Europe and the United States in the 1960s after the demise of European colonialism. The basic principle of SLES is simple: Always support the underdog, particularly when non-Western, and always accuse Western powers, preferably the United States and its allies, for what the underdog does. Anything aggressive or destructive a non-Western group says or does must be explained by Western dominance or oppression. This ranges from the emergence of Al-Qaida, which is blamed on the United States' dropping of its support for the Mujahideen in Afghanistan after the Soviets were expelled, to corruption and violence in Africa, which is blamed on the aftereffects of European colonialism.
SLES is built on very questionable psychology: It assumes that if you are nice to people, all conflicts will disappear. It simply disregards the human desire for dominance, power and a belief system that gives them self-respect. As a result, SLES, under the guise of humanitarianism, assumes that non-Western groups don't have a will of their own; that all they do, feel or want is purely reactive to the West. It is also devoid of respect for non-Western groups: It assumes that they are not responsible for their deeds, and that all they do must be explained by victimization by the West.
If you listen to the left's explanations of Palestinian behavior, you might easily conclude that Israel is omnipotent and that Palestinians have no self will. In conversations with Palestinians I have heard more than once that they feel that the right wing respects them more than the left because the left always presumes to know what the Palestinians really want. [end of citation]
---------------------
Comment from Amihai City: Jerusalem State: Israel
The Left is gone because it has failed to understand that the conflict is not an Israeli-Palestinian one but rather an Israeli-Arab conflict, one between Israel and the entire Muslim-Arab world and civilization that has refused to accept Israel`s right to be, to exist as the nation-state of the Jewish people.
In its attempt to resolve the conflict whose nature the left has misunderstood it has come to blame Israel and even Zionism for standing firm and demanding recognition of right of the Arab side.
And when that demand has not been met, indeed when Barak offered peace for such recognition and the end of conflict and received a war-of-attrition-through-terror that lasted for years, the Left, instead of siding with Barak`s loyalty to his people and his state, left him and became closer to Arafat and Bargouti.
It has now paid the price.
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
UNRWA's proud denial
“I can refute allegations that UN school curriculum includes anything about the Holocaust. Anyone can have a look at the school books. Really we focus on human rights in curriculum.” -- Commissioner-General of UNRWA, Karen Abu Zayd ( responding to Hamas' objection to the Holocaust being taught by the UN schools in Gaza)
Source: Ma'an News Agency September 1, 2009
Source: Ma'an News Agency September 1, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)