'Fatah has never recognized Israel'
Jul. 22, 2009 Khaled Abu Toameh , THE JERUSALEM POST
Fatah has never recognized Israel's right to exist and it has no intention of ever doing so, a veteran senior leader of the Western-backed faction said on Wednesday.
Rafik Natsheh, member of the Fatah Central Committee who also serves as chairman of the faction's disciplinary "court," is the second senior official in recent months to make similar statements regarding Israel.
Natsheh is also a former minister in the Palestinian Authority government who briefly served as Speaker of the Palestinian Legislative Council.
Earlier this year, Muhammad Dahlan, another top Fatah figure, said that Fatah had never recognized Israel's right to exist despite the fact that it is the largest faction in the PLO, which signed the Oslo Accords with Israel.
Natsheh's remarks came days before Fatah's general assembly that is slated to take place in Bethlehem on August 4.
The assembly, the first in two decades, is expected to bring some 1,500 Fatah delegates together to discuss ways of reforming the faction and holding internal elections.
One of the topics on the conference's agenda is whether Fatah should formally abandon the armed struggle and recognize Israel's right to exist.
"Fatah does not recognize Israel's right to exist," Natsheh said, "nor have we ever asked others to do so." His comments, which appeared in an interview with Al-Quds Al-Arabi, came in response to reports according to which Fatah had asked Hamas to recognize Israel as a precondition for the establishment of a Palestinian unity government.
"All these reports about recognizing Israel are false," Natsheh, who is closely associated with PA President Mahmoud Abbas, said. "It's all media nonsense. We don't ask other factions to recognize Israel because we in Fatah have never recognized Israel."
Asked about calls for dropping the reference to armed struggle from Fatah's charter, Natsheh said: "Let all the collaborators [with Israel] and those who are deluding themselves hear that this will never happen. We'll meet at the conference [in Bethlehem]."
Natsheh stressed that neither Fatah nor the Palestinians would ever relinquish the armed struggle against Israel "no matter how long the occupation continues." He said that Fatah, at the upcoming conference, would reiterate its adherence to the option of pursuing "all forms" of an armed struggle against Israel.
Another senior Fatah representative, Azzam al-Ahmed, confirmed that his faction would renew its pledge to pursue the armed struggle against Israel during the conference.
"The Fatah conference won't obliterate the "resistance option," he said."Fatah has been the target of a conspiracy to liquidate it ever since the signing of the Oslo Accords and the establishment of the Palestinian National Authority. The elimination of Fatah means the end of the revolutionary era which began in 1965 [when Fatah was founded]." He said that, more than four decades later, Fatah's main strategy and goals remain unchanged.
The decision to convene the conference in Bethlehem has triggered a crisis in Fatah. Many Fatah living in Arab countries have protested Abbas's decision, saying it was inconceivable that the parley be held under "Israeli occupation." They are still demanding that the conference be held in an Arab country to avoid a situation where Israel would try to prevent some delegates from arriving in Bethlehem.
Meanwhile, there is growing concern in Fatah that Hamas would not permit hundreds of Fatah activists from leaving the Gaza Strip to attend the conference. Senior Fatah officials said that the conference would be called off if Hamas stopped the Fatah members from leaving the Gaza Strip.
The officials said that Fatah leaders have been talking to Syria and Egypt about the possibility that Hamas might prevent their men from traveling to the West Bank. "We made it clear to the Egyptians and Syrians that the conference would not be convened without the Fatah members from the Gaza Strip," a Fatah official in Ramallah told The Jerusalem Post.
This article can also be read at http://www.jpost.com /servlet/Satellite?cid=1248277865155&pagename=JPArticle%2FShowFull
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
Is U.S. reconciled to a nuclear Iran?
Israel slams Clinton statement on nuclear Iran
By Barak Ravid, Haaretz Correspondent, and The Associated Press 7/22/09
A key minister in the Israeli government criticized U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's statement on Tuesday that Washington would provide "a defense umbrella" for its allies in the Middle East in the event that Iran develops nuclear weapons.
Dan Meridor, Israel's minister for secret services, told Army Radio that [Clinton's] comments imply a willingness to reconcile with the eventuality of a nuclear-armed Iran.
"I heard, unenthusiastically, the Americans' statement that they will defend their allies in the event that Iran arms itself with an atomic bomb, as if they have already reconciled with this possibility, and this is a mistake," Meridor told Army Radio. "Now, we don't need to deal with the assumption that Iran will attain nuclear weapons but to prevent this."
By Barak Ravid, Haaretz Correspondent, and The Associated Press 7/22/09
A key minister in the Israeli government criticized U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's statement on Tuesday that Washington would provide "a defense umbrella" for its allies in the Middle East in the event that Iran develops nuclear weapons.
Dan Meridor, Israel's minister for secret services, told Army Radio that [Clinton's] comments imply a willingness to reconcile with the eventuality of a nuclear-armed Iran.
"I heard, unenthusiastically, the Americans' statement that they will defend their allies in the event that Iran arms itself with an atomic bomb, as if they have already reconciled with this possibility, and this is a mistake," Meridor told Army Radio. "Now, we don't need to deal with the assumption that Iran will attain nuclear weapons but to prevent this."
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Follow the Maccabiah games on video!
Take a moment and see the vitality of the young Jewish athletes from all over the world participating in the Maccabiah games in Israel! Wow!
Monday, July 20, 2009
Hamas not dedicated enough for Hizb ut-Tahrir
Hizb ut-Tahrir, which is holding its convention now in Chicago,
considers Hamas insufficiently dedicated to liquidating Israel.
Hiz ut-Tahrir expects that under a renewed Caliphate, Islam will return to the path taken under Omar's Khilafah" that established and consolidated the authority and rule of Islam over Palestine and ruled that the yahood will not reside in this blessed land." Yahood = a derisive term for Jew. //Mark Finkelstein
Hizb ut-Tahrir Media Office Official Website
Source: www.hizb-ut-tahrir.info June 26, 2009
The Hamas Regime is imitating the Fatah Regime at every step!
considers Hamas insufficiently dedicated to liquidating Israel.
Hiz ut-Tahrir expects that under a renewed Caliphate, Islam will return to the path taken under Omar's Khilafah" that established and consolidated the authority and rule of Islam over Palestine and ruled that the yahood will not reside in this blessed land." Yahood = a derisive term for Jew. //Mark Finkelstein
Hizb ut-Tahrir Media Office Official Website
Source: www.hizb-ut-tahrir.info June 26, 2009
The Hamas Regime is imitating the Fatah Regime at every step!
This is Palestine; its solution does not lie in extending a hand of cooperation towards America and negotiating a two-state solution with the Jewish State. ... Hence the recognition of the 2-nations within Palestine will not give the Jewish entity any legitimacy under Islam, since Fatah and Hamas do not represent either Islam or Muslims, but they are merely a part of the Islamic convoy deviated from the correct path.
Interfaith Alliance of Iowa: Proposed school policy on religion "ambiguous, unbalanced."
The Interfaith Alliance of Iowa's Exec. Dir., Connie Ryan Terrell, penned an excellent op ed about a North-west Iowa school district's desire to formulate a new policy on religion in the public schools. Connie finds the proposed policy "ambiguous and unbalanced." She concludes: "In policy and practice, schools must exercise extreme caution to protect the religious [freedom] of all..." //Mark Finkelstein
Guest column: Clarify, balance religious-liberties policy
CONNIE RYAN TERRELL is executive director of the Interfaith Alliance of Iowa. Contact: connie @interfaithalliance iowa.org • July 18, 2009 Des Moines Register
The Spencer school district is discussing a new public policy on religious liberty. It is admirable for the school board to tackle the contentious issue and attempt to craft a policy that defines the role of religion in a public-education setting and clarifies the meaning of religious freedom and expression.
The problem with the proposed policy is that it is ambiguous and unbalanced. The school board needs to return to the drawing board.
The policy states, "School will permit the graduating class to choose whether to have an invocation and or benediction to be given by student volunteer in non-proselytizing and nonsectarian manner." Why is it OK to put religious freedom up for a vote? Is it OK for the majority to win just because there are more? It is not the business of public schools to promote religion, even if everyone present unanimously believes.
If we allow public prayer at a graduation, a ceremony intended for all students, whose religion is honored? Evangelical or mainline Christians? Orthodox or Reform Jews? Unitarian Universalists, Sikhs, Muslims or Hindus? Whose religious freedom is irrelevant at a public-school event?
Several items in the policy are ambiguous, including "Distribution of Religious materials on School Grounds." Who can distribute materials? Does this include outside organizations? Are materials from any religion welcome? Can a teacher distribute religious brochures to students?
Perhaps of gravest concern is the policy section "Religion in the Curriculum." It's not because the school board wants religion to be included in curriculum, but because of the unbalanced description. Although the policy states, "Approach must be academic, not devotional," there is no balance in the electives or curriculum to be offered including "The Bible in History and Literature" and "Critic of Darwinism, a Scientific Approach." In the Darwin class, the only suggested text is "Darwin's Black Box" by Behe, a pro-creationism book not accepted by the science community. Does the school board show its hand by the examples cited and those excluded?
If the school board wants to provide "Religion in the Curriculum" in a balanced fashion, then cover the myriad of religious beliefs in "Religion and History," including the history of those who question or reject religion. If the desire is to provide a class on "Evolution vs. Creationism," do so as a political science or debate class and include examples of resources from across the spectrum of opinion.
One point in the policy where we can find common ground is "For many years public education has often gone too far in excluding religious influences for fear of offense. The purpose of this policy is to restore balance to the issues." Religion is an important element of society and history. Teaching about religion is important for students to receive a well-rounded education. However, the statement should also acknowledge that prior to the trend to exclude religion altogether, public schools allowed religion to have too much influence. Finding real balance is critical.
Public schools may teach about religion in a world-religions class, but they cannot teach a Bible study class. Schools may include songs with religious text at a concert, but the program should be diverse and cover an array of religious and secular music. In policy and in practice, schools must exercise extreme caution to protect the religious rights of all people regardless of religious belief, including those who choose no religion. In all areas, the personal beliefs and private expression of all students and staff are protected, with or without a policy.
Two great equalizers commonly valued in this country include our dedication to religious freedom and our commitment to provide a quality, public education for all children. Respecting the greatness of both and how they can complement one another is critical in this conversation.
When the religious freedom of each person is protected, it makes for a healthy democracy and a successful public-education system.
Guest column: Clarify, balance religious-liberties policy
CONNIE RYAN TERRELL is executive director of the Interfaith Alliance of Iowa. Contact: connie @interfaithalliance iowa.org • July 18, 2009 Des Moines Register
The Spencer school district is discussing a new public policy on religious liberty. It is admirable for the school board to tackle the contentious issue and attempt to craft a policy that defines the role of religion in a public-education setting and clarifies the meaning of religious freedom and expression.
The problem with the proposed policy is that it is ambiguous and unbalanced. The school board needs to return to the drawing board.
The policy states, "School will permit the graduating class to choose whether to have an invocation and or benediction to be given by student volunteer in non-proselytizing and nonsectarian manner." Why is it OK to put religious freedom up for a vote? Is it OK for the majority to win just because there are more? It is not the business of public schools to promote religion, even if everyone present unanimously believes.
If we allow public prayer at a graduation, a ceremony intended for all students, whose religion is honored? Evangelical or mainline Christians? Orthodox or Reform Jews? Unitarian Universalists, Sikhs, Muslims or Hindus? Whose religious freedom is irrelevant at a public-school event?
Several items in the policy are ambiguous, including "Distribution of Religious materials on School Grounds." Who can distribute materials? Does this include outside organizations? Are materials from any religion welcome? Can a teacher distribute religious brochures to students?
Perhaps of gravest concern is the policy section "Religion in the Curriculum." It's not because the school board wants religion to be included in curriculum, but because of the unbalanced description. Although the policy states, "Approach must be academic, not devotional," there is no balance in the electives or curriculum to be offered including "The Bible in History and Literature" and "Critic of Darwinism, a Scientific Approach." In the Darwin class, the only suggested text is "Darwin's Black Box" by Behe, a pro-creationism book not accepted by the science community. Does the school board show its hand by the examples cited and those excluded?
If the school board wants to provide "Religion in the Curriculum" in a balanced fashion, then cover the myriad of religious beliefs in "Religion and History," including the history of those who question or reject religion. If the desire is to provide a class on "Evolution vs. Creationism," do so as a political science or debate class and include examples of resources from across the spectrum of opinion.
One point in the policy where we can find common ground is "For many years public education has often gone too far in excluding religious influences for fear of offense. The purpose of this policy is to restore balance to the issues." Religion is an important element of society and history. Teaching about religion is important for students to receive a well-rounded education. However, the statement should also acknowledge that prior to the trend to exclude religion altogether, public schools allowed religion to have too much influence. Finding real balance is critical.
Public schools may teach about religion in a world-religions class, but they cannot teach a Bible study class. Schools may include songs with religious text at a concert, but the program should be diverse and cover an array of religious and secular music. In policy and in practice, schools must exercise extreme caution to protect the religious rights of all people regardless of religious belief, including those who choose no religion. In all areas, the personal beliefs and private expression of all students and staff are protected, with or without a policy.
Two great equalizers commonly valued in this country include our dedication to religious freedom and our commitment to provide a quality, public education for all children. Respecting the greatness of both and how they can complement one another is critical in this conversation.
When the religious freedom of each person is protected, it makes for a healthy democracy and a successful public-education system.
Friday, July 17, 2009
Diplomats: Iran has means to test bomb in 6 months
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS 5:56 PM EDT, July 17, 2009
VIENNA - Iran is blocking U.N. nuclear agency attempts to upgrade monitoring of its atomic program while advancing those activities to the stage that the country would have the means to test a weapon within six months, diplomats told The Associated Press Friday.
The diplomats emphasized that there were no indications of plans for such a nuclear test, saying it was highly unlikely Iran would risk heightened confrontation with the West -- and chances of Israeli attack -- by embarking on such a course.
But they said that even as Iran expands uranium enrichment, which can create fissile nuclear material, it is resisting International Atomic Energy Agency attempts to increase surveillance of its enrichment site meant to keep pace with the plant's increased size and complexity.
More
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS 5:56 PM EDT, July 17, 2009
VIENNA - Iran is blocking U.N. nuclear agency attempts to upgrade monitoring of its atomic program while advancing those activities to the stage that the country would have the means to test a weapon within six months, diplomats told The Associated Press Friday.
The diplomats emphasized that there were no indications of plans for such a nuclear test, saying it was highly unlikely Iran would risk heightened confrontation with the West -- and chances of Israeli attack -- by embarking on such a course.
But they said that even as Iran expands uranium enrichment, which can create fissile nuclear material, it is resisting International Atomic Energy Agency attempts to increase surveillance of its enrichment site meant to keep pace with the plant's increased size and complexity.
More
Thursday, July 16, 2009
Anonymous, faceless and unverifiable -- hearsay -- accusations are being made against the Israel Defense Forces's [IDF] role during Israel's Gaza operation. In response, the IDF asserts that all allegations are investigated and offenders are punished.
Many IDF soldiers feel a deep sense of injustice at how some are misrepresenting them and the IDF. Hear soldiers tell their stories, on the grassroots website below.
www.soldiersspeakout.com/
Here's one testimony:
Pinchas, age 29, is a Politcal Science student. He served in an elite IDF infantry unit and today performs almost 70 days of reserve service each year. During the operation against Hamas in Gaza, his unit was called to duty for additional service. Pinchas speaks about finding rocket launchers in a Palestinian ambulance and escorting a terrorist bomb-maker who then helped the soldiers discover explosives which were hidden under civilian facilities such as schools and clinics.
Many IDF soldiers feel a deep sense of injustice at how some are misrepresenting them and the IDF. Hear soldiers tell their stories, on the grassroots website below.
www.soldiersspeakout.com/
Here's one testimony:
Pinchas, age 29, is a Politcal Science student. He served in an elite IDF infantry unit and today performs almost 70 days of reserve service each year. During the operation against Hamas in Gaza, his unit was called to duty for additional service. Pinchas speaks about finding rocket launchers in a Palestinian ambulance and escorting a terrorist bomb-maker who then helped the soldiers discover explosives which were hidden under civilian facilities such as schools and clinics.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)