Beyond the Cusp

March 29, 2014

Obama, Kerry and Israeli Leftists Attempt to Crash Coalition

It was initially unlikely that the Obama administration thought it necessary to attempt to change the ruling coalition government in Israel as the administration’s push to restart the negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians was met with Israeli cooperation across the boards. Predictably, the peace talks lost their presumed initial momentum as the Palestinians began refusing every Israeli attempt to reach any compromise where both sides would give some to reach a middle area of agreement. Mahmoud Abbas began stating repeatedly that there would be no agreement unless his every demand was recognized and enacted and that he also be granted the power to unilaterally reject any Israel provision with which he was not comfortable. This trend eventually reached its logical and unavoidable conclusion with Abbas and other Palestinian spokespersons insisting that Israel retreat completely back to the Green Line, surrender all of East Jerusalem, accept the influx of over five-million Arab refugees into Israel granting them immediate citizenship, full compensation to these very same refugees as well as those who did not choose to return, and adamantly refused to recognize Israel as the home of the Jewish People or to declare any agreement as the end of their struggle to liberate all of Palestine. Further exacerbation of the situation occurred as Palestinians also revealed they were remaining in the talks solely and only until the last groups of terrorist murderers were freed from prison by Israel. When some Israelis, particularly Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon, gave voice to their observations that the talks had broken down, the Obama administration started to ramp up efforts to pressure the Israelis to bend further and basically fall on their swords for peace.

 

The initial taking of affront by the United States State Department and the administration was at Moshe Ya’alon’s comment referring to Secretary of State Kerry as being “Obsessive and Messianic” to which the State Department demanded an immediate and public apology. As the ensuing weeks passed and the commentary from the Palestinians became increasingly adversarial to reaching any compromise with their call that their only desire was for the peace process to allow further releases of terrorists by Israel there were some Ministers in the Knesset who began questioning the logic of continuing with the final release as such would only serve to terminate the talks and set up the next series of demands for Israeli concessions. They felt that since releasing the terrorists would result in a Palestinian refusal to continue talking that there was no pressing need to actually release the last group. This was the point where things went off the rails and into some foreign land where logic does not hold rule and everything becomes the fault of Israel.

 

The initial turning was signaled when the State Department came out and dropped their support for the Israeli demand that the Palestinians recognize Israel as the home of the Jewish People and now referred to this demand from the Israelis as an unnecessary demand giving the fact that the United States so recognized Israel and that should be sufficient. The reasoning behind the demand for Israel to be recognized as the home of the Jewish People is to disallow the return of the over five million descendants of Palestinian refugees from the 1948 War launched by Arab armies to annihilate Israel into Israel changing the nation’s demographic to a majority Arab and Muslim state. The situation only deteriorated from there and the demands from Washington have gotten more shrill. This is the same sequence the world has watched time and again as the peace negotiations break down and in an effort to “save” the negotiations there is excessive pressure placed on Israel to concede more and more. This is the exact process that has brought the negotiations to the point where Jerusalem is even being discussed instead of recognizing that it is the Israeli capital city and has been annexed from before the Oslo Accords and was never to be placed within the definition of debatable negotiations.

 

Now, as Israel has actually refused to free the final set of murderous terrorist masters from her prisons, we will witness the blame Israel for the failure voices screaming from all quarters and the demands that Israeli leadership has squandered their best hope for peace, every negotiations becomes the Israeli best hope for peace until the next negotiations, and the insistence that Israel find new and more accommodating leadership. The chorus will be joined by the Israeli leftists and those parties who are currently not in the governing coalition as they will see this as their opportunity to take hold of the lead in Israel and enact those policies that the world is clamoring for Israel to take. This was the case when Ehud Olmert was elected to be Prime Minister and yet even with the politically correct leadership the Israeli offers for peace were refused by the Palestinians. This should have proven where the tripwire is that where the negotiations stumble each and every time, but the world can only blame Israel. We can now expect there to be pressures placed on the Israeli government to make new and more extensive concessions in order to lure the Palestinians back to the talks. It is revolting that every time that the world decides to push for renewed peace talks that Israel has to make concessions to entice the Palestinians to allow negotiations but that there are never, or seldom, any concessions given the Israelis. Where is the eventual reciprocation that Israel is constantly promised? I realize that may seem a silly question, but would any other nation continue with talks if every time they meet they are forced to surrender further? Of course not. Also, if every rendition of peace talks requires Israelis to surrender more using the final position of the last talks as the basis for the new talks, why would the Palestinian ever agree to a settlement when they are constantly rewarded for their intransigence? Perhaps the time will come when the Israelis will stand up and say, no more, and demand that the Palestinians make some concessions to prove they are finally serious about making peace.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

March 21, 2014

To Release or not to Release; the Terror Prisoner Conundrum

Filed under: 1949 Armistice Line,1967 Borders,1967 War,Act of War,Administration,Amalekites,Anti-Israel,Anti-Semitism,Anti-Zionist,Appease Islamic Interests,Appeasement,Arab Appeasement,Arab League,Arab World,Arabs,Blood Libel,Boko Haram,Borders,Building Freeze,Children Murdered,Civilization,Condemning Israel,Conflict Avoidnce,Divided Jerusalem,Domestic NGOs,Egypt,Egyptian Military,Equal Rights,Equal Treatment,Europe,European Council,European Governments,European Pressure,European Union,Executive Order,Fatah,Fatah Charter,Forced Solution,Foreign Funding,Foreign NGOs,Gaza,Golan Heights,Grand Mufti of Jerusalem Hussani,Hate,History,Holy Sites,IDF,International Politics,Intifada,Islam,Islamic Pressure,Israel,Israeli Capital City,Jerusalem,Jewish Heritage,Jewish Home,Jewish Leadership,Jewish State,Jews,Jihad,Jordan,Jordanian Army,Judea,Judean Hills,Kotel,Land for Peace,Mahmoud Abbas,Mediterranean Sea,Middle East,Murder Israelis,Muslim World,Muslims,Netanyahu,Old City,Oslo Accords,Palestinian,Palestinian Authority,Palestinian Liberation Organization,Palestinian Pressures,Palestinian Security Force,Peace Process,PLO,PLO Charter,Politics,President Obama,Prime Minister,Prisoner Release,Prisoners,Promised Land,Recognize Israel,Response to Terrorism,Right of Return,Samaria,Sanctions (BDS),Saudi Arabian Pressure,Settlements,Sinai,Sinai Peninsula,Six Day War,Statehood,Syria,Syrian Military,Temple Mount,Terror,Terrorist Release,Threat of War,Tzipi Livni,United Nations,United Nations Presures,United States,United States Pressure,UNSC Res 242,West Bank,Western Wall,World Opinion,World Pressures,Zionism,Zionist — qwertster @ 2:44 AM
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Israel was coerced, pressured and hornswoggled into releasing one-hundred-four terrorist prisoners, most of whom were serving life sentences for multiple murders of Israelis either through their direct actions or as planners who sent numerous homicide-bombers into Israeli central bus stations, shops, malls, restaurants, wedding ceremonies, Bar Mitzvahs, Passover Seders and other places where large numbers could be murdered, simply as a bribe to get Mahmoud Abbas and the Palestinian Authority to agree to sit and talk for nine months without any guarantee of progress towards making an actual peace agreement. Even from the beginning of this round of the peace process there were comments from numerous Palestinian Authority spokespersons even including the actual negotiators who openly stated that they were not negotiating to reach any agreement but were only pretending to actually negotiate in order to attain the freedom for as many terrorists as possible before they would walk away from the table. The other running commentary came mostly from the mouth of Mahmoud Abbas also from the very beginning of the talks demanding that the Israelis also be forced to implement a building freeze despite turning down that choice in favor of the terror prisoners release over any other concessions from Israel. What is of further note is that this time, just as in every previous situation when the United States, the European Union, the United Nations or any other source decided to sponsor another round of peace talks, the only concessions demanded were forced from the Israelis and the Palestinians refused to agree to negotiations unless Israel met certain preconditions. Of real interest is that the Palestinians have never offered or been forced to make a single concession since the initial implementation of the Oslo Accords. The Palestinian Authority have yet to even meet the main demand they agreed to in the original agreement where they had promised to alter their charter by removing the demand to destroy Israel as the state for the Jewish People. To their credit, the Palestinian Authority did agree to appoint a committee to rewrite that section of their charter when the United States sent some monitors to assure that the agreement was fulfilled. They never did form that committee but the American observers left satisfied the demands to change certain parts of their charter would be met. So much for trust but verify. So, where do the current talks sit, one might ask.

 

The release of the one-hundred-four terrorist prisoners was arranged to be accomplished in four stages throughout the negotiations. Israel has released three sets with the last group to be released near the end of March. Each release has spawned great celebrations by the Palestinian Authority giving the released terrorists a heroes greeting. As a bonus for their terrorist acts the released terrorists were granted positions within the Palestinian Authority where those who committed the greater acts of terror receiving sentences over twenty years being rewarded with higher paying positions while all others receive a lesser amount. Some of the reports have put the salaries as high as $4,000 per month, a salary equal to a rank of general in the Palestinian Security Forces. The salaries are in addition to bonuses given to the released terrorists with some receiving as much as $50,000 while one terrorist, Issa Abed Raboo, will be receiving $60,000 as his bonus. Who says terrorism does not pay? These salaries are even higher than the amounts paid to the terrorists’ families and the terrorists while they were held in Israel. The Palestinian Authority is claimed to be paying as much as $46,000,000 in terrorist salaries to those in Israeli prisons this year alone.

 

For the past six weeks barely a day goes by without Mahmoud Abbas, one of the Palestinian negotiators or high level Palestinian Authority spokesperson demanding that the Palestinians walk away from the table as soon as Israel releases the final set of terrorists. Some even demand they end their ruse now and stop negotiations immediately. Such calls are always met with a reassuring and calm Abbas claiming the moderate mantle promising that the Palestinians will stay the course until every Palestinian terrorist has been released. Abbas freely states regularly that he is only waiting for the last group to be released unless the United States can force Israel to agree to release more terrorist prisoners including Marwan Barghouti and also implement a building freeze throughout Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem, then he claims he will extend the negotiations for as long as the release of the additional terrorist prisoners are being freed. The Palestinians Authority has released numerous statements for their public to consume claiming that they have made a complete mockery and collapsed the idea of Israel imposing a life sentence for murdering Jews by forcing the terrorist releases. All of this does beg the question as to why would the Israelis release the last set of terrorist prisoners knowing that doing so will only result in the Palestinians walking out of the negotiations and there is no possibility of any gains to be made towards a real peace? The sole reason that might make sense is that should Israel withhold the final release, then the Palestinian Authority could leave the negotiations claiming that Israel refuses to take the necessary steps to reach a peace agreement. But is that reason enough?

 

Well, that is where everything really enters the theater of the absurd. As was hotly argued were comments, more like threats, made by United States Secretary of State Kerry aimed at Prime Minister Netanyahu and the Israelis stating, “Failure of the talks will increase Israel’s isolation in the world. The alternative to getting back to the talks is a potential of chaos. I mean, does Israel want a third intifada?” Just this week a European Union delegation urged Israel to release the long term terror prisoners as doing so was essential to continuing the peace process and moving it forward. The head of the European Union delegation Emer Costello was quoted demanding, “We believe that the release of prisoners… is central to the peace process.” He also stated, “I think there is an acceptance on both sides, even with the members of the Knesset that we met (knew the) importance of the prisoner issue.” I would love to have the list of the Ministers of the Knesset with which the European Union met. I have a pretty good idea that almost none were from Likud, Jewish Home or even Tzipi Livni herself as she was quoted from her Facebook page clarifying that, “”In order to advance serious negotiations, we will all need to take decisions and prove we are determined to reach an agreement and real peace. That burden of proof is also on the Palestinians’ shoulders. Accordingly, we will examine the issue of the prisoners, meaning that the key to the cells of the Palestinian prisoners is also to be found in the hands of Abu Mazen (Abbas) and the decisions he will take in the coming days.” So, where does that leave Israel going forward?

 

The Israeli leadership will need to weigh what the repercussions would be if they refused to release the rest of the terror prisoners without an actual agreement signed and completed with the Palestinian Authority. Prime Minister Netanyahu might add to the offer the release of Marwan Barghouti and a number of other highly prized terrorist masters should an actual and lasting peace with Israel recognized in the agreement as the home for the Jewish People and an end to the claims of Palestinian refugees’ “right of return.” The result of such actions is easily predicted. Mahmoud Abbas backed by a chorus of other Palestinian Authority spokespeople and accompaniment by the United Nations, European Union, various European governments’ heads of state, Secretary of State Kerry and President Obama at a minimum all condemning Israel and expressing their full understanding for the implementation of a third intifada of terror and murder against Israel and demanding that all civilized nations place sanction on Israel immediately. Where this becomes completely ridiculous is that even should Israel release the last group of terrorists and the Palestinian Authority walk away from the talks the very next morning, within a week, ten days at most, I can predict what the world’s news reports and the entire gauntlet of above noted leaders will all be declaring; Israel destroyed any possibility for peace in the Middle East as they refused to release the remaining terrorists they have been holding in their prisons and insist on continuing to build more housing for Jews in the occupied territories. It is necessary that the world’s leaders take measures to implement policies that display their dissatisfaction and anger over Israeli reluctance to make the necessary compromises for peace. Mahmoud Abbas offers the best possibility for peace and the time is right that peace could be accomplished if only Israel would take the necessary steps. Abbas will meanwhile be complaining about how he was ready and willing to continue the negotiations if only Israel would be reasonable and meet their obligations for peace.

 

The claim we have heard from President Obama is that everybody knows what the formula is for peace and that is the 1967 Lines (actually the 1949 Armistice Lines) with mutually agreed land swaps (if permitted by the Palestinians) with the Palestinian capital in East Jerusalem (cutting the Israelis and all Jews from accessing the Kotel (Western Wall) and Temple Mount (the holiest place on Earth for Jews) and all of the Old City (the historical capital since King David declared Jerusalem as his capital in the tenth century BCE) and some consideration for the Palestinian refugees. Nobody seems to have any difficulty with this solution and think it reasonable. All one need do is remember back to just after the Six Day War when Israel has routed three Arab Armies which had massed on her border and waged war forcing Israel into a defensive war. The actual start to the war was forced by both Egyptian and Syrian troops massed on Israel’s northern and southern borders and all shipping through the Red Sea blockaded by Egypt which was casus belli thus the actual start to the state of war. Within hours of hostilities starting between Syria and Egypt against Israel and upon hearing the Egyptian and Syrian reports of their great and glorious ongoing victory and ignoring pleadings from Israel not to believe the lies, Jordan chose not to believe the Israelis and joined in what they expected would be the destruction of Israel. History recorded a nearly unimaginable victory with Israel routing the Egyptian armies, pushing back the Syrian armies and defeating the Jordanian army. Israel, when hostilities stopped at the insistence of the United Nations, Russia, United States, much of Europe and numerous Arab nations (funny how whenever Israel’s enemies are gaining on the field of battle there is silence but if Israel has the advantage the world screams STOP!) Israel held the Golan Heights, the Sinai Peninsula, Judea, Samaria, and all of Jerusalem (the West Bank). The agreement hammered out was United Nations Security Council Resolution 242 (S/RES/ 242) passed on November 22, 1967 was very carefully crafted with great pains to use exact wording such that Israel was to return some, but not necessarily all or even near to all) the gained territories from her defensive war that had been imposed upon Israel. Technically, under International Law, since Israel was the victim of three aggressor nations, Israel did have the right to keep every inch of the lands she had gained. Of course, as has been proven repeatedly, when it comes to Israel the laws, international and otherwise, seem to never quite apply as they would with any other nation. Still, Israel was required to return parts of the land and retain those lands Israel determined were required to provide for safe and secure borders. Most of the world at that time presumed that Israel would likely return most of the Sinai Peninsula and retain the Golan Heights, Judea, Samaria, Jerusalem and Gaza. So, what exactly was that solution that everybody knows is the necessary result of the negotiation between the Palestinians and Israel? When the United Nations passed their resolution there was no mention or even the inkling of an idea of a Palestinian people, let alone a nation of Palestine, there was Egypt, Syria and Jordan. Sure, there was the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) which was formed in 1964, three full years before there was any “occupied lands”; I prefer, like many, to call them disputed lands. What was the purpose of the PLO? Their charter called for the eradication of Israel and the liberation of all the lands from the Jordanian border to the Mediterranean Sea, and that Jordanian border included half of Jerusalem and all of Judea and Samaria (West Bank). The PLO, and thus the so-called Palestinians, made absolutely no claims on Judea, Samaria or East Jerusalem and had stated that once they had liberated all of Israel they planned on joining it to Jordan, the actual and original Palestinian State. My how the world has twisted and contorted everything in the years since November 22, 1967. Those were simpler times when people spoke of such things as right and wrong and sometimes I wonder, when did everything run off the rails and become so twisted and the values we held disappear without even a trace of what we once held so dearly.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

March 7, 2014

What Next After Compromise on Building Freeze?

As we have mentioned before, Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas could have requested virtually any concession from Prime Minister Netanyahu and the State of Israel and partially due to excessive pressure from United States President Obama and Secretary of State Kerry been granted virtually any demand. The proof is the fact that Israel will have released over one-hundred terrorists the majority of which were serving sentences for multiple murders. Chairman Abbas was informed when he chose the terrorist be released that Israel intended to build in the communities east of the green line, particularly in those neighborhoods which were most likely to remain as part of Israel through land swaps. Abbas accepted this reality for about thirty seconds and then began demanding that the Israelis also concede and pronounce their granting of a complete building freeze including even in Jerusalem. Chairman Abbas is now threatening to walk out of the negotiations before even considering the United States Secretary of State Kerry’s proposal if Prime Minister Netanyahu does not announce and implement a building freeze. Should Mahmoud Abbas prove true to form, as soon as he finally persuades President Obama and Secretary of State Kerry to pressure Israel and twist the arm of Netanyahu threatening whatever proves necessary to force him to grant the demand for a building freeze; he will soon thereafter demand yet another concession, as the sole reason he ever negotiates, to gain concessions and then walk when he figures he cannot get any additional concessions. This usually is accomplished in a way that Abbas can claim that the intractable Israelis refusal to be reasonable and meet their obligations caused him to walk away from the negotiations. This is accomplished usually by demanding Israel promise their intent to accept a full right of return of five to six million descendants of refugees, a concession that would end Israel as the state that serves as home for the Jewish people.

 

It would not be all that surprising if during Prime Minister Netanyahu’s recent visit to the White House that President Obama laid the initial groundwork for demanding that Israel enact the building freeze that Abbas is whining and demanding with more pressures sure to follow. What was disturbing was the casual misuse and misinterpretation of a variation of one of the most famous quotes from the revered Rabbi Hillel. Obama’s remarks came in the interview last week with Jeffrey Goldberg where President Obama stated, “When I have a conversation with Bibi (Netanyahu), that’s the essence of my conversation. If not now, when? And if not you, Mr. Prime Minister, then who? How does this get resolved?” This misrepresentation implies that Rabbi Hillel was inferring that the Jewish people make concessions and surrender before their enemies, the exact opposite of the meaning of the actual quote. What Rabbi Hillel actually stated was, “If I am not for myself, then who will be for me? And if I am only for myself, then what am I? And if not now, when?” As is obvious the first intent is the obligation of a person to defend and care for their needs but not exclusively as the care of one’s brother is also a requirement in Judaism and finally the intent that such actions should not wait. This agrees with President Obama’s misrepresentation in one area, the need for immediacy. This is far from the first time that President Obama has misquoted a famous person turning their actual intent and statement on its head simply to serve his ends and appear to sound well educated and familiar with other cultures and philosophies. If anything, President Obama reminds me of Alfalfa from the television show Our Gang where he would regularly use long and impressive vocabulary but always errantly almost always using a word which sounded similar to the actual word he might have intended. Such a resemblance does not reflect well on President Obama but is also unfortunately valid, especially in this particular instance. President Obama was fortunate that Prime Minister Netanyahu had, by all appearances, decided before meeting President Obama not to react or try to match absurdity with indignance but instead allowed President Obama to state his points, lecture and talk down and show the normal disrespect which often seeps into his exhortations and then simply depart in silence and refuse to comment one way or another and simply continue with the primary reason for the Prime Minister’s trip, his addressing of the AIPAC Convention.

 

As a result of the meeting between the two leaders, expect no manner of progress and one may ignore the promise granted by the President to the Israeli Prime Minister to pressure Mahmoud Abbas as hard to force him to make any sacrifice or concession to match the seemingly unending string of unrequited concessions given up by the Israelis over the past twenty plus years starting with the Oslo Accords. That is highly unlikely as the very first person called by President Obama from the Oval Office after his first inauguration before any other Chief of State was Mahmoud Abbas. Such respect and favor is not given to one you plan to pressure and President Obama will not utter anything short of praise and sworn agreement with Abbas. My prayers and hopes is that we will never have the opportunity or situation for Mahmoud Abbas to demand and whine about what else Israel must give up otherwise he will fulfill the threat to walk out on the negotiations, blame Israel to every media outlet that will print his rant unedited and with only respectful commentary followed by touring Europe and other friendly climes ending up at the United Nations for the opening ceremonies of the General Assembly once more demanding the world body grant him his state and enlist the armies of all the upright and honorable nations of the world to make war on Israel forcing them to capitulate. It might not be so boring and painful if Abbas was not so damned predictable.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

« Previous PageNext Page »

Blog at WordPress.com.