"Why Palestinians Have Time On Their Side"

I agree with most of what Mr. Goldberg writes here, although I do not agree with his main premise, his concern for the survival of the state of Israel as a Jewish state. But is it possible that people like Netanyahu don't see things the way Mr Goldberg sees them? It is quite possible that Israeli politicians, like other politicians in other countries, see only for the short term and think in electoral terms, so this is why they are locked in a short term vision. And while Israel could not afford to be a country like others, it is acting like any other country. Does this mean that they don't see Palestinians as an existential threat, as Mr. Goldberg sees them (and this is quite racist because he is alluding to Palestinian demographic and rights as an exitential threat to Israel)? Of course they see things the same way but they think that as long as they have international support, they will deal with any threat, or any pressure to engage in peace and concessions, the way they dealt with until now: more bloodshed and brute force while Israel will explain to the world that its existence as it is now: without peace, without definite borders, without justice for Palestinians, and with brute force and political instability in the region, is a natural an biblical right for the Jewish people that tremples any other right. And it will take another holocaust for the world to understand.

Meanwhile, Palestinians should take their matters in their own hands, strictly speaking.

By Jeffrey Goldberg

If I were a Palestinian (and, should there be any confusion on this point, I am not), and if I were the sort of Palestinian who believed that Israel should be wiped off the map, then I would be quite pleased with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s performance before Congress this morning.

I would applaud Netanyahu for including no bold initiatives that would have suggested to the world that Israel is alive to the threat posed by its seemingly eternal occupation of the West Bank.

In fact, I would make support for Netanyahu the foundation stone of my patient campaign to dismantle the world’s only majority-Jewish country. I would support not only Netanyahu, but the far-right parties of his governing coalition, the parties that seem uninterested in democracy and obsessed with planting more Jewish settlements on the West Bank.

The settlements would have my wholehearted backing. I would encourage my brother Palestinians to help build settlements at a brisk pace. I would ask the Israelis to build an even more intricate system of bypass roads on the that would connect Jewish settlements to one another and to Israel proper. I would ask my ostensible allies among the Arab nations to provide interest-free mortgages to Israelis in Tel Aviv, so they could move out to the settlements for some fresh air and a little more yard. And, while I was at it, I would insist that my leaders abort their campaign for United Nations recognition of an independent state of Palestine.

Entanglement

My goal: To hopelessly, ineradicably, entangle the two peoples wedged between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea.
Then I would wait as the Israeli population on the West Bank grew, and grew some more. I would wait until 2017, 50 years after the Six Day War, which ended with Israel in control of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. I would go before the UN and say the following:

"We, the Palestinians, no longer seek a homeland of our own. We recognize the permanence of Israeli occupation, the dominion of the Israeli military and the power of the Israeli economy. So we would like to join them. In the 50 years since the beginning of the ’temporary’ occupation, we have seen hundreds of thousands of Israelis build communities near our own communities. We admire what they have built, and the system of laws that governs their lives. Unlike them, many of us live under Israeli military law but have no say in choosing the Israelis who rule us. So we no longer want statehood. We simply want the vote."

And this, of course, would bring about the end of Israel.

Apartheid State

Either the Jews of Israel would grant the Palestinians the vote, at which point their country would lose its Jewish majority and its identity as a refuge for the Jewish people, or it would deny them the vote, and become an apartheid state. The latter option is untenable, of course: Many Jewish Israelis would be repulsed by this thought; other nations that already consider Israel a pariah would now have just cause; and Israel would lose its last remaining friend, the U.S., because no American -- including and especially young American Jews -- would identify with a country reminiscent of pre-Mandela South Africa

If Netanyahu had been thinking strategically, he might have realized this when he went before Congress this morning. And he might have done something bold: Acknowledge that the age of Jewish settlement is over. He did mention, fleetingly, that certain settlements would be set adrift in a theoretical peace deal. But he seemed unaware that he was delivering a speech that could easily have been given 10 years ago.

It is not 10 years ago. Israel is now 10 years closer to achieving full pariah status. And -- in part because the Palestinians lack the patience to pursue a strategy of gradual, irreversible entanglement -- a moment of truth for Israel is rapidly approaching.

UN Vote

The Palestinians are seeking a UN vote in September on independence. They will prevail in the General Assembly, though not in the Security Council Barack Obama, with whom Netanyahu just picked a fight, will have to spend a good amount of political capital to stymie the Palestinian campaign, even though he appears to have nothing but contempt for Netanyahu’s lack of vision.

But American opposition to this unilateral declaration will be in many ways immaterial. Israel will soon enough be seen by most of the world as the occupier not of disputed territory but of a foreign country. The Palestinians will wake up to find that a General Assembly vote did not, in fact, give them true independence. And then there will be an explosion.

The Palestinians who are watching Yemenis, Libyans and Syrians fighting for their freedom will soon be inspired to once again take up their own fight.

Existential Threats

Netanyahu, who understands the existential threat posed by Iran, does not seem to understand the nature of this other existential threat. His five predecessors as prime minister -- including Ariel Sharon, whose heart did not bleed for Palestinians -- understood it. President Obama understands it, too.

"The number of Palestinians living west of the Jordan River is growing rapidly and fundamentally reshaping the demographic realities of both Israel and the Palestinian territories," Obama told members of AIPAC, the pro-Israel lobbying group, on May 22. "This will make it harder and harder, without a peace deal, to maintain Israel as both a Jewish state and a democratic state."

An eternal truth of Middle East politics is that the Palestinians never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity. Lately, though, this has become an Israeli specialty. If Israel misses the chance this year to set the Palestinians on a course toward independence, it will jeopardize its future as a Jewish democracy.

A Magnanimous Vision

Yes, it will be dangerous for Israel to return to its 1967 borders, or anything close. The potential merger between Hamas and the more moderate Fatah is cause for despair, but it should spur Netanyahu to try to split the moderates from the radicals by offering a magnanimous vision for peace. He should realize that it will be fatal for Israel to maintain control over millions of Palestinians who seek what the people of Yemen and Libya and Syria seek: freedom.

Absent any hope of progress, the Palestinians will do what they can to undermine Israel. But all they have to do is wait.

Amnesty report: Israel denies water to Palestinians

This is not news. This is life under Israeli occupation and apartheid. Read the summary here where you will find the link to the report.

There is an extensive radio documentary from the CBC's Anna Maria Tremonti on the question of water between Israel and the Palestinians (March, 9th, 2009) in which what struck me most at the time is the racist justification of the government of Israel for allowing very little water for palestininans: way of life, they don't need water as much as Israelis do and...let them eat biscuits....

Jim MIles: Uncertain outcomes.

Israel threatening the international community with war unless the Goldstone report is discarded by the UN

Zionists are quick to blame others for the lack of peace prospects in Palestine. They blamed Arabs, Palestinians, terrorists, the UN, and now they are blaming a 575 pages report for the UN on Israeli war crimes in Gaza. They wanted to bury it with the help of Mr. Nobel peace prize 09 and the collaboration of the illegitimate Mahmoud Abbas but they did not succeed. Palestinians were so angry with Abbas that he had to reverse his position in order to retain a semblance of legitimacy among his people.
Palestinians' thirst for justice can only be measured by the amount of injustice that was inflicted upon them by the zionist state and its acolytes. This time they are determined and hey want a clear condemnation from the international community of war crimes. A Jewish south african judge wrote a report for the UN on war crimes in Gaza with one concern, justice, not politics. But this is precisely what is infuriating Israel. Israel's attitude toward war and peace has become so extreme that it is alienating many in the Jewish diaspora and creating fracture lines. I can't wait to see these Israeli soldiers, commanders, politicians, judged for what they have done to the people of my region...And I don't care if Hamas has to be judged too. I have never been for any party, I am only for those who were dispossessed and are being daily oppressed by Zionists...

Israel says that if the case against it gains steam, the Jewish state will not be able to make the wide-ranging concessions necessary for any peace deal.

This is a bad argument since everybody can argue, based on the history of the Jewish state, the contrary: that Israel was never interested in peace. However, if Israel is genuinely determined to make peace, which comes with land concessions, so let them deliver first and then see what to make of the report.

Illegal evictions of Palestinian families from East Jerusalem

(AP Photo/Sebastian Scheiner)
The eviction is illegal because it was decided by an court order from the occupying entity, Israel, and not by an international court, despite wide international international condemnation of such a practice by Israel. This is a land acquired by war and agressions...Israel does not abide by international law.

All Palestine was acquired by terrorism, war of agressions, and occupation, and Israel does not have the intention to stop this practice.

Nasser Ghawi, one of the evicted Palestinians, said his family had been living in the house for 53 years before the Israeli forces came and broke down the doors. Maher Hanoun, the head of the other evicted family, was out on the street along with Mr. Ghawi.

“I do not need a tent or rice,” Mr. Hanoun said. “What I need is to return to my house where I and my children were born.”

A total of 38 members of the Ghawi family were removed from six apartments that made up one of the houses. The Hanoun family numbers 17.

Me, my neighbour, Israel, and the Palestinians

I have a dog. I have been walking this dog for more than ten years now in a neighbourhood park every morning. Over these years,I have got to know so many wonderful people with dogs. We developped friendships, shared our domestic stories, discussed film, culture, politics, and everything else.

Many of the people I know in this park are Jewish and most of them are very careful when discussing with me ME politics, as I am with them. But one of them, whom I see sporadically, sent me the following chain email yesterday (I am not reproducing the entire email):

this is very upsetting, please read.
----- Original Message -----
From: --------
To: ----------
Sent: November-25-08 2:16 PM
----- Subject: Fw: UN to Mourn 60 Years of Israel's Existence

UN to Mourn 60 Years of Israel 's Existence Anne Bayefsky - Nov 21,
2008 Eye on the U.N.


NEW YORK - This Monday, November 24th, the UN will commemorate its annual
International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People with a film
depicting Jews as Nazi-equivalents and a public exhibit mourning the sixty
years of Israel 's existence.

"The event is an annual reminder that the UN's real agenda is to
delegitimize the birth - and the perseverance - of the state of Israel ,"
said Anne Bayefsky, Editor of EYEontheUN.org.
...
As in years past, there will be a formal meeting Monday morning of the
Committee on the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People, a film, an
afternoon meeting of the General Assembly on the "Question of Palestine,"
and the opening of a public exhibit in the entrance to the UN's New York
headquarters.
...
The General Assembly is scheduled to adopt another six resolutions
condemning only Israel for violations of human rights. The total number of
resolutions criticizing Israel expected to be adopted at this fall's General
Assembly is 20, as compared to only four resolutions critical of human
rights records in any of the remaining 191 UN member nations.

The 2008 installment of what is in essence a repeat of the "Zionism = Racism
allegation, will be the public showing of the film "La Terre Parle Arabe"
or "The Land Speaks Arabic." The film draws parallels between the Nazis'
final solution and the alleged Zionist design for Palestinians. It is commonly billed with these words: "...the late-19th century Zionists...drew up plans, put them into practice, then...used... force, often brutal."
...
The exhibit to be opened at 6 p.m. on Monday in the UN lobby - the public
entrance through which school children from across the United States and
tourists from around the world pass every day - is entitled "The Palestinians: 60 years of struggle and enduring hope." Bayefsky comments: "The "sixty years" of struggle is telling. It puts a lie to the alleged root cause of the Arab-Israeli conflict as an "occupation" that began with the 1967 war. The real complaint is the alleged wrong of the creation of the State of Israel itself." She adds: "The carefully selected word "struggle" also speaks volumes. What the UN glorifies as a struggle is a series of wars launched by Arabs to annihilate the state of Israel beginning in 1948, and the ongoing "struggle" of Palestinian and other Arab terrorists dedicated to the same end."
...
"Anyone hoping to see an Israeli flag flown in addition to a Palestinian
one in celebration of the UN partition plan that approved a two-state
solution, should not hold their breath," said Anne Bayefsky, Editor of
EYEontheUN.org. She continued, "the UN tradition of mourning the creation of
the state of Israel continues."

----- End -----

For many Jews who will not be able or willing to check the truth, this is the kind of propaganda they receive in their mailbox.

I waited 24 hours before I decided that I was not going to tell this acquaintance the truth. If I do so, she won't believe me. But I did not want her to keep sending me this kind of propaganda. This morning I sent her the following mail:

Thank you for the message and the article. As you know I am from a Lebanese origin. Although I am 100% for the existence of Israel, I am not insensitive to the plight of the Palestinians. Because I value, above politics, our mutual understanding, I am asking you not to send me again this kind of message.

No hard feelings.

Love,

Unpopular and failed governments in Israel and Lebanon and the sacrifice of Palestinian civilians

The last Israeli agression on Lebanon that was supposed to crush Hezbollah was a disaster to both countries, a disaster to peace in the region, and a bigger disaster for Palestinians. Palestinians are so let down by the Arab and international community that killing them isn't a big deal anymore. And that is exactly what is happening in Lebanon under the cover of fighting Muslim extremists.

The defeat of Israel in its last agression on Lebanon has produced, on top of the civilian casualties, and the cluster bombs that continue to kill in Lebanon, and the 800000 refugees, and the destruction of the country and the land and the harvest for a long time to come, two unpopular and rotten governments hanging on power against the odds and against democratic common sense. Olmert for example enjoys a popularity rate under the margin of error. As for Lebanon's PM Sanyura (Siniora in the western press), there was no investigation committee on his role during the war and no opinion polls to test his popularity. But you know that things have gone wrong when this PM, who is hanging on an amputated government contested since November by more than half the population, orders his army, who never lifted a finger against any agression on Lebanon, not even during the Israeli agression, to attack Palestinian refugee camps inside Lebanon.

The Muslim extremists whom Sanyura is fighting were able to infiltrate the camps thanks to Sanyura's all time ally Hariri and his Saudi mentors. One can recognize here the neocon doctrine at work; maintaining muslim extremists at hand in order to justify wars and civilian casualties. These confrontations, which Sanyura and his allies seem to attribute to Syrian interference in Palestinian refugee camps in northern Lebanon, are tailored to pressure an increasingly hesitant national security council towards establishing a special tribunal for Lebanon, officializing the vassalization of Lebanon to US and French interests and consequently tipping the balance of power toward an increasingly unpopular US sponsored Sanyura government and its March 14th ally, against the will of more than half the population, the Shias led by Amal and Hezbollah, and half the Christians led by general Michel Aoun, in addition to support form a sizeable part of other communities (sunnis and druzes).

But thanks to investigative journalist Seymour Hersh, the Lebanese government move should not be considered otherwise than a survival manoeuvre. Like Olmert, whose army is continuing to kill palestinians in order to distract his political detractors inside Israel, the political survival manoeuvres launched by the Sanyura government in northern Lebanon are made on the dead bodies of civilians to distract from his government unpopularity and lack of support. More than cluster bombs and more than nuclear weapons, failed politicians in the ME are the most dangerous weapons againt civilian populations and against regional and international peace. Failed Politicians in the ME are Weapons of Mass Destruction. Yet, the US foreign policy has been doing just that, implementing Weapons of Mass destruction in the ME by supporting failed politicians (and sometimes removing them when they become disobediant and replacing them by other failed ones more obediant), feeding wars and conflicts, in total disregard for human life.

Here are some excerpts from Hersh's article 'The redirection' shwowing clearly the link between the US supported Sanyura and Hariri government and the sunni extremists they are pretending to fight now in norhtern Lebanon. I let you draw the conclusions...

''In 2005, according to a report by the U.S.-based International Crisis Group, Saad Hariri, the Sunni majority leader of the Lebanese parliament and the son of the slain former Prime Minister—Saad inherited more than four billion dollars after his father’s assassination—paid forty-eight thousand dollars in bail for four members of an Islamic militant group from Dinniyeh. The men had been arrested while trying to establish an Islamic mini-state in northern Lebanon. The Crisis Group noted that many of the militants “had trained in al-Qaeda camps in Afghanistan''.''
''In an interview in Beirut, a senior official in the Siniora government acknowledged that there were Sunni jihadists operating inside Lebanon. “We have a liberal attitude that allows Al Qaeda types to have a presence here,” he said. He related this to concerns that Iran or Syria might decide to turn Lebanon into a “theatre of conflict.”''
''Martin Indyk, of the Saban Center, said, however, that the United States “does not have enough pull to stop the moderates* in Lebanon from dealing with the extremists.” He added, “The President sees the region as divided between moderates and extremists, but our regional friends see it as divided between Sunnis and Shia. The Sunnis that we view as extremists are regarded by our Sunni allies simply as Sunnis.”''
''Alastair Crooke, who spent nearly thirty years in MI6, the British intelligence service, and now works for Conflicts Forum, a think tank in Beirut, told me, “The Lebanese government is opening space for these people to come in. It could be very dangerous.” Crooke said that one Sunni extremist group, Fatah al-Islam, had splintered from its pro-Syrian parent group, Fatah al-Intifada, in the Nahr al-Bared refugee camp, in northern Lebanon. Its membership at the time was less than two hundred. “I was told that within twenty-four hours they were being offered weapons and money by people presenting themselves as representatives of the Lebanese government’s interests—presumably to take on Hezbollah,” Crooke said.''

*Please note that what the US (and neocon Indyk) call 'moderates' in Lebanon refers only to US allies without regard to their local political or religious allegiances.

'Recognising 'Israel's right to exist' implies acceptance that Palestinians be treated as Subhumans'

''What 'Israel's right to exist' means to Palestinians''
By John V. Whitbeck, Opinion, The Christian Science Monitor

Note: Click on the image to see how Israel restricts Palestinians movements inside the territories.

''Since the Palestinian elections in 2006, Israel and much of the West have asserted that the principal obstacle to any progress toward Israeli-Palestinian peace is the refusal of Hamas to "recognize Israel," or to "recognize Israel's existence," or to "recognize Israel's right to exist."
These three verbal formulations have been used by Israel, the United States, and the European Union as a rationale for collective punishment of the Palestinian people. The phrases are also used by the media, politicians, and even diplomats interchangeably, as though they mean the same thing. They do not.
"Recognizing Israel" or any other state is a formal legal and diplomatic act by one state with respect to another state. It is inappropriate – indeed, nonsensical – to talk about a political party or movement extending diplomatic recognition to a state. To talk of Hamas "recognizing Israel" is simply to use sloppy, confusing, and deceptive shorthand for the real demand being made of the Palestinians. ''

Read On... (Link found on Angry Arab)