SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : WAR on Terror. Will it engulf the Entire Middle East? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: HH who wrote (4346)5/15/2002 10:35:37 AM
From: Scoobah  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 32591
 
May. 15, 2002
Former PM Netanyahu: I will defang PA state threat
By GIL HOFFMAN

Former prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu expressed confidence yesterday that he will succeed in convincing both the nation and the government not to permit the establishment of a Palestinian state.

Netanyahu told The Jerusalem Post that passing the resolution opposing the establishment of a Palestinian state west of the Jordan in Sunday's Likud central committee meeting was the first step in his effort to "defang" the threat of a Palestinian state.

"My positions may have seemed far out at first, but they eventually became government policy," Netanyahu said. "But it doesn't happen overnight. You cannot change the perspective of an entire country in one day, especially if [the inevitability of a state] has been repeated ad nauseam."

Netanyahu said his calls for ending Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's restraint policy, destroying the Palestinian Authority's infrastructure of terror, and entering Area A were all dismissed as crazy and extreme at first, but they were all adopted to great success. He predicted the same would happen with his recommendations of exiling PA Chairman Yasser Arafat and preventing a Palestinian state from being created.

However, a Dahaf Institute poll published yesterday suggested Netanyahu has a long a way to go. The poll found that 63 percent of Israelis and 43% of Likud supporters back Sharon's position that a Palestinian state should be created in the framework of a future peace agreement.

Among Likud supporters, 64% backed Sharon's effort to delay the anti-Palestinian state resolution, and 54% said Sharon should be the party's candidate for prime minister in the next election, compared to only 35% for Netanyahu.

While most Likud voters said their opinions of Sharon and Netanyahu had not been changed by the meeting, 24% said their impression of Sharon improved, and 20% said their opinion of Netanyahu changed for the worse.

To prepare for a face-off against either Sharon or Netanyahu, Labor Party chairman Binyamin Ben-Eliezer and possible Labor challengers Knesset Speaker Avraham Burg and MK Haim Ramon are set to unveil their diplomatic plans at today's Labor central committee meeting at Kibbutz Shefayim.

Ben-Eliezer's plan calls for initiating complete security separation from the Palestinians, with a wall but without setting a border or withdrawing the IDF until a diplomatic agreement is reached along the lines of the Clinton-Barak plan, but more conservative on the Jerusalem issue.

A spokeswoman for Ben-Eliezer denied reports the plan calls for foreign sovereignty on the Temple Mount.

Ramon advocates full separation, and Burg a full withdrawal from the territories. All of the Labor plans are intended to differentiate the party from the Likud.

Sharon's closest ally in the cabinet, Communications Minister Reuven Rivlin, said the poll proves Netanyahu's attacks on the prime minister will come back to haunt him when the Likud primary comes around next year.

"Arik Sharon is the most popular man in the Likud and the election will prove it," Rivlin said.
Netanyahu said he was not attacking Sharon, but defending the Likud platform, which has always opposed the establishment of a Palestinian state. He said the meeting strengthened Israel's hand in any future negotiations by making US and Europe aware that they must take into account the Israeli street and not just the Arab street.

"I do back up Sharon when I agree with him," Netanyahu said. "I give him fuller backing than he receives from anyone else in the world, but when he offers a Palestinian state unilaterally that will allow terrorism to be aimed at the heart of Israel, my duty is to say the right thing, whether popular or not."

Netanyahu said the central committee meeting was brought about by Sharon and could have been avoided if he would have joined him in accepting a compromise. His aides said he did not accept the compromises publicly, because the vote could not have been avoided and he did not want to speak ambivalently.

Channel 1 reported that Netanyahu's ally, MK Avraham Herschson, tried to convince him to call for a compromise from the podium, but his campaign chief, MK Yisrael Katz persuaded him not to. The report said the rivalry in the Netanyahu camp is growing.

Netanyahu admitted he made a mistake in responding to heckling from the crowd, but said he is only human and what they were saying hurt him personally, especially because many hecklers were at the meeting illegally.

"I was dealing with a subject profoundly critical to Israel and I saw people who don't belong to Likud deliberately thwarting a chance for it to be heard," Netanyahu said.

Netanyahu called upon Sharon not to ignore the meeting's decision. He said Sharon is wrong in saying a Palestinian state is inevitable or irrelevant. He warned of a state forced on Israel by the international community being "just around the corner."



To: HH who wrote (4346)5/15/2002 12:47:25 PM
From: Haim R. Branisteanu  Respond to of 32591
 
Pinocchio's Palestinian proboscis

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: May 15, 2002
1:00 a.m. Eastern

© 2002 WorldNetDaily.com

About his people, the late Palestinian intellectual, Ibrahim Abu-Lughod, said the following: "We're mediocre, and in the end maybe that very mediocrity is what's going to beat the Israelis, for all their brilliance."

Uncharacteristically candid, the late professor was understating the issue in a manner not exactly typical of his people's habit. In the war of words, the Israelis have, sadly, already been defeated.

The clod's strategy has been effective.

"Arafat's obsequious, clownish posturing," as Edward Said – another Palestinian intellectual – described the chairman, is now ameliorated by a bevy of slick propagandists. Professor Abu-Lughod might have agreed, however, that their delivery is still more brawn than brains. Be it chief Palestinian Authority representative in the U.S., Abdel Hasan Rahman, or the beguiling legal adviser for the PA, Diana Buttu, the strategy they deploy is the same: unflinchingly repeat the staple lies again and again, while retaining a shot-with-botox facial expression.

And so the canard of a massacre or atrocities in Jenin is repeated even in the face of the discovery by Kadoura Moussa, the Fatah director for the northern West Bank, of 56 battle casualties. Not included among the dead was a corpse which – while being lugged by a group of Palestinian aspiring movie extras (staging one of those perennial "funerals" for the benefit of the uncritical, leftist media) – was dropped from the stretcher, only to rise from the dead and scurry away.

The Palestinian Jenin joust is reminiscent of the 1948 Dir Yassin libel. Dir Yassin was a village turned Arab base, where a fierce, Jenin-like battle ensued over the route to Jerusalem between the Israelis and the attacking Arab forces. As Samuel Katz describes in "BattleGround: Fact and Fantasy in Palestine," like in Jenin, Arab fighters barricaded themselves among the villagers. One-third of the Israeli force was killed, and, tragically, and in contrast to Jenin, many civilians did in fact perish in the crossfire.

Then, as today, Arab leaders were aided by British propaganda, with the result that the lie – according to which the Israelis had committed a massacre – grew over the decades like Pinocchio's proboscis. Jews have expressed deep sorrow over the tragic events in Dir Yassin, something a local villager recorded in a Jordanian daily. Yunes Ahmed Assad recounted that, "The Jews never intended to hurt the population of the village," and that "the Arab exodus from other villages …" was caused by "the exaggerated descriptions spread by Arab leaders to incite them to fight the Jews."

Has there been any expression of regret from Palestinian leaders, the U.N., and the news networks the world over – all of which orchestrated the massacre libel? Have the networks stopped indulging – and giving credence to – the embellishments of the Palestinians?

More obfuscation than lie is the mantra that the "occupation" is responsible for the homicidal bombers.

Nowhere does Hamas (or, to the best of my knowledge, any Islamic militant group, including the factions sponsored by and operating under Arafat) promise to swear off violence when – and if – Israel retreats to the indefensible borders of 1967. These grisly killers are very clear about their agenda.

The 1988 Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) states:

The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgement Day. It, or any part of it, should not be squandered; it, or any part of it, should not be given up.

And:


There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors.

The Hamas seals the Covenant with a foreboding, pan-Islamic promise that "Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it."

To use that cliché of in-betweenness, Israel is caught between murderous militants and a hard place.

In their own words, "occupation" of the West Bank and Gaza is not the cause of the militants' murder sprees – Jewish life in the land of Israel is. And nowhere do the militants, who have the run of the PA, promise to cease exploding innocent people if and when a retreat from Gaza and the West Bank is finalized. The Islamists tell us they will rest only when they conquer the land of Israel in its totality.

According to the Hamas Covenant, nothing less than the destruction of Israel as a Jewish State will do.

So when Raghida Dergham, the bonny propagandist from the newspaper Al Hayat, repeats for the umpteenth time on "Hardball" that the depredations of the "Israeli occupation" are responsible for Hamas detonating Israelis, she lies.

Hamas' own manifesto contradicts her.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



To: HH who wrote (4346)5/15/2002 11:41:30 PM
From: jcky  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 32591
 
HH,

I don't thinking pointing fingers at who started it first is very constructive at this stage unless you are implying both the Israelis and Palestinians are acting like children. It isn't going to solve any of the current problems.

What's more appropriate is the future for Israel. Now, I happen to believe it is in Israel's best interest to pursue peace and not war. Economically, the Jews have a greater stake to lose than the Palestinians.

A total military triumph over the Palestinians will prove to be a hollow victory. You aren't going to eliminate Arab sponsored terrorism from Syria, Saudi Arabia and Iraq. Sooner or later, a diplomatic solution is needed to resolve these differences. The only pure military solution to guarantee Israel's total security is to eliminate all the Arabs in the Middle East. And this is not a viable option.