Clinton calls on Israel to embrace moderate Palestinians, negotiations

(Haaretz) Speaking at the 2012 Saban forum at the Willard InterContinental Washington DC Secretary of State Hillary Clinton warned that without progress towards peace Israel will be forced to choose between "preserving democracy and the Jewish identity of the state." ‫Clinton rejected Lieberman's pessimism on concerning the Palestinian Authority's capability to govern its territory and bring about a lasting peace. "With very little money, no natural resources, they have accomplished quite a bit, building a security force that works every single day with the IDF. They have entrepreneurial successes. They are nationalistic - but largely secular. Israel should support them." "Some Israelis claim Abbas is not a partner for peace", Clinton continued, possibly with the Israeli Foreign Minister Lieberman, who sitting just several feet away, in mind. "Well, I think that should be tested."‬
Please leave your spawn in America Hillary. Abu Mazen just claimed that some of the rocket attacks were Fatah's action. Secondly the Palestinians are the world's largest charity. It is the end all of a welfare state... and if Fatah were largely secular then the hadith about the tree of the Jews would not be in the charter.

‘Embarrasing Defeat For U.S.’: UN Votes Overwhelmingly To Recognize State Of Palestine

‘Embarrasing Defeat For U.S.’: UN Votes Overwhelmingly To Recognize State Of Palestine

Comment: Kahane Chai. He was right. Oslo's accord has been dead, dug up... shot... buried again, dug up, hanged then buried again... then dug up and certified. Push the Muslims out. This is not just a religious argument. This is a survival argument. No Jew can take an Israeli government seriously about safety of their family that does nothing now

UNITED NATIONS — The United Nations voted overwhelmingly Thursday to recognize a Palestinian state, a long-sought victory for the Palestinians and an embarrassing diplomatic defeat for the United States.
The resolution upgrading the Palestinians’ status to a nonmember observer state at the U.N. was approved by a vote of 138-9, with 41 abstentions, in the 193-member world body.
A Palestinian flag was quickly unfurled on the floor of the General Assembly, behind the Palestinian delegation. In the West Bank city of Ramallah, hundreds crowded into the main square waved Palestinian flags and chanted “God is great.” Others who had watched the vote on outdoor screens and television sets hugged, honked and set off fireworks before dancing in the streets.
Real independence, however, remains an elusive dream until the Palestinians negotiate a peace deal with the Israelis, who warned that the General Assembly action will only delay a lasting solution. Israel still controls the West Bank, east Jerusalem and access to Gaza, and it accused the Palestinians of bypassing negotiations with the campaign to upgrade their U.N. status.
The United States immediately criticized the historic vote. “Today’s unfortunate and counterproductive resolution places further obstacles in the path peace,” U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice said. U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton called the vote “unfortunate” and “counterproductive.”

it's a bit more extreme then that, but take what you can get with those two

The United States and Israel voted against recognition, joined by Canada, the Czech Republic, the Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau and Panama.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called the speech by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas to the General Assembly shortly before the vote “defamatory and venomous,” saying it was “full of mendacious propaganda” against Israel. Netanyahu called the vote meaningless.
Abbas had told the General Assembly that it was “being asked today to issue the birth certificate of Palestine.” Abbas said the vote is the last chance to save the two-state solution.
After the vote, Netanyahu said the U.N. move violated past agreements between Israel and the Palestinians and that Israel would act accordingly, without elaborating what steps it might take.
Thursday’s vote came on the same day, Nov. 29, that the U.N. General Assembly in 1947 voted to recognize a state in Palestine, with the jubilant revelers then Jews. The Palestinians rejected that partition plan, and decades of tension and violence have followed.
Just before Thursday’s vote, Israel’s U.N. ambassador, Ron Prosor, warned the General Assembly that “the Palestinians are turning their backs on peace” and that the U.N. can’t break the 4,000-year-old bond between the people of Israel and the land of Israel.
The vote had been certain to succeed, with most member states sympathetic to the Palestinians. Several key countries, including France, this week announced they would support the move to elevate the Palestinians from the status of U.N. observer to nonmember observer state.
Unlike the more powerful U.N. Security Council, there are no vetoes in the General Assembly, and the resolution to raise the Palestinian status only required a majority vote for approval.
The vote grants Abbas an overwhelming international endorsement for his key position: establishment of a Palestinian state in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and east Jerusalem, the territories captured by Israel in the 1967 Mideast war. With Netanyahu opposed to a pullback to the 1967 lines, this should strengthen Abbas’ hand if peace talks resume.
The overwhelming vote also could help Abbas restore some of his standing, which has been eroded by years of standstill in peace efforts. His rival, Hamas, deeply entrenched in Gaza, has seen its popularity rise after an Israeli offensive on targets linked to the Islamic militant group there earlier this month.
Israel has stepped back from initial threats of harsh retaliation for the Palestinians seeking U.N. recognition, but government officials warned that Israel would respond to any Palestinian attempts to use the upgraded status to confront Israel in international bodies.
The Palestinians now can gain access to U.N. agencies and international bodies, most significantly the International Criminal Court, which could become a springboard for going after Israel for alleged war crimes or its ongoing settlement building on war-won land.
However, in the run-up to the U.N. vote, Abbas signaled that he wants recognition to give him leverage in future talks with Israel, and not as a tool for confronting or delegitimizing Israel, as Israeli leaders have alleged.

via patdollard.com

Hillary Clinton Reminds a Hurting Latin America That She Is Opposed to Drug Legalization - Hit & Run : Reason.com

Mike Riggs|Nov. 29, 2012 7:43 pm

At a forum hosted by Foreign Policy magazine, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton reminded the leaders of Latin America, whose countries have been savaged by drug-war violence, that the Obama administration, and Clinton in particular, are opposed to legalizing drugs as a means of making those countries less reminiscent of failed states:

"I respect those in the region who believe strongly that [U.S. legalization] would end the problem," Clinton said Thursday at a Washington D.C. forum hosted by Foreign Policy magazine. "I am not convinced of that, speaking personally."
Some Central American leaders have urged the United States to consider other approaches to domestic drug usage — citing ruthless drug cartels that murder thousands of their citizens. Several Central American countries are considering limited legalization of drugs within their borders.
"I think when you've got ruthless vicious people who have made money one way and it's somehow blocked, they'll figure out another way," she said. "They'll do kidnapping they'll do extortion."
Speaking about the two states that recently legalized marijuana, Clinton repeated the Obama administration position that they haven't formulated a response yet.
"This is an ongoing debate," she said. "We are formulating our own response to the votes of two of our states as you know — what that means for the federal system, the federal laws and law enforcement."
"I think you can, with a comprehensive strategy succeed in certainly pushing back the tide of violence and corruption that drug trafficking brings," she said.

Clinton's statement about ballot initiatives in Colorado and Washington represents the largest number of words a named official of this administration has uttered regarding the single biggest change in drug policy this century. Good on Clinton for acknowleding that it happened.
It's also fascinating to me how Clinton has shifted on this topic. Here's what she said during a Mexico City trip in 2009:

"Our insatiable demand for illegal drugs fuels the drug trade. Our inability to prevent weapons from being illegally smuggled across the border to arm these criminals causes the deaths of police officers, soldiers and civilians."

Here she is in February 2011:

Maerker: In Mexico, there are those who propose not keeping going with this battle and legalize drug trafficking and consumption. What is your opinion?
Clinton: I don't think that will work. I mean, I hear the same debate. I hear it in my country. It is not likely to work. There is just too much money in it, and I don't think that—you can legalize small amounts for possession, but those who are making so much money selling, they have to be stopped.

And November 2012: "I am not convinced of that, speaking personally."
Since when do personal convictions matter in deciding policies that directly affect billions of people?

via reason.com

back in the day it was the lady warriors who campaigned against the evils of alcohol. Today we have soccer Moms and pantsuit brigades who think of vice in the same manner.

Has the US Administration Decided to Get Rid of Jordan's King Abdullah?

Unless the US clarifies its position regarding King Abdullah and reiterates its full backing for his regime, the Muslim fundamentalists are likely to step up their efforts to create anarchy and lawlessness in the kingdom. Washington needs to reassure King Abdullah and his followers that it will not allow the creation of an Islamic terror republic in Jordan.

Has the US Administration decided to get rid of Jordan's King Abdullah?
This is the question that many Jordanians have been asking in the past few days following a remark made by a spokesman for the US State Department.
Deputy State Department Spokesman Mark Toner managed to create panic [and anger] in the Royal Palace in Amman when he stated that there was "thirst for change" in Jordan and that the Jordanian people had "economic, political concerns," as well as "aspirations."
The spokesman's remark has prompted some Jordanian government officials to talk about a US-led "conspiracy" to topple King Abdullah's regime.
The talk about a "thirst for change" in Jordan is seen by the regime in Amman as a green light from the US to King Abdullah's enemies to increase their efforts to overthrow the monarchy.
The US spokesman's remark came as thousands of Jordanians took to the streets to protest against their government's tough economic measures, which include cancelling subsidies for fuel and gas prices.
The widespread protests, which have been dubbed "The November Intifada," have resulted in attacks on numerous government offices and security installations throughout the kingdom. Dozens of security officers have been injured, while more than 80 demonstrators have been arrested.
And for the first time, protesters in the Jordanian capital have been calling for overthrowing King Abdullah. In an unprecedented move, demonstrators last week tried to march on the monarch's palace in Amman in scenes reminiscent of anti-regime protests in Tunisia, Libya, Yemen and Egypt.
The Jordanian authorities claim that non-Jordanian nationals who infiltrated the border have been involved in the violence, the worst to hit the kingdom in decades. The authorities say that Saudi and Syrian Muslim fundamentalists are responsible for attacks on government offices and other institutions, including banks.
Some Jordanian officials have pointed a blaming finger at Saudi Arabia and Qatar for encouraging the anti-regime protests and facilitating the infiltration of Muslim fundamentalists into the kingdom.
The officials believe that Jordan is paying the price of refusing to play a larger and stronger role in Saudi-Qatari efforts to topple Syrian dictator Bashar Assad.
The talk about the involvement of Saudi Arabia and Qatar in the recent unrest in Jordan prompted Prime Minister Abdullah Ensour to issue a warning to all the Gulf states that their security would be severely undermined if the Jordanian regime collapsed. Ensour was quoted as saying that the Gulf states would have to spend half their fortune in defending themselves against Muslim terrorists who would use Jordan as a launching pad to destabilize the entire Gulf.
Unless the US clarifies its position regarding King Abdullah and reiterates its full backing for his regime, the Muslim fundamentalists are likely to step up their efforts to create anarchy and lawlessness in the kingdom. Washington needs to reassure King Abdullah and his followers that it would not allow the creation of an Islamic terror republic in Jordan. The Americans also need to put pressure on the Gulf countries to resume financial aid to Jordan, to avoid turning the kingdom into a source of threats against moderate Arabs and Muslims, as well as the West.

via gatestoneinstitute.org

GOP Senators ‘Disturbed’ After Susan Rice Admits To Lying

Today Senators John McCain, Lindsey Graham and Kelly Ayotte met with United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice about her role in presenting false information about what took place in Benghazi to the people of America. While she had gone on several Sunday talk show to promote the lie that the attacks were not planned and were spontaneous protests that got out of hand because of a YouTube video, she declared that her statements were not true, which has led to an entire line of questioning as to why she had talking points that were known lies.
Each of the Senators had stunned responses:

“I’m more troubled today…because it is certainly clear from the beginning that we knew those with ties to al Qaeda were involved in the attack on the embassy.” -Senator Kelly Ayotte
“It is clear the information she gave the American people was incorrect.” -Senator John McCain
“Bottom line is, I’m more disturbed now than I was before.” -Senator Lindsey Graham

Clearly there were issues and it seems that each of the Senators have not changed their opinions of Ms. Rice being nominated as Secretary of State. It seems Graham was also one that didn’t really give an answer for why he threw the intelligence agencies under the bus during the press conference after being “more disturbed than he was before.” Personally, I’m disturbed at Graham here. Clearly the State Department was warned and they chose to ignore the threat. Republicans are going to have to get some spine and start pressing this matter more intensely or we will never get to the bottom of it.
Watch the press conference below:

Recommended Stories

• GOP Legally Barred From Fighting Voter Fraud (Freedom Outpost)
• Supreme Court Reinstates Case Against Obamacare (Freedom Outpost)
• DHS Spends Nearly Half A Billion Dollars On Radios For Incompetent Agents (Freedom Outpost)
• Obama Wants Your Handguns, But Bloomberg Wants More (Freedom Outpost)
• Bombshell Dropped In Fast And Furious Investigation (Freedom Outpost)

Also on the Web

• Who Is Holly Petraeus? The Scorned General's Wife Isn't All She Seems (CafeMom)
• World's Best Church Signs (Beliefnet.com)
• Photography: Vietnam's Cu-Chi Tunnels (Away.com)
• What You May Not Know About Buffet Food (Lifescript.com)
• The 8 Most Overpaid & Underpaid Jobs (Salary.com)

[?]

Tagged with

benghazi john mccain kelly ayotte lindsey graham susan rice

via freedomoutpost.com

Video: Following Gaza Ceasefire, Cleveland Rally Calls For The Destruction Of Israel

via weasel

Another New York Times double standard

(Carl) Consider The New York Times reporter who was fooled by Hamas into thinking that a terrorist was a journalist. Alana Goodman adds another data point.

Samir Khan was the editor of al-Qaeda’s Inspire magazine until he was killed in a CIA drone strike, but the New York Times has yet to accuse the Obama administration of “using war as cover to target journalists.” Apparently, Israel is the only country that’s expected to treat terrorists-posing-as-reporters the same way it treats actual reporters.

 I'm sure you're all shocked by that double standard.

Islamic Cleric Qaradawi: 'You must obey the prophet -- even if he tells you to kill!"

"Obey The Prophet, Even If He Tells You To Kill"(GI). By Raymond Ibrahim.
Just as, in the West, a general's orders – including to kill – are not to be questioned, so in Islam, according to Qaradawi, the "Godfather" of the Muslim Brotherhood, are Mohammed's orders not open to question by 1.5 billion soldiers, Islam's "soldiers."
Dr. Yusuf al-Qaradawi — the spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood who is now helping Egypt draft its new constitution, head of the International Union of Muslim Scholars, and author of over 100 books on Muslim doctrine — maintains that Muslims must obey the commands of Islam's prophet, even to murder. This is the same Dr. Qaradawi that American academics such as Georgetown professor John Esposito praise for engaging in a "reformist interpretation of Islam and its relationship to democracy, pluralism, and human rights."
Qaradawi made this declaration, missed in the West, two years ago on his popular Arabic program, Al-Sharia wa Al-Haya ("Sharia and Life"), broadcast worldwide by al-Jazeera to an estimated audience of 60 million.
Towards the end of the show, the host asked Qaradawi what he thought of the fact that Sheikh Admad Hassoun, the Grand Mufti of Syria, had earlier said to an American delegation: "If [Muslim prophet] Muhammad asked me to reject Christianity or Judaism, I would have rejected him." Visibly agitated, Qaradawi answered as follows:

No scholar of Islam, or even an average Muslim would ever say such words. If you believe that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah, then you must obey him—for he does not command except that which is good. So, even if he tells you to kill, you must— … The story about our prophet Musa [Moses], when al-Khidr killed the boy and Musa said "you killed and you did!," But then he [Khidr] revealed why he killed the boy, and why he punctured the boat. So we cannot distort the facts in order to please the people. Let the people be satisfied with the Truth [Sharia teachings], not the false.Read the full story here.

via mfs-theothernews.com

Judicial Watch Lawsuit Forces Release of bin Laden Burial Records from United States Navy.

Judicial Watch Lawsuit Forces Release of bin Laden Burial Records from United States Navy.(JW).Judicial Watch announced today that it has obtained bin Laden burial records from the United States Navy as a result of its July 18, 2012, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit seeking “any funeral ceremony, rite, or ritual” confirming that the slain terrorist was given full Islamic burial honors. Following the May 2, 2011, Navy SEAL raid that led to bin Laden’s capture and killing, the al Qaeda leader was reportedly transported by the USS Carl Vinson and buried at sea in accordance with Muslim law.
The documents, including 31 pages of heavily redacted emails, contain a paragraph describing the bin Laden interment at sea:

Traditional procedures for Islamic burial was [sic] followed. The deceased body was washed (ablution) then placed in a white sheet. The body was placed in a weighted bag. A military officer read prepared religious remarks, which were translated into Arabic by a native speaker. After words were complete, the body was placed on a prepared flatboard, tipped up, whereupon the deceased’s body slid into the sea.

The documents did not include the “prepared religious remarks” read at bin Laden’s burial as requested in the JW FOIA. The U.S. Navy told JW, in a letter accompanying the documents, that a search did not produce any documents in response to the request for the “remarks.”
If U.S. Navy regulations were followed, the remarks could have included the Muslim prayer,

“O Allah, forgive him, have mercy on him, pardon him, grant him security, provide him a nice place and spacious lodging, wash him (off from his sins) with water, snow, and ice, purify him … make him enter paradise and save him from the trials of grave and the punishment of hell.”

The emails indicated that “less than a dozen” members of military leadership were informed of the burial and that “No sailors watched.”
The U.S. Navy blamed the failure to provide the remarks and additional information related to the bin Laden burial on operational security: “The paucity of documentary evidence in our possession is a reflection of the emphasis placed upon operational security during the execution of this phase of the operation.” The Obama administration continues to withhold bin Laden burial documents under the “foreign policy” exemption in FOIA law, which protects information relating to national security and defense. President Obama has said publicly he does not want to release information pertaining to bin Laden’s capture and killing for fear of offending radical Islamists.
The documents suggest that preparations for receipt of bin Laden’s body were considered three days before the raid.
“These new documents confirm the honors given bin Laden at his burial, including a prayer in Arabic and ritual cleansing of his remains,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “But the American people still don’t have the full picture because the Obama administration is fearful of offending terrorists.”
The documents supplied to Judicial Watch by the U.S. Navy also failed to include the bin Laden post-mortem photos and videos as requested in its FOIA request. The Obama administration continues to withhold these records citing national security concerns.Read the full story here.

via mfs-theothernews.com

Turkey’s PM slams popular TV series for tarnishing Ottoman history.

Turkey’s PM slams popular TV series for tarnishing Ottoman history.(HD).A historical Turkish TV series has distorted Ottoman history, Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan was reported as saying by a news agency on Monday. “The Magnificent Century” chronicles the life of Suleiman the Magnificent, who ruled the Ottoman Empire in its golden age, has gained popularity in the Arab World, but according to Erdogan, the series has tarnished the image of the 16th century longest-reigning Ottoman emperor, Sultan Suleiman, Anadolu Agency reported Erdogan saying. “These are not our ancestors who have been portrayed in this TV series,” he said during the inauguration of an airport in Kutahya Province, 190 miles west of the capital Ankara. In the TV series, scenes which have particularly offended show a young and lusty sultan cavorting in the harem and drinking goblets of wine. These pursuits were frowned upon by the Muslim faithful for whom the sultan had religious as well as temporal authority. “We live in a seven-billion-people strong world and we know our role. We go to every place that our ancestors reached on their horsebacks, and we care about these regions,” he added. During the emperor’s reign, the Ottoman Empire reached its zenith, he said. “He spent 30 years of his life on the horseback, fighting wars and conquering cities.” The prime minister said he is pursuing a legal case against the TV directors of the Turkish drama. Read the full story here.

via mfs-theothernews.com

NGO gives Women prone to violence shooting training.

Turkey - NGO gives Women prone to violence shooting training.(HD).By Erdem Güneş.A Turkish NGO has launched a new course to teach women at risk of violence how to handle guns, citing the lack of state protection for such women. “We believe that armed women will be a deterrent for men with murderous intent,” Hayrettin Bulan, the head of Şefkat-Der, told the Daily News yesterday. The aim of the classes is to teach self-defense, Bulan said, adding that they also aimed to provide deterrence and safety to women who were not given protection by the state. The classes also include training on pepper gas, anger management and advice for using the legal system. But an official with the Family and Social Policies Ministry said it was impossible to solve domestic violence with more violence. A non-governmental organization, Şefkat-Der (Compassion Association), kicked off weapon training courses for “women under the threat of male violence” on Nov. 25, the Struggle Against Violence Toward Women Day.
The state should grant licensed, tax-free arms to women under threat in order to defend themselves in emergency situations, according to Bulan, who added that the association had received over 20,000 phone calls since they had announced the course. Bulan also said the association planned to spread the course across Turkey, which would also include transsexuals who are under threat of hate crimes. “This is only for self defense,” he stressed. Anyone over 21 is free to obtain a gun license in Turkey.Read the full story here.

via mfs-theothernews.com

hopefully guys like me get guns too

Homosexuals 'should be murdered': Muslim lecturer at London university

in Judaism there really isn't anything specific about homosexuality as there are loop holes in the argument. I certainly don't think gays should be condemned. If anything I'd like to find ways to work with gay people in a more efficient manner, but that would require the left to allow me to label a behavior as gay... and progressives have a tendency to be against objectification... which is horrible. It is from my view point horrible being stuck between the Christian right's moral view... the idiot right's world view which includes Islam, and then there are divergent feminist views. I'd like to help gay folks, but I can't help gay people if gays don't let me make some generalizations about gays and also allow government to work with gays in a unique manner. 
(examiner.com) "Perverted, dirty, filthy dogs who should be murdered..."
Brunel University in London's upscale and renown politically correct West End has found itself in its own politically correct-fueled firestorm.
The British news portal tailored specifically for the homosexual community, PinkNews.co.uk is reporting that Muslim Imam Abu Usamah at-Thahabi is scheduled to present a lecture later this week.
The topic of his lecture will be on the life of Aisha, one of the many wives of Mohammed, the founder of the Islamic belief system.
Reportedly, Aisha was Mohammed's child-bride, who was betrothed at the age of six and had her marriage consummated by Mohammed when she was nine-years-old.
"Homosexuals perverted, dirty, filthy dogs who should be murdered..."
As cited by Pink News, Thahabi has publically stated from his mosque;
"Do you practice homosexuality with men?
Take that homosexual man and throw him off the mountain."
Ensuring his comments couldn't be taken out of context, the Muslim holy man went on to preach;
"If I were to call homosexuals perverted, dirty, filthy dogs who should be murdered, that’s my freedom of speech, isn’t it?"
Not Only The Homosexual Community...
The British organization StudentRights.org.uk has posted on their official website that Thahabi has a history of controversial comments against non-Muslims, ex-Muslims and also of women in general.
As cited, Thahabi has also preached at his Birmingham, England mosque;
"we hate the people of the kufr [non-Muslims]. We hate the kuffar."
"whoever changes his religion from al-Islam to anything else, kill him in the Islamic state."
"Allah has created the women, even if she gets a PhD, deficient...her intellect is incomplete, deficient."
Brunel University recently touted on its official website that in a research study they themselves co-sponsored, that so-called multiculturalism and social diversity are "alive and well" in Great Britain as cited by one of the two researchers, Professor Tariq Modeed.

Hamas, now 'in play', could sway Saudis

a little white girl grab ass? yeah... we know what goes down with the journalists...

is glad to be quote in this fine new story by the excellent @dickinsonbeth: Hamas, now 'in play', could sway Saudis - thenational.ae/news/world/mid…
— Hussein Ibish (@Ibishblog) November 26, 2012

Hamas's exiled leader Khaled Meshaal (left) with Saudi foreign minister Prince Saud Al Faisal at a meeting in Riyadh in January 2010. Saudi Arabia’s support or cold shoulder could have a decisive impact on Hamas’s political role.Paul Handley / AFP

Hamas, now 'in play', could sway Saudis
Elizabeth Dickinson

---

After Hamas signed onto an Egypt-brokered ceasefire with Israel last week, Khaled Meshaal, the organisation's leader in exile, had a message that would have seemed impossible a year ago.
He thanked Iran for its role in arming the Sunni-Islamist group that rules Gaza and he called on Arab Gulf states to provide arms in the future.
The statement laid bare Hamas's fluid regional position. After breaking with the Syrian regime over its brutal crackdown, vacating offices in Damascus and clashing with Iran over continued support for the president, Bashar Al Assad, Hamas has moved tentatively away from the so-called "Axis of Resistance" toward the patronage of Sunni Arab states such as Egypt, Turkey and Qatar.
Missing from the stage so far has been Saudi Arabia, whose support or cold shoulder could have a decisive impact on Hamas's political role.
For the last decade, Riyadh has preferred to support the secular and US-backed Palestinian Authority (PA) in the West Bank. Now, analysts say that Hamas's rising profile - and the possibility that it could move away from the patronage of Riyadh's arch rival, Tehran - may entice Saudi Arabia to cultivate stronger ties.
"Hamas is in play," said Hussein Ibish, senior fellow at the Washington-based American Task Force on Palestine. "The Saudis have to ask themselves whether they want to simply stick with the PA or also get involved in the game of trying to court Hamas. And that raises the same question everyone is going to have to answer - particularly the United States and Israel: which group of Palestinians do they want to empower?"
A shift in Saudi policy would probably come slowly, but it could affect both the political dynamics of the region and the prospects for reopening the Arab-Israeli peace process.
Saudi Arabia has the region's deepest pockets, arguably the closest relationship with the US and a long history of behind-the-scenes involvement in efforts to find peace in the Middle East."The Saudis have become domestically focused, plus, they're trying to deal with the Arab Spring," said Kamran Bokhari, the London-based vice president for the Middle East and South Asia at Stratfor, which provides security analysis. "But the Gaza conflict will push the Saudis to say, 'We've been out of this for a while; it's time we go back in'."
In the lead-up to the Iraq war in November 2002, Saudi's then-Crown Prince Abdullah bin Abdulaziz sent a letter to George W Bush asking the US president to "confirm to us that you will be seriously engaging in solving the Middle East problem" in exchange for his support.
Saudi Arabia did not always favour Fatah over Hamas in Palestinian politics. In the early 2000s, US law enforcement officials estimated that as much as half of Hamas's operating budget, about US$10 million, came in cash from Riyadh.
But in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001, attacks on the US, Washington put heavy pressure on Saudi authorities to steer clear of Hamas, which the US calls a terrorist organisation. Saudi funding for Hamas dried up around 2004, according to testimony before the US senate by a treasury official a year later.
In the years since, Riyadh has repeatedly come to the financial aid of the PA in Ramallah. In July, Saudi Arabia announced that it would inject $100m (Dh367.31m) in emergency cash to the PA, which relies heavily on external budget support. Last year, Saudi Arabia contributed at least $200m.
But Riyadh has never abandoned its relationship with Hamas, said Ghassan Al Khatib, a former PA spokesman who now teaches at Bir Zeit University in the West Bank.
Despite receiving international support, the PA has seen its public support among Arabs drop in recent years over a failure to win concessions from Israel. Its continuing attempt to win recognition at the United Nations has so far only lost it financial backing; the US put a months-long hold on funding to the PA over the issue.
Hamas, by contrast, seems to be gaining leverage. A Muslim Brotherhood-inspired organisation, Hamas seems at ease dealing with ideological allies who now run the governments of Egypt and Tunisia.
Its armed resistance secured real gains in the latest clashes with Israel, despite a heavy cost. In the recent ceasefire, Mr Meshaal won a minor relaxing of the economic blockade on Gaza. "This last escalation between Gaza and Israel increased dramatically the political prominence of Hamas, not only among Palestinians in the Occupied Territories but also among Palestinians everywhere and Arab people more generally," said Mr Al Khatib. "The PA has taken the peace negotiations approach, which seems to be not working to Israel and US. Hamas went about things using the resistance approach which, at least this time, wasn't defeated."
Riyadh would likely struggle to completely displace Iran as a Hamas benefactor, since close ties to the US would preclude Saudi Arabia from arming the organisation. Still, the regional balance would almost certainly be altered if Hamas's patrons were largely allies of the West, rather than foes.
Mr Ibish argues that Hamas itself may change if it won broad international backing.
"If Hamas inherits or comes to dominate the Palestinian movement, the question is, will they adapt, and in what way?" he asked.
"Will they moderate? Will they become even more extreme? Will other radical forces emerge? It's in the least not clear. But the point is that there is a decision for everybody, especially the traditional backers of the PA, about whether they want to make that kind of open-ended gamble."
edickinson@thenational.ae

Dutch TV airs fake PM speech on targeting Gazans

"We are trying to maximize the number of civilian casualties," Netanyahu says in a fake satirical video edited to appear genuine.

THE HAGUE - A Dutch news show has stirred controversy by airing a fake satirical video of Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu bragging to US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton about civilian deaths in Gaza.
“We are trying to maximize the number of civilian casualties. We prefer that,” Netanyahu is seen telling Clinton in the video, which the broadcaster Vara aired on November 21, as part of the satirical corner of the prime-time news show De Wereld Draait Door. Approximately 1.5 million viewers watch the show every evening.

The video, made to appear genuine through seamless splicing of sound bites from previous speeches by Netanyahu, was spread by thousands of Twitter and Facebook users who advertised it under the headline “Netanyahu finally tells the truth.”

Related:

• Fake photos of escalation posted on Twitter
• Hamas co-opts photos of injured Syrians

“We are conducting these surgical operations against schools, mosques, hospitals, children,” Netanyahu is heard saying, adding: “This is something I don’t have to explain to Americans.”
De Telegraaf, the Netherlands’ largest-circulation daily, reported that the video irked Israel’s supporters here. “The video is tasteless but the show’s satirical corner spares no one, so this isn’t about agenda,” said Esther Voet, deputy director of the pro-Israel Center for Information and Documentation on Israel. “The problem is that the clip is humorless and technically a good forgery, so many people don’t understand its satirical nature.”
Timon Dias, a Sri Lanka-born columnist for the Dagelijkse Standard – the Dutch equivalent of the Huffington Post – said the video is “reminiscent of the many blood libels that already exist about Israel and Jews.”

via jpost.com

Ed Koch Thinks NYT Should Apologize for ‘Intolerant,’ ‘Outrageous’ Editorial

(Photo: Getty)

Former Mayor Ed Koch is very upset with The New York Times at the moment.
The cause? An editorial on immigration, where the the publication of record saw a new opportunity to push for reform in the wake of Republican election losses this year. But Mr. Koch, in one of his regular missives typically containing movie reviews, instead used the space to accuse The Times of overreaching in its rhetoric.
“I have never read a more biased editorial than The New York Times editorial of November 18th,” Mr. Koch began. “The Times in its editorials rarely refers to ‘illegal’ immigrants. It generally refers to them simply as immigrants, making no distinction between the legal and the illegal; sometimes, it refers to them as ‘undocumented,’ and its newest description is ‘unauthorized.’”
Mr. Koch went on to castigate The Times for its “full-throated call for amnesty,” and for using a straw man depiction, “hardliners against reform — including the white-culture alarmists and the closet racists,” to make their argument.
“I repeat, I have never seen a more intolerant editorial in language and tone appear in The New York Times,” the former mayor said. “The Times editorial board should apologize for its outrageous description of opponents of amnesty and allow a debate to ensue presenting the arguments fairly on both sides.”
View Mr. Koch’s full commentary below:
The New York Times Editorial of November 18th On Immigration Reform Is A Disgrace
I have never read a more biased editorial than The New York Times editorial of November 18th, entitled, “New Hope on Immigration.” It advocates, as it has for years, providing amnesty for the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants now residing within the borders of the United States.
The Times in its editorials rarely refers to “illegal” immigrants. It generally refers to them simply as immigrants, making no distinction between the legal and the illegal; sometimes, it refers to them as “undocumented,” and its newest description is “unauthorized.”
In its editorial ,The Times libels those Americans who believe that the U.S. should not have open borders. No country in the world has an open-door policy. The Times editorial refers to the opponents of open borders and amnesty as, “The hardliners against reform — including the white-culture alarmists and the closet racists.” It contrasts them with those “behind reform – student activists, business groups, farmers, labor unions, Catholic bishops, evangelical churches, African-Americans, civil-liberties organizations and regular American citizens who support legalization.” I believe a majority of Americans oppose the amnesty legislation. Because of their opposition, the proposal has been defeated several times in Congress.
Many of those opposed to an amnesty providing a path to citizenship for 11 million illegal immigrants, support a compassionate response such as the “Dream Act.” That act, which President Obama implemented by executive order, allows youngsters brought here by their parents illegally to remain here, receive a green card permitting them to work, and exempts them from deportation pending passage by the Congress of the Dream Act. Many would support keeping families together and include the parents in the amnesty ultimately provided the youngsters covered by the proposed Dream Act. Supporting such a broad amnesty is a good example of Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s comment “defining deviancy down,” meaning if you can’t control illegality, accept it and make it legal.
The Times in its full-throated call for amnesty and a change in immigration policy denounces opponents by stating they “despise illegals.” Untrue. The opponents believe the U.S. should enforce its immigration policy and not allow the law to be ignored and violated with impunity. Many of us believe that our current policy of permitting 750,000 aliens and 250,000 refugees to enter each year, all of whom are eligible for U.S. citizenship, should be amended to expand the number and allow more of those waiting in line for their turn to come in. The Times apparently believes no one should have to wait, and the walls should come tumbling down.
The Times even believes that those it refers to as “minor offenders” should be welcomed to stay, the “minor offenders” language generally referring to those who have committed misdemeanors where the crime is subject to up to a maximum one-year prison sentence. The Times states that “[t]here is enforcement work to be done like finding more effective ways to stifle illegal employment, but any strategy that fixates on deportation and the border is foolish and ineffective.” Ridiculous.
The Times objects to President Obama’s successful efforts to find and deport those who have committed crimes, other than the crime of illegal entry, resulting in 400,000 deportations annually. It opposes the federal government through Homeland Security using “state and local police officers” to help the feds in enforcing the law. President Obama’s policy has been to secure the borders before providing amnesty legislation. Amnesty legislation did not solve the problem in the 1980s when it was employed and won’t solve it now. Millions of people from around the world want to live in the U.S. and do not want to wait in line, as they must and do for every other country, including Mexico. Providing a blanket amnesty now simply encourages others to enter illegally and wait for the next amnesty.
I repeat, I have never seen a more intolerant editorial in language and tone appear in The New York Times. The Times editorial board should apologize for its outrageous description of opponents of amnesty and allow a debate to ensue presenting the arguments fairly on both sides. The Times editorial can be seen at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/18/opinion/sunday/new-hope-on-immigration.html...

via politicker.com

War On Men

(Fox) The battle of the sexes is alive and well. According to Pew Research Center, the share of women ages eighteen to thirty-four that say having a successful marriage is one of the most important things in their lives rose nine percentage points since 1997 – from 28 percent to 37 percent. For men, the opposite occurred. The share voicing this opinion dropped, from 35 percent to 29 percent.
Believe it or not, modern women want to get married. Trouble is, men don’t.
The so-called dearth of good men (read: marriageable men) has been a hot subject in the media as of late. Much of the coverage has been in response to the fact that for the first time in history, women have become the majority of the U.S. workforce. They’re also getting most of the college degrees. The problem? This new phenomenon has changed the dance between men and women.  
As the author of three books on the American family and its intersection with pop culture, I’ve spent thirteen years examining social agendas as they pertain to sex, parenting, and gender roles. During this time, I’ve spoken with hundreds, if not thousands, of men and women. And in doing so, I’ve accidentally stumbled upon a subculture of men who’ve told me, in no uncertain terms, that they’re never getting married. When I ask them why, the answer is always the same.
Women aren’t women anymore.
To say gender relations have changed dramatically is an understatement. Ever since the sexual revolution, there has been a profound overhaul in the way men and women interact. Men haven’t changed much – they had no revolution that demanded it – but women have changed dramatically.
In a nutshell, women are angry. They’re also defensive, though often unknowingly. That’s because they’ve been raised to think of men as the enemy. Armed with this new attitude, women pushed men off their pedestal (women had their own pedestal, but feminists convinced them otherwise) and climbed up to take what they were taught to believe was rightfully theirs.
Now the men have nowhere to go.
It is precisely this dynamic – women good/men bad – that has destroyed the relationship between the sexes. Yet somehow, men are still to blame when love goes awry. Heck, men have been to blame since feminists first took to the streets in the 1970s.
But what if the dearth of good men, and ongoing battle of the sexes, is – hold on to your seats – women’s fault?
You’ll never hear that in the media. All the articles and books (and television programs, for that matter) put women front and center, while men and children sit in the back seat. But after decades of browbeating the American male, men are tired. Tired of being told there’s something fundamentally wrong with them. Tired of being told that if women aren’t happy, it’s men’s fault.
Contrary to what feminists like Hanna Rosin, author of The End of Men, say, the so-called rise of women has not threatened men. It has pissed them off. It has also undermined their ability to become self-sufficient in the hopes of someday supporting a family. Men want to love women, not compete with them. They want to provide for and protect their families – it’s in their DNA. But modern women won’t let them.
It’s all so unfortunate – for women, not men. Feminism serves men very well: they can have sex at hello and even live with their girlfriends with no responsibilities whatsoever.
It’s the women who lose. Not only are they saddled with the consequences of sex, by dismissing male nature they’re forever seeking a balanced life. The fact is, women need men’s linear career goals – they need men to pick up the slack at the office – in order to live the balanced life they seek.
So if men today are slackers, and if they’re retreating from marriage en masse, women should look in the mirror and ask themselves what role they’ve played to bring about this transformation.
Fortunately, there is good news: women have the power to turn everything around. All they have to do is surrender to their nature – their femininity – and let men surrender to theirs.
If they do, marriageable men will come out of the woodwork.

Cigarette-smuggling: The urge to smurf | The Economist

THE busy interstate highway that zips through Richmond, Virginia, and up to the crowded cities of the north-east has long been a conduit for handguns bought wholesale in Virginia and sold to drug-dealers in New York. Now I-95 is siphoning northwards another form of contraband: black-market cigarettes.

Because Virginia’s tobacco tax is the second-lowest in America, gangsters buy cigarettes there in bulk and sell them at enormous profit in New York and other high-tax states. At a minimum, they pocket a big chunk of the difference between what Virginia adds in tax—30 cents a packet—and the higher rates imposed elsewhere. New York’s tax, at $4.35 a packet, is the highest in the country.
The federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives estimates that sales of illegal cigarettes cost government—local, state and federal—nearly $10 billion a year. For the smugglers, profits are better than those from cocaine, heroin, marijuana and guns, according to a report in September by the Virginia State Crime Commission. Moreover, the penalty for doing it—a maximum of five years in jail, under federal law—is considerably lighter than for selling drugs. If the smugglers were trafficking in heroin, they would face life in prison.
The growth of the cigarette-resale racket, known to police as “smurfing”, appears tied to a growing government appetite for cash. Since 2007 at least 27 states have raised their cigarette taxes, often to erase deficits or to cover sharp increases in health-care costs. This spurs the smugglers on. In New Jersey, where a packet of cigarettes carries a tax of $2.70, about 40% of all cigarettes are smuggled in from other states, according to the New Jersey Treasury Department. Maryland, Virginia’s neighbour to the north, reported a fourfold increase in seizures of illegal cigarettes between 2010 and 2012, though one official described the haul as the tip of the iceberg.
Virginia, a big tobacco state since colonial times, has recently declared it illegal to buy and possess, with intent to sell elsewhere, more than 5,000 cigarettes. That may sound a lot, but they are easy to miss. Smugglers can niftily get 600 cartons (that is, ten packs of 20 cigarettes) into a car, and 12,000 into a large van. When gun-running was at its peak, I-95 was known as the “iron highway”. Now it is the new Tobacco Road.

via economist.com

Mashaal 'to visit Gaza in December' | Maan News Agency

GAZA CITY (Ma'an) -- Exiled Hamas chief Khalid Mashaal plans to visit the Gaza Strip for the first time next month, informed sources told Ma'an on Sunday.
Mashaal hopes to attend the 25th anniversary celebrations of the Islamist movement in Gaza.
Ahmad Yousef, a former adviser to Hamas prime minister Ismail Haniyeh, told Ma'an that Mashaal will be in Gaza soon, but the details of his trip will be confidential.
Mashaal, 56, took over as Hamas leader following the 2004 assassinations of Abdel-Aziz al-Rantissi and Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, the movement's founder. With both of them killed in the Gaza Strip, Mashaal has led Hamas from the relative safety of exile.
He narrowly survived a 1997 Israeli attempt to kill him when two agents injected him with poison in broad daylight on a street outside his office in the Jordanian capital.

via maannews.net

how often do you hear Western media make a note of the fact that the Hamas leader is not in Gaza?

Our partner, Fatah, also fought Israel in Pillar of Defense

Gaza-based armed groups tied to Abbas's Fatah party claim they fired 516 rockets at Israel during recent conflict.

PHOTO: REUTERS/MOHAMMED SALEM

Khaled Abu Toameh..
JPost..
24 November '12..
Several armed groups belonging to Fatah in the Gaza Strip claimed Saturday that they had also fired various types of rockets and missiles at Israel during Operation Pillar of Defense.
A spokesman for the groups, which are affiliated with Fatah’s armed wing, the Aksa Martyrs’ Brigade, told reporters that his men fired 516 rockets and missiles at Israel during the conflict.
The spokesman warned that the Fatah groups would “continue to defend the heroic Palestinian people against Israeli crimes and massacres.”
According to the spokesman, Fatah gunmen fought alongside members of other groups in the Gaza Strip during the recent escalation.
He urged Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal to “head immediately to the Gaza Strip to put an end to the state of despicable state of division [between Hamas and Fatah].”

The Fatah groups also “welcomed” last week’s terror attack against a civilian bus in Tel Aviv, in which 28 people were hospitalized.
The masked Fatah spokesman revealed that a member of his group, Mohamed al-Zaini, who was responsible for launching rockets and missiles at Israel, was killed in an IDF air strike.
Abbas Zaki, a member of the Fatah Central Committee, was quoted over the weekend as praising Hamas and Islamic Jihad for “deciding to die for the sake of the Gaza Strip.”
Zaki said in an interview with a Palestinian TV station in the West Bank that Abbas was not against the “resistance” in the Gaza Strip.
“We gave legitimacy to the rockets and provided them with a political cover,” he added. “I have tremendous sympathy for Hamas. God bless them. They told Israel that the war was not a picnic. God bless Hamas and Islamic Jihad and all the other resistance groups which decided to die for the sake of the Gaza Strip.”
Link: http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=293297

via calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.co.il

Arabs in Gaza Have Destroyed Jewish Antiquities

Arabs in Gaza Have Destroyed Jewish Antiquities

An Arab propagandist in the guise of an American academic threw all academic objectivity to the winds in a relatively recent book, which she seems to hope will qualify her for tenure at Columbia University. One Nadia Abu al-Haj [also "Nadia el-Haj" & "Nadia Abu el-Haj"] has written Facts on the Ground: Archaeological Practice and Territorial Self-Fashioning in Israeli Society (University of Chicago Press, 2001), which makes a number of outrageous claims. Such as no Jewish past in the land of Israel, such as only a minority of Jews in Jerusalem in Herod's time, etc. One of her claims is that Israeli archeologists systematically disregard artifacts and remains of cultures other than Jewish and that Israeli archeologists may even systematically --or out of habitual negligence-- destroy non-Jewish remains. In fact, the reality is the opposite. One notable case is that of a Jewish inscription in the Hebrew and Greek alphabets that still existed as recently as 20 years ago but has since been destroyed, apparently by Islamic fanatics shortly after the start of the hate movement called the First Intifada [according to Haggai Huberman; the first "intifada" started in December 1987].

This stone carving was found in 1870, apparently by British travelers. It was discovered in the Great Mosque of Gaza on a stone column which was the upper tier of a double-tiered support for the roof and walls of the mosque. The mosque structure was originally a Crusader church, built after Baldwin I, the Crusader king of Jerusalem, decided to rebuild the city in 1149, after it had lain in ruins since before the Crusader conquest as a result of wars between Seljuk Turks and other Muslim factions, or may have been destroyed at some point by the Crusaders themselves [according to Michael Avi-Yonah]. In this light, it would seem that the Crusaders reused parts --including pillars-- of wrecked earlier buildings that were lying around in the ruined city. The Hebrew and Greek inscriptions together with the decorating medallion/wreath, described by Hershel Shanks as "Hellenistic," indicate that the pillar was part of a synagogue built during the late Roman or the Byzantine periods. The Hebrew and Greek are identical in meaning. They are a man's name, Hananyah son of Jacob,

Hananyah bar Ya`aqob [in Hebrew writing חנניה בר יעקב ]. The Greek inscription is Anania giyo Iako, meaning the same thing. Giyo [in today's Greek yiyo] means son or son of. Other features of the bas-relief include a seven-branched, three-footed menorah, a shofar [used in the synagogues on Rosh haShanah and Yom Kippur], an etrog[citron] and a lulav [palm frond].

Note that the Hebrew inscription uses the Aramaic word bar בר, meaning son or son of, instead of the usual Hebrew word ben בן. Aramaic was the predominant spoken language of the Jews in Israel in the late Roman and Byzantine periods. Hananyah was probably a major donor to building the synagogue, and he was honored with a stone carving in his name, just as Jews today honor major donors with stone or metal plaques in synagogues.
To summarize the history of the inscription of the bas-relief: 1) the synagogue with the carving in Hananyah's name was erected in the late Roman or Byzantine periods; 2) the synagogue may have been destroyed at the time of the Arab conquest or in one of the inter-Muslim wars in the early Muslim period before the Crusades, or when the Crusaders destroyed the city of Gaza --according to Michael Avi-Yonah [in the Encyclopedia Judaica, vol 7]--; 3) in 1149, Baldwin I decreed that Gaza be rebuilt; the column from the ruined synagogue was reused to build a Crusader cathedral; 4) after the Muslim reconquest of Gaza, the cathedral was made into a mosque, called the Great Mosque of Gaza; 5) 1870 the bas-relief with its Hebrew and Greek inscriptions was rediscovered on an upper tier of columns supporting the mosque structure; 6) shortly after the start of the hate movement called the First Intifada [December 1987], the bas-relief was destroyed by Muslim haters, apparently because this remnant of ancient Jewish civilization in the Land of Israel was intolerable to them both as Muslims and Arab nationalists. In order to destroy it they needed long ladders, or maybe a scaffolding, in order to get up to the height of the stone carving on the pillar.
Sources:
Michael Avi-Yonah, "Gaza," Encyclopedia Judaica, vol 7.
Haggai Huberman, יהודים בעזה (Netsarim: the Center for the Heritage of the Jews of Gaza 1993)
Hershel Shanks, Judaism in Stone: The Archaeology of Ancient Synagogues (New York: Harper & Row; Washington, DC: Biblical Archaeology Society, 1979).
Nadia Abu al-Haj's denial of the Jewish past in the Land of Israel seems to work by the rule of Article 20 of the PLO Charter:

Claims of historical or religious ties of Jews with Palestine are incompatible with the facts of history. . . [from Article 20 of the PLO Charter; Harkabi trans]

Since the PLO Charter denies any Jewish history in the Land of Israel, then those who support the aims of that Charter and those who devoutly believe in it, are likely to deny [or, if under pressure to admit some Jewish link to Israel, then minimize] Jewish history in Israel, which is what Abu al-Haj does, no matter what the actual facts are as attested by archeological findings, by ancient writings, whether pagan writings in Greek or Latin, whether Jewish writings in Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek, or even as attested in the Quran and Arab historiography [see our earlier post on the Quran's Zionist passages, as well as Arab historians writing before invention of the "palestinian people" notion]. Since Abu al-Haj is interested in building up a mystique of the newly invented and supposedly put-upon "palestinian people," it is unlikely that her book reports that the centuries-old Jewish community of Gaza was brought to a violent end in 1929, as the Gaza Jews were driven out by Arab pogroms.
It is noteworthy that Abu al-Haj's tract was published by the University of Chicago Press, proving once again that academic standards among the academic publishers are down.
UPDATING: The Biblical Archeology Review published an article about the destruction of this bas relief stone carving in its issue of January/February 2001. It also reports Arab destruction of other Jewish archeological remains in Gaza and elsewhere [including the Sinai under Egyptian control]. Most notably, perhaps, it shows an Arab mob happily wrecking the Tomb of Joseph in Sh'khem and desecrating Jewish holy writings. For more on Joseph's Tomb seehere.
Also see on Joseph's Tomb & its wrecking by an Arab mob:
Sharon Waxman, "They Knew Not Joseph," Jerusalem Post, 24 November 2000.
- - - - - -
Here is a relevant page from the blog of Paula Stern who awakened us to Columbia's support for historical falsification to Israel's detriment.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

http://ziontruth.blogspot.co.il/2007/09/arabs-in-gaza-have-destroyed-jewish.html

via israeljewsjudaism.blogspot.com

Unbelievable: Israel resuming talks with Turkey over 'apology'

Little Hitler himself, Turkish foreign minister Ahmet Davutoglu, has confirmed that Israel is once again considering 'apologizing' to Turkey for the Mavi Marmara incident. And it may even be willing to end the blockade of Gaza.

In an interview with CNN Turk, Davutoglu said that Turkey will not make any concessions on its terms for ending the bilateral crisis: an Israeli apology for the killing of nine Turks during the 2010 raid on the Gaza-bound Mavi Marmara, payment of compensation to the families of the dead and wounded, and a removal of the Gaza blockade.

"It was an informal meeting," said Davutoglu of the Turkish-Israeli encounter in Geneva last week. "We are prepared to talk if the Israelis say they are prepared to fulfill our conditions."

Haaretz reported over the weekend that the special envoy of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Joseph Ciechanover, and Turkish Foreign Ministry Undersecretary Feridun Sinirlioglu met last week in Geneva to try to come up with a formula that would end the rift between the two countries, which began after Operation Cast Lead and became a total rupture after the May 2010 Israel Defense Forces raid on the Mavi Marmara, which was attempting to breach the Gaza blockade.

The Turkish newspaper Yeni Safak, which is close to Islamic elements in that country, reported yesterday that during the Geneva conversation Ciechanover said Israel is prepared to apologize to Turkey for killing nine Turkish citizens on the ship and would pay compensation to the victims' families.

Ciechanover reportedly told Sinirlioglu that Israel expects, in return for these steps, that Turkey will normalize relations between the countries, return its ambassador to Tel Aviv and allow the Israeli ambassador to return to Ankara. According to the Turkish report, Ciechanover told Sinirlioglu of Israel's concern that even if it did what Turkey was demanding, it would not receive an appropriate quid pro quo and relations would not return to what they had been before.

Sinirlioglu reportedly responded that if Israel met Turkish demands, the government in Ankara would regard it as a "new leaf" in bilateral relations, and would respond as Israel requests. With that, Sinirlioglu stressed that in addition to an apology and the payment of compensation, Turkey is demanding that Israel move toward removing the Gaza blockade.

According to the report, Ciechanover did not categorically reject the proposal regarding the blockade. He noted it was a process that would take time, and that in any case Israel would need to receive guarantees from Turkey that removing the blockade would not undermine Israel's security.

The compensation is nothing new - Israel offered that two years ago, although frankly it was ridiculous then and is even more ridiculous now. But until now the apology was not going to happen (Israel suggested other language that fell short of the Turkish demands) and opening the Gaza blockade was out of the question.
The fact that Israel is even considering doing this is absurd. We've been vindicated by two blue-ribbon panels - our own and the UN's. It makes absolutely no sense to undermine our position this way. Turkey is not going to side with us against Iran or allow us to use their airspace.
What could go wrong?

via israelmatzav.blogspot.com

Lynched "Israeli collaborator" was really rival Islamist

You mean, Hamas used the war as an excuse to brutally kill political rivals?
But we keep getting told that Hamas is so peaceful, pragmatic and responsible!
From the Daily Mail (UK):

Publicly executed minutes earlier as an alleged ‘spy for Israel’, his body was dragged through Gaza City by men on motorcycles, waving pistols triumphantly in the air.
Substitute horses for bikes, noted one witness, and it could almost have been a scene from the Crusades.
Along with five others, the ‘collaborator’ was killed on Tuesday for allegedly providing intelligence to enable Israel to pinpoint attack targets. He was shot twice and then ‘finished off’ with a blow from a heavy rock.
Amid dizzying confusion at the height of the eight-day conflict, there were sketchy reports that the traitors were caught ‘red-handed’ with ‘high-tech filming equipment’.
The Mail on Sunday can today reveal that the dead man in the picture is 37-year-old father-of-five Ribhi Badawi, a Palestinian prisoner in Gaza.
His family, neighbours and friends believe the notion that he spied for Israel is absurd – and there is much that supports their view, not least that as a prisoner Badawi was under armed guard during last week’s conflict.
Badawi was a member of the Islamist group Jaljalat – Thunder – which takes its inspiration from Al Qaeda and is more hardline than Hamas.
He had been in prison since 2009 when he was arrested on terrorism charges. It was alleged he was one of several fighters planning to launch attacks on Hamas.
Badawi’s family claim that while in prison, he was tortured until he confessed to being a traitor.

‘Ribhi was a proud Palestinian. He loved his country with a rare passion and he was more opposed to Israeli occupation than Hamas is,’ said his widow Kholoud.
‘To see the body of my dear husband dragged through the streets like an animal is truly terrible. The men who did this were wild.’
Sitting in her cramped home with three-year-old daughter Baraa (whose name means Innocence), Kholoud then reveals another irony – that her husband was wanted by an Israeli military court for conspiracy to commit acts of terrorism following a foiled bombing mission.
The dead man’s family insists his execution had nothing to do with espionage but was rooted instead in political and tribal rivalry. ‘His enemies used the war as an excuse to kill him,’ said his widow, who alleges the man who arrested her husband had once been involved in a dispute with him.
Badawi told his family he was tortured by Hamas in the months after his arrest. For days on end, he said, he was suspended upside down and beaten. ‘They also put a machine gun in his mouth and threatened to shoot unless he signed a blank piece of paper,’ said his widow.
‘He is a tough man and he resisted but after 55 days he succumbed and signed. He was later charged with espionage and terrorism. He was sentenced to death and had been in jail ever since.’

This is how Hamas treats its Islamic rivals.
Just imagine how they would treat Jews if they were in power.
(h/t Adloyada)

via elderofziyon.blogspot.co.il

Netanyahu agreed to ceasefire after Obama promised US troops in Sinai next week?

President Obama promises to put U.S. troops in the Sinai without asking Congress? you ready for a real f'n disaster? Welcome to a bloodbath of Americans.

(RT) Israel and Palestine are momentarily at a ceasefire, but the potential reasoning behind the recess could have some real international implications. Israel’s Debka reports that the pause in fighting comes after the US promised to send troops to Sinai. According to Debka, US troops will soon be en route to the Sinai peninsula, Egyptian territory in North Africa that’s framed by the Suez Canal on the West and Israel on the East. In its northeast most point, Sinai is but a stone’s throw from Palestinian-controlled Gaza, and according to Debka, Hamas fighters there have been relying on Iranian arms smugglers to supply them with weaponry by way of Egypt. Debka reports this week that Sinai will soon be occupied by US troops, who were promised by President Barack Obama to Israel’s leaders as a condition that a ceasefire be called. Once deployed, the Americans will intervene with the rumored arms trade orchestrated by Iranians, ideally cutting off supplies for Hamas while at the same time serving as a thorn in the side of Iran. “Once the missile and arms consignments depart Iranian ports or Libyan arms bazaars, Tehran has no direct control of their transit from point to point through Egypt until they reach Sinai and their Gaza destination,” Debka reports. “All the same, a US special forces operation against the Sinai segment of the Iranian smuggling route would count as the first overt American military strike against an Iranian military interest.” The decision to send US troops to Sinai in exchange for a ceasefire was reportedly arranged early Wednesday morning after Pres. Obama made a deal over the phone with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. In the days prior, Israel was relentless in targeting Gaza, killing more than 100 persons — including civilians — during a renewed assault on Hamas. A ceasefire has since been called after a week of fight, but more military action could soon occur, claims Israel, if the flow of weapons to Gaza is not stopped. Netanyahu has been adamant with his pleas for the United States to strike Iran in an effort to disrupt its nuclear enrichment facilities, a demand which up until now has been brushed aside by Pres. Obama. The White House has up until now insisted on diplomatic measures in order to make an impact on any Iranian output, but Debka’s sources suggest that US troops may now have to intervene in Sinai if any smugglers should attempt to move weapons into Gaza. “By opening the Sinai door to an American troop deployment for Israel’s defense, recognizes that the US force also insures Israel against Cairo revoking or failing to honor the peace treaty Egypt signed with Israel in 1979,” adds Debka. According to their sources, US troops are expected in Egypt early next week. Meanwhile, American forces have all but surrounded Iran and are stationed in countless bases across the Middle East.