Showing posts with label negotiations. Show all posts
Showing posts with label negotiations. Show all posts
Tuesday, January 15, 2019
Friday, October 12, 2018
How Can You Negotiate With Someone Who Does NOT Want Peace, At Any Cost?
TOP PALESTINIAN ADVISER ADMITS CONFLICT'S ALL ABOUT ISLAM
No negotiating 'total destruction' of 'children of Israel'
Subscribe to feed
The Palestinian Authority and its allies long have insisted that the conflict in the Middle East boils down to a dispute over land.
If Israel would be willing to give up certain land and accept particular demands, peace could be achieved at last.
But a top adviser to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has made it clear that Islam and its objective to establish the rule of Shariah, not only in the region but over the entire world, is at the heart of the matter.
Mahmoud Al-Habbash, regarded at the PA’s most important religious figure, said the conflict between Palestinians and Israelis is not a political conflict but a “battle” between Islam and “the culture of Satan.”
Robert Spencer, the author of the newly published “The History of Jihad From Muhammad to ISIS,” writes on his Jihad Watch blog that history shows the “enemies of Islam” are non-Muslims “who refuse to accept the hegemony of Sharia and the second-class status that acceptance would entail for them.”
The Quran teaches in 9:29, points out Spencer, that non-Muslims must be warred against and subjugated.
“Those who think that the Israeli/”Palestinian” conflict will be solved through negotiations should heed the words of Mahmoud Al-Habbash,” Spencer said. “But they won’t.”
Palestinian Media Watch, which provided a translation of Habbash’s statement on video, said the cleric “continues to tell Palestinians that the conflict with Israel is an uncompromising religious war for Islam against Israel and Jews.”
Appointed by Abbas as his personal adviser on Islam and the PA’s supreme Shariah judge, Habbash spoke of “the battle of history between Islam and the enemies of Islam.”
Israelis and Jews are the “enemies of Islam,” “enemies of Muslims,” have a “culture of Satan” and represent “evil,” he said.
Moreover, he said the current battle is not just another battle on behalf of Islam but the ultimate battle described in the Quran as the “final promise,” leading to the destruction of the “children of Israel.”
PMW pointed out Habbash is preaching to a religious Palestinian population, with polls consistently finding that 95 percent of Palestinians say religion is “important” for them.
“Jerusalem is the arena of conflict between us and the colonialist project (Israel),” the cleric said.
“Jerusalem’s Al-Aqsa Mosque apparently is the heading for the eruption of the conflict and the battle of history between Islam and the enemies of Islam; between the Muslims and the enemies of Muslims; between the Islamic culture in all its splendor and human glory and the culture of Satan attempting to establish oppression and aggression at the expense of the culture of truth and goodness,” Habbash said.
He asserted the mosque is “decreed to be the arena of the battle between good and evil.”
“This mosque and this wonderful city – the city of history, religion and culture, Jerusalem – are decreed to be the heading of the conflict,” he said.
He said he and man others see Jerusalem “as the first step, as the spark of the battle of the ‘final promise.'”
PMW noted that the “final promise” is mentioned in the Quran in Sura 17 where Allah addresses the Jews as “the children of Israel.”
Some interpret the “final promise” as a battle that took place in the past. But Habbash said he and others see it as a future conflict in which Jews experience “[total] destruction.”
The battle with Israel today over Jerusalem, the cleric said, is “the spark of the battle,” meaning, the beginning of the war of destruction.”
Read more at https://www.wnd.com/2018/10/top-palestinian-adviser-admits-conflicts-all-about-islam/#ctigAuz6PA2X9OUr.99
Friday, October 4, 2013
Why Are Republicans So Quick To Call Uncle? McConnell Needs Some Good Ole Spine
McConnell: Halting ObamaCare unsuccessful but worthwhile
- 10/04/13 10:11 AM ET
Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said Thursday night it is pretty clear any effort to halt ObamaCare in the Democratic-led Senate will not succeed.
The GOP leader said, however, it was a worthwhile effort to highlight the shortcomings of the law even if the GOP doesn't have the numbers to overturn it.
“So I think it was worth the effort, worth highlighting it, but I do think that ObamaCare is not over, the Democrats are going to crack at some point,” he continued.
Days into a government shutdown and weeks away from bumping up against the U.S. borrowing limit, McConnell said it is “highly irresponsible” for President Obama to refuse to negotiate to raise the debt ceiling.
Nonetheless, He said he is confident “we are not going to default.”
McConnell described himself as a thorn in the side of the president. Up for reelection in 2014, McConnell said he is proud of the enemies he has made.
“I’m a thorn in the side to the president, and I’m sure they’d like to defeat me,” he said. “And I’m frankly proud of my enemies. I wouldn’t trade them for any group of people I can think of.”
k
Friday, September 27, 2013
Obama Will Negotiate With Iran, Syria, Russia But Not The Republicans. Confusing Contradictions, Right?
Obama’s ‘Please Kick Me’ Appearance At The U.N.
September 27, 2013 by Chip Wood
PHOTOS.COM
Chalk up another embarrassing rebuff for a U.S. President at the Mecca of international socialism, the United Nations.
Barack Obama’s team let it be known that the President would be delighted to meet Iranian President Hasan Rouhani while the two were at the U.N. this past Tuesday. The two could shake hands, smile at each other and pose for an historic photo op. They wouldn’t even have to discuss anything of substance, merely look like they were prepared to get along.
“Thanks, but no thanks” was the insulting Iranian response. At least their rebuff was announced before Obama was left standing alone, with his arm stuck out and a stupid smile on his face.
Guess Obama’s peeps didn’t learn anything from history. Back in 2000, then-President Bill Clinton offered the same opportunity to Iranian President Mohammad Khatami, another supposed moderate. Khatami also nixed shaking hands with the President of the United States.
Wouldn’t you think that someone on Obama’s staff would have made sure he and Rouhani would be smiling together for the camera before leaking news about it to the media? This is not only sloppy diplomacy, Mr. President; it’s downright embarrassing incompetence.
Please note that Obama is so eager to negotiate with Iran that he’s even willing to put up with some egg on his face. And Rouhani isn’t the only nasty ruler he’s been willing to make nice with. Heck, we’re even willing to sit down at a conference table with the lunatics who run North Korea.
And don’t forget about all of those cozy chats with Russian strongman Vladimir Putin, who has been only too happy to step into the role of negotiator-by-proxy. No doubt Obama is hoping that the world will soon forget all that talk about military strikes, inviolable red lines and the need to see Bashar Assad kicked out of the Syrian presidency.
Is there anyone this President isn’t willing to negotiate with?
Yes, there is one group that is beyond the pale and one issue that Obama won’t discuss under any circumstances. Negotiate with Republicans over the fate of the U.S. economy? Not on your life!
Obama has made it clear he won’t give an inch over his demand that Congress raise the debt ceiling without attaching any conditions to it. No reduction in spending, no promise to balance the budget someday, no give-and-take under any circumstances. Here is the one issue on which he vows there will be absolutely no compromise whatsoever.
The President has the nerve to claim that this is how it has always been, that Congress has never attached non-budget items to legislation raising the debt ceiling. Here’s how he put it last week, when he spoke to the Business Roundtable:
You have never seen in the history of the United States the debt ceiling or the threat of not raising the debt being used to extort a president or a governing party and trying to force issues that have nothing to do with the budget and nothing to do with the debt.
His claim, like so many other things he has said with such certainty, is total bunk. Glenn Kessler, the fact-checker for The Washington Post, didn’t have to dig very far to confirm that debt-ceiling legislation has been linked to such disparate causes as campaign-finance reform, Social Security, ending the bombing in Cambodia and voluntary school prayer.
A classic example occurred in 1980, when the House and Senate voted to repeal one of Jimmy Carter’s favored solutions to the energy crisis that existed then. Carter had demanded a fee on imported oil that would have raised the cost of a gallon of gas by 10 cents. Congress said “no way” in an attachment to legislation Carter very much wanted: authorization to borrow even more money he could spend.
When Carter vetoed the measure, the House and Senate voted overwhelmingly to override him. The vote was 335-34 in the House and 68-10 in the Senate. So much for Obama’s claim that such legislation was “never seen in the history of the United States.” Kessler rightly gives the president four Pinocchios for his duplicity on this one.
So what could be attached to a new debt-ceiling bill? For starters, how about a one-year delay in Obamacare? Obama has already agreed to a one-year delay for many businesses; how about giving the same break to the rest of us?
Yes, I know. The House has passed a bill to halt all funding for this healthcare monstrosity. But there is no chance that the Senate will agree. And even if by some miracle the bill’s proponents could find five or six Democrats who would vote with them (something I give a 0 percent likelihood of happening), does anyone think there are any circumstances that would persuade Obama to sign it? Not on your life.
Looks like we’ll see another exciting game of Washington playing chicken, folks.
In the meantime, what did you think of Texas senator Ted Cruz’s dramatic, all-night speech on the Senate floor, listing all of the reasons to oppose funding Obamacare?
He talked about a lot more than the Affordable Care Act, of course. He narrated the classic Dr. Seuss book Green Eggs and Ham, described the incredible bravery of the men who signed the Declaration of Independence and even compared conservatives’ efforts today to the rebel alliance in the “Star Wars” films. All in all, the freshman Senator put on quite a show.
Despite some catty remarks from his opponents (Senate Majority Leader Harry Read called the near-filibuster a “massive waste of time”) and much mockery in the mainstream media, I think Cruz scored a lot of points for his cause. The response on Twitter and other social media confirms that opinion. So congratulations to him and the other conservative stalwarts who had the courage to stand with him.
And speaking of Cruz’s fellow Republicans, shame on those who have been trying to stab the Tea Party favorite in the back. The latest example of their despicable behavior came last week. After Chris Wallace announced that Cruz would be interviewed on his “Fox News Sunday” program, the TV host described what happened next:
This has been one of the strangest weeks I’ve ever had in Washington, and I say that because as soon as we listed Ted Cruz as our featured guest this week, I got unsolicited research and questions, not from Democrats, but from top Republicans.
Wallace said the reason for slipping him the negative material was obvious: so he could “hammer Cruz” when he appeared.
Ain’t politics fun?
By this time next week, I expect that some sort of funding for the Federal government will be approved by Congress and signed by the President. It may just be for a few months, but I don’t think the Republican majority in the House will agree to a government shutdown. Not yet. Too bad; if we could control who got sent home and who kept getting a paycheck, it could be the best thing to happen to our country in years.
We all know that Obama and his henchmen would make any shutdown as painful as possible for as many of us as possible — just as the Administration did with sequestration, but a thousand times worse.
But don’t despair. This just one battle in a long-range war, my friends. And there is no doubt we’re getting more warriors on our side every day.
Until next time, keep some powder dry.
Tuesday, August 9, 2011
Washington Should Mind Its Own Business
When Washington can get around to running its own business, then they can tell other countries how to do theirs! The latest slap at Israel is the approval of additional housing in East Jerusalem. Not only is this area that was captured during the 1967 War after they defeated the Arabs but it has been controlled and built up since then.
Israel is the only country in human history that has been demanded to return lands they captured during a war! Why, because the world does not want the Jews to have their own land! Now, I know that some will not like that statement, however, it is true.
For thousands of years, Jews have been run out of country after country. Some of the stories are: they went to Egypt, prospered and then enslaved by the Pharaohs; they went to Israel, created a great country and then were defeated; they went to Spain, prospered and then expelled by the King and Queen; you know the story in Germany; they went back to Israel, conquered the land, created a state and were immediately attacked by its neighbors. Why should they give back the land they paid for by the sweat of their brow and the blood of their children? The only reason is that the world wants Jews to be powerless in the hope they will be destroyed.
Now, the United States is rapidly distancing itself from Israel as a way to placate the Palestinians. What a mistake! If you look back at history, every country that has initially welcomed the Jews and then kicked them out or prosecuted them has ended up being destroyed. Look at Egypt, Spain, and other Arab countries as examples. So why does the Administration not learn from history? Because they do not understand history nor are they students of the past. This will come back to haunt us here in the US. If we abandon Israel, we will pay mightily.
What can we do? We can be vocal by writing our Congressmen/women and President, walking in support rallies for Israel and most importantly votingout anyone who does not support this tiny dot in the Middle East.
From AP, here is the information on the latest blast against Israel by the current Administration:
WASHINGTON (AP) - The United States says it is "deeply concerned" by Israeli approval of new housing construction in disputed east Jerusalem.
The State Department says such "unilateral actions work against efforts to resume direct negotiations" and the spirit of the peace process. In a statement, the department says it has raised its objections with the Israeli government.
Last week, an Israeli planning commission approved 930 new housing units in the Har Homa neighborhood in east Jerusalem. Actual building is at least two years off.
Alongside its rare rebuke of a close ally, the State Department said Israelis and Palestinians should settle their differences on Jerusalem through negotiation.
Israel captured east Jerusalem in the 1967 Mideast war and claims it as part of its capital. Palestinians hope to establish their future capital there.
Friday, June 24, 2011
Interesting Option Regarding Israel Land Swap
In the following post, Victor Sharpe writes about Israel's missed opportunity by not annexing Judea and Samaria after the 1967 war. However, the one point that he makes in the latter parts of the article is one that I have never thought about.
When you get into a negotiation with someone you always want to propose something "out of the box" so that the discussion will move to the inconsequential and away from the major issues. It focuses the other person on the "throw away". It works and it works well.
In the case of Israel, the discussion has always been what land the country will give up to get peace. Mr. Sharpe proposes an alternative of creating land from not only lands under Israeli control but also part of land now controlled by Jordan. If the discussion can move to what lands the Hashimite Kingdom will give up for a Palestinian state, I think we might have an opportunity to change the conversation.
What do you think?
When you get into a negotiation with someone you always want to propose something "out of the box" so that the discussion will move to the inconsequential and away from the major issues. It focuses the other person on the "throw away". It works and it works well.
In the case of Israel, the discussion has always been what land the country will give up to get peace. Mr. Sharpe proposes an alternative of creating land from not only lands under Israeli control but also part of land now controlled by Jordan. If the discussion can move to what lands the Hashimite Kingdom will give up for a Palestinian state, I think we might have an opportunity to change the conversation.
What do you think?
Israel's Missed Opportunity
Victor Sharpe - Arutz-7, June 21st, 2011Why have the last 44 years since June 1967 been wasted and Judea and Samaria, the Jewish people’s biblical and ancestral heartland, not been annexed to the reborn Jewish state?
I received this simple but profound question from a reader.
“You wrote that for 19 long years from 1948 to 1967, Jordan had occupied Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) and the eastern half of Jerusalem. Then why didn’t Israel Annex the West Bank after 1967 and why doesn’t it annex it now?”
Indeed, why have the last 44 years since June 1967 been wasted and Judea and Samaria, the Jewish people’s biblical and ancestral heartland, not been annexed to the reborn Jewish state?
Unfortunately, many Israeli leaders at the time were socialists, leftists and some even atheists. They were not well grounded in the religious history of the Jewish people and its attachments to its holy places. Despite pleas from religious and conservative Jews, these leftists refused to fully appreciate the precious nature of those lands to the Jewish state: A tragic, missed opportunity.
The leftwing leaders also undertook a repeated policy of appeasement towards the hostile Arabs, and didn’t seize the opportunity for annexation that arose in 1967 after the Six Day War. Israel’s left leaning government at the time thought that by not annexing the territory it would lead to goodwill negotiations where everything would be on the table. This, and the failed policy of appeasement was a historic mistake.
The most extreme example of this appeasement was the immediate turnover of the Temple Mount in Jerusalem (the site of the two Jewish Temples) to the Arab Waqf by Moshe Dayan, Israel’s Defense Minister in the then leftwing Israeli government. Now the Waqf is deliberately destroying ancient Jewish and Christian antiquities, which Israeli authorities are unable to monitor. This is a crime against history and civilization.
Later—and still continuing the failed appeasement policy – subsequent prime ministers under the rubric of “land for peace” caused the woeful surrender of Jericho, of Hebron, (King David’s first capital city) of Shechem (Nablus), and so much of Judea and Samaria to illegal Arab development.
Even conservative Prime Ministers like Menachem Begin and Binyamin Netanyahu fell into the trap of believing that the Muslim world would finally accept a Jewish state in return for endless concessions. Begin gave away all of the Sinai peninsula and Netanyahu in his first term as Prime Minister gave away Hebron—one of Judaism’s four holy cities.
Again, this was a fatal mistake for the empirical fact is that Islam will never accept a non-Muslim state in lands once conquered in the name of Allah. This simple and enduring truth is nigh impossible for secular westerners—be they Israelis or Americans—to understand and yet without this realization, all talk of true and enduring peace is a grand delusion.
As time went by, fatal euphemisms began to be employed such as “the peace process, land for peace, and the two- state-solution.” All these baseless phrases led not to peace but to more Muslim Arab demands, war and terrorism against Israel. Yet still the Left remained deaf and blind.
The “Two State Solution,” has now been embraced by politicians and journalists alike, repeated endlessly, and touted as the panacea for a just, equitable solution to the Israel-Palestinian conflict. It has assumed the repetitious role of a muezzin’s call to Islamic prayer. But it is based on erroneous geography and history; on a mixture of wishful thinking, naiveté and a brilliant Arab propaganda campaign of disinformation and falsehood.
The Holocaust denying leader of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, and Israel’s supposed peace partner—a man who is a wolf in sheep’s clothing—has publicly rejected any willingness to accept Israel as a Jewish state; a sure indication of the falsity of any Arab claim to live in full and lasting peace with Israel, especially now Abbas has embraced within his government the malignancy known as Hamas.
The creation of yet another Arab state—this will be number 23—based upon the two-state-solution and carved out of Judea and Samaria within the mere 40 miles separating the Mediterranean and the Jordan River, is a recipe for war and for the piecemeal destruction of the Jewish state.
Israel is being pressured to shrink to a mere 9 miles wide as it was prior to the defensive war Israel was forced to fight in June, 1967. These lines were called the Auschwitz lines because of the impossibility of defending them against Arab genocidal hostility.
Any new Arab state will more than likely fall under the control of the Islamist Hamas movement, itself a branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, which seeks the annihilation of Israel and a worldwide Islamic Caliphate. Gaza, and what it has become, is living proof of Palestinian Arab genocidal intentions towards Israel
If Israel foolishly gives away parts of Judea and Samaria, there will be no part of Israel or Jerusalem safe from Palestinian Arab missile attacks. When President Bush was still Governor of Texas he flew over Israel’s tiny width and remarked, “why, in my state we have driveways longer than that.”
That nightmare for Israel is the most likely outcome of the current proposed Two State Solution west of the Jordan River, which the Obama Administration is pushing with the flawed zeal of a misguided zealot. Indeed, Barack Hussein Obama is practically demanding Israel be pressured to return to the pre-June 1967 armistice lines; essentially calling for Israel’s national suicide. This may well reach a crescendo in September.
But to truly create a just and equitable solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict there must be a Two-State Solution, not within the territory west of the River Jordan, but on both sides of the river.
The present day Kingdom of Jordan occupies four-fifths of geographical Palestine and, as the population is three fourths Palestinian Arab, it follows that the solution to the creation of a Palestinian Arab state should be within the present day Kingdom of Jordan and east of the River Jordan.
Let us also be reminded that the Jewish birthrate in Judea and Samaria (the so-called West Bank) is increasing and the Arab birthrate decreasing. The fear of an Arab demographic bomb is receding according to statistics.
If there is a desire within the international community to truly arrive at a “just and equitable” solution, then this would be it. Of course, if this was a perfect world, it would satisfy historical, geographical, religious and ethnic considerations. But, alas, it is anything but a perfect world and the fanatical desire by so many Arab and Muslim nations to wipe out all vestiges of a Jewish state is a depressing reality.
In the 44 long years since Israel liberated the territories from Arab occupation it has missed opportunities to annex Judea and Samaria. History might have been so different if the leaders of the Jewish state had not been ignorant of their biblical and post-biblical history or of their essential Jewish faith; so inextricably intertwined with the Land of Israel and its 3,000 year old Jewish capital: Jerusalem.
So many of the early Israeli politicians were from the Left and were not moved by faith to redeem the hills and valleys of biblical Judea and Samaria—the very heartland of the Jewish people and their history.
And still today, the Israeli Left is blinded by a veritable veil of deception. Peace Now, for example, despite every manifestation of Jew hatred by the Muslim and Arab world, does all it can to drive fellow Jews out of their ancestral lands. And a dominating Leftwing bias among Israeli tenured professors and a left-leaning Israeli Supreme Court often jeopardizes Israeli security.
The corollary to this is that the Jewish state must not succumb to the enemy within—the Left—and the enemy without—the Arab and Muslim world—or give away any more of its native, ancestral, biblical, spiritual and physical homeland to a people whose Islamic religion demands of them no true peace with Israel, no true negotiations with Israel, and no true recognition of Israel as a Jewish state.
There is no time for anymore missed opportunities
I received this simple but profound question from a reader.
“You wrote that for 19 long years from 1948 to 1967, Jordan had occupied Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) and the eastern half of Jerusalem. Then why didn’t Israel Annex the West Bank after 1967 and why doesn’t it annex it now?”
Indeed, why have the last 44 years since June 1967 been wasted and Judea and Samaria, the Jewish people’s biblical and ancestral heartland, not been annexed to the reborn Jewish state?
Unfortunately, many Israeli leaders at the time were socialists, leftists and some even atheists. They were not well grounded in the religious history of the Jewish people and its attachments to its holy places. Despite pleas from religious and conservative Jews, these leftists refused to fully appreciate the precious nature of those lands to the Jewish state: A tragic, missed opportunity.
The leftwing leaders also undertook a repeated policy of appeasement towards the hostile Arabs, and didn’t seize the opportunity for annexation that arose in 1967 after the Six Day War. Israel’s left leaning government at the time thought that by not annexing the territory it would lead to goodwill negotiations where everything would be on the table. This, and the failed policy of appeasement was a historic mistake.
The most extreme example of this appeasement was the immediate turnover of the Temple Mount in Jerusalem (the site of the two Jewish Temples) to the Arab Waqf by Moshe Dayan, Israel’s Defense Minister in the then leftwing Israeli government. Now the Waqf is deliberately destroying ancient Jewish and Christian antiquities, which Israeli authorities are unable to monitor. This is a crime against history and civilization.
Later—and still continuing the failed appeasement policy – subsequent prime ministers under the rubric of “land for peace” caused the woeful surrender of Jericho, of Hebron, (King David’s first capital city) of Shechem (Nablus), and so much of Judea and Samaria to illegal Arab development.
Even conservative Prime Ministers like Menachem Begin and Binyamin Netanyahu fell into the trap of believing that the Muslim world would finally accept a Jewish state in return for endless concessions. Begin gave away all of the Sinai peninsula and Netanyahu in his first term as Prime Minister gave away Hebron—one of Judaism’s four holy cities.
Again, this was a fatal mistake for the empirical fact is that Islam will never accept a non-Muslim state in lands once conquered in the name of Allah. This simple and enduring truth is nigh impossible for secular westerners—be they Israelis or Americans—to understand and yet without this realization, all talk of true and enduring peace is a grand delusion.
As time went by, fatal euphemisms began to be employed such as “the peace process, land for peace, and the two- state-solution.” All these baseless phrases led not to peace but to more Muslim Arab demands, war and terrorism against Israel. Yet still the Left remained deaf and blind.
The “Two State Solution,” has now been embraced by politicians and journalists alike, repeated endlessly, and touted as the panacea for a just, equitable solution to the Israel-Palestinian conflict. It has assumed the repetitious role of a muezzin’s call to Islamic prayer. But it is based on erroneous geography and history; on a mixture of wishful thinking, naiveté and a brilliant Arab propaganda campaign of disinformation and falsehood.
The Holocaust denying leader of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, and Israel’s supposed peace partner—a man who is a wolf in sheep’s clothing—has publicly rejected any willingness to accept Israel as a Jewish state; a sure indication of the falsity of any Arab claim to live in full and lasting peace with Israel, especially now Abbas has embraced within his government the malignancy known as Hamas.
The creation of yet another Arab state—this will be number 23—based upon the two-state-solution and carved out of Judea and Samaria within the mere 40 miles separating the Mediterranean and the Jordan River, is a recipe for war and for the piecemeal destruction of the Jewish state.
Israel is being pressured to shrink to a mere 9 miles wide as it was prior to the defensive war Israel was forced to fight in June, 1967. These lines were called the Auschwitz lines because of the impossibility of defending them against Arab genocidal hostility.
Any new Arab state will more than likely fall under the control of the Islamist Hamas movement, itself a branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, which seeks the annihilation of Israel and a worldwide Islamic Caliphate. Gaza, and what it has become, is living proof of Palestinian Arab genocidal intentions towards Israel
If Israel foolishly gives away parts of Judea and Samaria, there will be no part of Israel or Jerusalem safe from Palestinian Arab missile attacks. When President Bush was still Governor of Texas he flew over Israel’s tiny width and remarked, “why, in my state we have driveways longer than that.”
That nightmare for Israel is the most likely outcome of the current proposed Two State Solution west of the Jordan River, which the Obama Administration is pushing with the flawed zeal of a misguided zealot. Indeed, Barack Hussein Obama is practically demanding Israel be pressured to return to the pre-June 1967 armistice lines; essentially calling for Israel’s national suicide. This may well reach a crescendo in September.
But to truly create a just and equitable solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict there must be a Two-State Solution, not within the territory west of the River Jordan, but on both sides of the river.
The present day Kingdom of Jordan occupies four-fifths of geographical Palestine and, as the population is three fourths Palestinian Arab, it follows that the solution to the creation of a Palestinian Arab state should be within the present day Kingdom of Jordan and east of the River Jordan.
Let us also be reminded that the Jewish birthrate in Judea and Samaria (the so-called West Bank) is increasing and the Arab birthrate decreasing. The fear of an Arab demographic bomb is receding according to statistics.
If there is a desire within the international community to truly arrive at a “just and equitable” solution, then this would be it. Of course, if this was a perfect world, it would satisfy historical, geographical, religious and ethnic considerations. But, alas, it is anything but a perfect world and the fanatical desire by so many Arab and Muslim nations to wipe out all vestiges of a Jewish state is a depressing reality.
In the 44 long years since Israel liberated the territories from Arab occupation it has missed opportunities to annex Judea and Samaria. History might have been so different if the leaders of the Jewish state had not been ignorant of their biblical and post-biblical history or of their essential Jewish faith; so inextricably intertwined with the Land of Israel and its 3,000 year old Jewish capital: Jerusalem.
So many of the early Israeli politicians were from the Left and were not moved by faith to redeem the hills and valleys of biblical Judea and Samaria—the very heartland of the Jewish people and their history.
And still today, the Israeli Left is blinded by a veritable veil of deception. Peace Now, for example, despite every manifestation of Jew hatred by the Muslim and Arab world, does all it can to drive fellow Jews out of their ancestral lands. And a dominating Leftwing bias among Israeli tenured professors and a left-leaning Israeli Supreme Court often jeopardizes Israeli security.
The corollary to this is that the Jewish state must not succumb to the enemy within—the Left—and the enemy without—the Arab and Muslim world—or give away any more of its native, ancestral, biblical, spiritual and physical homeland to a people whose Islamic religion demands of them no true peace with Israel, no true negotiations with Israel, and no true recognition of Israel as a Jewish state.
There is no time for anymore missed opportunities
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)