by Rhonda Spivak
The following are questions given to Michael Ignatieff, the leader of Canada’s Liberal Party who was in Winnipeg during an interview on April 24th, and his responses. The questions and answers are reproduced here not necessarily in the order they were asked.
LOCAL-ABORIGINAL URBAN RESERVE IN TUXEDO
SPIVAK: Do you think there should be an urban aboriginal reserve in Tuxedo [Winnipeg South]?
IGNATIEFF: I can’t comment on that directly. I need to talk to the Chiefs, I need to talk to the community leaders a bit more before I wade in there. You know there’s some issues there that I think I need to think about more before I get drawn in.
IRAN
SPIVAK: What do you think of the approach of the Obama administration in dealing with Iran so far? First it tried dialogue, but now it has backed away from that ?
IGNATIEFF: I don’t think rapprochement is possible with the Ahmadinejad regime and I can’t believe that that’s the objective of the Obama policy. My sense of the Obama policy is [that it is designed to] contain the regime, isolate the regime, and deter the regime and that I think would be the core of a Canadian policy.
Now the issue is moving towards targeted sanctions, targeted in the sense that they target the core elements of the regime and try and avoid harming civilians in Iran. The thing that we have to get right is that there are a lot of people in Iran not only discontented with the A regime but seeking to move against it so if you are going to have a sanctions regime it’s got to target the regime and not cut off the legs of the civilian resistance to the regime and that’s the balance that Canadian policy and international policy has to follow. But, there can be no dealing with this regime. It just not an acceptable member of the international community
SPIVAK: How can sanctions target the regime without hurting Iranian civilians?
IGNATIEFF: I think there’s no question that we can target... the Revolutionary Guard, we can target some of the international holding companies that hold regime assets. [Liberal MP]Irwin Cotler has done wonderful work in thinking about that and marshalling international condemnation of the Iranian regime and also marshalling the instruments of international law to condemn the country for incitement to genocide. That’s been the core of Irwin’s campaign against Iran and it has my full support.
KAIROS
SPIVAK: What do you think about the Harper government’s defunding of KAIROS ?
[On November 30, KAIROS received notice from the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) that its project proposal for 2009-2013 had been declined, on the basis that its program did not fit CIDA priorities. In December 16, Jason Kenny Minister of Citizenship and Immigration said to the Global Forum to Counter Anti-Semitism in Jerusalem that “ We have defunded organizations, most recently, like KAIROS, who are taking a leadership role in the boycott [of Israel.]”
IGNATIEFF: I think there’s something gone badly wrong when a coalition of church groups that has a an established reputation for working in developing nations and doing good decent work is suddenly defunded by a Conservative government. I think it’s a bad decision, and we can’t understand its rationale. We think that KAIROS does good work and we would review the file again and see if whether our impression in opposition is right which is that these guys are going good work, let them get on with it.
FUNDING OF UNWRA FOR HUMANITARIAN FOOD AID ONLY
SPIVAK: What do you think of the Harper government’s decision to stop Canada’s core funding of the United Nations Works and Relief Agency [UNWRA] in 2009. Instead of providing funds to general education or health programs by UNWRA in UNWRA’s general account, Canada specifically earmarked all Canadian funds towards food aid for Palestinian refugees.
IGNATIEFF: UNWRA has a 50-60 year record of providing for Palestinian refugees. I know that there is criticism that... they’ve lost their impartiality, they’ve become too controlled by Palestinian elements. So I ‘m aware of the criticisms of UNWRA but I would frankly want to review that decision if we were in government. I think UNWRA is a delivery mechanism for people in need, and I’d want to review that decision... I obviously don’t want don’t want Canadian money going to militants, I don’t want Canadian money supporting political extremism but equally I don’t want us to deny legitimate aid to,you know, civilians in need.
[For more on this issue of the shift in Canadian funding of UNWRA, see Rhonda Spivak’s article in the Jerusalem Post, Jan 13, 2010 reprinted here at the very bottom.]
PALESTINIAN JUSTICE SYSTEM AND PALESTINIAN STATE
SPIVAK: In January 2010, Canada announced it would be focusing its efforts on funding the Palestinian justice system, including building courthouses in Ramallah and elsewhere in the West Bank? What do you think of that direction in Canadian policy?
IGNATIEFF: When I was last in Jerusalem I talked to some Canadian officials who were involved in Palestinian policing and heaven knows the Palestinian justice system needs all the help it can get and its police and security systems need all the help they can get so these are long standing commitments of Canada and we would again support them provided that there are no ties to militant extremism, provided these are building capacity for legitimate Palestinian institutions.
SPIVAK: What do you think of the stated intention of the President of the Palestinian Authority Salam Fayyad to declare a Palestinian state unilaterally by the summer of 2011?
IGNATIEFF: The conditions for recognition for a Palestinian state are very complicated... I’m not going to be drawn into anticipating what Salam Fayyad may or may not do, or what the Palestinians may or may not do.
I’ve always been clear that I believe in a two state solution. I don’t believe Israel can be secure unless its got a viable Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza, that can operate as a state, that has a monopoly of the means of force, that lives in peace with Israel and engages in economic partnership with Israel.
So, that’s where I think this has to end and I think that’s where this has to go, but there has to be an orderly process by which Palestinian statehood is achieved and that involves good faith negotiations with the Stare of Israel next door.
ON ISRAEL APARTHEID WEEK
Ignatieff made the following statement which appeared in the National Post in regard to Israel Apartheid Week:
“On university campuses across the country this week, Israeli Apartheid Week will once again attempt to demonize and undermine the legitimacy of the Jewish state. It is part of a global campaign of calls for divestment, boycotts and proclamations, and it should be condemned unequivocally and absolutely.
Apartheid is defined, in international law, as a crime against humanity. Israeli Apartheid Week is a deliberate attempt to portray the Jewish state as criminal.
The activities planned for the week will single out Jewish and Israeli students. They will be made to feel ostracized and even physically threatened in the very place where freedom should be paramount -- on a university campus.
Let us be clear: criticism of Israeli government policy is legitimate. Wholesale condemnation of the State of Israel and the Jewish people is not legitimate. Not now, not ever.
The very premise of Israeli Apartheid Week runs counter to our shared values of mutual respect and tolerance, regardless of nationality, race or creed. It is an attempt to heighten the tensions in our communities around the tragic conflict in the Middle East.
On behalf of the Liberal party of Canada and the Parliamentary caucus, I urge all Canadians to join with us in condemning Israeli Apartheid Week, and to reject, in principle, all forms of anti-Semitism, racism and intolerance, both within this country and around the world.”
LOOKING BACK: SPIVAK’S INTERVIEW WITH IGNATIEFF A YEAR AGO
By Rhonda Spivak, March 20, 2009
(*versions of this article below were published in the Canadian Jewish News and the Vancouver Jewish
Independent)
Liberal Party Leader Michael Ignatieff says that the Iranian government must understand that the international community’s support for Israel’s existence is “backed up by credible deterrents.”
Ignatieff was referred to a recent statement made by Israel’s incoming Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the March 9,2009 edition of Newsweek. Netanyahu was asked by Newsweek whether he thought that short of military action it’s possible to halt Iran’s nuclear program. Netanyahu answered, “I think this regime is vulnerable to pressure that ought to be intensified. But none of these sanctions and other measures that are contemplated would have much of an effect if the Iranians believe that a military option is off the table.”
After referring to the above statement by Netanyahu, Ignatieff was asked if he agreed with Netanyahu. Ignatieff’s response:
“What I would say is that Iran has to understand that the international community is united on the proposition that you can’t deny the holocaust, and you can’t threaten any of your neighbors, and certainly not the Jewish state. And that means that the Iranian government has to be aware that those feelings, those views are backed up with appropriate military force.... so its backed up by credible deterrents. But I think it’s legitimate... to say no thoughtful Israeli and no thoughtful Iranian in my view wants this to come to conflict, and it would be a catastrophe for both sides. And Canada has always stood for peace. So... Canada has to stand essentially for three things: unequivocal condemnation of holocaust denying rhetoric [and] anti-Israeli rhetoric by the Iranian regime 2) commitment to credible military deterrence 3) commitment to demanding that Iran comply with the International Atomic Energy Association in respect of its domestic nuclear program; and 4) Canada has always said there are no military solutions in this region.
“At the end of the day, Iran is a great power. Israel is a legitimate democratic state. There are no ultimate military solutions to these problems. There has to be some kind of opening of the doors in which Israel and Iran eventually sit down and live in peace with each other. The alternatives are generally too horrible to contemplate. That doesn’t mean backing down form being totally clear to the Iranians, but I don’t want to encourage any saber rattling rhetoric, especially not at a moment when the President of the United States is beginning to open the door to discussion. And those discussions I’ve made clear have to include as the central item of business with the Iranians: you can’t talk to Israel this way, it’s got to stop. And if they stop, then things become possible. If not, we’ll be back in the deep freeze for a long time to come.”
Ignatieff was asked whether he would be in favour of trying to organize an explicit statement and commitment from a number of countries (West and East) regarding the safety of Israel that might be used to try to dissuade Iran from ever deploying nuclear weapons against the Jewish state. He answered:
“I think Iran is fully aware...[Israel’s] allies have made it perfectly clear that nuclear threats towards Israel are unacceptable and will be met with...uh there’s credible deterrence, lets put it that way. I don’t think the Iranian regime... is in any doubt about the determination of Israel’s allies to defend her.”
Ignatieff made a statement in the Gaurdian, in April 19, 2002, regarding the Palestinian territories. He was quoted then as saying:
“Two years ago, an American friend took me on a helicopter ride from Jerusalem to the Golan Heights over the Palestinian West Bank. He wanted to show me how vulnerable Israel was, how the Arabs only had to cross 11 km of land to reach the sea and throw the Israelis into it. I got this message but I also came away with another one. When I looked down at the West Bank, at the settlements like Crusader forts occupying the high ground, at the Israeli security cordon along the Jordan river closing off the Palestinian lands from Jordan, I knew I was not looking down at a state or the beginnings of one, but at a Bantustan, one of those pseudo-states created in dying years of apartheid to keep the African population under control.”
When asked to clarify what he meant by the above statement, Ignatieff responded:
“You know I think all my adult life [I’ve] made it clear that... it’s... illegitimate to compare Israel to apartheid South Africa and let’s be very clear why, because all citizens of Israel have equal rights. In apartheid South Africa, people were excluded from full citizenship on the basis of race. And that was denounced as a crime against humanity. So I’ve never ever in my life equated Israel and apartheid South Africa. I think what I meant in using the terminology that I used in that article in 2002 is something that I think is as evident to Israelis as it is to anybody else, which is that the only way out of the horror and the tragedy in the Middle East is a two state solution in which Israel has absolutely solid guarantees of its security and international legitimacy, and the Palestinian state is viable enough to survive. I think my choice of words was not of the best, but the point was not to equate Israel to apartheid South Africa but to say for Israel’s own security the Palestinian state that will eventually emerge in the West bank and Gaza must be viable. It’s not for me to say what viability amounts to. It’s not for me to define what the boundaries and frontiers should be. That’s between the two parties. But it ought to be viable.”
When asked if he was concerned about the clear rise of anti-Semitism in the European mainstream, Ignatieff responded:
“Well, it’s not just in Europe. I’m very concerned about the statements by Hugo Chavez of Venezuela. I’m very concerned about Durban II, the flagrant misuse of international UN bodies to promote this entirely false equation between Zionism as a kind of racism. We’ve been here with this for thirty years. So some of the phenomena of anti-Semitism is not new in Canada, and I’m aware there are Jewish communities in Canada that feel a degree of insecurity in Canada that they’ve never felt before.
“My predecessor [Mr. Dion] committed to work with... not just the Jewish community but any community that feels its security is in danger to make sure they have the means to protect and defend their schools,.. all their establishments, because the bottom line for me as a Canadian politician is that every Canadian citizen must have a right to be who they are, say who they are, affirm their identity proudly, and go about their business in security. And the general atmosphere out in the world is of increasing hostility to the Jewish people and Canada has to make a very clear statement that that’s unacceptable, that all citizens in Canada are entitled to go about their business in peace and security.”
See the original interview in the Winnipeg Jewish Review
See more on this at Israel Behind the News
Showing posts with label UNRWA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label UNRWA. Show all posts
Sunday, May 2, 2010
Monday, March 29, 2010
Palestinian Incitement Information Provided to the US Congress
Most recently, our agencies met with staffers of members of the US Congress who serve on The Middle East Subcommittee of the US House Foreign Affairs Committee.
In addition to providing staffers with updated official Palestinian Authority maps that obliterate Israel, the following documentation was shared with congressional staff during this visit:
1.
Briefing Paper on the severe implications of US Military Assistance to
Palestinian Security Services:
http://israelbehindthenews.com/library/pdfs/Assessment_of_US_Military_Aid_to_Fatah_US.pdf
2.
THE INCITEMENT REPORT VOL. I, ISSUE II: Incitement by the Palestinian
Authority and UNRWA - January 2010 - February 2010
http://israelbehindthenews.com/library/pdfs/THE%20INCITEMENT%20REPORT%20Vol2.pdf
3.
THE INCITEMENT REPORT VOL. I, ISSUE I: Incitement by the Palestinian
Authority - November 2009 - January 2010
http://israelbehindthenews.com/library/pdfs/THE%20INCITEMENT%20REPORT%20Vol1.pdf
4.
U.S.Government Sponsored Palestinian Min. of Tourism brochure which rewrites
history/presents map which obliterates Israel
http://israelbehindthenews.com/bin/content.cgi?ID=3919&q=1
It is vital that American citizens to contact US Congressional staffers to provide US lawmakers with a perspective on the US Administration demand that Israel to establish a Palestinian state, led by the Fatah terrorist leadership that will not cease its vile incitement against the state and people of Israel
THESE EFFORTS ARE PRIVATELY SUPPORTED, in order to maintain absolute integrity and credibility.
http://israelbehindthenews.com/donations.html
In addition to providing staffers with updated official Palestinian Authority maps that obliterate Israel, the following documentation was shared with congressional staff during this visit:
1.
Briefing Paper on the severe implications of US Military Assistance to
Palestinian Security Services:
http://israelbehindthenews.com/library/pdfs/Assessment_of_US_Military_Aid_to_Fatah_US.pdf
2.
THE INCITEMENT REPORT VOL. I, ISSUE II: Incitement by the Palestinian
Authority and UNRWA - January 2010 - February 2010
http://israelbehindthenews.com/library/pdfs/THE%20INCITEMENT%20REPORT%20Vol2.pdf
3.
THE INCITEMENT REPORT VOL. I, ISSUE I: Incitement by the Palestinian
Authority - November 2009 - January 2010
http://israelbehindthenews.com/library/pdfs/THE%20INCITEMENT%20REPORT%20Vol1.pdf
4.
U.S.Government Sponsored Palestinian Min. of Tourism brochure which rewrites
history/presents map which obliterates Israel
http://israelbehindthenews.com/bin/content.cgi?ID=3919&q=1
It is vital that American citizens to contact US Congressional staffers to provide US lawmakers with a perspective on the US Administration demand that Israel to establish a Palestinian state, led by the Fatah terrorist leadership that will not cease its vile incitement against the state and people of Israel
THESE EFFORTS ARE PRIVATELY SUPPORTED, in order to maintain absolute integrity and credibility.
http://israelbehindthenews.com/donations.html
Thursday, February 4, 2010
Special Report: THE INCITEMENT REPORT, Volume 1, Issue 1: Incitement by the Palestinian Authority
THE INCITEMENT REPORT
VOL. I, ISSUE I
Incitement by the Palestinian Authority
November 2009 - January 2010
PUBLISHED BY:
THE CENTER FOR NEAR EAST POLICY RESEARCH
BEIT AGRON INTERNATIONAL PRESS CENTER
37 HILLEL STREET
JERUSALEM 94581 ISRAEL
TEL. 02 6236368
CtrForNearEastPolicyResearch@gmail.com
www.IsraelBehindTheNews.com
_____________________________________________
q Al-Ayyam (PA), November 12, 2009, reported:#
“Mahmoud Abbas…spoke in favor of armed resistance at a rally marking the fifth anniversary of Yasser Arafat's death: ‘We will continue [Arafat's] long and exhausting struggle [that was] fraught with blood, sweat, and tears. The road [we are traveling] today is anchored in a noble heritage of struggle that we built with brave hands, an enlightened mind, and a national thinking [rooted in] long experience. We combined armed struggle with political activity. Our guns were not the guns of highway robbers. They were political guns [promoting] a noble goal.’
q According to El-Shourouq (Tunisia), November 15, 2009:#
Fatah Central Committee member Nabil Sha'ath said in an interview: "Today we have the right to return to the armed struggle in order to restore our rights. For 18 years we tried to negotiate, but Israel has continued its aggression, destruction, massacres and [construction of] settlements. Today we have the right to turn back to the alternative [routes]... If negotiations fail, we will turn to armed struggle. This is our right, as I have said... International law stipulates that, when an occupying [force] takes one's land and harms one's honor, one has the right to resort to armed struggle."
q Hafez Al-Barghouthi, editor of the PA daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, wrote on November 15, 2009:#
"[We] must bring things to the point of no return: either [we obtain] a fully sovereign Palestinian state in the June 4, 1967 borders, or the flood will descend...
"The Palestinian people will not allow its tragedy to repeat itself without a reaction. If it must choose between a quick death and a slow one, it will choose the short road and set the land on fire everywhere...
"We owe nothing to anyone. On the contrary, it is others who owe us a huge debt. If the roads to peace are blocked by settlements and international conspiracies, we will turn ourselves into paragons of sacrifice... When we no longer have anything to lose, it will be [the Israelis] who will lose..."
q On December 24, 2009, three members of Al-Aksa Brigades killed Rabbi Meir Avshalom Chai in a drive-by shooting in Samaria and fled. Two days later, the IDF had tracked them to their homes, in the Nablus area . Two refused to come out of their homes and surrender; a third came out using his wife as a shield and was thought to be armed. They were all shot dead.
By December 27, the Palestinian Authority leadership and PA-controlled media had begun to refer to the three as shahids – holy martyrs:#
PA President Mahmoud Abbas sent a personal emissary – Secretary General of the President’s Bureau, Tayeb Abd Al-Rahim – to the homes of their families. He carried letters from Abbas that conveyed condolences and informed the families of his decision to name them “Shahids of the Palestinian Revolution” (PA TV)
Said Al-Rahim: "Without doubt, what the occupation authorities have carried out is a wild and barbaric act and a deliberate, malicious assassination in cold blood."
PA TV featured a poster of the three terrorists, expressing condolences from Abbas. The text on the poster read:
"With honor and admiration to those who are more honored than all of us.
"The Palestine Liberation Organization, Fatah, accompanies to their wedding [of martyrs with virgins in Paradise]:
“The Martyr, Commander, Hero: Rassan Abu Serah
”The Martyr, Commander, Hero: Ra'ed Al Aschregi
”The Martyr, Commander, Hero: Anan Sobh
The Director General of the Presidency expresses condolences to the Nablus Martyrs - in the name of the President [Abbas].”
Additionally, PA Prime Minister Salam Fayyad personally visited the homes of the families of these men and conveyed condolences.
It should be noted that there was denial of what the three men had done. There was no claim that “innocent” men had been mistakenly killed by the IDF.
Maan News Agency on December 26 referred to the activity of these men, “which led to the death of the settler in a shooting operation."
q Dalal Mughrabi was a young female terrorist who led a party of 11other terrorists down from Lebanon into northern Israel, via the Mediterranean, in 1978. They first killed wildlife photographer Gail Rubin on the beach and then hijacked a bus. When the bus was stopped at a roadblock, and a gun battle ensued, she blew it up. In all 37 civilians, including 10 children, were killed and 71 wounded. This attack, which became known as the Coastal Road Massacre, is one of the worst in Israel’s history. Mughrabi herself was killed in the gun battle.
On December 29, 2009, PA President Mahmoud Abbas honored Mughabri’s memory on the occasion of her 50th birthday. PA dignitaries and a children’s marching band were present for the ceremony.#
A very large banner was displayed at the ceremony. It had Mughrabi’s picture on it. The text read:
"Under the auspices of President Mahmoud Abbas
The Political and National Education Authority Ceremony on the anniversary of the birth of the bride of the cosmos The Shahida (Holy Martyr) Dalal Mughrabi."
Two PA TV broadcasts noted the ceremony.
Additionally, the governor of Ramallah announced the naming of Dalal Mughrabi Square.
While on December 30, 2009, PA spokesman Jamal Nazal, writing in Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, referred to her as “the heroine of Palestine’s heroines.”
q Wafa Idris, the first female Palestinian suicide bomber, detonated a bomb in the center of Jerusalem in January 2002 that killed one and injured over 100.
During the first week of January 2010, she was honored as a Shahida (Holy Martyr) in a Fatah promotional video broadcast on PA TV.#
q On January 11, 2010, the following appeared in the PA paper Al-Ayyam:#
Headline: "The occupation accuses the Palestinian leadership of incitement because of Dalal Mughrabi Square -Minister of Culture: Honoring the Shahids is the least we can do, and resistance to the occupation is a legitimate right"
"The occupation government [the Israeli government] has reiterated its familiar tune of accusing the [Palestinian] National Authority of incitement within Palestinian culture. The Israeli Prime Minister... claims that the Palestinian leadership is encouraging terror in its culture.
”Netanyahu claims that the proof, which he presented to the members of his government, is the naming of a square in the region of Ramallah and El-Bireh after the Shahida (Martyr) Dalal Mughrabi. ...
”Netanyahu is reported as saying: 'Anyone who supports naming [the square] after Dalal Mughrabi, who was responsible for the murder of dozens of Israelis, is encouraging terror and pushing peace further off...'
”Netanyahu was referring to the operation of self-sacrifice led by Mughrabi in 1978, the ‘Coast Operation’ within Israel, which led to the deaths of 36 Israelis. Netanyahu accused the [Palestinian] National Authority of incitement in schools and in cultural activities in general.
”Minister of Culture Siham Barghouti said, in response to the Israeli claims, that 'It is our right to preserve and maintain [the memory] of our fighters who sacrificed their lives for our sake and for the sake of the Palestinian cause.'
”She added: 'Honoring them in this way [by naming public places after them] is the least we can give them, and this is our right, especially since we believe that resistance, in the shadow of the ongoing occupation, is a legitimate right, and we are proud and we pride ourselves on our heritage of struggle, which has been realized by our Shahids and fighters throughout history.'
q Al-Quds, Jerusalem, January 21, 2010, reported:#
“The concluding statement of Fatah's Revolutionary Council meeting said that there was a need to step up the popular resistance and to expand it to all Palestinian areas harmed by the settlements and by the separation fence.”
q On Friday, January 29, 2010, a sermon was broadcast on PA-controlled TV that said in part:
“The Jews, the enemies of Allah and of His Messenger, the enemies of Allah and of His Messenger! Enemies of humanity in general, and of Palestinians in particular - they wage war against us using all kinds of crimes, and as you see - even the mosques are not spared their racism...
"Oh Muslims! The Jews are the Jews. The Jews are the Jews. Even if donkeys would cease to bray, dogs cease to bark, wolves cease to howl and snakes to bite, the Jews would not cease to harbor hatred towards Muslims. The Prophet said that if two Jews would be alone with a Muslim, they would think only of killing him. Oh Muslims! This land will be liberated, these holy places and these mosques will be liberated, only by means of a return to the Koran and when all Muslims will be willing to be Jihad Fighters for the sake of Allah and for the sake of supporting Palestine, the Palestinian people, the Palestinian land, and the holy places in Palestine. The Prophet says: 'You shall fight the Jews and kill them…’”#
Incitement by UNRWA
January 2010
Karen AbuZayd has retired as Commissioner-General of UNRWA and has been succeeded by Filippo Grandi, who had been AbuZayd’s lieutenant.
Providing insight into the issue of UNRWA incitement we have Mr. Grandi’s inaugural letter to the UNRWA staff, dated January 26, 2010. It appeared on the UNRWA website.#
Mr. Grandi’s letter includes the following:
“I need not tell you how difficult this period is for the Palestinian people. We are all painfully aware of the counterproductive policies collectively punishing the people of the Gaza Strip; conscious decisions that have caused untold suffering and a dramatic deterioration in the lives of the population, in contravention of international law. One of my key priorities will be to continue to advocate strongly on behalf of the 1.5 million Gazans, and to do so not only until the end of the blockade and the occupation, but also until a just and lasting solution to the plight of the refugees is achieved.
“Despite some recent economic improvements for some, the lives of most Palestinians in the West Bank continue to be made almost impossible by obstacles, walls, movement limitations and other restrictions, and by the expanding threat of settler violence. For those residing in East Jerusalem, as I do, it is cause for daily anguish to watch the situation deteriorate rapidly under our very eyes, especially the ruthless evictions of Palestinians from their homes. UNRWA will continue to stand with the affected families and all of those in need of our protection and will tirelessly lend our voice to their calls for justice.”
There are several seriously tendentious statements – and, in fact, outright misrep resenta tions – included here. But this material is problematic for reasons beyond this: UNRWA’S mandate is purely humanitarian. Grandi is assuming a political stance that is absolutely beyond his purview. How does UNRWA come to “stand with affected families” who have been evicted in eastern Jerusalem?
View the full document at Israel Behind the News
VOL. I, ISSUE I
Incitement by the Palestinian Authority
November 2009 - January 2010
THE CENTER FOR NEAR EAST POLICY RESEARCH
BEIT AGRON INTERNATIONAL PRESS CENTER
37 HILLEL STREET
JERUSALEM 94581 ISRAEL
TEL. 02 6236368
CtrForNearEastPolicyResearch@gmail.com
www.IsraelBehindTheNews.com
_____________________________________________
q Al-Ayyam (PA), November 12, 2009, reported:#
“Mahmoud Abbas…spoke in favor of armed resistance at a rally marking the fifth anniversary of Yasser Arafat's death: ‘We will continue [Arafat's] long and exhausting struggle [that was] fraught with blood, sweat, and tears. The road [we are traveling] today is anchored in a noble heritage of struggle that we built with brave hands, an enlightened mind, and a national thinking [rooted in] long experience. We combined armed struggle with political activity. Our guns were not the guns of highway robbers. They were political guns [promoting] a noble goal.’
q According to El-Shourouq (Tunisia), November 15, 2009:#
Fatah Central Committee member Nabil Sha'ath said in an interview: "Today we have the right to return to the armed struggle in order to restore our rights. For 18 years we tried to negotiate, but Israel has continued its aggression, destruction, massacres and [construction of] settlements. Today we have the right to turn back to the alternative [routes]... If negotiations fail, we will turn to armed struggle. This is our right, as I have said... International law stipulates that, when an occupying [force] takes one's land and harms one's honor, one has the right to resort to armed struggle."
q Hafez Al-Barghouthi, editor of the PA daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, wrote on November 15, 2009:#
"[We] must bring things to the point of no return: either [we obtain] a fully sovereign Palestinian state in the June 4, 1967 borders, or the flood will descend...
"The Palestinian people will not allow its tragedy to repeat itself without a reaction. If it must choose between a quick death and a slow one, it will choose the short road and set the land on fire everywhere...
"We owe nothing to anyone. On the contrary, it is others who owe us a huge debt. If the roads to peace are blocked by settlements and international conspiracies, we will turn ourselves into paragons of sacrifice... When we no longer have anything to lose, it will be [the Israelis] who will lose..."
q On December 24, 2009, three members of Al-Aksa Brigades killed Rabbi Meir Avshalom Chai in a drive-by shooting in Samaria and fled. Two days later, the IDF had tracked them to their homes, in the Nablus area . Two refused to come out of their homes and surrender; a third came out using his wife as a shield and was thought to be armed. They were all shot dead.
By December 27, the Palestinian Authority leadership and PA-controlled media had begun to refer to the three as shahids – holy martyrs:#
PA President Mahmoud Abbas sent a personal emissary – Secretary General of the President’s Bureau, Tayeb Abd Al-Rahim – to the homes of their families. He carried letters from Abbas that conveyed condolences and informed the families of his decision to name them “Shahids of the Palestinian Revolution” (PA TV)
Said Al-Rahim: "Without doubt, what the occupation authorities have carried out is a wild and barbaric act and a deliberate, malicious assassination in cold blood."
PA TV featured a poster of the three terrorists, expressing condolences from Abbas. The text on the poster read:
"With honor and admiration to those who are more honored than all of us.
"The Palestine Liberation Organization, Fatah, accompanies to their wedding [of martyrs with virgins in Paradise]:
“The Martyr, Commander, Hero: Rassan Abu Serah
”The Martyr, Commander, Hero: Ra'ed Al Aschregi
”The Martyr, Commander, Hero: Anan Sobh
The Director General of the Presidency expresses condolences to the Nablus Martyrs - in the name of the President [Abbas].”
Additionally, PA Prime Minister Salam Fayyad personally visited the homes of the families of these men and conveyed condolences.
It should be noted that there was denial of what the three men had done. There was no claim that “innocent” men had been mistakenly killed by the IDF.
Maan News Agency on December 26 referred to the activity of these men, “which led to the death of the settler in a shooting operation."
q Dalal Mughrabi was a young female terrorist who led a party of 11other terrorists down from Lebanon into northern Israel, via the Mediterranean, in 1978. They first killed wildlife photographer Gail Rubin on the beach and then hijacked a bus. When the bus was stopped at a roadblock, and a gun battle ensued, she blew it up. In all 37 civilians, including 10 children, were killed and 71 wounded. This attack, which became known as the Coastal Road Massacre, is one of the worst in Israel’s history. Mughrabi herself was killed in the gun battle.
On December 29, 2009, PA President Mahmoud Abbas honored Mughabri’s memory on the occasion of her 50th birthday. PA dignitaries and a children’s marching band were present for the ceremony.#
A very large banner was displayed at the ceremony. It had Mughrabi’s picture on it. The text read:
"Under the auspices of President Mahmoud Abbas
The Political and National Education Authority Ceremony on the anniversary of the birth of the bride of the cosmos The Shahida (Holy Martyr) Dalal Mughrabi."
Two PA TV broadcasts noted the ceremony.
Additionally, the governor of Ramallah announced the naming of Dalal Mughrabi Square.
While on December 30, 2009, PA spokesman Jamal Nazal, writing in Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, referred to her as “the heroine of Palestine’s heroines.”
q Wafa Idris, the first female Palestinian suicide bomber, detonated a bomb in the center of Jerusalem in January 2002 that killed one and injured over 100.
During the first week of January 2010, she was honored as a Shahida (Holy Martyr) in a Fatah promotional video broadcast on PA TV.#
q On January 11, 2010, the following appeared in the PA paper Al-Ayyam:#
Headline: "The occupation accuses the Palestinian leadership of incitement because of Dalal Mughrabi Square -Minister of Culture: Honoring the Shahids is the least we can do, and resistance to the occupation is a legitimate right"
"The occupation government [the Israeli government] has reiterated its familiar tune of accusing the [Palestinian] National Authority of incitement within Palestinian culture. The Israeli Prime Minister... claims that the Palestinian leadership is encouraging terror in its culture.
”Netanyahu claims that the proof, which he presented to the members of his government, is the naming of a square in the region of Ramallah and El-Bireh after the Shahida (Martyr) Dalal Mughrabi. ...
”Netanyahu is reported as saying: 'Anyone who supports naming [the square] after Dalal Mughrabi, who was responsible for the murder of dozens of Israelis, is encouraging terror and pushing peace further off...'
”Netanyahu was referring to the operation of self-sacrifice led by Mughrabi in 1978, the ‘Coast Operation’ within Israel, which led to the deaths of 36 Israelis. Netanyahu accused the [Palestinian] National Authority of incitement in schools and in cultural activities in general.
”Minister of Culture Siham Barghouti said, in response to the Israeli claims, that 'It is our right to preserve and maintain [the memory] of our fighters who sacrificed their lives for our sake and for the sake of the Palestinian cause.'
”She added: 'Honoring them in this way [by naming public places after them] is the least we can give them, and this is our right, especially since we believe that resistance, in the shadow of the ongoing occupation, is a legitimate right, and we are proud and we pride ourselves on our heritage of struggle, which has been realized by our Shahids and fighters throughout history.'
q Al-Quds, Jerusalem, January 21, 2010, reported:#
“The concluding statement of Fatah's Revolutionary Council meeting said that there was a need to step up the popular resistance and to expand it to all Palestinian areas harmed by the settlements and by the separation fence.”
q On Friday, January 29, 2010, a sermon was broadcast on PA-controlled TV that said in part:
“The Jews, the enemies of Allah and of His Messenger, the enemies of Allah and of His Messenger! Enemies of humanity in general, and of Palestinians in particular - they wage war against us using all kinds of crimes, and as you see - even the mosques are not spared their racism...
"Oh Muslims! The Jews are the Jews. The Jews are the Jews. Even if donkeys would cease to bray, dogs cease to bark, wolves cease to howl and snakes to bite, the Jews would not cease to harbor hatred towards Muslims. The Prophet said that if two Jews would be alone with a Muslim, they would think only of killing him. Oh Muslims! This land will be liberated, these holy places and these mosques will be liberated, only by means of a return to the Koran and when all Muslims will be willing to be Jihad Fighters for the sake of Allah and for the sake of supporting Palestine, the Palestinian people, the Palestinian land, and the holy places in Palestine. The Prophet says: 'You shall fight the Jews and kill them…’”#
Incitement by UNRWA
January 2010
Karen AbuZayd has retired as Commissioner-General of UNRWA and has been succeeded by Filippo Grandi, who had been AbuZayd’s lieutenant.
Providing insight into the issue of UNRWA incitement we have Mr. Grandi’s inaugural letter to the UNRWA staff, dated January 26, 2010. It appeared on the UNRWA website.#
Mr. Grandi’s letter includes the following:
“I need not tell you how difficult this period is for the Palestinian people. We are all painfully aware of the counterproductive policies collectively punishing the people of the Gaza Strip; conscious decisions that have caused untold suffering and a dramatic deterioration in the lives of the population, in contravention of international law. One of my key priorities will be to continue to advocate strongly on behalf of the 1.5 million Gazans, and to do so not only until the end of the blockade and the occupation, but also until a just and lasting solution to the plight of the refugees is achieved.
“Despite some recent economic improvements for some, the lives of most Palestinians in the West Bank continue to be made almost impossible by obstacles, walls, movement limitations and other restrictions, and by the expanding threat of settler violence. For those residing in East Jerusalem, as I do, it is cause for daily anguish to watch the situation deteriorate rapidly under our very eyes, especially the ruthless evictions of Palestinians from their homes. UNRWA will continue to stand with the affected families and all of those in need of our protection and will tirelessly lend our voice to their calls for justice.”
There are several seriously tendentious statements – and, in fact, outright misrep resenta tions – included here. But this material is problematic for reasons beyond this: UNRWA’S mandate is purely humanitarian. Grandi is assuming a political stance that is absolutely beyond his purview. How does UNRWA come to “stand with affected families” who have been evicted in eastern Jerusalem?
View the full document at Israel Behind the News
Sunday, January 17, 2010
Al QAIDA TARGETS UNRWA REFUGEE CAMPS
As published in the Winnipeg Jewish Report
by David Bedein
Jerusalem, Israel; A report, issued by the Washington-based Jamestown Foundation, shows that Al Qaida and its allies are bolstering efforts to infiltrate Palestinian refugee camps in the Gaza Strip, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria run by The United Nations Relief and Works Agency,[UNRWA].
UNWRA operates 59 refugee camps for Palestinian Arab 1948 refugees and their descendents
UNRWA is supported by direct contributions from 38 nations around the world under the framework of the the Refugee Working Group, [RWG] chaired by Canada.
Canada provides 11% of the UNRWA budget. The United States provides 31% of the UNRWA budget.
What may cause some concern among donor nations is that Al Qaida appears to have been targeting UNRWA Palestinian refugee camps for indoctrination and recruitment.
That concern stems from strict laws in the US, Canada and other donor nations which forbid financial donations to refugee camps that have become terror bases.
The Jamestown Foundation report documents how the Al Qaida-aligned Fatah Al Islam was recruiting cells in such UNRWA Lebanese camps as Bidawi and Burj Al Shamali.
"If training and organization become available to these young people they have the potential to become a threat to not only the countries in which they reside, but to the region as a whole," the report said.
The report documents that increasing Al Qaida presence has threatened the Western and United Nations presence in Arab states. Jamestown said Palestinians were undergoing radicalization and adopting the Al Qaida doctrine of jihad, or holy war.
In 2009, Al Qaida chief Osama Bin Laden addressed the Palestinians at least three times and appealed for their participation in his Islamist war against the West. Bin Laden has urged Palestinians to fight the United States in Iraq before moving on to Israel.
"They should hasten to take their positions among the ranks of the holy warriors in Iraq, and through support and trust in Allah," Bin Laden said in a recent message.
"The third phase is the emergence of the Salafi-Jihadi ideology as the primary ideology for Palestinian youth in the camps," the report said. "This phase is occurring now, as individuals and small groups are increasingly turning to Salafist militancy."
The biggest target of Al Qaida has been the UNRWA Palestinian refugee camp of Ein Hilwe. Ein Hilwe, the largest of the UNRWA Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon, was said to harbor several Al Qaida figures, including Ahmed Abdul Karim Al Saadi, Haitham Abdul Karim Al Saadi and Saleh Qiblawi. Haitham was identified as a deputy of the late Al Qaida network chief in Iraq, Abu Mussib Al Zarqawi.
In Syria, Palestinian followers of Al Qaida clashed with Syrian security forces in October 2008. The unrest was said to have taken place in Syria's largest UNRWA refugee camp, Yarmouk.
"When Syria became a transit point for Syrian and Arab fighters aiming to take up jihad against Americans between 2003 and 2007, there were several cases of young fighters passing through Yarmouk camp," the report said.
The Jamestown Foundation also reported an Al Qaida presence in Jordan's UNRWA Baqaa refugee camp. The UNRWA camp in Irbid, located near the Syrian border, was also deemed an Al Qaida stronghold.
"The ties between the Salafi-Jihadis across the Levant region show that some young men in the UNRWA refugee camps are inspired and influenced by the late Abu Mussib Al Zarqawi's ambition of creating a Levantine Salafi-Jihadi movement," the report said.
by David Bedein
Jerusalem, Israel; A report, issued by the Washington-based Jamestown Foundation, shows that Al Qaida and its allies are bolstering efforts to infiltrate Palestinian refugee camps in the Gaza Strip, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria run by The United Nations Relief and Works Agency,[UNRWA].
UNWRA operates 59 refugee camps for Palestinian Arab 1948 refugees and their descendents
UNRWA is supported by direct contributions from 38 nations around the world under the framework of the the Refugee Working Group, [RWG] chaired by Canada.
Canada provides 11% of the UNRWA budget. The United States provides 31% of the UNRWA budget.
What may cause some concern among donor nations is that Al Qaida appears to have been targeting UNRWA Palestinian refugee camps for indoctrination and recruitment.
That concern stems from strict laws in the US, Canada and other donor nations which forbid financial donations to refugee camps that have become terror bases.
The Jamestown Foundation report documents how the Al Qaida-aligned Fatah Al Islam was recruiting cells in such UNRWA Lebanese camps as Bidawi and Burj Al Shamali.
"If training and organization become available to these young people they have the potential to become a threat to not only the countries in which they reside, but to the region as a whole," the report said.
The report documents that increasing Al Qaida presence has threatened the Western and United Nations presence in Arab states. Jamestown said Palestinians were undergoing radicalization and adopting the Al Qaida doctrine of jihad, or holy war.
In 2009, Al Qaida chief Osama Bin Laden addressed the Palestinians at least three times and appealed for their participation in his Islamist war against the West. Bin Laden has urged Palestinians to fight the United States in Iraq before moving on to Israel.
"They should hasten to take their positions among the ranks of the holy warriors in Iraq, and through support and trust in Allah," Bin Laden said in a recent message.
"The third phase is the emergence of the Salafi-Jihadi ideology as the primary ideology for Palestinian youth in the camps," the report said. "This phase is occurring now, as individuals and small groups are increasingly turning to Salafist militancy."
The biggest target of Al Qaida has been the UNRWA Palestinian refugee camp of Ein Hilwe. Ein Hilwe, the largest of the UNRWA Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon, was said to harbor several Al Qaida figures, including Ahmed Abdul Karim Al Saadi, Haitham Abdul Karim Al Saadi and Saleh Qiblawi. Haitham was identified as a deputy of the late Al Qaida network chief in Iraq, Abu Mussib Al Zarqawi.
In Syria, Palestinian followers of Al Qaida clashed with Syrian security forces in October 2008. The unrest was said to have taken place in Syria's largest UNRWA refugee camp, Yarmouk.
"When Syria became a transit point for Syrian and Arab fighters aiming to take up jihad against Americans between 2003 and 2007, there were several cases of young fighters passing through Yarmouk camp," the report said.
The Jamestown Foundation also reported an Al Qaida presence in Jordan's UNRWA Baqaa refugee camp. The UNRWA camp in Irbid, located near the Syrian border, was also deemed an Al Qaida stronghold.
"The ties between the Salafi-Jihadis across the Levant region show that some young men in the UNRWA refugee camps are inspired and influenced by the late Abu Mussib Al Zarqawi's ambition of creating a Levantine Salafi-Jihadi movement," the report said.
CANADA ELECTS TO DEFUND UNRWA AND APPLY FUNDS TO PA JUSTICE SYSTEM
CANADA ELECTS TO DEFUND UNRWA AND APPLY FUNDS TO PA JUSTICE SYSTEM
By Rhonda Spivak
Canada advised the Palestinian Authority on January 9th, that it will be re-directing funds given to "general operatiing expenses" of the PA Treasury towards specific projects in the area of justice and policing, according to Minister Victor Toews, President of Canada's Treasury Board.
Canadian aid will be redirected "to specific projects in the Palestinian Authority that will ensure accountability and foster democracy in the PA," he said.
Toews said that on January 9, he met with PA Minister of Planning and Administrative Development Ali al-Jarbawi in Ramallah, and funding to UNWRA was discussed. UNWRA is the UN agency that runs Palestinian refugee camps in the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria. Until now, Canada has provided UNWRA with 11 percent of its budget, $15 million (Canadian) annually. Canada's funding of UNWRA, while still continuing to be $15 million annually has been specifically earmarked for "food security."
Toews also met with PA Justice Minister Ali Khashan and Attorney-General Ahmed al-Mughani.
He said that in the past, Canada aid earmarked for UNWRA "went into a general operating fund" in the PA Treasury and although Jarbawi had asked that this situation continue, the practice made it "difficult" for Canada to monitor how the funds were being used. Toews said Jarbawi had asked that the money be given "directly' to the PA Treasury but Toews refused the request.
Vic Toews meeting with Palestinian
officials in Ramallah
When asked whether Canada had concerns that UNWRA funds were being administered by Hamas operatives, Toews responded, "Canada has made a $300m. commitment over five years to the Palestinian Authority, but we want to put that money only into programs that are consistent with Canadian values. We are going to focus directing our funds on institution-building in the PA, such as building a proper functioning justice system. We need to insure that [the PA has] less wide discretion and the funds are being directed to specific projects."
Toews added, "I told him [Jarbawi] that our [Canada's] paramount concern is the security of Israel."
Toews, who is a former director of the Constitutional Law Branch at Manitoba's Department of Justice, said, "We are going to allocate money to training Palestinian prosecutors, and towards the Office of the Attorney-General, and the Public Prosecution Office. If we train people properly we will have the emergence of proper institutions necessary for a state."
"It is obviously more difficult to monitor the use of money sent into general funds than specific projects."
"Overall, Canada is not reducing the amount of money given to the PA, but it is now being redirected in accordance with Canadian values," he said.
Toews added, "Canada has pledged $20m. towards training prosecutors, judges and police and building up the Palestinian judicial sector by building courthouses in Ramallah, Hebron and Tulkarm. But more important than building the courthouses is training the people... A fair and effective system of criminal justice with an efficient and independent Prosecutions Office and Attorney-General's Office is integral to the process, and to securing long-term peace and stability in the Middle East."
Toews indicated that he met with PA officials on behalf of Canada's minister of international development, Beverley Oda, who is in charge of the Canadian International Development Agency.
Regarding the PA's police force that is being trained by US Lt.-Gen. Keith Dayton in Jordan, Toews said, "Canada has the largest contingency under Gen. Dayton. We have 18 officers, and the United States only has 10."
After noting that he had spoken to a Royal Canadian Mounted Police officer from Halifax, Nova Scotia, and others, Toews said, "A full third of Palestinian Authority police have no training whatsoever."
Toews, who also visited Jordan during his trip, said he met with Jordanian Prime Minister Samir Rifai, the kingdom's finance and planning ministers as well as the head of its Atomic Energy Commission, "because Jordan is looking to produce nuclear energy for desalination."
Vic Toews meeting with US Lt.-Gen.
Keith Dayton
"They don't have water or energy that other Arab states have. We had very good discussions. Our Canadian technology, CANDU reactors are not conducive to the development of weapons grade uranium. I met with an expert... at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem who assured me that this was the case. I wanted to verify it myself."
Toews was in Israel on behalf of the Canadian government to participate in the second annual Manitoba-Israel Water Symposium hosted by the Jewish National Fund-Keren Kayemet LeYisrael.
Rhonda Spivak, an attorney and a writer, is a member of the Canadian and Israel Bar Associations, now editing the Winnipeg Jewish Report at http://winnipegjewishreport.com/
By Rhonda Spivak
Canada advised the Palestinian Authority on January 9th, that it will be re-directing funds given to "general operatiing expenses" of the PA Treasury towards specific projects in the area of justice and policing, according to Minister Victor Toews, President of Canada's Treasury Board.
Canadian aid will be redirected "to specific projects in the Palestinian Authority that will ensure accountability and foster democracy in the PA," he said.
Toews said that on January 9, he met with PA Minister of Planning and Administrative Development Ali al-Jarbawi in Ramallah, and funding to UNWRA was discussed. UNWRA is the UN agency that runs Palestinian refugee camps in the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria. Until now, Canada has provided UNWRA with 11 percent of its budget, $15 million (Canadian) annually. Canada's funding of UNWRA, while still continuing to be $15 million annually has been specifically earmarked for "food security."
Toews also met with PA Justice Minister Ali Khashan and Attorney-General Ahmed al-Mughani.
He said that in the past, Canada aid earmarked for UNWRA "went into a general operating fund" in the PA Treasury and although Jarbawi had asked that this situation continue, the practice made it "difficult" for Canada to monitor how the funds were being used. Toews said Jarbawi had asked that the money be given "directly' to the PA Treasury but Toews refused the request.
Vic Toews meeting with Palestinian
officials in Ramallah
When asked whether Canada had concerns that UNWRA funds were being administered by Hamas operatives, Toews responded, "Canada has made a $300m. commitment over five years to the Palestinian Authority, but we want to put that money only into programs that are consistent with Canadian values. We are going to focus directing our funds on institution-building in the PA, such as building a proper functioning justice system. We need to insure that [the PA has] less wide discretion and the funds are being directed to specific projects."
Toews added, "I told him [Jarbawi] that our [Canada's] paramount concern is the security of Israel."
Toews, who is a former director of the Constitutional Law Branch at Manitoba's Department of Justice, said, "We are going to allocate money to training Palestinian prosecutors, and towards the Office of the Attorney-General, and the Public Prosecution Office. If we train people properly we will have the emergence of proper institutions necessary for a state."
"It is obviously more difficult to monitor the use of money sent into general funds than specific projects."
"Overall, Canada is not reducing the amount of money given to the PA, but it is now being redirected in accordance with Canadian values," he said.
Toews added, "Canada has pledged $20m. towards training prosecutors, judges and police and building up the Palestinian judicial sector by building courthouses in Ramallah, Hebron and Tulkarm. But more important than building the courthouses is training the people... A fair and effective system of criminal justice with an efficient and independent Prosecutions Office and Attorney-General's Office is integral to the process, and to securing long-term peace and stability in the Middle East."
Toews indicated that he met with PA officials on behalf of Canada's minister of international development, Beverley Oda, who is in charge of the Canadian International Development Agency.
Regarding the PA's police force that is being trained by US Lt.-Gen. Keith Dayton in Jordan, Toews said, "Canada has the largest contingency under Gen. Dayton. We have 18 officers, and the United States only has 10."
After noting that he had spoken to a Royal Canadian Mounted Police officer from Halifax, Nova Scotia, and others, Toews said, "A full third of Palestinian Authority police have no training whatsoever."
Toews, who also visited Jordan during his trip, said he met with Jordanian Prime Minister Samir Rifai, the kingdom's finance and planning ministers as well as the head of its Atomic Energy Commission, "because Jordan is looking to produce nuclear energy for desalination."
Vic Toews meeting with US Lt.-Gen.
Keith Dayton
"They don't have water or energy that other Arab states have. We had very good discussions. Our Canadian technology, CANDU reactors are not conducive to the development of weapons grade uranium. I met with an expert... at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem who assured me that this was the case. I wanted to verify it myself."
Toews was in Israel on behalf of the Canadian government to participate in the second annual Manitoba-Israel Water Symposium hosted by the Jewish National Fund-Keren Kayemet LeYisrael.
Rhonda Spivak, an attorney and a writer, is a member of the Canadian and Israel Bar Associations, now editing the Winnipeg Jewish Report at http://winnipegjewishreport.com/
Sunday, December 20, 2009
The Philadelphia Bulletin: Reconsidering the Credibility of DAVID MAKOVSKY as a Commentator on the Current Middle East Situation.
Reconsidering the Credibility of DAVID MAKOVSKY as a Commentator on the Current Middle East Situation.
After reading DAVID MAKOVSKY AT GA: OPTIMISTIC THAT ABBAS IS A REAL PARTNER in the Winnipeg Jewish Bulletin, (http://tinyurl.com/y9h2s2n) , here are some thoughts.
David Makovsky wants to live up to his job description as the “director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy’s project on the Middle East peace process”, and therefore promotes the notion that a middle east peace process still exists, when he states that “he is “hopeful” that real opportunities for peace between the Palestinian Authority and Israel exist today.
Makovsky chooses to ignore the unambiguous declaration of war on Israel to that the Fatah, which is the controlling organization in the Palestinian Authority, declared at its conference in August and at the meeting of the Fatah’s central committee Palestinian at its conference last week in Ramallah.
Instead, Makovsky declares that PA President Mahmoud Abbas is not a rejectionist, in the speech that he gave at the General Assembly of Jewish Federations of North America that took place in Washington, D.C., Nov. 8-10. On what basis did Makovsky draw such a conclusion? In Makovsky’s words, because, “Abbas has faced death threats from extremists for advocating a two-state solution.” Why does Makovsky not relate to the widespread corruption that continues to plague the Palestinian Authority and the widely publicized graft that Abbas’s own sons have benefited from in that context? Why does Makovsky not mention a word about the whereabouts of the billions of dollars from his mentor’s Arafat’s slush accounts that continue to help Abbas’s colleagues live high on the hog? Why does Makovsky not make any mention of the e thousands of Palestinians whom the PA continues to confine to UNRWA camps, under the specious premise and promise of the right of return to homes and villages that no longer exist from 1948?
Makovsky’s standing as a serious academic comes into question when he declares that he relies on the polling data of Khalil Shikaki of the Palestinian Centre for Policy and Survey Research, who declares that “49 percent of Palestinians recognize Israel as a Jewish state”.
In a totalitarian system, what is more important - what a state-run pollster concludes or the statements of all Palestinian Authority spokespeople who categorically declare that they will never recognize Israel as a Jewish state, beginning with Abbas’s countless statements in this regard.
A most unprofessional statement from Makovsky at the GA was when he praised the removal of checkpoints and barricades, saying that this would solve the problem that “people can’t get from Ramallah to Nablus”, in Makovsky’s words.
Makovsky’s praise of the “security co-operation between Israel and the PA” is devoid of any warning that this may have disastrous consequences, since the Fatah-dominated PA repeats, time and again, that it is not abandoning the military option against Israel.
Yet the unkindest cut of all in Makovsky’s myopic promotion of the Fatah as a peace partner occurred in October 2003, when he hosted four leaders of the Fatah Tanzim to Washington, D.C., to advance their cause with the U.S. Congress and with various Jewish organizations.
Yet Makovsky hosted the Tanzim at a time when the Tanzim were helping to orchestrate a murder campaign that claimed the lives of hundreds of people in Israel at the time.
It would be instructive to know if Makovsky, in his frequent visits to Israel, has taken the time to visit the victims of those whom he promotes as a peace partner.
Makovsky lived in Israel for many years. However, Makosvky chose to leave Israel and to raise his children in the comfortable suburb of Silver Spring, Md.
Distance makes the heart grow less sensitive to those who suffer at the hands of a terrorist organization. Anyway, that would not fit the script that Makovsky so optimistically lays out, which is that Israel has a peace partner to deal with.
After reading DAVID MAKOVSKY AT GA: OPTIMISTIC THAT ABBAS IS A REAL PARTNER in the Winnipeg Jewish Bulletin, (http://tinyurl.com/y9h2s2n) , here are some thoughts.
David Makovsky wants to live up to his job description as the “director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy’s project on the Middle East peace process”, and therefore promotes the notion that a middle east peace process still exists, when he states that “he is “hopeful” that real opportunities for peace between the Palestinian Authority and Israel exist today.
Makovsky chooses to ignore the unambiguous declaration of war on Israel to that the Fatah, which is the controlling organization in the Palestinian Authority, declared at its conference in August and at the meeting of the Fatah’s central committee Palestinian at its conference last week in Ramallah.
Instead, Makovsky declares that PA President Mahmoud Abbas is not a rejectionist, in the speech that he gave at the General Assembly of Jewish Federations of North America that took place in Washington, D.C., Nov. 8-10. On what basis did Makovsky draw such a conclusion? In Makovsky’s words, because, “Abbas has faced death threats from extremists for advocating a two-state solution.” Why does Makovsky not relate to the widespread corruption that continues to plague the Palestinian Authority and the widely publicized graft that Abbas’s own sons have benefited from in that context? Why does Makovsky not mention a word about the whereabouts of the billions of dollars from his mentor’s Arafat’s slush accounts that continue to help Abbas’s colleagues live high on the hog? Why does Makovsky not make any mention of the e thousands of Palestinians whom the PA continues to confine to UNRWA camps, under the specious premise and promise of the right of return to homes and villages that no longer exist from 1948?
Makovsky’s standing as a serious academic comes into question when he declares that he relies on the polling data of Khalil Shikaki of the Palestinian Centre for Policy and Survey Research, who declares that “49 percent of Palestinians recognize Israel as a Jewish state”.
In a totalitarian system, what is more important - what a state-run pollster concludes or the statements of all Palestinian Authority spokespeople who categorically declare that they will never recognize Israel as a Jewish state, beginning with Abbas’s countless statements in this regard.
A most unprofessional statement from Makovsky at the GA was when he praised the removal of checkpoints and barricades, saying that this would solve the problem that “people can’t get from Ramallah to Nablus”, in Makovsky’s words.
Makovsky’s praise of the “security co-operation between Israel and the PA” is devoid of any warning that this may have disastrous consequences, since the Fatah-dominated PA repeats, time and again, that it is not abandoning the military option against Israel.
Yet the unkindest cut of all in Makovsky’s myopic promotion of the Fatah as a peace partner occurred in October 2003, when he hosted four leaders of the Fatah Tanzim to Washington, D.C., to advance their cause with the U.S. Congress and with various Jewish organizations.
Yet Makovsky hosted the Tanzim at a time when the Tanzim were helping to orchestrate a murder campaign that claimed the lives of hundreds of people in Israel at the time.
It would be instructive to know if Makovsky, in his frequent visits to Israel, has taken the time to visit the victims of those whom he promotes as a peace partner.
Makovsky lived in Israel for many years. However, Makosvky chose to leave Israel and to raise his children in the comfortable suburb of Silver Spring, Md.
Distance makes the heart grow less sensitive to those who suffer at the hands of a terrorist organization. Anyway, that would not fit the script that Makovsky so optimistically lays out, which is that Israel has a peace partner to deal with.
Friday, December 11, 2009
CANADA CAN JUMP START THE PEACE PROCESS: CAN ASSERT ITS LEADERSHIP IN THE REFUGEE WORKING GROUP
CANADA CAN JUMP START THE PEACE PROCESS: CAN ASSERT ITS LEADERSHIP IN THE REFUGEE WORKING GROUP
by David Bedein
http://tinyurl.com/yz55vqc
Most recently, Israeli President Shimon Peres remarked to the European Union’s Middle East Envoy Miguel Moratinos, that the time has come to revive the dormant Refugee Working Group, comprised of 38 nations, chaired by Canada since the Madrid Middle East peace talks that were held in October, 1991. Indeed, despite the fact that Palestinian refugees and their descendents who dwell in or near United Nations refugee camps represent more than half of the Palestinian population, their fate has been overlooked by Middle East peace negotiations
Adopting the UNHCR model
The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees in the Near East, UNRWA, which has serviced the Palestinian refugees for more than for half a century, has countenanced a situation in which the agency operates as an anomaly: UNRWA, founded in 1949 to provide relief to the Arabs who fled from Israel in the course of the war of 1948-49, to keep them in refugee camps under the in principle promise of the “right of return” to the villages which no longer exist.
Less than one year later the UN High Commission for Refugees, UNCHR, was founded with the express purpose of protecting the rights of refugees to be rehabilitated in a permanent state of resettlement.
In real terms, this meant that UNRWA was permitted to continue to operate under its own terms with its own definition and not bound by the UNHCR Convention. UNRWA was, and remains, the only international agency devoted to keeping one specific group of refugees in a permanent state of refugee status. Why? The answer can be found on the UNHCR website, “The State of the World’s Refugees, Part 1, The Early Years puts the matter baldly: “Arab States... feared that the non-political character of the work envisioned for the nascent UNHCR was not compatible with the highly politicized nature of the Palestinian question.”
In other words, UNHCR operates on the principle that they help the refugees under their jurisdiction to find solutions so that they might get on with their lives with permanency, while UNWRA operates under the premise that the Palestinian Arab refugees are still refugees even if they acquire a new citizenship,[as many have in Jordan] until such time as they will return to their homes in Israel, from which they or their grandparents and great-great parents fled.
Canada, in the leadership role that it plays in the RWG, could ask the 38 nations that contribute to UNRWA to ask that UNRWA operate according to the principles of UNHCR - to protect the right of refugees to be resettled instead of implementing a policy that perpetuates their suffering, while fostering the illusion of the “right of return”
For a generation, any attempts to provide the refugees with permanent residence elsewhere are blocked by the UN
Indeed, in December 1985, when Israel attempted to move refugees into 1,300 permanent houses built for them near Nablus, a UN resolution was passed demanding that Israel not move refugees, because this would violate their “right of return”.
The time has come for Canada to apply UNHCR principles into the operation of UNRWA, to protect the right of Palestinian refugees to be resettled in permanent conditions, instead of dooming Palestinian refugees to yet another generation of squalor and indignity of life in 59 teeming refugee camps spread in areas ruled by Israel, the Palestinian Authority, Lebanon, Syria and Jordan.
View the Original Link at the Winnipeg Jewish Report: CANADA CAN JUMP START THE PEACE PROCESS: CAN ASSERT ITS LEADERSHIP IN THE REFUGEE WORKING GROUP
by David Bedein
http://tinyurl.com/yz55vqc
Most recently, Israeli President Shimon Peres remarked to the European Union’s Middle East Envoy Miguel Moratinos, that the time has come to revive the dormant Refugee Working Group, comprised of 38 nations, chaired by Canada since the Madrid Middle East peace talks that were held in October, 1991. Indeed, despite the fact that Palestinian refugees and their descendents who dwell in or near United Nations refugee camps represent more than half of the Palestinian population, their fate has been overlooked by Middle East peace negotiations
Adopting the UNHCR model
The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees in the Near East, UNRWA, which has serviced the Palestinian refugees for more than for half a century, has countenanced a situation in which the agency operates as an anomaly: UNRWA, founded in 1949 to provide relief to the Arabs who fled from Israel in the course of the war of 1948-49, to keep them in refugee camps under the in principle promise of the “right of return” to the villages which no longer exist.
Less than one year later the UN High Commission for Refugees, UNCHR, was founded with the express purpose of protecting the rights of refugees to be rehabilitated in a permanent state of resettlement.
In real terms, this meant that UNRWA was permitted to continue to operate under its own terms with its own definition and not bound by the UNHCR Convention. UNRWA was, and remains, the only international agency devoted to keeping one specific group of refugees in a permanent state of refugee status. Why? The answer can be found on the UNHCR website, “The State of the World’s Refugees, Part 1, The Early Years puts the matter baldly: “Arab States... feared that the non-political character of the work envisioned for the nascent UNHCR was not compatible with the highly politicized nature of the Palestinian question.”
In other words, UNHCR operates on the principle that they help the refugees under their jurisdiction to find solutions so that they might get on with their lives with permanency, while UNWRA operates under the premise that the Palestinian Arab refugees are still refugees even if they acquire a new citizenship,[as many have in Jordan] until such time as they will return to their homes in Israel, from which they or their grandparents and great-great parents fled.
Canada, in the leadership role that it plays in the RWG, could ask the 38 nations that contribute to UNRWA to ask that UNRWA operate according to the principles of UNHCR - to protect the right of refugees to be resettled instead of implementing a policy that perpetuates their suffering, while fostering the illusion of the “right of return”
For a generation, any attempts to provide the refugees with permanent residence elsewhere are blocked by the UN
Indeed, in December 1985, when Israel attempted to move refugees into 1,300 permanent houses built for them near Nablus, a UN resolution was passed demanding that Israel not move refugees, because this would violate their “right of return”.
The time has come for Canada to apply UNHCR principles into the operation of UNRWA, to protect the right of Palestinian refugees to be resettled in permanent conditions, instead of dooming Palestinian refugees to yet another generation of squalor and indignity of life in 59 teeming refugee camps spread in areas ruled by Israel, the Palestinian Authority, Lebanon, Syria and Jordan.
View the Original Link at the Winnipeg Jewish Report: CANADA CAN JUMP START THE PEACE PROCESS: CAN ASSERT ITS LEADERSHIP IN THE REFUGEE WORKING GROUP
Monday, December 7, 2009
The Philadelphia Bulletin: Lieberman, Berman Fail To Press Fayyad
Lieberman, Berman Fail To Press Fayyad
Monday, December 07, 2009
Jerusalem - At a recent press conference in Ramallah, Jerusalem Post Editor David Horovitz described how “two staunch Jewish supporters of Israel,” Senator Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., former Democratic vice presidential candidate, and current Representative Howard Berman, D-Ca., chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, “nodded their encouragement” when Palestinian Authority (PA) Prime Minister Salam Fayyad explained how he was preparing Palestinians for statehood. Mr. Fayyad outlined a Palestinian state in formation regarding security forces, the economy, and civic institutions, with an optimistic sense of what the PA is achieving.
Regrettably, Senator Lieberman and Representative Berman did not use the press conference to raise some troublesome questions, conveying the notion that all is well with Palestinian statehood plans.
Questions that Senator Lieberman, Rep. Berman or Mr. Horovitz could have asked might have centered around these issues:
Renunciation Of PLO State Of War With Israel
The charter of Fatah, the predominant element in the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and the PA, to this day, continues to call for the destruction of Israel. Written in 1964, before Israel controlled the West Bank and Gaza, it uses the term “Palestine” to refer exclusively to Israel within the Green Line. The charter declares that “Liberating Palestine is a national obligation,” and that “Armed public revolution is the inevitable method” for doing so. This cannot be dismissed as an irrelevant anachronism. Last August, Fatah held its first General Congress in 20 years. Hope was held out for a charter revision, with violence officially renounced, but it never happened. Instead, Fatah continued to unambiguously embrace “armed resistance” to liberate Palestine.
Cessation Of Incitement From PA Textbooks
The Institute for Monitoring Peace and Tolerance in School Education has issued six reports on new PA textbooks issued over the last eight years. Journalist and scholar Dr. Arnon Groiss, who translated these PA textbooks, has just completed an update. He writes that the new PA texts:
• Deny the historical and religious presence of Jews in Palestine.
• Fail to recognize the State of Israel.
• Demonize Jews and Israel.
• Assign blame for the conflict exclusively on Israel, totally absolving Palestinians.
• Stress the idea of a violent struggle of liberation rather than a peaceful settlement.
It is disingenuous for Mr. Fayyad to profess dedication to peace, while the PA curriculum infuses these ideas within its youngsters. Peace is impossible until the message changes. Why do visiting elected officials and journalists not hold Mr. Fayyad and the PA accountable for the new PA textbooks?
Cessation Of PA Pursuit Of Hamas As A Partner
The PA inclination to participate in a government that includes Hamas remains an “elephant in the room” that the international community, somewhat inexplicably, has chosen to ignore: Hamas is recognized by the U.S. and the European Union as a terrorist entity. Yet, in March 2007, Fatah and Hamas briefly formed a “unity government,” negotiated by Saudi Arabia via the Mecca Accord, which saw Fatah acceding to Hamas demands. It fell apart with the Hamas coup in Gaza, but, in recent months the news is awash with reports of negotiations via Egypt for a Fatah-Hamas reconciliation. Pursuing negotiations with Israel and Hamas at one and the same time is not acceptable. Why not ask the PA to make a choice?
Renunciation Of The “Right Of Return”
The “right of return,” promoted for 60 years by the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) and embraced by the PA as a non-negotiable right, remains a recipe for the destruction of Israel from within. If Mr. Fayyad and the PA are serious about peace, why not ask them to accept the principle of permanent resettlement of the refugees? The United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR), which oversees all refugees except Palestinians, operates according to this principle. Only Palestinian refugees are not resettled, but, instead, for purely political reasons, are forced to linger in a rage-inducing state of limbo. Mr. Fayyad, in his master plan for a Palestinian state, openly states that he supports the “right of return.” Isn’t it time to ask for Senator Lieberman and Representative Berman to ask Mr. Fayyad and the PA to openly embrace the UNHCR policy and pave the way for UNRWA to adjust its mandate?
David Bedein can be reached at bedein@thebulletin.us
Monday, December 07, 2009
Jerusalem - At a recent press conference in Ramallah, Jerusalem Post Editor David Horovitz described how “two staunch Jewish supporters of Israel,” Senator Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., former Democratic vice presidential candidate, and current Representative Howard Berman, D-Ca., chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, “nodded their encouragement” when Palestinian Authority (PA) Prime Minister Salam Fayyad explained how he was preparing Palestinians for statehood. Mr. Fayyad outlined a Palestinian state in formation regarding security forces, the economy, and civic institutions, with an optimistic sense of what the PA is achieving.
Regrettably, Senator Lieberman and Representative Berman did not use the press conference to raise some troublesome questions, conveying the notion that all is well with Palestinian statehood plans.
Questions that Senator Lieberman, Rep. Berman or Mr. Horovitz could have asked might have centered around these issues:
Renunciation Of PLO State Of War With Israel
The charter of Fatah, the predominant element in the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and the PA, to this day, continues to call for the destruction of Israel. Written in 1964, before Israel controlled the West Bank and Gaza, it uses the term “Palestine” to refer exclusively to Israel within the Green Line. The charter declares that “Liberating Palestine is a national obligation,” and that “Armed public revolution is the inevitable method” for doing so. This cannot be dismissed as an irrelevant anachronism. Last August, Fatah held its first General Congress in 20 years. Hope was held out for a charter revision, with violence officially renounced, but it never happened. Instead, Fatah continued to unambiguously embrace “armed resistance” to liberate Palestine.
Cessation Of Incitement From PA Textbooks
The Institute for Monitoring Peace and Tolerance in School Education has issued six reports on new PA textbooks issued over the last eight years. Journalist and scholar Dr. Arnon Groiss, who translated these PA textbooks, has just completed an update. He writes that the new PA texts:
• Deny the historical and religious presence of Jews in Palestine.
• Fail to recognize the State of Israel.
• Demonize Jews and Israel.
• Assign blame for the conflict exclusively on Israel, totally absolving Palestinians.
• Stress the idea of a violent struggle of liberation rather than a peaceful settlement.
It is disingenuous for Mr. Fayyad to profess dedication to peace, while the PA curriculum infuses these ideas within its youngsters. Peace is impossible until the message changes. Why do visiting elected officials and journalists not hold Mr. Fayyad and the PA accountable for the new PA textbooks?
Cessation Of PA Pursuit Of Hamas As A Partner
The PA inclination to participate in a government that includes Hamas remains an “elephant in the room” that the international community, somewhat inexplicably, has chosen to ignore: Hamas is recognized by the U.S. and the European Union as a terrorist entity. Yet, in March 2007, Fatah and Hamas briefly formed a “unity government,” negotiated by Saudi Arabia via the Mecca Accord, which saw Fatah acceding to Hamas demands. It fell apart with the Hamas coup in Gaza, but, in recent months the news is awash with reports of negotiations via Egypt for a Fatah-Hamas reconciliation. Pursuing negotiations with Israel and Hamas at one and the same time is not acceptable. Why not ask the PA to make a choice?
Renunciation Of The “Right Of Return”
The “right of return,” promoted for 60 years by the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) and embraced by the PA as a non-negotiable right, remains a recipe for the destruction of Israel from within. If Mr. Fayyad and the PA are serious about peace, why not ask them to accept the principle of permanent resettlement of the refugees? The United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR), which oversees all refugees except Palestinians, operates according to this principle. Only Palestinian refugees are not resettled, but, instead, for purely political reasons, are forced to linger in a rage-inducing state of limbo. Mr. Fayyad, in his master plan for a Palestinian state, openly states that he supports the “right of return.” Isn’t it time to ask for Senator Lieberman and Representative Berman to ask Mr. Fayyad and the PA to openly embrace the UNHCR policy and pave the way for UNRWA to adjust its mandate?
David Bedein can be reached at bedein@thebulletin.us
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
The Philadelphia Bulletin: ARE THERE QUESTIONS PEOPLE ARE AFRAID TO ASK FAYAD?
Are there Questions People are Afraid to Ask Fayyad?
In his column of November 20, Salam Fayyad builds Palestine, Jerusalem Post Editor David Horovitz describes “two staunch Jewish supporters of Israel” - Senator Joe Lieberman, former vice presidential candidate, and Representative Howard Berman, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee - “nodding their encouragement” at a recent Ramallah press conference, where Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salam Fayyad explained how he was preparing Palestinians for statehood. The piece goes on to outline a Palestinian state in formation, regarding security forces, the economy, and civic institutions, with an optimistic sense of what the PA is achieving.
Regrettably, Senator Lieberman and Representative Berman did not use the press conference to raise some troublesome questions.
Since these American elected officials let that opportunity pass, perhaps it was the journalistic responsibility of Mr. Horovitz to explore these matters, to offer a more balanced picture. Instead, he alluded to “staunch supporters of Israel nodding their agreement,” conveying the notion that, except for some technical problems, all is well.
Questions that Senator Lieberman, Rep. Berman or Mr. Horovitz could have asked would have included:
Renunciation of the PLO state of war with Israel
The charter of Fatah - the predominant element in the PLO and the PA - to this day continues to call for the destruction of Israel. Written in 1964, before Israel controlled the West Bank and Gaza, it uses the term “Palestine” to refer exclusively to Israel within the Green Line. The charter declares that “Liberating Palestine is a national obligation,” and that “Armed public revolution is the inevitable method” for doing so. This cannot be dismissed as an irrelevant anachronism. Last August, Fatah held its first General Congress in 20 years. Hope was held out for a charter revision, with violence officially renounced, but it never happened. Instead, Fatah continued to unambiguously embrace “armed resistance” to liberate Palestine.
Cessation of incitement via changes in PA-produced textbooks
The Institute for Monitoring Peace and Tolerance in School Education has issued six reports on new PA textbooks issued over the last eight years. Journalist and scholar Dr. Arnon Groiss, who translated these PA textbooks, has just completed an update. He writes that the new PA texts...
- Deny the historical and religious presence of Jews in Palestine.
- Fail to recognize the State of Israel.
- Demonize Jews and Israel.
- Assign blame for the conflict exclusively on Israel, totally absolving Palestinians.
- Stress the idea of a violent struggle of liberation rather than a peaceful settlement.
- It is disingenuous for Fayyad to profess dedication to peace, while the PA curriculum infuses these ideas within its youngsters. Peace is impossible until the message changes. Why do visiting elected officials and journalists not hold Fayyad and the PA accountable for the new PA textbooks?.
Cessation of PA pursuit of Hamas as a coalition partner.
The PA inclination to participate in a government that includes Hamas remains an “elephant in the room” that the international community, somewhat inexplicably, has chosen to ignore: Hamas is recognized by the US and the entire Quartet as a terrorist entity. Yet in March 2007, Fatah and Hamas briefly formed a “unity government” - negotiated by Saudi Arabia via the Mecca Accord - that saw Fatah acceding to Hamas demands. It fell apart with the Hamas coup in Gaza, but in recent months the news is awash with reports of negotiations via Egypt for a Fatah-Hamas reconciliation. Pursuing negotiations with Israel and Hamas at one and the same time is not acceptable. Why not ask the PA to make a choice?.
Renunciation of the “right of return.”
The “right of return,” promoted for 60 years by UNRWA and embraced by the PA as a non-negotiable right, remains a recipe for the destruction of Israel from within. If Fayyad and the PA are serious about peace, why not ask them to accept the principle of permanent resettlement of the refugees? UNHCR, the UN High Commission for Refugees - which oversees all refugees except Palestinians - operates according to this principle. Only Palestinian refugees are not resettled, but instead, for purely political reasons, are forced to linger in a (rage-inducing) state of limbo. Fayyad, in his master plan for a Palestinian state, openly states that he supports the “right of return.” Isn’t it time to ask Fayyad and the PA to openly embrace the UNHCR policy and pave the way for UNRWA to adjust its mandate?
Lastly, Mr. Horovitz writes that “most of the international community completely supports [PA] demands for a 100% Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank,” noting that “Netanyahu...is intent on driving a harder bargain.” The reader is left with the impression that Netanyahu is obstinately resisting what the world expects. Left unsaid is that the Israeli electorate is most definitely not in favor of complete withdrawal, and that the prime minister simply reflects the will of the nation in this regard. What is more, Mr. Horovitz neglects to say that neither does international law support this: UN Security Resolution 242, which does not demand full Israeli withdrawal, acknowledges Israel’s need for secure borders.
David Bedein works as the Director of the Israel Resource News Agency and the Center for Near East Policy Research, www.IsraelBehindTheNews.com and the Middle East Correspondent for the Philadelphia Bulletin, www.TheBulletin.us.
Arlene Kushner is the senior research analyst for the Center for Near East Policy Research and author of a daily blog, “Arlene From Israel”, www.arlenefromisrael.info
Are there Questions People are Afraid to Ask Fayyad?
In his column of November 20, Salam Fayyad builds Palestine, Jerusalem Post Editor David Horovitz describes “two staunch Jewish supporters of Israel” - Senator Joe Lieberman, former vice presidential candidate, and Representative Howard Berman, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee - “nodding their encouragement” at a recent Ramallah press conference, where Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salam Fayyad explained how he was preparing Palestinians for statehood. The piece goes on to outline a Palestinian state in formation, regarding security forces, the economy, and civic institutions, with an optimistic sense of what the PA is achieving.
Regrettably, Senator Lieberman and Representative Berman did not use the press conference to raise some troublesome questions.
Since these American elected officials let that opportunity pass, perhaps it was the journalistic responsibility of Mr. Horovitz to explore these matters, to offer a more balanced picture. Instead, he alluded to “staunch supporters of Israel nodding their agreement,” conveying the notion that, except for some technical problems, all is well.
Questions that Senator Lieberman, Rep. Berman or Mr. Horovitz could have asked would have included:
Renunciation of the PLO state of war with Israel
The charter of Fatah - the predominant element in the PLO and the PA - to this day continues to call for the destruction of Israel. Written in 1964, before Israel controlled the West Bank and Gaza, it uses the term “Palestine” to refer exclusively to Israel within the Green Line. The charter declares that “Liberating Palestine is a national obligation,” and that “Armed public revolution is the inevitable method” for doing so. This cannot be dismissed as an irrelevant anachronism. Last August, Fatah held its first General Congress in 20 years. Hope was held out for a charter revision, with violence officially renounced, but it never happened. Instead, Fatah continued to unambiguously embrace “armed resistance” to liberate Palestine.
Cessation of incitement via changes in PA-produced textbooks
The Institute for Monitoring Peace and Tolerance in School Education has issued six reports on new PA textbooks issued over the last eight years. Journalist and scholar Dr. Arnon Groiss, who translated these PA textbooks, has just completed an update. He writes that the new PA texts...
- Deny the historical and religious presence of Jews in Palestine.
- Fail to recognize the State of Israel.
- Demonize Jews and Israel.
- Assign blame for the conflict exclusively on Israel, totally absolving Palestinians.
- Stress the idea of a violent struggle of liberation rather than a peaceful settlement.
- It is disingenuous for Fayyad to profess dedication to peace, while the PA curriculum infuses these ideas within its youngsters. Peace is impossible until the message changes. Why do visiting elected officials and journalists not hold Fayyad and the PA accountable for the new PA textbooks?.
Cessation of PA pursuit of Hamas as a coalition partner.
The PA inclination to participate in a government that includes Hamas remains an “elephant in the room” that the international community, somewhat inexplicably, has chosen to ignore: Hamas is recognized by the US and the entire Quartet as a terrorist entity. Yet in March 2007, Fatah and Hamas briefly formed a “unity government” - negotiated by Saudi Arabia via the Mecca Accord - that saw Fatah acceding to Hamas demands. It fell apart with the Hamas coup in Gaza, but in recent months the news is awash with reports of negotiations via Egypt for a Fatah-Hamas reconciliation. Pursuing negotiations with Israel and Hamas at one and the same time is not acceptable. Why not ask the PA to make a choice?.
Renunciation of the “right of return.”
The “right of return,” promoted for 60 years by UNRWA and embraced by the PA as a non-negotiable right, remains a recipe for the destruction of Israel from within. If Fayyad and the PA are serious about peace, why not ask them to accept the principle of permanent resettlement of the refugees? UNHCR, the UN High Commission for Refugees - which oversees all refugees except Palestinians - operates according to this principle. Only Palestinian refugees are not resettled, but instead, for purely political reasons, are forced to linger in a (rage-inducing) state of limbo. Fayyad, in his master plan for a Palestinian state, openly states that he supports the “right of return.” Isn’t it time to ask Fayyad and the PA to openly embrace the UNHCR policy and pave the way for UNRWA to adjust its mandate?
Lastly, Mr. Horovitz writes that “most of the international community completely supports [PA] demands for a 100% Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank,” noting that “Netanyahu...is intent on driving a harder bargain.” The reader is left with the impression that Netanyahu is obstinately resisting what the world expects. Left unsaid is that the Israeli electorate is most definitely not in favor of complete withdrawal, and that the prime minister simply reflects the will of the nation in this regard. What is more, Mr. Horovitz neglects to say that neither does international law support this: UN Security Resolution 242, which does not demand full Israeli withdrawal, acknowledges Israel’s need for secure borders.
David Bedein works as the Director of the Israel Resource News Agency and the Center for Near East Policy Research, www.IsraelBehindTheNews.com and the Middle East Correspondent for the Philadelphia Bulletin, www.TheBulletin.us.
Arlene Kushner is the senior research analyst for the Center for Near East Policy Research and author of a daily blog, “Arlene From Israel”, www.arlenefromisrael.info
Are there Questions People are Afraid to Ask Fayyad?
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Ten Obstacles to Middle East Peace
by David Bedein
1. November 2, 2009 marked the 92nd anniversary of Balfour day, which led to the 1922 San Remo Treaty and to the 1924 League of Nations ratification of the San Remo Treaty, which recognized the right of Jews to purchase land in the Jewish national homeland, defined as anywhere west of the Jordan River. Ratified by the UN in 1945, that is the basis of international law by which Israel can, indeed, settle the land of Israel with Jews who come from the four corners of the earth. The internationally ratified legal basis for Israel has been forgotten.
2. The Arab league rejected the idea of a Jewish national home, declaring a war of extermination in 1945 and actualizing that declaration in 1948. That declaration which is still extant, and the Arab League’s war to exterminate Israel continues. Egypt was then the dominant factor of the Arab League. The Saudis, however, remain the dominant factor of the Arab League today, as the only nation contiguous to Israel to have never signed any armistice or peace treaty with the Jewish state.
3. Perhaps the most effective tactic of the Arab League was to spawn the PLO under its aegis, whose task it would be to coordinate indigenous Palestinian Arabs to join the Arab States in their war to conquer and displace the Jewish state. To this day, the PLO, led by the Fatah reports to the Arab League, which has never changed its charter to destroy Israel. For that matter, neither has the PLO changed its charter to destroy Israel. At the same time, the Fatah conveys the false impression to the world that it is the product of a grass roots Palestinian national movement. Yet the PLO, course, changed the map and the perception of the Arab war to exterminate Israel, to make the war look like some kind of war of national liberation.
4. The Arab League continued its war of extermination by confining Palestinian Arab refugees from 1948 to the squalor of refugee camps, under the premise and promise of the right of return. Their presence in UNRWA refugee camps continues to this day, under the aegis of the UN, through UNRWA, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency.
5. The purpose of UNRWA is to fulfill successive UN resolutions that promote the supposed “inalienable right” of Palestinian Arab refugees and their descendent's to return to villages from before 1948. Palestinian Arab refugees and their descendants in the UNRWA camps learn that the 531 Israeli villages, kibbutzim, moshavim and neighborhoods that replaced the Arab villages are the illegal Israeli settlements, which are located in Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, Haifa, Ashkelon, BeerSheva, Ashdod, Sderot and hundreds of other Israeli communities that were established on the ruins of Arab villages after 1948. While the popular imagination posits that the Palestinian Arab national ambition is only to replace the Israeli communities in Judea, Samaria and Katif, the Palestinian Arab ambition as dictated by the PLO and its patron in the Arab League, is to take back the lands lost in 1948. UNRWA, financed by the US and other western nations, reinforces that ambition. UNRWA has recently been taken over by Hamas, to ensure that the ambition to actualize the right of return has gained a new, Islamic emphasis. Just look at how many Palestinian Arab refugees have left the teeming UNRWA Arab refugee camps in Gaza to live on the lands of the expelled Jewish communities from Katif. Not one. Why? Because the dictate of the PA, the PLO and Hamas is that Palestinian Arab refugees and their descendants must return to the homes and villages that they left after 1948 - to Jaffa, Beer Sheva, Ashdod, Ashkelon, etc.
6. The Palestinian Authority, established in 1994, instead of spurring the newly recognized Palestinian national entity to establish a nation state alongside Israel, has instead launched a base from where they can liberate the rest of of Palestine.
7. Meanwhile, the PA has established an educational system to educate the next generation that Israel must not exist. The new PA school books and the new PA maps speak for themselves, as the first school curriculum since the Third Reich that inculcates the idea that you must make war on the Jews and that Jews are less than human. The PA school books go one step beyond the Nazis, however, as they introduce lesson plans which praise those who murder Jews. While the Nazis murdered Jews, the Nazis always tried to obfuscate their acts. The Palestinian Authority instead teaches their children to take pride in the act of murdering a Jew.
8. To further reinforce the Palestinian entity around a renewed religious determination of the continued war to liberate all of Palestine, the Palestinian Authority adopted the draft of an Islamic constitution, based on the Sharia law. This was revealed to the public by a senior official in the Vatican who addressed visiting US congressmen in March 2003. This radical constitution was sponsored by the US government, through US AID.
9. Meanwhile, the Hamas Islamic movement took control of the PA legislature in democratic elections that were held under the sponsorship of the American government, in January 2006, which led to a Fatah-Hamas power sharing agreement known as the Mecca Accord, signed between the Fatah and the Hamas in March 2007. When the Fatah began to hesitate in carrying out the Mecca Accord, Hamas took over Gaza in its entirety in June, 2007.
10. The PA has made it clear that it will make no deal with Israel that does not assure the right of return of Palestinian Arab refugees, the PA control over Jerusalem, and the establishment of full and total sovereignty, which includes an army.
View the Original Link at Israel Behind the News: Ten Obstacles to Middle East Peace
1. November 2, 2009 marked the 92nd anniversary of Balfour day, which led to the 1922 San Remo Treaty and to the 1924 League of Nations ratification of the San Remo Treaty, which recognized the right of Jews to purchase land in the Jewish national homeland, defined as anywhere west of the Jordan River. Ratified by the UN in 1945, that is the basis of international law by which Israel can, indeed, settle the land of Israel with Jews who come from the four corners of the earth. The internationally ratified legal basis for Israel has been forgotten.
2. The Arab league rejected the idea of a Jewish national home, declaring a war of extermination in 1945 and actualizing that declaration in 1948. That declaration which is still extant, and the Arab League’s war to exterminate Israel continues. Egypt was then the dominant factor of the Arab League. The Saudis, however, remain the dominant factor of the Arab League today, as the only nation contiguous to Israel to have never signed any armistice or peace treaty with the Jewish state.
3. Perhaps the most effective tactic of the Arab League was to spawn the PLO under its aegis, whose task it would be to coordinate indigenous Palestinian Arabs to join the Arab States in their war to conquer and displace the Jewish state. To this day, the PLO, led by the Fatah reports to the Arab League, which has never changed its charter to destroy Israel. For that matter, neither has the PLO changed its charter to destroy Israel. At the same time, the Fatah conveys the false impression to the world that it is the product of a grass roots Palestinian national movement. Yet the PLO, course, changed the map and the perception of the Arab war to exterminate Israel, to make the war look like some kind of war of national liberation.
4. The Arab League continued its war of extermination by confining Palestinian Arab refugees from 1948 to the squalor of refugee camps, under the premise and promise of the right of return. Their presence in UNRWA refugee camps continues to this day, under the aegis of the UN, through UNRWA, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency.
5. The purpose of UNRWA is to fulfill successive UN resolutions that promote the supposed “inalienable right” of Palestinian Arab refugees and their descendent's to return to villages from before 1948. Palestinian Arab refugees and their descendants in the UNRWA camps learn that the 531 Israeli villages, kibbutzim, moshavim and neighborhoods that replaced the Arab villages are the illegal Israeli settlements, which are located in Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, Haifa, Ashkelon, BeerSheva, Ashdod, Sderot and hundreds of other Israeli communities that were established on the ruins of Arab villages after 1948. While the popular imagination posits that the Palestinian Arab national ambition is only to replace the Israeli communities in Judea, Samaria and Katif, the Palestinian Arab ambition as dictated by the PLO and its patron in the Arab League, is to take back the lands lost in 1948. UNRWA, financed by the US and other western nations, reinforces that ambition. UNRWA has recently been taken over by Hamas, to ensure that the ambition to actualize the right of return has gained a new, Islamic emphasis. Just look at how many Palestinian Arab refugees have left the teeming UNRWA Arab refugee camps in Gaza to live on the lands of the expelled Jewish communities from Katif. Not one. Why? Because the dictate of the PA, the PLO and Hamas is that Palestinian Arab refugees and their descendants must return to the homes and villages that they left after 1948 - to Jaffa, Beer Sheva, Ashdod, Ashkelon, etc.
6. The Palestinian Authority, established in 1994, instead of spurring the newly recognized Palestinian national entity to establish a nation state alongside Israel, has instead launched a base from where they can liberate the rest of of Palestine.
7. Meanwhile, the PA has established an educational system to educate the next generation that Israel must not exist. The new PA school books and the new PA maps speak for themselves, as the first school curriculum since the Third Reich that inculcates the idea that you must make war on the Jews and that Jews are less than human. The PA school books go one step beyond the Nazis, however, as they introduce lesson plans which praise those who murder Jews. While the Nazis murdered Jews, the Nazis always tried to obfuscate their acts. The Palestinian Authority instead teaches their children to take pride in the act of murdering a Jew.
8. To further reinforce the Palestinian entity around a renewed religious determination of the continued war to liberate all of Palestine, the Palestinian Authority adopted the draft of an Islamic constitution, based on the Sharia law. This was revealed to the public by a senior official in the Vatican who addressed visiting US congressmen in March 2003. This radical constitution was sponsored by the US government, through US AID.
9. Meanwhile, the Hamas Islamic movement took control of the PA legislature in democratic elections that were held under the sponsorship of the American government, in January 2006, which led to a Fatah-Hamas power sharing agreement known as the Mecca Accord, signed between the Fatah and the Hamas in March 2007. When the Fatah began to hesitate in carrying out the Mecca Accord, Hamas took over Gaza in its entirety in June, 2007.
10. The PA has made it clear that it will make no deal with Israel that does not assure the right of return of Palestinian Arab refugees, the PA control over Jerusalem, and the establishment of full and total sovereignty, which includes an army.
View the Original Link at Israel Behind the News: Ten Obstacles to Middle East Peace
Sunday, October 18, 2009
The Philadelphia Bulletin: Take the Fayyad Plan for What It Is
Take the Fayyad Plan for What It is
by David Bedein
In a Jerusalem Post article “In the land of miracles, let’s get real (Sept. 29),” Gershon Baskin describes Palestinian Prime Minister Salaam Fayad’s plan as “one of the most positive and optimistic developments of recent times.”
However, a reading of Fayad’s plan, entitled “Ending the Occupation, Establishing the State: Program of the Thirteenth Government (August 2009)” would seem to belie Baskin’s postulation.
While the preface to Mr. Fayad’s paper introduces a Palestinian state that would strive for “peace, security and stability in our region on the Palestinian territory occupied in 1967, with east Jerusalem as its capital,” Mr. Fayad’s 38-page position paper reads like a declaration of war, not of peace.
Mr. Fayad asserts that “Jerusalem” will be the Palestinian capital of the Palestinian state - not east Jerusalem.
In case anyone was wondering if Mr. Fayad had made a typographical error by not mentioning “east” Jerusalem as the capital of a future Palestinian state, he repeats - 10 times - that he means Jerusalem, all of Jerusalem. He leaves nothing to the imagination, and writes that the Palestinian state will “protect Jerusalem as the eternal capital of the Palestinian state,” because he asserts that, “Jerusalem is our people’s religious, cultural, economic and political center. It is the Flower of Cities and Capital of Capitals. It cannot be anything but the eternal capital of the future Palestinian state. Jerusalem.”
Mr. Fayad goes on to claim that Jerusalem “is under threat” and that “the occupying authority is implementing a systematic plan to alter the city’s landmarks and its geographical and demographic character in order to forcibly create facts on the ground, ultimately separating it from its Palestinian surroundings and eradicating its Arab Palestinian heritage.” Mr. Fayad further claims that “Palestinian life in Jerusalem is under daily attack through systematic violations perpetrated by the occupation regime” and that “it is the right and the duty of all Palestinians to protect their land, reject the occupation and defy its measures,” adding that the Palestinian state “bears special responsibility for nurturing our people’s ability to persevere and protect their homeland.”
He adds that the Palestinian government will maintain its “unreserved commitment to defending the Arab character and status of Jerusalem.... The government will continue to do all that is possible to achieve this goal. The government will work with all organizations to preserve the landmarks of Jerusalem and its Arab Palestinian heritage, develop the city, and secure its contiguity with its Palestinian surroundings.”
Mr. Fayad frames Jerusalem as an illegal settlement, postulating that, “the occupying authority is pursuing its intensive settlement policy in and around Jerusalem.... The occupation regime has shut down our national institutions, neglected the development of Palestinian life, continued to demolish and evacuate Palestinian homes, and restricted access to sacred Christian and Islamic sites.”
He goes so far as to present a practical plan to Arabize Jerusalem: Maintaining Jerusalem as a top priority on the government’s agenda and “highlighting its predicament in the media. Launching programs to promote the steadfastness of Jerusalemites, including: Strengthen Palestinian institutions in Jerusalem, providing financial support to help them deliver services to citizens.”
He reassures his readers that a future Palestinian state would not be satisfied with Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza as the national home for Palestinians, and says that the Palestinian government will continue to advocate for “Palestinian refugees in accordance with relevant international resolutions, and UN General Assembly Resolution 194 in particular,” which mandates that Palestinian refugees and their descendants have a right to return to the homes and villages that Palestinians left during the 1948 war and its aftermath.
Mr. Fayad reminds Palestinians that, “the refugee issue will remain under the jurisdiction of the PLO through its Department of Refugees’ Affairs... in a manner that does not exempt the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) from its responsibilities.” In Mr. Fayad’s view, UNRWA will therefore continue to confine Palestinian refugees and their descendants to the indignity of refugee camps under the premise and promise of the “right of return.”
Meanwhile, Mr. Fayad expresses full support for Palestinians who have been convicted of murder and attempted murder, saying that, “the state also has an enduring obligation to care and provide for the martyrs, prisoners, orphans and all those harmed in the Palestinian struggle for independence.” He simply cannot understand why Palestinians convicted of capital crimes should be jailed.
He proclaims that “the continued detention of thousands of Palestinian detainees and prisoners in Israeli prisons and detention camps in violation of international law and basic human rights is of great concern to all Palestinians,” and declares that “securing the freedom of all these heroic prisoners is an utmost Palestinian priority and it is a fundamental duty all Palestinians feel to honor their great sacrifices and end their suffering,” and demands the “freedom of all Palestinian detainees and prisoners and will continue to strive to secure their liberty.”
He further declares that the Palestinian state will be an Islamic state and will “promote awareness and understanding of the Islamic religion and culture and disseminate the concept of tolerance in the religion through developing and implementing programs of Shari’a education as derived from the science of the Holy Koran and Prophet’s heritage.”
In sum, the Palestinian prime minister concludes with a demand for a Palestinian state in the next two years, along the parameters that he has outlined - Jerusalem as the capital of an Islamic Shari’a state that will campaign for all convicts to be freed, for all refugees to return to the homes and villages that they left in 1948.
It would be instructive to know whether Baskin even bothered to read the plan before calling it a “positive development.”
by David Bedein
In a Jerusalem Post article “In the land of miracles, let’s get real (Sept. 29),” Gershon Baskin describes Palestinian Prime Minister Salaam Fayad’s plan as “one of the most positive and optimistic developments of recent times.”
However, a reading of Fayad’s plan, entitled “Ending the Occupation, Establishing the State: Program of the Thirteenth Government (August 2009)” would seem to belie Baskin’s postulation.
While the preface to Mr. Fayad’s paper introduces a Palestinian state that would strive for “peace, security and stability in our region on the Palestinian territory occupied in 1967, with east Jerusalem as its capital,” Mr. Fayad’s 38-page position paper reads like a declaration of war, not of peace.
Mr. Fayad asserts that “Jerusalem” will be the Palestinian capital of the Palestinian state - not east Jerusalem.
In case anyone was wondering if Mr. Fayad had made a typographical error by not mentioning “east” Jerusalem as the capital of a future Palestinian state, he repeats - 10 times - that he means Jerusalem, all of Jerusalem. He leaves nothing to the imagination, and writes that the Palestinian state will “protect Jerusalem as the eternal capital of the Palestinian state,” because he asserts that, “Jerusalem is our people’s religious, cultural, economic and political center. It is the Flower of Cities and Capital of Capitals. It cannot be anything but the eternal capital of the future Palestinian state. Jerusalem.”
Mr. Fayad goes on to claim that Jerusalem “is under threat” and that “the occupying authority is implementing a systematic plan to alter the city’s landmarks and its geographical and demographic character in order to forcibly create facts on the ground, ultimately separating it from its Palestinian surroundings and eradicating its Arab Palestinian heritage.” Mr. Fayad further claims that “Palestinian life in Jerusalem is under daily attack through systematic violations perpetrated by the occupation regime” and that “it is the right and the duty of all Palestinians to protect their land, reject the occupation and defy its measures,” adding that the Palestinian state “bears special responsibility for nurturing our people’s ability to persevere and protect their homeland.”
He adds that the Palestinian government will maintain its “unreserved commitment to defending the Arab character and status of Jerusalem.... The government will continue to do all that is possible to achieve this goal. The government will work with all organizations to preserve the landmarks of Jerusalem and its Arab Palestinian heritage, develop the city, and secure its contiguity with its Palestinian surroundings.”
Mr. Fayad frames Jerusalem as an illegal settlement, postulating that, “the occupying authority is pursuing its intensive settlement policy in and around Jerusalem.... The occupation regime has shut down our national institutions, neglected the development of Palestinian life, continued to demolish and evacuate Palestinian homes, and restricted access to sacred Christian and Islamic sites.”
He goes so far as to present a practical plan to Arabize Jerusalem: Maintaining Jerusalem as a top priority on the government’s agenda and “highlighting its predicament in the media. Launching programs to promote the steadfastness of Jerusalemites, including: Strengthen Palestinian institutions in Jerusalem, providing financial support to help them deliver services to citizens.”
He reassures his readers that a future Palestinian state would not be satisfied with Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza as the national home for Palestinians, and says that the Palestinian government will continue to advocate for “Palestinian refugees in accordance with relevant international resolutions, and UN General Assembly Resolution 194 in particular,” which mandates that Palestinian refugees and their descendants have a right to return to the homes and villages that Palestinians left during the 1948 war and its aftermath.
Mr. Fayad reminds Palestinians that, “the refugee issue will remain under the jurisdiction of the PLO through its Department of Refugees’ Affairs... in a manner that does not exempt the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) from its responsibilities.” In Mr. Fayad’s view, UNRWA will therefore continue to confine Palestinian refugees and their descendants to the indignity of refugee camps under the premise and promise of the “right of return.”
Meanwhile, Mr. Fayad expresses full support for Palestinians who have been convicted of murder and attempted murder, saying that, “the state also has an enduring obligation to care and provide for the martyrs, prisoners, orphans and all those harmed in the Palestinian struggle for independence.” He simply cannot understand why Palestinians convicted of capital crimes should be jailed.
He proclaims that “the continued detention of thousands of Palestinian detainees and prisoners in Israeli prisons and detention camps in violation of international law and basic human rights is of great concern to all Palestinians,” and declares that “securing the freedom of all these heroic prisoners is an utmost Palestinian priority and it is a fundamental duty all Palestinians feel to honor their great sacrifices and end their suffering,” and demands the “freedom of all Palestinian detainees and prisoners and will continue to strive to secure their liberty.”
He further declares that the Palestinian state will be an Islamic state and will “promote awareness and understanding of the Islamic religion and culture and disseminate the concept of tolerance in the religion through developing and implementing programs of Shari’a education as derived from the science of the Holy Koran and Prophet’s heritage.”
In sum, the Palestinian prime minister concludes with a demand for a Palestinian state in the next two years, along the parameters that he has outlined - Jerusalem as the capital of an Islamic Shari’a state that will campaign for all convicts to be freed, for all refugees to return to the homes and villages that they left in 1948.
It would be instructive to know whether Baskin even bothered to read the plan before calling it a “positive development.”
Sunday, September 27, 2009
The Philadelphia Bulletin: Palestinian Prime Minister Belies Moderate Image
Palestinian Prime Minister Belies Moderate Image
by David Bedein
Palestinian prime minister Salam Fayad's plan for a Palestinian State was received with adulation and praise at the United Nations this past week in New York. Indeed, throughout the month of August, 2009, Palestinian National Authority Prime Minister Salam Fayad met with more than fifty members of the US Senate and US House of Representatives and made a fine impression on each and every one of them, from both sides of the aisle.
In press conferences held by almost democratic and republican congress people after meeting the American educated Fayad, the consistent impression that they conveyed was that Mr. Fayad represented a "moderate voice of leadership" for a future Palestinian state that could live alongside the state of Israel.
A group of Israeli peace groups received and distributed the English version of a position paper for a future Palestinian state that Mr. Fayad submitted this week to the UN, The EU, The American government and the Russian government
However, Fayad's paper "Ending the Occupation, Establishing the State: Program of the Thirteenth Government - August 2009" would seem to belie Fayad's image as a "moderate voice of leadership" available on the net at HERE.
The preface to Fayad's paper introduces a Palestinian state that will strive for "peace, security and stability in our region on the Palestinian territory occupied in 1967, with East Jerusalem as its capital".
Yet Fayad's 38 page position paper reads like a declaration of war, not of peace.
Fayad asserts that "Jerusalem" will be the Palestinian capital of the Palestinian state - not East Jerusalem.
In case anyone was wondering if Fayad had made a typographical error by not mentioning "east" Jerusalem as the capital of a future Palestinian state, Fayad repeats - ten times - that he means Jerusalem, all of Jerusalem. Fayad leaves nothing to the imagination, and writes that the Palstininian stat will " Protect Jerusalem as the eternal capital of the Palestinian state", because Fayad asserts that "Jerusalem is our people's religious, cultural, economic and political center. It is the Flower of Cities and Capital of Capitals. It cannot be anything but the eternal capital of the future Palestinian state. Jerusalem"
Fayad goes on to claim that Jerusalem "is under threat" and that " the occupying authority is implementing a systematic plan to alter the city's landmarks and its geographical and demographic character in order to forcibly create facts on the ground, ultimately separating it from its Palestinian surroundings and eradicating its Arab Palestinian heritage".
Fayad further claims that "Palestinian life in Jerusalem is under daily attack through systematic violations perpetrated by the occupation regime" and that "It is the right and the duty of all Palestinians to protect their land, reject the occupation and defy its measures", adding that the Palestinian state "bears special responsibility for nurturing our people's ability to persevere and protect their homeland".
Fayad ads that the Palstinian government will maintain its "unreserved commitment to defending the Arab character and status of Jerusalem.... The Government will continue to do all that is possible to achieve this goal. The Government will work with all organizations to preserve the landmarks of Jerusalem and its Arab Palestinian heritage, develop the city, and secure its contiguity with its Palestinian surroundings".
Fayad frames Jerusalem as an illegal settlement, postulating that "the occupying authority is pursuing its intensive settlement policy in and around Jerusalem...The occupation regime has shut down our national institutions, neglected the development of Palestinian life, continued to demolish and evacuate Palestinian homes, and restricted access to sacred Christian and Islamic sites"
Fayad goes so far as to present a practical plan to Arabize Jerusalem:
Maintaining Jerusalem as a top priority on the Government's agenda and·" highlighting its predicament in the media. Launching a programs to promote the steadfastness of Jerusalemites, including: Strengthen Palestinian institutions in Jerusalem, providing financial support to help them deliver services to citizens".
Fayad reassures his readers that a future Palestinian state would not be satisfied with Jerusalem, the west bank and Gaza as the national home for Palestinians, and says that the Palestinian government will continue to advocate for "Palestinian refugees in accordance with relevant international resolutions, and UN General Assembly Resolution 194 in particular", which mandates that Palestinian refugees and their descendents have a right to return to the homes and villages that Palestinians left during the 1948 war and its aftermath.
Fayad reminds Palestinians that "the refugee issue will remain under the jurisdiction of the PLO, through its Department of Refugees' Affairs...in a manner that does not exempt the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) from its responsibilities"
In the view of Fayad, UNRWA will therefore continue to confine Palestinian refugees a their descendents to the indignity of refugee camps, under the premise and promise of the "right of return".
Meanwhile, Fayad expresses full support for Palestinians who have been convicted of murder and attempted murder, saying that "the state also has an enduring obligation to care and provide for the martyrs, prisoners, orphans and all those harmed in the Palestinian struggle for independence".
Fayad simply cannot understand why Palestinians convicted of capital crimes should be jailed.
Fayad proclaims that "the continued detention of thousands of Palestinian detainees and prisoners in Israeli prisons and detention camps in violation of international law and basic human rights, is of great concern to all Palestinians" and declares that "Securing the freedom of all these heroic prisoners is an utmost Palestinian priority and it is a fundamental duty all Palestinians feel to honor their great sacrifices and end their suffering" and demands the "freedom of all Palestinian detainees and prisoners and will continue to strive to secure their liberty".
Fayad also asserts that the PLO and have signed "all provisions of agreements signed with Israel", yet forgets to mention that the PLO never ratified the signed agreements with Israel.
On October 6, 1993, PLO chairman Arafat could not get a quorum for the PLO executive to ratify the Oslo accords that Arafat had signed with Rabin on the White House lawn.
On April 24, 1996, the Palestinian National Council would not cancel the PLO covenant and has never ratified the PLO covenant, despite the PLO commitment to do so as an integral part of the Oslo accord. The PLO Covenant has yet to be cancelled.
Fayad's view of justice is well articulated in this piece when he states that "All Palestinians are equal before the law".
Anyone who is not a Palestinian is therefore not equal
Fayad declares that the Palestinian State will be an Islamic state and "Promote awareness and understanding of the Islamic religion and culture and disseminate the concept of tolerance in the religion through developing and implementing programs of Shari'a education as derived from the science of the Holy Qur'an and Prophet's heritage".
In sum, Fayad concludes with a demand for a Palestinian state in the next two years, along the parameters that he has outlined, with an Palestinian state that will have all of Jerusalem as its capital, in an Islamic Sharia state that will campaign for all convicts to be freed, for all refugees to return to the homes and villages that they left in 1948.
A voice of moderation?
It would be interesting to know if the peace groups that distributed Fayad's working paper ever bothered to read it.
View the Original Link: Palestinian Prime Minister Belies Moderate Image
by David Bedein
Palestinian prime minister Salam Fayad's plan for a Palestinian State was received with adulation and praise at the United Nations this past week in New York. Indeed, throughout the month of August, 2009, Palestinian National Authority Prime Minister Salam Fayad met with more than fifty members of the US Senate and US House of Representatives and made a fine impression on each and every one of them, from both sides of the aisle.
In press conferences held by almost democratic and republican congress people after meeting the American educated Fayad, the consistent impression that they conveyed was that Mr. Fayad represented a "moderate voice of leadership" for a future Palestinian state that could live alongside the state of Israel.
A group of Israeli peace groups received and distributed the English version of a position paper for a future Palestinian state that Mr. Fayad submitted this week to the UN, The EU, The American government and the Russian government
However, Fayad's paper "Ending the Occupation, Establishing the State: Program of the Thirteenth Government - August 2009" would seem to belie Fayad's image as a "moderate voice of leadership" available on the net at HERE.
The preface to Fayad's paper introduces a Palestinian state that will strive for "peace, security and stability in our region on the Palestinian territory occupied in 1967, with East Jerusalem as its capital".
Yet Fayad's 38 page position paper reads like a declaration of war, not of peace.
Fayad asserts that "Jerusalem" will be the Palestinian capital of the Palestinian state - not East Jerusalem.
In case anyone was wondering if Fayad had made a typographical error by not mentioning "east" Jerusalem as the capital of a future Palestinian state, Fayad repeats - ten times - that he means Jerusalem, all of Jerusalem. Fayad leaves nothing to the imagination, and writes that the Palstininian stat will " Protect Jerusalem as the eternal capital of the Palestinian state", because Fayad asserts that "Jerusalem is our people's religious, cultural, economic and political center. It is the Flower of Cities and Capital of Capitals. It cannot be anything but the eternal capital of the future Palestinian state. Jerusalem"
Fayad goes on to claim that Jerusalem "is under threat" and that " the occupying authority is implementing a systematic plan to alter the city's landmarks and its geographical and demographic character in order to forcibly create facts on the ground, ultimately separating it from its Palestinian surroundings and eradicating its Arab Palestinian heritage".
Fayad further claims that "Palestinian life in Jerusalem is under daily attack through systematic violations perpetrated by the occupation regime" and that "It is the right and the duty of all Palestinians to protect their land, reject the occupation and defy its measures", adding that the Palestinian state "bears special responsibility for nurturing our people's ability to persevere and protect their homeland".
Fayad ads that the Palstinian government will maintain its "unreserved commitment to defending the Arab character and status of Jerusalem.... The Government will continue to do all that is possible to achieve this goal. The Government will work with all organizations to preserve the landmarks of Jerusalem and its Arab Palestinian heritage, develop the city, and secure its contiguity with its Palestinian surroundings".
Fayad frames Jerusalem as an illegal settlement, postulating that "the occupying authority is pursuing its intensive settlement policy in and around Jerusalem...The occupation regime has shut down our national institutions, neglected the development of Palestinian life, continued to demolish and evacuate Palestinian homes, and restricted access to sacred Christian and Islamic sites"
Fayad goes so far as to present a practical plan to Arabize Jerusalem:
Maintaining Jerusalem as a top priority on the Government's agenda and·" highlighting its predicament in the media. Launching a programs to promote the steadfastness of Jerusalemites, including: Strengthen Palestinian institutions in Jerusalem, providing financial support to help them deliver services to citizens".
Fayad reassures his readers that a future Palestinian state would not be satisfied with Jerusalem, the west bank and Gaza as the national home for Palestinians, and says that the Palestinian government will continue to advocate for "Palestinian refugees in accordance with relevant international resolutions, and UN General Assembly Resolution 194 in particular", which mandates that Palestinian refugees and their descendents have a right to return to the homes and villages that Palestinians left during the 1948 war and its aftermath.
Fayad reminds Palestinians that "the refugee issue will remain under the jurisdiction of the PLO, through its Department of Refugees' Affairs...in a manner that does not exempt the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) from its responsibilities"
In the view of Fayad, UNRWA will therefore continue to confine Palestinian refugees a their descendents to the indignity of refugee camps, under the premise and promise of the "right of return".
Meanwhile, Fayad expresses full support for Palestinians who have been convicted of murder and attempted murder, saying that "the state also has an enduring obligation to care and provide for the martyrs, prisoners, orphans and all those harmed in the Palestinian struggle for independence".
Fayad simply cannot understand why Palestinians convicted of capital crimes should be jailed.
Fayad proclaims that "the continued detention of thousands of Palestinian detainees and prisoners in Israeli prisons and detention camps in violation of international law and basic human rights, is of great concern to all Palestinians" and declares that "Securing the freedom of all these heroic prisoners is an utmost Palestinian priority and it is a fundamental duty all Palestinians feel to honor their great sacrifices and end their suffering" and demands the "freedom of all Palestinian detainees and prisoners and will continue to strive to secure their liberty".
Fayad also asserts that the PLO and have signed "all provisions of agreements signed with Israel", yet forgets to mention that the PLO never ratified the signed agreements with Israel.
On October 6, 1993, PLO chairman Arafat could not get a quorum for the PLO executive to ratify the Oslo accords that Arafat had signed with Rabin on the White House lawn.
On April 24, 1996, the Palestinian National Council would not cancel the PLO covenant and has never ratified the PLO covenant, despite the PLO commitment to do so as an integral part of the Oslo accord. The PLO Covenant has yet to be cancelled.
Fayad's view of justice is well articulated in this piece when he states that "All Palestinians are equal before the law".
Anyone who is not a Palestinian is therefore not equal
Fayad declares that the Palestinian State will be an Islamic state and "Promote awareness and understanding of the Islamic religion and culture and disseminate the concept of tolerance in the religion through developing and implementing programs of Shari'a education as derived from the science of the Holy Qur'an and Prophet's heritage".
In sum, Fayad concludes with a demand for a Palestinian state in the next two years, along the parameters that he has outlined, with an Palestinian state that will have all of Jerusalem as its capital, in an Islamic Sharia state that will campaign for all convicts to be freed, for all refugees to return to the homes and villages that they left in 1948.
A voice of moderation?
It would be interesting to know if the peace groups that distributed Fayad's working paper ever bothered to read it.
View the Original Link: Palestinian Prime Minister Belies Moderate Image
The Philadelphia Bulletin: Denigration of Israel in the Public Domain: Yom Kippur and the American Jewish Media
The principle of Freedom of the Press assures every media outlet the right to publish freely in the public domain. Yet on Yom Kippur, we couch that freedom with a restraint on "Hotzaat Shem HaRa" - denigration in the public domain
In 2008, Tikkun magazine, a fellow member of the American Jewish Press Association, won the American Jewish Press Association ‘s Simon Rockower Award for “Excellence in Special Sections or Supplements” for its “Israel at 60” issue.
Yom Kippur provides an opportunity for AJPA to reconsider such an award to a special issue of a magazine which was dedicated to promoting "Hotzaat Shem HaRa" and the denigration of Israel.
That issue contains vile diatribes against Israel as a human-rights-violating oppressor of the Palestinian people, a “shanda fur de goyim” (a disgrace among the nations), and an idolatrous worshipper of power instead of trust in YHVH (the God of healing and transformation, the God that calls for a world based on love and generosity and promises to throw the Jews out of their land if they do not embody this different and very anti-”realistic” perspective that is the whole point of being Jewish).” In that issue, Tikkun editor Michael Lerner described the founding of Israel by writing that “...Jews were determined to be as ruthless towards others as others had been towards us. Yet, there were alternatives. We could have remained a minority in an Arab country and hoped for the goodness of the Arab people to prevail...We could have reached out...to a growing Palestinian nationalist movement and tried to create a bi-national state. We could have rejected20the Histadrut's "Jewish only" policy of membership...” Lerner added that “starting in the 1980s, it was the Jews who rejected reasonable offers for peace...” and that “the kind of Zionism that has emerged in Israel is fundamentally incompatible with the highest values of the Jewish tradition, and must be rejected...”
This is reminiscent of an interview with Dr. Mubarak Awad, head of a Palestinian “Center for the Study of Non-Violence” which Tikkun magazine commissioned our agency to conduct, on January 8, 1988.
Dr. Awad, whose office was decorated with pictures of Dr, Martin Luther King and Dr Mahatma Ghandi, said in the taped interview for Tikkun that he favored a coalition of violent and nonviolent organizations that would advocate the Palestinian cause. When Dr Awad was asked how his approach differed from the pure approach of non-violence advocated by King and Ghandi, Awad responded that he was "more pragmatic than they were." However, Tikkun Michael Lerner deleted these questions in the March 1988 published interview, explaining later that "this is not the Awad we know.”
In terms of current Tikkun Denigration activities, the Tikkun invitation to Alice Walker to speak for them on Yom Kippur speaks for itself.
Walker remains one of those who refer to Israel’s war with Gaza in terms of Israel’s “war crimes”.
It will be most instructive to observe the reaction of the American Jewish Press Association to Lerner’s latest act of denigration of Israel in the public domain.
The second Yom Kippur matter with AJPA concerns allegations of a former president of the American Jewish Press Association, Marc Klein, who engaged in a serious Hotzaat Shem HaRa against my work.
During this past year, I requested news interviews with J Street through J St9 9s representative - Steve Rabinowitz of Rabinowitz Dorf - asking for the opportunity to raise journalistic questions of the organizers of J Street concerning J Street's continued description of the PLO/Fatah/Abbas/The PA as a “moderate” entity..
However, Rabinowitz refused to allow me to ask questions to J Street organizers.
Incredibly, Marc Klein supported the idea that Rabinowitz would not have to answer questions from a journalist.
Klein justified the idea by attacking me as a right wing ideologue who is not really a journalist.
In other words, AJPA defines Michael Lerner as a journalist, but not David Bedein.
It is doubtful whether Klein bothered to peruse 909 bylined articles in the Philadelphia Bulletin , 2006-2009, which have been published over the past three years to see for himself whether the title “journalist” was appropriate or not..
With the advent of Yom Kippur, it would behoove Klein to express regret for engaging in Hotzaat Shem HaRa against me, and to admit that he while he may not like my questions, that he does recognize me as a colleague and professional journalist.
I have worked diligently in the world of journalism since launching a news agency at Beit Agron on Dec.1, 1987, a web magazine on Feb 1 1997 and assuming the chairmanship of an academic research center on August 1, 2005.
During these 22 years, I have applied my MSW and social work ethics to my work, and to stick to the facts, no matter whose toes are stepped on.
As a student of Saul Alinsky, whom I learned with at the Free University in Madison forty years ago, the principle of focusing on moral principles while carrying out a professional role remains of primary concern.
Contrary to how Klein has stereotyped my work, the passion of my background is in the peace movement, both in the United States and in Israel. From 1970 to the present, I was involved in Jewish-Arab dialogue groups, with organizations that advocate the protection of Jewish and Arab civil liberties, and with groups that seek a solution to the continuing indignity of Arab refugee camps.
When the PLO betrayed the principles pf the peace movement, the responsible thing do was to blow the whistle on the PLO, unlike many colleagues from the peace movement and from the world of social work who prefer to look the other way and to give the benefit of the doubt to the PLO, which continues to endorse the liberation of all of Palestine - albeit in stages - and the return of refugees and their descendants to homes from 1948 which no longer exist..
Israel Resource works on issues that most reporters prefer to ignore: the PLO suppression of civil liberties and human rights, the PLO persecution of Christians, the PLO media celebrations of those who murder Jews, the new PLO textbooks which inculcate the idea that Israel should be wiped off the face of the earth. (http://tinyurl.com/ydgfzna)
Israel Resource made enemies in the Jewish media by exposing Arafat before others did so, by hiring Palestinian journalists to record Arafat’s message in Arabic to his own people, while most of the media ignored Arafat’s clear message in Arabic.
Our Palestinian TV crew was the only TV media outlet that covered the Palestinian National Council meeting in April 1996 which would not change the PLO covenant to destroy Israel, which contradicted the lie promulgated at the time that the PLO had changed its covenant. (http://tinyurl.com/ydvrhof)
Today, it is understood that Arafat was not a man of peace.
However, that was not always the case.
Our agency that exposed the fact that the UJC, in October 1999, intended to bestow the Isaiah Award for Peace on Yassir Arafat, Steve Rosenberg, then the editor of the Jewish Advocate in Boston, checked our story and received confirmation from the UJC and from Arafat’s office that the UJC indeed planned to grant the Isaiah Award for Peace to Arafat.
Thanks to that revelation, the UJC was forced to cancel that honor to the terror chieftan.
UJC never thanked our agency for saving them from that disgrace.
Imagine if Arafat’s obituary five years later would have mentioned an honor granted to Arafat by the American Jewish establishment?.
Instead, the UJC hired Kroll Associates to investigate the sources of our story, and issued memos to Jewish Federations to beware of our agency.
Yes, there is a price to be paid for being ahead of your time.
Today, with Yom Kippur on the horizon, the American Jewish media copes with paid professionals associated with the New Israel Fund, the Americans for Peace Now and Rabinowitz Dorf/J Street, all of whom are members in good standing of the American Jewish Press Association, all of whom promote the idea that the PLO/Fatah wants peace, along with the notion that Jewish communities beyond the 1949 armistice lines stand n the way of peace. They promote the idea that anyone who reports the PLO’s Arabic language message should be dismissed as “right wing” and not be listened to.
Arafat’s protégé, Abbas, in negotiation with Hamas to run a joint dictatorship over the Palestinian people, remains in control.
While Abbas's voice is softer than Arafat. his message remains the same.
Jewish media who cover suppression of Palestinian human rights could easily focus on Palestinian refugees and their descendants who are confined by the UN to the squalor of UNRWA refugee camps, funded by the Western nations, under the premise and promise of the right of return to villages from 1948 that no longer exist.
However, such concerns do not fit the agenda of those who denegrate the state Israel and such concerns do not fit the agenda of those who hold Israel responsible for confining Palestinian Arabs to refugee camps for an entire generation.
Yom Kippur is designed to bring about an inner change which will produce new ways of thinking and considering the challenges of life.
That should apply to the Jewish media and its coverage of the PLO.
Our agency asks, once again, that the June 2010 annual meeting of the American Jewish Press Association conduct a session on the Arabic language message of the PLO and its Palestinian Authority to their own people. If the PLO will convey a message of peace and reconciliation in the Arabic language by then, that will be discussed. Indeed, The Obama Administration is now addressing itself to the issue of virulent Palestinian incitement, unlike the Clinton and Bush administrations which ignored the issue.
In 2008, Tikkun magazine, a fellow member of the American Jewish Press Association, won the American Jewish Press Association ‘s Simon Rockower Award for “Excellence in Special Sections or Supplements” for its “Israel at 60” issue.
Yom Kippur provides an opportunity for AJPA to reconsider such an award to a special issue of a magazine which was dedicated to promoting "Hotzaat Shem HaRa" and the denigration of Israel.
That issue contains vile diatribes against Israel as a human-rights-violating oppressor of the Palestinian people, a “shanda fur de goyim” (a disgrace among the nations), and an idolatrous worshipper of power instead of trust in YHVH (the God of healing and transformation, the God that calls for a world based on love and generosity and promises to throw the Jews out of their land if they do not embody this different and very anti-”realistic” perspective that is the whole point of being Jewish).” In that issue, Tikkun editor Michael Lerner described the founding of Israel by writing that “...Jews were determined to be as ruthless towards others as others had been towards us. Yet, there were alternatives. We could have remained a minority in an Arab country and hoped for the goodness of the Arab people to prevail...We could have reached out...to a growing Palestinian nationalist movement and tried to create a bi-national state. We could have rejected20the Histadrut's "Jewish only" policy of membership...” Lerner added that “starting in the 1980s, it was the Jews who rejected reasonable offers for peace...” and that “the kind of Zionism that has emerged in Israel is fundamentally incompatible with the highest values of the Jewish tradition, and must be rejected...”
This is reminiscent of an interview with Dr. Mubarak Awad, head of a Palestinian “Center for the Study of Non-Violence” which Tikkun magazine commissioned our agency to conduct, on January 8, 1988.
Dr. Awad, whose office was decorated with pictures of Dr, Martin Luther King and Dr Mahatma Ghandi, said in the taped interview for Tikkun that he favored a coalition of violent and nonviolent organizations that would advocate the Palestinian cause. When Dr Awad was asked how his approach differed from the pure approach of non-violence advocated by King and Ghandi, Awad responded that he was "more pragmatic than they were." However, Tikkun Michael Lerner deleted these questions in the March 1988 published interview, explaining later that "this is not the Awad we know.”
In terms of current Tikkun Denigration activities, the Tikkun invitation to Alice Walker to speak for them on Yom Kippur speaks for itself.
Walker remains one of those who refer to Israel’s war with Gaza in terms of Israel’s “war crimes”.
It will be most instructive to observe the reaction of the American Jewish Press Association to Lerner’s latest act of denigration of Israel in the public domain.
The second Yom Kippur matter with AJPA concerns allegations of a former president of the American Jewish Press Association, Marc Klein, who engaged in a serious Hotzaat Shem HaRa against my work.
During this past year, I requested news interviews with J Street through J St9 9s representative - Steve Rabinowitz of Rabinowitz Dorf - asking for the opportunity to raise journalistic questions of the organizers of J Street concerning J Street's continued description of the PLO/Fatah/Abbas/The PA as a “moderate” entity..
However, Rabinowitz refused to allow me to ask questions to J Street organizers.
Incredibly, Marc Klein supported the idea that Rabinowitz would not have to answer questions from a journalist.
Klein justified the idea by attacking me as a right wing ideologue who is not really a journalist.
In other words, AJPA defines Michael Lerner as a journalist, but not David Bedein.
It is doubtful whether Klein bothered to peruse 909 bylined articles in the Philadelphia Bulletin , 2006-2009, which have been published over the past three years to see for himself whether the title “journalist” was appropriate or not..
With the advent of Yom Kippur, it would behoove Klein to express regret for engaging in Hotzaat Shem HaRa against me, and to admit that he while he may not like my questions, that he does recognize me as a colleague and professional journalist.
I have worked diligently in the world of journalism since launching a news agency at Beit Agron on Dec.1, 1987, a web magazine on Feb 1 1997 and assuming the chairmanship of an academic research center on August 1, 2005.
During these 22 years, I have applied my MSW and social work ethics to my work, and to stick to the facts, no matter whose toes are stepped on.
As a student of Saul Alinsky, whom I learned with at the Free University in Madison forty years ago, the principle of focusing on moral principles while carrying out a professional role remains of primary concern.
Contrary to how Klein has stereotyped my work, the passion of my background is in the peace movement, both in the United States and in Israel. From 1970 to the present, I was involved in Jewish-Arab dialogue groups, with organizations that advocate the protection of Jewish and Arab civil liberties, and with groups that seek a solution to the continuing indignity of Arab refugee camps.
When the PLO betrayed the principles pf the peace movement, the responsible thing do was to blow the whistle on the PLO, unlike many colleagues from the peace movement and from the world of social work who prefer to look the other way and to give the benefit of the doubt to the PLO, which continues to endorse the liberation of all of Palestine - albeit in stages - and the return of refugees and their descendants to homes from 1948 which no longer exist..
Israel Resource works on issues that most reporters prefer to ignore: the PLO suppression of civil liberties and human rights, the PLO persecution of Christians, the PLO media celebrations of those who murder Jews, the new PLO textbooks which inculcate the idea that Israel should be wiped off the face of the earth. (http://tinyurl.com/ydgfzna)
Israel Resource made enemies in the Jewish media by exposing Arafat before others did so, by hiring Palestinian journalists to record Arafat’s message in Arabic to his own people, while most of the media ignored Arafat’s clear message in Arabic.
Our Palestinian TV crew was the only TV media outlet that covered the Palestinian National Council meeting in April 1996 which would not change the PLO covenant to destroy Israel, which contradicted the lie promulgated at the time that the PLO had changed its covenant. (http://tinyurl.com/ydvrhof)
Today, it is understood that Arafat was not a man of peace.
However, that was not always the case.
Our agency that exposed the fact that the UJC, in October 1999, intended to bestow the Isaiah Award for Peace on Yassir Arafat, Steve Rosenberg, then the editor of the Jewish Advocate in Boston, checked our story and received confirmation from the UJC and from Arafat’s office that the UJC indeed planned to grant the Isaiah Award for Peace to Arafat.
Thanks to that revelation, the UJC was forced to cancel that honor to the terror chieftan.
UJC never thanked our agency for saving them from that disgrace.
Imagine if Arafat’s obituary five years later would have mentioned an honor granted to Arafat by the American Jewish establishment?.
Instead, the UJC hired Kroll Associates to investigate the sources of our story, and issued memos to Jewish Federations to beware of our agency.
Yes, there is a price to be paid for being ahead of your time.
Today, with Yom Kippur on the horizon, the American Jewish media copes with paid professionals associated with the New Israel Fund, the Americans for Peace Now and Rabinowitz Dorf/J Street, all of whom are members in good standing of the American Jewish Press Association, all of whom promote the idea that the PLO/Fatah wants peace, along with the notion that Jewish communities beyond the 1949 armistice lines stand n the way of peace. They promote the idea that anyone who reports the PLO’s Arabic language message should be dismissed as “right wing” and not be listened to.
Arafat’s protégé, Abbas, in negotiation with Hamas to run a joint dictatorship over the Palestinian people, remains in control.
While Abbas's voice is softer than Arafat. his message remains the same.
Jewish media who cover suppression of Palestinian human rights could easily focus on Palestinian refugees and their descendants who are confined by the UN to the squalor of UNRWA refugee camps, funded by the Western nations, under the premise and promise of the right of return to villages from 1948 that no longer exist.
However, such concerns do not fit the agenda of those who denegrate the state Israel and such concerns do not fit the agenda of those who hold Israel responsible for confining Palestinian Arabs to refugee camps for an entire generation.
Yom Kippur is designed to bring about an inner change which will produce new ways of thinking and considering the challenges of life.
That should apply to the Jewish media and its coverage of the PLO.
Our agency asks, once again, that the June 2010 annual meeting of the American Jewish Press Association conduct a session on the Arabic language message of the PLO and its Palestinian Authority to their own people. If the PLO will convey a message of peace and reconciliation in the Arabic language by then, that will be discussed. Indeed, The Obama Administration is now addressing itself to the issue of virulent Palestinian incitement, unlike the Clinton and Bush administrations which ignored the issue.
Sunday, August 30, 2009
The Philadelphia Bulletin: Hamas Imposes Islamic Dress Code on Students
by David Bedein
With the commencement of the school year next week, The Middle East Newsline has confirmed that Hamas has imposed an Islamic dress code on female students.
Hamas announced that female students must wear Islamic dress in schools starting from the current academic semester. The dress code stipulated head covering and full-length robes and required that teachers instruct only those of the same sex.
"Any female student that does not attend class in the proper attire will be sent home," Hamas said on Aug. 24.
The Hamas regulation came in wake of numerous denials by the Islamic regime in the Gaza Strip of plans to impose a dress code for females. Hamas has also established a so-called modesty police force aimed to prevent the mixing of sexes at beaches or unmarried couples in cars.
Under the dress code, the head covering of the girls must be white, and wear a blue robe.
"The uniform should be as follows: Navy blue jilbab with white headscarf and black or white shoes," said the announcement. "We request that all girls follow these instructions."
The Palestinian Education Ministry has banned the employment of male teachers at girls' schools and women teachers in boys' schools. The regulations would directly affect the 250,000 students of government schools, which began the academic year on Aug. 23.
On Aug. 24, Palestinian sources said several girls were sent home when they arrived to school in jeans. The sources said Christian girls in government schools were also forced to observe the Muslim dress code.
In 2009, Hamas, amid the rise of Al Qaida, imposed Islamic law on the Gaza Strip, including forcing female attorneys to wear Islamic dress. Hamas has also been pressing the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), with 200,000 enrolled in its school system, to abide by the regulations.
Hamas controls recently won control of the UNRWA teachers association, winning 85 percent of the vote.
View the original article in the Philadelphia Bulletin
With the commencement of the school year next week, The Middle East Newsline has confirmed that Hamas has imposed an Islamic dress code on female students.
Hamas announced that female students must wear Islamic dress in schools starting from the current academic semester. The dress code stipulated head covering and full-length robes and required that teachers instruct only those of the same sex.
"Any female student that does not attend class in the proper attire will be sent home," Hamas said on Aug. 24.
The Hamas regulation came in wake of numerous denials by the Islamic regime in the Gaza Strip of plans to impose a dress code for females. Hamas has also established a so-called modesty police force aimed to prevent the mixing of sexes at beaches or unmarried couples in cars.
Under the dress code, the head covering of the girls must be white, and wear a blue robe.
"The uniform should be as follows: Navy blue jilbab with white headscarf and black or white shoes," said the announcement. "We request that all girls follow these instructions."
The Palestinian Education Ministry has banned the employment of male teachers at girls' schools and women teachers in boys' schools. The regulations would directly affect the 250,000 students of government schools, which began the academic year on Aug. 23.
On Aug. 24, Palestinian sources said several girls were sent home when they arrived to school in jeans. The sources said Christian girls in government schools were also forced to observe the Muslim dress code.
In 2009, Hamas, amid the rise of Al Qaida, imposed Islamic law on the Gaza Strip, including forcing female attorneys to wear Islamic dress. Hamas has also been pressing the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), with 200,000 enrolled in its school system, to abide by the regulations.
Hamas controls recently won control of the UNRWA teachers association, winning 85 percent of the vote.
View the original article in the Philadelphia Bulletin
Monday, August 3, 2009
The Philadelphia Bulletin: Israel Renews Construction Supply Sale to Gaza
by David Bedein
Fourth Anniversary Of Explusions Marked: What Do The Katif Communities Look Like Now
An area where Israel continues to cope with is the world wide campaign against Israel’s restrictions of potentially lethal exports into Gaza.
Since the Hamas terror takeover of Gaza in June 2007, Israel did halt the sale of iron, cement and other building materials into Gaza to prevent the construction of fortifications such as underground bunkers and the use iron to manufacture weapons and rockets
On July 16, a group of Philadelphia Rabbis, led by Rabbi Arthur Waskow of Germantown’s Shalom Center, organized Rabbis from all over the United States to conduct an international day of fasting to protest the Israeli “blockade” of humanitarian and medical supplies into gaza.
Due to such pressure, Israel on Thursday allowed renewed export of 300 tons of cement, steel pipes and construction materials into Gaza, for the first time since its military offensive last January.
Rabbi Waskow would not return phone calls to explain why he spread the false rumor that Israel had blocked humanitarian and medical supplies into Gaza.
Mr. Raed Fattouh, an official in the Palestinian Ministry of National Economy, confirmed in an interview with the Palestinian Ma'an news agency that cement would be shipped through UNRWA, the United Nation's relief agency for Palestinian refugees. The Israeli government also approved the transfer of 25 million dollars in cash into Gaza each month, earmarked to pay the salaries of the Palestinian Authority workers and UNRWA workers-
An Israeli security establishment spokesman stressed that "We will carry out all the necessary examinations to ensure that the cement does not fall into the wrong hands-to Hamas,"
However, since Hamas terrorists won an overwhelming victory in the March 2009 UNRWA workers election, with Hamas winning more than 80% of the vote, UNRWA facilities are solidly in the hands of the Hamas terror personnel. This was the third straigt election which affirms the dominant Hamas role in UNRWA.
Israel Minister of Defense, Ehud Barak, would not respond to a Bulletin query as to how Israel could avoid cement and cash payments from falling into the hands of Hamas, since Hamas personnel dominate UNRWA facilities in Gaza.
Fourth Anniversary Of Explusions Marked
This week, more than 2,000 people took part yesterday in a rally to mark the fourth anniversary of Israel’s expulsion of 21 Jewish communities from the Katif district of Gaza.
The rally, held near the Kissufim border crossing to the east of Gaza was attended by expelled residents from various Katif communities, including hundreds of teenagers and young children.
"I am a refugee in my own land and am trying to rehabilitate myself,"
said Mr. Avi Farhan, who was evicted from Yamit in the Sinai in April 1982 after the Camp David Accord and then from Elei Sinai in northern Gaza in August 2005. "You need to understand that it is going to take seven years of living out of boxes, moving from one rented apartment to another, until we move into our own house."
At this point in time, 8 out of the 23 permanent communities earmarked for the Katif evictees are still under construction.
In 11 of the communities, preliminary infrastructure work has yet to be begun. Unemployment among the evictees is 21%, as opposed to the 5% unemployment rate that existed when the Katif communities were thriving.
What Do The Katif Communities Look Like Now?
Four years after the destruction of the 21 Katif Jewish communities, several Israeli journalists hired Palestinian cameramen to take pictures of the destroyed Jewish communities, to see what Palestinians had done there since taking over the area.
What Israelis want to know is whether overcrowded UNRWA refugee camps had moved into the abandoned Jewish communities of Katif.
Polls show that Israeli and international public opinion supported the eviction of the Jewish communities from Katif in order to enable a better life for thousands of Palestinian families who have been confined to teeming tenements of UNRWA refugee camps since 1948.
However, pictures taken by a Palestinian photographer show that contrary to what Israelis believed would happen, Palestinians have not built a single new house in the
any Katif community, four years after the destruction of these Jewish communities, where public buildings were allowed to remain..
The photographs indicate that the Palestinians completely destroyed anything that was left standing following the evacuation process, including synagogues and buildings that remained standing.
More than 100 photographs were taken in the framework of the project.
"What is sad is that it's very hard to identify the buildings that are documented in the photographs," said one Israeli journalist who had covered Katif for the international media.
Why have Palestinians from overcrowded UNRWA camps not moved into the abandoned Katif communities?
An UNRWA camp committee spokesman explained that, “These were not our homes - we want to move back to the homes that we left after we were expelled in 1948 - from places like Beer Sheva and Ashkelon”
Obama To Achieve Normalization Gestures From Arab World?
After several days of consultations with Israeli government officials, US Presidential Middle East envoy George Mitchell left his Israeli interlocutors with an assurance that President Obama would be able to extract some normalization gestures towards Israel from the Arab world within a month, following White House confirmation that Preisdent Obama had indeed sent letters leaders of Morrocco, Bahrain, Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, asking them for confidence-building measures toward Israel.
However, Saudi Arabia, the kingpin of the Arab League of Nations which has been in a formal, full scale war with Israel since 1948, immediately responded with a full rejection of any gesture of normalization with Israel, so long as Israel does not relinquishsovereignty over Jerusalem, allow recognition of the right of return of Palestinian refugees from 1948, and stop the development of any Jewish community that lies in areas acquired by Israel in 1967.
View this story in the Philadelphia Bulletin
View this story at Israel Behind the News
Fourth Anniversary Of Explusions Marked: What Do The Katif Communities Look Like Now
An area where Israel continues to cope with is the world wide campaign against Israel’s restrictions of potentially lethal exports into Gaza.
Since the Hamas terror takeover of Gaza in June 2007, Israel did halt the sale of iron, cement and other building materials into Gaza to prevent the construction of fortifications such as underground bunkers and the use iron to manufacture weapons and rockets
On July 16, a group of Philadelphia Rabbis, led by Rabbi Arthur Waskow of Germantown’s Shalom Center, organized Rabbis from all over the United States to conduct an international day of fasting to protest the Israeli “blockade” of humanitarian and medical supplies into gaza.
Due to such pressure, Israel on Thursday allowed renewed export of 300 tons of cement, steel pipes and construction materials into Gaza, for the first time since its military offensive last January.
Rabbi Waskow would not return phone calls to explain why he spread the false rumor that Israel had blocked humanitarian and medical supplies into Gaza.
Mr. Raed Fattouh, an official in the Palestinian Ministry of National Economy, confirmed in an interview with the Palestinian Ma'an news agency that cement would be shipped through UNRWA, the United Nation's relief agency for Palestinian refugees. The Israeli government also approved the transfer of 25 million dollars in cash into Gaza each month, earmarked to pay the salaries of the Palestinian Authority workers and UNRWA workers-
An Israeli security establishment spokesman stressed that "We will carry out all the necessary examinations to ensure that the cement does not fall into the wrong hands-to Hamas,"
However, since Hamas terrorists won an overwhelming victory in the March 2009 UNRWA workers election, with Hamas winning more than 80% of the vote, UNRWA facilities are solidly in the hands of the Hamas terror personnel. This was the third straigt election which affirms the dominant Hamas role in UNRWA.
Israel Minister of Defense, Ehud Barak, would not respond to a Bulletin query as to how Israel could avoid cement and cash payments from falling into the hands of Hamas, since Hamas personnel dominate UNRWA facilities in Gaza.
Fourth Anniversary Of Explusions Marked
This week, more than 2,000 people took part yesterday in a rally to mark the fourth anniversary of Israel’s expulsion of 21 Jewish communities from the Katif district of Gaza.
The rally, held near the Kissufim border crossing to the east of Gaza was attended by expelled residents from various Katif communities, including hundreds of teenagers and young children.
"I am a refugee in my own land and am trying to rehabilitate myself,"
said Mr. Avi Farhan, who was evicted from Yamit in the Sinai in April 1982 after the Camp David Accord and then from Elei Sinai in northern Gaza in August 2005. "You need to understand that it is going to take seven years of living out of boxes, moving from one rented apartment to another, until we move into our own house."
At this point in time, 8 out of the 23 permanent communities earmarked for the Katif evictees are still under construction.
In 11 of the communities, preliminary infrastructure work has yet to be begun. Unemployment among the evictees is 21%, as opposed to the 5% unemployment rate that existed when the Katif communities were thriving.
What Do The Katif Communities Look Like Now?
Four years after the destruction of the 21 Katif Jewish communities, several Israeli journalists hired Palestinian cameramen to take pictures of the destroyed Jewish communities, to see what Palestinians had done there since taking over the area.
What Israelis want to know is whether overcrowded UNRWA refugee camps had moved into the abandoned Jewish communities of Katif.
Polls show that Israeli and international public opinion supported the eviction of the Jewish communities from Katif in order to enable a better life for thousands of Palestinian families who have been confined to teeming tenements of UNRWA refugee camps since 1948.
However, pictures taken by a Palestinian photographer show that contrary to what Israelis believed would happen, Palestinians have not built a single new house in the
any Katif community, four years after the destruction of these Jewish communities, where public buildings were allowed to remain..
The photographs indicate that the Palestinians completely destroyed anything that was left standing following the evacuation process, including synagogues and buildings that remained standing.
More than 100 photographs were taken in the framework of the project.
"What is sad is that it's very hard to identify the buildings that are documented in the photographs," said one Israeli journalist who had covered Katif for the international media.
Why have Palestinians from overcrowded UNRWA camps not moved into the abandoned Katif communities?
An UNRWA camp committee spokesman explained that, “These were not our homes - we want to move back to the homes that we left after we were expelled in 1948 - from places like Beer Sheva and Ashkelon”
Obama To Achieve Normalization Gestures From Arab World?
After several days of consultations with Israeli government officials, US Presidential Middle East envoy George Mitchell left his Israeli interlocutors with an assurance that President Obama would be able to extract some normalization gestures towards Israel from the Arab world within a month, following White House confirmation that Preisdent Obama had indeed sent letters leaders of Morrocco, Bahrain, Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, asking them for confidence-building measures toward Israel.
However, Saudi Arabia, the kingpin of the Arab League of Nations which has been in a formal, full scale war with Israel since 1948, immediately responded with a full rejection of any gesture of normalization with Israel, so long as Israel does not relinquishsovereignty over Jerusalem, allow recognition of the right of return of Palestinian refugees from 1948, and stop the development of any Jewish community that lies in areas acquired by Israel in 1967.
View this story in the Philadelphia Bulletin
View this story at Israel Behind the News
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
