Tag Archives: Palestine

Palestinian Statehood – Separating Fact from Fantasy


The NY Times recently reported that the Vatican has concluded a treaty recognizing Palestinian statehood. During Israel’s recent election, however, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu commented that if re-elected, he would oppose the creation of a Palestinian state. He has good reason to oppose it.

Security Council Resolution 242 (November 22, 1967) speaks of withdrawal by Israel from lands occupied in the Six-Day War provided that Israel’s sovereignty, territorial integrity, political independence and right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force are recognized.

The response of the Palestinians and the Arab world was simple and unequivocal – The Khartoum Declaration – “No recognition, no negotiation, no peace” – and despite generous offers by Israeli Prime Ministers Barak and Olmert, it is clear that no Palestinian leader then or now is prepared to accept Israel’s right to exist in any borders whatsoever despite all the rhetoric to the contrary.

This became clear on May 10th, 1994, in the wake of Arafat’s signing the Oslo Accords, when he travelled to Johannesburg, South Africa and compared his signing of the Accords with Mohammed’s deceptive signing of a 10-year peace treaty at Hudaybiyyah with the Quraish tribe of Mecca. Two years later, Mohammed broke the Treaty, attacked the Quraish, slaughtered them and conquered Mecca. In other words, the 10-year Treaty was a deception designed to allow Mohammed time to build his forces until they were powerful enough to conquer the Quraish. Arafat stated unequivocally that he viewed the Oslo Accords in the same light as Hudaybiyyah.

In the same month, Israel and the PLO signed the Cairo Agreement under which Israel withdrew from Jericho and more than half of Gaza , all of which was turned over to Palestinian control. The Agreement was based on the formula of “land for peace” whereby Israel relinquished strategic territory and the Palestinians promised to prevent violence and combat terrorist attacks against Israel.

The Cairo Agreement had the exact reverse effect. It unleashed a wave of unprecedented Palestinian terrorism, which included suicide bombings that shook Israel to its core. “Land for peace” quickly devolved into “land for terrorism.” Subsequent deals, such as the Oslo II Accord of September 1995, the January 1997 Hevron protocol, and the October 1998 Wye River Agreement were all based upon the same principle. In each case, Israel handed territory over to the Palestinians in exchange for promises of peace, and, in each instance, without fail, Israel’s gestures were reciprocated with terrorist attacks against its citizens and its country.

And for those who maintain that a more “moderate” Palestinian leadership is now in power, perhaps they should consider the comments of Ahmed Bahar, deputy speaker of the PA parliament, who, on May 14th, confirmed that the Palestinian parliament continues to reject any Jewish right to the land of “Palestine” (meaning the State of Israel) which it defined as “an Islamic endowment to which Jews have no right to even a single inch.” It also confirmed that the Palestinians will never agree to the settlement of the so-called “Palestinian refugees” outside the territory of “Palestine” (meaning the State of Israel), nor will they ever agree to recognize Israel.

The Palestinians have broken every promise they made in the Oslo Accords and continue to seek recognition from world bodies such as the UN and the ICC so as to avoid any negotiations (as required by the Accords) or compromise that would require their recognition of the State of Israel.

Critics of Netanyahu’s position fail to note that, in furtherance of this goal, Palestinian suicide bombers were sent into Israel during the Second Intifada solely for the purpose of killing Jews in marketplaces, restaurants and discoteques because they believed that by doing so, they would secure their “martyrdom”.

The irony is that there never was a “peace process” except in the minds of the Western media and most Western leaders who have bought into all these lies and deceptions. The intention, rather, was to use international diplomatic pressure to force Israel into making strategic concessions that would ultimately lead to its destruction ….. as Arafat openly admitted in Johannesburg over twenty years ago.

Critics should note as well that the Palestinian educational system includes Palestinian poetry, schoolbooks, crossword puzzles and children’s music videos that teach Palestinian children that “Jews are the descendants of pigs and monkeys” and must be killed, and Palestinian leaders have openly declared that any future Palestinian state would be “Jew-free”. They are also using US and European foreign aid dollars to pay Palestinian terrorists in Israeli prisons as well as the families of Palestinian suicide bombers, and they continue to name marketplaces, town squares, tournaments, and cinemas after these suicide bombers whom they hail as “heroes” and “martyrs”. Nor is mention ever made of Hamas’s founding Charter that openly calls for the murder of Jews wherever they are, and for the destruction of their State.

The sad truth is that the Palestinians want a state not beside Israel, but in place of it. If critics would take the time to read what the Palestinians are saying to each other in Arabic (as translated by the Middle East Media Research Institute and Palestine Media Watch) as opposed to what they are saying to Western leaders and the Western media in English, they would understand the Islamic concept of taqqiyah (deception) and discover the real truth behind the Arab-Israeli conflict – not Israel’s refusal to accept a State of Palestine, but the Arab refusal to accept the existence of Israel as a Jewish state on what they consider to be Islamic lands.

Netanyahu’s new government needs to reject any such pressure to recognize a Palestinian state under current circumstances as should all Western leaders. To give up further lands in exchange for a deceitful peace is something that Israel tried in the 1990s with tragic results. It should not be repeated again.


Mark Silverberg

The writer is a foreign policy analyst for the Ariel Center for Policy Research (Israel). He is a former member of the Canadian Justice Department, a past Director of the Canadian Jewish Congress (Western Office), a member of Hadassah’s National Academic Advisory Board and a Contributing Editor for Family Security Matters and Intellectual Conservative. He served as a Consultant to the Secretary General of the Jewish Agency in Jerusalem during the first Palestinian intifada. His book “The Quartermasters of Terror: Saudi Arabia and the Global Islamic Jihad” and articles are archived at http://www.acpr.org.il andwww.marksilverbeg.com.

Palestinians and the Art of the Possible

Bismarck once said, “Politics is the art of the possible.” So it is with the Mideast, as much as it was in the Europe of Bismarck. The pro-Western, and pro-Zionist side is failing to take this insight to heart, preferring legal theory to practical wisdom.

The Jewish writer Yehudit Shier Weisberg is quick to cite San Remo as the authorization for Jewish settlement wherever in Judea and Samaria that Jews build communities. She has noted:

The present United Nations Charter recognizes its obligation to uphold the commitments of the League of Nation[s]. Article 80 of the UN Charter states that a right gained through a Mandate will not expire as a result of the expiration of a Mandate — Yehudit Shier Weisberg

Mrs. Weisberg further builds her case:

… [R]ights once granted or recognized under a treaty or other legal instrument do not expire with the expiration of the treaty or instrument is now codified in article 70(1)(b) of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties … — Yehudit Shier Weisberg

This leads to the conclusion:

So according to international law valid to this day, Jews are allowed to settle anywhere west of the Jordan River — Yehudit Shier Weisberg

With such a forceful legal insight, Mrs. Weisberg correctly asserts the Jewish right to build in Judea and Samaria under International Law.

However, the inconvenient flip side of San Remo, is that Arabs in Judea and Samaria are also to have full civil rights, which were also forcefully guaranteed by the Palestinian Mandate, and which also do not expire. If the Mandates obligations to the Jews are valid, so also are the obligations to the Arabs.

The same Mandate guaranteed:

…safeguarding the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine, irrespective of race and religion. — Article 2, of final draft of the League of Nations San Remo Mandate

We know that these rights included the right to vote, as the British Mandate offered voting rights to the Arabs.

As I have told my Jewish friends, from time to time, San Remo is a two-edged sword, and one cannot assert one’s rights under San Remo, while ignoring the aforementioned rights of the Arabs. The Arabs were to be treated equitably, which requires voting and building permits.

If San Remo is to be the basis for Israel’s claims to Judea and Samaria, then extending full civil rights, including voting rights, to the Arabs must follow. This is precisely why Israel has offered the voting franchise to the Arabs in the Golan Heights and the eastern side of Jerusalem. If those local Arabs are foolish enough to  not avail themselves of the offer — and most are so foolish — their rights still do not expire, as Mrs. Weisberg has so forcefully demonstrated.

Where those rights are not tendered to the Arabs, the Jewish rights, it might be argued, are in abeyance, since the rights are connected. Yet, today the Arabs in Judea and Samaria, when prosecuted by Israel, are tried in military, not civil, courts with a consequent abridgment of legal protections. They have no say, by voting, in the Israeli government which controls their borders, a right guaranteed by San Remo, which, as noted, does not expire.

Sadly, San Remo was weak. Britain was quick to riddle the document with escape clauses; and duplicitous enough to avoid declaring a Jewish precedence in rights over the Arab, except in the right of setting up national homeland. Britain talked out of both sides of her mouth; and left a time bomb of a problem.

To be sure, I am not so crazy as to advocate that Israel immediately extend the franchise to 2 million increasingly radicalized Arabs in Judea and Samaria; but that is the flip side of any claim to the land based on San Remo. If Jewish rights do not expire, then neither do Arab rights. That is the rub; and that is why I am not so benighted as to build a case for Israel based on a flawed San Remo.

Therefore, let us remove the problem from sovereignty by virtue of a sorely duplicitous San Remo instrument and apply the principle of Bismarck. Let us aim for what is possible, with an eye to saving Israel apart from the suicidal obligations of San Remo to the Arabs.

Concentrating on what is possible, we find that young Arabs are willing to immigrate out of Judea and Samaria.

44% of young Palestinians are willing to [e]migrate if given the opportunity. — Dr. Martin Sherman, citing a Bir Zeit University Poll, as quoted by JPOST, 2006

That is an amazing statistic. At once we see that almost half of the future Palestinian demographic in Judea and Samaria could disappear, if we dispensed with blaming one side or the other, and worked to implementing a practical solution.

The Arab elite are so terrified of this statistic that they have issued fatwas against emigration.

No doubt, once the 44% have left, the remaining 56% might soften their hardline stance, and more could be persuaded to leave.

So the question remains: if 44% of Arab youth in Judea and Samaria are willing to emigrate. How can we help them? The answer, of course, is by financial compensation.

Arrangements can be made to offer visas to a third country, along with monetary packages, tended to the youth upon arrival in that country. The money should be sufficient to set the youth, or young family, up in a self-sustaining basis in the new land. Low-balling compensation, to lower costs, would only defeat the purpose. Moreover, the Palestinians should come in with enough capital that the receiving nations would welcome them as assets, rather than burdens. No nation will take in poor Palestinians.

$100,000 per adult, with $50,000 for children under 14, would prove more than sufficient to set up Palestinians for life in many countries, offering them enough to purchase a house and a business.

For this to work requires a willingness to forego some justice. Many Israelis want no part of reimbursing the violent Palestinians, but while such a view might have merit, the end result will be a continued low-grade war. Bismarck’s wisdom is in order here.

For a precedent to this view, one might cite the American Civil War. Prewar abolitionists were horrified when the plan to purchase and manumit slaves was considered. It was ungodly to reward the slave owner with profit for his crime. However, the Civil War cost far more than the contemplated purchased manumission would have, with the horrific result that 600,000 of America’s finest stock died. The Constitution would not have been distorted from a prewar extreme of state’s rights to the postwar extreme of Federal control, and a happier balance would have obtained. Sometimes, the most moral thing to do is to forego human justice; and leave it up to God.

Assuming we have such money available, what countries would take them in?

Sadly, we must rule out all the Arab countries. The Arabs have determinedly refused to naturalize Palestinians for decades, under the aegis of the Casablanca Protocol of 1965. Though neutrality stated, the Protocol is exercised to deny rights to any Palestinian. The Arabs, who otherwise disagree on everything else, have shown a remarkable cohesion on this. Some nations, like Saudi Arabia, have a Palestinian naturalization exclusion written into their laws.

Pressure could be put on non-Arab Muslim nations to take their brethren; though by extension, we can probably safely assume that Pakistan, Malaysia, and Indonesia will exhibit that very same Muslim solidarity against naturalization. Should that be proven wrong, and Palestinians be welcomed, these countries would prove wonderful destinations, where the Palestinians could be set up in a prosperous condition for a reasonable cost.

The cost of setting up the Palestinians in Europe and America would be prohibitive. Moreover, given Arab anger at the West — which is blamed for its part in creating Israel — it would probably not be so safe to take too many Palestinians in.

But, as I previously noted in AT, there is a place in the world where Arabs are welcomed, where they often become elites, and almost always assimilate well: South America. While most Arab immigrants to South America were Christian, not all were — and the descendants of those Muslims who did arrive are often Christian. Moreover, South America is a place where $100,000 per adult would be sufficient to set up the Palestinians for life.

So let’s crunch some numbers, shall we?

Uruguay allows anyone who can show a $6,000 a year income to immigrate in. A young Palestinian couple coming in with $200,000 would easily meet that requirement — with any future children becoming Uruguayan rather than potential mujahideen in Judea and Samaria.

Uruguay, right now, has a population of 3.3 Million, with less than 400 being Muslim.

The Muslim population lives primarily near the border with Brazil. An Islamic cultural representative estimated 300 to 400 Muslims in the country but noted that the majority were minimally observant. – U.S. State Department, 2007

Were Uruguay to accept 25,000 Muslims, they en toto would only constitute 0.75% of Uruguay’s population.

Uruguay is probably South America’s most secular republic. A civil war was fought over this principle, and Uruguay ruthlessly secularized, removing crucifixes from classrooms, and God from oaths. Such a secular people will not so easily tolerate Islamic extremism. The new Palestinian arrivals, if dispersed, will assimilate, and eventually Christianize and/or secularize over time.

We in America know fully well the power of Hispanic culture, which is why our legal, voting, and tax forms are now bilingual. Hispanic culture, formed out of the Reconquista, will not so easily yield to multicultural tolerance of Islamic shenanigans; but will eventually overpower it. Once young Palestinian females catch a glance of Uruguay’s lusty national dance, the Candombe, sharia will collapse rather quickly.

This is no mere exercise in thought. Obama and Kerry offered a $4 billion dollar package to the Palestinians trying to wring out a peace deal in 2013. For that same amount of money, they could have moved 40,000 young Palestinian women to South America, which would have been a real move for peace.

If Uruguay could easily take 25,000 Palestinians, how about Chile?

Chile has 18 Million people. Less than 4,000, or 0.025% are Muslim. Moreover Chile is in the midst of an Evangelical Revival, which would sweep up many new arrivals. If 100,000 Palestinians were sent to Chile — at an overall cost of $10 billion dollars — $100,000 per adult — they would still constitute only about 0.6% of the population. Already, Chile has shown a willingness to absorb even Muslim Palestinians at lower numbers. Chile has a large 500,000 strong, economically settled, assimilated, intermarried, and elite Palestinian Christian community, which is rather sympathetic to many of the Muslims in Judea and Samaria. These Palestinian Christians would outnumber the new Muslim arrivals around 5 to 1. The rest of Christian non-Palestinian Chileans would outnumber the Muslims almost 175 to 1.  A few new mosques might be built; but in the end, assimilation is inevitable, and the mosques would eventually be sold to strip malls for construction.

One has to merely make sure that the new arrivals are not concentrated in Muslim ghettos, and one can readily see that in one generation, most will convert either by intermarriage with Christians, or by choice. One could further recommend that individual families be located near Evangelical Pentecostal Churches, and the outcome would be all but certain.

Peru has 30 Million people with only 5,000 Muslims. If 150,000 Palestinians were sent to Peru, they would constitute less than 0.5% of the population. Like, Chile, Peru has strong Evangelical communities, some of which even send missionaries to the Muslim world.

Brazil, with 200 Million people, could take more. São Paulo has a large Christian Arab community which would welcome them, and even has an Arab Evangelical Church.

Likewise with Argentina, Paraguay, Colombia, etc. in proportion to their population, and economic capacity for absorption, with preference being given to those countries with stronger proselytizing Evangelical communities.

In all these countries, families coming in with $100,000 per adult, and $50,000 per child under 14, could easily buy a house, a car, and set up a business in South America. The arrivals would be readily welcomed by large Christian Arab communities, already prosperous and settled for generations, who would ease the immigrants’ introduction, and hasten their assimilation, while toning down their Islamic ardor, and probably completing the arrangement with intermarriage unto conversion, something which is quite common as evinced by this Muslim-Argentine with a Christian daughter.

A non-practicing Muslim, [Tamara] married an Argentine Christian and allowed her two daughters to choose their own religion. “One is a Christian, the other one is still thinking about it”, Tamara says. — Buenos Aires Herald

Though most Zionists are eager to point out that Islamic rage is independent of the return of the Jews to their land — in order to avoid the blame game — it cannot be denied that, though the Jews are right in their return, that return has been a red flag in the face of the Islamic bull.

We cannot accept that Palestine will become Jewish. — Osama Bin Laden

A festering Palestinian problem only aggravates an already crazed Islamic street. Moving the Palestinians out of Palestinian will not make the Muslim street any saner, but it will refocus their rage internally, rather than at the West, whom they blame for supporting Zionism.

But how can this be done? No Arab group will agree to sell out Palestine.

Precisely! But who says we have to go through Arab agencies? I suggest that the deal be discretely offered to individuals. Dr. Martin Sherman had referred to this as atomization. It does not require corporate Arab agreement.

An effort could be made, especially to young Arab women — the ones who have yet to start childbearing — that they could be offered an escape from sharia. They could be offered $100,000 and a visa to a South American republic. The key is the visa. Without an escape, they would never take the money. Women, in particular, being less violent, would be more readily acceptable to Latin countries. There is no reason that an offer could not be made, and the woman flown out in a few hours, before retaliation is even possible.

Would it work? To some extent. Every little bit helps. It will start off slowly, but as more settle into South America, social networks will be created to help the remaining arrivals. It will accelerate over time. Landed Arabs will never agree, but they are a minority. Landless — and by extension, rootless — youth would have nothing to lose. Concentrate on getting the women out, for they hold the key to stopping the demographic growth of Arabs. Removing men would do nothing in a polygamous society, where the remaining men would merely double up on the wives. As the number of women decrease, testosterone will force men to leave, many at their own expense.

Who should pay?

Some Christian churches, the Evangelical Right, should be asked to contribute. If Arab countries can be persuaded to contribute, I have no problem; but I doubt any Arab country will subsidize an Arab flight from “Palestine.” Don’t hold your breath.

Much of this will have to be subsidized by the Jewish community worldwide. If that irks some Jews, and it will, remind them of the Abolitionist error during the Civil War. Impress dissenters that by subsidizing the relocation, they are not rewarding the Arab, but rather indirectly paying a third-party country to take the problem off of Israel’s back. No payments means the Israelis are stuck with the problem. In the end, this will be cheaper than a Mideast Conflagration.

The EU should be persuaded — by legal action, if necessary — to stop contributing to Arab building projects. The millions spent on building solar-powered camps for Bedouins could easily pay for Palestinians to be relocated. It matters not whether the Arab construction is illegal, or whether Israel is illegally withholding permits from the Arabs. Avoid the legal wrangling altogether, and do what is practicable.

But does this sound crazy?

Au contraire! In fact, in 2008, Condoleezza Rice suggestion a Palestinian relocation to a province in Argentina.

The United States proposed giving Palestinian refugees land in South America as a radical solution to a problem that has haunted Middle East peace talks for decades. — The Guardian

Secretary Rice’s solution was just a variation of what is being suggested here, except that in this plan no one South American country would have to provide the whole solution by ceding a province, and the Palestinians would not be concentrated, encouraging a growth in Islam; but rather spread far and wide with an eye to assimilation.

Conclusion: Rather than arguing about the rights granted to the Jewish people under San Remo — which conversely require rights also be tendered to the Arabs as well — a better solution can be found in applying a common-sense policy of relocation, using the wisdom of Bismarck that “politics is the art of the possible.”

Forget the legalese, which can swing both ways, and concentrate on merely moving the Arabs out.

Recognize that whether morally just or not, Jews will have to pay much of the expense. Christian Zionists should also be encouraged to put their money where their mouth is. The EU and the State Department should be required to stop subsidizing a continuance of the Arab problem, and refocus their monies on a solution. Cut subsidies to UNRWA and use the money to relocate the Arabs. Cut subsidies to the Palestinian Authority and use the money to send Arab women out to a life of freedom. The monies spent on tent cities built in Area C — which sooner or later, rightly or wrongly, will be bulldozed by the Israelis — should be used to relocate the Arabs instead.

The key here is to make sure that the incoming Arabs are not concentrated. The arrivals should be kept under 1% of the population of whatever country takes them in. South Africa, where Muslims are only 1.5% of the population, but very powerful, has shown that 1% is about the tipping point for social issues. Under 1% and Islam dies out, which is the historical South American experience. Caution should therefore be exercised in the number of immigrations sent to Argentina, which is near that 1% Muslim tipping point already. With 400 million in South America, the addition of 2 Million Palestinians from Judea and Samaria to the continent would constitute only 0.5% of the continental population, well under our cutoff.

Gaza is another matter and may be a lost cause; but since Jews are not presently settling in Gaza, it can be kept under blockade. Judea and Samaria is the pressing situation. Concentrate there.

Europe and the USA should inform Arab countries that no Arab immigration will be tolerated until the Arabs start naturalizing Palestinians in Syria, Egypt, Iraq, etc. Those who will not naturalize Palestinians should not expect us to naturalize them.

The UN should be told that funding to maintain the problem will not be subsidized. Rather only funding to relocate will be considered. Had all the money spent on a two-state solution been spent on relocation, Judea and Samaria would be Jewish by now.

Finally, stop nay-saying. This is doable, if people would forego their pride, concentrate less on who is right or wrong, and just work toward ending the problem. Politics is the art of the possible.

Mike Konrad is the pen name of an American who is neither Jewish, Latin, nor Arab. He runs a website, http://latinarabia.com, where he discusses the subculture of Arabs in Latin America. He wishes his Spanish were better.

Palestinian Hamas leader reportedly beheaded by ISIS

 The war between Sunni ISIS and Shiite Iran is taking a toll on Hamas, allied with the mullahs.  ISIS has taken control of 90% of a Palestinian “camp” (really just a district of Damascus) that once housed half a million people, but which, in the wake of the civil war in Syria, now houses 18,000 people. And once in control, ISIS turned its savagery against a sworn enemy of Israel. Erika Solomon of the Financial Times reports on the background:

Militants from Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (Isis) have seized nearly all of a Damascus district just outside the city centre, activists said, amid reports of atrocities in the besieged neighbourhood.

Activists on Saturday said the jihadi group may succeed in cementing a foothold in the Syrian capital, a move that would increase pressure on President Bashar al-Assad’s seat of power as he tries to fight a four-year revolt against his rule. (snip)

“Reports of kidnappings, beheadings and mass killings are coming out from Al-Yarmouk,” said Saeb Erekat, an member of the Palestinian Liberation Organisation’s executive committee, based in the West Bank. “The priority must be to save the Palestinian refugees in the camp by creating a safe passage for them out of the death trap that Al-Yarmouk has become.”

Arutz 7 provides the detail:

On Saturday, senior Israel Arab journalist Khaled Abu Toumeh posted agraphic image which appeared to show the severed head of Sheikh Abu Salah Taha, held aloft by an ISIS fighter in Yarmouk.

A Turkish news site supplies the grisly picture:

One can get dizzy trying to follow the connections and rivalries that animate this Islamic religious civil war. If it doesn’t engulf humanity in a catastrophe, at least it has the possibility of distracting the militants from destroying Israel.

Israel would never behave in such a manner, but can you imagine the world outcry if Israel behaved so barbarically toward those sworn to genocide against it?

Will The Real Palestine Please Stand Up?

Hamas 6

Ilya Meyer // Part of the “solution” to the entire Middle East morass that US President Obama reckons is the key to the outbreak of world peace, universal love and spontaneous outbursts of “Kumbaya” being sung in Hebrew, Arabic and Persian, is the evasive Palestinian-Israeli peace, that elusive chimera that if caught will solve all our problems in single stroke.

So here are a few truths that we all need to internalise so we can all help President Obama realise his dream. You may think this is difficult, that no, we can’t achieve it. But the fact is, YES WE CAN. In fact, we even have an entire electoral campaign built around that simple, universal truth. A truth so simple yet so condensed that experts in Washington are still trying, six years later, to ascertain what it actually means at its very heart.


  1. There are no prospects for peace anywhere in the entire Middle East unless Palestinian Arabs get a capital city (they don’t yet have a state and they’re killing each other over who should rule that state, but hey, who’s quibbling) which is in the heart of Jerusalem. Let me explain: Jerusalem is the Israeli capital city that none other than Barack Obama (yes, this same one, not a clone) insisted in the run-up to his election must remain the undivided and sole capital of the State of Israel.
  2. It is apparently this lack of peace between Israelis and Palestinian Arabs – and the troubling lack of a Palestinian Arab capital inside the Israeli capital – that is fuelling sectarian Sunni-on-Shia violence in Lebanon. And Syria. And Iraq. And Yemen.
  3. Equally clearly, it is this lack of peace between Israelis and Palestinian Arabs that is fuelling the rise of Boko Haram and Al Shabab in Africa.
  4. And of course it is the same reason why Muslim immigrants are perpetually displeased in countries such as Britain, France, Sweden, Belgium, Germany, Australia – in fact, the entire world where they have settled. What is confusing and very annoying, however, is why Hindu, Sikh, Jewish, Chinese, Filipino, Polish, Rumanian and other immigrants insist on swiftly acclimatising to and fully embracing their new lives in these very same countries. That’s REALLY annoying and needs to be studied, but that’s a separate issue.
  5. Unsurprisingly, it is the lack of peace between Israelis and Palestinian Arabs that is prompting Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmud Abbas, currently in the eleventh (11th) year of his 5-year presidency, to threaten the Jewish state of Israel with terrorism, war and even legal action for alleged war crimes – by which he means Israel’s attacks against Gaza, the Hamas-controlled enclave from which Hamas has fired more than 14,000 missiles into exclusively civilian population centres in Israel – schools, apartment houses, shops, buses, kindergartens, hospitals.
  6. All of which explains, equally clearly, why this same Abbas is now entreating the Arab world to bomb that same Gaza – because Hamas ousted Abbas from power in a bloody coup almost a decade back. Of course, he doesn’t want to threaten the Arab world with terrorism, war and legal action if they do bomb Gaza. That treatment is only reserved for Jews. And before you can ask – no, this kind of deliberate selection of Jews and only Jews for negative treatment is NOT anti-Semitic: some of Abbas’s best friends are Jews…
  7. Hamas 2

All the above is of course perfectly clear to any right-thinking individual. What isn’t clear, at least to this writer – and I would really love US President Barack Obama to comment on this – is how this Palestinian Fatah call to bomb Palestinian Hamas can be squared with the US President’s solution, since both Fatah and Hamas are in a coalition government with each other. And Obama assures us that the only solution for peace in the entire Middle East is for Israel to make peace with the Palestinian Arabs.

Because of course the logical question is, which Arabs? Those Hamas Arabs who bomb Jews in their homes? Or those Fatah Arabs who bomb Israel for daring to bomb those Hamas Arabs who bomb Jews in their homes? Or those Fatah Arabs who implore the rest of the Arab world to bomb those Hamas Arabs who kill Fatah Arabs – but only for that crime, not because they also bomb Jews in their homes?

Hamas  1

In short, which Palestinian Arabs are we supporting?

President Obama, I’m asking you this question because you’ve constantly assured us you have all the answers. We’ve seen how right you’ve been so far in Libya, Egypt, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Israel, Russia.

So please, President Obama, would you please just help us out here? We could do with all the help you can offer. But don’t take time out from your busy schedule with Iran – securing that watertight deal, which gives us peace in our time, naturally comes first.

And don’t mind what Israel does in the meantime as you sip a cup of mint tea in Tehran and savour the historic signing ceremony. Israel won’t be bothering you at all after this.

Because Israel will be too busy preparing for the war of survival you have just foisted on the Jewish state as she scrambles to defend itself from spreading Iranian Mullah hegemony.

What hegemony, you ask Mr President? Look at a map: Iran, then Lebanon, then Syria, then Iraq. And now Yemen.

In all this raging conflict and geopolitical turbulence, it’s reassuring to know that we still have the solution within our grasp. The solution you so rightly underscore as the only issue worth discussing, Mr President: peace between Israel and the Palestinian Arabs. But not peace among the Palestinian Arabs, or their backers, or the vast Arab and wider Muslim hinterland to the north, south or east…

PA responds to US court ruling that the PA has to pay $655 million to victims of terror

by Itamar Marcus and Nan Jacques Zilberdik
PLO Executive Committee member Hanan Ashrawi:

“We will appeal the ruling, and we wholeheartedly believe that we will win the appeal”

“The PLO and the PA had absolutely nothing to do with these actions”

“We were denied [the status] known as ‘sovereign immunity’ to which we are entitled as a sovereign state”

“The PA and the PLO lack the funds necessary to pay”

“The US State Department issued a warning not to visit Israel at that time (2000-2004)… What were they [Americans] doing in a region about which there is a warning?”

MP and Commission of Prisoners’ Affairs Director Issa Karake:

“The recent ruling of the American court… sets a dangerous precedent that contradicts international law”

“[It is] forbidden to deal with or appear before these courts, since their objective is to harm the PLO’s standing”

PA government:

“We will continue to cast out extremism and violence from our midst, and to preserve our strong commitment to peaceful popular resistance and international, political, legal and moral justice. As always, we are absolutely prepared to be partners in the peace process.”

Economic expert Dr. Nasser Abd Al-Karim:

“If the ruling goes into effect after the appeal, it will be final, and it will be obligatory to pay. Even if the PA does not pay, it will represent a liability for it, and it may encounter difficulties in performing financial transactions and transfers, or in opening bank accounts in the international banking system.”

Last week, the US Federal District Court in New York ruled that the Palestinian Authority is financially liable for $655 million in damages to victims of terror attacks. 10 American families who are all victims or related to victims of Palestinian terror, sued the PA for damages, saying that the PA was responsible for the terror attacks in which they were personally injured or their relatives were killed during the years of the PA terror campaign (Intifada, 2000-2005)..

The US court ruled in favor of the terror victims, accepting the prosecutor’s claim that the PA was responsible for these attacks. Palestinian Media Watch‘s documentation of the PA leadership’s conduct during the period in question and later statements by PA leaders has been a vital part of the prosecution’s preparation for the case.

Responding to the verdict, PLO Executive Committee member Hanan Ashrawi immediately stated that the PA and the PLO will “appeal the ruling” [Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Feb. 25, 2015] and next time use “a firm capable of achieving what we are entitled to.” [Watan TV, Feb. 24, 2015] She also said that the PA and the PLO “do not have the funds to pay the compensation.” [Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Feb. 25, 2015]

PA Parliament Member and Director of the Commission of Prisoners’ and Released Prisoners’ Issa Karake said that “the recent ruling of the American court… sets a dangerous precedent that contradicts international law,” and stated that it is “forbidden to deal with or appear before these courts, since their objective is to harm the PLO’s standing…” Karake also said that “the Palestinian people has fallen victim to political extortion,” and that it is “fitting that we start suing Israeli officers, soldiers and officials in the courts of countries whose laws allow for it, and that we hurry to turn to the International Criminal Court in order to sue the occupation army and its commanders for the war crimes they perpetrated and continue to perpetrate against our people.” [Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Feb. 7, 2015]

The PA government was quoted in the official daily as stressing “its confidence that justice would be done for the Palestinians and their leadership,” stating: “We believe in the American legal system, and are absolutely certain in our rational conviction and well-founded legal position.” It also added that:

“We will continue to cast out extremism and violence from our midst, and to preserve our strong commitment to peaceful popular resistance and international, political, legal and moral justice. As always, we are absolutely prepared to be partners in the peace process as well as uncompromising defenders of our people’s rights and our homeland, in order to live as a free, independent, democratic and thriving state that will coexist peacefully with its neighbors.”

[Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Feb. 24, 2015]

The following are longer excerpts of statements by PA officials responding to the US court’s decision that the PA pay $655 million to victims of PA terror:

PLO Executive Committee member Hanan Ashrawi:

“The PA and the [Palestinian Liberation] Organization lack the funds necessary to pay these compensations or fines…. It is also extremely difficult to find a US law firm willing to defend the PLO, PA or the Palestinians. In the next stage, the stage of appeal, we will have a firm capable of achieving what we are entitled to…

We were denied [the status] known as ‘sovereign immunity’ to which we are entitled as a sovereign state. This is a very serious matter, for the entire world recognizes us as a state, except for a few countries, including the US.”

[Watan TV (independent Palestinian channel), Feb. 24, 2015]

PLO Executive Committee member Hanan Ashrawi:

Headline: “Ashrawi: New York court ruling was based on false claims”

“PLO Executive Committee Member Hanan Ashrawi stressed yesterday [Feb. 24, 2015] that the PLO and the PA are determined to appeal the ruling of the US Federal [District] Court in New York, which held them responsible for six bombing attacks carried out by Palestinians in Israel, and ordered to pay compensation to the killed [victims’ families].

Ashrawi stated that the Court’s accusations were based on false and unfounded claims, while failing to immediately set a date for the submission of an appeal.

Ashrawi spoke at a press conference she had organized at the central PLO headquarters in El-Bireh, during which she described the [court’s] ruling to impose a fine as an act of extortion, coming at a time when Israel continues to seek to bring down the PLO and the PA, who are committed to a peaceful solution according to international laws and resolutions.

Ashrawi denied there was any link between the PLO and the PA to the events that formed the subject of the court’s ruling. She also noted that they had occurred during Israel’s invasion of the towns of the West Bank and its occupation of the Muqata’a, the [PA] Presidential Headquarters in Ramallah, which created a state of complete anarchy and the theft [by Israel] of the Palestinian documents used by the court…

Ashrawi, who had already testified before the court, said the court had refused to refer to Palestine as a state, [but rather] considered the Palestinians as an entity or group that had carried out [military] operations.

She added: ‘US law does not allow for sovereign states to be prosecuted but it does not recognize either the State of Palestine nor Palestinian sovereignty, but rather treats us as if we were some group that has carried out an incident, with no claim to immunity, while most countries of the world have recognized us [as a state].’ She also stressed that the PLO and the PA do not have the funds to pay the compensation.

She said: ‘Individuals with US and Israeli citizenship have decided to take advantage of the US justice system; but this does not contradict the facts, and we maintain that the PLO and the PA had absolutely nothing to do with these [terror] actions. These are false and unfounded claims, and we reiterate that these incidents were not carried out based on PLO or PA decisions, regardless of the titles (i.e., positions in the PA) of those who carried out the incidents.’

She added: ‘We stress that we will appeal the ruling, and we wholeheartedly believe that we will win the appeal. We do not doubt or fault the US justice system in any way.’

Ashrawi noted that there are precedents in which American courts refused to try institutions and organizations that are outside the US…

Dr. Ashrawi noted that this ruling to impose 218 million dollar [payment] on the PLO and the PA comes at a moment of severe financial crisis for Palestine, with Israel’s robbing Palestinian tax money and its working to bring down the PA, the government’s inability to pay its workers’ salaries, and the thwarting of the PLO’s and the PA’s plan to comply with international law – while Israeli individuals are taking advantage of their US citizenship to extort money.

She added: ‘The painful thing is that Israel, since the 1967 occupation alone, has killed over 70,000 Palestinians, arrested 850,000 [others], stolen lands and resources, and expropriated the liberty, rights and lives of the Palestinians. I doubt that any sum of money would be sufficient to pay any kind of compensation to the Palestinian people.’

She continued: ‘One cannot blame the victims for their reactions. This is an oppressive occupation founded on injustice and tyranny, that must come to an end.’

Ashrawi finished her speech by saying that this event highlights the need to turn to the International Criminal Court, because Israel is a state that violates the law, that works in ways that violate the rights of the Palestinians, and we insist on Israel‘s being tried by international law and the sovereignty of international law.

[Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Feb. 25, 2015]

PLO Executive Committee Member Hanan Ashrawi:

“Even after the US State Department issued a warning not to visit Israel at that time (2000-2005), several acts occurred that caused damage to several Americans who had not heeded the US State Department’s warnings. What were they doing in a region about which there is a warning, where there is violence, instability, and so on? Rachel Corrie, who was the victim of premeditated murder (Rachel Corrie was run over trying to stop a bulldozer from destroying terrorist infrastructure, see more information below, -Ed.) using Israeli Caterpillar bulldozers – the Israeli Supreme Court of Justice ruled that this was a state of war and that it could not rule against the person who had committed the murder or the atrocity – the person guilty of her premeditated murder. Certainly, those who came from another country to one in which there was violence and so on – despite the warning issued by their government – and then accuse an entire government, an entire Authority, for every person and for each individual [military] operation, as if the entire Palestinian political establishment were responsible. This is a dangerous precedent. Honestly, I, we all, all the senior [Palestinian] officials, are now monitoring [the issue] daily, in a professional and direct manner. We know we will win the appeal, [even] if we do not succeed in getting an acquittal now.”

[Official PA TV, Feb. 23, 2015]

Note: Rachel Corrie – was run over by an Israeli army bulldozer in Gaza in 2003 while trying to prevent the bulldozers from destroying terrorist infrastructure. The Corrie family sued Israel for “wrongful death” of their daughter but the Israeli court ruled against the Corrie family, stating that the driver could not see Rachel Corrie, that she had intentionally put herself in a war zone, and that her death was a regrettable accident.


 MP and Commission of Prisoners’ Affairs Director Issa Karake

Headline: “Karake: American and Israeli courts put the legitimate Palestinian struggle on trial”

“Commission of Prisoners and Released Prisoners’ Affairs Director Issa Karake said that the recent ruling of the American court in New York, according to which the PA must pay 218 million dollars in compensation to [the families of] those killed, who were US citizens and served in the Israeli army, sets a dangerous precedent that contradicts international law. In addition, he called [the case] a political lawsuit against the legitimate Palestinian national struggle, which is sanctioned by international law and UN resolutions.

Karake said it was forbidden to deal with or appear before these courts, since their objective is to harm the PLO’s standing and to define the Palestinian people’s resistance to the occupation as a criminal act.

Karake said that these Americans had oppressed and killed the Palestinian people in the ranks of the occupation forces, and that they are the ones who should appear before the international courts and pay compensation to the Palestinian victims. Karake noted that Palestine is now a country under occupation, and UN resolutions have established that resisting occupation in order to achieve self-determination and independence is a legitimate right…

Karake wondered how it is possible that the courts have targeted the identity of the national struggle of the Palestinian people, turning all its sacrifices into crimes and acts of [criminal] gangs…

Karake noted that the Palestinian people has fallen victim to political extortion, and that it is fitting that we start suing Israeli officers, soldiers and officials in the courts of countries whose laws allow for it, and that we hurry to turn to the International Criminal Court in order to sue the occupation army and its commanders for the war crimes they perpetrated and continue to perpetrate against our people…”

[Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Feb. 7, 2015]

Op-ed by Hafez Al-Barghouti, regular columnist for official PA daily:

“The Israeli-American Jews played in the American court, which leans in their favor, and sued the PA and the PLO over the wounding of Jews with dual citizenship in [military] operations in Jerusalem. During the same period, between 2002 and 2004, occupation forces attacked all the PA’s headquarters and Security Forces, destroyed all the headquarters and attacked dozens of bases of the National Security Forces, the police, the Preventive Security and the Intelligence Forces. In other words, the PA had no sovereignty over its own territory, not to mention the occupied territories under Israeli control, like Jerusalem. The question is, why did these American-Israelis come to occupied land, and why do they become Americans when they are wounded, and Israelis when they commit crimes against our people?

We do not rely on any American court, because they are, by their very nature, founded on absurdity, not on justice. Yet this fact allows us to sue the US administration itself, as well as the US army, for the crimes they carried out against our people by arming and training the occupation army. It also allows us to turn to courts in other countries – Arab and non-Arab alike.”

[Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Feb. 25, 2015]

Official PA daily:

Headline: “The [PA] government: New York court ruling is a tragic response for millions of Palestinians”

“The [Fatah-Hamas] National Consensus Government expressed deep disappointment over the negative verdict handed down yesterday [Feb. 23, 2015] by the New York [Federal District] Court, which convicted the PA and PLO of having supported a series of bombing operations carried out between 2004 and 2011(sic). Furthermore, the New York court ignored legal precedents repeatedly set by US courts, including a verdict handed down by the federal judge in Washington DC last week, who ruled that local American bodies were not appropriate for hearings of this kind.

The government stressed that the Palestinian bodies involved – the PLO and the PA – would appeal the ruling. It stressed its confidence that justice would be done for the Palestinians and their leadership, stating: ‘We believe in the American legal system, and are absolutely certain in our rational conviction and well-founded legal position.’

The government stated: ‘This verdict is a tragic response for millions of Palestinians, who have invested into the democratic process and the rule of law, in order to work for justice and the correction of the injustice done to them and to the international community, which has invested much, both financially and politically, in the two-state solution the PA is striving for.’

The government added: ‘We will continue to cast out extremism and violence from our midst, and to preserve our strong commitment to peaceful popular resistance and international, political, legal and moral justice. As always, we are absolutely prepared to be partners in the peace process as well as uncompromising defenders of our people’s rights and our homeland, in order to live as a free, independent, democratic and thriving state that will coexist peacefully with its neighbors.'”

[Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Feb. 24, 2015]

Economist in official PA daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida,

Headline: “Will Israel deduct the compensation to the American Jews from [PA] tax money?”
“Economists believe that the US Court of Appeals’ upholding of the New York State jury’s decision, which obligates the PA to compensate the families of several American Jews killed in attacks during the second Intifada (2000-2005), will be a painful economic and financial blow to the PA, causing it partial bankruptcy and partial paralysis…

Economics expert Dr. Nasser Abd Al-Karim stressed to Al-Hayat Al-Jadida that if the ruling goes into effect after the appeal, it will be final, and it will be obligatory to pay. Even if the PA does not pay, it will represent a liability for it, and it [the PA] may encounter difficulties in performing financial transactions and transfers, or in opening bank accounts in the international banking system.”

[Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Feb. 25, 2015]

Top 10 Results of Palestinian Investigation into NC Murders

From Reuters:

The Palestinian government on Saturday condemned as “terrorism” the killings of three young Palestinian-Americans in North Carolina and called on U.S. authorities to include its investigators in the probe.

Police have charged a neighbor with Tuesday’s shooting in the town of Chapel Hill of Deah Barakat, 23, his wife Yusor Abu-Salha, 21, and her sister Razan Abu-Salha, 19, saying the incident followed a dispute over parking.

But investigators said they were also looking into whether the suspect, Craig Stephen Hicks, was motivated by hatred toward the victims because they were Muslim.

Branding Hicks “an American extremist and hateful racist”, the Palestinian Foreign Ministry said the incident suggested a rise in dangerous discrimination against American Muslims.

“We consider it a serious indication of the growth of racism and religious extremism which is a direct threat to the lives of hundreds of thousands of American citizens who follow the Islamic faith,” the ministry said in a statement.

It called for “a serious investigation and the involvement of Palestinian investigators to clarify the circumstances of these assassinations and premeditated murders” in Chapel Hill.

Really? Palestinian Authority “experts” want to investigate the murders?

Given their track record of investigations, that would be interesting indeed.

Here are the top ten findings likely to be discovered by “objective” Palestinian Authority investigators:

  • The bullets were made out of depleted uranium
  • The apartment complex is an illegal settlement for all non-Muslims who live there
  • Hicks blanketed the area with white phosphorus
  • Four Korans were stepped on and burned and spat upon during the murders
  • Trained wild boars and dogs attacked the victims
  • Mohammed cartoons were posted on street signs outside the victims’ apartment
  • The parking space had belonged to the victims for 8000 years
  • Hicks is, of course, really a Jew and a Zionist
    • And he owns a bank, two newspapers and a Hollywood studio
  • Two words: Polonium poisoning