Middle East 12:13 AM 5/23/2013
News from America 2:46 AM
Middle East 5:16 AM
Yisrael Medad is a revenant resident of Shiloh, in the Hills of Efrayim north of Jerusalem. He arrived in Israel with his wife, Batya, in 1970 and lived in the renewing Jewish Quarter, eventually moving to Shiloh in 1981.
Currently the Menachem Begin Center's Information Resource Director, he has previously been director of Israel's Media Watch, a Knesset aide to three Members of Knesset and a lecturer in Zionist History. He assists the Yesha Council in it's contacts with the Foreign Media in a volunteer capacity, is active on behalf of Jewish rights on the Temple Mount and is involved in various Jewish and Zionist activist causes. He contributes a Hebrew-language media column to Besheva and publishes op-eds in the Jerusalem Post and other periodicals.
Tishrei 11, 5771, 9/19/2010
The news is
Senior Palestinian Authority negotiator Nabil Shaath has announced that the PA will never accept Israel as a Jewish state...Shaath said that recognizing Israel as Jewish state would undermine the PA's demand for the “right of return,” which would grant Israeli citizenship to the millions of descendants of Arab who fled Israel during its War of Independence...
My advice to Prime Minister Netanyahu is to announce a new moratorium.
No, not on construction in Yesha communities.
And no, not on construction in Jerusalem's new neighborhoods.
Rather a moratorium of "peace" negotiations.
If this is the Arab position, we don't need this. In fact, it's an existential attack on Israel.
Let's have a 10-month suspension on talks.
Tishrei 7, 5771, 9/15/2010
My last blog post referred to the supposed alliance between Israel and the United States and now I've reviewed the remarks of Special Envoy George Mitchell at yesterday's meeting of Israeli, Palestinian Authority and Egyptian leaders at Sharm el-Sheik and I have a problem with Mitchell's language.
First, Mitchell repeats the mantra of 'two states for two peoples' (but that is actually three states for two peoples - Israel, Jordan and a "Palestine"), saying:
"...All of us reaffirmed our commitment to reaching a shared goal of a just, lasting, and secure peace. Our common goal remains two states for two peoples."
He then defines the specific character of those states:
"And we are committed to a solution to the conflict that resolves all issues for the state of Israel and a sovereign, independent, and viable state of Palestine living side by side in peace and security."
and, continuing in an answer to a question, he more explicitly clarifies:
"We have said many times that our vision is for a two-state solution that includes a Jewish, democratic state of Israel living side by side in peace and security with a viable, independent, sovereign, and contiguous state of Palestine. But of course, this is one of many sensitive issues that the parties will need to resolve themselves, and that is the point of negotiations. The parties will reach agreement on all major issues."
So, this proposed "Palestine", does it need have to be democratic? America isn't concerned about that?
And that "contiguity", does it mean all the territories, to the last centimeter, as Sadat used to phrase it, will be surrendered? The Arabs don't have to compromise on territory for a war they started? Will Israel's territorial integrity be endangered from without by this proposed "Palestine" while we also are threatened by demands from within for Arab ethnic autonomy?
What is the US planning for Israel?
Tishrei 6, 5771, 9/14/2010
There is no doubt that the most vexing problem facing Israel in the diplomatic sphere is coming to terms with the thinking of Washington and more specifically, the mindset of President Barack Obama. In the past, we had presidents that were very much beholding to oil interests and others who weren't that favorably disposed to Jews as such. It happens. These are rational dislikes.
But what are we to make of Obama?
My good friend CK sent me an article which you should read and I'll excerpt just one section:
From a very young age and through his formative years, Obama learned to see America as a force for global domination and destruction. He came to view America's military as an instrument of neocolonial occupation. He adopted his father's position that capitalism and free markets are code words for economic plunder. Obama grew to perceive the rich as an oppressive class, a kind of neocolonial power within America...For Obama, the solutions are simple. He must work to wring the neocolonialism out of America and the West. And here is where our anticolonial understanding of Obama really takes off, because it provides a vital key to explaining not only his major policy actions but also the little details that no other theory can adequately account for.
It was written by an Indian, Dinesh D'Souza, president of the King's College in New York City. He is a former White House policy analyst. The King's College is a Christian liberal arts college and is listed by the Intercollegiate Studies Institute as one of the top 50 colleges for conservatives. Born in Mumbai, India, Dinesh D'Souza came to U.S. as an exchange student and graduated Phi Beta Kappa from Dartmouth College in 1983. In a personal sense, he mirrors to a certain extent what Obama stands for: underprivileged geographical origin, non-white. He is, to put it mildly, controversial. His enemy, and that of America, is the cultural left, in his words.
D'Souza concentrates on Obama's economic worldview based on his political outlook. But that neocolonialism also explains much of what has been frustrating Israelis. His refusal to acknowledge the deep-rooted Zionist character of the Jewish people and what Israel is as the national homeland of the Jewish people. The Cairo speech, the Holocaust justification, the push on Jerusalem as well as his refusal to take concrete steps against Iran.
It is too unfortunate that there are Jewish liberals who have flocked to Obama's crusade, seeking to undermine Israel's democratic choice to seek out its destiny, its security and its identity.
America has its problems with Obama; so do we.
It is time we seek out those who can be better allies.
Elul 28, 5770, 9/7/2010
So, it is to be "no Jews allowed".
Mahmoud Abbas of something called the Palestinain Authority is quoted by local Arab news sources as declaring that no Jews will be permitted to reside in Judea, Samaria and the new Jerusalem neighborhoods once peace is agreed upon.
I wonder where all the Arabs of Israel will move to?
That is a logical question, no?
After all, we wouldn't want to be part of a discriminatory policy.
Think about that.
Elul 28, 5770, 9/7/2010
The Hebrew New Year is upon us.
I will do my best to renew my blogging here for all those who are truly dedicated to the Jewish People's right to the Land of Israel, to maintain its national, religious and cultural existence in it historic homeland, in security and with the ability to be a true reflection of our contribution to the process of redemption.
May we all enjoy the New Year's promise in sweetness of our family, friends and allies.
Tags: Inside Israel