Follow by Email

Tuesday, May 24, 2011

Obama’s position “hurt the peace process gravely,”

The plan for a negotiated peace between Israel and the Palestinians based on the 1967 Israeli border was dealt a serious blow and damaged the global image of the United States, Israeli advocate and Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz told Newsmax.TV.
Dershowitz was commenting on Obama’s Thursday address at the State Department in which he pressed Israel to reach a peace agreement with the Palestinians and set the 1967 border as it existed before the Six-Day War as a starting point. Obama’s position “hurt the peace process gravely,” he said, adding that the president’s declaring such a marker repeated a negotiating error that led to an earlier breakdown in talks when he insisted on a freeze of Israeli settlements in occupied territories.
“He made the same mistake again in this speech,” Dershowitz said. “He put himself ahead of the Palestinians. That is he insisted Israel go back to ’67 borders with land swaps, but he did not demand that the Palestinians give up the right of return.”
The former Supreme Court law clerk and noted defense lawyer believes the speech will have a “terrible impact” on U.S. Israeli relations and increased the level of distrust dramatically, although “polite discourse” will continue.
“The tragedy is during the Obama administration the prospect of peace has gone further away than it’s ever been in recent years since Israel offered to give the Palestinians a state . . . He’s been ham-handed in how he has dealt with the issue of negotiations and the result is we’re further away than ever before from negotiated peace and that’s in large part the fault of President Obama and I think that’s the terrible tragedy of how he’s handled this process.”
Dershowitz also maintained the speech will damage the country’s image.
“I think also the speech was not particularly good for the United States,” he said. “It set us out in a way that showed naiveté and created a situation where neither side will be encouraged to move toward peace by what the president said. So I think on balance it was a net loss rather than a net gain. And I am disappointed because I favor a two-state solution, I voted for Obama and I was hoping he would have a more sophisticated and realistic approach to negotiations which he doesn’t seem to have. He has twice now set back the prospects for negations and a two state solution.”
Dershowitz also criticized how little time Obama spent on the question of Iran and its nuclear weapons program. Obama devoted few words to the issue in his speech, noting at one point that the United States’ “opposition to Iran’s intolerance and Iran’s repressive measures, as well as its illicit nuclear program and its support of terror, is well known.”
“The thousand-pound elephant in the room that threatens Israel’s security more than the Palestinians, or the Syrians or the Egyptians is the prospect that Iran will develop nuclear weapons,” Dershowitz said. “Although he threw a little bone against Iranian development of nuclear weapons he did not guarantee Israel that Iran would not be permitted to develop nuclear weapons. In fact he had a big statement saying Israel will have to be prepared to defend itself alone.”
Such language increases the “distress most Israeli’s have in Obama,” Dershowitz said.
“It would have been far better had he not make that speech than that he included the few paragraphs he did about Israel which were ill conceived and I think not helpful to the peace process,” he said.

Monday, May 16, 2011

Thoughts on Palestinian Unity

I don't agree with all of the things Noa says here, Earl probably wouldn't either, but he would have felt it was important to hear what this loyal Israeli had to say about the Fatah plan to declare themselves a country, and what that entails.
Achinoam Nini is an Israeli, from Yemen.
She is quite beautiful, and is Israel's most popular vocalist.

Thoughts on Palestinian Unity

Here’s my take on the Hamas-Fatach unity deal.

My opinion of Hamas is well known: putting it lightly, I’m not a fan.

On the other hand, they were elected democratically (for all I know) by the majority of Gazans. Sadly, in my opinion, but that’s the way it is.

My major problem (amongst many) with Hamas is that they deny Israel’s right to exist. In fact their formal decree is that every Jew should be hunted out and killed wherever they may hide. Nice guys.

Israel has often stated that it cannot deal with Abu Mazen because he is “too weak” and “does not really represent the majority of the Palestinian people”.

Well, now he has entered into a coalition with Hamas. And he is the one doing the talking. No matter how you look at it, these are not the doings of a weak man. I personally admire Abu Mazen and wish Netanyahu would exhibit half the wisdom and leadership.

We all know that as September approaches, Israel will have to deal with The Palestinian move towards recognition of their Independence by the UN. I have stated in the past that I see it as totally pathetic that Israel, rather than initiating talks and signing an agreement, is forcing the Palestinians to do it on their own and “drag” us onto reluctantly agreeing: How ignoble that is, how embarrassing, how indicative of our present governments total impotence and lack of navigational skills.

I believe the fledgling Palestinian state will not receive the recognition it desires so long as members of its government (Hamas) continue to deny Israel’s right to exist. So if they are adamant about proceeding, they will have to amend that, which is a good thing. If they refuse to, it is difficult to believe they will be embraced by the international community as they strive to be.

Further, whatever agreement is reached does not depend on radical voices within each government, as long as the agreement is signed. Israel’s government also includes parties who deny the existence of a Palestinian people or the need for/legitimacy of an independent Palestinian state. That will not stop any given government from making an agreement, IF it can. We believe the Israeli people, government and future governments will respect that agreement…and we would like to believe the same goes for the Palestinians, however mixed their opinions could be.

If Hamas, as part of the Palestinian government, continue to be set on destroying Israel, and carrying out their sinister plans after the peace agreement is signed (the greatest fear of many Israelis), then we will go to war with them. But this time, the rules of the game will be different: it will not be Israel attacking so-called “innocent civilians” who are under her “cruel occupation”, but fighting against equals: a country with an army (Palestine) that has chosen to obliterate another country with an army (Israel).

Needless to say that is a horrible scenario. But how much more horrible than what is already happening, or what could potentially happen if we do not proceed?

So: I say lets wait and see, throw our omnipresent Paranoia down the drain and go bravely into what has the potential of being a new and better future for our region.

Monday, May 09, 2011

I Wish You Were Here, Earl

I wish you were here, Earl, of course I always wish that, every day, but particularly I wished you'd been here to see the end of Bin Laden, the mass-killer.
As the rest of those criminal miscreants, OBL was a dedicated Jew-killer, an enemy of Israel, and basically all cvivilization.
The world is so much better off without this evil criminal,
Your spirit and your life gives us strength against those who would harm us..
There is a huge empty space that you filled, that is sadly empty, except to the extent that your powerful spirit over powered death,
We miss you, Earl Krugel.

Our blessing to your entire family, and especially your grandsons and your dear wife, Lola.

Irv Rubin and Earl Krugel