 |
||
 |
        |
 |
|
||
| MP3 Radio | Website News Briefs: | |||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
 |
 |
1. Will Netanyahu's Highlights or Concessions Be Remembered
by Dr. Amiel Ungar
Everybody knows that Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is a deft and articulate speaker and he proved this once again in his address before the two houses of Congress. The address had a number of good points, stylistically and content-wise, but the very fact that Tzahi Hanegbi of Kadima could find no fault with it means that it could have been delivered -perhaps with less panache and dash -by another politician and even by a party to the left of Likud.
Let us start with the good points. As opposed to other politicians, the Prime Minister used the words Judea and Samaria and termed them parts of the Jewish homeland. Judea and Samaria is not a cancerous limb, the Prime Minister called them a part of the historic Jewish homeland.
The Prime Minister was blunt about putting the blame on the Palestinian side and establishing the fact that the conflict was not over territory, but over the very legitimacy of a Jewish state in the Middle East. He did this well and amplified the passage in House Majority Leader Eric Cantor's speech before AIPAC that brought down the house.
Israeli politicians, particularly President Shimon Peres, feel that by describing the Palestinians as they are, they are subverting the peace process. Netanyahu was not shy and did not give Arab anti-Semitism a free pass, but cited the genocidal anti-Semitic approach of Hamas. He also effectively inserted mention of the persecution of Christians by the Moslem world.
In seemingly throwaway remarks, Netanyahu demolished the Europeans, saying "the European observers evaporated overnight." He was probably also referring to the Europeans when he condemned the lack of outrage when Iran threatens to eradicate Israel.
He managed to co-opt president Obama on a number of occasions in support of his position, something that will probably have Obama squirming in protest. He also managed a dig here and there, for example, commending Obama for imposing sanctions on Iran but then adding that the American Congress had passed tougher sanctions.
Where Obama was vague, Netanyahu was explicit - no return to 1967, the Arab refugee problem will be solved outside of Israel, and there are creative solutions to Jerusalem, although it will stay undivided and united under Israeli control.
So there were many positives.
There were also negatives, such as the promise that Israel would be in the forefront of those welcoming a Palestinian state to the United Nations. There was talk of generous concessions and some settlements outside the boundaries of a Jewish state.
True, the Prime Minister could argue that the Arabs would never agree to the minimal conditions that he had set in the address. In the meantime, the Arab side has pocketed another concession.
If even a so-called right wing Prime Minister can offer such concessions, what is the Arab incentive for making peace? What penalty does the Arab side face for its refusal to engage in negotiations in the expectation that it will get a better deal?
This was the part of the Obama argument that the Prime Minister did not rebut and should have. If, as Obama says, time is working against Israel, then Israel should snap up every deal that is offered because the world is getting tired of the conflict.
Comment on this story
by Dr. Amiel Ungar
Everybody knows that Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is a deft and articulate speaker and he proved this once again in his address before the two houses of Congress. The address had a number of good points, stylistically and content-wise, but the very fact that Tzahi Hanegbi of Kadima could find no fault with it means that it could have been delivered -perhaps with less panache and dash -by another politician and even by a party to the left of Likud.
Let us start with the good points. As opposed to other politicians, the Prime Minister used the words Judea and Samaria and termed them parts of the Jewish homeland. Judea and Samaria is not a cancerous limb, the Prime Minister called them a part of the historic Jewish homeland.
The Prime Minister was blunt about putting the blame on the Palestinian side and establishing the fact that the conflict was not over territory, but over the very legitimacy of a Jewish state in the Middle East. He did this well and amplified the passage in House Majority Leader Eric Cantor's speech before AIPAC that brought down the house.
Israeli politicians, particularly President Shimon Peres, feel that by describing the Palestinians as they are, they are subverting the peace process. Netanyahu was not shy and did not give Arab anti-Semitism a free pass, but cited the genocidal anti-Semitic approach of Hamas. He also effectively inserted mention of the persecution of Christians by the Moslem world.
In seemingly throwaway remarks, Netanyahu demolished the Europeans, saying "the European observers evaporated overnight." He was probably also referring to the Europeans when he condemned the lack of outrage when Iran threatens to eradicate Israel.
He managed to co-opt president Obama on a number of occasions in support of his position, something that will probably have Obama squirming in protest. He also managed a dig here and there, for example, commending Obama for imposing sanctions on Iran but then adding that the American Congress had passed tougher sanctions.
Where Obama was vague, Netanyahu was explicit - no return to 1967, the Arab refugee problem will be solved outside of Israel, and there are creative solutions to Jerusalem, although it will stay undivided and united under Israeli control.
So there were many positives.
There were also negatives, such as the promise that Israel would be in the forefront of those welcoming a Palestinian state to the United Nations. There was talk of generous concessions and some settlements outside the boundaries of a Jewish state.
True, the Prime Minister could argue that the Arabs would never agree to the minimal conditions that he had set in the address. In the meantime, the Arab side has pocketed another concession.
If even a so-called right wing Prime Minister can offer such concessions, what is the Arab incentive for making peace? What penalty does the Arab side face for its refusal to engage in negotiations in the expectation that it will get a better deal?
This was the part of the Obama argument that the Prime Minister did not rebut and should have. If, as Obama says, time is working against Israel, then Israel should snap up every deal that is offered because the world is getting tired of the conflict.
Comment on this story
2. Rabbi Dasberg Buried; Grandchildren Orphaned Second Time
by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu
Rabbi Uri Dasberg, one of three casualties of a fatal crash Tuesday, was buried Wednesday and leaves behind two grandchildren, whose mother and father were killed in a terrorist attack.
Rabbi Dasberg, 65, of Alon Shvut, Yocheved Altshuler, 55, of Elazar and Elana Olach, 55, of Efrat, were killed when Dasberg's car apparently veered from its lane on Highway 60 south of Jerusalem, between Neve Daniel and Elazar, and was rammed by a truck, hitting another car.
He and his wife Yehudit raised the two infant children of Yaron and Effie Ungar, who were orphaned when their parents were gunned down by Arab terrorists in 1996 while driving near Beit Shemesh.
Effie. the daughter of the Dasbergs, a graduate of Emunah College of Art and Technology in Jerusalem, was already known at her young age as the creator of a newspaper cartoon series for children. It was based on her toddler son Dvir's adventures and the series were published posthumously by her parents in several books which became household words for Israeli children.
Rabbi Yisrael Rosen of the Tzomet Institute that pioneers in halakhic solutions for technological problems, said that he and Rabbi Dasberg, who headed the Alon Shvut institute with him, ”walked hand in hand for 35 years" and had worked together since the founding of Tzomet. Rabbi Dasberg also edited a weekly Torah booklet that is distributed in synagogues all over Israel.
“He was a man of great kindness and as an editor of the Talmudic Encyclopedia, was perhaps one of the best editors of our generation.”
Rabbi Dasberg was so modest that he eschewed the title of “rabbi” despite his having been ordained as such at the Mercaz HaRav and Kerem b’Yavneh yeshivas, Rabbi Rosen added.
Comment on this story
by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu
Rabbi Uri Dasberg, one of three casualties of a fatal crash Tuesday, was buried Wednesday and leaves behind two grandchildren, whose mother and father were killed in a terrorist attack.
Rabbi Dasberg, 65, of Alon Shvut, Yocheved Altshuler, 55, of Elazar and Elana Olach, 55, of Efrat, were killed when Dasberg's car apparently veered from its lane on Highway 60 south of Jerusalem, between Neve Daniel and Elazar, and was rammed by a truck, hitting another car.
He and his wife Yehudit raised the two infant children of Yaron and Effie Ungar, who were orphaned when their parents were gunned down by Arab terrorists in 1996 while driving near Beit Shemesh.
Effie. the daughter of the Dasbergs, a graduate of Emunah College of Art and Technology in Jerusalem, was already known at her young age as the creator of a newspaper cartoon series for children. It was based on her toddler son Dvir's adventures and the series were published posthumously by her parents in several books which became household words for Israeli children.
Rabbi Yisrael Rosen of the Tzomet Institute that pioneers in halakhic solutions for technological problems, said that he and Rabbi Dasberg, who headed the Alon Shvut institute with him, ”walked hand in hand for 35 years" and had worked together since the founding of Tzomet. Rabbi Dasberg also edited a weekly Torah booklet that is distributed in synagogues all over Israel.
“He was a man of great kindness and as an editor of the Talmudic Encyclopedia, was perhaps one of the best editors of our generation.”
Rabbi Dasberg was so modest that he eschewed the title of “rabbi” despite his having been ordained as such at the Mercaz HaRav and Kerem b’Yavneh yeshivas, Rabbi Rosen added.
Comment on this story
3. White House Says Time Has Come for PA ‘Good Will’
by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu
The White House, in a rare departure from “even-handed statements,” said after Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s speech to Congress Tuesday that the time has come for the Palestinian Authority “to give Israel confidence.”
Resuming the political process for creating the Palestinian Authority as a state “is going to require a credible answer from the Palestinians about the role that Hamas is going to play in the new government, and whether a Palestinian partner and interlocutor can credibly say it recognizes Israel’s right to exist and is not committed to engaging in terrorism,” U.S. Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Communications Ben Rhodes told reporters.
“So in the first instance, there is some -- again, some step that needs to be taken on the Palestinian side, again, to give Israel that confidence coming into the negotiation,” he added.
The United States government for years has demanded that Israel make “goodwill” concessions to the Palestinian Authority to boost the standing its leader, Chairman Mahmoud Abbas.
The reunification of Hamas with the government of Mahmoud Abbas, who heads the rival Fatah faction, apparently has finally crossed Washington’s red lines. Israel previously has agreed to skip over Roadmap requirements that the PA first halt incitement to violence and that the borders of a new PA state be negotiated.
The Bush and Obama governments have gradually whittled away almost all of the commitments made by the Palestinian Authority in the Oslo Accords, and the “Roadmap to Peace” outlined by then-President George W. Bush. The PA already has violated the Oslo Accords in several ways, including creating – with American military training and aid – an army which officially is called a “police force” and whose numbers far surpass those allowed by the agreement.
Contrary to the Roadmap, the United States has agreed to the Arab world’s demand that Israel accept final borders before meeting for what it calls negotiations. U.S. President Barack Obama this week, while accepting the PA demands for borders based on the 1949-1967 Armistice lines, backtracked somewhat by saying that the same borders would be altered by “land swaps” due to large Jewish population centers in Judea and Samaria.
Rhodes did not state any criticism of Prime Minister Netanyahu’s speech, which won almost unprecedented applause in Congress and widespread criticism from media pundits who apparently expected the Prime Minister to make further concessions. The winning style of Prime Minister Netanyahu, who clearly felt at ease in Congress, also ruffled the feathers of opposition politicians and media columnists.
The New York Times' Thomas Friedman wrote after Prime Minister Netanyahu's speech, "If Netanyahu actually put a credible, specific two-state peace map on the table — not just the same old vague promises about 'painful compromises' — he could get the Americans and Europeans to toss in anything Israel wanted, including the newest weapons, NATO membership, maybe even European Union membership."
Comment on this story
by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu
The White House, in a rare departure from “even-handed statements,” said after Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s speech to Congress Tuesday that the time has come for the Palestinian Authority “to give Israel confidence.”
Resuming the political process for creating the Palestinian Authority as a state “is going to require a credible answer from the Palestinians about the role that Hamas is going to play in the new government, and whether a Palestinian partner and interlocutor can credibly say it recognizes Israel’s right to exist and is not committed to engaging in terrorism,” U.S. Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Communications Ben Rhodes told reporters.
“So in the first instance, there is some -- again, some step that needs to be taken on the Palestinian side, again, to give Israel that confidence coming into the negotiation,” he added.
The United States government for years has demanded that Israel make “goodwill” concessions to the Palestinian Authority to boost the standing its leader, Chairman Mahmoud Abbas.
The reunification of Hamas with the government of Mahmoud Abbas, who heads the rival Fatah faction, apparently has finally crossed Washington’s red lines. Israel previously has agreed to skip over Roadmap requirements that the PA first halt incitement to violence and that the borders of a new PA state be negotiated.
The Bush and Obama governments have gradually whittled away almost all of the commitments made by the Palestinian Authority in the Oslo Accords, and the “Roadmap to Peace” outlined by then-President George W. Bush. The PA already has violated the Oslo Accords in several ways, including creating – with American military training and aid – an army which officially is called a “police force” and whose numbers far surpass those allowed by the agreement.
Contrary to the Roadmap, the United States has agreed to the Arab world’s demand that Israel accept final borders before meeting for what it calls negotiations. U.S. President Barack Obama this week, while accepting the PA demands for borders based on the 1949-1967 Armistice lines, backtracked somewhat by saying that the same borders would be altered by “land swaps” due to large Jewish population centers in Judea and Samaria.
Rhodes did not state any criticism of Prime Minister Netanyahu’s speech, which won almost unprecedented applause in Congress and widespread criticism from media pundits who apparently expected the Prime Minister to make further concessions. The winning style of Prime Minister Netanyahu, who clearly felt at ease in Congress, also ruffled the feathers of opposition politicians and media columnists.
The New York Times' Thomas Friedman wrote after Prime Minister Netanyahu's speech, "If Netanyahu actually put a credible, specific two-state peace map on the table — not just the same old vague promises about 'painful compromises' — he could get the Americans and Europeans to toss in anything Israel wanted, including the newest weapons, NATO membership, maybe even European Union membership."
Comment on this story
4. Wall Street Journal Op-Ed Editor: Obama’s Peace ‘a War Formula’
by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu
U.S. President Barack Obama’s Palestinian Authority-Israel peace plan is a ”formula for war,” writes Bret Stephens, foreign affairs editor and deputy editorial page editor of The Wall St. Journal.
In an op-ed article in the Journal, Stephens charged that the president’s approach to Israel and his relationship to American Jews has showed that he “has mastered the concept of chutzpah.”
“What Mr. Obama offered is a formula for war, one that he will pursue in a second term. Assuming, of course, that he gets one,” Stephens wrote.
He noted that President Obama’s “sandbagging” Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu “with an adversarial policy speech” the day before his visit is not the first time the American leader has treated foreign visitors with disdain.
“Remember when the Dalai Lama visited Mr. Obama last year?” Stephens wrote. ”As a courtesy to Beijing, the president made sure to have the Tibetan spiritual leader exit by the door where the White House trash was piled up. And that was 11 months before Hu Jintao's state visit to the U.S.”
Stephens accused President Obama, who said in his speech “It’s time to tell the truth,” of composing language that served as a “thin tissue of falsehoods, rhetorical legerdemain, telling omissions and self-contradictions….
“For starters, it would be nice if the president could come clean about whether his line about the 1967 line – "mutually agreed swaps" and all – was pathbreaking and controversial, or no big deal. On Sunday, Mr. Obama congratulated himself for choosing the hard road to Mideast peace as he prepares for re-election, only to offer a few minutes later that "there was nothing particularly original in my proposal."
“Yet assuming Mr. Obama knows what he's talking about, he knows that's untrue: No U.S. president has explicitly endorsed the '67 lines as the basis for negotiating a final border.”
Stephens articulated what virtually no other newspaper or news website, except for Israel National News, has stated: “Mr. Obama would also know that in 2009 Hillary Clinton had described this formula as ‘the Palestinian goal.’ Now it's Mr. Obama's goal as well, even as he insists that ‘no peace can be imposed.’
The article also chastised President Obama for maintaining that the United States “will hold the Palestinians accountable for their actions and their rhetoric.” Stephens challenged the president, “Can Mr. Obama offer a single example of having done that as president, except perhaps at the level of a State Department press release?"
If President Obama were really pro-Israel, “He would tell Palestinians that there is no right of return,” wrote Stephens and “would outline hard and specific consequences should Hamas join the government.”
President Obama glaringly dismissed the issues of the status of Jerusalem and that of “refugees’ by suggesting the inherent contradiction that the Palestinian Authority and Israel should discuss them – after agreement on a PA state.
Comment on this story
by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu
U.S. President Barack Obama’s Palestinian Authority-Israel peace plan is a ”formula for war,” writes Bret Stephens, foreign affairs editor and deputy editorial page editor of The Wall St. Journal.
In an op-ed article in the Journal, Stephens charged that the president’s approach to Israel and his relationship to American Jews has showed that he “has mastered the concept of chutzpah.”
“What Mr. Obama offered is a formula for war, one that he will pursue in a second term. Assuming, of course, that he gets one,” Stephens wrote.
He noted that President Obama’s “sandbagging” Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu “with an adversarial policy speech” the day before his visit is not the first time the American leader has treated foreign visitors with disdain.
“Remember when the Dalai Lama visited Mr. Obama last year?” Stephens wrote. ”As a courtesy to Beijing, the president made sure to have the Tibetan spiritual leader exit by the door where the White House trash was piled up. And that was 11 months before Hu Jintao's state visit to the U.S.”
Stephens accused President Obama, who said in his speech “It’s time to tell the truth,” of composing language that served as a “thin tissue of falsehoods, rhetorical legerdemain, telling omissions and self-contradictions….
“For starters, it would be nice if the president could come clean about whether his line about the 1967 line – "mutually agreed swaps" and all – was pathbreaking and controversial, or no big deal. On Sunday, Mr. Obama congratulated himself for choosing the hard road to Mideast peace as he prepares for re-election, only to offer a few minutes later that "there was nothing particularly original in my proposal."
“Yet assuming Mr. Obama knows what he's talking about, he knows that's untrue: No U.S. president has explicitly endorsed the '67 lines as the basis for negotiating a final border.”
Stephens articulated what virtually no other newspaper or news website, except for Israel National News, has stated: “Mr. Obama would also know that in 2009 Hillary Clinton had described this formula as ‘the Palestinian goal.’ Now it's Mr. Obama's goal as well, even as he insists that ‘no peace can be imposed.’
The article also chastised President Obama for maintaining that the United States “will hold the Palestinians accountable for their actions and their rhetoric.” Stephens challenged the president, “Can Mr. Obama offer a single example of having done that as president, except perhaps at the level of a State Department press release?"
If President Obama were really pro-Israel, “He would tell Palestinians that there is no right of return,” wrote Stephens and “would outline hard and specific consequences should Hamas join the government.”
President Obama glaringly dismissed the issues of the status of Jerusalem and that of “refugees’ by suggesting the inherent contradiction that the Palestinian Authority and Israel should discuss them – after agreement on a PA state.
Comment on this story
5. Likud Takes Strong Lead in New Election Poll
by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu
The Likud party, headed by Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, has opened up a larger lead over other parties in the latest poll, mostly at the expense of the Labor party.
The poll, taken before the Prime Minister spoke in Congress on Tuesday, also showed that respondents favored Netanyahu over Opposition leader Tzipi Livni as prime minister by a margin of 38-35 percent. The effect on voters of the Prime Minister's speech to Congress on Tuesday is unknown.
If elections were held today, the Likud would win 34 Knesset seats, seven more than it now has, according to the Sarid Institute survey carried out for Israel’s Channel 2 television. Kadima, headed by Livni, would lose one mandate and wn 28 seats, while the recently-split Labor party would win only eight places in the Knesset. Under the leadership of Defense Minister Ehud Barak, who left the party earlier this year, Labor won 13 seats in the last election.
Respondents awarded Yisrael Beiteinu, headed by Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, 14 Knesset Members, one less than it now has.
The poll did not show results for other parties.
The most recent survey before the Channel 2 poll was taken at the end of March and showed that all parties except for Labor would more or less hold their present strength. That poll’s respondents put Likud at the top of the list, with 29 mandates.
Neither survey took into account new parties. Yair Lapid is forming a new left-wing political faction, and Barak has founded the Atzmaut (Independence) party.
Comment on this story
by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu
The Likud party, headed by Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, has opened up a larger lead over other parties in the latest poll, mostly at the expense of the Labor party.
The poll, taken before the Prime Minister spoke in Congress on Tuesday, also showed that respondents favored Netanyahu over Opposition leader Tzipi Livni as prime minister by a margin of 38-35 percent. The effect on voters of the Prime Minister's speech to Congress on Tuesday is unknown.
If elections were held today, the Likud would win 34 Knesset seats, seven more than it now has, according to the Sarid Institute survey carried out for Israel’s Channel 2 television. Kadima, headed by Livni, would lose one mandate and wn 28 seats, while the recently-split Labor party would win only eight places in the Knesset. Under the leadership of Defense Minister Ehud Barak, who left the party earlier this year, Labor won 13 seats in the last election.
Respondents awarded Yisrael Beiteinu, headed by Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, 14 Knesset Members, one less than it now has.
The poll did not show results for other parties.
The most recent survey before the Channel 2 poll was taken at the end of March and showed that all parties except for Labor would more or less hold their present strength. That poll’s respondents put Likud at the top of the list, with 29 mandates.
Neither survey took into account new parties. Yair Lapid is forming a new left-wing political faction, and Barak has founded the Atzmaut (Independence) party.
Comment on this story
6. Most Israelis against Obama’s ‘67 Border Land Swap Idea.
by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu
More than 60 percent of Israelis oppose Obama's plan for a Palestinian Authority state on borders along the 1949-1967 lines with land swaps, according to an independent poll.
The survey by Geocartography, one of the leading polling organizations in the country, showed that only 27 percent support President Obama’s idea, with 12 percent stating no opinion. The idea of land swaps never has been discussed in detail and it is unlikely that Israeli Arabs would agree to give up their freedom and economic privileges as citizens of Israel.
The poll also verified another survey reported in Israel National News Wednesday that the Likud has opened a wide lead over other parties, and it showed that Kadima has suffered a severe drop in popularity.
If elections were held today, Kadima, headed by Tzipi Livni, would receive only 22 seats in the Knesset, six fewer than it now has. Geocartography director Prof. Avi Dagni explained, “There is no doubt that Livni does not enthuse voters” and that dissension in the party has contributed to its weakness.
The Yisrael Beiteinu party headed by Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman gained two seats in the poll and the other parties would remain the same. Another unusual result of the Geocartography poll is that Defense Minister Ehud Barak’s new Atzama'ut (Independence) party would not win enough support to be represented in the Knesset.
Comment on this story
by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu
More than 60 percent of Israelis oppose Obama's plan for a Palestinian Authority state on borders along the 1949-1967 lines with land swaps, according to an independent poll.
The survey by Geocartography, one of the leading polling organizations in the country, showed that only 27 percent support President Obama’s idea, with 12 percent stating no opinion. The idea of land swaps never has been discussed in detail and it is unlikely that Israeli Arabs would agree to give up their freedom and economic privileges as citizens of Israel.
The poll also verified another survey reported in Israel National News Wednesday that the Likud has opened a wide lead over other parties, and it showed that Kadima has suffered a severe drop in popularity.
If elections were held today, Kadima, headed by Tzipi Livni, would receive only 22 seats in the Knesset, six fewer than it now has. Geocartography director Prof. Avi Dagni explained, “There is no doubt that Livni does not enthuse voters” and that dissension in the party has contributed to its weakness.
The Yisrael Beiteinu party headed by Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman gained two seats in the poll and the other parties would remain the same. Another unusual result of the Geocartography poll is that Defense Minister Ehud Barak’s new Atzama'ut (Independence) party would not win enough support to be represented in the Knesset.
Comment on this story
7. Netanyahu’s Lone Heckler in Congress – a CODEPINK Jew
by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu
One person heckled Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu in his speech to Congress Tuesday. The voice belonged to none other than a left-wing Jewish CODEPINK activist, who was quickly whisked out of the Congressional chambers after shouting, "Stop Israeli war crimes.”
Rae Abileah, in her late 20s and one of the group's national organizers, made her comment as the Prime Minister congratulated U.S. President Barack Obama for the elimination of Osama Bin Laden, adding "Good riddance"!
After the incident, she said in a statement released by CODEPINK, “Prime Minister Netanyahu says that the 1967 borders are indefensible. But what is really indefensible is the occupation of land, the starvation of Gaza, the jailing of dissenters and the lack of equal rights in the alleged Israeli democracy. As a Jew and an American taxpayer, I can’t be silent when these crimes are being committed in my name and with my tax money.”
The Prime Minister, who has faced much worse taunts in Israel’s contentious Knesset, laughed off the remark by praising the United States for being a “real democracy,” unlike the “farcical” regimes of Iran and elsewhere.
He suggested that Congressmen watch the Knesset in action to get a real taste of what heckling is like.
Email readers: click HERE and scroll down to view video.
Comment on this story
by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu
One person heckled Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu in his speech to Congress Tuesday. The voice belonged to none other than a left-wing Jewish CODEPINK activist, who was quickly whisked out of the Congressional chambers after shouting, "Stop Israeli war crimes.”
Rae Abileah, in her late 20s and one of the group's national organizers, made her comment as the Prime Minister congratulated U.S. President Barack Obama for the elimination of Osama Bin Laden, adding "Good riddance"!
After the incident, she said in a statement released by CODEPINK, “Prime Minister Netanyahu says that the 1967 borders are indefensible. But what is really indefensible is the occupation of land, the starvation of Gaza, the jailing of dissenters and the lack of equal rights in the alleged Israeli democracy. As a Jew and an American taxpayer, I can’t be silent when these crimes are being committed in my name and with my tax money.”
The Prime Minister, who has faced much worse taunts in Israel’s contentious Knesset, laughed off the remark by praising the United States for being a “real democracy,” unlike the “farcical” regimes of Iran and elsewhere.
He suggested that Congressmen watch the Knesset in action to get a real taste of what heckling is like.
Email readers: click HERE and scroll down to view video.
Comment on this story
8. Video: Abbas Says Palestinians 'Own History'
by Elad Benari
The Palestinian Authority leadership, while telling the world it supports peace talks with Israel, continues to say otherwise when talking to its people through its own television channels.
The Palestinian Media Watch research institute presented on its website on Tuesday a video which aired on PA television on May 14, as part of the official events in Ramallah and in Gaza to mark ‘Nakba Day’ - the day the Palestinian Authority mourns what they term the “catastrophe” of the creation of the State of Israel.
Email readers: click HERE and scroll down to view video.
The video shows that in PA President Mahmoud Abbas’ speech in Gaza on Nakba Day, delivered in his name by his advisor and representative, he denied that Jews have a history in the Land of Israel and claimed a fictitious 9000 year-old Palestinian history dating back to 7000 BCE. This history, said Abbas, made Palestinians “the owners of history.”
Furthermore, Abbas taunted in his speech Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, saying: “National reconciliation [between Hamas and Fatah] is required in order to face Israel and Netanyahu. We say to him [Netanyahu], when he claims - that they [Jews] have a historical right dating back to 3000 years BCE - we say that the nation of Palestine upon the land of Canaan had a 7000 year history BCE. This is the truth, which must be understood and we have to note it, in order to say: ‘Netanyahu, you are incidental in history. We are the people of history. We are the owners of history.’”
The canard that Palestinians are Canaanites was claimed by Palestinian spokeswoman Hanan Ashrawi tens of years ago in National Geographic and received with amusement. The Canaanites, as well as the other peoples mentioned in the Bible as living in the parts of the land of Israel, disappeared as distinguishable nations thousands of years ago. Except for the Jewish people, they are untraceable today.
PMW rightfully notes in its report that Abbas’ so-called history is a brazen distortion of known facts. Judean and Israeli history in the Land of Israel, says the report, dates back thousands of years and is documented by ancient Jewish and non-Jewish sources.
"Palestinians", however, is a term that has only recently begun to be used to identify Arabs in the region, most of whom, as documented in the book From Time Immemorial by Harvard professor Joan Peters, came in the early twentieth century hoping to cash in on Zionist economic prosperity.
There is no reference to a Palestinian-Arab nation in antiquity as Abbas claims. PMW notes that Islamic sources as well do not refer to Palestinians. In fact, the holy Muslim book, the Quran, refers to the people of Israel and to the destruction of their Temple in Jerusalem.
Comment on this story
by Elad Benari
The Palestinian Authority leadership, while telling the world it supports peace talks with Israel, continues to say otherwise when talking to its people through its own television channels.
The Palestinian Media Watch research institute presented on its website on Tuesday a video which aired on PA television on May 14, as part of the official events in Ramallah and in Gaza to mark ‘Nakba Day’ - the day the Palestinian Authority mourns what they term the “catastrophe” of the creation of the State of Israel.
Email readers: click HERE and scroll down to view video.
The video shows that in PA President Mahmoud Abbas’ speech in Gaza on Nakba Day, delivered in his name by his advisor and representative, he denied that Jews have a history in the Land of Israel and claimed a fictitious 9000 year-old Palestinian history dating back to 7000 BCE. This history, said Abbas, made Palestinians “the owners of history.”
Furthermore, Abbas taunted in his speech Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, saying: “National reconciliation [between Hamas and Fatah] is required in order to face Israel and Netanyahu. We say to him [Netanyahu], when he claims - that they [Jews] have a historical right dating back to 3000 years BCE - we say that the nation of Palestine upon the land of Canaan had a 7000 year history BCE. This is the truth, which must be understood and we have to note it, in order to say: ‘Netanyahu, you are incidental in history. We are the people of history. We are the owners of history.’”
The canard that Palestinians are Canaanites was claimed by Palestinian spokeswoman Hanan Ashrawi tens of years ago in National Geographic and received with amusement. The Canaanites, as well as the other peoples mentioned in the Bible as living in the parts of the land of Israel, disappeared as distinguishable nations thousands of years ago. Except for the Jewish people, they are untraceable today.
PMW rightfully notes in its report that Abbas’ so-called history is a brazen distortion of known facts. Judean and Israeli history in the Land of Israel, says the report, dates back thousands of years and is documented by ancient Jewish and non-Jewish sources.
"Palestinians", however, is a term that has only recently begun to be used to identify Arabs in the region, most of whom, as documented in the book From Time Immemorial by Harvard professor Joan Peters, came in the early twentieth century hoping to cash in on Zionist economic prosperity.
There is no reference to a Palestinian-Arab nation in antiquity as Abbas claims. PMW notes that Islamic sources as well do not refer to Palestinians. In fact, the holy Muslim book, the Quran, refers to the people of Israel and to the destruction of their Temple in Jerusalem.
Comment on this story
More Website News:
 |
Netanyahu: History Will Salute America for Condemning Iran  |
|
EJC Speaks Out Against Scotland Ban of Israeli Products |
|
PA Charges Netanyahu ‘Declared War on Peace Process’ |
|
Late Arieh Handler, British-Born Zionist |
|
109-Year-Old Haifa Resident Gets New Nose at Rambam Hospital |
