« May 2009 | Main | July 2009 »

Posts from June 2009

No Obama, "Settlements" Are NOT an Obstacle To Peace


But Islam is.

The real root of the conflict stems from Islamic teaching concerning as they put it:

The House of Islam/ The House of War:


"The Koran sees the world as divided into two - one part which has come under Islamic rule and one part which is supposed to come under Islamic rule in the future. There is a division of the world which is very clear. Every single person who starts studying Islam knows it. The world is described as Dar al-Islam (the house of Islam) - that's the place where Islam rules - and the other part which is called Dar al-Harb - the house of war. Not the "house of non-Muslims," but the "house of war." It is this house of war which has to be, at the end of time, conquered. The world will continue to be in the house of war until it comes under Islamic rule. This is the norm. Why? Because Allah says it's so in the Koran. God has sent Mohammed with the true religion in order that the truth will overcome all other religions. "

Lets clear up some long circulated MSM media bias:

The word "settlements" conveys the false impression that our Israeli friends in Judea and Samaria are living in thatched huts or something.

That word also serves the cause of the Arab/Islamist "myth and falsehood", charging that Israelis are "intruders" or "colonizers" in land that does not belong to them. As Netanyahu correctly stated in his recent speech, "Israel's ties to Judea and Samaria are 3500 years old." That pre-dates Islam and Arabs in the land by more than 2000 years!

How did the Arab Muslims come to be in Israel? The same way Babylonians, Persians, Greeks, Romans, British, and other Europeans:

Though invasion and "occupation". In the case of the Arab Muslim invasion and illegal "occupation" of Israel, it was the spread of Islam by the sword.

The late Jean Kirkpatrick, former U.S. Ambassador to the UN, elaborated on how the Arab/Islamists have used the myth and falsehood of Israeli "colonization" and "imperialism"  in her excellent article, "How The PLO Was Legitimized"

The Hedgehog also weighs in:

Are Settlements an Obstacle to Peace?

And just who is advocating apartheid and ethnic cleansing?

The U.S. / NATO on the Wrong Side Again: Iran / Serbian Contrast

At no time did the Serbs ever have a nuclear weapons program.

In fact, the only nuclear reactor Serbia ever had was built when Serbia was part of Yugoslavia. It was shut down in 1984 and dismantled in 2002.

That being the case, at no time did Serbs ever pose a dangerous nuclear weapons threat to another country.

At no time was Serbia ever an exporter of terrorism around the world.

Let alone call for the use of nuclear weapons to "wipe another country off the map".--as Iranian Ayatollah Rasfanjani has done. And also Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.


In August of 1995 the Clinton U.S. government and NATO launched a massive bombing campaign against the Bosnian Serbs:

"After blaming the Bosnian Serbs "beyond reasonable doubt" for the "mortar shell" which caused the Market Street carnage, the Clinton Administration then used this incident to justify the massive bombing campaign which was launched against the Bosnian Serbs virtually immediately. On August 29, President Clinton called the still-escalating bombing campaign "an appropriate response to the shelling of Sarajevo".

["an appropriate response to the shelling of Sarajevo" that the Islamists, and not the Serbs were responsible for. In that regard, Islamists have been well documented in the perpetration of "self-inflicted" atrocities against their fellow Muslims, and then blaming on others to garner sympathy. Case in point, the motar shell explosion on a Gaza beach.]

[See also Staged-Managed Massacre-by Robert Spencer at Jihad Watch ]

"Starting in the pre-dawn hours of August 30, wave after wave of NATO aircraft -- 80 to 85 percent of them US -- began pounding Bosnian Serb strategic and regular military objectives. Initial targets were around Sarajevo, giving credence to the fig-leaf claim of retaliation for the "mortar shell". But, within a few hours, bombing raids were taking place all over Bosnia-Herzegovina."

"Thus, rhetoric aside, the US became an active and dominant participant in the wars in the former Yugoslavia."

"It was only after the first waves of predominantly US NATO strike aircraft had already dropped their bombs over Bosnian Serb targets that the Clinton Administration grudgingly began to tell truth. By this time, wide cracks were beginning to appear in the claim that the "mortar shell" had been fired by the Bosnian Serbs."

British and French ammunition experts at the site determined that forensic evidence was counter to the claim that Serbs had fired the mortar shell. 

Contrast with the U.S. and NATO's actions towards the Islamic Iranian regime:

Iran has not one, but serveral nuclear sites.

Ayatollah Rasfanjani has stated publically that the Muslim nation should use nuclear weapons to destroy Israel.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has on more than one occasion remarked that Israel should be "wiped off the map".

The Iranian Islamist regime has most certainly been an exporter of terrorism around the world. And that is never any truer than their involvement in the Balkans. Bosnia as well as Kosovo. 

And in that conflict the Clinton led U.S. government and NATO were on the wrong side. They effectively took the side of the Jihadists against the Serbs, who had endured centurys of brutal Islamic repression and occupation.

Then there was the suicide truck bombing of a U.S. marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon in which nearly 300 U.S. marines lost their lives. Hizbullah, Iran's proxy in Lebanon was responsible.

Or how the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, has meddled in Iraq providing explosives for IED's that have maimed and injured scores of U.S. personel.

What has been the response and actions of the Obama led U.S. government and NATO in light of the above?


It is obviously apparent that neither the Obama Administration nor NATO will seriously consider  preemptive military strikes to destroy, or at the least, damage and set back Iran's nuclear weapons program.

In addition, the U.S. Administration has refused Israel's request for bunker-busters and long distance refueling aircraft.

What were the actions of the U.S. and NATO towards Serbia that was not an exporter of terrorism, did not have a nuclear program, and did not threaten the use of nuclear weapons to destroy another country"

They bombed the Serbs into "submission".

"Submission" where have we heard that term before?

Once again it appears our own U.S. government is going to be on the wrong side again. This time allowing the Iranian Islamist regime to acquire nuclear weapons. Reprehensible.

In the aftermath of the recent Iranian elections the true nature of this dangerous Islamic regime should be apparent to all objective unbiased observers.

The Iranian regime has ordered the brutal suppression and imprisionment of it's own people.

The beef is not with the Iranian people who lift up their voices in oppostion to a stolen election. They deserve the entire international communitys support for freedom from an oppressive authoritarian regime.

Thanks to Obama, financial support for Democratic protesters in Iran has been cut off.




The Legitimization of Hamas Terrorists: FBI Starts Official Outreach

Efforts by the misguided to bestow legitimacy on the evil Islamic terrorist organization continue.

Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch reports this info from a well placed source :

"Today, FBI Executive Assistant Director Tom Harrington is meeting at FBIHQ with Imam Majid of the ADAMS Center in Sterling,VA. Imam Majid is also the Vice-President of the Islamic Society of North America - a known Muslim Brotherhood entity and un-indicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation Trial in Dallas in which all defendants were found guilty of leading the Hamas front group. This was the largest terrorism financing trial in the history of the United States."

"This meeting today follows yesterday's official decision by FBIHQ to use ISNA as their official point of contact with the American Muslim community. ISNA is one of the largest and most prominent Muslim Brotherhood enities in the U.S. The Brotherhood was founded in Egypt in 1928 with two objectives [ which are their same two objectives today]: implement Islamic Law and re-establish the global Islamic Caliphate. Their creed, which is still their creed today, includes "...martyrdom in the way of Allah is our highest inspiration."

[ official point of contact with Hamas?]

It was reported that former president Carter delivered a message to Hamas in Gaza, seeking to open a dialogue with the terrorist group.

There could obviously be a connection here.

Follow the updates on the push to legitimize this terrorist organization here.

Real Clear Politics [RCP] Takes A Turn For The Worse

In addition to Free Republic and Red State, Real Clear Politics also used to be a favorite hang-out for politically minded bloggers. Especially conservatives.

And that for obvious reasons.

For example, side by side comparison polling data during both the primary and general election.

Transcripts of major political speeches and interviews.

And besides the featured articles chosen by the Real Clear editors, readers and visitors to RCP had one other great opportunity:

And that was to browse and read any of the many articles written and composed by readers themselves.

This feature was called the "Reader Articles Section."

Quite often the articles written and posted by the readers,[ or bloggers],  would offer a better perspective, with more accurate facts, than articles on the same topic selected by the RCP editors themselves.

For example, consider these articles selected by RCP this week after Israeli PM Netanyahu's foreign policy speech Sunday:

First, on Monday was this article by Jeff Barak entitled, "Netanyahu's Lost Opportunity". This article was posted at RCP from Jpost. 

Just glancing at the title it would be easy to surmise the writer had in mind Netanyahu's failure to clearly articulate why the establishment of a "Palestinian" state needed to be firmly rejected. That such a state, aside from being a dangerous threat to Israel, would not end the conflict but make it worse. And never bring peace.

But that's not what Jeff Barak had in mind. In fact, Barak thinks Bibi lost an opportunity to bow down further in appeasement fashion. And according to Barak one of Israel's better Prime Ministers, Yitzhak Shamir, was actually the worse. But that's because Shamir was not the roll-over-lie-down appeaser that Barak thinks he should have been. 

On Tuesday at RCP there was this article the editors had selected:

"Obama Must Pressure Bibi For Peace", written by Jacob Weisberg. Posted at RCP from Newsweek. In actuallity, the correct title for that article as it appears at Newsweek is " A Friend In Need".

It goes without saying, but with friends like Weisberg, neither Israel nor Netanyahu need enemies. What Weisberg does in his article is call good "evil", and evil "good". One example:

"those presidents regarded as the least friendly to the Jewish state have done it the most good. "

"Its strong allies have proved much less helpful."-Weisberg.

Let's go with Weisberg's logic for an insane moment:

Suppose Mike Huckabee were president instead of Obama. Huck, who has been to Israel 10 different times. And only one of those times while a presidential candidate doing politicking.

Huckabee has stated on numerous occasions the extreme danger to Israel of giving up the Golan. Or Judea and Samaria. He has also stated time and again that Jerusalem remain the undivided capital of Israel.

With that in mind, how different might Netanyahu's speech this past Sunday have been?

How different the relationship between the two governments. It is a given that there would be more mutual understanding and a seeing of eye to eye on the most important matters. For example, Iran.

And Weisberg would have us believe that would be less "helpfull" for Israel than the "help" from the current Administration?

These types of folks have a real twisted up understanding as to what "help" and "good" really are. Folks like Weisberg have reallity turned upside down.

Come Wednesday at RCP, was this featured article, " The Arabs Turn To Respond To Netanyahu", written by Rami G. Kouri. And selected by RCP from the Daily Star.

Thus far at RCP this week, in regards to Israel and Netanyahu, there have only been articles featured by the RCP editors that promote the Arab/Islamic narative against Bibi and Israel. 

Articles that offer a better and more realistic perspective that would counter the anti-Israel Arab/Islamic narrative against Israel have not showed up on Real Clear Politics this week. As of yet. And the week is almost done.

There are those who will suggest that RCP is just trying to be diverse.  And that this week  just happens to be " attack Netanyahu and Israel week" at RCP.

Not so. 

Have been monitoring for serveral months now the articles featured at RCP having anything to do with the Middle East "conflict". Those articles are usually posted by RCP in their "Real Clear World" section.

And there is most definently a trend in more articles being featured that are less supportive of our ally Israel. For example, here is one from a couple months ago not long after Bibi became Prime Minister:

"Netanyahu's Second Chance", written by Alon Ben Meir.

At first glance the title would suggest the writer has in mind a second chance for Netanyahu not to repeat another horrible mistake such as the Wye River appeasement folly. But that's not what they have in mind:

"those who know him well suggest that Netanyahu has matured considerably since he was first Prime Minister [1996-1999]. He is well aware that he may never be given another opportunuity as prime minister and that he now stands before an historic crossroad."-Meir

As Meir tells it, their idea of the "maturing" of Bibi, means learning to become an even bigger appeaser than that of Wye River. To literally fall down prostrate before the very folks who seek your destruction. 

Now, here is where RCP has definently taken a turn for the worse:

Late last year around November, when attempting to log in to my "Reader Article" account at RCP, a notice was displayed stating that the "Reader Articles" section was in the process of being "re-tooled" , and would be back after the first of the year.

The first of the year has come and gone by serveral months. But the "Reader Articles" section has not yet been restored.

My guess is that RCP is not going to bring it back either. And on that note RCP loses, as well as the reading public.

The webmaster@realclearpolitics.com has been e-mailed more than once as to when the Reader Articles section would be back. As of yet, no response.

The same with regard to the letters@realclearpolitics .com











Pentagon Exam: "Protests" Are Low-Level Terrorism--What??

A Pentagon exam given to Dept. of Defense employees as part of routine training asks the following question:

"Which of the following is an example of low-level terrorism?"

-Attacking the Pentagon


-Hate crimes against racial groups


The correct answer, according to the exam, is "Protests."

The right to protest and take issue with our government is low-level terrorism? 

In response to a storm of protest being voiced the Pentagon says it is going to look into the matter.

In my humble opinion that question doesn't list any "correct" answers.

Attacking the Pentagon:

As on 9/11-that's "major" terrorism.


As in the matter of IED's that have wounded and injured many of our troops in Iraq--that's "major" terrorism.

Hate crimes against racial groups:

Such as the murders and lynchings the KKK has perpetrated--pure hateful terrorism.

Such as the shooting at the Jewish Holocaust Memorial Museum last week--- an act of evil terrorism. 

There isn't such a thing as "low-level terrorism".

But evidently someone at the Pentagon thinks there is.





Attempts By The Misguided To Legitimize Hamas Continue

Former President Jimmy Carter who is no friend to Israel, [or America either], will urge Obama to remove Hamas, one of the most evil Islamic terrorist organizations, from the U.S. Terror List.

According to a report at Fox News.

The efforts by misguided appeasers to legitimise this terrorist group seems to be increasing.

Back in November 2008, this blog predicted that once Obama became president he would push for the legitimization of Hamas. The article also provides a look at the means in which this would be done.

That particular article post is updated as relevant events transpire. 

The full updated article can be read here.  

Full Text of PM Netanyahu's Foreign Policy Speech

Netanyahu Full text of PM Netanyahu's speech:

Honored guests,

citizens of Israel.

Peace has always been our people’s most ardent desire. Our prophets gave the world the vision of peace, we greet one another with wishes of peace, and our prayers conclude with the word peace.

We are gathered this evening in an institution named for two pioneers of peace, Menachem Begin and Anwar Sadat, and we share in their vision.

Two and half months ago, I took the oath of office as the Prime Minister of Israel. I pledged to establish a national unity government – and I did.  I believed and I still believe that unity was essential for us now more than ever as we face three immense challenges – the Iranian threat, the economic crisis, and the advancement of peace.

The Iranian threat looms large before us, as was further demonstrated yesterday.  The greatest danger confronting Israel, the Middle East, the entire world and human race, is the nexus between radical Islam and nuclear weapons.  I discussed this issue with President Obama during my recent visit to Washington, and I will raise it again in my meetings next week with European leaders.  For years, I have been working tirelessly to forge an international alliance to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.

Confronting a global economic crisis, the government acted swiftly to stabilize Israel’s economy. We passed a two year budget in the government – and the Knesset will soon approve it.

And the third challenge, so exceedingly important, is the advancement of peace.  I also spoke about this with President Obama, and I fully support the idea of a regional peace that he is leading. 

I share the President’s desire to bring about a new era of reconciliation in our region. To this end, I met with President Mubarak in Egypt, and King Abdullah in Jordan, to elicit the support of these leaders in expanding the circle of peace in our region.

I turn to all Arab leaders tonight and I say: “Let us meet. Let us speak of peace and let us make peace. I am ready to meet with you at any time.  I am willing to go to Damascus, to Riyadh, to Beirut, to any place- including Jerusalem.
I call on the Arab countries to cooperate with the Palestinians and with us to advance an economic peace. An economic peace is not a substitute for a political peace, but an important element to achieving it. Together, we can undertake projects to overcome the scarcities of our region, like water desalination or to maximize its advantages, like developing solar energy, or laying gas and petroleum lines, and transportation links between Asia, Africa and Europe. 

The economic success of the Gulf States has impressed us all and it has impressed me. I call on the talented entrepreneurs of the Arab world to come and invest here and to assist the Palestinians – and us – in spurring the economy.

Together, we can develop industrial areas that will generate thousands of jobs and create tourist sites that will attract millions of visitors eager to walk in the footsteps of history – in Nazareth and in Bethlehem, around the walls of Jericho and the walls of Jerusalem, on the banks of the Sea of Galilee and the baptismal site of the Jordan.
There is an enormous potential for archeological tourism, if we can only learn to cooperate and to develop it.

I turn to you, our Palestinian neighbors, led by the Palestinian Authority, and I say: Let’s begin
negotiations immediately without preconditions.
Israel is obligated by its international commitments and expects all parties to keep their commitments.

We want to live with you in peace, as good neighbors. We want our children and your children to never again experience war: that parents, brothers and sisters will never again know the agony of losing loved ones in battle; that our children will be able to dream of a better future and realize that dream; and that together we will invest our energies in plowshares and pruning hooks, not swords and spears.

I know the face of war.  I have experienced battle.  I lost close friends, I lost a brother.  I have seen the pain of bereaved families.  I do not want war.  No one in Israel wants war.

If we join hands and work together for peace, there is no limit to the development and prosperity we can achieve for our two peoples – in the economy, agriculture, trade, tourism and education -  most importantly, in providing our youth a better world in which to live, a life full of tranquility, creativity, opportunity and hope.

If the advantages of peace are so evident, we must ask ourselves why peace remains so remote, even as our hand remains outstretched to peace?  Why has this conflict continued for more than sixty years?

In order to bring an end to the conflict, we must give an honest and forthright answer to the question: What is the root of the conflict?

In his speech to the first Zionist Conference in Basel, the founder of the Zionist movement, Theodore Herzl, said about the Jewish national home “This idea is so big that we must speak of it only in the simplest terms.” Today, I will speak about the immense challenge of peace in the simplest words possible.

Even as we look toward the horizon, we must be firmly connected to reality, to the truth. And the simple truth is that the root of the conflict was, and remains, the refusal to recognize the right of the Jewish people to a state of their own, in their historic homeland.  

In 1947, when the United Nations proposed the partition plan of a Jewish state and an Arab state, the entire Arab world rejected the resolution. The Jewish community, by contrast, welcomed it by dancing and rejoicing.

The Arabs rejected any Jewish state, in any borders.

Those who think that the continued enmity toward Israel is a product of our presence in Judea, Samaria and Gaza, is confusing cause and consequence.

The attacks against us began in the 1920s, escalated into a comprehensive attack in 1948 with the declaration of Israel’s independence, continued with the fedayeen attacks in the 1950s, and climaxed in 1967, on the eve of the six-day war, in an attempt to tighten a noose around the neck of the State of Israel. 

All this occurred during the fifty years before a single Israeli soldier ever set foot in Judea and Samaria .

Fortunately, Egypt and Jordan left this circle of enmity.  The signing of peace treaties have brought about an end to their claims against Israel, an end to the conflict. But to our regret, this is not the case with the Palestinians. The closer we get to an agreement with them, the further they retreat and raise demands that are inconsistent with a true desire to end the conflict.

Many good people have told us that withdrawal from territories is the key to peace with the Palestinians. Well, we withdrew. But the fact is that every withdrawal was met with massive waves of terror, by suicide bombers and thousands of missiles.

We tried to withdraw with an agreement and without an agreement.  We tried a partial withdrawal and a full withdrawal.  In 2000 and again last year, Israel proposed an almost total withdrawal in exchange for an end to the conflict, and twice our offers were rejected.

We evacuated every last inch of the Gaza strip, we uprooted tens of settlements and evicted thousands of Israelis from their homes, and in response, we received a hail of missiles on our cities, towns and children. 

The claim that territorial withdrawals will bring peace with the Palestinians, or at least advance peace, has up till now not stood the test of reality.

In addition to this, Hamas in the south, like Hezbollah in the north, repeatedly proclaims their commitment to “liberate” the Israeli cities of Ashkelon, Beersheba, Acre and Haifa. 
Territorial withdrawals have not lessened the hatred, and to our regret, Palestinian moderates are not yet ready to say the simple words: Israel is the nation-state of the Jewish people, and it will stay that way.

Achieving peace will require courage and candor from both sides, and not only from the Israeli side.
The Palestinian leadership must arise and say: “Enough of this conflict. We recognize the right of the Jewish people to a state of their own in this land, and we are prepared to live beside you in true peace.” 
I am yearning for that moment, for when Palestinian leaders say those words to our people and to their people, then a path will be opened to resolving all the problems between our peoples, no matter how complex they may be.

Therefore, a fundamental prerequisite for ending the conflict is a public, binding and unequivocal Palestinian recognition of Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people. 
To vest this declaration with practical meaning, there must also be a clear understanding that the Palestinian refugee problem will be resolved outside Israel’s borders.  For it is clear that any demand for resettling Palestinian refugees within Israel undermines Israel’s continued existence as the state of the Jewish people.

The Palestinian refugee problem must be solved, and it can be solved, as we ourselves proved in a similar situation.  Tiny Israel successfully absorbed tens of thousands of Jewish refugees who left their homes and belongings in Arab countries. 
Therefore, justice and logic demand that the Palestinian refugee problem be solved outside Israel’s borders.  On this point, there is a broad national consensus.  I believe that with goodwill and international investment, this humanitarian problem can be permanently resolved. 

So far I have spoken about the need for Palestinians to recognize our rights.  In am moment, I will speak openly about our need to recognize their rights.  
But let me first say that the connection between the Jewish people and the Land of Israel has lasted for more than 3500 years.  Judea and Samaria, the places where Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, David and Solomon, and Isaiah and Jeremiah lived, are not alien to us.  This is the land of our forefathers.

The right of the Jewish people to a state in the land of Israel does not derive from the catastrophes that have plagued our people. True, for 2000 years the Jewish people suffered expulsions, pogroms, blood libels, and massacres which culminated in a Holocaust - a suffering which has no parallel in human history. 
There are those who say that if the Holocaust had not occurred, the state of Israel would never have been established.  But I say that if the state of Israel would have been established earlier, the Holocaust would not have occured. 
This tragic history of powerlessness explains why the Jewish people need a sovereign power of self-defense.
But our right to build our sovereign state here, in the land of Israel, arises from one simple fact: this is the homeland of the Jewish people, this is where our identity was forged. 
As Israel’s first Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion proclaimed in Israel’s Declaration of Independence: “The Jewish people arose in the land of Israel and it was here that its spiritual, religious and political character was shaped. Here they attained their sovereignty, and here they bequeathed to the world their national and cultural treasures, and the most eternal of books.”

But we must also tell the truth in its entirety: within this homeland lives a large Palestinian community. We do not want to rule over them, we do not want to govern their lives, we do not want to impose either our flag or our culture on them.

In my vision of peace, in this small land of ours, two peoples live freely, side-by-side, in amity and mutual respect.  Each will have its own flag, its own national anthem, its own government.  Neither will threaten the security or survival of the other.

These two realities – our connection to the land of Israel, and the Palestinian population living within it – have created deep divisions in Israeli society. But the truth is that we have much more that unites us than divides us.
I have come tonight to give expression to that unity, and to the principles of peace and security on which there is broad agreement within Israeli society. These are the principles that guide our policy.

This policy must take into account the international situation that has recently developed.  We must recognize this reality and at the same time stand firmly on those principles essential for Israel.
I have already stressed the first principle – recognition.  Palestinians must clearly and unambiguously recognize Israel as the state of the Jewish people.  The second principle is: demilitarization. The territory under Palestinian control must be demilitarized with ironclad security provisions for Israel. 
Without these two conditions, there is a real danger that an armed Palestinian state would emerge that would become another terrorist base against the Jewish state, such as the one in Gaza. 
We don’t want Kassam rockets on Petach Tikva, Grad rockets on Tel Aviv, or missiles on Ben-Gurion airport.  We want peace.

In order to achieve peace, we must ensure that Palestinians will not be able to import missiles into their territory, to field an army, to close their airspace to us, or to make pacts with the likes of Hezbollah and Iran. On this point as well, there is wide consensus within Israel.

It is impossible to expect us to agree in advance to the principle of a Palestinian state without assurances that this state will be demilitarized.

On a matter so critical to the existence of Israel, we must first have our security needs addressed.

Therefore, today we ask our friends in the international community, led by the United States, for what is critical to the security of Israel:  Clear commitments that in a future peace agreement, the territory controlled by the Palestinians will be demilitarized: namely, without an army, without control of its airspace, and with effective security measures to prevent weapons smuggling into the territory – real monitoring, and not what occurs in Gaza today.  And obviously, the Palestinians will not be able to forge military pacts.

Without this, sooner or later, these territories will become another Hamastan. And that we cannot accept.

I told President Obama when I was in Washington that if we could agree on the substance, then the terminology would not pose a problem. 
And here is the substance that I now state clearly:

If we receive this guarantee regarding demilitirization and Israel’s security needs, and if the Palestinians recognize Israel as the State of the Jewish people, then we will be ready in a future peace agreement to reach a solution where a demilitarized Palestinian state exists alongside the Jewish state. 

Regarding the remaining important issues that will be discussed as part of the final settlement, my positions are known: Israel needs defensible borders, and Jerusalem must remain the united capital of Israel with continued religious freedom for all faiths. 

The territorial question will be discussed as part of the final peace agreement.  In the meantime, we have no intention of building new settlements or of expropriating additional land for existing settlements.

But there is a need to enable the residents to live normal lives, to allow mothers and fathers to raise their children like families elsewhere.  The settlers are neither the enemies of the people nor the enemies of peace.  Rather, they are an integral part of our people, a principled, pioneering and Zionist public.

Unity among us is essential and will help us achieve reconciliation with our neighbors.  That reconciliation must already begin by altering existing realities.  I believe that a strong Palestinian economy will strengthen peace.

If the Palestinians turn toward peace – in fighting terror, in strengthening governance and the rule of law, in educating their children for peace and in stopping incitement against Israel - we will do our part in making every effort to facilitate freedom of movement and access, and to enable them to develop their economy.  All of this will help us advance a peace treaty between us. 

Above all else, the Palestinians must decide between the path of peace and the path of Hamas. The Palestinian Authority will have to establish the rule of law in Gaza and overcome Hamas.  Israel will not sit at the negotiating table with terrorists who seek their destruction.  
Hamas will not even allow the Red Cross to visit our kidnapped soldier Gilad Shalit, who has spent three years in captivity, cut off from his parents, his family and his people. We are committed to bringing him home, healthy and safe.

With a Palestinian leadership committed to peace, with the active participation of the Arab world, and the support of the United States and the international community, there is no reason why we cannot achieve a breakthrough to peace. 

Our people have already proven that we can do the impossible.  Over the past 61 years, while constantly defending our existence, we have performed wonders.
Our microchips are powering the world’s computers. Our medicines are treating diseases once considered incurable.  Our drip irrigation is bringing arid lands back to life across the globe. And Israeli scientists are expanding the boundaries of human knowledge.
If only our neighbors would respond to our call – peace too will be in our reach.

I call on the leaders of the Arab world and on the Palestinian leadership, let us continue together on the path of Menahem Begin and Anwar Sadat, Yitzhak Rabin and King Hussein. Let us realize the vision of the prophet Isaiah, who in Jerusalem 2700 years ago said: “nations shall not lift up sword against nation, and they shall learn war  no more.”

With God’s help, we will know no more war. We will know peace. 


Debunking The Obama Speech "Spin" On The Lebanese Elections

Lebanon_Election_Celebrations At left Lebanese celebrate.

Hizbullah's loss in the recent Lebanese elections is certainly cause for celebration:

"The March 14 alliance clinched 71 out of 128 seats, maintaining it's majority in parliament after defeating the Hizbullah-led alliance in Sunday's crucial elections.

Celebrations broke out in serveral cities as television stations began airing preliminary results."

This is news greeted with delight and "spin".

MSM pundits and "analysts" have been quick to credit Obama's speech in Cairo, Egypt as a factor in the Lebanese election results. Here is one example:

"As the Vienna Philharmonic finished its annual outdoor program at the Schonbrunn Castle, the guest conductor Daniel Barenboim exclaimed to the 50,000 gathered that he had a new hope because of the speech by the American President Obama on that day.  The statement was met with a roar of approval.  The next day, every major newspaper in Vienna carried the transcript of the Obama's Cairo speech.   

Apparently, they heard the President  in Lebanon and Iran as well."

Now in order to provide a little cover for himself the pundit says this: 

"We don't know the exact effect that Obama is having on these elections." 

What he said next is really mindboggling:

" But it appears from the 2004 results that the Cheney/Bush presidency bolstered the enemies of America.  Four years later it looks like  the Obama's presidency may do the opposite." 

He's got things totally backwards.

The enemies of America have never been more bolstered or emboldened at any time than with the election of Barack Hussein Obama and his reckless appeasement minded view towards foreign policy. As well as his anti-Israel policies which jihadists the world over view with glee.

Throughout Mr. Raushenbush's article, he never once refers to what must have been a very important factor in how many Lebanese voted:

That many Lebanese are still very angry at Hizbullah for bringing much damage and destruction to their country.

The Islamist groups terrorist attacks against Israelis across the border that started what has been refered to as the 2nd Lebanon War. And brought much damage to their country for which Hizbullah is solely responsible for.

Many Lebanese people suffered serious property damage, injury, and loss of life directly due to Hizbullah's use of human shields and launching rockets from civilian areas drawing a severe response from Israel's Air Force. 

Looking at the damage done to their country as a result of the terrorist actions of Hizbullah, this must certainly have weighed very strongly among the minds of many voters.

Many pundits in the MSM will deliberately not acknowledge this. To do so is to also acknowledge the fallacy of another MSM "spin" that was repeated over and over again during the 2nd Lebanon War:

MSM critics and reporters argued that the Israeli Air Force's response against the launching of missiles from Lebanon by Hizbullah was going to result in the terrorists winning the "hearts and minds" of the people. 

The opposite is actually true. Israel's counter-terror operation turned people against Hizbullah.

One doesn't embrace terrorists unless they also embrace their terrorist ideology. Regardless of any promise or help with social sevices and welfare.

The Forgotten Christians of Lebanon




Opposition To A "Palestinian" State---Is Not Opposition To "Peace"

Just today there was an article written by Jpost staffer Elie Leshem entitled " MK's To Peres: Stop Talking Peace."

That article has now completely disappeared from the Jpost site. It has the same link, but the link now leads to an entirely different article alltogether entitled, "Officials: Speech Reports Baseless", written by Herb Keinon.

Other news sources picked up on the article and posted a link to it. Such as the Wall Street Journal:

Jerusalem Post 6 hours ago

MKs to Peres: Stop talking peace

"The Knesset's right-wing parties on Thursday demanded that President Shimon Peres tone down his comments regarding the peace process and refrain from holding meetings on the matter, saying that such meetings were "outside the president's job... Full Article at Jerusalem Post "

Forget about reading the full article at Jpost. It has disappeared and been replaced.

As explained above, if you follow that link to the Jpost article entitled " MK'S To Peres: Stop Talking Peace", the link now leads to a different article alltogether.


Below is the letter that was sent to Elie Lesham via editors@jpost.com:

 To Elie Leshem,

Just read your article on the Jpost website:


You chose a "title" for your article that is both journalistically dishonest and factually incorrect. That title gives the false impression that the MK's referred to are against peace or against working for peace. That is absolutely false.

National Union, Likud, Jewish Home,and Israel Beytenu all want "peace." Aside from perhaps some Arab Israeli MK's, such as Haneen Zuab who loves the idea of Iran getting Nukes, there are no Israeli MK's who do not desire or want peace.

But there is a strong difference of opinion on how that can best be achieved.

Misguided liberals and Islamists alike are perpetuating a false propaganda in the media. That false propaganda goes like this:

"If you oppose a "Palestinian" state, or the non-solution "two-state solution", then it is because you are opposed to "peace".

That is an absolute falsehood.

Opposing the establishment of a "Palestinian" state on Israel's land of Judea and Samaria,-- is not opposing "peace".

In fact, it is precisely for the cause of peace, Israel's "peace", that a Palestinian state not be allowed in Judea and Samaria. Such a state would not bring "peace", or end the conflict. What it would do is be a springboard for Islamists to launch more terror against Israel. And also serve to embolden other Islamists in different parts of the world to carry out their campaign of jihad against other infidel non-Muslim countries.

Make no mistake about it, jihadists around the world are watching. Watching to see if Israel will bend the knee and bow. Bow to Obama's pressure, as Obama has bowed to the king of Saudi Arabia. And prostrated himself at the altar of reckless appeasement.

Just recently Abbas Zaki, the official PA representative in Lebanon, reaffirmed the Fatah PLO's commitment to the "Phased Plan."  The Fatah PLO PA's strategy to destroy Israel in stages or phases.I strongly encourage you to read this article, "The Phased Plan-Another Name For The Roadmap", at the following link:


Update: I take note that the above article link at Jpost, "MK's To Peres: Stop Talking Peace" , now links to an entirely different article alltogether entitled "Officials: Speech Reports Baseless", written by Herb Keinon. That was fast.