The House joined the Senate this week in passing a resolution, which Ha'aretz reports urges "President Barack Obama's administration to suspend financial assistance to the Palestinian Authority if its leaders push for a United Nations vote for unilateral recognition in September."
The AIPAC-drafted resolution, which was introduced by House Majority Leader Eric Cantor and his Democratic counterpart, Steny Hoyer, is the usual boilerplate which comes down to this: the Palestinians are obstructing peace, as usual while the Netanyahu government, also as usual, is vigorously pursuing an agreement. As usual, the resolutions include not a single word criticizing Netanyahu (who is expanding settlements with true abandon, despite repeated pleas from the United States that he freeze settlements to facilitate negotiations).
Naturally both the House and Senate resolutions passed with virtually no opposition. Not surprisingly, few members of Congress are willing to risk the wrath of some powerful donors over an essentially meaningless resolution.
Besides, and I say this with two decades of experience working on Capitol Hill, very few senators or House members care very much about Israel (or the Palestinians) one way or another. Why stick your neck out over an issue that is not very important to you?
This indifference to Israel (and the Palestinians) is one of the secrets of the lobby's success. It is also one of the reason J Street has had such a hard time making inroads on the Hill. The J Street approach requires actually caring about Israel and crafting a U.S. strategy that help would ensure its survival. The lobby approach requires reading AIPAC talking points into the Congressional Record and voting "aye" every time an AIPAC bill comes up. If one does not care much one way or another, why stand up against one of the most powerful interest groups Washington has ever known?
Think of it this way. If you had a sibling or a child in Congress and he or she asked you if he should just go along with AIPAC or bravely resist (risking campaign donations), what would you say?
The sad thing is that every victory by the lobby (or by the Netanyahu government which gives it its marching orders) undermines Israel's chances of survival. As Eric Alterman writes in this week's Jewish Forward, the success of the right in destroying prospects for the two-state solution is likely ensuring the triumph of the one-state alternative. (Consider Israel's "victory" over the flotilla this week which the Netanyahu government intends to follow with an even greater triumph over the Palestinians at the U.N. in September. Both bring to mind the Greek general Pyhrrus' statement about his victory over the Romans at Asculum in 279 BCE, "another victory like that and we're done for.")
That is sad for people like me who strongly favor a secure independent Israel living alongside a secure independent Palestine. It is however good news for those who dream of the day when Israel and Palestinians share a single democratic state which would likely be governed by the Arab majority.
That is why it is fair to call J Street, Americans for Peace Now and other pro-peace, anti-occupation organizations the two-state lobby while AIPAC, American Jewish Committee, the Anti-Defamation League, etc, constitute the one-state lobby. If the latter succeeds, the whole Zionist enterprise will collapse.
Do they care? Who knows? One thing is clear: the "pro-Israel" forces in this country are wrongly labelled. They are not pro-Israel. They are anti-Palestinian. They believe that so long as the Palestinians are losing, Israel is winning. They have it precisely backwards.
Follow MJ Rosenberg on Twitter: www.twitter.com/mjayrosenberg
MJ Rosenberg: Is Israel Officially Giving Up on Democracy?
Guy Ziv: The Generals vs. Netanyahu
In particular:
"This indifference to Israel (and the Palestinians) is one of the secrets of the lobby's success. It is also one of the reason J Street has had such a hard time making inroads on the Hill. The J Street approach requires actually caring about Israel and crafting a U.S. strategy that help would ensure its survival. The lobby approach requires reading AIPAC talking points into the Congressional Record and voting "aye" every time an AIPAC bill comes up. If one does not care much one way or another, why stand up against one of the most powerful interest groups Washington has ever known?"
What Bibi wants is clear, just listen to him.
A Palestinian territory, with expanding settlements, and IDF presense, no ROR and all of Jerusalem.
He also stated that he would never permit 500,000 new citizens this side of the Jordan River.
Who would impose a one state solution?
no one
Bibi wants status quo.
The real conflict is Israel/Israel and the PA/PA.
Israel needs a ner revolution or civil war to give up what it has and wants.
The PA needs nearly the same.
If the PA can get the world behind them, Israel will be forced to cede to 2 states.
A bitter pill, but sometimes you have to take your medicine
Pal reps Saeb Erekat and Nabil Abu Rudaineh visited Washington this past weekend, they were informed us that the US would veto if they went to the UN Security Council and declared a state....The were also told that Congress would vote in favor of cutting off financial aid to the PA if it proceeded with its plan to go to the UN.
Furthermore Canada said that it is rejecting a Palestinian effort to win recognition at the UN as an independent state. "Our government's long-standing position has not changed. The only solution to this conflict is one negotiated between and agreed to by the two parties," said Chris Day, the spokesman for Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird. "One of the states must be a Jewish state and recognized as such, while the Palestinian state is to be a nonmilitarized one." "Unilateral action is ultimately unhelpful," said Day.
Furthermore, in a letter addressed to EU Foreign Policy Chief Catherine Ashton, more than 100 European Union parliament members signed a letter objecting to a unilateral declaration of Palestinian statehood in September.
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/1022744--canada-opposes-palestinian-bid-for-recognition-of-statehood?bn=1
http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=228575
The Covenant of Hamas (The Islamic Resistance Movement) [1]
In the name of Allah the Merciful and the Compassionate Palestine, Muharram 1, 1409 A.H./August 18, 1988
In the name of Allah the Merciful and the Compassionate
"You are the best nation that has been brought out for mankind. You command good and forbid evil and believe in Allah. If only the people of the Book [i.e., Jews and Christians] had believed, it would have been well for them. Some of them believe, but most of them are iniquitous. They will never be able to do you serious harm, they will only be an annoyance. If they fight you, they will turn their backs and flee, and will not be succored. Humiliation is their lot wherever they may be, except where they are saved from it by a bond with Allah or by a bond with men. They incurred upon themselves Allah's wrath, and wretchedness is their lot, because they denied Allah's signs and wrongfully killed the prophets, and because they disobeyed and transgressed." (Koran, 3:110-112).
"Israel will exist, and will continue to exist, until Islam abolishes it, as it abolished that which was before it." [From the words of] The martyr, Imam Hasan al-Banna', Allah's mercy be upon him. [2]
There is no way in hell they can even badly damage Israel.
You write this to excuse the occupation and land grab.
But in light of their intentions, no one fair-minded can blame Israel for making sure that these terrorists can't "even" badly damage her.
Article 31 forbids harm to anyone who has not first "borne arms against you on account of religion, nor turned you out of your dwellings"
The anger, hatred, and viciousness, perhaps reflects the policies of the Israeli government.
We have seen here all the arrogance and insults hurled at any threader who disagrees with them,
now imagine how bad it must be for those Palestinians, who have to endure all this personally.
Hasbara, cyberspace soldiers, or whatever they are called, have not made a dent in convincing anyone here, that Israel is doing the right thing. The world now likens Israel to North Korea and Iran; not a good position to be in.
Mr. Rosenberg here argues for the "two states for two peoples" solution. Do you agree with it? Do you agree that Israel is the legitimate state of the Jewish people, while a future Palestinian state will be the legitimate state of the Palestinian people? Which means that there will be no "right of return" and no additional claims, once the borders have been agreed? Let me know if you agree with this. An unequivocal answer would be appreciated...
I certainly agree that this is what MJ advocates.
Personally, no, I don't agree with him.
"Do you agree that Israel is the legitimate state of the Jewish people, while a future Palestinian state will be the legitimate state of the Palestinian people?"
No, I do not agree with those sentiments at all.
I firmly believe that a state belongs to "all its citizens", in which case Israel is the state for the citizens of Israel, and Palestine is the state for the citizens of Palestine.
Crazy notion, heh?
"Which means that there will be no "right of return" and no additional claims, once the borders have been agreed?"
Why, exactly?
A person who has been driven from his home has a right to return to that home, and that right survives all manner of crazy ethnocentric concepts of statehood.
After all, under *your* definition some Jewish dude in Brooklyn who has never set foot in "Eratz Yishrael" has more "right" to this state than does an Arab who was born in Israel and has lived all his life as a law-abiding citizen of that state.
That sounds "logical" to you, does it?
"Let me know if you agree with this. An unequivocal answer would be appreciated"
I can't put it any straighter than this: someone who thinks the way that you so obviously think is a racist.
http://mwcnews.net/focus/politics/9244-the-shekel-has-dropped.html
This time I hope it will be more successful but only if people like you are marginalized and folks that are not prejudice and support peace take over.
"In recent months we have seen significant escalation in violent clashes between radical Islamists and members of the Copt minority across Egypt. It started with the lethal suicide attack in one of Alexandria's main churches in the first days of the year, even before the popular protest against Mubarak gained steam. Twenty three worshippers were murdered and some 100 were wounded. "
"According to official figures, some eight million Copts live in Egypt, comprising 10% of the population. The Copt Church claims that the community numbers 13 million. Many Christians, young and wealthy, left Egypt in recent years, seeing no future for themselves in the country.
"At first we thought that the revolution would put Egypt on the right path," said Maher, who immigrated to Canada and returned to visit his family. "We believed that the many minorities in the country would be able to live freely in a new society, yet today we no longer believe it. The Islamists are reckless and are taking over the country. It's only a matter of time before they impose Islamic law here."
"In post-revolution Egypt, almost no day goes by without the Salafiyun assaulting Christians or members of other Muslim sects. They even took over a Cairo mosque held by the State, removed the local Imam and appointed one of their own instead – an elderly preacher who was recently released from jail and boasts of fighting the "Zionists" in 1948."
Any other "brilliant" ideas MJ?
No sorry, not even close
Everything you post here is nothing more then your own imagination at work
According to Islam Christians and Jews - although people of the book or Dhimmis, are still infidels and should be treated as such
As long as they understood their place in Muslim society - second class and subservient, they'd be allowed to live. They had to pay a special tax - Jizya and were excluded from various parts of the society.
The CIA never financed the Muslim Brotherhood. The CIA wasn't even established until more then 20 years after the Muslim Brotherhood was already founded.
Muslim Brotherhood founded in 1928,
CIA founded in 1947
All the Christian and Muslims get along as long as there's been a string autocratic government. The Christians in Syria pray for Assad to survive because they know if he falls, the Islamsts will have control and the Christians will be the first attacks just as its been in Ira and just as its now in Egypt.
Perhaps you might see things clearer if you stop trying to blame everything on everyone else. Its not the west but your own Mosques, schools and media that promote hatred of non Muslims.
- Christian Patriarch of Jerusalem Michel Sabbah.
"many of them (Christians) voted for Hamas. They were angry at us. In Taibeh... a Christian village, and one hundred people voted for Hamas."
- Kadura Fares, aide to Fatah leader Marwan Barghouti.
"We are all - Christians and Muslims - united for a free Palestine......We also share a common suffering under Israeli occupation and each of us has reciprocal respect towards our religious beliefs."
Christian Hamas elected official Hosam al-Taweel.
Notable Christian activists:
George Habash - founder of PLFP.
Hilarion Capucci - Syrian born Archbishop of Caesarea.
Michel Aflaq - founder of Ba’athism, a form of Arab nationalism.
Wadie Haddad - leader of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine's armed wing.
Nayef Hawatmeh - General Secretary of the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP).
Hanan Ashrawi - founder of MIFTAH.
Perhaps the last word from the leaders of the three main Christian churches in Palestine:
"We need only one thing: to be protected by the world against the crimes of Israel"
http://tinyurl.com/3c3qzft”
Illegal Israeli settlements on Palestinian land.............236+
Illegal Palestinian settlements on Israel's land...............0
They are mostly in empty parts of the West Bank, which was owned by the Ottoman Empire, then Britain, then Jordan, then Israel.
It might become Palestinian land someday if there's an eventual peace settlement.
All the land that Germany occupied and then lost does not belong to the ingenious people.
Tell your theory to the French or the Ukrainians.
And of course the West Bank is in no way "owned" by Israel. Again, according to Israel itself it is not Israeli territory.
1. Naive idealists who are incapable of or unwilling to see reality.
2. Those who want Israel destroyed and see this as one way to accomplish that.
3. Those who want a Palestinian state but are too lazy to do the hard work involved in its building or who believe the Palestinians incapable of building their own so they would
coopt Israel and take advantage of their decades of hard work.
Some folks might be both 2 and 3. Whatever their motivation, however, they never will see their one state plan come to fruition because, as real peace noted, Israel will not commit suicide and no one could force this solution on them.
Right, Palestine will destroy Western culture. Now I've heard it all.
Faved!