Bloodthirsty Liberal

Bibi, baby, when ya in town? Call me:

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu leaves on Sunday morning for Washington, where he is to address the 2009 General Assembly of the UJC/Jewish Federations of North America the next day.

As of press time, the Prime Minister’s Office said no formal meeting had been scheduled with US President Barack Obama during the visit, which could last through the week. No departure date has been set.

Netanyahu and Obama last met in New York in September on the sidelines of the opening of the United Nation’s General Assembly session.

…

[A] number of Jewish leaders indicated that their optimism about a White House visit taking place was waning as the date of Netanyahu’s arrival neared with no meeting being announced.

President Obama seems to want something from Netanyahu in exchange for a meeting—and he does not mean a raisin bagel with a schmear.

It’s not like the Israelis aren’t giving plenty to the Palestinians:

This evening the Civil Administration in Judea and Samaria facilitated the entrance of 20,000 does of swine flu vaccination to the Palestinian Authority. This effort, which brought the vaccinations to Ramallah via the Qalandiya crossing, comes a few days before Palestinians will set out to the “Hajj” to Mecca early week and was necessary since vaccination against swine flu is a condition of entrance to Mecca, Islam’s holiest city. The Civil Administration places great value on cooperation and coordination with the Palestinian Authority in the fields of health and religious expression.

How many of those 20,000 Palestinians will spend their Hajj praying for Israel to be annihilated in a fiery holocaust? About 19,998 would you say?

One of my favorite Israeli bloggers, Arlene Kushner (who’m I kidding?—she’s about the only Israeli blogger I read) had a link to this quick hit interview of Netanyahu. I hope you watch: it’s about the best minute and a half you’ll ever spend:

I lived in New York at this time, and as a goy, I found it difficult to take the Lubavitcher Rebbe Menachem Schneerson (whom Netanyahu is quoting) seriously. The literature that one would see proclaiming him as the Jewish messiah seemed a bit of a stretch. But the wisdom of what he told Bibi, the naive but faithful optimism of his comment, is profoundly moving. It’s almost miraculous how it resonates a quarter of a century later.

Because there is still room for truth at the UN:

Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen…

Nearly 62 years ago, the United Nations recognized the right of the Jews, an ancient people 3,500 years-old, to a state of their own in their ancestral homeland. I stand here today as the Prime Minister of Israel, the Jewish state, and I speak to you on behalf of my country and my people.

The United Nations was founded after the carnage of World War II and the horrors of the Holocaust. It was charged with preventing the recurrence of such horrendous events. Nothing has undermined that central mission more than the systematic assault on the truth.

Yesterday the President of Iran stood at this very podium, spewing his latest anti-Semitic rants. Just a few days earlier, he again claimed that the Holocaust is a lie.

Last month, I went to a villa in a suburb of Berlin called Wannsee. There, on January 20, 1942, after a hearty meal, senior Nazi officials met and decided how to exterminate the Jewish people. The detailed minutes of that meeting have been preserved by successive German governments.

Here is a copy of those minutes, in which the Nazis issued precise instructions on how to carry out the extermination of the Jews. Is this a lie?

Go read the rest, or watch the clip. I will give this man my bandwidth any time.

I rarely quote the entirety of a piece, preferring to save the bandwidth and not to bore you with something for too long if you’re not interested.

But I can’t leave out a word of this.

Not a word.:

Netanyahu’s 4.8.09 Speech at the Nefesh B’Nefesh Arrival Ceremony at Ben-Gurion Airport

The Prime Ministers Office 04/08/2009

You know what a tipping point is? A tipping point is when something changes “bevat echat” – on the spot. We’re very close to a tipping point. I think all of you are going to be part of it, and you’ll witness it. And here it is: for the first time in about 2,000 years, there are going to be more Jews in Israel than Jews outside of Israel. This has been a long time coming. We had a very large diaspora in the Eastern Mediterranean and Egypt and what is today Turkey, and it branched out but then it got a whopping increase when we lost our independence under the Romans and under the Arab conquest. The country depleted and the Jews left their land, and from there we went from one catastrophe to another.

And so our whole history since that, in the last 2,000 years, has been to come back to this land, re-establish our independent state and our ability to control our fate and our destiny, and that involves the ingathering of the exiles. That’s the number one base for the re-establishment of Israel and for the continuation of the State of Israel.

In the 19th century, when this modern return began, we were about 30,000 Jews here. We already had a majority in Jerusalem, but we were about 30 to 40 thousand. At the beginning of the State in 1948, we were 600,000, and very soon, because of your efforts and our efforts, we are now close to six million Jews, and the number of Jews is going to grow and grow and grow because the Jewish future is here in Israel.

So when I say to all of you, as did Natan Sharansky, who exemplified it in his own great struggle for freedom and the return; and as did Tony Gelbart, who’s been a visionary; and Rabbi Fass who’s been there with him; and all the others who are here today – I have to say that when we say “welcome home”, we mean it in the historical sense and in the personal sense. Welcome home, bruhim haba’im. Bruhim haba’im habaytah!

I want to welcome especially Leon Gordis. Leon, I hope I’m not revealing a state secret, is 75 years old. Leon, would you stand up? Leon? Look young. Thank you. And your wife Hadassah is with you. Welcome Hadassah too. Thank you.

I’d like to ask the parents of three-month-old Orly Rosen to stand up with Orly. Where are you? Where? Mazal tov to you.

So we have three months to 75 years. I think this is quite a gathering. We have 238 people here. We have doctors, bankers, heads of departments, businesspeople; we have grandparents, we have grandchildren. This is an extraordinary experience and extraordinary collection. The Aliyah from North America and from other Western countries contributes to us what immigrants from everywhere contribute to us – that is the strengthening and revitalization of the strength and the realization of the dream of centuries. But you do something else. You bring in a professionalism, dedication to work and to excellence, an antipathy – this I like – an antipathy to bureaucracy. You know, go ahead: voice it, express it.

Believe me, you’ll find a ready ear here. We want to change this country. We want to make it at once not only the realization of the dreams of the past, but a beacon to the future. This will be the most advanced country in the world – it already is in some areas. But we can make it excellent in all areas, and you’re part of that – an important part of that.

So we want you to bring in the dream of ages in your commitment to our commitment. But we also want you to bring in the things that you learn, the things that you yourself are part of in the United States, in Canada and elsewhere – how we make this country better, more competitive, more friendly to its citizens, and how we make the bureaucracy smaller – I’m very good for that.

And this is why I welcome what Tony did. Tony basically said, we’ll cut through the bureaucracy, we’ll go around it, and we’ll get the bureaucracy – the government and the Jewish Agency – to support this. And we are, and we have and we will. But the most important thing is that you are here and you have an opportunity to start your own new, personal life part as of our own, new renewal in the land of our forefathers. You’re going to pass here to Modi’in, some of you will go to Be’er Sheva, others will go the Golan, and others will go to Jerusalem. So this is a real homecoming. Build our home, be part of our lives. Welcome home.

Todah rabah, thank you.

I’m not Jewish, and I want to move there.

Two hundred and thirty-eight new citizens—a crowded subway car in Midtown Manhattan—and he makes a speech like that. Maybe it’s not deathless prose, but the sincerity and joy make it absolutely beautiful. Now, this is a leader of a nation.

I confess I didn’t pay much attention to PM Netanyahu’s speech on relations with the Palestinians because, like the good liberal I used to be, I don’t give much weight to statements made under duress or coercion. From what I saw, it looked like a hostage tape.

But others were watching and listening, and they didn’t much like what they saw and heard:

Palestinian Authority negotiations department head Saeb ‘Ariqat stated: “The peace process can be compared to a turtle, and now that Netanyahu has turned it over, it’s lying on its back. Not in a thousand years will Netanyahu find a single Palestinian who would agree to the conditions stipulated in his speech.”

…

Nabil Abu Rudeina, spokesman for the Palestinian Authority president, stated: “The speech has destroyed all peace initiatives and [chances for] a solution.”

…

PLO Executive Committee Secretary Yasser ‘Abd Rabbo stated: “Netanyahu’s speech was hollow, and it ruined the chances to advance toward a balanced settlement. … Netanyahu is a liar and a crook….”

…

Palestinian Ambassador to Egypt Nabil ‘Amro stated: “Netanyahu’s speech is nothing but a hoax [to deceive] America….”

…

Hamas issued an announcement, stating: “Netanyahu is offering the Palestinians a state without identity, sovereignty, army, or weapons; without Jerusalem or the right of return. And at the same time, it insists on leaving the settlements in place. He is offering an economic peace in return for normalization and recognition of the Zionist entity.

…

Hamas official Dr. Ahmad Bahr, who is acting speaker of the Palestinian Legislative Council, stated: “[Netanyahu’s] racist speech rests on denying the [existence of] the Palestinian people and on disregarding their suffering, and [affirms] that a racist entity [exists] on Palestinian soil. It is an arrogant Zionist speech, rife with threats and condescension towards the Palestinians as well as towards the Arab and Muslim peoples.

…

The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine called Netanyahu’s speech “akin to a declaration of war and an insult to the international community…”

Well, they’re Palestinians. No one expects them to be happy. Daily humiliation will do that to a people.

But you might have thought an Israeli PM’s concession to a Palestinian state would bring more of a positive reaction from our side:

U.S. officials reacted skeptically Monday to an Israeli proposal that the United States and other world powers guarantee that a new nation of Palestine remain demilitarized as a condition of its statehood.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said for the first time Sunday that Israel would be prepared to live side by side with a Palestinian state, but only if world powers guaranteed that it would be “demilitarized.” The proposal came in a major statement of his views on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that attracted attention worldwide.

…

“We take the security of Israel very seriously, but we need a solution that works, and this would be very difficult for the Palestinians to swallow,” said an official, who declined to be identified because of the sensitivity of the diplomacy. American officials “are a long way away from the point where we’d be talking about this kind of arrangement.”

I’ve got something the Palestinians can swallow right here, pal.

Exactly what need would the Palestinians have of “militarization”? They’ll be at peace with the Israelis, and all their other neighbors—Egypt, Jordan, even nearby Lebanon and Syria—are, if not always friendly, at least generally sympathetic.

No, the Palestinians need “militarization” because without “militarization” they’re not Palestinians. They’re just Arabs without guns, and that’s not much of an Arab at all.

Either that, or they have no intention of peaceful coexistence with Israel. You have to choose one.

This is all part of a death by a thousand cuts for Israel. We tell them what to say, then we tell them what we don’t like about it, then we tell them how it’s going to be.

I think Netanyahu was wise to take this step because there’s no way the Palestinians will reciprocate. You can see the statements above for proof, or you can just open your eyes.

PS: I just stumbled across another unhappy camper:

Today at the UN Human Rights Council, the Palestinian delegation attacked the Jewish nature of Israel. While critiquing the recent two-state solution peace plan proposed by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu it said its “most dangerous” aspect is “his request to our people to recognize the Jewish nature of the Israeli State.” Such a demand is “evidence of a systematic and organized racist policy.”

But at least he was answered:

Later in the session, one such Israeli delegate took the floor in his native Arabic to proudly declare that the Jewish nature of Israel in no way implies that it is racist. “The Jewish people have suffered over several ages because of racism,” he said. “Israel is a Jewish State committed to tolerance, democracy and human rights, and will always be a partner in the battle against racism.” The Israeli delegate also noted that some of the States that single out Israel for racism, including through the Durban process, themselves “commit the most flagrant violations against their own people.”

So is it now American policy to support the militarization of a Palestinian state, but not the Jewishness of a Jewish state? Just checking.

I’d say that’s how Netanyahu played this one:

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in a major shift, will accept the notion of a Palestinian state — a policy pushed by the Obama administration but resisted until now by Mr. Netanyahu, Israeli officials and Americans briefed on the Israeli leader’s thinking said.

The policy reversal, which is expected to go public this weekend, could help restart negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians and allow the Israeli leader to steer a course between Mr. Obama’s view and those of his own hawkish base.

The Israeli and American officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, told The Washington Times on Thursday that Mr. Netanyahu, in a major speech Sunday, will, however, set Israeli parameters for recognizing Palestinian sovereignty.

I wouldn’t give the Palestinians Perth Amboy, NJ, but I’m not Prime Minister. I think Netanyahu knows that this gesture on his part gives President Obama a carrot, but still takes the stick to the Palestinians. Will they reign in terror? No. Cease incitement and bigotry? Hardly. Will they give up on demanding the right of return and half of Jerusalem? Why would they start now?

We’re no further along than we’ve ever been. Each administration wants to bring peace to the Middle East, and each has failed for the same reason: the party opposed to a two-state solution is not the Israelis, but the Palestinians. By bombs or by demographics—doesn’t matter to them— and with a hefty dose of propaganda, they walk away from peace deals, sabotage good-will initiatives, piss on olive branches.

And for their troubles they are paid the highest per capita rate of international aid in the world, and rewarded with yet more plans and opportunities to achieve their ultimate goal of “one Palestine, from the river to sea”. Why would they ever stop? As a business model, it’s unbeaten.

The Israelis discover for themselves what it’s like to “go to the mattresses” against Vito Obama:

[T]ensions between Washington and Jerusalem are growing after the U.S. administration’s demand that Israel completely freeze construction in all West Bank settlements.

Interior Minister Eli Yishai on Sunday told cabinet ministers that the U.S. demands on settlement activity were tantamount to “expulsion.”

Israeli political officials have accused the administration of taking a preferential line toward the Palestinians with this regard.

Some officials expressed disappointment after Tuesday’s round of meetings in London with George Mitchell, Obama’s envoy to the Middle East. “We’re disappointed,” said one senior official. “All of the understandings reached during the [George W.] Bush administration are worth nothing.”

…

An Israeli official privy to the talks said that “the Americans took something that had been agreed on for many years and just stopped everything.”

What’s Hebrew for “I won”? Maybe that will get the point across.

What agreement are the Israelis referring to? With the help of Aaron Lerner at IMRA, this one:

Letter from US President George W. Bush to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon

His Excellency
Ariel Sharon
Prime Minister of Israel

Dear Mr. Prime Minister,

…

We welcome the disengagement plan you have prepared, under which Israel would withdraw certain military installations and all settlements from Gaza, and withdraw certain military installations and settlements in the West Bank. These steps described in the plan will mark real progress toward realizing my June 24, 2002 vision, and make a real contribution towards peace. We also understand that, in this context, Israel believes it is important to bring new opportunities to the Negev and the Galilee.

…

The United States appreciates the risks such an undertaking represents. I therefore want to reassure you on several points.

…

Under the roadmap, Palestinians must undertake an immediate cessation of armed activity and all acts of violence against Israelis anywhere, and all official Palestinian institutions must end incitement against Israel. The Palestinian leadership must act decisively against terror, including sustained, targeted, and effective operations to stop terrorism and dismantle terrorist capabilities and infrastructure. Palestinians must undertake a comprehensive and fundamental political reform that includes a strong parliamentary democracy and an empowered prime minister.

Second, there will be no security for Israelis or Palestinians until they and all states, in the region and beyond, join together to fight terrorism and dismantle terrorist organizations.

…

The United States understands that after Israel withdraws from Gaza and/or parts of the West Bank, and pending agreements on other arrangements, existing arrangements regarding control of airspace, territorial waters, and land passages of the West Bank and Gaza will continue.

…

As part of a final peace settlement, Israel must have secure and recognized borders, which should emerge from negotiations between the parties in accordance with UNSC Resolutions 242 and 338. In light of new realities on the ground, including already existing major Israeli populations centers, it is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949, and all previous efforts to negotiate a two-state solution have reached the same conclusion. It is realistic to expect that any final status agreement will only be achieved on the basis of mutually agreed changes that reflect these realities.

By pulling back from Gaza and parts of the West Bank, Israel has only opened its citizens to terrorism from the Palestinians, which has continued without abatement for the past five years.

And what do they hear from the Obama administration?

Tensions reportedly reached a peak when, speaking of the Gaza disengagement, the Israelis told their interlocutors, “We evacuated 8,000 settlers on our own initiative,” to which Mitchell responded simply, “We’ve noted that here.”

Gee, thanks, George.

Perhaps when President Obama stands upright and removes the love organ of King Abdullah from his mouth, he can explain where he thought the Israeli refugees from Gaza were going to go? On second thought, maybe we’d rather not know.

Obama has already begun to loosen the domestic constrictions of that “charter of negative liberties”, the Constitution. I don’t see how a few commitments in writing by a former president to one of our closest allies are going to stop him.

Remember when I wrote how wonderful it would be if we elected John McCain and Israel elected Benjamin Netanyahu?

No? Well, I do.

Way to screw it up America.

Here’s Israel’s once-and-hopefully-future-Prime-Minister:

“I don’t think Israel can accept an Iranian terror base next to its major cities any more than the United States could accept an al Qaeda base next to New York City.”

Or:

“If we accept the notion that terrorists will have immunity because as they fire on civilians they hide behind civilians, then this tactic will be legitimized and the terrorists will have their greatest victory.”

Or:

“We grieve for every child, for every innocent civilian that’s killed either on our side or on the Palestinian side. The terrorists celebrate such suffering, on our side because they openly say they want to kill us, all of us, and on the Palestinian side because it helps them foster this false symmetry, which is contrary to common decency and international law.”

And here’s what you went and done, America. Yes, you did:

[I]t is hard to believe that with the advent of the Obama administration, we are seeing history repeat itself with nearly unheard of exactness. US President Barack Obama’s reported intention of appointing former Sen. George Mitchell as his envoy for the so-called Palestinian-Israeli peace process will provide us with a spectacle of an unvarnished repeat of history.

In December 2000, outgoing president Bill Clinton appointed Mitchell to advise him on how to reignite the “peace process” after the Palestinians rejected statehood and launched their terror war against Israel in September 2000. Mitchell presented his findings to Clinton’s successor, George W. Bush, in April 2001.

Mitchell asserted that Israel and the Palestinians were equally to blame for the Palestinian terror war against Israelis. He recommended that Israel end all Jewish construction outside the 1949 armistice lines, and stop fighting Palestinian terrorists.

As for the Palestinians, Mitchell said they had to make a “100 percent effort” to prevent the terror that they themselves were carrying out. This basic demand was nothing new. It formed the basis of the Clinton administration’s nod-nod-wink-wink treatment of Palestinian terrorism since the Palestinian Authority was established in 1994.

By insisting that the PLO make a “100 percent effort,” to quell the terror it was enabling, the Clinton administration gave the Palestinians built-in immunity from responsibility. Every time that his terrorists struck, Yasser Arafat claimed that their attacks had nothing to do with him. He was making a “100 percent effort” to stop the attacks, after all.

…

Mitchell’s plan, although supported by then-secretary of state Colin Powell, was never adopted by Bush because at the time, terrorists were massacring Israelis every day. It would have been politically unwise for Bush to accept a plan that asserted moral equivalence between Israel and the PLO when rescue workers were scraping the body parts of Israeli children off the walls of bombed out pizzerias and bar mitzva parties.

I guess now is the time. He is the change he has been waiting for.

What a [bleeping] travesty.