LIVE HEADLINE NEWS FEEDS

THERE IS NO DIPLOMATIC SOLUTION

Support Israpundit

USD

ILS

CND


April 26, 2012

Peace activism in decline in Israel

The number of Israeli-Palestinian joint events has significantly dropped over the past few years.

By Ophir Bar-Zohar, HAARETZ

The number of Palestinians participating in dialogue with Israelis has hit a low ebb recently, as more and more Palestinians see no point in reconciliation attempts while the peace process is at a stalemate.

Peace activists say that as prospects for the resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict seem gloomy, Palestinians perceive activities that don’t challenge the occupation directly as normalization, or acceptance of the status quo.

“Last year, Palestinian activists came to our campuses to meet young Israelis and talk to them about the conflict,” says Tal Harris, executive director of One Voice-Israel. “Today it is much more difficult. We had plans to carry out different activities together with Palestinian politicians and peace activists, but they have all been put on hold.”


The Bereaved Families Forum, an Israeli-Palestinian organization whose members lost close relatives in the conflict, launched an online campaign a few days ago. Contrary to the manifested desire of its initiators, “a crack in the wall,” a Facebook application that facilitates direct communication between Palestinians and Israelis, will feature discussions that will focus only on political issues.

They wanted the application to include discussions about entertainment, hobbies, day-to-day experiences and others, but were met with skepticism and disinterestedness on the Palestinian side. “It took us plenty of time to decide what issues should be discussed,” says Nir Oren, the association’s executive director. “The development of ‘a crack in the wall’ shows how careful we have to be these days, much more than before.”

As fewer Palestinians take part in dialogue initiatives, they become increasingly internal discussions, where Israeli activists talk among themselves. “The interface becomes more and more limited,” says Oren. “We are still able to do things but it is much, much harder.”

Ron Pundak, the co-chairman of the umbrella organization Peace NGO Forum, says that “many organizations carry on as usual, only that they’ve lowered their profile. They also aim at less contentious activities: dialogue between schoolchildren will be considered normalization, but a meeting of Israeli and Palestinian doctors and health officials, or a joint conference of farmers with the aim of boosting the export of strawberries to Europe, will be more easily accepted.”

He says that as the political situation deteriorates and the Palestinians have fewer reasons to be hopeful, these sentiments gain ground. “Violence against protesters, IDF shooting incidents and inflammatory remarks by [Foreign Minister Avigdor] Lieberman weaken those who claim that there is a partner for peace in Israel.”

The number of Israeli-Palestinian joint events has significantly dropped over the past few years. Last December, for example, Haaretz reported that a symposium organized by the Palestine-Israel Journal on the impact of the Arab spring on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was canceled, a mere week after protesters stormed into the Ambassador Hotel in East Jerusalem where the first conference of the Israeli Palestinian Confederation took place. The second conference of the confederation, which was scheduled to take place in the Palestinian town of Beit Jala shortly afterward, was also canceled.

Equally, a gala event of the Bereaved Families Forum was relocated from the Palestinian town of Beit Sahour to metropolitan Israel, after 220 out of 300 Palestinian participants pulled out. Dialogue sessions that were held on a monthly basis at Beit Jala’s Talitha Kumi school have become rare.

The declining popularity of Israeli-Palestinian dialogue has made fundraising harder for these organizations. “Donors are reluctant to support negative campaigns – they like positive ones,” says Gadi Baltiansky, the director general of the Geneva Initiative. “They would be much more enthusiastic to help rally support for diplomatic negotiations.”

Baltiansky says that the global financial crisis also led to significant cuts in foreign aid, but above all, add Pundak and Harris, people’s enthusiasm has waned. “There are organizations and private donors who channel funds for 20 years and there’s no peace in sight,” Harris says.

Pundak adds that “we’re subject to several layers of hardship: the financial crisis, fatigue, anti-normalization campaigns – they’re all working against us.”

“If this trend continues,” says Harris, “it will cast serious doubt on our raison d’etre. If all our activity will be restricted only to one side – the Israeli or the Palestinian – we will not be needed anymore.”

The exception to the rule is Combatants for Peace, an organization that has maintained a steady level of activity over time. Spokesman Avner Horowitz says that the organization’s activities “are conceived jointly and focus on protesting against the occupation.”

Last night, Combatants for Peace staged their seventh annual alternative Memorial Day ceremony, to which bereaved families were invited, including 40 Palestinian ones. Curiously, the popular event – that was relocated from the compact Tmuna theater to the bigger Hangar 11 at Tel Aviv’s port – was met with Israeli opposition. Yisrael Beiteinu MK Lia Shemtov called to cancel it, and a Facebook group was opened against it.

Naomi Enoch of Otzar Mifalei Yam, which operates the Tel Aviv port, said the company was opposed to the event but its hand were tied. “As a governmental body we reject any attempt to put dead IDF soldiers and Palestinian victims on a par as damaging the memory of the fallen soldiers,” she said. “But the event was held in a private capacity, and we were legally unable to prevent it from happening.”

Posted by Ted Belman @ 6:34 am | 45 Comments »



45 Responses to Peace activism in decline in Israel

  1. CuriousAmerican says:

    Understand what I say and do NOT misinterpret me.

    The Palestinians went to the peace table believing – officially – that they could win by negotiation what they could not win by violence.

    Now, with settler expansion – UNDERSTAND THAT I AM NOT CONDEMNING SETTLER EXPANSION – it is becoming obvious to the Palestinians that peace will win them nothing of import.

    As one Israeli said: The minimum the Palestinians could accept is more than the Israelis could give.

    I expect violence to resume soon, SADLY.

  2. NormanF says:

    The Zionist Left in Israel has completely disappeared. Most Israeli Jews understand peace is not going to happen for a long time – maybe centuries and given the depth of Jew-hatred in the Arab World, a dialogue of any kind is out of the question. Since Israel can’t make peace, the only thing left to do is to manage the conflict and make sure the Arabs don’t harm Israel. The disintegration of the Arab World has reduced the danger of military aggression but in the short term terrorism and other forms of indirect attacks against Israel are likely to continue. Israel can deal with it and survive.

  3. Laura says:

    @ CuriousAmerican:
    Israel surrendered Gaza, removed all Jews living there, even removed graves, and got missiles in return. Your comment makes it appear the “palestinians” are the ones willing to make concessions and the Israelis are the stubborn obstacles to peace. The problem lies with islamic Jew-hatred and the unwillingness to accept that Jews have any rights to their historic homeland.

  4. CuriousAmerican says:

    @ Laura:

    by Curious American

    Understand what I say and do NOT misinterpret me.

    Israel surrendered Gaza, removed all Jews living there, even removed graves, and got missiles in return. Your comment makes it appear the “palestinians” are the ones willing to make concessions …

    You misinterpreted me AFTER I WENT OUT OF MY WAY TO MAKE IT CLEAR!

    and the Israelis are the stubborn obstacles to peace. The problem lies with islamic Jew-hatred and the unwillingness to accept that Jews have any rights to their historic homeland.

    Partly true!

    YES!

    But had Israel not retreated from Gaza, had it stayed in Gaza, the Arab and non-Jews would NOW be outnumbering Jews in all the areas under Israeli control. You would be running into the first stages of minority rule over a disenfranchised majority. The word for this is “apartheid.” (TRY NOT TO MISINTERPRET ME THIS TIME – I am not saying Israel is an Apartheid state; but when you rule over a people who are not enfranchised, you generate problems.)

    It is NOT a stable form of government. It smacks of Empire. You cannot have a disenfranchised population so large and have a stable form of government. Empires break up over this.

    (TRY NOT TO MISINTERPRET ME AGAIN) I am not saying Israel is an empire, but the Arab population in Judea and Samaria is large enough to create political instability whether they are enfranchised or disenfranchised.

    (TRY NOT TO MISTERPRET ME AGAIN) I am not saying Israel should have or should not have withdrawn from Gaza. But had it stayed in Gaza, you would now be facing a real demographic nightmare.

    Gaza is still not technically free (TRY NOT TO MISINTERPRET ME AGAIN) I am not saying Gaza should or should not be free. But Israel controls Gaza’s Western (Sea), Northern and Eastern exits. Gaza does not have open access to the world. An Israeli boat can sail from Tel Aviv into the Mediterranean. A Gazan boat cannot (TRY NOT TO MISINTERPRET ME AGAIN) I am not saying this condition is right or wrong. But it is what it is.

    I understand Israel’s security concerns. I understand your desire to redeem the land. But you have a population which is starting to outnumber you.

    YES, the Religious Jews have more babies, but they are less likely to serve in the IDF.

    So, at this point, you misread my message.

    The concessions Israel could safely make – even were the PA sincere – would not be enough for the Arabs to accept – even were they sincere.

    The only options are

    1) Ethnic cleansing by means of war – since the Arabs will not go voluntarility

    2) Paying them to move elsewhere. (I recommended South America, but got called nuts for doing so)

    Wanting to annex Judea and Samaria, or re-annex Gaza, is impossible with so many hostile Arabs.

    I have a rough idea what the Abrahamic Covenant gave the Jews. But seriously, it cannot be fully obtained at the present moment.

  5. Arison says:

    CuriousAmerican Said:

    @ Laura:
    by Curious American
    Understand what I say and do NOT misinterpret me.
    Israel surrendered Gaza, removed all Jews living there, even removed graves, and got missiles in return. Your comment makes it appear the “palestinians” are the ones willing to make concessions …
    You misinterpreted me AFTER I WENT OUT OF MY WAY TO MAKE IT CLEAR!
    and the Israelis are the stubborn obstacles to peace. The problem lies with islamic Jew-hatred and the unwillingness to accept that Jews have any rights to their historic homeland.
    Partly true!
    YES!
    But had Israel not retreated from Gaza, had it stayed in Gaza, the Arab and non-Jews would NOW be outnumbering Jews in all the areas under Israeli control. You would be running into the first stages of minority rule over a disenfranchised majority. The word for this is “apartheid.” (TRY NOT TO MISINTERPRET ME THIS TIME – I am not saying Israel is an Apartheid state; but when you rule over a people who are not enfranchised, you generate problems.)
    It is NOT a stable form of government. It smacks of Empire. You cannot have a disenfranchised population so large and have a stable form of government. Empires break up over this.
    (TRY NOT TO MISINTERPRET ME AGAIN) I am not saying Israel is an empire, but the Arab population in Judea and Samaria is large enough to create political instability whether they are enfranchised or disenfranchised.
    (TRY NOT TO MISTERPRET ME AGAIN) I am not saying Israel should have or should not have withdrawn from Gaza. But had it stayed in Gaza, you would now be facing a real demographic nightmare.
    Gaza is still not technically free (TRY NOT TO MISINTERPRET ME AGAIN) I am not saying Gaza should or should not be free. But Israel controls Gaza’s Western (Sea), Northern and Eastern exits. Gaza does not have open access to the world. An Israeli boat can sail from Tel Aviv into the Mediterranean. A Gazan boat cannot (TRY NOT TO MISINTERPRET ME AGAIN) I am not saying this condition is right or wrong. But it is what it is.
    I understand Israel’s security concerns. I understand your desire to redeem the land. But you have a population which is starting to outnumber you.
    YES, the Religious Jews have more babies, but they are less likely to serve in the IDF.
    So, at this point, you misread my message.
    The concessions Israel could safely make – even were the PA sincere – would not be enough for the Arabs to accept – even were they sincere.
    The only options are
    1) Ethnic cleansing by means of war – since the Arabs will not go voluntarility
    2) Paying them to move elsewhere. (I recommended South America, but got called nuts for doing so)
    Wanting to annex Judea and Samaria, or re-annex Gaza, is impossible with so many hostile Arabs.
    I have a rough idea what the Abrahamic Covenant gave the Jews. But seriously, it cannot be fully obtained at the present moment.

    We only need the right leadership. If I were Commander in Chief of the IDF, i’d annex all the territory from Iraq to Saudi Arabia, from Jordan to the river. Eretz Yisroel. Annex. Give citizenship to all those who want to stay, all those who don’t compensation and air ticket to whereever they like. Open up Dimona and stay on red alert with threat warnings to anyone who wants to mess with us.

    Mission accomplished. We don’t need anyone’s approval, and we have the capability to do it.

  6. CuriousAmerican says:

    We only need the right leadership. If I were Commander in Chief of the IDF, i’d annex all the territory from Iraq to Saudi Arabia, from Jordan to the river. Eretz Yisroel. Annex. Give citizenship to all those who want to stay, all those who don’t compensation and air ticket to whereever they like. Open up Dimona and stay on red alert with threat warnings to anyone who wants to mess with us.

    Mission accomplished. We don’t need anyone’s approval, and we have the capability to do it.

    If you are willing to give citizenship (WITH VOTING RIGHTS) to those willing to stay, I have no problem with your suggestion … except this one issue:

    Ask yourself this: How long will Israel remain a Jewish state when the Arabs and Left form a coalition?

    Would the Arabs even need to form a coalition? 22 Million in Syria alone.

    You want a Jewish state. But in order to maintain a Jewish state, you need a Jewish supermajority (70%+)

    That is going to be a problem if you annex the territories.

    Compensation and flight to South America is not as crazy as it seems at first.

    I do not object to you redeeming the land. But think ahead. It has to be done slowly.

  7. yamit82 says:

    @ CuriousAmerican:

    You make assumptions that annexation of territories includes annexation of people with the territories.

    If we ever were graced with a leadership in favor of annexation, do you really believe that they would then accept the annexed populations?

    War is the perfect cover for depopulation. If there is a will there will be a way. Think of it as the 2nd phase of a population exchange begun during the 48 war.

    Napalm works great and it’s cheap. Roasted cockroaches. Yummy.

  8. CuriousAmerican says:

    by yamit82:

    You make assumptions that annexation of territories includes annexation of people with the territories.

    If we ever were graced with a leadership in favor of annexation, do you really believe that they would then accept the annexed populations?

    War is the perfect cover for depopulation. If there is a will there will be a way. Think of it as the 2nd phase of a population exchange begun during the 48 war.

    Napalm works great and it’s cheap. Roasted cockroaches. Yummy.

    The Nazis did some depopulating. They thought Jews were cockroaches.

    I do NOT say Israel acts like the Nazis. Clearly they do not.

    But you do!

  9. yamit82 says:

    The Nazis did some depopulating. They thought Jews were cockroaches.

    I do NOT say Israel acts like the Nazis. Clearly they do not.

    But you do!

    Questions:

    Where those Jews trying to take over Germany?

    Where the Jews threatening the Lives of Germans or anyone else?

    Did those Jews give the Germans and Europeans any rational reason for them to want to murder the Jews?

    Are the Arabs (generic) my declared enemy?

    Given the opportunity would most of them especially if they constitute a mob then tear me apart limb by limb or worse?

    Judaism teaches us to treat our enemies as they would treat us and an oft-quoted rabbinic legal dictum, “Im ba l’hargekha, hashkem l’hargo,” “If someone comes to kill you, rise up and kill him (first).”

    I would advise that you check your own moral compass if you believe there is any more or actual comparison with me and Nazis.

  10. Jason says:

    yamit82 Said:

    The Nazis did some depopulating. They thought Jews were cockroaches.
    I do NOT say Israel acts like the Nazis. Clearly they do not.
    But you do!
    Questions:

    Where those Jews trying to take over Germany?
    Where the Jews threatening the Lives of Germans or anyone else?
    Did those Jews give the Germans and Europeans any rational reason for them to want to murder the Jews?

    That was the belief at the time, in Europe

  11. Jason says:

    yamit82 Said:

    Where those Jews trying to take over Germany?
    Where the Jews threatening the Lives of Germans or anyone else?
    Did those Jews give the Germans and Europeans any rational reason for them to want to murder the Jews?

    yamit82 Said:

    The Nazis did some depopulating. They thought Jews were cockroaches.
    I do NOT say Israel acts like the Nazis. Clearly they do not.
    But you do!
    Questions:

    Where those Jews trying to take over Germany?
    Where the Jews threatening the Lives of Germans or anyone else?
    Did those Jews give the Germans and Europeans any rational reason for them to want to murder the Jews?

    Churchill, International Jews and the Holocaust: A Revisionist Analysis
    http://www.inconvenienthistory.com/archive/2011/volume_3/number_1/churchill_international_jews_and_the_holocaust.php

    In 1921, Churchill reiterated the British government’s position on the Balfour Declaration. One of the main reasons that it was issued is because the assistance of Jews from various parts of the world was needed to induce the nation states in which they lived to enter the war on Great Britain’s side.21 A similar agenda motivated Churchill during the late 1930s: he believed continuing British support for a Jewish home in Palestine would motivate American Jewry to help bring the United States to Britain’s side in the expected war with Germany. Here is a quote from a December 1939 Churchill memorandum:

    “ This movement among the Jews is not new. From the days of Spartacus-Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, and down to Trotsky (Russia), Bela Kun (Hungary), Rosa Luxemburg (Germany), and Emma Goldman (United States), this world-wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilization and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality, has been steadily growing. It played, as a modern writer, Mrs. Webster, has so ably shown, a definitely recognizable part in the tragedy of the French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the Nineteenth Century; and now at last this band of extraordinary personalities from the underworld of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their heads and have become practically the undisputed masters of that enormous empire.”7

    Churchill specifically stated that Jewish Marxists were causing major problems in Germany. He wrote:

    “The same phenomenon [i.e., Jewish involvement with left-wing and Communist movements] has been presented in Germany (especially in Bavaria), so far as this madness has been allowed to prey upon the temporary prostration of the German people. Although in all these countries there are many non-Jews every whit as bad as the worst of the Jewish revolutionaries, the part played by the latter in proportion to their numbers is astonishing.”8

    More recent scholarship has vindicated some of Churchill’s views. Jewish-American political scientists Stanley Rothman and S. Robert Lichter, and anti-National-Socialist historian Robert Payne documented the decisive role that Jews played in far left and Communist movements in Germany prior to World War II, although they may not believe that Jewish influence was as destructive as Churchill believed it to be.9

    Despite Churchill’s 1920 exposé of the decisive Jewish involvement with Communism, in a November 1935 article he criticized Hitler and the German National Socialists for believing that Jews “were the main prop of communism.”10 Of course, this is precisely what Churchill had stated in “Zionism versus Bolshevism: A Struggle for the Soul of the Jewish People,” when he wrote:

    “There is no need to exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshevism and in the actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution, by these international and for the most part atheistical Jews. It is certainly a very great one; it probably outweighs all others. With the notable exception of Lenin, the majority of the leading figures are Jews [Gilbert pointed out that Lenin’s paternal grandfather was a Jew. Ed.]. Moreover, the principal inspiration and driving power comes from the Jewish leaders.”11

  12. Volvi says:

    In my opinion only Jews should be able vote for its future through the elected Knesset. But I would grant citizenship to those non – Jews who serve in the IDF, as they “throw their lot in with the Jews”. Who says if we were to annex Judea and Samaria that we are obliged to confer citizenship on all those Arabs? For those Arabs who are willing to live in peace with me I have no problem with them and would grant them Permanent Residency status conditional on their non participation in terror or war on the Jews. I can name dozens of countries around the globe that do not confer citizenship to all who may reside in their countries but many have permanent residency status and do NOT have the right to vote in their general parliamentary elections, only in municipal elections.

    Only Jews are the rightful custodians of the Land of Israel.

  13. CuriousAmerican says:

    @ Volvi:

    In my opinion only Jews should be able vote for its future through the elected Knesset. But I would grant citizenship to those non – Jews who serve in the IDF, as they “throw their lot in with the Jews”. Who says if we were to annex Judea and Samaria that we are obliged to confer citizenship on all those Arabs? For those Arabs who are willing to live in peace with me I have no problem with them and would grant them Permanent Residency status conditional on their non participation in terror or war on the Jews. I can name dozens of countries around the globe that do not confer citizenship to all who may reside in their countries but many have permanent residency status and do NOT have the right to vote in their general parliamentary elections, only in municipal elections.

    Only Jews are the rightful custodians of the Land of Israel.

    Would you deny voting to those Gentiles who serve in the IDF?

    By the way, I would find your case ALMOST REASONABLE if

    A) you gave the vote to those Gentiles who serve in the IDF

    B) you withdrew the vote from the Haredi who do not

  14. CuriousAmerican says:

    Volvi

    Who says if we were to annex Judea and Samaria that we are obliged to confer citizenship on all those Arabs?

    International Law requires it.

  15. Michael Dar says:

    International Law is a joke..who keeps it anyway..Jordan gave Fakestinians Jordanian citizenship for decades and recently backtracked..took it back for thousands of them. Who complained about that? What about the League of Nation’s provision for Palestine recognizing and legalizing the right of the Jews on the land and create their National Homeland on it. Since UN org. was by law binded to follow those provisions and resolutions by the letter..as such the UN Partition Plan was illegal in the first place. Scores of countries hold on to lands not theirs without even been questioned by international instances..but condemn Israel to hold on territory which is historically, morally and indeed legally hers..

  16. Ted Belman says:

    @ CuriousAmerican:
    Wrong.International law does not require it. The left and the UN constantly call on international law in support of their goals but they violate what is truly international law by doing so. As for international law, some say its not international and its not law.

  17. Ted Belman says:

    CuriousAmerican Said:

    But had Israel not retreated from Gaza, had it stayed in Gaza, the Arab and non-Jews would NOW be outnumbering Jews in all the areas under Israeli control. You would be running into the first stages of minority rule over a disenfranchised majority. The word for this is “apartheid.” (TRY NOT TO MISINTERPRET ME THIS TIME – I am not saying Israel is an Apartheid state; but when you rule over a people who are not enfranchised, you generate problems.)

    It is NOT a stable form of government. It smacks of Empire. You cannot have a disenfranchised population so large and have a stable form of government. Empires break up over this.

    You are unknowingly affected by leftist thinking and values. It flows from the world referring to Gaza and Judea and Samaria as occupied territories. There is nothing wrong with being occupiers. e.g. I occupy the apartment I rented. So in what context is being an occupier, wrong. The Fourth Geneva Convention described occupation as resulting when one signatory to the treaty occupies land of another signatory. But these lands were never he lands of another signatory. Jordan claimed sovereignty over Judea and Samaria for 19 years but this sovereignty was only recognized by two countries. But even if one grants that these lands are “occupied”, there is no obligation anywhere to give citizenship to residents in occupied territory. Furthermore the relationship of the Palestinians in these areas to the Israelis have been determined by the Oslo Accords and not the FGC. The US State Department has excluded from the definition of occupied land, any otherwise occupied land, for which the occupation is governed by an agreement between the parties. Finally Res 242 passed by the UNSC gave the Israelis the right to remain in occupation until such time as it had secure and recognized borders. Thus the occupation is approved and agreed to by all parties.

  18. Michael Dar says:

    You are right on all accounts Ted Belman! One would only have to stick to international law to find a final solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict. I suggested long ago to return to the basics, shrug off all the distortions, misconceptions, maneuvering, deceits, fals narratives
    which have characterize the conflict to start from scratch. Let’s resume..The Ottomans conquerors and occupiers of the whole M-East lost the war, the international community- League of Nations – parcelled their empire, from which the Arabs received their fair share(Lebanon, Syria, Iraq etc.) The same international legal authority acknowledged the right of the Jews to re-constitute their national Homeland in Palestine. The British in an illegal move amputated 75% of Palestine (set aside for the Jews) to create Trans-Jordan. The remaining part from the Med Sea to the Jordan river belongs to the Jews as per international law…no question about that. Why don’t we reaffirm that and constantly back off from our historic, moral and legal rights?

  19. CuriousAmerican says:

    @ Ted Belman:
    You are unknowingly affected by leftist thinking and values. It flows from the world referring to Gaza and Judea and Samaria as occupied territories.

    I try not to use the term “occupied territory,” but prefer “disputed areas.” I often call it Judea and Samaria, so my opinion is NOT based on leftist thinking.

    @ Ted Belman:
    … The Fourth Geneva Convention described occupation as resulting when one signatory to the treaty occupies land of another signatory. … there is no obligation anywhere to give citizenship to residents in occupied territory

    Again, a straw man. I do not usually refer to it as occupied, but rather as disputed.

    However, I have to be to disagree on the annexation issue.

    In 1848, when the USA annexed the Southwest, when the USA annexed Texas in 1836, citizenship was automatically bestowed on Mexican nationals. Over the decades this kept Mexican-Americans from being treated as poorly as blacks, though still not perfectly. Mexican-Americans could be gerrymandered, but they could NOT be denied the vote.

    In 1867, citizenship was automatically bestowed on Alaskans.

    In 1898, citizenship was given to Hawaiians, though mainlanders considered them suspiciously African looking; and they immediately got the vote in Hawaii.

    In 1967, Israel offerred citizenship to all East Jersualemites who asked for it. In 1981 (I believe) it was offerred to all Golan Arabs (who stupidly rejected it).

    Clearly, after WW2, any nation which annexed without enfranchisement would be deemed a tyranny.

    This is not leftist thinking. This is what International Law requires. The Arab states do not live up to it, but it is required.

    If Israel could have annexed Judea and Samaria without enfranchisement, it would have done so in 1967. It was the desire to avoid that requirement which made Israel opt for the situation they have today.

    Yes, some real dictatorships flout this. But these do not respect International Law.

    Annexation requires enfranchisement – which is precisely why Israel still offers citizenship to East Jerusalemites and Golan Arabs.

    Finally you argue from both ends.

    But even if one grants that these lands are “occupied”, there is no obligation anywhere to give citizenship to residents in occupied territory.

    There is no obligation if you claim they are “occupied,” which is a term that Israel is trying to avoid. I never said they were “occupied.” I said they were “disputed.” I said Israel ruled over them, which it does and did.

    My point is basic. Annexation requires enfranchisement. If you bring up Puerto Rico, Puerto Ricans are citizens. And every few decades, Puerto Rico is given a vote if they want to be independent.

    I am not opposed to Israeli annexation of Judea and Samaria, though I think enfranchisement of the Arabs would be folly.

    But it is not leftist thinking to say that people should be able to vote for the government which rules over them. That is the very basis of the American Revolution; a principle which is now recognized by all civilized nations.

    International Law changes all the time. In the 18th century, Britain’s slave trade monopoly to South America (the Asiento) was quite legal. By 1900, it was illegal.

    Israel is going to have to do some creative thinking. (I recommend compensation and passports to South America, but I am called nuts).

    I think Israel has a right to Judea and Samaria. I do think it would be folly to enfranchise the Arabs; but that is what is presently required. Israel is going to have to do some creative thinking if it wants to annex the disputed areas.

    But modern interpretations of International Law would not allow annexation without representation.

    Maybe Israel should ignore International law.

    But even though Israel has right to Judea and Samaria, there would be a firestorm of action, if Israel annexed the area without enfranchisement.

  20. CuriousAmerican says:

    @ Ted Belman:
    Wrong.International law does not require it. The left and the UN constantly call on international law in support of their goals but they violate what is truly international law by doing so.

    If you annex Judea and Samaria (which is your right), you have 2+/- Million Arabs in Judea and Samaria.
    You have/had 1-1/2 million in Gaza.

    When a country – ANY COUNTRY – rules over any people without giving them representation, they have problems.

    Israel is not the British Empire. And natives are no longer obedient.

    It will be a nightmare if Israel annexes the territory without first persuading the vast majority to leave. Disenfranchising them will not be enough.

    I take no pleasure in this sad fact that things are difficult for Israel.

    As for international law, some say its not international and its not law.

    You might be right there. I have told my Jewish friends that their claim to the land is based on

    a) history
    b) continous presence
    c) archeology
    d) if you are religious; the Abrahamic Covenant

    But I tell them the Balfour Declaration and the Mandate are actually weak claims.

    I support Israel, but realize its survival is NOT dependent on International Law.

    However, annexation, as understood today, would require enfranchisement.

  21. Ted Belman says:

    CuriousAmerican Said:

    If you annex Judea and Samaria (which is your right), you have 2+/- Million Arabs in Judea and Samaria.
    You have/had 1-1/2 million in Gaza.

    Yes, if we annex all the land there will be considerable pressure to grant citizenship. Whether International law requires it, I am not sure. As has been pointed out a number of countries give permanent residence status rather that citizenship.

    Furthermore Yoram Ettinger has done considerable work on the demographics and has come to the conclusion that If Israel annexed Judea and Samaria, the Jews would outnumber the Arabs 2:1. That’s because the Arabs total about 1.5 million not the 2million + that you suggest. That includes the 200,000 living in Jerusalem.

    In any event, I am against annexation because I don’t want 1/3 of our population to be Arab, citizens or otherwise. Short of the Jordanian solution I would support annexation of Area C and maybe B only. The Arabs in A could have autonomy just as they do now.

    If Israel were to annex all of it, she should set up a fund of $50 billion or so to induce all Arabs to leave voluntarily.

  22. Ted Belman says:

    CuriousAmerican Said:

    But I tell them the Balfour Declaration and the Mandate are actually weak claims.

    You may be right on this but Howard Grief thinks otherwise. In any event I insist that our legal rights are unassailable. That’s my position and I am sticking to it. No court of law will ever be asked to adjudicate on it.

    You left out one important right. We conquered the land in a defensive war and thus have the right to keep it. All nations of the world were created by conquest, America included, and not by law.

  23. stanley says:

    @ yamit82:

    Get real. Israel is under an intense scrutiny. The days of population expulsion of the kind you hope for is long over. You may rant and rave to the contrary, it will not happen. This is the dream of old (f) tarts (f) that is beyond realization, so forget it. Enuff aslready.

  24. stanley says:

    @ Ted Belman:
    @ Ted Belman:

    You are unknowingly affected by leftist thinking and values. It flows from the world referring to Gaza and Judea and Samaria as occupied territories.

    Just as you cannot ” fight city hall” you cannot fight the will of the rest of the world. 7 million vs 7 billion is unassailable.Bibi is learning this lesson as I write this blog. But you are correct, in the world of Israpundit, Belman is king and his word prevails. Who in the dickens is Howard Grief?

  25. yamit82 says:

    @ CuriousAmerican:

    However, annexation, as understood today, would require enfranchisement.

    After annexing the territories we must expel the Arabs and If they resist and attack us: Seal the Palestinian entity off and deal with it as with a state: ban migrant workers, stop issuing any visas, block all shipments, and wage total war after they attack. But there is no need to kill the Palestinians; dispersing them into neighboring Arab countries would work just as well.

    Israel will probably be sanctioned by the International community in any event just because of what they call “our occupation of the west bank). The same sanctions which we would have incurred by annexation and expelling the Arabs. So annex the “WB” expel the Arabs, live through a few years of sanctions, but afterwards enjoy a comfortable, homogenous state.

  26. Ted Belman says:

    stanley Said:

    The days of population expulsion of the kind you hope for is long over.

    I did not recommend expulsion. I only suggested that we offer a large sum of money to any family that wants to leave, say perhaps $100,000 per family.

  27. Volvi says:

    War often creates self – expulsion. Population movement. Did not half a million Arabs elect to leave themselves in 1948? Later they want to say Jews expelled them which was never the case as Jews grovelled to them to stay. I see a time when most Arabs of Judea and Samaria will flee of their own accord……..Inshallah.

  28. CuriousAmerican says:

    @ Ted Belman:

    I did not recommend expulsion. I only suggested that we offer a large sum of money to any family that wants to leave, say perhaps $100,000 per family.

    Very close to what I suggest, but it will probably have to be $100,000 per individual.

    And it will have to include passports to the West, since the Muslim nations refuse to take in their brethren; and will kill those who sell out.

    And immediate effort should be made to offer money and passports to Christians in Bethlehem who are persecuted. Chile has 400,000 Palestinian-Christians ALREADY! Mostly from Beit Jala, Beith Shahour, and Bethlehem, precisely where the Christians are today. The Chilean Palestinians are 3-5 generations already in Chile.

    I TRANSLATED THIS VIDEO INTO ENGLISH and PUT IT BACK UP ON YOU TUBE – ARAB IMMIGRATION TO CHILE
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3bfm8XznCPY

    Moving 180,000 Christians to Chile (at $100,000 per individual) would cost $18 Billion. But at that much money, Chile would welcome them, and the lost land could be given to the Jews. Bethlehem could be annexed then to Jerusalem. The Arabs would panic.

    And the Palestinians in Chile are second and third cousins to the Palestinians left in Judea and Samaria.

    THIS COULD BE DONE! IT WOULD COST, BUT IT IS DOABLE.

    However, $100,000 per family is NOT enough to get relatively (by Arab Standards) prosperous Christians to leave. Once the Christians leave, the West Bank economy will collapse, the Muslims will panic, and the buy out prices can be lowered.

    The Christians were innocents in this dance of death.

    Even during the Arab Uprising in the 30s, out of 282 leaders, only 4 were Christian, even though 1/3rd the population was Christian at that time. (Source: Wikipedia) Those 4 were probably bribed.

    The Christians are the least guilty in this dance of death. They should be offered good money and passports to leave.

  29. CuriousAmerican says:

    @ Ted Belman:
    I did not recommend expulsion. I only suggested that we offer a large sum of money to any family that wants to leave, say perhaps $100,000 per family.

    I made an amateur documentary about the option of buying the Palestinians out.
    This revision is 43 Minutes long.
    I know it is not the best. I am still working on it.

    But the numbers are crunched. I give all the numbers and figures.

    A DIFFENT SOLUTION (to the Palestinian Problem)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=glXKzvLwFqc&feature=relmfu

    It sounds crazy at first, but Argentina/Chile/Brazil have a clear history of taking in and assimilating, and finally Christianizing Muslims.

    IN LARGE NUMBERS!

  30. yamit82 says:

    @ CuriousAmerican:

    The Christians are the least guilty in this dance of death. They should be offered good money and passports to leave.

    They will leave for nothing or face their brother Muslim’s consequences. ;)

    Remember The Jack Benny Program – “Your Money Or Your Life”

  31. CuriousAmerican says:

    @ yamit82:
    They will leave for nothing or face their brother Muslim’s consequences.

    You truly are an ugly person.

  32. yamit82 says:

    @ CuriousAmerican:

    It sounds crazy at first, but Argentina/Chile/Brazil have a clear history of taking in and assimilating, and finally Christianizing Muslims.

    IN LARGE NUMBERS!

    I GUESS YOU THINK THAT IS POSITIVE?

    You are too Yellow to go to Muslim countries and missionize them ( you value your heads too much) but sending them to S. America you have probably a 50/50 chance at stealing new souls within a generation or two. If they arrive con mucho dinero paid by stupid Jews then for you guys it would be a win win. If you want them so much take the money earmarked for Jews and apply to both Christian and Muslim Arabs. Then it’s a win win for the Jews.

  33. yamit82 says:

    @ CuriousAmerican:

    Thanks for the compliment. Actually I’ve been told that I’m not bad looking. Is this your way of hitting on me? I don’t think we are compatible, maybe Babs and his alter-ego Stanley are more your type. I would guess they are pro choice is that a problem?

  34. CuriousAmerican says:

    @ yamit82:
    I GUESS YOU THINK THAT IS POSITIVE?

    You are too Yellow to go to Muslim countries and missionize them ( you value your heads too much) but sending them to S. America you have probably a 50/50 chance at stealing new souls within a generation or two. If they arrive con mucho dinero paid by stupid Jews then for you guys it would be a win win. If you want them so much take the money earmarked for Jews and apply to both Christian and Muslim Arabs. Then it’s a win win for the Jews.

    You truly are ugly. A peaceable solution is offered and you are upset that no one is killed.

  35. CuriousAmerican says:

    @ yamit82:

    I GUESS YOU THINK THAT IS POSITIVE?

    You are too Yellow to go to Muslim countries and missionize them ( you value your heads too much) but sending them to S. America you have probably a 50/50 chance at stealing new souls within a generation or two. If they arrive con mucho dinero paid by stupid Jews then for you guys it would be a win win. If you want them so much take the money earmarked for Jews and apply to both Christian and Muslim Arabs. Then it’s a win win for the Jews.

    If we only use the money earmarked for Jews, I would only take the Christians, and leave you stuck with an even higher concentration of Muslims.

    But you are ugly to even talk like you do.

    Yamit-”stealing new souls”

    Yes! I have three souls locked up in a safe-deposit box.

  36. dweller says:

    @ CuriousAmerican:

    “The Palestinians went to the peace table believing – officially – that they could win by negotiation what they could not win by violence.”

    Of course. When Palis negotiate, they make promises they have no intention of keeping.

    And they prove that, again & again.

    The violated every undertaking they’d agreed to at Oslo, and early-on in the game.

    Yet the world — and all of the Israeli Left — still expected the G.O.I. to keep their word in every particular & on schedule, notwithstanding the mutually provisional nature of the agreement.

    When the Palis parley and negotiations fall thru — whenever talks start up again, they don’t begin by going back to square one.

    Instead, they insist that Israel concede as a starting point everything that was last proposed at the point where talks had broken off

    — as if those things were already granted them, and are now beyond bargaining over.

    “Now… it is becoming obvious to the Palestinians that peace will win them nothing of import… I expect violence to resume soon, SADLY.”

    Well, of course it won’t (good God, I should hope it wouldn’t!), not that kind of ‘peace.’

    But it’s only when the above gambit has been revealed for the sham and the scam that it is — as in fact, it now has been so revealed — and it becomes clear that they can’t wring out any more concessions by talking, that they revert to type & show their true colors. So of course fresh violence is on the way; it’s bound to be. That’s the way they think; it’s their modus operandi.

    And what else is new?

  37. dweller says:

    @ CuriousAmerican:

    “But had Israel not retreated from Gaza, had it stayed in Gaza, the Arab and non-Jews would NOW be outnumbering Jews in all the areas under Israeli control. You would be running into the first stages of minority rule over a disenfranchised majority. The word for this is ‘apartheid’.”

    No, the word for it is not ‘apartheid.’

    It may be a species of minority rule — but not apartheid.

    Apartheid is legally imposed separation, segregation. “Apartheid” comes from the word “apart.” That’s its signature characteristic.

    “[T]he Arab population in Judea and Samaria is large enough to create political instability whether they are enfranchised or disenfranchised.”

    Yes, it is — as long as the terrorist organizations (any of them) are armed & allowed to operate freely. . . .

    “[Had Israel] stayed in Gaza, you would now be facing a real demographic nightmare.”

    Not so. I told you some weeks ago, Curious, that is an overstated issue. It wasn’t a problem when Israel left in 2005 — and there’s no reason to believe that it would be now, just 7 yrs later.

    “But you have a population which is starting to outnumber you.”

    When the assholes have been wiped out [uh. . . . poor choice of imagery, I guess], that population will be able to go about the business of improving their lot economically — and as is typically the case when populations become increasingly prosperous, their birthrates will decline. In fact, they’re apparently already leveling off.

    “YES, the Religious Jews have more babies, but they are less likely to serve in the IDF.”

    That latter is changing.

  38. dweller says:

    @ CuriousAmerican:

    “If you are willing to give citizenship (WITH VOTING RIGHTS) to those willing to stay, I have no problem with your suggestion … except this one issue: Ask yourself this: How long will Israel remain a Jewish state when the Arabs and Left form a coalition?”

    Been over this ALSO with you, a while ago.

    There’s no reason to give out citizenship immediately — let alone, automatically.

    “I do not object to you redeeming the land. But think ahead. It has to be done slowly.”

    It isn’t the redeeming of the land that needs to proceed slowly — it’s the granting of citizenship that needs to go slowly.

    Those who wanted it could be put on a “citizenship track” that would be completed over a 12 or 15 year period — if they weren’t ejected from it for one reason or another. They’d be subject to a discreet and extensive scrutiny.

    And not everybody might want it. Those who didn’t want it might still wish to stay; if they were prepared to behave themselves, I doubt they’d be unwelcome.

    Every country has the right to maintain its own citizenship practices in such a way as to assure its reasonable security.

  39. dweller says:

    @ CuriousAmerican:

    “Who says if we were to annex Judea and Samaria that we are obliged to confer citizenship on all those Arabs?”

    “International Law requires it.”

    Cite the specific international ‘law’ to which you allude.

    There may be a familiar international attitude that regards the proposition as legitimate

    — but I seriously doubt that there is actually some international statute, treaty, or ruling that so provides.

  40. dweller says:

    @ CuriousAmerican:

    “Balfour Declaration and the Mandate are actually weak claims.”

    Not that weak.

    The Mandate was grounded in acknowledged Jewish history.

    Note the boldfaced 3rd recital below.

    “Preamble to the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine, 1922.

    The Council of the League of Nations:

    Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have agreed, for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, to entrust to a Mandatory selected by the said Powers the administration of the territory of Palestine, which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire, within such boundaries as may be fixed by them; and

    Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted the said Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country; and

    Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country; and

    Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have selected the Britannic Majesty as the Mandatory for Palestine; and

    Whereas the mandate in respect of Palestine has been formulated in the following terms and submitted to the Council of the League for approval; and

    Whereas His Britannic majesty, has accepted the mandate in respect of Palestine and undertaken to exercise it on behalf of the League of Nations in conformity with the following provisions; and

    Whereas by the afore-mentioned Article 22 (paragraph 8), it is provided that the degree of authority, control or administration to be exercised by the Mandatory, not having been previously agreed upon by the Members of the League, shall be explicitly defined by the Council of the League of Nations.”

    “I support Israel, but realize its survival is NOT dependent on International Law.”

    It’s not dependent on the WORLD’S acceptance of International Law.

    Its survival IS dependent on the willingness of Jews to spill blood, their own & others’.

    And where Jews, in particular, are concerned, that willingness won’t be forthcoming unless they know they are on lawfully solid ground. (Seems it’s just the way the way they’re constructed.)

    So in the end, Israel’s survival IS dependent on International Law, after all.

    “However, annexation, as understood today, would require enfranchisement.”

    Still waiting for you to cite the specific law.

  41. dweller says:

    @ Ted Belman:

    “Yoram Ettinger has done considerable work on the demographics and has come to the conclusion that If Israel annexed Judea and Samaria, the Jews would outnumber the Arabs 2:1. That’s because the Arabs total about 1.5 million not the 2 million+ that you suggest. That includes the 200,000 living in Jerusalem.”

    Ettinger’s staff found that the Palis had double-counted their numbers in the heartland provinces & Jerusalem.

  42. dweller says:

    @ CuriousAmerican:

    “The Christians were innocents in this dance of death.”

    PFLP, George Habash and various Marxist components of the PLO were, for the most part, from the Christian Pali community.

    In the early days, after the separation of “Southern Syria” [Palestine Mandate] from “Greater Syria” [French Mandate], much of the Palestine Arab leadership was Christian. Taking a leadership role was often their way of establishing their nationalist bona fides with the larger Muslim populace.

  43. yamit82 says:

    @ CuriousAmerican:

    If we only use the money earmarked for Jews, I would only take the Christians, and leave you stuck with an even higher concentration of Muslims.

    Bigot!

    But you are ugly to even talk like you do.

    You are a soul snatcher (who uses methods not unlike Muslims) as opposed to “The Body Snatchers” was a classic film in it’s genre.

    Yamit-”stealing new souls”

    Yes! I have three souls locked up in a safe-deposit box.

    Are they: Moe Curly and Larry or maybe:… Papa Bear, Momma Bear and Casper (the friendly ghost)?

  44. yamit82 says:

    @ dweller:

    Transfer Is The Way To Peace!

    Transfer is not a genocide, on the contrary, transfer can prevent genocide, bloodshed and war.

    Hundreds of thousands of Palestinians emigrated between 1956 and 1967. Similar closure of economic cooperation with Israel would devastate the Y&S demographically in a matter of years. Massive demolitions of all illegal structures in Israel and the strict enforcement of tax collections on all Arabs on both sides of the Green Line. Confiscation of all weapons held by Arabs. Not recognizing more than one wife
    their children for welfare entitlements will all go a long way in persuading Arabs to leave, especially the educated and professional class. Cessation of tax transfers and raising tariffs on any imports from the territories will hurt them economically. Make all investments using gold illegal. Bar all Arabs (non citizends from receiving work permits in Israel. Israel creating police force to enforce Bedouin illegal construction. Israel should expand this force to cover all of Israel and the territories.

    Israel should deport all subversives and close all Arab Universities under it’s control just as the British and Jordanians did.

    Once upon a time, even leftists were to the right of the current right-wingers: Levi Eshkol, for example, corrected the Allon plan so that Israel would incorporate Gaza without Arabs. In another instance, the term “iron fist” as a policy against Palestinians was introduced not by Sharon or Begin, but Rabin. Perhaps the only difference between right and left is that the right’s violence was purposeful, while the left’s was hysterical and senseless, such as when Rabin repressed both Jewish settlers and the Palestinians who attacked them.

    Implementing my suggestions adding new discriminatory laws and strict enforcement will cause many if not most to leave of their own volition.

    The Jews don’t realize that expelling a hostile population is a commonly used and generally effective way of preventing violent entanglements. There are no gas chambers here. It’s not genocide; it’s transfer.

    After World War II, Poland was recreated by the Allied Powers. In doing so, the Allies sliced off a chunk of Germany and extended Poland west to the Oder-Neisse line. Anywhere from 3.5 million to 9 million people were forcibly relocated. British Prime Minister Winston Churchill was pleased. In 1944, he had explained to the House of Commons that “expulsion is the method which, so far as we have been able to see, will be the most satisfactory and lasting. There will be no mixture of populations to cause endless trouble . . . a clean sweep will be made.” Churchill was right. The Germans accepted the new border, and decades of conflict between Poles and Germans ended.

    Arab-Jewish conflict is exponentially more volatile than the German-Polish conflict ever was. And the solution is far easier. If there was “room in Germany for the German populations of East Prussia and of the other territories,” as Churchill stated, there is certainly room in the spacious Muslim states of the Middle East for 5 million Palestinians and Israeli Arabs. If Germans, who had a centuries-old connection to the newly created Polish territory, could be expelled, then surely Palestinians, whose claim to Judea, Samaria and Gaza is dubious at best, can be expelled.

    Jews are not Nazis. Transfer is not genocide. And anything else isn’t a solution.

  45. dweller says:

    @ yamit82:

    Economic & sociological incentives to emigrate seem not unreasonable — although making gold investments (per se) illegal is troubling.

    Forcing anybody to rely on fiat currency never sits well with me.

    Are you concerned about excising (or exposing) an underground economy? — or just making emigration more appealing by default?

    “Israel creating police force to enforce Bedouin illegal construction”

    Why does G.O.I. not want them building in the Negev?

    Where IS it legal for the Bedouin to build?

    “Once upon a time, even leftists were to the right of the current right-wingers…”

    Yes, I think about that often.

    “Anywhere from 3.5 million to 9 million people were forcibly relocated. British Prime Minister Winston Churchill was pleased.”

    It was Germany’s punishment for the war. (Churchill was for hanging all the Third Reich’s leaders on the spot; thought Nuremburg Tribunals were a waste of time & trouble.)

    Don’t know that he’d have looked nearly as sanguinely upon expulsion outside that context of war’s punitive aftermath — howsoever rational the proposition might otherwise appear.

    “If Germans, who had a centuries-old connection to the newly created Polish territory, could be expelled, then surely Palestinians, whose claim to Judea, Samaria and Gaza is dubious at best, can be expelled.”

    Germany was the country punished

    — so those expelled ethnic Germans were expelled TO Germany.

    For the analogy to be complete, you’d have to expel the ethnic Arabs of the heartland provinces to some Arab country that was likewise being punished.

    Outside the context of another full-scale war involving the surrounding sovereignties, the notion seems a pipedream.

    “And anything else isn’t a solution.”

    Granted.

    Maybe, however, this isn’t a time for solutions.

Israpundit Digest

Support Israpundit


USD

ILS

CAD

Syndication

Blog Traffic

Pages|Hits |Unique

  • Last 24 hours: 19,445
  • Last 7 days: 145,658
  • Last 30 days: 339,875
  • Online now: 54
Los Angeles SEO

Recent Comments

  • Can Israel be both Jewish and democratic (183)

    • AbbaGuutuu: Ted Belman Said: @ AbbaGuutuu:Please desist from discussing Jesus...

    • honeybee: dweller Said: You’re still making mistakes, Twinkie you need to...

    • honeybee: dweller Said: — that no man — not even the King himself — is above...

    • dweller: @ dove: Asked and answered (and more than once). “Why couldn’t...

    • dweller: @ yamit82: “Yeshua and His disciples never taught about the day of...

  • Obama Plans to Return Looted Jewish Artifacts To Iraq (18)

    • honeybee: SHmuel HaLevi 2 Said: Will that happen I shall sabotage the...

    • dove: @ the phoenix: Thanks! I actually feel quite blessed. I am somewhat...

    • SHmuel HaLevi 2: @ honeybee: They will have to take back the artifacts by any...

    • the phoenix: @ dove: Have a good day! … Thank you, dove. You too :-)

    • dove: @ the phoenix: I certainly understand how you took CA’s comment....

  • There is No Authentic Right in Israel (32)

    • honeybee: @ dweller: ” You doth protest to loudly”, Rosebud.

    • Bear Klein: The over focus on labels right, not so right, left, far left,...

    • Shy Guy: dweller Said: She was no ‘whore.’ If she were, the text would say...

    • dweller: @ yamit82: “Breaths were held Monday night… [etc]…Finally, the...

    • yamit82: dweller Said: Vengeance indeed — GOD‘s vengeance. His wrath, His...

  • Palestinians must come to the table for peace (1)

    • Bear Klein: Some people like Dershowitz in-spite of 100 years of evidence to...

  • Steve Goldberg: The Only Viable Option (4)

    • Ted Belman: @ ArnoldHarris:I already asked for that and then some. Should be...

    • ArnoldHarris: Ted, when you are finished fixing Israpundit, I sincerely hope...

    • ArnoldHarris: Israel must first annex all of Area C, which comprises about...

    • Viiit: Ted, the social help should be given by Jewish organizations not by...

Sponsor

Fair Use

This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of political, human rights, economic, democracy, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research, educational, or satirical purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Site Membership



Google Site Search

Editor

    Ted Belman

    tbelman3-at-gmail.com

Mission

    News and Views on Israel, the Middle East, the war on terror and the clash of civilizations.

Polls

Will Israel attack Iran

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

RECOMMENDED BOOKS




Tolerism2

Iran islam

Sharing

mandate4

Daily Archives

April 2014
S M T W T F S
« Mar    
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930  

Selected Israpundit Articles

Sponsors

Miscellaneous Info

    All Politic Sites