Monday, September 27, 2010

MJ Rosenberg's Selective Outrage

Yesterday MJ Rosenberg published another article with his usual combative headline: "Netanyahu to U.S. Drop Dead." The idea is that the renewal of Israel's settlement construction (not exactly a surprise, I might add) is the equivalent of telling all of America to "drop dead."

Of course, one cannot help but wonder: Did Rosenberg say that when Abbas was being pressured by Obama to come to the table? How about when he refused to recognize Israel as a Jewish state? Or when he wouldn't make a compromise regarding the renewal of settlements? Nope. Rosenberg was nowhere to be found. I guess only Israel can tell America to "drop dead." Just another example of that good old down-to-earth unbiased HP reporting!

And then of course there is the article.
"Moreover, Israel's position is utterly hypocritical.
It is notorious for establishing conditions on negotiations. For instance, it says it won't negotiate with Hamas unless and until Hamas (1) ends all violence, (2) recognizes Israel, and (3) accepts all agreements previously agreed to by the Palestinian Authority. In the 15 years since Oslo, it placed condition after condition even on actions it had pledged to implement. One could write a book on the history of Israel's conditions on...everything."
 Sorry Mr. Rosenberg, but nice try. Hamas is not involved right now (so I don't know why he even brought them up) while in these negotiations it has been made clear that there are no preconditions. Rosenberg is simple making things up...again. But he doesn't stop there:
"Abbas, on the other hand, has one condition. It is that Israel not build on the very land they are negotiating about. And Israel says "no way.""
I see Mr. Rosenberg's head has been buried in the sand for the past eight months. Israel was not building, and Abbas wasn't talking. That sure sounds like more than one condition to me. What, does he think we're idiots, and won't notice Abbas' behavior. Hey Rosenberg! Abbas had the chance to negotiate during the settlement freeze! He didn't take it!

"This is ridiculous. The United States should step in with a map and tell the two sides that Israel can build whatever it wants in the areas that will remain Israel (pre-'67 lines with modifications and landswaps) and that Palestinians should start building their state in the rest: West Bank, Gaza, East Jerusalem."
What? That's outrageous! How absurd! Oh wait, I'm kidding. That totally works. Except that the Palestinians demand a complete settlement freeze, not just in the areas that will remain Israel. Regardless, I don't think Mr. Rosenberg is going to find many Zionists who disagree with that (except maybe the East Jerusalem part) so I don't know why he is bringing it up.
"Yes, the lobby will scream and so will its cutouts in Congress."
 I guess it just wouldn't be an MJ Rosenberg article without a ZOG reference and railing about "the Lobby."
"Even if the GOP takes Congress, and even if Obama is only President for two more years, which is unlikely, Israel will need the support of its ally and lifeline for those two years.
Obama holds all the cards, if only he acted like it."
 Maybe. Except that Congress is the one who controls the budget, so if Obama wanted to cut off aid to Israel (for instance) he would need Congress' approval. Good luck with that, especially if the Republicans win. 


  1. Let's point out the land is UNDER DISPUTE and Israel has a LEGITIMATE CLAIM to it. Jews have as much right to be there as the Arabs.

    If there is going to a freeze, it should be applied to BOTH SIDES, not just to the Jews, to avoid prejudicing the outcome of negotiations.

    A freeze applied ONLY to the Jews is anti-Semitic and immoral. As Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman observed tonight, the Arabs had all the time in the world to negotiate while a freeze was in effect. They have no moral and legal right to ask Israel to extend it.

    Take that, good ol' MJ Rosenberg!

  2. What "settlement freeze"?

    There has never been one.


Hey guys we've started to employ a slight comment policy. We used to have completely open comments but then people abused it. So our comment policy is such: No obvious trolling or spamming. And be warned: unlike the Huffington Post we actually enforce our comment policy.