"Nevertheless a recent opinion poll from the Pew Research Centre shows that 42% favour the US recognising Palestine as an independent nation, with 26% against. Nearly a third (32%) expressed no opinion. The US veto obviously does not represent he American people, only the American elite."Um, this seems like number crunching. It doesn't sound like Americans are speaking with one voice about this issue. She's correct that more Americans are in favor of Palestinian recognition than are against it, but neither side possesses a majority opinion. So if the American government has to pick one view or the other on this, then they probably won't be going to the people about it. Instead, they'd be going to their own political interests. So I guess if Ms. Barlotelli wants to sound like a happy and rephrase that as "American elite," then go for it. But it doesn't sound so convincing me to.
"And while we believe that both historically and in today's "wired" world it is futile to suppress the quest for knowledge, there are many in Iran whose lives are being threatened or damaged by the attempt."You should read the whole thing though. Secondly, a video in which Tutu believes that there Israel does have a right to exist in secure boundaries and that he is against boycotts:
"The people of Palestine have undergone centuries of external pressure if not always occupation -- from the Israelite, the Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Greek, Roman, Byzantine, Iraqi, Egyptian, Turkish and British forces to name a few -- and history has proved that, when push came to shove, the Palestinian voice was repeatedly silenced. Nobody asked them for their thoughts when Theodor Hertzl advocated for a Jewish State.."Quick question. Who exactly does Ms. Freeman think "the Palestinians" are? Is she not aware that they are the descendants of the Arab armies who invaded in the 700s? Because they are, and will proudly tell you of their brotherhood with their fellow Arabs. So as usual it is ironic that she says the Israelites "occupied Palestine" before it even was Palestine, and therefore occupied the Palestinian Arabs, even though there were no Palestinian Arabs there to occupy. Her writing indicates a level of ignorance or a level of dishonesty that is unusual even by Huffington Post standards.
"In 1963 the PLO constitution was drafted at a summit of Arab states in Cairo, although it took another 11 years for the UN and the Arab League to recognize the PLO as the sole representative of the people of Palestine. In 1967 the work of the Zionists was done with the complete occupation of the rest of Palestine."The reference to the people of Israel as "the Zionists" continues throughout the whole article by the way. So notice how she doesn't tell us inconvenient facts about the PLO in 1963: Namely that they didn't consider the West Bank and Gaza to be "Palestine" but only Israel was "Palestine." But then in her next sentence we see that not only does she fully swallow that Israel wanted to conquer the West Bank all along, but that Israel itself is an occupation. This seems to be confirmed elsewhere in the article where she declares that "the Palestinians do not occupy even a quarter of their own country." In other words, Israel is really the Palestinians' country. Not seeing much daylight here between what Ms. Freeman is saying and what a Hamas propagandist might say.
(AP) JERUSALEM — In his historic speech to the United Nations, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas eloquently laid out the case for granting his people an independent state. But in doing so, he presented a narrative that is disputed by Israel, and in at least one case, appeared to be factually incorrect.
Here is a look at the counterarguments to Abbas' claims:
OCCUPATION: Abbas called Israel's control of the territories claimed by the Palestinians "the only occupation in the world."
THE FACTS: The world is full of ethnic minorities that might claim to be ruled by occupiers, ranging from Tibetans living under Chinese rule to Kurds in Turkey, Basques in Spain, Chechens in Russia and Muslim separatists in Indian-ruled Kashmir.Read the whole thing.
On the eve of Rosh Hashana (the Jewish New Year) the Israeli population consists of some 7,797,400 residents: 5,874,300 Jews, 1,600,100 Arabs and approximately 323,000 defined as others, according to new data published by Israel's Central Bureau of Statistics on Monday.
The additional 217,000 foreign workers residing in Israel were not included in the statistics.
ccording to the CBS, in the passing year Israel's Jewish population grew by 1.7%, the Arab population by 2.5% and other sectors by 1.7%. The Muslim population rose by 2.7%, the Christian grew by 0.9% while the Druze population rose by 1.8%.
An above-average growth rate was recorded in Jerusalem (2.3%) and in central Israel (2.2%), while the Tel Aviv District showed the smallest population increase (0.6%).
Some 166,255 babies were born in the past year, an increase of 3.2% compared with 2009. The average number of children per household is 3.03, compared with 2.96 between 2008-2009.
The Israeli population is relatively young in comparison to Western nations. In 2010, some 28% of the population consisted of children aged 0-14, whereas in other Western countries the number is considerably lower - 17%.
Israel's elderly population has also increased, reaching 4.7% in 2010 compared with 3.8% in the early 1990s.
Throughout 2010, some 16,633 immigrants came to Israel – a 14% increase in comparison to 2009. The majority of immigrants originated from Russia (3,404), the United States (2,530), France (1,775), Ukraine (1,752) and Ethiopia (1,655).
The CBS also released data on the ultra Orthodox education system for the first time. The numbers showed that the amount of yeshiva students has risen by 28% since 1997 – from 108,228 to 138,249.
"For the moment, whatever happens in the coming weeks at the U.N., and in the West Bank in the aftermath, isn’t it time for the world’s focus to shift to what is actually happening on the ground? After all, it's the occupation, stupid."Sorry, but no one who has read a history book knows that not only was there fighting before the occupation (which Mr. Tolan refers to as going on for 45 years, fyi) but that the occupation of the West Bank alone has never been what motivates Palestinian militants. Just ask them. Yes, we know that "End the occupation" is the endless Palestinian and leftist mantra, but thankfully those in positions of power know that it is more complicated than that. I actually wish that the Palestinians would make it even more clear that they consider Tel Aviv to be just as occupied as Bethlehem (or not), because then we could actually get somewhere.
"As an apt example, consider the morally and strategically bankrupt tactic of suicide bombings, carried out from 2001 to 2004 by several Palestinian factions as a response to Israeli attacks during the second intifada. That disastrous strategy gave cover to all manner of Israeli retaliation, including the building of the separation barrier."How informative. Yes suicide bombings are morally bad but it doesn't tell you anything about the Palestinians who commit them, or their motivations. And besides what's really bad about them is that it gave Israel a good excuse for doing things Mr. Tolan doesn't like. Naturally we get this as well:
"(The near disappearance of the suicide attacks has been due far less to the wall -- after all, it isn't even finished yet -- than to a decision on the part of all the Palestinian factions to reject the tactic itself.)"Ha ha ha. It continues to mystify me that people like Mr. Tolan seriously expect us to believe that the above quoted Hamas for example just by coincidence decided to stop using one of their most effective terror tactics against Israel in the same places that the security barrier was being built. Yes, okay, sure. Sorry, but I'm not that gullible.
"It is a sad state of world affairs when there is only one person who takes the UN and its handful of leaders to task when given the opportunity. It is an even sadder state of affairs that one man's words will change nothing for the powerless, poor and devastated majority of this world who suffer from those leaders' sins."It would be grossly misleading to say that Shirin Sadeghi (former producer of the BBC and Al Jazeera)'s blog post on the Huffington Post defends Iran's President Ahmadinejad, but it's more along the lines of "I don't like what he has to say, and I don't like him personally, but he does make a few good points, so we should listen to him." Think I am misinterpreting her?
"But Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is audacious and a voice that should be paid attention to because it has a great deal of influence."Tell you what. Fine. We'll see what he has to say besides the Holocaust didn't happen, Israel should be destroyed, and the US was responsible for 9/11, even though any one of those things should make him a laughingstock on the world stage.
"Only from him will you hear a reference to historical global colonialism. Only from him will you hear that the descendants of slaves in the United States should be given reparations. Or that the atomic bomb was a travesty of humanity and a war crime that remains unaddressed and unresolved."Really? Only Ahmadinejad will say this stuff? Because I'm pretty sure Chomsky alone has covered all of those topics in his last interview alone. And furthermore, how is discussing "historic global colonialism" a breaking issue deserving of the world's attention. Oh no wait I got it, Ahmadinejad wants the West to grovel before him and say "I'm sorry" (sort of like Chomsky by the way). Beyond the simple hypocrisy in the way Iran treats its own people, I'm pretty sure Islam is not native to historic Persia. Oh, and who is the one seeking to get an atomic bomb against the will of the international community? But hey, according to Ms. Sadeghi, these are all "legitimate points" that we should listen to.
"Obama continues to parrot the line that peace can only be achieved between the "two parties," that only they can really bring this global ulcer to a close, when they decide to negotiate."How exactly is that a "line," Rosen? Are you saying that the Palestinians can make peace with someone other than Israel? Like Japan for example? Or that Israel should just do whatever they want to the Palestinians instead of negotiation? Somehow I doubt it. Oh no wait I understand, because you are in support of this UN statehood stunt, you are therefore pretending to be against negotiations. Wow, what a confusing rhetorical contortion! Especially considering even Abbas said he would return to negotiations after the UN bid finished. Talk about being more Palestinian than the Palestinians.
"What if the US had said to Kosovo -- no statehood, no recognition from the US until you resolve all of your ongoing issues with Russia?"Well maybe because (a) Kosovo never intended to destroy all of Russia, while the Palestinians proudly tell you that all of Israel is "theirs" to be reclaimed and (b) Kosovo never signed an agreement saying they would take no unilateral measures only to tear it up 20 years later. I mean I'm no fancy shmancy journalist but even I know the history of the region better than Rosen does. He fits right in on the Huffington Post.
"Obama ...has assured the rise of Hamas, the legitimation of violence in pursuit of Palestinian political goals, by yet again showing that peaceful, non-violent moderates like Mahmoud Abbas ultimately get nothing..."Ha ha ha. What a freaking joke, admittedly not a particularly funny one. Time for some bullet points:
"Even if they play the role of the "good Palestinian," the one who listens to his masters, who doesn't get too disturbed when humiliated at Israel's border check points and at UN Security Council meetings."Cry me a river. Who would have imagined that blowing up almost a thousand Jews would lead to some sort of negative consequences? Obviously not Steve Rosen, whose column is full of these half-truths/entire lies which indicate not a knowledge of the situation but a devotion to Palestinian propaganda. Along with this is his claim that Abbas is moving "peacefully" toward his goals, like a Pandela. One little problem: Abbas doesn't have the will of the people backing him up (he lost the election) and all those pesky genocidal terrorist groups are still around. And they would be helped too by a Palestinian state. Of course Rosen forget about this.
"It is 2011 of course. 2012 will be an expensive year of political campaigning and this makes riling up some donors in the Jewish American community politically complicated. It should be noted that some enlightened Jewish Americans support a two state solution, peace, and even Mahmoud Abbas' play at the United Nations."If you're Jewish, no matter your political point of view, that's pretty freaking insulting. The vast majority of American Jews have always supported peace between Israel and its neighbors, far longer than the Palestinians have. That historical record is very clear. But as usual, if you don't toe Steve Rosen's line, you're "anti-peace." I guess the pot shots at Jews really doesn't end on the Huffington Post.
"A group of Palestinians wearing masks threw rocks at Israeli police officers and border guards Friday in East Jerusalem. Police officers gave chase as the rock-throwers fled the scene, apprehending one of them and taking him in for questioning."But in general the West Bank has been very quiet. Doesn't stop the Huffington Post from pushing a propaganda story, though.
Read the rest. It's a remarkable story.
While the US military abolished their "Don’t Ask Don't Tell" policy (where soldiers must keep their sexual orientations a secret in order to continue to serve) just this year, the IDF has allowed openly gay men and women to serve in uniform 17 years prior.
Andrei Rubin, a gay man serving as a combat soldier for the Home Front Command's Search and Rescue unit, tries to explain why the IDF's repeal preceded the US military's by such a large gap. "The US – as big and democratic as it is – seems to have a more conservative spirit," he says. "In Israel, there is more of a familial vibe, the melting pot we live in forces us to accept each other."
Andrei moved to Israel when he was 10 years old, and came out to one of his friends on his 17th birthday. "He was very supportive when I told him and that gave me the courage to tell everybody. The first reaction is very important. My coming out was very successful and I didn’t get a very negative reaction," he shares.
However, coming out to his father was still extremely difficult for him. "My dad thought I was just young and confused," he tells. "His acceptance ended up coming via music. We were listening to 'Queen' together and talked about how Freddie Mercury was immensely successful regardless of his sexual orientation, and suddenly he was more understanding of it. The turning point was when I brought my boyfriend at the time home for dinner, and my parents warmly welcomed him, and spoke Hebrew most of the night regardless of the language barriers."
"Alternatively, Abbas could decide to directly file a petition with the General Assembly to be recognized as a non-state observer member of the United Nations, much like the position the Vatican currently holds. "Actually, if I recall correctly the General Assembly can create a state observer member, which means that it is not part of the United Nations. That probably doesn't seem like a big difference but it is an important one. But I could be mistaken about this. Moving on: to an incredibly egregious mistake:
"The new Palestinian state would return to the borders Israel and Palestine shared before the War of 1967, which means the Palestinian state would include the West Bank, Gaza and east Jerusalem."I don't know whether this is an intentional lie or just a ridiculous oversight, but everyone who has even a passing familiarity with the history knows that there was no Palestine in 1967 and there certainly wasn't a "border" between Israel and its Arab neighbors. Pretty blatant attempt by the HuffPo to rewrite the history of this conflict. Finally, our last mistake is more in what is unsaid than what is said. According to the Huffington Post, this is Israel's position:
"Israel considers the Palestinian initiative an attempt to delegitimize the country and bypass it in negotiations. Israelis are also concerned the move would allow Palestinians to challenge Israel in international organizations and courts."This is of course only half the story. Israel is also concerned about the future of the people living in the settlements, the fact that the Palestinians are going back on their word in the form of the Oslo Accords (which is also what America doesn't like), and oh yeah....they are worried that this might lead to another freaking war. Like when Israel left Gaza. But sure, HuffPo, you publish whatever you want. Don't worry about whether or not its true.
"When Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas addresses the United Nations this week, it will signal a significant step forward in the continuing search for peace with Israel."After this he proceeds to blame everything on Israel, that negotiations aren't happening because of "Israeli intransigence" and not because of Abbas' preconditions, preconditions that even President Obama agreed were unreasonable. But we can't expect the "moderate"
"The Palestinians, represented by the PLO, have long sought to establish an independent, sovereign state in the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem. The obvious question is simple: if not now, when? "Funny, but I seem to remember that when the PLO was first founded it was very clear that it was Israel they were seeking to "liberate" and that they held no claim to the West Bank or Gaza. Of course we can't expect the PLO to air their own dirty laundry, but even paying lip service in the vein of "I've changed, baby, now take me back" would have been appreciated. (Now cue all the trolls saying "history doesn't matter.")
"American aid has played a significant role in helping us to provide the Palestinian people with essential services, such as health and education, and in supporting our economy. Cutting off aid as a response to our diplomatic, non-violent move at the United Nations will have a serious impact on our ability to meet our obligations particularly in the security sphere."I wonder what would happen if, say, Michael Oren got on the Huffington Post and explained why American aid to Israel was so important. I'd imagine it would lead to about a thousand comments screaming "cut off the aid!!!!" But really that's besides the point. As you will see, Areikat tries to make the point that Palestine is a state ready for its independence. But how exactly is a people on welfare (and they are) supposed to make the case in front of the United Nations that they are ready for statehood? Answer: They can't, but will anyway because their Arab brothers will always back them up. And furthermore, Americans can do whatever they want with our aid, and seeing as how this whole statehood bid is a big middle finger to America, they deserve what they get.
"This is a turbulent time in our region and the United States has always been supportive of a people's right to self-determination."Technically they already fulfilled their right of self-determination when the Palestinian Authority was created. But Areikat is hardly the first Huffington Post blogger to misunderstand what self-determination means.
"Hundreds of Palestinians clashed with Israeli security forces in several locations in the West Bank on Wednesday, as the Palestinian Authority launched its official statehood celebrations across West Bank cities.
A 16-month-old Israeli baby suffered light injuries when a stone struck her head in a riot between Tapuah and Migdalim junctions. She was taken to Schneider Hospital in Petah Tikva. Three Palestinians were arrested during clashes, and an Israeli citizen was lightly injured from stones hurled at him while he was travelling near the West Bank city of Halhul."So much for those "harmless rock throwers" huh?
Israeli officials have been pseudo-confidently telling whoever will listen that the Palestinian pursuit for recognition at the United Nations is an affront to the peace process. Didn't the Palestinians know that their legitimacy -- and the creation of their state -- flows through Israel? At some point in the last couple of years the mainstream Palestinian political leadership finally emerged out of Plato's cave and answered that rhetorical question: It's Israel's legitimacy that flows in fact through Palestine.Let me sum up this article for you: Israel better let the Palestinians have a state, or else. This seems to be the far left rhetoric version of the Hamas threats of destroying Israel. I wonder what MJ Rosenberg would say about this article.
The claim that the Palestinian effort at the UN seeks to discredit the State of Israel is a case of the pot calling the kettle black. In fact it is Israel's future legitimacy that derives from the creation of a Palestinian state. The longer its political leaders procrastinate, the more tenuous its legitimacy as a democratic and viable state becomes.
Moreover, by rejecting the current Palestinian attempt to enshrine a two-state solution at the United Nations, Israel risks opening the pandora's box of what's next. Who is to say that the Palestinian leadership in the face of a lack of progress won't switch to backing a bi-national democratic state à la South Africa? In the eyes of the world -- which is generally supportive including in U.S. popular opinion of the Palestinian attempt at recognition -- how legitimate would the State of Israel be without a Palestine?
It seems that both Israel and the U.S. have already made up their minds regarding the vote this week. However, this issue will not disappear and will continue to linger. The Palestinian leadership is trying to firmly establish the legitimacy of the two state solution and the existence of Israel. The question remains will Israel undermine its own legitimacy in response?"
"Around 40 Palestinians clashed with IDF forces near Beit Omar, and dozens of others rioted near the Qalandiya checkpoint.Violence has already started, yet I'm sure to the Huffington Post readership it will be a big surprise should things get worse.
Some rioters set tires on fire and stoned security forces, who used crowd-control measures to control the scene, including sonic cannons and tear gas. No injuries or damage were reported."
"In 1988 Mubarak Awad, who became known as the "Palestinian Gandhi," was arrested and deported by the Israeli authorities."Really? Just like that? Those mean ol' Israelis deported this great guy for no reason at all? Oh wait no he became a US citizen and was only there on a tourist visa. And that is why the Israeli Supreme Court ruled that he didn't have the "right" to stay there, though he claimed he had the "right" to stay in the place of his birth. Sure, whatever. The rules don't apply to Palestinians, we got it.
"If my engagement as a Palestinian in nonviolence does not have in it the expression of love to those that hate and persecute me, then I cannot call such actions "nonviolent."Are so disgustingly hypocritical. Especially when you consider further that people like Mr. Award will never criticize Hamas or any hatred that doesn't come out of the mouths of Jews. For all his high handed language, what it comes down to is that Mr. Award is just another propagandist, saying what his audience wants to hear so that they'll get on his side. Gandhi would be so proud.
World leaders are bracing themselves this week for a storm at the United Nations to be unleashed by the Palestinian Authority in its demand for a Palestinian state.
Visiting with community leaders in Toronto, Israeli Minister of Foreign Affairs and Deputy Prime Minister, Avigdor Lieberman stressed that Western nations need to understand that Israel is on the front lines defending Western democracy. "Our security problem is your security problem... if you want to survive, you must support us. The Jewish state is fighting for the entire western world" Lieberman said.
Surrounded by hostile Arab countries, Israel is indeed on the front lines of the fight to preserve fundamental Western values of democracy, freedom and human rights. Even with the Arab Spring now taking hold in parts of the Middle East, there are few emerging signs that rights and freedoms are taking hold -- particularly as they relate to women and homosexuals.
Some hoped the Arab Spring would liberate the Muslim world from its incessant hatred of Israel and true peace would take hold in the Middle East. But the situation looks grim especially after the last couple of weeks that saw a diplomatic tussle -- Turkey expelled the Israeli ambassador; the Israeli embassy in Cairo was torched and its diplomats airlifted home; and as a 'precautionary measure,' Israel recalled its ambassador to Jordan.
The Palestinian's ultimate vision, said Lieberman is to "destroy the Jewish state of Israel." The Palestinians have given Israel little reason to think otherwise. Surely, if they wanted a peaceful resolution comprised of a two-state solution they would embrace Israel rather than unapologetically refuse to recognize Israel as a Jewish state.
The Palestinians, Lieberman said, have rebuffed every offer given to them for an independent state, including the Camp David Summit in 2000 (where over 91 per cent of the West Bank and 100 per cent of Gaza was offered to Arafat) and recently, a more extensive offer by the Olmert/Livni government was rejected by current Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas. Even Ariel Sharon tried a different approach in 2005 by painfully vacating Gaza and uprooting Israeli towns to help the Palestinians see their dream of a state.
Like many Israelis, Lieberman believes that everything has been tried and that Israel must "change its concept entirely." What that concept might be will depend on what happens at the UN this week.
But it is unclear what the Palestinians will gain. They have already refused every overture made to them for a Palestinian state, including the 1947 UN partition plan for a Jewish and a Palestinian state. Ironically, unable to take Israel by force, they are running back to the same world body they rejected 64 years ago.
What is clear however is that they still want the whole enchilada. Maybe one day they will learn what every three-year-old already knows -- how to share.Refreshing to see the Huffington Post is allowed unapologetically pro-Israel blog posts on its site, even if it is published on HuffPost Canada (?).
