Why Obama is pushing 'peace' talks with arabs who repeatedly declare their intentions to destroy Israel

Obama's charade of peace talks between Israel and palestinian arabs has not only had nothing to do with peace (that has been obvious all along to the unblinkered), but to service two goals, that of 1) divesting Israel of all of its ancestral lands, and 2) of keeping Israel's leadership so busy that it can not meet to discuss the awful decisions necessary to strike Iran.

It is not otherwise logical that the President of the United States should invest his time, and his Secretary of State's time  so profusely whilst the rest of the middle east is literally burning.

Israel is a tiny state surrounded by enemies, and Obama wants at this dangerous time for Israel to give up its strategic high ground? Israel can not be defended without its high ground, just a few miles, literally, from its only international airport and the majority of its population centers in the low lying coastal areas.

It is sad to see that Israel's leader at this time is a silvery tongued diplomat rather than an iron willed Ben-Gurion. Israel has rolled over time and again to receive Obama's tickles on its tummy, his oft repeated guarantees that America will always have Israel's back. And during all this Kerry the Iran lover, Samantha Power ('attack Israel') and the rest of Obama's Israel hating team are sharpening the knife to help arabs slaughter, our nation. We've been there before in 1948 when Britain did the same thing. It is so sad to see this being prepared by the great nation which was the very first to recognize the rebirth of the Jewish State after 2,000 years.

Israel whilst loving the american people must come out from the umbrella of a USA which whilst compelling Israel to join talks in  preparation for its own funeral, forces Israel's prime minister Netanyahu to pay for this  release over a hundred of the most heinous arab killers. Yet again Israel is forced to make gestures to genocidally inclined arabs, who honor the murderers and give nothing but assurances as to Israel's coming destruction.

Israel must say no to any more releases of these killers of old men and women, of holocaust survivors and children.

This release is the latest in a series that have over the years made a mockery of Israel's justice system, as only jews ever serve their full sentences. Israel's population where every family has lost at least one member in the wars arabs forced upon it are sick and tired of being made to pay a blood price every time, solely because they are a moral nation.

It is time that Israel forgets the false morals that the world demands of Israel, morals which prevent Israel ever winning its wars, morals which only apply to Israel and to a lesser extent to western democracies. As someone who has in the past been against the brutal death penalty I find myself in Israel's case becoming increasingly for it.

If there is no opportunity to make mass murderers sit in a cell for the rest of their lives after having taken innocent blood, then they need to be executed after due process.

Israel has a right to protect its society, even if Obama, Kerry and the rest of his evil pack don't believe so.

If Israel does not do reinstitute the death penalty, then its soldiers will probably take matters into their own hands which is not the best solution. It is a better solution however than seeing time after time these prisoner releases which have led to hundreds more deaths of Israelis in the recent past.

Morality demands that arab murderers be punished, just as the USA never releases prisoners, and only this week the USA condemned Mexico for releasing a drug gang leader who killed an american.

This is the world's morality. Jews must time and again be compelled to turn the other cheek and forgive those who destroy our people.

Israel is badly served by its leaders in the face of the most anti-Israel american administration ever.

Shabbat shalom

Obama, Kerry and their arab friends can salivate over a truncated Israel ripe for destruction, but the future looks different

Netanyahu has a hard time juggling all the different balls in play, of keeping his eye on Israel's enemies, on Lebanon, on Iran, on Egypt, and on Gaza and Judea and Samaria, just to name the most immediate threats to Israel's security.

Netanyahu has also had a number of jousting sessions with that other enemy of Israel, its avowed 'friend' Obama and his various side-kicks. Kerry's new 'peace' initiative is of course anything but that, just another attempt by Obama to revive his failed attempt of a couple of years ago, to push Israel back into indefensible 'borders', i.e. the armistice lines of 1948.

It's interesting to see that Hamas has totally rejected this plan. Hamas finds it hard to even play the double speak that Abbas and his Fatah boys find so rewarding:

 GAZA, (PIC)-- Political analyst Dr. Naji Batta said that Hamas movement had unequivocally rejected the Arab initiative, and said that "it does not meet the minimum rights of the Palestinian people."

Batta told PIC on Saturday that the Arab initiative and the idea of land swaps crossed red lines and pointed to more concessions.

"The Arab initiative is originally rejected, because Palestine is not for sale or rent," the political analyst said, stressing that no one has the right to give up any part of the land of Palestine.

The "minimum rights of the Palestinian people" just so happen to mean the destruction of Israel.

One thing we can be pretty sure of, is that no matter what plans the enemies of the Jewish People cook up, they will sooner or later be frustrated.

And just to avoid any doubt about Hamas' intentions:

"Our borders are the historic land of Palestine. The land belongs to us, and we refuse the Arab initiative," Haniyeh said.

He stressed that the new Arab position that supports the exchange of land represents an unacceptable waiver and encourages the occupation to continue the settlement activity.

Gaza Premier called on the Palestinian people to adhere to the option of resistance as it represents the strategic choice.

"What was taken by force can only be restored by force. Negotiations can never be the way towards the liberalization," he said.

Of course a " historic land of Palestine" never existed, unless Hamas is talking not of Israel, but of Mandatory Palestine from 1917-1948. This included Transjordan as it was known after Britain created it in 1921. Arabs however they describe themselves  are welcome to Jordan, unless they attack Israel again from there, so maybe there will be some room for compromise over that land, at a future date.

With Israel's growing population safe borders might mean not just keeping all its ancestral lands, but,should arabs again make war on Israel, mean taking more defensible high ground that belonged to the jewish people in bible times on the east bank of the Jordan and north of Rosh Haniqra. This is the message that Netanyahu needs to give Obama and its other enemies. Just as with Russia of 2008, if you attack us, we will not shrink our borders, but expand them. Germany, Hungary and Roumania understood this after 1945, just as Armenia mercilessly drove its enemies from its borders in 1991.

As with the Gaza retreat which brought only arab attacks, so with Egypt. There was no need to give the Sinai to Egypt. The Sinai never belonged to Egypt before the British came along and annexed it to British occupied Egypt at the turn of the 20th century. Britain confiscated it from Turkey so as to defend its own occupation of the Suez Canal, the lifeline defending the route to India, the so-called 'Jewel in the Crown'.

In 1973 Israel had two egyptian armies at its mercy. Thanks to US pressure it fed them rather than destroy them. People say that the Peace Treaty with Egypt has kept the peace for 30 years, but this is untrue. Israel's might, and Sadat and Mubarak's fear of a new war kept the peace. The Muslim Brotherhood is a new gang in town, and is not frustrated in its wishes to wage war on Israel by the peace treaty which Morsy has on a number of occasions indicated, means nothing to  him. Egypt can not make war because of the turmoil in the arab world mixed with the dire state of Egypt's finances. Israel should however of course still keep a close eye on Egypt.

Arabs should know that time is on Israel's side, that if they don't want peace, but just wish to wage war not only amongst themselves, but against Israel whenever they feel strong enough, they must take into account the possibility that they will find themselves territorially even further away from  achieving their objectives.

If Israel has in the past talked about 'Land for Peace', rejected every time by arabs, in 2001 under Barak and lastly in 2008 under Olmert, Israel's enemies should be told in no uncertain terms that 'Land in exchange for Aggression and War' is also an option in future.

The message should be, 'continue to make war on Israel and you will lose more land'. Thankfully such a scenario of another 1973 style attack on Israel is a thing of the mid to distant future. Arabs are too much involved in massacring themselves at the moment to think too much about the jews, that is except Hamas, and even they understand the new rules of the game. Hamas is talking tough, but reigning in the kassam missile firings.

A lesson in 'Palestinian' nationalism and the 'umma'

The Saudi Sheikh is laughing at this black man who disgraced himself, and sold out black people who still suffer from arab racism in Libya, Egypt and Saudi Arabia, and from genocide in Darfur

Every time a new 'peace plan' comes along intended to divest Israel of essential high ground, territory the tiny nation needs to defend itself, we need to read the below post from the 'learned elder'.




We are used to seeing just how deeply nationalistic the so-called palestinians are with the successive failures of Fatah and Hamas to even present a common front, let alone unity. And then there is Syria, tearing itself apart into its constituent parts. 

But the very notion of palestinian identity is a trick for arabs to destroy Israel, the free world's outpost in the region. 'Palestinian identity' is an invention, only emerging in order to attack the zionist pre-state project and Israel. 

We must keep the real intentions of the arabs in mind as Kerry, Obama attempt over and over again to drag Israel to make more concessions.

I have some faith in Netanyahu that he has the full measure of this enemy Obama administration that would dearly like to see Israel dismembered. Obama and his friend Jimmy Carter might sell themselves and the USA for Saudi gold, but Israel will be there when they are long gone.


The disappearance and reappearance of Palestinian Arab nationalism, 1949-1968
 Palestinian Arab nationalism effectively sprung out of thin air in 1920. Up until then, with very little exception, it was subsumed under the desire to be a part of "Greater Syria" which would include all of Palestine - and leave no room for a Jewish state.

 As soon as the ink dried on the San Remo resolution, Palestinian Arab leaders changed their tune, and embraced the idea of an Arab Palestine that would, again, ensure that no Jewish state would ever exist.

 After 1948, the desire for a Palestinian Arab state disappeared again. Palestinian Arabs in the west bank of the Jordan became citizens of that country; those in Gaza saw their land occupied by Egypt. Neither of them showed the slightest interest in their own state - the desire just disappeared.

 What replaced it was a return to 1919's Syrian-style pan-Arabism, and the person they believed could help them was Egypt's Gamal Abdel Nasser.

 Here is an interesting AP story from 1957:

 Yes, Palestinians in Gaza in 1957 wanted to be under the administration of Egypt - not to have their own country!

 In fact, Jordan's King Hussein's major problem during that time was the threat from Nasser, who incited Jordanian Palestinians to revolt against him and even to assassinate him, so the entire Arab world could be Nasserist.

 What happened to their vaunted nationalism? Where was their desire for an independent state that their leaders spoke about so eloquently during the 1940s?

 It is apparent that the desire for a state was far less than the desire to destroy Israel, which was Nasser's selling point to them. "Liberating Palestine" meant liberating it - from Jews.

 The 1964 PLO Covenant is a very interesting document. Its Arabic name is "Al-Mithaq Al-Kawmee Al-Philisteeni," which roughly means The Palestinian Pan-Arabist Covenant. It is mostly wedded to the Nasserist vision, insisting on how the Palestinian cause is a pan-Arab cause, and it is replete with references to Arab unity and the Arab nation. (It also specifically excludes Gaza and the West Bank from areas wanted for "Palestine" - since those areas were considered "liberated!" Significantly, it also refers to Israel's pre-1967 existence as "occupation.")

The 1968 version of the document, in contrast, is called "Al-Mithaq Al-Watanee Al-Philisteeni" which more explicitly means "The Palestinian National Covenant." Which means that only after 1967, when hopes for an Arab military victory over Israel faded, did Palestinian Arab nationalism become reincarnated.

 We see that the Palestinian Arab leadership went from Greater Syrian nationalism to Palestinian Arab nationalism to pan-Arab Nasserite nationalism and then back to Palestinian Arab nationalism, all in the course of fifty years.

 All of those political movements boasted wonderfully written documents and passionate speeches explaining why their cause was the only logical, moral and legal means to justly deal with Palestinian Arabs. There were no apparent cases of whiplash as people moved from one to the next, contradictory political position. The reason is clear: all those disparate movements had one thing in common, the eradication of Jewish nationalism. Everything else was window dressing to put a polite face on what is really a philosophy of hate.

 And it continues today, as Palestinian Arabs are seemingly torn between what appears to be completely different paths - the PLO's stated methods of declarations and popular resistance, or Hamas' newly stated method of embracing a strategy of stages that mimics Arafat's 1974 Phased Plan to destroy Israel, to Islamic Jihad's dedication to nothing but armed resistance, to Hezbollah's single-minded goal of utterly destroying Israel by any means possible. But in the end, they are all paper-thin veneers on top of the same underlying goal - to destroy Israel by whatever means makes the most sense at the moment.

 Westerners cannot wrap their heads around the idea that an entire national movement is really not interested in liberty and freedom for their people, but rather is meant solely to destroy another people. It is literally unbelievable that Arab leaders would hold millions of people hostage simply to use them as human weapons against Israel. But like it or not, it is the truth, and it is what needs to be understood before any real progress can be made.