http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/10688#.To9L6nJiK-U
On September 28th the world was supposed to celebrate, but conveniently forgot that it was the anniversary of the Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement, widely known as the Oslo Accords.
Three political stooges: Yasser Arafat, Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Perez, received the Nobel Peace prize for signing this worthless piece of paper, which was based on fake promises made by Yasser Arafat in a letter to then-Prime Minister of Israel, Yitschak Rabin on 9 September, 1993.
In this letter Yasser Arafat promised:
“The PLO considers that the signing of the Declaration of Principles constitutes an historic event, inaugurating a new epoch of peaceful coexistence, free from violence and all other acts which endanger peace and stability. Accordingly, the PLO renounces the use of terrorism and other acts of violence and will assume responsibility over all PLO elements and personnel in order to assure their compliance, prevent violations and discipline violators.”
It was particularly not convenient to celebrate the dead accords when Mahmoud Abbas came to the UN and put the final nail in its coffin, unilaterally abandoning the principles of negotiation and undermined stability of the peace process.
Due to enormous political pressure exhorted on Israel by the Clinton administration to sign the agreement, many parts of it were deliberately written ambiguously to make it open to interpretation.
Israel was prepared to allowed limited autonomy to the non-Jewish populations of Judea, Samaria and Gaza, but the PLO was determined to obtain statehood as the first step towards future territorial expansion with the inclusion of the land of Israel and possibly Jordan, as part of Palestine.
Many promises were made, clearly but deceitfully, by Arafat and never delivered:
1. Terror attacks on Israel have never stopped.
2. PA regularly sabotaged negotiations, endangering peace and stability by breaking them and calling for international pressure on Israel.
Arabs respect strong opponents. It is integral to their national makeup.
Terrorists of Fatah, Hamas and other Islamic organisations continued freely conducting their bloody business. Often, the terrorist actions were coordinated by PA to meet its political aim.
When the Oslo agreement was signed, several important undertakings were promised by the PLO, but not delivered by Arafat and Abbas:
1. Israel is still not legally recognised by the Palestinian Authority or by any major organisations like PLO or Hamas.
2. The new entity is supposed to be a democracy. After the last election, which Hamas won, Abbas illegally retained control of the PA and the next election is long overdue. Therefore, the current PA leadership is not legitimate nor democratically elected representatives of so-called Palestinians.
3. Article XI,1: “The two sides view the West Bank and the Gaza Strip as a single territorial unit” - At the moment there are two defacto governing bodies: PA, Fatah controlled, in Judea and Samaria, and Hamas in Gaza.
4. Terrorist attacks on Israel have never stopped. Israel was forced to build a wall around the West Bank to stop suicide bombers, who were mainly recruited by Fatah. Gaza was sealed due to terror attacks instigated by Hamas.
5. Article XXII,2: “Israel and the Council will ensure that their respective educational systems contribute to the peace between the Israeli and Palestinian peoples and to peace in the entire region” - PA has never stopped anti-Israel propaganda! Martyrdom is glorified in the press and in mosques, kindergartens and schools by both Fatah and Hamas.
The Oslo agreement expired several years ago. It had not brought peace, but exposed lies and treachery.
Instead of negotiating peace, the PA regularly walked from the negotiation table in pursuit of hypocritical international support in order to pressure Israel for more concessions, giving nothing in return.
This agreement was dead on arrival! It must be viewed by Israel as a lesson, which many terror experts insist on: “Never negotiate with terrorists!”
So-called Palestinian people are the fake nation which was forged by Arabs in 1964 in order to destroy Israel. They are not interested in peace with Israel. They are occupiers of Jewish land!
Israel must realise that the only way to resolve the conflict is to utilise self-reliance and determination to end the occupation of Jewish land by Arabs and so-called Palestinians.
The painful experience of the peace process has proven one obvious point - Arabs will never have peace with Israel! Israel has done everything possible to accommodate the peace with this terror infested entity. Any other country or nation would not even bother.
Therefore, it is time to reclaim our land, transfer enemy population to Sinai or to other numerous Arabs states, those who claim to care so much about “poor Palestinians”. (Why not them? - In order to have peace, Israel forcibly removed 8,500 Jews from Gaza. It did not stop terror attacks. The PA insists that all Jews must be removed from Judea and Samaria! So why not remove them from Jewish land instead?)
This is the only option Israel has. The alternative is annihilation!
Arabs respect strong opponents. It is integral to their national makeup. When Israel demonstrated its military superiority it was respected not just by Arab states, but by most countries, including the Soviet Union.
It is time to stop being “a little ghetto Jew”, end the policy of appeasement of international anti-Semitic bigots who will never be content with Jews, and stand up for our own rights.
Palestine is the Eretz-Israel - the Land of Israel! It is the Jewish ancestral land, which was promised to Jews by G-d and even by resolution of the League of Nation in 1922. It is time to take it back!
vhttp://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/10689#.To9MinJiK-U
Throughout the ongoing unrest in the Middle East and North Africa, endless streams of ink have been poured over the issue of what is to come in countries like Libya, which has recently witnessed the ousting of Qaddafi. Will Libya be another Iraq, an Islamist-dominated nation, or a stable liberal democracy?
So these questions have been asked innumerable times. Perhaps now we should be wondering: What might be a good indicator or litmus test of the direction in which Libya is going?
Luckily, a useful answer lies in the recent case of David Gerbi, a Libyan Jew who has spent most of his life in exile in Italy but returned to his native land in the summer to assist the rebels in overthrowing Qaddafi’s regime. As numerous outlets have reported, he was initially enthralled at the prospect of building a new post-Gaddafi Libya, yet his hopes were quickly dashed once he was subject to death threats on account of his attempts to restore the crumbling synagogue in Tripoli.
He was further told by a man claiming to represent the new Libyan authorities that a mass anti-Semitic demonstration was being planned for that Friday in Tripoli’s Martyrs’ Square, formerly known as “Green Square” when Qaddafi was in power.
Gerbi appealed to the National Transitional Council (NTC), urging them to convey the message to the people that “we are pluralistic,” yet the NTC did not respond kindly to Gerbi’s reasoned pleas, ostensibly dismissing the matter as “premature,” in the words of NTC leader Mustafa Abdul-Jalil.
Like other nations in the Middle East and North Africa, the exodus of Libya’s Jewish population was in great part due to attacks by Muslim mobs and government-sponsored persecution.
As Alex Joffe reports, in the case of Libya, in 1945 (at that point under British occupation) pogroms organized by Muslims killed hundreds of Jews and destroyed many Jewish-owned shops and synagogues, leading to the departure of some 30,000 Libyan Jews for Israel between 1949 and 1951.
Just before Libya became independent in 1951, the Prime Minister Mahmoud Muntasser affirmed that there could be “no future” for Jews in Libya, and the 8,000 who remained suffered numerous restrictions, including a ban on having passports and serving in public office.
After the Six Day War, a series of pogroms led to the expulsion of all remaining Jews in Libya.
For many Mizrahim [Jews from North Africa, Iraq, etc. ed.] now living in Israel and the West, it has been their dream to return to or at least visit their countries of origin without restrictions.
If the new emerging governments from the “Arab Spring” in the Middle East and North Africa- along with the populations at large- have a problem with Jews who desire to return to their homelands, on what basis should it be presumed that these nations will adopt the values of appreciation of tolerance and diversity that are the hallmarks of a liberal democracy?
Another case in point is that of post-Saddam Iraq. Following the American-led invasion in 2003, many Iraqi Jews longed to return, reclaim their property or at least receive compensation from the government for confiscation by the Iraqi authorities. However, to this day, the Iraqi government refuses even to provide compensation, claiming that the exodus of Jews from Iraq was entirely a matter of free choice and willingly selling property, a claim that is far from the truth.
Far from seeing even a marginal influx of Jews into the country, Iraq has witnessed a decline in its already tiny Jewish remnant community since 2003, with at least one kidnapped and killed by al-Qa’ida militants.
There are now just seven Jews remaining in Baghdad, and the Meir Taweig synagogue in the capital has been closed, while in Basra, the last synagogue was ransacked and converted into a warehouse after the city’s only Jew left following the invasion. A proposal was raised among a few residents of the city to restore the synagogue, but did not come to fruition.
Despite an American expenditure of well over $1 trillion on the war effort (including some $53 billion allocated for reconstruction projects), Iraq today cannot be classified as a true electoral democracy.
As Freedom House notes, the country conducted generally free and fair elections in 2010, but genuine democratic decision-making is severely impeded by corruption, excessive bureaucracy that is a legacy of what Daniel Pipes terms the “Stalinist nightmare” of Saddam Hussein, sectarianism and personal power struggles among the political elite. It is therefore no surprise that Freedom House still designates Iraq as “Not Free.”
By contrast, Morocco, which still has a protected Jewish community of several thousand, appears to be faring well in the present unrest, having made Tamazight an official language (any emphasis on a Berber national identity in this manner can only serve as a bulwark against Islamism: and it is of note that in Libya the Berber community has been generally supportive of David Gerbi’s efforts) in light of largely peaceful demonstrations and introducing pragmatic reforms that stand a reasonable chance of leading towards true liberal democracy at a gradual and steady pace. Such measures will result in both short and long term stability.
Nonetheless, the persistent and virulent anti-Jewish attitudes elsewhere do not bode well for prospects of liberal democracy taking hold of the Middle East and North Africa anytime soon.
No comments:
Post a Comment