Deelnemers Annapolis conferentie onder druk

Vanwege de dreiging van Iran en de moslimextremisten, verwachtte de regering Bush de (relatief) gematigde Arabische staten makkelijk warm te kunnen maken voor de aanstaande Annapolis conferentie. Dat viel wat tegen. Te veel toegeeflijkheid zou overkomen alsof ze de Palestijnse zaak verraden, en kan daarmee de extremisten juist in de hand spelen.

 

Met oorlogen en boycots hebben ze Israël echter niet klein gekregen in het verleden, en de status quo laten voortbestaan werkt eveneens de extremisten in de hand, die hen ervan beschuldigen niets te doen om hun 'Palestijnse broeders' te helpen.

 

Welbegrepen eigenbelang zou daarom vereisen dat ze - zoals Sadat van Egypte voor hen - de stap wagen om de hand uit te steken naar Israël, en echt te gaan onderhandelen over vrede en erkenning van de Joodse staat, inclusief diens aanspraken op (een deel van) de Oude Stad in Jeruzalem.

 

 

Wouter

_________________

Jerusalem Post / Nov 1, 2007 23:32 | Updated Nov 2, 2007 12:41
Analysis: Israel bound to feel the heat ahead of Annapolis

 

By HERB KEINON
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1192380715981&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

This week, for the first time, word began filtering out that the US was starting to lean on Israel to take some steps to ensure a successful meeting at Annapolis.

The US, according to diplomatic officials, sent a clear message that Washington has spent a great deal of time, energy and political capital on this event, and wants to make sure it succeeds. The message to Jerusalem was that Israel would have to start evacuating settlement outposts, obligations spelled out under the road map, if it expected the Palestinians to fulfill their own road map obligations.

With US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice due to arrive on Saturday night for her eighth visit this year, and the looming advance of the end of fall - the date by which the Americans have said the long-discussed Annapolis meeting would be held - crunch time is fast approaching.

And, as it approaches, Israelis should buck up for a degree of pressure from Washington that hasn't been felt for a long time.

Because while the Annapolis meeting is, on the surface, about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and President George W. Bush's efforts in his last year in office to put his two-state vision on track, it is not solely - or even primarily - about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It is also about American needs, and American interests in the Middle East.

With the US experiment in Middle East democracy-building not exactly a resounding success, its eyes now are set on creating an arc of moderate Arab regimes, from the Persian Gulf to North Africa, to act as a bulwark, when it withdraws from Iraq, against Iran and marching Shi'ite extremism.

The two major issues concerning the US in the region right now are Iraq and Iran - not necessarily in that order - and then Israel.

When Bush first broached the idea of a Mideast meeting in July, he seemed to be wagering that the "moderate" Arab countries - like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Morocco - would jump at the opportunity to attend and give a lending hand, if not out of a recognition that Israel was an established entity, then at least from their own domestic considerations. And these considerations were simple: a realization by these regimes that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict fed the extremists in their own midst, and that it was in their own interest to deprive the extremists of this "nutrition."

The idea was that with Iran going after nukes, and terrorism and global jihad knocking at their own door, these moderate regimes would finally be willing to come out of the closet and give legitimacy to Israel-Palestinian negotiations.

But the moderate states did not jump on the bandwagon, partly because of concern about how attendance at the conference, which would be interpreted as endorsing Israel's right to exist, will be taken by the masses.

Now, just weeks prior to one of the dates being bandied about for this meeting, November 26, it is still not clear whether Saudi Arabia - a key in making Annapolis a success because of its unique standing in the Arab world - will even attend.

Hence the pressure on Israel from Washington. The Bush Administration simply cannot afford another Mideast failure.

If the US fails to pull off the Annapolis meeting, the ripple effects will extend to Iran. It will, first and foremost, be an indication that the Iranians now have more pull in the region then the US, because the Iranians are doing whatever they can to throttle the meeting.

Interestingly enough, as much as Washington is antipathetic toward Syria, it needs Syria in Annapolis because having it there would send a strong message to Iran. Syria is a test, and whether it can be lured to the conference will be an indication of whether it can be lured out of the Iranian orbit, or whether it is locked in with Teheran.

But part of the bait to lure Syria to the conference would obviously be something that Israel would be expected to pay - a willingness to talk about the Golan Heights. Israel will also be asked to pay for the bait needed to lure a reluctant Saudi Arabia to the table as well.

If the US cannot get Israel and the Palestinians at Annapolis to agree on a paper that will be endorsed by the moderate Arab world, then the Saudis won't come, and the Iranians - who oppose the conference - will emerge as the winners. Surely not a prospect Israel relishes.

But if the Saudis do show up at Annapolis, and if the Syrians decide to come as well, Israel will be expected to pay the price for getting them there. And that price will be paid to a Palestinian leader, PA President Mahmoud Abbas, who represents - at best - only half the Palestinians.

As Rice comes to shepherd Israel and the Palestinians down the final stretch toward Annapolis, neither option looks overly appealing.

Israëls veiligheid sleutel tot overeenkomst Palestijnse staat

Onderstaand bericht suggereert iets duidelijkere taal dan in de speeches die Livni en Olmert zondag gaven voor het Saban Forum.
___________________________

Israel's security seen as key to deal for Palestinian state
Reuters / Published: November 4, 2007
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/11/04/africa/mideast.php?WT.mc_id=rssafrica

JERUSALEM: Tzipi Livni, the Israeli foreign minister, told Condoleezza Rice, the U.S. secretary of state, Sunday that any deal Washington hoped to broker for a Palestinian state would not be implemented until Israel's security was assured.

Rice is on her third visit to the region in six weeks. She is trying to bridge gaps between the two sides before the United States hosts a conference that is expected to take place in the last week of November in Annapolis, Maryland.

Israel and the Palestinians are still at odds over a joint document for the conference, which would serve as a starting point for negotiations on core issues ranging from borders to the fate of Jerusalem to millions of Palestinian refugees. Israeli leaders have insisted that any future agreement could be put into effect only after the Palestinians met their obligations under a U.S.-backed "road map" for peace charting reciprocal steps towards statehood.

The 2003 blueprint requires Palestinians to crack down on militants and for Israel to halt the expansion of Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank and remove dozens of outposts set up without Israeli government permission.

The Palestinians "need to understand that the implementation of future understandings would be implemented only according to the phases of the road map - the meaning is security for Israel first and then the establishment of a Palestinian state," Livni told reporters, with Rice at her side.

"Nobody wants to see another terror state in the region," Livni said, an indirect reference to fears that Hamas, the Islamist part that took over the Gaza Strip in June, could do the same in the West Bank, where the Fatah faction of President Mahmoud Abbas holds sway.

Rice told Livni that she hoped her visit would help to "advance the work you are doing bilaterally with the Palestinians as well as continuing to plan for the Annapolis meetings."

Rice told reporters that it was very unlikely there would be agreement on a document during her two-day trip, during which she will also meet separately with the Israeli prime minister, Ehud Olmert, and Abbas.

"They are going through some knotty discussions, and I think those knotty discussions are going to continue for some time," Rice said Saturday.

Israel and the Palestinians are also at odds over a call by Abbas for a timeline to wrap up so-called final status negotiations for creating a Palestinian state.

Olmert opposes a time frame, cautioning that a failure to meet deadlines could deepen frustrations and touch off violence. But he has said that it was his goal to reach an accord before President George W. Bush ends his second term in January 2009. Rice was also set to meet with Tony Blair, the Middle East envoy and former British prime minister, and to make a speech in Jerusalem that was expected to encourage both sides to make bold compromises.

Israeli strikes kill 4 in Gaza

Israeli missile strikes killed four Palestinians in the Gaza Strip on Sunday, Reuters reported from Jerusalem, citing local medical officials.
Israel said it had targeted militants firing rockets at its territory.
Palestinian officials said some of the dead were civilians.

Drie mannen in Oost-Jeruzlaem gearresteerd voor beramen aanslagen in Israël

Eén van de vele aanslagen die worden gepland en verijdeld.
___________________________

Last update - 20:12 04/11/2007

Three East J'lem men arrested for planning attacks in Israel 
By Ofra Idelman, Haaretz Correspondent  
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/920183.html 
 

A gag order was lifted on Sunday on the arrest of three East Jerusalem residents suspected of planning terror attacks in Israel.

Among the cell's planned attacks was a suicide attack in Jerusalem and shooting attacks on security forces on Mugrabi Gate in the Old City.

An indictment filed by the Jerusalem District Attorney on Friday reveals that at the end of 2006, 19-year-old Mamoun Abu Tir and Atallah Abu Tir, 20, both from Umm Tuba in East Jerusalem, decided to set up a terror cell. To advance the cell, Mamoun Abu Tir established contacts with a man who introduced himself as an Islamic Jihad activist in Algeria.


According to the indictment, the man send Mamud Abu Tir instructions on preparing explosives, and, in September 2007, connected him with an Islamic Jihad militant in the Gaza Strip.

The indictment also states that Mamoun Abu Tir discussed with the Gaza militant potential attacks on various figures, including the mayor of Jerusalem. The two originally discussed bringing a suicide bomber from Hebron to Be'er Sheva, but eventually decided to try and carry out an attack on Jerusalem instead.

The Gaza militant, according to the indictment, offered to bring a suicide bomber to the separation fence in Jerusalem, from where Mamun Abu Tir would pick him up. The latter agreed, and asked his friend Atallah Abu Tir to act as a driver. The two agreed to search for the ideal location for an attack in the city, and to obtain weapons for a shooting attack on forces guarding the Mugrabi Gate.

Roughly one week later, the Gaza middleman allegedly told Mamoun Abu Tir in apparent code that he should prepare to pick up a "present" in the West Bank city of Jenin. The indictment states that Abu Tir understood from this that he was to pick up a suicide bomber and an explosives belt.

Several hours later, Mamoun Abu Tir was arrested by security forces. He and Atallah Abu Tir have been charged with conspiring with an enemy during wartime, and the former also with contacts with a foreign agent.

The indictment also charges Said Amira, from the Jerusalem neighborhood of Tzur Bahar, with conspiring with an enemy during wartime. The indictment says that in early 2007, Attalah Abu Tir discussed with Amira possible attacks against Jews.

Amira is also changed with throwing a stone at Israeli police officers in 2002 after Friday prayers at the Al Aqsa Mosque, and of membership in a terror organization, after he took part in a Hamas rally in 2004 and acted as a Hamas observer for Palestinian Authority elections in 2006

'Het enige land waar we nog nooit uit zijn gegooid is Israël'

... Op dezelfde manier is het Israëlische hooggerechtshof waarschijnlijk de enige rechtbank in het Midden-Oosten waar Arabieren tegenover de staat in het gelijk worden gesteld.
Dit laat onverlet dat Al Jazeera geen objectieve nieuwszender is en toch vooral vanuit Arabisch perspectief over de zaken bericht. Dat Al Jazeera desondanks uit alle Arabische staten, inclusief de Palestijnse gebieden is gegooid (door de Palestijnen, niet door Israël), is veelzeggend.

 

Hoever zou een Israëlisch TV station komen in de Arabische wereld? Niet ver. In een aantal landen mogen Joden niet eens komen, en kom je ook met een Israëlisch stempel in je paspoort al niet binnen. Israëlische producten komen er ook vaak niet in, en in sommige landen hebben bedrijven die handel drijven met Israël eveneens een probleem.

 

 

Ratna

---------

'The only country we haven't been kicked out of is Israel'

It's not just America that's hostile to al-Jazeera, Nigel Parsons, who launched the English version of the channel, tells James Robinson. The so-called 'Terror TV' station has ruffled feathers across the Gulf

* James Robinson
* The Observer
* Sunday November 4 2007
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2007/nov/04/television?gusrc=rss&feed=media

In Washington, the political elite call al-Jazeera 'Terror TV' - so rolling out an international version of the 24-hour Arabic news channel to extend its reach to the English-speaking world was always likely to be fraught with difficulties.

Sipping tea in a central London hotel, Nigel Parsons, the man who launched al-Jazeera English a year ago, recalls the reception he received on an early visit to Washington to meet a US Congressman. 'When I walked in he said "So you're the guys who are responsible for our kids dying in Iraq". And this was a Democrat - an ex-surfer from California.'

Parsons, an Englishman with an unassuming manner who has worked at the BBC and Associated Press, has had to fight to make AJE's voice heard. As the channel's anniversary approaches, al-Jazeera English is still not available in American homes and has been forced to rely on its website to build a presence in the US. 'Cable companies were fearful of a backlash,' Parsons says.

It has hired a posse of big-name reporters and presenters, including ex-BBC stars Rageh Omaar and Sir David Frost, to imbue the network with some star quality, and Frost helped the channel get off to a good start, securing an interview with Tony Blair in its first week in which the then Prime Minister appeared to agree that the invasion of Iraq had 'so far been pretty much of a disaster'.

Though few stories have made such a spectacular splash since then, Parsons says there have been plenty of other exclusives: 'We had five cameras in Burma when no one else could get in and that was picked up [by other networks].' So too was the channel's footage of the Pakistani army's raid on the Red Mosque in Islamabad.

After a delayed launch, which left more than 100 of its 390 journalists sitting in the Qatari desert, Parsons is pleased to be in nearly 100 million homes in more than 60 countries (market-leader CNN is in 200 million). 'I could hear the knives sharpening as launch day approached. Now that we are on air, people can judge us for what we are.'

There is no doubt that AJE's coverage is distinctive. Parsons says around 40 per cent of its output covers the Middle East, but it majors on stories in developing nations and offers a world view that is refreshingly different or dangerously subjective, depending on your personal perspective.

'We don't want to be part of the herd,' Parsons says. 'That's not saying the herd is always wrong, but following it is responsible for the mistakes that have been made. Iraq was a classic example of that. It was nothing short of a dereliction of duty, for broadcasters in particular. We assumed that our politicians knew more than we did and assumed their statements were based on fact.

'The rhetoric being used against Iran is a carbon copy of the rhetoric used against Iraq. They are already linking Iran with al-Qaeda and using that phrase "nuclear ambitions". But the media are more wary this time and there will be a lot of questions asked if there is a rush to war.'

AJE covered President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's recent visit to New York 'quite differently', Parsons says. 'We were far more critical of his treatment. We are far more aware of the fact that he is not the ultimate leader of Iran. It is a very old nation that hasn't invaded anyone for 300 years and was on the wrong end of a war of attrition with Iraq.' But he also points out: 'We're not less critical of Iran. We often get thrown out of the country.'

One of the ironies of AJE's pariah status in the US is that the original Arabic-language al-Jazeera, which claims to report and reflect the view from the 'Arab street', often clashes with Middle Eastern regimes, which don't always appreciate candid criticism. 'Saudi is the most difficult one to cover. We haven't been in for years, though we're trying to. The only country we haven't been kicked out of is Israel; even the Palestinians kicked us out once.'

Those who characterise AJE's sister channel as Osama bin Laden's favourite news outlet might also be interested to learn that al-Qaeda has just issued a fatwa against AJE. 'We didn't show [bin Laden's latest statement] in a flattering enough light.'

It was those videotaped statements that first made al-Jazeera's reputation in the West, but Parsons is dismissive of those who claim they are aiding bin Laden by airing them. It has always insisted that it would not hand over tapes to the CIA and Parsons says that journalists who say bin Laden should be denied the oxygen of publicity are being disingenuous. 'If he offered you an exclusive interview in a cave in Tora Bora, you'd go. If they protest they wouldn't, they'd be lying.'

These days, other broadcasters frequently find bin Laden's tapes before al-Jazeera does, he says. 'They used to be dropped off anonymously, but are uploaded in an internet cafe now. Reuters received the last one.'

Both channels are funded by the fabulously wealthy Emir of Qatar, in part because they allow the kingdom to punch above its weight politically and diplomatically, but Parsons denies they have money to burn: 'We don't have the same commercial pressure, but we have fixed budgets. We don't have as much money as our competitors.'

Neither were its big-name signings lured with big-money offers. 'The idea that we are the Chelsea of broadcasting is a complete myth. We had a deliberate policy of not buying our way into the market. We are at the bottom end of the global pay league. I can tell you that Rageh's not being paid anything near what his agent would have liked. He could have made a lot more money elsewhere.' Reporters are attracted by the chance to do work they enjoy, travelling when they want to, but doing less 'rooftop journalism' from the edge of war zones, he claims.

The truth - however unpalatable it may be to some - is that the channel will come into its own next time there is a major conflict in the Middle East, when it hopes to use its correspondents and contacts in the region to get to places and people Western news outlets might not reach.

Parsons admits that last summer's Israeli-Lebanese conflict, which preceded AJE's launch was frustrating to watch because his colleagues had to watch the war unfold from their desert base. 'It's a dilemma. The region's seen enough conflict, but if there were another Lebanese war tomorrow, that could make us as a channel.'

His only regret so far, he says, is that AJE didn't go on a publicity push in America: 'We've been very weak on marketing. I would have taken one of those big Times Square electronic signs and put a slogan up saying "The rest of the world is watching; why aren't you?". It's debatable whether that would have won it a wider audience in America, but it would certainly have provoked an interesting response.'

 

Toespraak premier Ehud Olmert op Saban Forum

Hieronder Olmert's speech op het Saban Forum (zie ook: Livni's speech op het Saban forum).

 

Evenals Livni houdt Olmert het vooral bij mooie woorden en algemeenheden, geen duidelijke eisen of ferme uitspraken, evenmin concrete toezeggingen, maar vooral 'verbiage'. Hij gaat uitgebreid in op de vraag waarom een conferentie, waarom nu, en het doel, maar echt wijzer wordt je er niet van.

Annapolis is a landmark, it is an international seal of approval, on the path to negotiations and of the genuine effort to achieve the realization of the vision of two nations: the State of Israel - the nation of the Jewish people; and the Palestinian state - the nation of the Palestinian people.

There will not be negotiations on the vision; there will be no bargaining about this fundamental goal which the U.S. President, George Bush, declared so eloquently: "Two countries for two peoples".  A Jewish state for the Jewish people - a Palestinian state for the Palestinian people.

We will not negotiate about the right of existence for the State of Israel as a Jewish state.  We will not bargain about the right of the Palestinian people to their own state.

Both are fundamental conditions, basic positions, obvious understandings which cannot be denied.  All the basic questions, all the substantive problems, all the historic questions which are pertinent to the disagreement between us and the Palestinians are on the agenda.  We will avoid none of them, we will not run from discussing any of them.

Helaas is Israëls bestaansrecht voor de Palestijnen geen uitgemaakte zaak, want zij eisen een onbeperkt recht op terugkeer van de vluchtelingen. Het is dus één van beiden: of alles ligt op tafel en staat ter discussie, inclusief Joodse zelfbeschikking, of Olmert moet expliciet zeggen dat recht op terugkeer onbespreekbaar is. Me dunkt dat Palestijnse soevereiniteit over de Klaagmuur en de Joodse begraafplaats ook onbespreekbaar is, maar ook daar laat hij zich niet over uit.

Annapolis will not be a place for negotiations, but it will certainly be a starting point.  Annapolis will be the jumping-off point for continued serious and in-depth negotiations which will not avoid any issue or ignore any division which has clouded our relations with the Palestinian people for many years.

Waarom geen onderhandelingen op Annapolis? Als geen enkel probleem of punt van 'disagreement' vermeden dient te worden, als we niet 'weglopen van het bespreken ervan', dan waarom geen onderhandelingen op Annapolis? Waar is Olmert bang voor? De Palestijnen stellen eisen aan de lopende band, dus veel erger kan dat niet worden. Is hij bang dat hij op die eisen in zal moeten gaan? Dat hij moet verantwoorden waarom hij ze niet, of sommigen niet, of nu niet, in wil willigen? Dat hij, kortom Israëls belangen in concreto zal moeten verdedigen en dit zal moeten onderbouwen?

 

Ratna
----------

"We agreed that if and when we reach an understanding with the leaders of the Palestinian Authority, this understanding will be implemented according to the Roadmap, with all its phases and its sequence."

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's Speech at the Saban Forum
November 4, 2007
www.pmo.gov.il/NR/rdonlyres/53A152A9-3B49-4413-8901-197EA4E79086/0/sabanENG041107.doc

Distinguished Guests,

At the outset, I wish to say something personal.

Today, November 4, is the anniversary of the tragic murder of the late Yitzhak Rabin.  We held the official memorial service according to the Hebrew date two weeks ago, and last night masses of people gathered in Rabin Square to commemorate his memory as they do every year.

However, today, November 4, is the day seared in our collective consciousness as the day of the murder.  He will never be forgotten.

I bow my head in profound sorrow to the memory of Yitzhak Rabin.  He was a special man who left his mark - which will never be erased - on the life of our country.

I mentioned that I would say something personal: from where I am now, I understand the difficult dilemmas and the power of the suffering Yitzhak Rabin dealt with.  Rabin did not charge towards the peace process with excessive enthusiasm.  More than anything, he exhibited doubt, hesitation, and was repeatedly tormented by the cost of peace and the risks it entailed.

However, when he saw a chance, he acted to realize it.  When he recognized an opportunity, he did not undermine it, but rather he was willing to take chances, to expose himself to criticism, to face the accusatory voices both domestic and international. He did everything in order to realize the opportunity.

He made no political considerations.  He did not take into account temporary benefits, inter-party balances of power, and what could be worthwhile.  He weighed all the doubts against the hopes, the fears against the chances, the horrible loneliness against the weight of responsibility - and acted.

This is Rabin's legacy.  All the rest are slogans which often cover up the lack of desire to act.  This is a legacy to which I am obligated; this is a legacy according to which I intend to lead the State of Israel over the coming months - before the meeting in Annapolis, during it and most importantly after it.

Tonight, I wish to remember my predecessor, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon.

Exactly two years ago, in this place, I sat together at the head of the table with the Prime Minister of Israel, Ariel Sharon.  This was only days after the implementation of the Disengagement Plan, and ahead of the upcoming elections.

I have no doubt that Prime Minister Ariel Sharon intended to continue advancing the peace process between ourselves and the Palestinians.

Disengagement was not meant to be isolated from the wider context of our relations with the Palestinians.  Arik contemplated the continuation of the path, versus the need to realize the Roadmap.  It was necessary to reach purposeful, substantial, open and daring negotiations with the Palestinians.

I am committed to this inheritance with all my heart, with all my strength. I do not intend to be satisfied with statements.  Chances and opportunities are not slogans, but rather a working plan - and they obligate me.

Why Annapolis?

Annapolis is a landmark, it is an international seal of approval, on the path to negotiations and of the genuine effort to achieve the realization of the vision of two nations: the State of Israel - the nation of the Jewish people; and the Palestinian state - the nation of the Palestinian people.

There will not be negotiations on the vision; there will be no bargaining about this fundamental goal which the U.S. President, George Bush, declared so eloquently: "Two countries for two peoples".  A Jewish state for the Jewish people - a Palestinian state for the Palestinian people.

We will not negotiate about the right of existence for the State of Israel as a Jewish state.  We will not bargain about the right of the Palestinian people to their own state.

Both are fundamental conditions, basic positions, obvious understandings which cannot be denied.  All the basic questions, all the substantive problems, all the historic questions which are pertinent to the disagreement between us and the Palestinians are on the agenda.  We will avoid none of them, we will not run from discussing any of them.

Annapolis will not be a place for negotiations, but it will certainly be a starting point.  Annapolis will be the jumping-off point for continued serious and in-depth negotiations which will not avoid any issue or ignore any division which has clouded our relations with the Palestinian people for many years.

That is why - Annapolis.

Why now?

Because it is time.  Years ago, the Oslo Accords were signed.  I was not among its supporters.  I feared its negative effects.  At the time, I estimated that its results would not lead to peace between us and the Palestinians.  The opportunity which ripened then collapsed under the furor of terror; the lack of credibility of the Palestinian leadership at time and the stormy disagreement in Israeli society, which ended with three bullets in Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin's back.

There was another chance developing in 2000 - the special effort made by the State of Israel which reached its peak at the Camp David summit in July of that year.  That meeting unfortunately ended with an explosion that led to the bloody Intifada, which even today continues in the most sensitive areas of our lives.

Now is the time.  The Palestinian leadership is headed by men committed to all the agreements previously signed with the State of Israel.  We do not ignore their weaknesses; we are completely aware of the failures of the Palestinian Authority - of the lack of stable governing mechanisms, of the total disintegration of the security mechanisms in Judea and Samaria, of the Hamas rule over the Palestinian parliament and of the violent control of the murderous organizations in the Gaza Strip.  Their control allows for unceasing firing of Qassam missiles at residents in the south of the country.

We have abundant reasons to postpone Annapolis; we have very convincing arguments - why the conditions are not yet ripe in the Palestinian Authority to take practical and comprehensive responsibility to implement the understandings with the State of Israel which have yet to be enacted.

However, ladies and gentlemen, we are capable of facing these constraints.
Under the existing circumstances, we have a partner and we are not willing to postpone negotiations to a later date, at which point our partner might not be capable of fulfilling the mission.

Mahmoud Abbas, President of the Palestinian Authority, and Salaam Fayyad, its Prime Minister, publicly state - without hesitation and despite the inherent difficulties of the complex relations within Palestinian society - that they want to live with us in peace.  This is an opportunity - it should be taken.

We agreed that if and when we reach an understanding with the leaders of the Palestinian Authority, this understanding will be implemented according to the Roadmap, with all its phases and its sequence.  The Palestinians are obligated to fight terrorism and to completely change their internal reality. It should be remembered that the Roadmap sets out a series of steps for the State of Israel.  These steps, like the obligations of the Palestinians, have yet to be implemented.  We will not concede to the Palestinians on any of the obligations outlined in the Roadmap, and we will not avoid fulfilling our own obligations to the letter.  Some of them are difficult, some will create considerable political hardships - and I have no intention, no matter how difficult it is, of attempting to escape the obligations imposed on the State of Israel.

I recommend to each of the leaders and involved parties to deal bravely and unhesitatingly with all the components of this opportunity, this chance.  Be open to hope and face the genuine and clear risks and difficulties so that the process may move ahead.

What next?

After Annapolis, we will enter into vigorous, ongoing and continuing negotiations.  If we and the Palestinians act with determination, there is a chance that we can achieve real accomplishments perhaps even before the end of President Bush's term in office.  There is no intention of dragging the negotiations on endlessly; there is no reason to suffer the same foot-dragging which previously characterized our discussions. There is no basis for the assumption that someone will attempt to circumvent dealing with the fundamental issues which are a condition for realizing the vision of two states living side-by-side in security and peace.

Ladies and Gentlemen, Distinguished Guests,

This is a good moment.  I am excited by the chance to contribute to our chances.  I know all the excuses and arguments why not, but I believe - from the bottom of my heart - that the time has come.

In this spirit, I will come to Annapolis; to extend my hand in friendship and good will to all those who come to the meeting, and I promise: the State of Israel will be there.  Indeed, we will come with caution; we will examine every issue responsibly; we will consider every proposal sensitively; but we come in good will, happily and full of hope.

Toespraak Tzipi Livni op Saban Forum

Terwijl de Palestijnen hun wensen en eisen duidelijk naar voren brengen (100% '67 grenzen, inclusief niemandsland, recht op terugkeer van de vluchtelingen, Oost-Jeruzalem inclusief de Klaagmuur onder Palestijnse soevereiniteit, 2.000 gevangenen vrij...), blijft Israël vaag en praat in algemene termen over het belang van veiligheid en het probleem van terrorisme. Ik kan mij dan ook wel vinden in Aaron Lerners ietwat cynische commentaar hieronder op Livni's speech voor het Saban Forum.

Wat ik niet begrijp is, waarom Israël niet heel duidelijk stelt dat, voordat er gevangenen worden vrij gelaten en checkpoints opgeruimd en gebied overgedragen, de Palestijnen onomwonden het Joodse recht op zelfbeschikking in Israël moeten erkennen, en Joodse nationale rechten in Jeruzalem. Het moet duidelijk zijn dat een onbeperkt recht op terugkeer van de vluchtelingen onverenigbaar is met Joodse zelfbeschikking. Er moet een einde komen aan claims als dat de Joden geen historische connectie met Jeruzalem zouden hebben, en aan haatzaaierij op TV en in schoolboeken zoals onlangs nog een clip op de officiële zender van de Palestijnse Autoriteit, waarin Palestijnse kinderen werd opgeroepen het hele land, inclusief Jaffa en Ramla en Beersheva (allen plaatsen binnen de Groene Lijn) te bevrijden en de gewapende strijd werd verheerlijkt.

Joden zijn geen 'sons of apes and monkeys' en de Protocollen zijn bedrog, en de Joden zijn ook niet de nazi's van deze tijd. En de Palestijnse Autoriteit moet meer doen om te laten zien dat het ze menens is wat betreft het handhaven van de orde, het voorkomen van aanslagen en bestrijden van gewapende milities.

 

Ratna

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2007 12:12 PM
Subject: FM Livni addresses the Saban Forum [main points - role of Arabs states in stopping terror not mentioned]


[Dr. Aaron Lerner - IMRA:  "bad news is - terrorism rules in Gaza. Hamas took advantage of the democratic process and is arming itself from the Philadelphi Corridor"

A person not familiar with the situation would think that those naughty Hamasniks have some kind of Star Trek device that enables them to arm themselves by beaming in weapons that miraculously appear at the Philadelphi Corridor.

But they don't.

They get their weapons from Egypt.

And Egypt is hardly alone as a country in the Middle East associated with either enabling or actually providing for the training and supply of the terrorists.

FM Livni could argue that her vague wording implies that Israel would like the Arabs do something about this:

"The Arab world must lend its support to the process, without taking the place of the Palestinians in the negotiations. If a conference supporting the process is convened, they must go to it and support it, not place obstacles before it. They as well as the international community must help bridge the gap between the willingness and intentions of the Palestinian government and its ability on the ground. "

But its a stretch.

Here's the problem:  Israel comes to the conference mumbling about what it wants and needs and requires and carefully avoiding saying anything really offensive while the Arabs walk in with clear demands and a head-on verbal assault.

And then people wonder why Israel has a such a hard time getting the world to understand its position or to see it in a favorable light.

Once again.  Please.  I know it is really fantastic to show the world that Israel has girls in bikinis and homosexuals and hi-tech  (that's the campaign high points - don't blame me), but it would be nice to give a try at giving the world a chance to understand what's really bothering us and needs to be addressed.]

===============================

FM Livni addresses the Saban Forum
(Communicated by the Foreign Minister's Bureau)
- Nov 3, 2007

The fourth annual meeting of the Saban Forum is being held from November 3-5, 2007, in Jerusalem. The Saban Forum, organized by the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution, brings a high-level, bipartisan U.S. delegation to Jerusalem for discussions with their Israeli counterparts on the theme of "War and Peace in the Middle East."

Following are the main points of Foreign Minister Livni's address to the Saban Forum (3 November):

This moment in time could definitely be called historic. As leaders, we have the responsibility of checking out all options, diagnosing the problems - and there are problems - and finding opportunities to advance the process.

The situation today is more complex than ever; we must recognize the reality on the ground. The bad news is - terrorism rules in Gaza. Hamas took advantage of the democratic process and is arming itself from the Philadelphi Corridor, while Israel is under attack daily. The good news is - there is a moderate Palestinian leadership that accepts the idea of peace, the vision of two states living in peace and security.

Today, the Palestinians understand that terrorism harms their own interests. At the same time, there are problems with implementing the vision, given the current situation. There are problems with their ability to deliver, and we must strengthen the moderate leadership in order to improve the situation on the ground - not only in the Gaza Strip but also in the West Bank. That is the reality.

We cannot turn a blind eye to the reality and the terrorism in the Gaza Strip. Therefore, we have decided to adopt a dual strategy - to isolate Hamas, to take steps against terrorism and, at the same time, to look for a vision and a common denominator with the Palestinian leadership and together to change the situation on the ground.

The change must be on the ground and not just in theory. I believe that we must send a message to the Palestinian people that the situation does not have to be this way, that there is a choice. The duality must become reality. However, as we try to find a common denominator, Israel's security needs and the reality on the ground must be addressed.

The formula we have chosen is the Roadmap. The Roadmap is based on the understanding that the path to establishing a Palestinian state passes through ensuring Israel's security. This formula was adopted by the entire international community, including Israel and the Palestinians. The original idea was to create a continuum of security - dialogue - permanent arrangement. We could have waited until the end of the first stage's implementation, but we chose not to, because we believe in dialogue with the Palestinians. However, we still have to provide a solution to the problems of security. Therefore, we decided to begin a dialogue now and to return to security before the agreements are implemented. Now the implementation of the first stage is beginning, by both sides. We are continuing the dialogue but must remember our security needs; we owe that to ourselves and to both peoples. This is not a zero-sum game.

We must find the way to agreements, but this will happen only when both sides understand that this demands compromise. It is not true that Israel is avoiding in advance discussion of the sensitive issues. We are not holding a dialogue for the sake of dialogue; we must learn from past experience, and it is our responsibility to draw conclusions and to do the right thing. We must see if it is possible to reach understandings on these topics, to see if we can proceed; this is a process that we will understand in the near future. We have already experienced failure in the past and we don't want to go there again.

Learning from past experience brings us to the role of the Arab world, and it is crucial. The Arab world must lend its support to the process, without taking the place of the Palestinians in the negotiations. If a conference supporting the process is convened, they must go to it and support it, not place obstacles before it. They as well as the international community must help bridge the gap between the willingness and intentions of the Palestinian government and its ability on the ground.


--------------------------------------------
IMRA - Independent Media Review and Analysis
Website: www.imra.org.il

Gesprekken over soevereiniteit Tempelberg

Terwijl iedereen naar de Klaagmuur kan, tijdens diensten daar of op sabbath of zomaar, is de rest van de Tempelberg meestal slechts toegankelijk voor moslims. Afhankelijk van de veiligheidssituatie mogen toeristen (waaronder Joden) er op bepaalde tijdstippen in. De moskeeën zijn ook dan niet toegankelijk voor niet-moslims. Volgens de Joodse religieuze voorschriften zou niemand toegang moeten hebben tot het 'Heiligste der Heiligen' op de Tempelberg (volgens sommigen op de plek waar nu de Rotskoepel staat). Deze lokatie is voor de Joden zo heilig dat ook zijzelf er niet mogen komen. Maar moslims komen er nu dagelijks. Dat is een enorm compromis, aldus Aaron Lerner van IMRA, en daarvoor in ruil zouden Joden op de Tempelberg moeten kunnen bidden, en er niet slechts op bepaalde tijden als toerist toegang verkrijgen.

Volgens onderstaand bericht uit Arutz7, is de VS in overleg met religieuze leiders van de verschillende religies over de toekomst van de Tempelberg. De VS zou een einde aan de Israëlische soevereiniteit over de Tempelberg en de gehele Oude Stad inclusief een paar omliggende gebieden (het bassin geheten) willen:

As a follow-up, the invitations to the Chief Rabbis to the White House for three days of meetings were issued. The meetings, which will be attended by members of the Islamic Wakf and Christian leaders, will reportedly deal with a proposal similar to that floated by Vice Premier Chaim Ramon (Kadima).
According to the proposal, the Jerusalem "Holy Basin" - meaning the Old City and surrounding areas - would be administered by a joint committee and not remain under Israeli sovereignty. According to Ramon's plan, the Western Wall and Temple Mount would remain under Israeli control, but the Americans are reportedly pushing to see the Temple Mount relinquished as well.

80 Jaar geleden zocht de Britse Shaw commissie na rellen bij de Klaagmuur naar een oplossing en hoorde de verschillende religieuze leiders. Men stelde voor dat de Joodse gemeenschap zijn claims op de Klaagmuur opgaf, maar wel het recht zou hebben er te bidden. De rellen die hieraan vooraf gingen waren overigens uitgelokt door de groot-moefti Al Husseini, die de biddende Joden verstoorde door er juist tijdens sabbath zogenaamde werkzaamheden uit te laten voeren.

Tussen 1948 en 1967, toen de Oude Stad onder Jordaanse soevereiniteit viel, werd Joden de toegang tot de Klaagmuur ontzegd, in tegenspraak met de wapenstilstandsovereenkomst. Ook vernielde Jordanie 56 van de 57 synagoges in de oude stad, en werden stenen van de Joodse begraafplaats op de Olijfberg gebruikt voor de aanleg van wegen.

Terwijl de Tempelberg en de andere religieuze plaatsen in Jeruzalem onder Israëlische soevereiniteit vallen, regelen religieuze comité's (zoals de islamitische Waqf) de dagelijkse en religieuze zaken. De Waqf heeft zoveel macht dat ze eigenhandig opgravingen laat doen in gebied dat zeer kwetsbaar is vanwege de mogelijke resten van vroegere artefacten en gebouwen. Ze gaan daarbij bepaald niet fijngevoelig te werk. In principe laat Israël iedereen toe tot de heilige plaatsen (waar ook mensen van alle gezindten wonen), maar vanwege de veiligheid is het voor Palestijnen uit de Westelijke Jordaanoever steeds moeilijker om Jeruzalem binnen te komen. Zij kunnen van daaruit immers vrijelijk door heel Israël reizen. Toch lijkt Israëlische soevereiniteit de beste en ook meest rechtvaardige optie. Israël heeft immers bewezen de meeste tolerantie en respect te hebben voor de heilige plaatsen van andere religies, en diens rechten het beste te waarborgen.

 

Bovendien is Jeruzalem altijd zowel het nationale als spirituele centrum van het Jodendom geweest, en is het in het verleden slechts hoofdstad geweest van een Joodse staat. De band van de Joden met de stad gaat vooraf aan die van de christenen en de moslims, en is daar in het eerste geval een afgeleide van. Jeruzalem komt in de Koran in het geheel niet voor, er wordt slechts éénmaal in gesproken van de 'verste hemelboog', wat volgens sommigen een verwijzing naar Jeruzalem zou zijn. Het hele verhaal van Mohammed die zijn paard aan de Klaagmuur zou hebben gebonden voordat hij erop ten hemel steeg komt niet uit de Koran, maar is later verzonnen om de Joden een voet dwars te zetten.

Ratna
--------------

[Dr. Aaron Lerner - IMRA:  A curious element of the Temple Mount issue is that the rabbinic views regarding restrictions on access to various locations on the Temple Mount are not vis-a-vis access for Jews in particular but instead their position regarding the presence of human beings - regardless of their faith - at those locations. If these rabbis expressed their view to Ms. Rice in the style of the Moslem clergymen they would be saying "the Chief Rabbinate doesn't think anyone should be on the Temple Mount today - not Jews, not Moslems, while there are other Rabbis who hold that it is acceptable to go to certain locations on the Temple Mount - but certainly not at the site of the Holy of Holies - where the Dome of the Rock is located today."

What would be the advantage of this?

The compromise of the Jews is that they accept that Moslems (or for that matter tourists of all faiths (including Jews)) have access to the area of the Holy of Holies where the Dome of the Rock is presently located even though this is in gross violation of Jewish law and considered to be an incredibly terrible thing.

In return for this tremendous Jewish concession the Moslems are expected to accept that Jews can pray (that's pray - not just come as tourists) at locations on the Temple Mount that, according to some Rabbinical authorities, access is permitted to human beings even though some Moslem clerics hold that it is an abomination for non-Moslems to pray on the Temple Mount.  In addition, Israel has sovereignty over the Temple Mount.

After all, while the Moslem "concession" of allowing Jewish prayer on the Temple Mount relates to a view held by some Moslem clerics regarding the prayer of non-Moslems at any mosque in general, the Jewish "concession" regarding access to the location of the Holy of Holies relates to a view universally held by the Rabbis and that is specific to the Temple Mount.

From a practical standpoint, it is hardly "PC"  for Moslem clerics to say to Ms. Rice that they don't want Jews and Christians saying a prayer on the Temple Mount while the Jewish clerics who say that they don't want any human beings at certain places on the Temple Mount actually sound "PC" since their view applies to all human beings. ]

==============

Exclusive: Rabbis Invited For Pre-Annapolis Temple Mount Talks
by Ezra HaLevi Arutz 7 News   4 November 2007

Israel's Chief Rabbis and the Chief Rabbi of Haifa have been invited to the White House for pre-Annapolis talks to explain the Jewish connection to the Temple Mount.

Chief Rabbis Yonah Metzger and Shlomo Amar, as well as the Chief Rabbi of Haifa and Chairman of the Chief Rabbinate Communications Committee Rabbi She'ar-Yashuv Cohen departed Saturday evening for a series of meetings to clarify to US leaders that the Temple Mount is Judaism's holiest site.

Ahead of the Annapolis Conference, the Bush administration is trying to gauge Israel's "red lines" and examine the possibility of relinquishing the Temple Mount to Islam.

Despite the fact that many rabbis both visit and encourage other Jews to visit the Temple Mount in the manner permitted by Jewish law, the chief rabbinate says that Jews should not visit the Temple Mount. A large sign is affixed to the path leading to the Mount saying it is "forbidden for Jews to visit the Mount according to Jewish law."

All three rabbis agree that the Temple Mount must remain under Jewish sovereignty.  However, the chief rabbis believe the mount should be closed to all since a special level of ritual purity must be obtained before ascending to the site of the Jewish Holy Temple. Rabbi Cohen believes the Temple Mount should be open to Jewish worship and a synagogue should be constructed there.

Second Such Meeting

Arutz-7's Yedidya HaCohen reports that a secret meeting on the matter took place two weeks ago during one of the recent visits by U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to Jerusalem. The meeting dealt with Jerusalem's holy sites and was attended by Rabbi Cohen, as well as Muslim and Christian religious leaders. The meeting lasted over two hours.

Muslim leaders aired their claim that "the Jews want to destroy the Al-Aksa Mosques" and their oft-heard denial that there was ever a Jewish temple at the site. The chief Mufti has already declared that Jews should not be allowed to pray at the site. Recent archaological finds from the First Temple have not tempered Muslim denial of pre-Islamic history on the mount, as well as the Western Wall.

Rabbi Cohen responded to those present: "It is forbidden to deny that the Jews had our Holy Temple at that site. It is forbidden to forget that King David purchased the Temple Mount, King Solomon built the Holy Temple and Ezra the Scribe rebuilt it as well [after it was destroyed -ed.]. All who come afterward must recognize the rights of those who came first. Although I do not propose the demolition of the mosques, the Muslims must remember that they are there due to us."

Rabbi Cohen also recalled the historical fact that the Muslim Caliph Omar Suleiman built a synagogue on the Temple Mount where Jews prayed, and that it was later destroyed by another Caliph.

In summation, Rabbi Cohen told Rice and the other religious leaders that he is completely opposed to any withdrawal from the Temple Mount and site of the Holy Temple.

Rice reportedly responded: "Honorable rabbi, I understand you well. I am the daughter of a priest and the granddaughter of a priest, I learned the Bible and know what is written there."

Rice said, at the conclusion of the meeting, that she understood that religious matters were at the root of the disagreements ahead of the conference. "If this matter is not solved, then nothing will be solved," she said. Those at the meeting reported her demeanor as tense.

As a follow-up, the invitations to the Chief Rabbis to the White House for three days of meetings were issued. The meetings, which will be attended by members of the Islamic Wakf and Christian leaders, will reportedly deal with a proposal similar to that floated by Vice Premier Chaim Ramon (Kadima). According to the proposal, the Jerusalem "Holy Basin" - meaning the Old City and surrounding areas - would be administered by a joint committee and not remain under Israeli sovereignty. According to Ramon's plan, the Western Wall and Temple Mount would remain under Israeli control, but the Americans are reportedly pushing to see the Temple Mount relinquished as well.

Sources connected to the Chief Rabbinate say there is great significance to the inclusion of Rabbi She'ar-Yashuv Cohen, who has declared publicly that he will fight such a plan and not just take part in the inter-religious arrangements being planned for the Holy City. Rabbi Cohen's position that the Temple Mount must be opened to Jewish prayer is well known, as well as his call for the establishment of a synagogue on the Mount.

Also joining the rabbinic delegation are Chairman of the Chief Rabbinate Oded Weiner and Rabbi David Rosen, former chief rabbi of Ireland and the head of the World Committee for Jewish-Christian relations.

Conference Mirrors Pre-State Events

The meetings resemble similar discussions by the British Shaw Committee that took place 80 years ago. Those meetings aimed to determine to whom the Western Wall belonged. Former Israel Chief Rabbi Avraham Yitzchak HaKohen Kook went before the committee to offer his perspective, while the committee honored the Muslim Mufti by coming to his office adjacent to the Temple Mount.

Rabbi Kook presented the committee with arguments for Jewish rights to pray at the site and emphasized its holiness. When asked to bring supporting proof, Rabbi Kook responded: "By relying on documents, we are liable to weaken this truth, which is among those that are so well known that it is not in need of proof. It is similar to one who raises a candle to increase the brightness of the sun's light.It is known that this site is enwrapped in the same holiness of our Holy Temple."

Later in the deliberations, the heads of the Zionist establishment agreed to relinquish claims of ownership of the Western Wall and receive only the right to pray at the site. In response to the initiative, Rabbi Kook responded: "G-d forbid we give up the Western Wall; we have not received power of attorney from the Nation of Israel!"


--------------------------------------------
IMRA - Independent Media Review and Analysis
Website: www.imra.org.il

Arabische Knessetleden: verbieden van reizen naar vijandige staten is racistisch

In landen als Syrië en Iran is het onvoorstelbaar dat een parlementslid naar Israël zou reizen, of op welke manier dan ook contact zou hebben met Israëli's zonder in grote problemen te komen. Zelfs in Jordanië en Egypte is het 'not done' (om het eufemistisch te zeggen) voor politici om Israël te bezoeken. Met name in Egypte geldt er een soort boycot op tal van terreinen, en een Egyptische acteur moest onlangs voor de rechter komen verdedigen dat hij in een film speelde waarin ook een Israëlische acteur speelt.

Nadat tijdens de Libanon oorlog een Arabisch knessetlid naar Syrië was gereisd en zijn solidariteit met Hezbollah had betuigd, gingen in Israël stemmen op dit soort praktijken te verbieden. De reactie van een Arabische volksvertegenwoordiger is veelzeggend:

Hadash Chairman MK Mohammad Barakeh said that "If we have to choose between loyalty to our people, or serving in the Knesset, then good luck to the Knesset. We don't want you."

'Our people', dat zijn de Arabieren, en blijkbaar ook de vijanden van Israël. Misschien hoort iemand die zich zo vereenzelvigd met Israëls vijanden inderdaad niet in de Knesset thuis. En hij bewijst de Israëlische Arabieren met deze houding zeker geen dienst.

 

Ratna

------------

Arab MKs: Bid to bar trips to enemy states is 'racist'
By Shahar Ilan and Jack Khoury, Haaretz Correspondents

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/918985.html
Last update - 20:53 31/10/2007

 

Israeli Arab lawmakers responded angrily Wednesday to proposed legislation that would prevent anyone who travels to a country classed as an enemy state from serving as a Knesset member.

The Knesset plenum on Wednesday passed the preliminary readings of two bills proposals on the issue.

The bills were drafted by right-wing MKs Zevulun Orlev of National Union-National Religious Party and Esterina Tartman of Yisrael Beiteinu. 

MK Ahmed Tibi (Ra'am-Ta'al) said that "the Knesset is steeped in racism. Corrupt members of Knesset want a Knesset without Arabs. The face of the Knesset is the face of Esterina: Knesseterina. If I am invited [to enemy states] I will go regardless of the law. I am sure that a person who breaks an unjustified law, or whose conscience is not completely clear, and is willing to pay the price and be imprisoned in order to raise public awareness regarding the injustice in the law, then that person is showing his respect to the most supreme values."

Talab A-Sana (Ra`am-Ta`al) said that "the bill is opposed to the peace, the Arab public, and its representatives that are visiting Arab states. This is a dark bill that constitutes political persecution, and shows what a substandard level the Knesset has reached."

The bills passed with a majority of 52 in favor against 19 who opposed. MK Zehava Gal-On (Meretz) maintained that the bill is racist.

Hadash Chairman MK Mohammad Barakeh said that "If we have to choose between loyalty to our people, or serving in the Knesset, then good luck to the Knesset. We don't want you."

During the hearing, Barakeh called out to other MKs, "choke along with the Knesset." Mk Yuval Steinetz (Likud) slammed Arab MKs in return, saying, "you believe in Syrian democracy."

Libanese TV: Protocollen van de Wijzen van Zion - complot om met drugs de wereld te beheersen

Narrator: "The Koran said about them: 'They strive to spread corruption throughout the land.' Spreading corruption throughout the land is the declared goal of the Zionist hands of evil, which are infiltrating the world. The Zionists have summarized their destructive principles in what has become known as The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which contains their secret plan to subjugate the entire world by spreading chaos and promiscuity among the nations, by imposing corrupt and depraved ideologies on human minds, and by destroying the foundations of religion, nationalism, and morality.

 

"Drugs were the Jews' method of wearing down the German people, which led to the Nazi extremism, in which the Jews themselves played a role. In addition, they carried out widespread drug dealing in Czarist Russia, from the 17th century. This was in accordance with the Jewish Talmud, which says that the Jews must devote their greatest efforts to prevent other nations from ruling the land, so that the rule would be in the hands of the Jews alone.

Er zijn een hoop mensen die dit soort onzin geloven, en een hoop mensen die dit soort onzin verspreiden. Desondanks geloven verlichte geesten in het Westen graag dat het wel meevalt met het Arabische antisemitisme, en men vooral kwaad en gefrustreerd is vanwege de bezetting en onderdrukking van de Palestijnen. Het valt niet mee, en het heeft weinig van doen met de Palestijnen.

Ratna

---------------

 

Lebanese TV: Protocols of the Elders of Zion plot to annihilate the world using drugs

From MEMRI:

 

TV Channel Affiliated with Lebanese Parliamentary Speaker Nabih Beri in Show on Protocols of the Elders of Zion: Jews Use Drug Trafficking to Control World, Subjugate Other Nations
 
 
 
The following are excerpts from a Lebanese TV report on The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. The report aired on NBN TV on October 22, 2007.
 
To view this clip visit: http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/1588.htm

...
 
"Jews Purport to Have Their Own Private God in the Heavens, Who Commanded Them to Annihilate the... Peoples of the World Using Drugs"
 
Maria Maalouf: "On land and in the heavens – the use that American and Israeli Zionism makes of the weapon of drugs in order to thwart intifadas and revolutions cannot be justified by the American claims about the intensification of the struggle on land, as long as the Jews purport to have their own private god in the heavens, who commanded them to annihilate the nations and peoples of the world, using drugs and causing anxiety, and numbing the mental, psychological, and physical capabilities of non-Jews, as written in the Talmud or The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
 
"Isn't it true that these Jewish plots to corrupt the peoples were described by American 'plot-disrupters,' such as Benjamin Franklin and Henry Ford, and even by some Jews, like Alfred Lilienthal, and even Karl Marx, who, more than 150 years ago, exposed in his book On the Jewish Question that there was an instinct within the Jewish individual that drives him to take control of the world, by means of illegal money – which is known today as 'money laundering?'" [...]
    
 
"Since the Occupation of Palestine, the Zionist Policy has Supported and Spread Drug Abuse in the Holy Lands"
 
Narrator: "The Koran said about them: 'They strive to spread corruption throughout the land.' Spreading corruption throughout the land is the declared goal of the Zionist hands of evil, which are infiltrating the world. The Zionists have summarized their destructive principles in what has become known as The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which contains their secret plan to subjugate the entire world by spreading chaos and promiscuity among the nations, by imposing corrupt and depraved ideologies on human minds, and by destroying the foundations of religion, nationalism, and morality.
 
"Since the occupation of Palestine, the Zionist policy has supported and spread drug abuse in the holy lands, and has acted to get rid of the legal procedures meant to prevent this, and refrain from prosecuting drug dealers and traffickers. The Israeli prison authorities turn a blind eye to smuggling, and even facilitate drug abuse among the Arab detainees, and they clamp down upon Palestinian NGOs trying to curb drug abuse.
 
"In addition to the provoking of civil strife and to the poisoning of minds, the Jews have turned to physical poisoning. They became known in history for poisoning wells. They are also known for adding certain amounts of harmful substances to medicine and alcoholic beverages, as well as to flour and its products, and to other products that the Jews export, directly and indirectly, to unfriendly peoples, if not to all peoples."
    
 
"Drugs Were the Jews' Method of Wearing Down the German People, Which Led to the Nazi Extremism"
 
"Drugs were the Jews' method of wearing down the German people, which led to the Nazi extremism, in which the Jews themselves played a role. In addition, they carried out widespread drug dealing in Czarist Russia, from the 17th century. This was in accordance with the Jewish Talmud, which says that the Jews must devote their greatest efforts to prevent other nations from ruling the land, so that the rule would be in the hands of the Jews alone.
 
"In The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, the end justifies the means, and when the forces of society are in a state of disarray, the power of the Jews is stronger than that of anyone else."
 
"Moreover, the ninth Zionist protocol states, in a banal way, that any revolution against the Jews must be made [as futile as] a dog barking at an elephant. The third Zionist protocol states that other nations must be left sick, poor, and lacking any determination or strength. Naturally, drugs are the most effective means to accomplish this goal. The American thinker Benjamin Franklin, in his famous 1789 manifesto, the American industrialist Henry Ford, who wrote The International Jew, and others like them warned of the danger posed by the Jews, who destroy morals. In an indirect reference to drugs, Franklin said about [the Jews]: 'They destroy morale in any land they settle.' He described them as 'bats' and 'blood-suckers,' and said that if they are not kept away from the children of America, these children – according to Franklin – would end up as workers in fields for the feeding of the Jews."[...]
 
    
"The Spreading of Drugs is One of Their Means of Taking Control of Non-Jewish Peoples"
 
Maria Maalouf: "I have a final question about what is written in The Protocols of the Elders of Zion: 'The Jews are entitled to treat the other peoples as animals, to corrupt them, to tear countries apart, to destroy the other nationalities, and to spread promiscuity and chaos.' Some believe that the spreading of drugs is one of their means of taking control of non-Jewish peoples."
 
Hussein Al-Kheishan: "I believe this is true, we must consider our responsibility – what we should do to overcome this plague, which is killing our society."

 

Jeruzalem: tunnel om Joods kwartier te verbinden met synagoge in moslim kwartier

Een synagoge in de islamitische wijk van de Oude Stad? Wat een Zionistische expansiedrift! Of toch niet?

"Ohel Yitzhak was built in 1917 but was abandoned during the Arab riots of 1936. It was then blown up by the Jordanians, along with every other synagogue in the Old City, after they captured the area in 1948."

Ratna

---------

Haaretz / Last update - 15:28 02/11/2007
Tunnel to link J'lem's Jewish Quarter, Muslim Quarter synagogue

By Nadav Shragai, Haaretz Correspondent
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/919750.html

An underground passage is being planned in Jerusalem's Old City to link the reconstructed Ohel Yitzhak synagogue in the Muslim Quarter with the Western Wall tunnels in the Jewish Quarter.

The passageway, which is being planned by the Western Wall Heritage Foundation, will utilize existing spaces created by archaeological excavations beneath the Muslim Quarter. This would minimize the need for new digging, Rabbi Shmuel Rabinowitz told Haaretz.

The idea still needs approval from the government, security services and the Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA).

Rabinowitz, the rabbi of the Western Wall, said the foundation signed an agreement a few days ago with Cherna Moskowitz, who owns the Ohel Yitzhak complex. Moskowitz is the wife of American Jewish tycoon Irving Moskowitz, who has been active in settling Jews in Muslim areas of Jerusalem.

According to the agreement, the Western Wall Heritage Foundation will manage and maintain both Ohel Yitzhak and the areas beneath it that the IAA has excavated. The foundation plans to open an educational institute and museum at the site, which will preserve the antiquities unearthed by the excavations.

IAA Director General Yehoshua Dorfman said that while he has not studied the foundation's plan carefully, his initial impression is that it is a good idea, assuming that the IAA's professional staff approves and that the foundation complies with any conditions the IAA sets.

The foundation also presented the plan to security officials a few days ago and gave them a tour of the site.

Contrary to claims already raised by the Islamic Movement, Arab Knesset members and the Waqf (the Muslim religious trust that runs the Temple Mount), the plan will not involve any digging within the Temple Mount compound. The new passage will lie about 100 meters west of the mount.

Ohel Yitzhak was built in 1917 but was abandoned during the Arab riots of 1936. It was then blown up by the Jordanians, along with every other synagogue in the Old City, after they captured the area in 1948.

About 15 years ago, the Moskowitzes bought the site. They then financed the synagogue's reconstruction, based on old photographs plus remnants of the destroyed building found at the site.

In 2004, the IAA began excavating under Ohel Yitzhak. The principal find was a giant public bathhouse from the Mameluke period (the 14th century), which occupies the entire site.

Its cloakroom was completely intact, and archaeologists also found remnants of the ovens that produced the steam and the vents that carried the warm air into the baths. According to IAA archaeologist Yuval Baruch, this is the most complete relic of the Mameluke period ever discovered in Jerusalem.

Other relics found at the site come from the Roman, Byzantine, early Islamic and Crusader periods.

The Western Wall tunnels, which were first discovered more than 20 years ago, currently attract millions of visitors a year.

Muslims have repeatedly accused Israel of digging under the Temple Mount with the goal of causing its mosques to collapse. But only once has an Israeli dig penetrated the mount - and that dig, organized by the Religious Affairs Ministry in 1981, was swiftly halted by then prime minister Menachem Begin, and the opening into the mount was sealed.

Barak wil uitstel voor evacuatieplan buitenposten

Iets wat je vervelend of lastig vind stel je uit - in de hoop dat het probleem vanzelf zal verdwijnen of je opvolger het wel zal oplossen. Zo ongeveer schijnt de Israëlische regering te denken. Israël heeft meermaals aan de VS beloofd de buitenposten te ontruimen, die ook volgens het Israëlische recht illegaal zijn. Dit zal de veiligheid op geen enkele manier in gevaar brengen, integendeel, het zal de VS gunstig stemmen en Israëls onderhandelingspositie tegenover de Palestijnen versterken.

Ratna

---------

Haaretz / Last update - 20:40 01/11/2007
Barak seeks another extension on plan to evacuate outposts

By Yuval Yoaz, Haaretz Correspondent
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/919533.html

Defense Minister Ehud Barak asked the High Court of Justice on Thursday to grant him a two-month extension to formulate a final plan for the removal of illegal West Bank settlement outposts.

The request was submitted by the state prosecution on the defense minister's behalf, during a hearing on a Peace Now petition for the removal of the Migron outpost.

In December 2006, the state prosecution asked for a four to five-month extension, to allow it to present the High Court with an update on the issue.

At the time, the prosecution said that then defense minister Amir Peretz had instructed the Israel Defense Forces to negotiate with settler leaders, in order to reach an agreement for settlers to evacuate the outposts voluntarily "at a near date." The prosecution said that, should the negotiations fail to achieve results, Peretz would order the removal of Migron within six months - by June of this year.

In May, the prosecution told the High Court that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert had asked Peretz to present him by the end of the month with a plan to remove the outposts.

Palestijnen willen instituties in Oost-Jeruzalem heropenen

"The Palestinian Authority has demanded that Israel formally sanction a document in which it promises to permit Palestinian institutions in East Jerusalem to continue to operate, the Shin Bet security service has told the government in recent days.
The Palestinian negotiators repeated their demand that Israel cease settlement construction and expansion, and that Israel withdraw to its positions prior to September 28, 2000, the day which marked the start of the Al-Aqsa intifada."

De Palestijnen hebben ook de Klaagmuur al opgeëist, en een onbeperkt recht op terugkeer van de vluchtelingen, en het vrijlaten van alle gevangenen. Abbas heeft ook aanspraak gemaakt op het zogenaamde 'niemandsland' van voor 1967, op de Joodse wijk in Oost-Jeruzalem, die in 1948 etnisch werd gezuiverd door het Jordanese leger, en op de Joodse begraafplaats op de Olijfberg. Het zijn de eisen van een overwinnaar die zijn voorwaarden kan opleggen. Toch gelooft iedereen dat de arme Abbas zo zwak is en Israël van alles moet doen om hem te versterken. Achter Abbas doemt het schrikbeeld op van Hamas.

Voordat Israël aan sommige van Abbas' eisen wat betreft Oost-Jeruzalem tegemoet kan komen, dient Abbas onomwonden Joodse rechten in Jeruzalem te erkennen. En voordat het Orient House zijn deuren weer kan openen, dient de VS zijn ambassade van Tel Aviv naar Jeruzalem te verplaatsen (het Orient House diende als een soort inofficiële ambassade voor de Palestijnen, waar men allerlei buitenlandse delegaties ontving).

 

Ratna

---------

Last update - 11:07 01/11/2007   
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/919372.html

Palestinians seek to renew institutional activities in E. J'lem

By Aluf Benn, Haaretz Correspondent

The Palestinian Authority has demanded that Israel formally sanction a document in which it promises to permit Palestinian institutions in East Jerusalem to continue to operate, the Shin Bet security service has told the government in recent days.

The document, known as the "Peres letter," was appended to the Oslo II agreements of 1993.

The Shin Bet - which is presenting its analysis of the negotiating stance the Palestinians are expected to put forward at next month's Annapolis peace conference - has also warned Prime Minister Ehud Olmert against falling into the trap of declaring Israeli recognition of East Jerusalem as the capital of a future Palestinian state.

The warning points especially to the fact that "East Jerusalem" is understood to encompass the Old City and the Western Wall, both.

Shin Bet analysts are weary of a Palestinian negotiating ploy in which Israel would be lured to agree in principle to recognize East Jerusalem as the future capital of a Palestinian state, while delaying debate on the particular details of which side would maintain authority over religious sites.

President Shimon Peres, who served as foreign minister at the time of the signing of the Oslo Accords, had dispatched a letter to his Norwegian counterpart, Johan Jorgen Holst, stating Israel's recognition of the importance of Palestinian institutions in the city and its commitment to protect them.

Initially, Peres denied the existence of the letter after former PA Chairman Yasser Arafat revealed its contents. The intense public pressure which ensued from within the media and the political community eventually forced Peres to acknowledge the letter as fact.

The Palestinians are demanding that Israel allow the renewed activity of Palestinian institutions in east Jerusalem, chief among them Orient House, which was shut down in August 2001 in response to the Palestinian suicide bombing of the Sbarro pizzeria in the city.

The Palestinian demand is one of a series of measures in which Israel is expected to adopt so as to ease tensions on the ground, as is prescribed in the road map.

The first stage of the road map stipulates that Israel reopen the Palestinian Chamber of Commerce "and other closed Palestinian institutions in east Jerusalem... in accordance with prior agreements between the parties." The Palestinians were forbidden from undertaking government activities in east Jerusalem, and were required to preserve the status of these institutions as bodies of the Palestine Liberation Organization.

Since 2001, Israel has balked at requests to allow these institutions to resume functioning. Indeed, Jerusalem has viewed the closure of these bodies as one of its significant achievements from the intifada period.

As one of its reservations in agreeing to the road map, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's government stated that the Palestinian Authority's status in Jerusalem is a matter to be discussed as part of final status talks, not beforehand.

Livni, Qureia meet privately in Jerusalem
Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni on Wednesday met privately in Jerusalem with the head of the Palestinian negotiating team, Ahmed Qureia, as part of ongoing bilateral talks in preparation for the upcoming U.S.-sponsored regional peace summit. No further details were given about the meeting.

Palestinian negotiators have insisted to their Israeli counterparts that they are meeting their requirements under the first phase of the road map, which include: consolidating their security apparatus; renouncing violence; and appointing a prime minister and a cabinet with executive powers separate from those of the Palestinian Authority chairman.

The Palestinians say they remain committed to prior agreements signed with Israel.

The Palestinian negotiators repeated their demand that Israel cease settlement construction and expansion, and that Israel withdraw to its positions prior to September 28, 2000, the day which marked the start of the Al-Aqsa intifada.

Terroristen lanceren mortiergranaten vanaf schoolplein

Deze video laat zien waarom Palestijnse kinderen soms helaas het slachtoffer worden van Israëlische legeroperaties...

_________________

Video: Terrorists firing mortars from schoolyard

Footage shows terror cell preparing to launch mortar shells near elementary school in Gaza, fleeing site after launches. IDF says terror organizations 'aware of our sensitivity to these areas and they take advantage of that, this is as cynical as their use of the civilian population gets'

 

Hanan Greenberg Published: 10.31.07, 21:05

www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3466387,00.html [includes video]

A cell of three terrorists launching mortar shells towards Israel from a Gaza schoolyard was captured carrying out the attack by Israeli intelligence on Monday.

After the attacks are carried out the cell quickly flees the launch site, a courtyard outside an elementary school in the town of Beit Hanun in northern Gaza. IDF forces, who identified the cell as it was carrying out the attacks, struck the terrorists after they had cleared the public buildings.

The tall structure in the video is the school and the red circle tracks the terrorists as they prepare to fire the mortars. Military officials said Israeli forces withheld fire, fearing civilians would be harmed.

A senior IDF officer told Ynet on Wednesday that Palestinian terror organizations continue to abuse the civilian population in Gaza by launching attacks against Israel from their midst.

"They don't think twice about firing Qassam rockets near crowded public areas, even though they're fully aware that they're endangering innocent civilians," said the officer.

"We're constantly faced with very difficult and complex dilemmas, how best to defend Israel's citizens and strike at these terror cells while at the same time avoid civilian casualties on the Palestinian side. The terror organizations are well aware of our sensitivity to these issues and they take full advantage of the situation, this is as cynical as their use of the civilian population gets," he said.

Honderden Palestijnse politieagenten in Nablus aangekomen om orde te handhaven

Voordat Israël zich kan terugtrekken uit significante delen van de Westoever en het bestuur overdragen aan de Palestijnen, moeten dit soort projecten succesvol blijken en op grotere schaal worden uitgevoerd.

 

Ratna
-----------------

Hundreds of PA police arrive in Nablus to impose law and order
By Amos Harel and Avi Issacharoff, Haaretz Correspondents

Last update - 15:26 02/11/2007
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/919546.html

 

 

Hundreds of Palestinian security officers arrived in Nablus on Friday in a Western-backed crackdown on gunmen in the West Bank intended to impose order ahead of a peace conference with Israel. The police are expected to significantly establish their presence in the town by the afternoon hours.

Israel, which is seeking to bolster Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas, approved the deployment in the flashpoint city. Israeli government spokesman David Baker said the move would improve security. More Palestinian forces could be deployed elsewhere in the West Bank if the initiative worked well.

Palestinian Interior Minister Abdel-Razak Yahya told Reuters armed officers belonging to the Palestinian National Security Forces had entered Nablus and would deploy in the next few days, providing a major boost to the city's weak police force. 

"Hundreds of members of the Palestinian National Security Forces...arrived in Nablus to deploy for the first time to impose law and order," Yahya told Reuters by telephone.

The deployment was agreed upon following a meeting Thursday evening between Defense Minister Ehud Barak and Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayad. Both men reached an agreement in principle on the deployment roughly one and a half months ago.

The deployment was not carried out earlier, due to difficulties on the Palestinian side in organizing their forces. Israel has agreed to allow 500 police officers to deploy, although only 300 are actually expected to do so.

Nonetheless, Israel has made it clear that the Israel Defense Forces will continue to operate in the West Bank city when needed and will retain overall security responsibility in the Nablus area, while the police officers will focus on imposing law and order.

According to recent reports, United States Mideast security coordinator Lt. Gen. Keith Dayton has said behind closed doors that the Palestinian security forces operating in the West Bank are not adequately prepared to accept security responsibility over Palestinian cities.

Barak told officials during his recent visit to the U.S. that Israel is interested in further easing restrictions on Palestinians, and to allow their security forces to operate in the West Bank.

In meetings with Israeli officials, Dayton praised Fayad for his efforts to rehabilitate the Palestinian security services. However Dayton, who prior to Hamas' rout of Fatah in the Gaza Strip expressed faith in the ability of the PA security forces, now has a much more pessimistic assessment of their capabilities.

Nonetheless, he believes the forces will be ready to assume security control following additional training in the next six months.

Israeli intelligence officials share Dayton's pessimistic assessment, telling the political leadership that the PA would be unable to exercise security control over West Bank cities in the near future.

Fayad himself said during the summer that his forces are not yet ready for the mission. Israel, however, is continuing to allow the PA to deploy police officers in West Bank cities in order to preserve public order, but not take responsibility for security matters.

The PA established a select force during the summer, which is currently awaiting deployment in Nablus. Once deployed, the force will immediately begin a sweeping operation to counter criminal activity in the city.

Israeli security sources say they believe the PA is concerned it will be unable to impose order in Nablus, due to expected clashes with armed gangs in the city. PA officials are also worried that IDF soldiers, who will continue counterterrorism operations, will also engage armed police officers.

*** Balanced Middle East News ***
MidEastweb http://www.mideastweb.org
Subscribe - mail to mewnews-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

MewBkd - Background & analysis -
mail to Mewbkd-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

News Letter -  our commentary -
mail to mideastweb-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Abbas eist van Hamas opgeven Gazastrook voor gesprekken kunnen beginnen

Er doen veel geruchten de ronde over een mogelijke hernieuwde dialoog en toenadering tussen Fatah en Hamas. Abbas ontkent dat recente ontmoetingen met vertegenwoordigers van Hamas gericht zijn op verzoening, maar waarom nodigde hij hen dan uit voor een gezamelijk vrijdaggebed?

Last month Hamas said it was ready to hold reconciliation talks with Fatah and hinted it might be ready to give up control of the Gaza Strip. But Fatah ruled out talks unless Hamas first cedes control of the coastal territory.

Als Hamas echt heeft gesuggereerd dat het de controle over de Gazastrook op wil geven - en dat is ook de voorwaarde van Abbas -, dan lijkt de weg vrij voor verdere toenadering. Abbas wil daar uiteraard mee wachten tot na de Annapolis conferentie, maar tegelijkertijd het signaal afgeven dat hij open staat voor dialoog met Hamas. Hij heeft eerst een afspraakje met Israël en de VS, en weet dat zij extra hun best zullen doen omdat er een andere kaper op de kust is. Alom wordt immers gevreesd, dat als de top mislukt, de Palestijnen verder zullen radicaliseren. Er is een algemeen gevoel dat er, met de Fatah regering op de Westoever, nu een momentum is waarvan gebruik moet worden gemaakt. Abbas acht zichzelf in de comfortabele positie waarin hij kan eisen, zonder te laten zien dat hij ook tot een compromis bereid is.

 
Ratna
-------------

Abbas tells Hamas officials no unity talks until group quits Gaza
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/919792.html

By The Associated Press
Last update - 13:57 02/11/2007   


Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas met Hamas officials in the West Bank on Friday but reiterated he would not hold formal reconciliation talks with the Islamist group unless it gives up control of Gaza.

Hamas forces routed Abbas's secular Fatah faction in violent clashes in Gaza in June. Abbas then sacked a Hamas-led government and appointed a Fatah-backed administration in the West Bank.

"I met with Hamas officials and told them there would be no dialogue with Hamas until they reverse their coup first," Abbas told Reuters in the West Bank city of Ramallah.

Abbas said he met Hamas lawmaker Hussein Abu Kwaik and a Hamas-backed former government minister, Naser el-Deen al-Shaer.

Abbas spokesman Nabil Abu Rdainah said two other Hamas members were also present at the meeting at Abbas's presidential compound in Ramallah. Hamas official Sami Abu Zuhri told Reuters in Gaza Abbas had invited the group to his compound for prayers, but said the meeting was not linked to dialogue between Hamas and Fatah.

"The prayers in the Muqata came after an invitation by Abbas to some Islamist figures, including some Hamas officials. It was not linked to any kind of dialogue between Hamas and Fatah."

Last month Hamas said it was ready to hold reconciliation talks with Fatah and hinted it might be ready to give up control of the Gaza Strip. But Fatah ruled out talks unless Hamas first cedes control of the coastal territory.

Jerusalem has warned that dialogue between Fatah and Hamas could torpedo a peace deal with Israel, which Palestinians hope will lead to statehood

Anti-Zionisten in Bahrein kwaad over officieuze ontmoeting met Livni

De Arabische staten spreken tegenwoordig niet meer veel over "de Zionistische vijand". Toen Abbas die woorden 2 jaar geleden nog tijdens zijn verkiezingscampagne gebruikte, zorgde dat voor veel ophef.

 

In haar vredesinitiatief van 2002/2007 bood de Arabische Liga aan tot normalisatie van de betrekkingen met Israël bereid te zijn als Israël aan haar voorwaarden zou voldoen, zoals een volledige terugtrekking naar de grenzen van voor 1967 en een oplossing van het Palestijnse vluchtelingenprobleem conform de VN-resoluties, die door hen als een recht op terugkeer van alle-vluchtelingen-en-hun-nakomelingen naar Israël wordt uitgelegd.

 

Olmert wilde wel met de Arabische Liga aan tafel gaan zitten, maar uiteraard niet op voorhand en onverkort haar eisenpakket inwilligen. Onderhandelingen waren echter niet voorzien in het initiatief, hooguit over de details van de uitvoering.

 

In de aanloop naar de Annapolis conferentie wordt er alsnog officieus overlegd met de Israëli's, tot woede van de anti-Zionistische vereniging in Bahrein, een eilandstaatje met zo'n 700.000 inwoners, die nog op de ouderwetse toer is: Israël moet eerst alle eisen inwilligen en als die onafhankelijke Palestijnse staat er is, dan...

Ja wat dan? Of er dan vrede met Israël gesloten kan worden, laat men liever in het midden. Vrede is in hun Orwelliaanse taalgebruik synoniem met een Palestijnse staat, niet met vrede met Israël.

 

"Only after full peace returns can we ever think of talking with the Zionist enemy."

 

 

Wouter

Ontvangen via: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MewBkd/

 

--------------------------------------------------------------

Gulf Daily News, Bahrain / Oct. 29, 2007
Anti-Zionist drive to be stepped up
   By RASHA AL QAHTANI
http://www.gulf-daily-news.com/Story.asp?Article=198141&Sn=BNEW&IssueID=30223

ANTI-ISRAEL activists are calling for a wider public involvement in their campaign against normalisation with the "Zionists".

A meeting is being held today by the Bahrain Society Against Normalisation with the Zionist Enemy, Adliya, at 8pm, where a host of non-governmental organisations and MPs have been invited.

They will discuss steps to be taken following the Foreign Minister's unofficial meeting with his Israeli counterpart in New York earlier this month.

The society maintains that Bahrain should not have any interaction with anyone in Israel at any level.

"We are expecting a large number of people to attend this meeting where we will suggest presenting a number of letters to the Foreign Affairs Ministry and the Arab League to denounce the move," said society secretary Abdulla Abdulmalik.

"The meeting will also discuss an incident that took place in a private school where students were asked to colour the Zionist regime's flag."

"We hope to get more support from all societies and citizens in our campaign."

The Foreign Ministry issued a statement earlier this month stating that the meeting came within the framework of Bahrain's role in the Arab peace initiative, which called for maintaining contacts with all sides involved in the Middle East peace process, to defend the Palestinian cause.

*****

Public Debate in Bahrain over Contacts with Israel

24/10/2007

Gulf Daily News
http://www.gulf-daily-news.com
By Mandeep Singh
http://www.palestine-pmc.com/details.asp?cat=1&id=1138

BAHRAIN should not have any interaction with anyone in Israel, at any level, the "Bahrain Society Against Normalization with the Zionist Enemy" secretary Abdulla Abdulmalik said Tuesday.

He was reacting to the Foreign Minister Shaikh Khalid's recent unofficial meeting with his Israeli counterpart in New York.

But the Foreign Ministry says the meeting was within Bahrain's role in the Middle East peace process.

"The Foreign Ministry wishes to make it clear that Bahrain's stances in support of the Palestinian cause remain unequivocal and unflinching and are not susceptible to any political manipulation or bargaining," it said in a statement earlier this month.

"Bahrain's crystal clear stances, which never derailed from the Arab mainstream, stress the need to reach a lasting, comprehensive and just peace based on the establishment of a fully-independent Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital.

"The Foreign Ministry's contacts must not be regarded as a normalisation step with Israel, but as a contribution to the joint Arab efforts in support of the Palestinian cause and to the benefit of Bahrain's supreme interests."

The statement added that the meeting came within the framework of Bahrain's role in the Arab peace initiative, which called for maintaining contacts with all sides involved in the Middle East peace process, to defend the Palestinian cause.

"There is no need for this, since there is no peace in the entire Middle East region, thanks to the Israelis," Abdulmalik told a Press conference at the society headquarters in Adliya.

"We are against any such interaction, official or unofficial, until there is complete peace in the region.

"We know well enough that it is the Zionists who are responsible for what is happening in the region.

"Palestinians are being killed every day and the Zionists are getting more and more daring and arrogant. Under the circumstances, why should there be a dialogue with them?"

He said Shaikh Khalid acted against the conscience of Bahrainis, Arabs and Muslims by meeting his Israeli counterpart Tzipi Livni.

"It is not true that the meeting was within Bahrain's role in the Middle East peace process. The Arab League has mandated that role to Egypt and Jordan and not to Bahrain," said Abdulmalik.

He said it was also not right to suggest that the meeting came within the framework of Bahrain's role in the Arab peace initiative, which called for maintaining contacts with all sides involved in the Middle East peace process, to defend the Palestinian cause.

"We want all this to stop, for the sake of peace and for the sake of the Palestinian people. Only after full peace returns can we ever think of talking with the Zionist enemy."